User reviews

The made for TV and 'remake' labels have tended to devalue All Quiet on the Western Front. With successors like Das Boot and Saving Private Ryan, it also seems less visionary now. However, All Quiet on the Western Front is a superb adaptation of Erich Maria Remarque's classic novel. The novel, published in 1929 by the 31 yr old Remarque was an instant classic. I remember reading it nearly two decades ago and its still one of the best books I've ever read. The Hollywood adaptation starring Lew Ayres - director Lewis Milestones greatest achievement - was very good as testified by its IMDb status. The remake is better! The remake is more intelligent, the cast is great and the period detail is extraordinary. The director - Delbert Mann - is an experienced veteran with classics like Marty to his credit. All Quiet is his magnum opus, released on TV because theatre owners didn't see it making any money. Naturally very few people watch message movies. Fewer still would make the effort to rent a "made for TV" film. Hardly anyone would watch this when they can see the original instead - a film with a more famous pedigree.

This adaptation is very faithful to the novel. Even with minor changes in the ending, the basic spirit of the book is retained. The cast is uniformly excellent with Richard Thomas playing the central role of Paul. Donald Pleasance, Ian Holm and Ernest Borgnine all give uniformly good performances in character driven and memorable roles. It could be said that Ernest Borgnine is too old and too fat to be a corporal. True, but on an emotional level be fits brilliantly into the role and his physicality really lends an element of humanity to him. The war scenes would rank very high in anyones list but for Saving Private Ryan's gritty realism. I loved the old German town from where Paul and his friends come. It looks straight out of the 1910's. All the period details are top notch. I strongly recommend watching this unheralded classic.

This is a very good anti-war movie. It shows how the young and naive are being brain-washed to think that somehow it is their duty to kill and die. Big words like Fatherland, Kaiser, God, Patriotism. But it is always the young generation that does the dying, whilst the old men discuss strategy over a beer. War has lost whatever legitimacy it ever may have had when the leaders left the front line to lead from the back, safe in their headquarters miles away from the killing. Sending young boys to their death whilst claiming it is eventually for the Good is the ultimate cowardice. Some get their come-uppance, such as Cpl Himmelstoss, but most live their lives in the comfortable cocoon of their self-righteousness – the school teacher, the father, the Kaiser himself.

But sometimes a young soldier sees through the scam, as when Paul kills a Frenchman by sheer instinct, only too late realising what he has been forced to do to someone who might have been his brother. But even then the cultural impregnation is too strong for him to follow his true human feelings and draw the only logical conclusion. And of course in the end he pays the price himself. Destroyed - for what?

That is the lesson that we all should take to heart, to this very day.

A very good film based on an exceptional book.

This version may not be as good as its great predecessor, but it's definitely a fine show on its own. Richard Thomas is very good, if about ten years too old, as the central character, Paul Baumer, who grows from glory seeking school boy to crusty veteran to, finally disillusioned, weary, almost hopeless pawn. Ernest Borgnine is terrific as Kat, the cagey survivor, who takes the youngsters under his wing, teaching them ways to make trench warfare almost tolerable. Ian Holm has a nice turn as Paul's town's postman turned training NCO, who later is transferred to the trenches. The great actress, Patricia Neal, shines in a cameo as Paul's mother. Donald Pleasance is excellent as Paul's patriotic teacher who exhorts Paul and his classmates to enlist. Gradually the grinding attrition of war eliminates Paul's classmates and the old sweats, until the famous final scene, when so little happened that day that the war entry was "All quiet on the Western Front." Most of the scenes in the original are presented here, a few additions and a couple deletions. The color cinematography is nicely done. Well worth a look as either a comparison or companion to the 1930 original.

This 1979 remake of Lewis Milestones 1930 classic anti war film tells the story of German youths who enlist in the Kaisers army to fight for the Fatherland in the great war. Based on the masterful novel by Erich Maria Remarque the youths who join at the encouragement of their schoolteacher with dreams of glory quickly learn the horror of war. Some parts of this version are better than the original and in others the 1930 version still stands out

Ian Holm's portrayal of Himmelstoss the sadistic drill instructor comes off somewhat better than in the original. In this version he is not the boys hometown postman so the viewer only sees him as the stern and cruel D.I.. His cowardice scene is also handled better. Veteran actor Ernest Borgnine as Kat the group leader is only a tad off as being as good as Louis Wolheims. Richard Thomas as Paul Baumer the central figure is about neck and neck with Lew Ayres original. Donald Pleasance is convincing as Kantorek the boys schoolteacher who tells them their plans for the future must be put on hold in favor of serving the Fatherland. Both this and the 1930 recently restored version should be watched back to back if possible.

