posted on December 10, 2000 01:10:47 PM new
I was watching Apocalypse Now for the umpteenth time the other night and as always I wondered how close the movie came to reality. I suspect some scenes -- such as the USO-show-from-hell -- were overly embellished by Francis Ford Coppola's imagination, but others had me thinking, This seems very realistic, particularly the assault on the village at the mouth of the river (well, realistic except for Robert Duval commanding soldiers to surf as bullets whiz by and helicopters fly overhead playing Wagner over loudspeakers).
Of course, it's very easy for me to sit back on my couch and think This seems very realistic because I wasn't even ten when the war ended. Knowing that there are veterans on this board, I thought I might ask which Vietnam movie is most realistic, and in what way?
Personally, I've seen Apocalypse Now, Deerhunter, Full Metal Jacket, Born On the Fourth of July, that one with Michael J. Fox, and probably others. Also used to watch China Beach when it was on late night reruns (yes, Julesy, on Lifetime).
Are there Vietnam movies I haven't seen which are better or more realistic? Everybody feel free to contribute.
posted on December 10, 2000 02:44:51 PM new
Spaz, this is a setup, right?
I don't think that a single movie could define it with complete realism.
"Born on the Fourth of July" is excellent and true, the others that you mention are embellishments on a point, but are entertainment rather than documentary. I didn't like "Apocalypes Now" at first because I felt that it unfairly characterized the war. I like it better now, but only for it's lyrical quality. One, "Hamburger Hill" is closer to fact and there is a good presentation of the reality of a few long days.
China Beach has a lot, at least as much as it could and stay within the confines of a money making venture.
Lots of stereotypes in almost all of the presentations, and I guess that they have to do that.
I thought that "Platoon" would be the end all movie about Vietnam, and I still watch it occasionally for the mood of it, but coming away from it was when I realized that there probably never would be an end all at all.
There were two (which I can't remember the names of) which addressed the after Vietnam issues of veterans pretty well. One had John Lithgow(?), the other Don Johnson. Both were direct and not difficult to understand. There was another with Robert Deniro about a visit in Washington to a friend that is less overt, but telling. All three were 'b' movies, and I really don't have the titles though I might have copies of a couple around as I used to bootleg a lot of movies at home.
In all, there's bits in every one of them, but 'Coming Home' sucks.
posted on December 10, 2000 03:24:28 PM new
I never saw Coming Home. Was that Jon Voight? I don't like Jon Voight. Even in Midnight Cowboy, blechh. Then again, the only good thing about Midnight Cowboy was Nilsson's song, so maybe I shouldn't be to hard on him for that role.
But I had a feeling that there might be no single most realistic movie. Maybe I should rephrase the question to ask which Vietnam movie has the most realistic scene(s) or elements.
posted on December 10, 2000 03:42:02 PM new
Yeah, the war paraplegic Jon Voight with a mouth custom made for fellatio nursed by none other than Jane Fonda.
There was no single reality. I don't think that there has been in any war. As I said, "Hamburger Hill" could be added to your list.
posted on December 10, 2000 04:22:30 PM new
Unlike krs, I am not a combat veteran. REMF would describe my military role.
Some of the others: Charlie MO PIC, The Odd Angry Shot, Good Morning Vietnam, Go Tell the Spartans, and The Green Berets.
Most seem to more accurately reflect the biases and political agendas of the filmmakers as opposed to an accurate representation of the experience.
Like yourself, I can only imagine what it is like to be in military combat. I was particularly struck by the apparent realism displayed in the opening scenes of "Saving Private Ryan". The sound was unlike anything I'd ever heard before.
I've experienced being shot at in my present occupation but I don't think it's quite the same. Even though you didn't ask, I think the most realistic police show was "Barney Miller".
I really should proofread before clicking that button!
[ edited by xardon on Dec 10, 2000 04:32 PM ]
posted on December 10, 2000 05:37:13 PM new
My DH insists that Full Metal Jacket is reality; the others are fiction. But I must tell you that he has refused to watch most of them. He did have tears in his eyes when he watched "Letters From Vietnam" on HBO.
posted on December 10, 2000 07:11:26 PM new
I was kinda hoping that with all the eyes at AW, there would be a few Vets who could answer the question.
I'm going to keep an eye and see if someone can tell me, because now I really want to know which director(s) got it right, if any.
posted on December 10, 2000 08:15:18 PM new
Victoria, I have not seen any of the movies listed in this thread.
I would say Born on the Forth of July based on Ron Kovic's after the war experance & Hambburger Hill. The story of the senseless fighting & deaths for Hill 937.
Full Metal Jacket because Cariad's Husband said so.
posted on December 10, 2000 09:13:44 PM new
My husband is a veteran, 3 purple hearts, a silver star and a bronze. He doesn't like to talk about it and won't watch movies about it.
posted on December 10, 2000 10:31:12 PM new
I have seen most of the movies mentioned in this thread. Full Metal Jacket was one I watched more than once or twice. Apolcolypse Now, I didnt much care for (except the music). I, too, would be interested in knowing which one is "most true".
posted on December 11, 2000 02:28:07 AM new
I have two brothers who are early Nam vets. Neither will watch "war" movies. Typical for most combat vets who were in the real mix.
