FULL METAL JACKET (1987)

[JakeO]

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.

[M.10rda]

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?

[Neville]

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.

[JakeO]

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

[Allhallowsday]

...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?