Many films that are remade often times do not stand up to their original counterparts but this 1979 film does. Considering it was a made for TV film makes that quite an accomplishment. If you enjoyed Saving Private Ryan you'll enjoy this one as well.

I know that many people over here think this movie isn't as good as the original one from 1930. I believe you, but I can't help asking myself how many of you really have seen the original version? Or is it because you know this is 'just' a remake?

I only know the version from 1979, but I'm really impressed with it. I already saw it several times, but I never got bored with it once. I keep enjoying it time after time. It gives you a view on how it was at the time. The inspiring, but childish patriotism at the beginning of the war, the hard training, the awful conditions at the front and the loss of innocence and the disillusions at home... It shows it all.

This movie gives you an accurate view on what being an ordinary soldier during World War One was like and is therefor alone already worth a 9/10. But the acting, the good script, the feeling which it leaves you behind with... make that I give it an even higher score. 10/10 is the only correct score according to me. I believe this is one of the best (anti-)war movies ever.

This movie is one of the things which sparked my interest in everything that has something to do with the First World War. All over the world there are only a handful of veterans of this war left. Soon, accurate movies like this one, history books, cemeteries and museums will the only things left about it. That's also why this movie is so important to me.

ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT is the second adaptation of the famous novel about German soldiers fighting in the trenches during WW1. This one goes for the lengthy epic route and has to be commended for featuring authentic-looking battle sequences on what must have been a tight budget. What I most liked about this film is that most WW1 movies feature the big battles in the middle of the night, using the cover of darkness to hide limitations, whereas all of the big scenes in this one take place in broad daylight and they're all the better for it.

An ensemble cast has been assembled in this movie and most of them do a decent job. I wasn't too keen on Richard Thomas's hero, as I found him oddly muted and difficult to root for. Thomas was much better a decade later in the likes of IT and STALKING LAURA (still his finest moment as an actor, I reckon). Still, Ernest Borgnine is fine as the old lag buddy, and Ian Holm has an excellent supporting role as a postman who becomes a conscript. Watch out for Dai Bradley, the kid from KES, all grown up and fighting it out on the battlefield. British viewers may get a kick out of Michael Sheard (GRANGE HILL's Mr. Bronson) playing the father while old-time starlet Patricia Neal is the mother.

After putting off watching this film for a while, mainly due to seeing a few bad war movies and quite a few mediocre ones(The Thin Red Line, The Eagle Has Landed), I finally decided to watch this. I had heard that it was realistic and powerful, but I wasn't quite sure that I actually believed it. I barely glared at the first few seconds of it, uninterested and expecting a mediocre, dull and cliché-ridden war film, but was immediately captured by the purity of the film and the lack of pretension. The director doesn't shove the belief of war being pointless and devastating physically, spiritually and psychologically down our throat... he merely shows it as it is, and lets us decide/discover for ourself. The plot is very good, and the way it's told is great. The first half or so has a good bit of flashbacks, with the main character thinking back to the past, in a very disturbing and worrying fashion. Many of the major tragic events in the first half are made even worse when you see the flashback related to it. The pacing is good, but it drags a little at some points, and there are too many scenes that seem less important than they should. The acting is very good, none of the major roles disappoint. The characters are well-written, credible and human. None of them are heroes or villains. Everyone is equal, which is exactly what it is like in real life, in war. I was incredibly moved by this film, and deeply affected. It shows exactly how rotten, pointless and devastating to humanity and creativity war really is. I didn't cry, watching this movie, but had I not looked away during the most disturbing sequences and possessed an almost insurmountable amount of self-control, I would have. This shows that you don't have to display graphic violence, deafen your audience with loud, noisy heavy metal or throw in plot twists to shock your audience; you can show something that the general public is oblivious of, such as war in it's purest and most uncensored form. This movie is so close to being a masterpiece that it's too bad that it falls just a little short. The cinematography is good, but there were times where it could have been better(see The Thin Red Line for a good example). It's very, very close to a perfect rating, but it has just enough low points to pull it down. I recommend this film to just about anyone who believe they can manage to sit through it... everyone should see it. Everyone. The very end is so devastating and horrifying that no one can possibly see it without being affected. Beautiful symbolism. 8/10

I don't believe "All Quiet on The Western Front" can ever be adequately adapted into film form without either making the movie look overly poetic or simply an action (anti-)war film. The book is in "memory" form. It is about Paul's recollections and reflections on the war. Those reflections had to be presented as dialogue or monologue in scenes that didn't quite match them in emotion or chronology. Alternatively, it can be delivered in the form of a series of flashes back while a narrator tells stories.

