vasean-71009

In the 1970's Terrence Malick's directorial debut "Badlands", and 5 years later "days of heaven" established him as a fresh, unique voice in a decade that produced a new generation of film makers. Both offerings were both powerful and visually beautiful, and then, he disappeared for twenty years.... He returned to direct one of the greatest war films of all time. No The Thin Red Line does not have a typical story line, but neither does life, and that is what Malick captures and expresses in Red Line so honest and eloquently. Rather than the typical Hollywood plot arc, Malick instead focuses on the conflict, love, and fear the characters are going thru at that moment in time, and in relation to the war. It saddens me but does not surprise me that there are people who don't get Thin Line. Thankfully both critics in the states and around the world both "got" Thin Line, and also often considered it to be the best film of the decade. War is a traumatic experience, and Malick captures that with the honest narration that threads throughout the film. He exposes the characters with their inner narrations, offering the viewer a deeper, and more vulnerable portrait than is usually depicted in typical war films. In many ways it's more a profound character film with the backdrop of war secondary, serving as a setting to explore these characters. Never have I seen a film, or director who better explores the human character so honestly as Malick. That combined with the stunning choreography makes for a unique and beautiful cinematic experience. It's my guess that the people who don't get this film or Malick, are probably also the people who don't get life on a deeper and more honest level.

This film could have easily been a docu-comedy if edited differently. But instead we are expected to take a delusional Matthew Vandyke seriously as he hits the road to battle his mild OCD, fight alongside rebel forces, get captured and imprisoned, and create a fictionalzed character for himself along the way. At first it was easy and entertaining to laugh at the observations and realizations that spew from Vandyke's mouth. But as the documentary is edited in such a way to reinforce Vandyke's idea of himself and his "adventure", I found myself becoming annoyed in the character occupying my TV who I'm suppose to be taking seriously. I think it's also worth mentioning Matthew's inflated idea self of importance, and misguided adventure would be funny if not for what he's continued to do since, and especially do to the success of Point and Shoot. The character that Vandyke created in Point he has bizarrely continued to personify long after the film ends. And again this two would also be funny except he's used his notoriety to meddle even more extensively in various other middle eastern affairs. It's unfortunate that Point and Shoot somehow has earned Vandyke credibility and a platform.