All Quiet on the Western Front

Netflix | Release Date: October 7, 2022

7.8	USER SCORE Generally favorable reviews based on 221 Ratings

USER RATING DISTRIBUTION

Watch Now

Stream On

Review this movie

VOTE NOW

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Please sign in or create an account before writing a review.

Check box if your review contains spoilers

0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User score By date Most helpful

sittingbullfrogOct 29, 2022

I read somewhere that Hollywood's best selling product is sanitized war. While this movie doesn't showcase the squeaky clean war of the MCU or Star Wars it's still very sanitized. This war film is significantly less gory than your averageI read somewhere that Hollywood's best selling product is sanitized war. While this movie doesn't showcase the squeaky clean war of the MCU or Star Wars it's still very sanitized. This war film is significantly less gory than your average horror film. Unable or unwilling to show war as it really is brings into sharp relief the other failings of the film particularly the loud and obnoxious horn that blares every few minutes for no reason at all. Of the three versions of "All Quiet On The Western Front" I've seen this is easily the weakest, tamest version.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

RatedRexOct 30, 2022

Since "Saving Private Ryan," war movies have been more gruesome. I guess directors feel that the more gruesome the film, the more realistic. That may be true. But gruesome doesn't equate to good. Gruesome simply equates to gruesome. "AllSince "Saving Private Ryan," war movies have been more gruesome. I guess directors feel that the more gruesome the film, the more realistic. That may be true. But gruesome doesn't equate to good. Gruesome simply equates to gruesome. "All Quiet on the Western Front" goes over the top with its violence. Doom and gloom hover over the movie from start to finish. After a few minutes, I knew that EVERY scene would have an unhappy ending. The original "AQOTWF" release in 1930 is a better film.… Expand

1 of 4 users found this helpful13

All this user's reviews

Brent_MarchantDec 30, 2022

War is hell. We all know that. But do we really need to be reminded of that? Given mankind’s propensity for conflict, one might say yes. However, how emphatically need that message be stressed? The latest version of this time-honored 1929War is hell. We all know that. But do we really need to be reminded of that? Given mankind’s propensity for conflict, one might say yes. However, how emphatically need that message be stressed? The latest version of this time-honored 1929 anti-war novel by author and military veteran Erich Maria Remarque tells the story of an idealistic young German soldier (Felix Kammerer) who sets off with friends to fight in World War I, seeing it as his patriotic duty and a grand coming of age adventure. Before long, however, he experiences the brutality and futility of combat as he watches his buddies die horrific deaths under deplorable conditions. And, as the story wears on, the film depicts the extreme emotional and physical stress it places on soldiers in the waning days of the war immediately prior to the November 1918 armistice that ended the fighting. In doing this, the picture shines a bright light on the perils of wartime atrocities and blind nationalism in its attempt to drive home the story’s anti-war message. Nevertheless, for a production that professes to convey this sentiment, it incorporates a plethora of exceedingly graphic battle footage, so much so that it often verges on dangerously disturbing combat porn that drones on seemingly endlessly. It’s almost as if viewers are subjected to a cinematic symposium illustrating the myriad ways that people can be killed. While it’s one thing not to hold anything back, there’s such a thing as overkill, and this offering definitely pushes those boundaries. In light of that, writer-director Edward Berger’s latest is an overlong, tedious, difficult watch whose primary thematic intent is overshadowed by its visuals, a problem that tends to dilute the value of those scenes in which its principal aim is achieved (albeit eclipsed). It also never attains the heroic quality of a film like “1917” (2019), instead opting for an uber-realistic, in-your-face, supremely depressing approach. To its credit, the cinematography of this release is often compelling (if gratuitous at times), and Kammerer’s lead performance captures the range of conflicted emotions his character experiences. But, despite the many accolades that the film has received thus far, the filmmaker’s take on this tale is all a bit much for me, just as I suspect it might also be for many would-be viewers.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

eded9999Nov 30, 2022

Looking a this movie i can say Hollywood is fcked, this is better than 99% of what MODERN Hollywood does (in production quality) on pair with the levels of the OLD Hollywood. Really impressed on that department. But the rest i am not thatLooking a this movie i can say Hollywood is fcked, this is better than 99% of what MODERN Hollywood does (in production quality) on pair with the levels of the OLD Hollywood. Really impressed on that department. But the rest i am not that impressed tho... I don't like how the narrative is structured, make the movie feels boring or uninteresting. You don't get to care about the character or their stories too much.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

agagilJun 2, 2023

This movie has no soul. Can't figure out why with such terrible tragedies falling on the main characters and the terrible blood letting they endure, they just don't make me care about them. It's as bland as 1917 (the film) was.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

Mauro_LanariOct 30, 2022

(Mauro Lanari)
Nothing new on the cinematographic front. Unfortunately it is not an auteur film, one of those that, after havin' metabolized pacifism and antimilitarism, tries to deepen the subject in search of the origins (even metaphysical)(Mauro Lanari)
Nothing new on the cinematographic front. Unfortunately it is not an auteur film, one of those that, after havin' metabolized pacifism and antimilitarism, tries to deepen the subject in search of the origins (even metaphysical) of evil, hatred, horror. Already Kubrick took about 3 decades to go from the 1st to the 2nd level, that is, from "Paths of Glory" (1957) and "Dr. Strangelove" (1960) to "FMJ" (1987). Also Spielberg took a minimum of time to transition from "Saving Private Ryan" (1998) to "Band of Brothers" (2001). The best directors hit the mark on the first try: Coppola with "Apocalypse Now" [1979], Klimov with "Idi i smotri" (1985), Nolan with "Dunkirk" (2017). In 2019 Mendes' "1917" had few functional scenes to delve into the darkness, while "Platoon" (1986) should be considered as one of Stone's works dedicated to tackling the dramas and myths of his generation, Eastwood's 4 feature films (the Gunny of "Heartbreak Ridge" [1986], the 2006 diptych "Letters from Iwo Jima" & "Flags of Our Fathers" and "American Sniper" [2014]) have other goals, the same for "Life is Beautiful" (1997) and "The Tiger and the Snow" [2005] by Benigni, "M*A*S*H" (1970) by Altman and even "The Thin Red Line" (1998), where Malick applies his typical stream of consciousness to this genre of movie. Perhaps Berger's 147 minutes serve just to sensitize Netflix's clientele to the current war events, but they do not know how to go further: the immediately following Spanish flu caused many more deaths and in a shorter chronological span.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

HabibiehakimDec 27, 2022

My major problem with the film is in the large part of the second act, i thought the non-war part in the second act of the film super boring and the second war sequence was also became boring because of that, one particular scene in theMy major problem with the film is in the large part of the second act, i thought the non-war part in the second act of the film super boring and the second war sequence was also became boring because of that, one particular scene in the second boring war sequence that i found silly but their intention is to make it serious and it didn't work for me just like most of the parts of the film, first act and first war sequence was fine and i like the last act and final war better but it's not like i was so amazed by it, there is still a lot of things to appreciate in All Quiet On The Western Front from the amazing visual, incredible performance by all the cast, fantastic sound, and great cinematography, WWI is a real thing and i get the point about the haunting and terrifying experience, but this particular story that parts of it maybe fiction maybe real because only the author of the book knows it and it just doesn't work for me for the most part, great example of a great war movie was both Spielberg's Saving Private Ryan and War Horse, Nolan's Dunkirk, 1917, these are great war movies for me, All Quiet On The Western Front is not, ok first and last act that fills with great performances, visual, cinematography, and sound, but the story and a mess boring second act makes the film fail for me.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

AhdhNov 4, 2022

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It's amazing movie,… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews