I gotta disagree with the thin red line... first off objectively a midnight clear and a bridge too far are not better war movies. better to you, perhaps, but not like saying the godfather is a better mob movie than hoodlum. second, saying that many fans took it as a challenge to their intellectuality, while ringing very true, could be said about so many films and books as to be almost moot. third, the film is not a waste of resouces (cough, bridge too far, cough) war is a waste of resources, and it was a great conceit to have all these actors who people know and feel an emotional connection to doing the grunt work of the war. plus they all just wanted to work with malick
now about the film itself... pedestrian plot? again, this is the absurdity of war. go there, take that stretch of land by force. reasons? who needs em? penn's bitter and cynical sargeant, nolte's ambitious colonel, and caviezel's wayward private were all played perfectly off each other.
other common criticisms of this film... the narration ran together? intended and effective. it was pretentious? hardly. the thoughts weren't directly in the characters heads. it was a philosophical, almost poetic, distillation of their hopes, fears, even worldviews. name another mainstream american movie that took it's central focus and put it on the backburner in favor of philosophy and poetry. yeah okay some of the poetry wasn't the best we've ever heard... it still moved me.
I haven't even mentioned the beautiful cinematography, the haunting music. two other huge reasons I love this movie.
anyway I guess this is just my opinion, obviously... but I don't get why you'd kill such a truly unique work of cinema.