adonis98-743-186503 An in-depth examination of the ways in which the U.S. Vietnam War impacts and disrupts the lives of people in a small industrial town in Pennsylvania. The Deer Hunter is unfortunately another film that doesn't hold up and it's sad cause De Niro, Streep and Walken try their best but that sometimes is never enough i'm afraid and despite their own perfomances the movie was both way too long and very boring as a whole and i'm sorry but it does not belong to be on the Top 250 movies of all times as many other pictures before it have been in it as well. (0/10)

thedarkknight-99999 Its running length may annoy some, and it's criticized for being self-indulgent, and for having a problematic message. And while I can see that it could have been more shorter, I think that it has this great emotional impact because Cimino took his time in a very long first act that made us dive into the characters, and most importantly, their relationship. This first act with all its very very long scenes that feel as they were unedited is what made us care deeply about his characters when they were thrown inside a terrifically tense, gut-wrenching second act. That's how Cimino made us thoroughly disturbed, and have mixed, and vague feelings that result in creating a great catharsis at the third act. Every actor gave a very realistic performance, needless to say that both De Niro and Meryl Streep shine, but Christopher Walken's Oscar-winning performance is the standout here. All the characters are fully-developed, and fleshed out, but they are incredibly realistic and three-dimensional that can be analyzed as they are Shakespearean or Tolstoyan characters.I can't believe or describe how emotionally sweeping and overwhelming this epic is.(9/10)

jmsg-40295 I recently saw The Deer Hunter for the first time not to long ago and I thought it was great. I heard it was a good film before I went into it but I was surprised by how the story went into the issues of post-war life and PTSD.The performances of Robert De Niro was well done and I'd probably say that this is his second best role (my favourite is Raging Bull) in my opinion. I also liked Meryl Streep in the film and I'm not a fan of Meryl Streep. She plays her character really well and it really shines through during the second half of the movie. However the role that steals the show for me is Christopher Walken. He really knocked it out of the park with this role. The emotions he played were strong and his death by the end of the movie really hits hard. Not enough to drive me to tears but still hit quite hard. He totally deserved the Oscar win.The scenes in Vietnam have to be some of the most intense scenes I've seen to date. The Russian Roulette scene was really intense and it left me quite on the edge of my seat (or bed since I was watching this at night). (I'm also aware that some scenes aren't historically accurate, specifically with the Russian Roulette scene where there were no documented cases of Russian Roulette being played during the Vietnam War but honestly that doesn't change my opinion). I also really like the scenes with Mike trying to reconnect to society were also really well done. You can tell he wants to reconnect with the world again but the horrors of the war haunt him. However my favourite scene is the ending when Nick dies and everyone is at the table ready to honour him. The silence that surrounds the scene is almost too real. As if you were there with them. A perfect way to end the film.However I do have some issues with the film. One problem I have is that the other side characters aren't that interesting. They didn't really add a lot and didn't leave that much of an impression. I'm not saying they were bad characters it's just that they weren't that interesting. Some scenes drag on for a little bit, specifically when Nick returns to his home. I felt they could've been cut shorter but honestly that could be considered a nitpick. But my main issue with the film is with the beginning. More specifically with the wedding. The wedding scene lasted for way to long and it honestly brought me out of the experience a little bit. I know they're having this huge celebration before they get sent off to war but it really did drag. Also the run-time can also be considered an issue as it's way over 2 hours long and I did feel it's length. Overall I thought the film was great and I'm glad I watched it. I liked how the film dealt with the topics of post-war life rather than romanticising the what happens after a soldier's done with war. The characters struggles and emotions feel real and really brings to life the tragedies that war can bring not onto a country but into citizens outside the war. But while I did like the film it's probably going to be one of those films that I won't see for a very long time. I really liked it a lot but there isn't much re-watch value for multiple revisits. It's definitely a one-and-done type of film for me. Also the run-time and the wedding scenes can be enough of a turn off for me to not want to watch it again. But I still think the film is really amazing and definitely worth at least one viewing.

chas437 I saw this film in college in the early-80s. At the time, there was so much hype around 'The Deer Hunter", I felt I almost had to love it. I was greatly disappointed and never gave it a second thought. A film group I'm in viewed this recently, and WOW, it hit me, this isn't just a bad film, its aged horribly. Nonetheless, my contemporizes continue to heap praise on the film.Lets be clear, the film is way too long, tedious and unrealistic. The wedding reception goes on forever, and for no apparent reason. The director was obviously going for some sort of effect here, but he failed, and today's audiences would simply walkout on this.The hunting scenes are farcical. Last time I checked, the Canadian Rockies aren't in Pennsylvania.The war scenes are offensively bad.So, how did this film come to be so highly regarded when, in fact, its a terrible film? I believe its an exercise in mass delusion. So, this was the first big Vietnam War film to hit American theaters in 1978, AND it was meant to show the war in a very negative light. Well, that's all film critics and movie "aficionados" needed.