Gallipoli: Weir's Cruel Optimism and the Sprint to Nowhere

Okay, so I finally got around to Peter Weir's Gallipoli. Been on my list forever, partly because I'm trying to deep-dive into Weir's filmography. I'm interested in how he crafts these really specific, almost insular worlds, and then just...shatters them. I think Gallipoli is him at his most brutal in that regard. The sense of youthful idealism he builds up at the beginning with Archy (Mark Lee) and Frank (Mel Gibson) is incredible, even kinda joyful. All that open space, the sprint across the desert... you really buy into the naive idea that they're heading for something meaningful. But here's my theory, and it's probably not groundbreaking, but the entire movie is a slow-motion representation of that final, fateful sprint. Archy's athletic prowess, so celebrated at the start, becomes utterly pointless. He's running toward death. The sound design in that final scene, with the screams and the gunshots, is so impactful BECAUSE it's the antithesis of the peaceful, sun-drenched opening. Weir deliberately lulls you into a false sense of security before ripping the rug out. It's cruel, but it's effective filmmaking. What I find MOST interesting is how Weir doesn't really focus on the Ottoman perspective, but chooses to zoom into the wasted potential and loss of innocence of these individual young men. It’s less about 'war is hell' and more about 'dreams, crushed.' And it makes the impact THAT much better. It feels like he is focusing on a specific story of the war, as opposed to the global scale of it all. Archy’s blind loyalty, Frank’s initial cynicism evolving into camaraderie... it all gets reduced to nothing in that last, agonizing moment. Brutal. I'm still chewing on it, but I think it’s one of his most devastating films. Def worth the watch if you're into character-driven war stories and slow-burn tragedy. Anyone else pick up on this 'sprint to nowhere' parallel, or am I reaching?