FULL METAL JACKET (1987) Hadn't seen it in decades. Wow. :thumbup:
I LOVE that movie.
One of my top 10 war movies.
That movie is f**ked up. If your old enough to recall watching Vietnam on the news in the 60's and 70's, it aint like watching the news now. It showed everything. It was f**ked up.
(https://i.imgur.com/3rj8Zy7.gif) (https://lunapic.com)
I haven't rewatched it in years. From my last watch, the 1st half is fantastic but once they leave the boot camp the film is generic war movie.
I prefer both Platoon and Apocalypse Now.
^ I whole heartly disagree. The first part was just a prelude.
" These are the greatest people we will ever know."
(https://i.imgur.com/ZTceJTj.gif) (https://lunapic.com)
I had the same reaction to the narrative dichotomy the first time I saw this. D'Onofrio and Ermey dominate the first half of the film and none of the other characters stand out much or hold my attention in the second half. However, that was clearly Kubrick's intention. He sends us off into this whole other alienating dimension where everyone's a stranger and cipher, and where death lies around every corner. The final stretch w/ the sniper is just grueling. A highly FORMAL cinematic experiment... exactly what we expect from Kubrick, right?
An underrated Kubrick classic.
PRIVATE SNOWBALL!
I used this movie's local release in 1987 as an example of Apartheid censorship stupidity when I did my interview the other day. If you were between the ages of 2 to 21 you couldn't see this movie but if you were 16 and a high school graduate, you could be conscripted into the army. 😳😳
Quote from: Cult_Moody_Movies on April 22, 2023, 04:04:51 PM
I haven't rewatched it in years. From my last watch, the 1st half is fantastic but once they leave the boot camp the film is generic war movie.
I prefer both Platoon and Apocalypse Now.
It's the flip opposite for me. The first half is intensely claustrophobiv. The twisted messages and savaged innocence of the 2nd half is not a "generic war movie". No heroes. But there is
"Mickey Mouse... Mickey Mouse..." eerily beautifully filmed.
I'm another fan of the first half over the second half. I think the first half is a masterpiece. There's good stuff on the back end, but I find it a bit of a letdown given how good the beginning was.
Add me to the list of "loved the first half" people. The second part was actually boring for me, and couldn't care less about it.
Quote from: Gabriel Knight on April 24, 2023, 12:41:46 PM
Add me to the list of "loved the first half" people. The second part was actually boring for me, and couldn't care less about it.
Ditto.
Kubrick built up the content of the first 3rd of the novel the film is based on, for the well regarded first half. The second half is based on the last two thirds of the novel... I think, the name I don't recall.
I found the first half of endless abuse disturbing, as it resolves. It is riveting, but not self-contained as its typically read. The 2nd half is after destruction of humanity, pointless killing. Inhumanity upon inhumanity. "Together we will hold our banner high! High! High! High!"
Kubrick sure didn't aim to give pleasant reassuring messages.
I'm with most of you. It's a great movie, but the second half pales in comparison to the first. As M.10rda said, the first half has the sergeant and Gomer Pyle. The second? A dead VC in a pagoda and Joker getting mugged in Saigon. No contest.
It does pick up during the last stages, when the platoon gets pinned by sniper fire and what comes next.
Quote from: Neville on April 25, 2023, 10:29:05 AM
I'm with most of you. It's a great movie, but the second half pales in comparison to the first. As M.10rda said, the first half has the sergeant and Gomer Pyle. The second? A dead VC in a pagoda and Joker getting mugged in Saigon. No contest.
It does pick up during the last stages, when the platoon gets pinned by sniper fire and what comes next.
Joker isn't mugged, his friend's (Raptor man) camera is stolen. The lies pile up. The sniper happens. She is a child. Joker has no more jokes. The first half of the film is extremely personal. The second half is de-personalized.
I'm with John on this one. I am fascinated by the film as a whole.
Quote from: Neville on April 25, 2023, 10:29:05 AM
I'm with most of you. It's a great movie, but the second half pales in comparison to the first. As M.10rda said, the first half has the sergeant and Gomer Pyle. The second? A dead VC in a pagoda and Joker getting mugged in Saigon. No contest.
It does pick up during the last stages, when the platoon gets pinned by sniper fire and what comes next.
Second half(especially it's earlier part) just shows how "casual" war in Nam was in my opinion. Just like first half where a lot of vets in general can relate to drills, in second a lot of actual people who've been there can relate to how casual violence and crime was there and how mundane otherwise horrid events were.
Quote from: JakeO on May 03, 2023, 07:17:53 AM
Quote from: Neville on April 25, 2023, 10:29:05 AM
I'm with most of you. It's a great movie, but the second half pales in comparison to the first. As M.10rda said, the first half has the sergeant and Gomer Pyle. The second? A dead VC in a pagoda and Joker getting mugged in Saigon. No contest.
It does pick up during the last stages, when the platoon gets pinned by sniper fire and what comes next.
Second half(especially it's earlier part) just shows how "casual" war in Nam was in my opinion. Just like first half where a lot of vets in general can relate to drills, in second a lot of actual people who've been there can relate to how casual violence and crime was there and how mundane otherwise horrid events were.
Interesting take - I appreciate your input, Jake.
A famous review (probably Ebert's, but I don't have time to check) discussed that PLATOON was Oliver Stone's statement that "I WAS THERE AND THIS IS WHAT IT WAS LIKE", while FMJ was Kubrick's that "I WAS NOT THERE BUT THIS IS WHAT I IMAGINE IT WAS LIKE" or something to those effects.
I've puzzled over this at time over the past few decades, as I've often thought PLATOON is, in some ways, extremely contrived and false... and at least one Vietnam veteran I've spoken to has agreed for the most part.
Meanwhile, FMJ seems....... terrifyingly authentic, really. (I never asked that Vet what he thought of FMJ, though.)
I wonder if FMJ was, at least in spirit, way too close/too real/too raw/too existentially bleak for the late 80s?
I'm not surprised at those who think the Vietnam parts of the film seem very authentic. Kubrick wasn't known for cutting corners, and he also based that half of the movie on the book Dispatches by Michael Herr. I've read it and although it lacks a backbone -it's mostly comprised of little events and anecdotes- it's very similar in tone to those scenes of the film.
However, I also feel it doesn't entirely sit well with the first half of the film. It's not just that the first half is great, it's the difference in tone and approach.
Quote from: Neville on May 03, 2023, 07:54:59 AM
However, I also feel it doesn't entirely sit well with the first half of the film. It's not just that the first half is great, it's the difference in tone and approach.
Yeah, switch from 1st part climax to 2nd part is really sudden. Ending of 2nd part is a lot more in tune with ending of part 1 I'd say, especially sniper and marching scenes in the end.
I'd say biggest issue is how sudden the transition is.
Also gonna try to find Dispatches, sounds like an interesting read, thanks :D
Quote from: Neville on May 03, 2023, 07:54:59 AM
...However, I also feel it doesn't entirely sit well with the first half of the film. It's not just that the first half is great, it's the difference in tone and approach.
Each half is like to a different movie? Maybe there is NO "sit well" with either half of the film?