rudge49

An interesting artifact from a bygone era, the "nudie-cutie" move, like the "nudist" movie and magazine arose during the few years between the allowing of nudity in movies and the de facto legalization of hardcore pornography. And then disappeared when hardcore porn became readily available and the skin magazines more explicit. Like "The Raw Ones" and later "Educating Julie" you can take this one as a "documentary" on the nudist lifestyle or an excuse to see naked bodies-girls-but in an un-explicit and more tasteful manner. I am amused to see the "acting" dismissed as "wooden", seen plenty of big budget productions with big names that did not do any better, and appearing in the buff took a bit of nerve back then. So sit back and enjoy it for what it isi.

Having met and talked to both Ernest Borgnine and Richard Thomas I feel a stronger bond with this version, which I find much more realistic and naturally acted than the 1930 version, which I found too stylized and melodramatic-more like a play than a movie. A movie which shows The Other Side and portrays them as ordinary men pulled into a conflict which they barely understand and suspect is for Somebody's Else's benefit but they will do their duty to their country, their homes and families-and each other. The strength of Remarque's novel is captured here-he does not preach or shout, he merely presents and lets the reader and viewer draw his own conclusions. As an Army veteran I particularly liked Kaczynski's observation that "It wouldn't be such a bad war if we could get some more sleep." The production values are excellent, the period details-the uniforms, especially-are excellent, and it has a quality I consider very important in a historically based movie-you really feel you are traveling back in Time.