User reviews

Stephen Crane's classic American novel concerning fictional Yankee private Henry Fleming of the 304th New York Regiment--who loses his courage to fight after seeing the random insanity of life and death on the battlefield--is not a natural for the screen. In 1951, writer-director John Huston had tried for a thorough adaptation of the story, but that theatrical feature left audiences unmoved and was drastically altered by its studio. This faithful television version has been smartly thought-out by writer John Gay and director Lee Philips and, despite some overwrought performances and distinct 1970s haircuts, contains many powerful sequences. Richard Thomas is perhaps a bit too old to be convincing as the teenage Henry (age 18 in the book), yet his character's confusion--and guilt over his cowardice--is overpowering and intensely felt. Injured by stampeding soldiers, Henry finds strength and personal redemption in being 'wounded', returning to his fellow recruits to carry the flag into battle. This psychological tale of wartime is demanding and dramatic, yet is laid-out for us cleanly, without any creeping pretensions. The locations are disappointing (most likely due to budget restraints), however the power of Crane's storytelling is palpably realized.

I was hardly satisfied with theJohn Huston's film, which was a good movie, and showing an excellent Audie Murphy, in a role so close to his true own history as a soldier. Here, more or less the same topic, but with a very annoying actor. And I have never liked films speaking of courage, heroism, glory.... It is so American. I prefer cowardness, it is more interesting to show, more daring, more psychological. This one is very hard to watch till the end. It is bland, flat, boring, except maybe the battles scenes.

I remember watching this movie on a rainy Saturday afternoon as a kid. It really struck me with its emotive power. Especially notable was one of the battle scenes that was shot adroitly from the young man's point of view, that really made me anxious, as if I were in his place. I would like to see this movie again to see if it is as effective while viewing it as an adult. I always keep an eye out to see if this movie will be shown on late night TV, but it seems as if only the original is ever shown. Does anyone know a way to obtain a copy of this or for that matter any made for TV movies that are not released on video?

I have looked and searched, trying to find this movie, there has to be one out there some where, its on TV once and in great while..I would even settle for your own Home Made VHS of this movie. Why cant the release of this movie be retrieved? I once heard it was available as an import, but I still got no results. I remember watching this on cable TV, I think it was The Retro channel, any way, I HAD a copy of this movie on my Cable TV DVR, but my DVR broke and I had to get a new one, I wish I would have remembered to Record this movie, before I turned my DVR back to The Cable Co. Like other Reviewers I keep a watch out for this movie to be shown again. I think your best bet is: The Family Channel. please let me know if you find this movie in any form.

This was a great movie and it's the second time Richard Thomas starred in a remake that was better than the original. The other film was All Quiet on the Western Front and is available on DVD unlike this film which I have not been able to find anywhere.

No, this is NOT the famous 1951 black and white masterpiece that we all know and saw many times. This is a 1974 TV film, which I never heard of and never saw before. Many people criticized that take fiercely, which laves me totally shocked. Why? This full color take is not bad, this is a very decent try, a nice effort that depicts war as it is - cruel, miserable, sad, bloody, ferocious, wild, wanton, merciless, panicking, awful, bad and horrid. The movie is short, so it doesn't drag or get on your nerves. The plot of the book is depicted very vividly and it does not glorify violence, it shows it as a real terrible and blood-chilling affair. This rare film is certainly worth watching if only for educational sake and also for a fresh view of a classic

Richard Thomas was just right back then; portraying a guy who was scared and ashamed, but too proud to keep running, everything..he got it just right. I think Stephan Crane would appreciate this version better than the 1951 movie.

It's confusing enough being that age, then finding yourself in the middle of one of those huge battles- you couldn't pull me away from that TV way back when. It didn't need all of the high tech special effects, Henry Fleming(John boy)and his fellow soldiers brought you into the story as well as the book did. It was a great movie and should be available to high school kids, history buffs, or anybody who enjoys a good flick. But is it available to anyone? I can't find it for sell online anywhere. What a shame. The scene showing fixed bayonets charging, one sticking in a tree trunk accidentally, was artistic license no doubt, but classic! Classic I say! Where are the rerun Gods when you need them? This would be great for my school age son...I'll keep looking.

Unlike the Audie Murphy/John Huston version from 1951, this film was truer to the book in at least two points: the Union regiment was from New York, not Ohio; the solders were all young men, not grizzled old Hollywood character actors apparently preferred by Huston.

I'm still in shock over the fact that I never saw or heard of this film, in spite of the fact that I rank the novel up there with "Farewell to Arms" and "The Great Gatsby".

Stephen Crane is one of the best writers in American literature. Like his friend and contemporary, Henry James, he was not a realist or a naturalist exactly, but more of an impressionist whose work consisted of capturing the exact feeling of any scene he created at that precise moment to the character he was depicting.

He prefigured Hemingway (who thought Crane the best) and Fitzgerald, as they wrestled their way through humanly non-heroic characters ripped up by ironic tragedy.