“all quiet on the western front”, and the integrity of anti-war cinema
is it possible to make an anti-war film without some level of emotional manipulation? “all quiet” is a war film. it’s also a coming-of-age film, in the sense of documenting a loss of innocence in the most inhumane of circumstances.
war films always make for awards season bait, and yet somehow there always seems to be a war story to tell. i suppose we all collectively carry an endless supply of violence with us. “all quiet” offers more of the same, although more often than not it plays less like a war film than a lush montage of stunning — but often excruciating — cinematography, but thats the privilege of hindsight and cinema.
every war film is also about the destruction of innocence, and though compared to others it seems to have less structure, it’s only because of its dedication to its mission: the rare occurrence of being a faithful anti-war adaptation of a landmark anti-war novel. don’t come here looking for a hero’s journey with toy soldiers and heroic explosions — this film is much smarter and human than that.
what “all quiet” lacks in traditional cinematic structure it more than makes up for in mood, emotion, sound, cinematography, and if only for those alone renders it memorable enough on its own. “all quiet” does precisely what it needs to do — and does it well. it accomplishes the rare feat of being truly anti-war, and if it seems unfulfilling for some (especially war film fans) it’s only because it stands squarely with the truth, unwilling to compromise for the sake of cheap spectacle. and for that it is a triumph.
