Viewed in
2010
Formats
HD TV
Premise
Robert De Niro and Christopher Walken star as Pennsylvanian brothers who fight in the Vietnam War.
Liked
The performances.
Disliked
The length in the first act, the point of the film.
Thoughts
Unfortunately I could not see what was so great about this classic film.
One undeniable strength was the acting. The big names of De Niro, Walken and Meryl Streep delivered some intense and painful moments. John Savage was very good as the third brother who was able to leave the Vietnam War, but not in one piece. John Cazele had some scene-stealing moments as an insecure friend. I IMDB'd his career, and was blown away. He only did five films, except they were five of the most prestigious titles of the decade.
Back to The Deer Hunter, not only was the performances strong, the story also had some haunting, unforgettable scenes. In the second hour, there was unrelenting war intensity. The centerpiece was watching captives forced to play Russian roulette against each other, probably the closest thing to actually being tortured psychological.
Then it shifted into a third gear, as it explored how the soldiers attempted to re-adjust to life after war. In a lesser movie, I expected obligatory flashbacks and nightmares. Instead it was thoughtful and observational, especially De Niro's character. The term, "silence is deafening", was masterfully executed in some of these memorable scenes. As for the climax? Wow.
As a mostly character-driven film, it took its time in story-telling. The biggest problem I had with that was the first hour, all dedicated to a wedding. I know the film makers wanted to immerse us with these characters, but I think I would have the same feeling for these characters and understood their pre-war personalities had this chapter been just half an hour long.
My other issue was that I didn't know what this film was about. Clearly there were a few themes, such as the horrors of war. But I felt like I was watching three short stories without much tying them together, except the characters. Maybe I am being overly-critical, but I was expecting greatness from such a hailed film.
Lastly, what was up with the aspect ratio change in the last and third to last shots?
I enjoyed the strong performances, along with some intense, haunting, and insightful moments. But I could not see why this was considered one of the greatest Vietnam War movies of all times, as it tested my patience minute-wise and message-wise.
What I would change
Shortened the first hour by half.
