larz928 I'm not going to go over the movie. Others have. I lived the time. The movie was believable. It drew me in and held me. It made me weep. I remember my friends. This film may not resonate for some. If you lived and experienced the time, watch this emotional, but not overwrought movie. It won't be shown often. It has the ring of authenticity, and you will feel what you felt then. You will be there.

otankgirl Right-wing, hackneyed, stereotyped. It's been 24 years since I first heard of this movie, so I have wanted to see it for a quarter century. Unfortunately it turned out to be an un-involving mess. And the absolute worst part is the jarring, atonal jazz-like musical score that yanks you out of every scene it infects. The next worst thing is the script, with "you've heard it before" dialogue like a film from the 1930's. Even the top-notch acting performances of Sweeney, Jones and Caan cannot overcome this stilted narrative. Fishburne gets one short scene, early, as the sadistic black Barracks Leader. "Gardens of Stone" is one of those train-wreck viewing experiences, that one wishes one had been warned about beforehand. The IMDb rating is currently 6.5, but a 2.5 would be more accurate.

JoeytheBrit It's strange how Hollywood still feels the constant need to pursue its glorification of the military when every other nation's film industry has pretty much moved on from the war film genre. Of course, America is a nation that has been engaged in more conflicts than most other nations in the past half-century and, while that isn't intended as a criticism, it does perhaps provide the key to America's seemingly endless fascination with the arena of war in all its guises.Coppola's return to the theme of the Vietnam war is as different from its predecessor as any two films with the same backdrop can be. The story of Gardens of Stone takes place in America, amongst the soldiers detailed to bury the bodies that are shipped back to Arlington National Cemetery from the scene of the conflict with monotonous and terrifying regularity. It is a relatively meditative and introspective study, weakened by a thinly drawn pivotal character (Jackie Willow, played by D. B. Sweeney) who is incredibly one-dimensional for a film that is attempting to offer an insight into the mentality of the soldier away from the battlefield at a time of war. James Caan, in his first movie role for five years, makes good use of a much stronger role as Sgt. Clell Hazard, the experienced soldier frustrated by the impotence of his position, who believes he should be fighting in the field or at least training youngsters on how to stay alive out there instead of burying them when they come back. Both he and James Earl Jones in another good part, display a healthily jaundiced view of the war. Angelica Huston also has an important (if slightly ineffectual) role as the individual caught in the middle who opposes the war but understands Hazard's reasons for wanting to fight. Jordan Cronenweth's camera-work is worthy of praise here, softening Huston's angular features and making it possible for her to convincingly play a gentler and softer character than she normally does. All other characters are strictly genre stereotypes.Unfortunately, any good work by the principle members of the cast is spoiled by a weak and unconvincing storyline that fails to involve the viewer – the 'tragic' ending is particularly unmoving, although it may have a greater impact on American audiences whose families were more closely involved with the conflict. At a time when Vietnam films were all the rage, Coppola is to be applauded for choosing a different – but no less relevant – perspective, but any message he may have wished to deliver is hopelessly weakened by a mediocre script and uninvolving storyline.

grendelkhan I saw this movie on video, soon after its original release, while attending college on a NROTC scholarship. It is a fine work, with a unique perspective on the Vietnam War. It was especially poignant, as I was preparing for military service during the Reagan/Bush years. This was not a film about the soldiers in the rice paddies; or protesters in Washington. This is the story of the men who had to bury the dead and honor their memories. These were soldiers who might be going to Vietnam, and those who had come back from there. It's about the senseless loss of life that war brings and the hubris of youth.Spoilers-James Caan gives an outstanding performance. He has seen Vietnam and would rather be over there or in a training position, where he feels he could help bring some of these boys back alive, rather than burying them. He is torn up by the knowledge that he can't help. He meets and falls in love with Anjelica Huston, a reporter who opposes the war, but is attracted to Caan. Caan tries to make her see his point, that he doesn't love the war, but has the knowledge hat could save some of the men who have to fight it.DB Sweeny has some fine moments as the young soldier who is itching to be in the middle of the war. He is the face of so many who did their duty and paid a horrible price.There are many fine performances in this film, but it doesn't always come together. Still, it is greater than its faults.I didn't notice this in the goofs; but, in the original video release, you could clearly see the boom mic in frame during the restaurant conversation between Sweeny and his girl. My friends and I used to laugh hysterically during this scene, as the mic would swivel between actors as they said their lines. When I later bought a copy, the mic was missing. I assume it was erased when it was remastered for laser and dvd.