I acknowledge that selecting parts to display and parts to leave out must have been a challenge. Some parts inevitably had to be left out. But I could still feel their necessity. For example, Paul's observations of nature and the earth were missing. I think those were momentous in the book. (I believe "1917" did a good job about "nature".) I also found the hospital praying scene in the book symbolic and of special focus. The same with Behm's story. But these were either dismissed or altered.

Some other minor things bothered me with the film besides the fact that I was hoping for the characters to speak German! (Too high of an expectation?) The portrayal of some characters was not faithful to the book. For instance, the book merely mentioned that Leer was the first among the group to have intercourse. At one point, Paul says that Leer was a good mathematician in school but the film simply portrayed him as a lover-boy. There are more examples like this all of which are less significant. So to avoid being fussy and spoilers, I shall stop here.

I could not withstand comparing this film with the 1930 version which is rated higher. (I have only watched a few scenes of the 1930's and am to edit this review when I fully watch it.) I find the acting in the latter a bit over-the-top and kind of melodramatic. Maybe that's just how movies were made back then but it didn't quite sit well with me. The 1979 version certainly looked more realistic.

Nonetheless, believe that anybody who enjoys historical films should watch "All Quiet on The Western Front". It is different in character than most war films. It's truly a classic when it comes to anti-war literature. However, these characteristics are inherited from the book so I would put the book 1st.

This 1979 remaster of the 1930 classic, "All Quiet on the Western Front," does great justice to the original narrative. A cinematic representation of the war through the eyes of the aggressors gives the audience and history buffs a contrasting viewpoint that aids us in understanding the war from all sides. This film focuses on the grueling effects of trench warfare and the psychological war that soldiers were facing as a result of hellish battle sequences and harsh conditions. This film emphasizes the significance of nationalism in the development of Germany and the outcome of the war, furthermore the disdain the Germans began to feel against their leaders and their role in the war. This film is genuine and provides the audience with an in depth progression of German soldiers and their outlook of the world around them.

This was very, very good. Considering it was made for TV I thought the action and special effects were great. Richard Thomas was perfect as the boy who finds out what war is really like. Ernest Borgnine fantastic, what a great actor. It does a very good job of capturing the book which is to show the war from a common man's point of view. Hungry, dirty, seeing all your friends die, etc. The guy that wrote the book lived through the war but all his friends were killed. He drifted from job to job, had trouble sleeping, etc, what they call now post-trauma, then to get the stuff out of his head he wrote it down in 1929. Then boom! It's a bestseller, he has money, goes to Hollywood, marries a move star (Paulette Goddard) and travels around the world. The Nazi's hated him so he couldn't go back to Germany until after WWII but as you look at the movie it's amazing the guy's life turned out like it did. His life would make a great movie.

There are moments when this re-make of Erich Maria Remarque's "All Quiet on the Western Front" evokes the original movie masterpiece, and there are certain images which are up to the level of the (then) nearly 50 year old classic. For example, this version's early battle scenes and its sequence involving rats are nicely staged. The sound, especially the "mosquito" gunfire, also recalls director Lewis Milestone's 1930 film, which was much admired for its use of sound (something new in motion pictures, at the time). But, this award-winning "Hallmark Hall of Fame" production falls far short of the original film, which you really should see first. Also, the earlier film had an extraordinary ending, which this version alters.

War-bound Richard Thomas (from "The Waltons") plays the sensitive German teenager "Paul Baumer" without accent; he is particularly incongruous in scenes with heavily-accented instructor Donald Pleasence (as Kantorek). His six war buddies do, like Mr. Thomas, grow on you. Co-star Ernest Borgnine (as Stanislaus Katczinsky) always strengthens a cast; herein, however, Mr. Borgnine is miscast. It is strange to watch Thomas (and stand-in) carrying Borgnine's weight during the last act. Superior officer Ian Holm inexplicably stomps Thomas' feet, and Patricia Neal appears briefly. David "Dai" Bradley (as Albert Kropp), best remembered for playing "Kes" (1970), is notable in one of the good, but lesser, buddy roles.

***** All Quiet on the Western Front (11/14/79) Delbert Mann ~ Richard Thomas, Ernest Borgnine, Ian Holm, David Bradley

The 1979 TV movie is true to the novel, whereas the 1930 movie is not, although they are both very powerful films.

I read All Quiet On The Western Front while serving in the U.S. Marines in Vietnam, 1966-1967. It is without question the greatest war novel ever written. It is the universal story of the "grunt", all those who have ever fought on the front lines and experienced battle and death. Remarque served in the German army and lived through the hells he describes. Do not mistake his plain style of writing for a lack of literary ability - his simple telling of the events is one of the things that make this book so great. For example, after the company has been called back to the rear for reinforcements, the captain calls the roll several times. Half of the names are not there - they are dead, wounded or missing. Paul (the story teller) says "A line, a short line, trudges off...". Remarkable, this terse imagery of the depth of violence that happened at the front. Another line comes from one of soldiers while discussing how to stop the war (referring to the generals and politicians): "Give 'em all the same grub and all the same pay, and the war would be over and done in a day." Still true today. When describing what happens to common men fighting for their lives in battle, Paul says: "...this wave..that..turns us into thugs, into murderers, into God only knows what devils...". As Colonel Kurtz would say: "The Horror, the horror". This novel will forever speak across the years for all soldiers in combat everywhere.

World War 1 and a young German, Paul Baumer, enthusiastically joins the Army. With romantic notions of war and idealistic dreams in his head he undergoes training and then is sent off to the Western Front. In due course the romantic notions are replaced by the harsh reality of war and he becomes disillusioned with it all.

The original movie, made in 1930, was brilliant. Based on Erich Maria Remarque's 1929 novel, it was grim and gritty and probably the first anti-war movie ever made. So good it won the 1931 Best Picture Oscar.

This 1979 adaptation is not in the same league. Retains the same plot but doesn't have the same grittiness, feeling quite tame in comparison. Performances also feel quite subdued. Overall, not bad, but not great either.

Watch the 1930 version instead.

this is strictly made for TV.However, having said that, one would have to put it up there among one of the finest that the tube has had to offer over the last 25 years or so.

Technically, there are some flaws in the directing.Flashback scenes are thrust upon the viewer without the slightest warning, which in parts, makes it confusing to distinguish past and present for a few moments.Yet, the positive far outweighs any small negatives.This little flick can captivate a person. The acting by all, especially by Holm, is commendable to say the least.Borgnine is Borgnine as usual.

Overall, aside from some glitches, it's well worth seeing. 7/10

Granted I've never seen the original - I do have that unfortunate problem of being unable to relate to films made in a very young time.

Nevertheless, I did grow up during the "Golden Age Of TV Movies" and I never saw this on television. There was a teacher that kept airing it when I was working in the A/V Lab. I didn't care about that.

Well I was old enough to take note. Now I think this is probably the Best Made For Television Movie of all time.

The Great War (or World War I) is a war that I believe is immensely ignored in the scheme of the 20th Century. I was one of those people that heard pretty much everything about WWII and I can recite it backwards and inside-out.

But the thing about the situation in Europe needs to be looked at more seriously and in a long amount of time. WWII didn't just pop out of nowhere.

I'm going to tell you to know the 20th Century you need to research "The Great War" and "The Franco-Prussian War".

But if you want to only find out how the Industrial Revolution turned war into a total, complete killing factory World War I is where it all started.

And if you research further, most people didn't really know what they were fighting for and/or who.

Young men were asked to go fight to keep up the status quo. That's basically about all you can say about ANY war.

That's what this movie is about; young me going to war and dying and the tragic circumstances. It's an endless theme.

What is there to say about this adaptation of the best (in my opinion) and one of the most famous German anti War books ever written (Im Westen nichts neues by Erich Maria Remarque)? Well not much I must say, for the film is pretty much the same as the book, excluding some minor additions and alterations. I, as a great fan of the book must state here that the book is much better than this film, for it has more depth, more brutality, more intriguing images, which (the latter) were not included here for it is a TV movie and therefore could not be too brutal. Also I must say, the English speaking ‘Germans' annoyed me a little, for the use of the German language in the book, had much more impact on me. Maybe cause I'm German, maybe not, but if you saw Saving Private Ryan (as an American) spoken in German, what would you think??? The bottom line is that, if you have got the time read the book (big 9 out of 10). If you ain't got it, watch this film, for it is pretty good, despite it's flaws (lack of depth and brutality, only OK acting, directing and special effects).

7 out of 10

The movie is an honest attempt to portray the story in the book. However, it misses the mark and is highly edited to show evidently what director Delbert Mann and writer Paul Monash (Salem's Lot (1979) (TV)) thought you would want to see and not what Erich Maria Remarque wrote about. Do you remember the scene that Remarque wrote about befriending a cat while enjoying the spoils of protecting the abandoned town? How about the night they crossed the river to meet some girls at their house? The time he faked sick to get off the train and stay with his buddy? No? I wonder why?

You are right movies can't be the same as books. But the Lewis Milestones 1930 classic comes a lot closer. It is sort of a distraction to see Johnboy playing Paul Bäumer. Younger viewers at least won't have that distraction. If this is the only exposure to the story you have then it is masterful. However, it is only a reflection of the book or other movie versions. If you only taste ersatz coffee, you may still drink coffee, but you will never know what it is like to drink real coffee that does not say "cinnamon crumb cake" on the label.