100 BEST WAR MOVIES: 28. 84 Charlie MoPic (1989)

  

                It was shown on PBS.  (It was one of the first movies I taped with my cutting edge new VCR.  I showed it in my American History class a few times.)  I don’t think it spent much time in theaters and made less than $200,000.  It was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Festival and Best First Feature for writer and director Patrick Sheane Duncan (“Courage Under Fire”) at the Independent Spirit awards.  It was a “found footage” film long before “Blair Witch Project” made that style popular.  The movie was filmed in Southern California on a very low budget with unknown actors.

            84C is the military designation for a movie cameraman.  The premise of the movie is that 84 Charlie (Byron Thames) is tagging along on a long range patrol to chronicle what happens in the bush.  The entire movie is seen through MoPic’s lens and we only see him briefly at the end of the movie.  The mission of the five man patrol is to locate a North Vietnamese Army base camp in the Central Highlands of South Vietnam in August, 1969.  The mission is being led by a green lieutenant (Jonathan Emerson) who is called LT.  He is looking to get his combat ticket punched for promotion purposes and sees the motion picture (to be called “Lessons Learned”) as a career move.  He is not exactly welcomed by the veteran LRRP squad.  In fact, the sergeant who runs the unit (and continues to run it in spite of the LT) is downright belligerent and disrespectful.  OD (Richard Brooks) is hard core and makes it clear he thinks the presence of LT and MoPic will get his men killed.  The rest of the unit is heterogeneous in the classic tradition of small unit films.  Easy (Nicholas Cascone) is the radio operator who is close to the end of his tour.  He jokes around a lot.  They are the kind of lame jokes soldiers tell.  “I wouldn’t shit you, you’re my favorite turd” is typical.  Pretty Boy (Jason Tomlins) considers himself to be lucky, but is about to crack.  Hammer (Christopher Bergard) is the cocky M-60 gunner.  Cracker (Glenn Morshower) is a hillbilly who is a lifer.  He’s the guy who is usually called “Pop” in war movies.  His best friend is the African-American OD.   The five are very tight knit in spite of their various backgrounds.  The mission is pretty standard for a long-range patrol.  The men hump through the boonies until they reach the enemy camp.  They call in artillery and then move to the egress point.  This is when things get complicated and the movie becomes a “who will survive?” story.

ACTING:   B                 

ACTION:   C  (6/10)

ACCURACY:  N/A          

PLOT:  A-                     

REALISM:   A 

CINEMATOGRAPHY:    A

SCORE:   none 

SCENE:  the sniper

QUOTE: Easy:   I’m so short I could parachute off a dime.

            Although the movie is called a “found footage” movie, I prefer to refer to it as a movie that was filmed completely in POV.  This makes it unique among Vietnam War movies.  There are several excellent movies set in the war, but none does as good a job of putting you in the grunts’ boots.  The movie is as micro as you can get, but you will learn more about the soldier experience than any other film.  It is like a tutorial on what a mission behind enemy lines would have been like.  You are on the mission with the men.  The movie is excellent on the details.  There are many small touches that prove that Duncan was a veteran of the war.  For instance, the men use C-4 to heat their rations.  The uniforms, equipment, and weapons are realistic.  The dialogue is authentic and not forced like in many Vietnam War movies.  Duncan throws in a lot of slang (“there it is”) and it helps if the viewer is already versed in how the soldiers talked.  Much of the dialogue is the unit members ribbing each other.  Few war movies are better at portraying the unique comradeship of American soldiers.  Part of the film involves interviews with each of the men.  This helps with character development and gives various perspectives of typical soldiers.  For example, Easy was “volunteered” for service by a judge.  You care about the men and the dynamics in the unit are fascinating.  Although there is some stereotyping, the movie avoids the trope of the incompetent and/or frag-worthy officer.  The conflict between LT and OD is not trite or predictable.  The acting is surprisingly good for such a no-name cast.  Brooks (“Law and Order”) and Morshower (Lt. Col. Matthews in “Black Hawk Down”) went on to respectable careers.  For “cherries”, the cast acts naturally and there are no histrionics. 

