5/10
The book had a great influence on me back then, so I'm quiet disappointed now
12 January 2023
I think one of the main problem with the film that they wanted to cram into too many things, too much background information about the war. There are scenes about politics and hackneyed war characters, which I think only interrupts the main plot. (we all know the main story from school, or its 2 min. To read in wikipedia) They even changed the original (book) date of the action to the end of the war - probably to make the deaths and losses feel even more pointless - but I think it was unnecessary.

The book is a masterpiece, which I would suggest everyone should read, so then hopefully noone would ever feel that war is a nice idea.

However this film doesn't remind me of that classic except that there are some characters with the same name from the book, but they have almost no resemblance to the original personalities. Which could be ok, if it was conceptual, but unfortunately they just became more shallow, and it was very hard to sympathize with them.

Althoough the film seems historically authentic (thats why I gave 5 stars), but lacks that dramatical dephtness, which the book has. I know that its a crazy hard task to screen literatures like this, so I shouldn't be too harsh with my critics, but unfortunately I just saw 1917 some days ago, and I have to say, that 1917 is a much more authentic visualisation of the athmosphere of the book "All Quiet on the Western Front" (even though the plot is completely different) than this film with the same title.
24 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed