march boutiques-francophones Unlimited cloud storage SmartSaver Furniture Introducing Kindle Oasis Music Deals Store sports Tools ca_ty_gno

Customer Reviews

4.2 out of 5 stars216
4.2 out of 5 stars
Your rating(Clear)Rate this item


There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.

Showing 1-10 of 18 reviews(1 star). Show all reviews
on February 15, 2001
Look, I was in 'Nam and this movie captures nothing but a few tears from weepy card burning hippies who used to throw eggs on us back in the day. This film naively chose to focus on the sad aspects of war, like watching your buddy go crazy. It neglected to display the great aspects of war, like you and your buddy being able to legally kill people. I mean, you can call me crazy, but until you've actually been in that position you don't know how exhilirating it is. This movie is unrealistic, melodramatic, and highly overrated.
0Comment|One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 2, 1999
The Deer Hunter is an overlong drama about the effects of war. This film is considered a war movie but they barely show any war scenes in this film. Sure, the scenes of Russian roulette are disturbing but then the film just goes into a long phase of boredom. I think this movie would have worked better if the characters were brothers rather than friends, that way the complete mental collapse would make much more sense.
0Comment|One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on March 9, 1999
The Deer Hunter was awarded the Best Picture that should have gone to Apocalypse Now the next year. Very long with dull scenes that have nearly no actual truth to Vietnam. Boring script and acting make this one a pitiful three hour piece of trash.
0Comment|One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on December 20, 1998
A decidedly boring film that takes 3 hours to painfully wend its way to its desultory, but ultimately entirely predictable conclusion.
0Comment|One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 17, 1999
THis film hardly does justice to vetrans of the Vietnam war becaues it exploits what happend to them and then plays it in complety unrealistic ways( I know becaues my father is one) Above from the story unrealistic tones, the film is hardly intresting in any cinematic terms. Every scene is draged out way to long and every charter is carboard or worse. THe film musical score is equally hokey. The film also is done in by weak writing and genrally bad acting. ( espacilly di nero which is shocking) Wlakens ok but nothing speical. The story telling is badly disjointed and tells a secen from one to many angles. Any one who claimed they went throught a similar story has bowed to waht the media thinks hapend in vietnam. I
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on June 2, 1999
Here is one of those "classics" that everyone is afraid of saying anything bad about. This movie doesn't for one second belong in AFI's Top 100. It is overly long (right at 3 hours) and is only compelling for a few minutes of the 180 long ones the viewer must endure. It takes an almost an hour and a half to get from PA. to Vietnam. Yes we meet the characters but do we really need to spend so much time learning who they are. The wedding scene last longer than some weddings I have been to in real life. And I'm sorry, they could not have picked a more disturbing theme on which to base a movie. Yet just because it is disturbing, does not mean it can support a 3 hour movie. Boring.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on May 10, 1999
Chimino and this waste of film stock were so over-hyped.
This film has no real story, no real message, and is in fact offensive to those who fought, supported, or protested the war.
This is by far the worst film in the 1979-1980 stretch in which several real masterpieces were released. Might I suggest Being There, The Shining, Raging Bull, or Atlantic City? Even The Empire Stikes Back, as silly and pretentious as it is, is 10 times better than this senseless film.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 28, 2001
I'll give you one thing: this movie is not as bad as Apocalypse now, although it is still HORRIBLE for its inaccurate portrayal of the Vietnamese. I know that the filmmakers are biased towards Americans because they are AMERICAN themselves. (Takes no rocket scientist to figure that out). So they would portray Americans as honest, brave boys going to fight for "their country" and the Vietnamese as ugly, deceiving, cruel wretched people. I think the scenario fits better the other way around. If you think that Americans played "fairly" in the game of war, think again. They're just as cruel as the next. I mean, we even have people admitting they massacred innocent, unarmed people nowadays. Do you expect me to praise you because you're a soldier? My loathe for war is too obvious, and the fact that humans cannot get along disturbs me, because one side is always thinking they're "superior" than the other and wants power. Americans should not even have gotten involved in this dirty, unnecessary war. Mind your own business, then at least you can have disregard for human life without actually proving that by MURDERING innocent people.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on April 7, 2000
I found this film to be highly overrated. First, it desperately needed the attention of an editor. The 3 hours isn't what bothers me, it's just that they tried to do way too many things with the script and it comes off to me as noisy and not focused. Yeah, the hardships, yeah, the friendship, yeah, the abused women who have to cope with disgusting husbands. But there are little redeeming qualities you take from the characters and the situations. Second, the Vietnam scene was a disasterous mess from start to ridiculous escape. The famous Russian roulette scene lasts about 45 minutes, which is the duration of the Vietnam scene. After 45 minutes, you probably will get tired of people shouting and seeing others shoot themselves through the head and watch as blood streams from the wound as they fall and twitch on the floor. The escape is absurdly preposterous, and Christopher Walken is left behind. The last hour and a half of the movie is Robert DeNiro walking around town saying, "Hello, nice t'see ya!" And by the time you see Walken again in the end you've probably forgotten that he's even in the movie. I'm sorry to say that it seems like this film could be really good, if they would have polished it and focused it more. From the dragging, overly long wedding to the deer hunting scene to Vietnam to home again, it all seems like the movie is just a bunch of outtakes or something.
0Comment|Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse
on October 18, 2003
Of course the acting, directing, cinematography, etc. of this movie are all, by near universal consensus (and I don't exclude myself), simply first-rate. The main point of disagreement seems to be how necessary those VERY slow wedding scenes were to setting the backdrop for the rest of the movie.
My rejection of the movie as a thing of worth is based on one specific element: the Russian roulette scenes.
When I saw the movie, I was extremely moved, indeed haunted, by as much as, if not more than, anything else in the movie, the Russian roulette scenes. They are so powerful: de Niro's character helping the others pull through, the daring escape, their effect on Walken's character, who by the end of the movie is completely emotionally numbed/scarred by them, etc.
The movie portrayed these scenes so convincingly, and my own personal knowledge of the Vietnam war was sufficiently sparse, that I took it for granted, without even a second thought, that these scenes portrayed a phenomenon that was a legitimate part of the Vietnam War experience. And the thought that this was another of the horrors that U.S. soldiers had to face was very disturbing to me and lasted with me for a long time.
I found out years later that the Russian roulette scenes were a total fantasy, a fiction, a fake, a fabrication. That such scenes rarely, if ever, took place in the Vietnam War.
So what is the message of this movie? How I am supposed to treat seriously a movie which takes such pains to build up a realistic group of characters, sent to a horrible war that really did take place, come back and have to deal with real-life situations of apple-pie America, when a central pillar of the experience of the movie is total fantasy-land?
It is as if, instead of having the Russian roulette scenes, the movie had portrayed the soldiers being abducted by UFO's for a time, and showing the impact such an episode would have on them. Sound ridiculous? Of course it is! But therefore so too is inter-weaving a bizarre, surrealistic experience of Russian roulette, which bears no more relation to reality than a UFO escapade.
I object to the deception. I seriously doubt that I am the only person who was thus misled by the movie. It is simply lazy and manipulative to concoct such a fictitious scenario. Russian roulette, a forced game where the stakes are life and death and the outcome is dictated by the roll of the dice (so to speak), is a cheap, easy, artificial way to inject a sense of morbid tension and high drama into the movie.
If the movie-makers wanted to show us a movie which portrays the horrors of the Vietnam War, then please show us a movie which portrays the horrors of the Vietnam War! not a movie which portrays the horrors of your imagination! Was there not enough material of what the U.S. soldiers went through in Vietnam that you had to fabricate this Russian roulette nonsense?
I see one reviewer after another speak of the "realism" of this movie. In light of what I've written here, I just don't get it.
0Comment|One person found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you?YesNoReport abuse