MovieChat Forums > Im Westen nichts Neues (2022) Discussion > [Spolers] As usual, completely overhyped...

[Spolers] As usual, completely overhyped before release.

posted 2 years ago by Kendricks (2239)
3 replies | jump to latest

It seems today, every single release needs to be hyped up into oblivion to be the next best thing since sandwiches and basically the greatest movie of all time...... and then it of course isn't.

Overall, this is a solid movie, but a terrible adaptation.
Too many important scenes and even central characters (Himmelstoß!??) from the book are missing and could have been easily implemented. Instead, they went with completely over the top fantasy nonsense like the "great last battle" because the eager, evil general was eager and evil one more time, probably because he was like... really eager and evil, or something. Oh and don't forget his stupid balcony rant about the evil social democrats... just why do I feel the makers of this film felt they had to squeeze some [current year] political messages into this? Mmhh...

Ugh, this was dumb beyond measure and really hurt to watch.

Of course Paul had to die not only in the last battle in the last hours or minutes, no, it had to be the literal last second of the whole war because... why exactly? It feels like something out of a dumb American movie, but for a European production, this really hurts. In the book, he died on an uneventful day, where nothing else happened so all the report said was ALL QUIET ON THE WESTERN FRONT. The movie does not even explain its own title, because it completely alters Paul's demise. And again, it is so pointless and stupid, it reminds me of D&D going out of their way to "subvert expectations" resulting in butchering a fail-safe story into something dumb and unrecognizable.

And what was up with Kropp stabbing himself dead over his leg, even before it was amputated?
What utter nonsense! In the book he loses his leg and falls into depression, but he does not die, let alone kill himself.

And Kat?
The moment they went back to the farm, everyone who has ever seen a movie knew exactly what was going to happen because "movie rules and tropes". What horribly lazy writing.
Why not just have him die like in the book!?

The movie is solid when it sticks to the book and completely falls apart the moment it deviates from the source material.

What a shame, considering the production quality (aside from garbage CGI tanks and CGI rats), this could have been an actual masterpiece, easily. But no, we had to put a "special spin" on it and now it's generic 2020s crap.

[–] StoneKeeper (26656) 2 years ago

I liked the movie a lot, just like I enjoyed the 1930 version.

But I’m curious, how did Kat died in the book? Is it like in 1930?

[–] Kendricks (2239) 2 years ago

I do not remember the 1930 version at all, but I think so.

In the book, he gets wounded by shrapnel from artillery outside of combat, kinda randomly.
Paul carries him on his back to a field hospital - like in the movie, but he is dead on arrival.

So his death is the same, but how it came to be was unnecessarily different. Like I explained, it was so idiotic to go back to that farm, the viewer knew "that's it, he dies" in that moment. Also weirdly executed. That boy that apparently ran after them with the rifle, not out of breath at all, just standing there, shooting him?

Didn't like it.

[–] StoneKeeper (26656) 2 years ago

That scene was indeed the part where the movie made less sense. I was like “why did they ran for their lives for like a minute and a half just sit calmly in the middle of the field without hiding when someone is behind shooting at them? WTF?” Also, the kid just shot him once and left without a trace? That boy sure can run!

But yeah, it’s the same thing than the book that happens in 1930 film.