|
Post by ijon on Jan 27, 2006 20:38:30 GMT -5
Well, I'm not sure a truly realistic presentation of war is possible in a movie, though I thought Thin Red Line did better than Private Ryan on that score. I'd be interested in Worm's opinion though.
Thin Red Line's combat sequences often caught the "empty battlefield" well. Private Ryan's final sequence feels wrong to me in that the Germans don't seem too concerned with taking cover.
Our local paper carried a reaction to Private Ryan by a vet. One thing that struck him was all the philosophizing on the war the characters do. He was saying he couldn't remember ever having a conversation like, "What's it all about?" Particularly not in a combat area where you were busy keeping your eyes peeled. He also felt that confining the immobilizing fear syndrome to essentially one character was inaccurate, that that hit everybody at some point. S. L. A. Marshall's study of that exact campaign estimated that at any one point in an action up to 75% of US troops were doing nothing beyond taking cover (admittedly there is controversy over how representative that is).
I know a lot of people were put off by the more "poetic" passages in Thin Red Line (and indeed they weren't it's strongest moments for me), but for my part I found more believable moments in it than Private Ryan. Personally though, based on those vets I've been able to get to talk to (they tend to be quite reluctant) and readings I think 1949's Battleground may be one of the best portrayals of them, though the swearing and maiming had to be largely implied at that time.
|
|
|
Post by Shep on Jan 29, 2006 9:14:00 GMT -5
I heard that the most realistic war film ever is the first half of Full Metal Jacket. Would this be true? Having never been in combat/the army it's difficult for me to say. It certainly seems real though. And it's definitely one of the best.
|
|
|
Post by Broadsword on Jan 29, 2006 9:22:58 GMT -5
I heard that the most realistic war film ever is the first half of Full Metal Jacket. Would this be true? That is the problem I have with this film. The first half is so good that the second is a let down. Still love the film though not as good as Platoon.
|
|
|
Post by ijon on Feb 1, 2006 18:12:12 GMT -5
I can bring some experience to Full Metal Jacket, having done a half-assed NROTC Basic. That compares to Parris Island like a sno-cone to a ski-slope, but at least we had Marine DIs. Based on that I would say the training portion is extremely convincing. Just as Pvt Ryan and Thin Red Line form a pair, this movie is always linked with Platoon it seems. Regarding the combat sequences I can't dismiss that Stone does bring actual experience to them. I remember in interviews he was saying that actual combat is always more confusing and difficult to follow than movie versions; that fits with everything else I've heard and the sequences in Platoon certainly capture that feeling better. But I think it's also fair to ask just what a combat sequence is trying to show. Platoon is, I think, better if what you want is a first-person view of combat. Full Metal Jacket's combat sequences are more third-person. It's important to us as viewers to follow the action and fates of the various characters, and for that we need an omniscient viewpoint that none of them would have.
|
|
|
Post by Mr. Atari on Feb 1, 2006 19:26:48 GMT -5
Only Forrest/Dr. Thompson could turn a Terrence Malick thread into a Stanley Kubrick thread.
|
|
|
Post by ijon on Feb 1, 2006 20:07:55 GMT -5
Hehehe, as a mere Toblerone I wasn't going to say anything . . .
But to steer it back to Malick and The Thin Red Line, I remember Gwynn Dyer's documentary series War featured an interview with a Vietnam era platoon commander. He was saying that the memories that still haunted him were the moments when the whole platoon went to ground after a single shot. At that point he had to determine whether this was a lone VC who was already beating feet, or was this a major ambush about to go off. The only way to check was order one guy to break cover and--to put it bluntly--see whether someone killed him or not. He was saying he never forgot the "What, ME?" look he always got from whoever he signaled to do it. I thought Thin Red Line captured that moment very well.
|
|
|
Post by Citizen Kane Hodder on Apr 30, 2006 0:08:50 GMT -5
I just picked up The Thin Red Line on dvd the other day. It was pretty cheap at Best Buy. Can't wait to watch it.
|
|
|
Post by Shep on Apr 30, 2006 9:34:45 GMT -5
Only Forrest/Dr. Thompson could turn a Terrence Malick thread into a Stanley Kubrick thread. So, that Terrence Malick guy... how come he has made so few films? Partly because he's a perfectionist. Also because he got pissed off by the whole "Days of Heaven" experience (couldn't cast who he really wanted, etc.), so he turned his back on Hollywood and went to live in Paris for nearly 20 years. I think for "Days" he originally wanted young John Travolta or Dustin Hoffman, both of whom were unavailable at the time. The studio stuck him with Richard Gere who immediately pissed Malick off by refusing to cut his hair to period length. They didn't get along, but Malick still got a pretty good performance out of Gere. And what a beautiful film!
|
|