jonathanfergusonvernon Few films have left me so moved and shocked. I saw this film in passing, perhaps twice when I was in my teens. Half-hearted attempts to give it a name failed until I clicked through an IMDb list. It is gripping, moving and wonderfully told. You can never again lie awake in bed at night and not imagine how you would cope with such a nightmare. It poses so many questions about what it means to be alive, violent conflict, war, nursing and treatment and the right to live or die - even the 21st century question of what defines 'to be alive' and ways today to communicate through brain wave activity when there is nothing else to monitor. This should be seen by anyone with an interest in the First World War alongside documentaries, action thrillers, romances and comedy about conflict on this scale. As pertinent to those interested in the Second World War, indeed any conflict where a combatant is left horrendously broken and then kept in the quasi-statis of the undead.

cmoyton Having watched this i again feel almost blessed that i have never had to face the hell that must be a battlefield. Having debated the legitimacy of war many times with ardent pacifists i believe the jury is still out. What this film masterfully achieves is the distillation of one mans life through his memories after having his body obliterated at the end of the First World War. To single out one soul from the millions who perished simplifies the conflict and yet this is what makes the movie all the more powerful. Joes memories become more surreal as the story progresses and also display an increasing level of macabre black humour. In contrast the parallel story of his life in the hospital bed as a limbless faceless living corpse (eerily shot in black and white) shows him make "progress" eventually being able to communicate by morse to the hospital staff. The movie ends sadly with Joe realising the full extent of his predicament and all hope is lost. The surreal nature of some of the movie dream scenes and the effective use of black and white film pre dates cinematic styles later used by the likes of David Lynch and Dennis Potter.

DragoonKain Let me preface this by saying I have not read the book but I definitely want to after seeing this very thought provoking film.Like many of you, I first heard about this movie from Metallica's video of their song, One. It's essentially the story of a young WWI soldier, Joe, who loses his limbs, his face, and all of his senses except for touch. But his mind is completely intact, yet trapped in his completely broken body. When I first heard about the movie, it seemed incredibly disturbing, and it definitely peaked my interest in seeing the film. But I never got around to actually seeing it until recently. And now that I've seen it, I'm very glad I have.The movie wasn't as disturbing as I thought it would be. Perhaps, had I seen this when I was younger, and more fearful of the losses he had suffered, I would have been horrified. But, as we age and are increasingly exposed to such tragedies and losses, our sensibilities numb somewhat, and we become more accepting of our own mortality and frailty. This movie is also somewhat comforting in that it makes ones own problems seem trivial by comparison. We often forget that things could always be worse. And Joe's situation seems to be about as bad as it good get. Nevertheless, he does his best to deal with it as best he can, which is also strangely comforting.Another reason why this movie didn't feel as depressing or disturbing as I thought was because the acting wasn't that great. There were times when I literally laughed out loud during some of the more emotional scenes simply because the delivery was off. The movie felt quite amateurish at times. There were also times when the film got a little too preachy. It often tries to force its pacifist views on the viewer a little too obviously, particularly in the way it portrays the military commanders as heartless buffoons with no redeeming qualities. Still, the movie did seem to get better as it went on and there were enough great moments in this movie to make it worthwhile.Probably my favorite aspect of the film was in the way it explored the themes of reality vs. dreaming. Because Joe is unable to communicate for much of the film, he creates a world for himself, mostly of memories, and of dreams, and of strange moments that have stuck with him. In his head, he often converses with his old girlfriend, a somewhat incompetent Jesus, and his father in order to get advice on how to deal with his situation. None are able to really provide good advice, reinforcing the fact that his situation is truly hopeless, but the things they talk about are often very thought provoking and deep on an almost existentialist level.Jesus, in particular, helps him to see that he is perhaps better off living for his dreams rather than for his real life, since his real life is more like a nightmare, and his dreams often give him hope and comfort. In a memorable conversation with his girlfriend, he questions what is real, and what time is. Since all he has is his memories and is no longer able to experience anything worthy of memory, does he really age? Will he ever forget anything since there are very few new memories to replace the old? In a way, he's frozen in time, and keeping track of time becomes one of his goals early on.All in all, this leads me to believe that the source material from which this film was made is probably much better than the film, and probably much deeper than just a simple pacifist's message. Check this film out if you get the opportunity, it will certainly make you think, and it's actually not as morbidly depressing and disturbing as you might think.

secondtake Johnny Got His Gun (1971)I was devastated by the book, in the early 1970s, and yet this movie feels forced and a little cheesy. But this is purely because of how it was made, not for the story, which is terrifying both for the idea at its core, and for the way they carry it through. There might be some problems with the logic of what to show and from whose point of view. "The Diving Bell and the Butterfly" is easily a way to approach this problem a little differently. Dalton Trumbo, the director and the writer here, relies heavily on flashbacks, and in a way we have a movie of a young man preparing to go to war, with his girlfriend more afraid than he is about, and a father with troubles of his own, a whole panoply of memories that make up a young man's life.. The narration by Timothy Bottoms (from the wounded soldier's head) has an awkward delivery--the words work, the voice less so.The book when I read it felt like a protest to the Vietnam war, even though it was published in 1939. The movie was meant, I'm sure, to target more specifically Vietnam, but now, in 2010, it's lost some of that immediacy, and it becomes a bit more abstract. It's also a bit of a moviemaker's exercise, due to the restriction of point of view (either literally, or through flashbacks).No amount of analyzing will remove the horrors of this situation. The movie lingers when you think it should move on, and it stutters at times with some less than convincing acting. But when the communication actually begins, it's quite a thrill. Trumbo is a writer and screenwriter, and maybe this wears at the overall effect of the film, as a film. As a story, it remains devastating.