They finally did watch "Saving Private Ryan" being they felt it was like a documentary.
posted on December 11, 2000 07:27:57 AM new
My husband was in Vietnam in 1968/69. The closest he came to any fighting was when a mortar exploded about fifty feet from the barracks. For him "Full Metal Jacket" is the most realistic. He said he found the factions and friction to be pretty accurate. He feels that most of the other movies have an agenda. (It would be interesting to hear his younger brother's side. He was an Army medic there in 1969.)
posted on December 11, 2000 07:50:09 AM new
It would be. Medics had life expectancies like scout helicopter crew. Those years, 1968-69 were the heaviest periods of fighting of the entire thing. Full scale divisional operations began in early 1967 and before that, with notable exceptions such as the decimation of U.S. Marine units right at the DMZ in 64-65 and the siege of Khe Sanh in 1965, much was spent to make friends with the people and enable them to fight their own war.
Most of the closest realism is in books that I guess they won't chose as scripts. All movies have an agenda and the time alloted barely enables them to achieve that, if they do, much less provide a sense of realism.
posted on December 11, 2000 09:12:46 AM new
The "don't watch, don't tell" comports with my father's behavior. 68/69 (TET Offensive, Ton Son Nhut AFB), and Bronze Star w/Oak Leaf Cluster, since you're doing decorations here. Noncombat by trade. Mortar fire as background music every tape I remember him sending home.
Is it really surprising that a lot of those who were there wouldn't want to chance reliving any of it?
posted on December 11, 2000 09:19:35 AM new
I doubt that you have any brothers who were ever in Vietnam. But if you do, the reason they don't speak of it is probably because they are afraid to let anybody know how ashamed they are of themselves. Afraid to let anyone know anything about their emotional reactions to it, afraid to be assosiated as losers by the people of this country, and without the balls to stand up and say "NO! I am not ashamed and I won't accept that characterization anymore". But most of all they're probably afraid of losing their little brother's hero worship.
And speaking of shame, what "real" marine could be in the corps during those years and NOT go to Vietnam?
posted on December 11, 2000 09:29:09 AM new
Being an infant during Vietnam, I have to defer to networker41 my father. He fought in vietnam with the 25th Infantry, 101st Airborne, and 7th Special Forces Group. He feels Hamburger Hill is accurate for the assault it focused on (He should know he was there). He feels Platoon although accurate tried to encompass too much of the individuality of the war into one unit in one place.
He doesn't talk about his time there that often. He says it was a war of confusion, fought by boys who brought a dying concept of America to a place that only cared about having the economic benefits of American ideals absent many of its freedoms.
posted on December 11, 2000 09:35:09 AM new
Trying to avoid reliving it is wasted denial. I don't think there is a combat vet anywhere who doesn't relive it in one way or another.
Trying to shunt it under the table and act as though it didn't happen or playing some expected stoic role for others is what keeps any possibility of healing the scars from having a chance. It's there and needs confronting or it screws up your head forever.
I looked to movies once to show me that there might be an acknowledgement of our effort and service. It's not really there. Instead what's there are put together stories which ally themselves with the public perception of the Vietnam war. The reason that there are more of them in the last 15 years is probably a good thing, and that they better approach a realism is also a good thing compared with the 'crazed vet killer' stereotype of the 70's. It means, I think, that some of the blame has been lifted from us.
But there will never be the perception of an honorable and patriotic service such as is given WW2 vets, because Vietnam (and Korea) were 'dirty little wars' that we are not proud of having been involved in.
Fred,
Was it that late? Or 1967? I really haven't paid a lot of attention to I corp.
posted on December 11, 2000 09:52:05 AM new
networker67, It is good that your father & you talk. My son who is now 25 are just starting to talk. God bless the both of you.
posted on December 11, 2000 10:23:58 AM new
xardon, I agree. I was a college student - most of my friends weren't in the service. But my best friend from childhood and I had a major falling-out over that war. I was in her wedding in December 1968. She was a nurse who married a doctor. In 1969 he had to join the service and immediately volunteered to go to Vietnam. She joined understanding that they would be stationed together. It didn't happen. I'm sure she saw more death than she ever imagined she would as a student nurse. When they returned, he was very much anti-war. She on the other hand rabidly supported the war. I can certainly understand where she was coming from, but eventually we went our separate ways - the conversations were too emotionally draining. She lives about a hundred miles from me now and I've gone through her town several times in the past few years and have always wondered how she was doing. I'll have to call her next time. But still I'm afraid of opening old wounds just by being a reminder of that era.
posted on December 11, 2000 11:06:53 AM new
My S.O. was Air Force, flew Republic F 105 Thunderchief (Thunderthud) 1966, 68,
doesn't mind talking that much... still flys today.
In WW2 dad flew P-51, flew 30 missions, still belongs to the Checkertail Clan, N. Africa, Italy, and Slavic theater, and doesn't mind a bit talking about, like all the time
posted on December 11, 2000 11:25:56 AM new
Well, Bythesea, now you know.
Because they talk about being fighter pilots they are "unaffected, the wannabe's, and vets who experienced minor ear infections while in the service" according to sgtmike.
