I just had massive flashbacks to high school chemistry biology

>This results in a free hydrogen, which is pushed through some protein machinery to force a phosphate group onto adinosine diphosphate, creating adisonine triphosphate, otherwise known at ATP.

Ah the electron transport chain. It also binds leftover hydrogen atoms to oxygen make water as well right?

>The fact that the title lost it's original meaning is really annoying.

Yes. It reminds me of what they did with the ending of I Am Legend.

>Not a good adaptation but a good standalone movie.

100% agree. Good movie, bad adaptation.

I think those points are accurate. It's a good WW1 movie. But it's not All Quiet on the Western Front.

It did.

But >!every character that died in the film died differently in the book. Characters who lived in the book died in the film, they joined the war 3 years later in the film than the book, there's the random subplot with Daniel Bruhl that wasn't in the book and Paul dies in October 1918 in the book, which is where the title comes from, not some random attack after a bossfight on the last day of the war some officer ordered which has no basis in reality (for the Germans anyway).!<

Almost done. The 1979 movie is better than this, the 1930 movie is better than the 1979 one and the book is better than all 3.

As a movie it's not bad. But it should have a different title. I'm about an hour and 20 into it and it's similar to World War Z in that it has nothing in common with the book other than the title and names of the characters. And in both cases the movies are massively inferior to the novels.

Both the 1979 and especially the 1930 movies do a much better job of telling the story.

The movie is OK, but it shouldn't be called All Quiet on the Western Front.

Edit: almost done the movie and keeping the same name is an insult to the book.