None of the films take sides, at least from my view - in fact it deals about War without any maneuvers - if at all they were against someone, it was against their own country and proved that War was the epitome of insult to humanity and comes with a comeuppance of moral decadence.
Yeah, The Deer hunter actually doesn't stick its leg into the actual crux of the issue but makes it up with the characters, transforming through the Vietnam war. The whole "Russian Roulette" angle was debatable but that works for the movie as it was shown to 'affect' their lives beyond just 'death'(although there is nothing more permanent than that). How this indirectly affects the whole group back in little town from Streep to Cazale - at least how their cohesion changes post-war when Deniro comes back. The only big worry was: It shows Vietnamese in a bad light - thats the big glitch. But the transformation(which elicits a strong Anti-war lash out) undermines Uncle Sam's cause!
It shows the extremity of Post traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) with Christopher Walken's character(in fact every character undergo a profound change) . PSTD was also the base for OS's BOTFOJ for the important phase of the movie. Scorsese's 'Taxi driver' lays no emphasis on War but it also deals with PTSD of an ex marine - in Forrest Gump, Gary Sinise's character has eminent signs of PTSD. My question is, the movies touch upon "degradation of American soldiers" due to war, they don't justify the cause at any point! How come they are called to be have some bias. Maybe because of 'false portray' of Vietnam people and exaggerations of situations could have been the reason (or) Innuendos ? If there is one thing that BOTFOJ can claim, it is 'crystal clear transparency' but it was way too bogged down instead of dealing it in a subtle way - somehow that prevents it from being a favorite.
I beg to disagree with Platoon, It was not a typical Oliver Stone film like his later efforts which IMO has became more and more pathetic over the years - In fact the whole Vietnam trilogy (haven't seen the last one which deals with Vietnam side of things) doesn't preach or support US in any form. The first one tells them from the whole platoon perspective.
I think 'Apocalypse now' would rank as the best Anti-War movie from Hollyland and whole of celluloid dealing on Vietnam war. It deserves every bit of praise IMO. Coppola's efforts were worth it and the documentary of its making is a classic in its own right. Coming back to AN, No other film has engrossed the viewer down the doomed gutters of War - Right from the title, it was against War in every sense. It's a great character study (With evidence/reports- a style that builds up tension) and The narrative from Sheen heightens the intensity but we always get the feeling of pseudo-realistic artifacts when it seem to vilify 'Kurtz' and Sheen's interaction in the journey- the Trauma of American soldiers is lethal - every character from 'Eccentric but Old' Duvall to young Fishburne (forgot the character names) - portrayed the evils of war - and almost every deterioration it brings about - gut wrenching. The climax signifies the title like no other movie - Hauntingly brilliant. Insane to start with, 'Kurtz' became a question and when it answers - it answers the larger question, war has left a void over stability of men - the movie is a visual haunt fest with exquisite symbolism - All this and not to forget the lines in the movie and hw effective it was - None gets more intense and gut wrenching than The legendary words "Horror..Horrror" - which sums up the context of war!
To summarize, the aforementioned movies are primarily 'Anti-War' and deprecates the home strategies at different levels - With final statement of 'Shooting in the foot' stamped over it.
Looks like, our perception seem to vary to the extreme
)
2001, SL, ACWO, S being the most favorites :P )
Reply With Quote
)
Originally Posted by thilak4life
Bookmarks