            The movie is mostly talking and marching, but so is war.  It builds nicely to the action-packed concluding act.  Easy stops joking as things get really serious and there are some gut-wrenching deaths (including a great twist).  The movie does not pull its punches and can be quite emotional.  Given the budget, the action is not up to other Vietnam War movies, but the “fog of war” aspect of the jungle setting ameliorates this. Besides, the object of the film is more drama than action.

            Most lists of the best Vietnam War movies overlook “84 Charlie MoPic”.  It can be argued that it is not the best, but there can be no argument that it is in the top five.  It is a must-see for any fan of Vietnam War movies. 

BEST AND WORST OF 2014

      Another year of watching war movies and another mixed bag.  I saw 89 war movies this year and finished the 100 Greatest.  Besides some great movies, I also saw a discouraging number of very bad movies.  But that's my life, so I'm not complaining.  Some of my fondest memories are of truly terrible movies.

THE TOP TEN

10.  Lone Survivor - a balls to the wall "who will survive?" scenario set in Afghanistan involving a SEAL team behind enemy lines
9.    Captain Blood-  Errol Flynn swashbuckler with plenty of action and some nonmushy romance with Olivia DeHavilland
8.    Go Tell the Spartans -  early in the American phase of the Vietnam War, an outpost is defended against a Viet Cong attack while Burt Lancaster deals with the insanity of the war
7.    The Dawns Here Are Quiet-  Soviet film about a male sergeant and five female soldiers who take on German infiltrators in some woods 
6.    Das Boot-  one ill-fated tour by a German u-boat in 1941 which is the best submarine movie ever made
5.    Born on the 4th of July -  the biopic about disabled Vietnam veteran Ron Kovic from gung-ho warrior to anti-war activist 
4.    All Quiet on the Western Front-  the granddaddy of all war movies based on the greatest war novel
3.    Paths of Glory-  a drama about the trial of three French soldiers in WWI who are accused of not making a suicidal attack and must be sacrificed for unit morale/intimidation
2.    Tropic Thunder-  the funniest war movie comedy ever made which satirizes several famous war movies

BEST MOVIE 2014:  84 Charlie MoPic (1989)

                This year the best war movie I saw was an old favorite – “84 Charlie MoPic”.  It won my March Madness Tournament to determine the best Vietnam War movie which means it beat some stiff competition.  Most of my readers may not have heard of it, but it deserves to be better known.  I go way back with this movie.  I first saw it when it first came out.  It was shown on PBS.  (It was one of the first movies I taped with my cutting edge new VCR.  I showed it in my American History class a few times.)  I don’t think it spent much time in theaters and made less than $200,000.  It was nominated for the Grand Jury Prize at the Sundance Festival and Best First Feature for writer and director Patrick Sheane Duncan (“Courage Under Fire”) at the Independent Spirit awards.  It was a “found footage” film long before “Blair Witch Project” made that style popular.  The movie was filmed in Southern California on a very low budget with unknown actors.

                84C is the military designation for a movie cameraman.  The premise of the movie is that 84 Charlie (Byron Thames) is tagging along on a long range patrol to chronicle what happens in the bush.  The entire movie is seen through MoPic’s lens and we only see him briefly at the end of the movie.  The mission of the five man patrol is to locate a North Vietnamese Army base camp in the Central Highlands of South Vietnam in August, 1969.  The mission is being led by a green lieutenant (Jonathan Emerson) who is called LT.  He is looking to get his combat ticket punched for promotion purposes and sees the motion picture (to be called “Lessons Learned”) as a career move.  He is not exactly welcomed by the veteran LRRP squad.  In fact, the sergeant who runs the unit (and continues to run it in spite of the LT) is downright belligerent and disrespectful.  OD (Richard Brooks) is hard core and makes it clear he thinks the presence of LT and MoPic will get his men killed.  The rest of the unit is heterogeneous in the classic tradition of small unit films.  Easy (Nicholas Cascone) is the radio operator who is close to the end of his tour.  He jokes around a lot.  They are the kind of lame jokes soldiers tell.  “I wouldn’t shit you, you’re my favorite turd” is typical.  Pretty Boy (Jason Tomlins) considers himself to be lucky, but is about to crack.  Hammer (Christopher Bergard) is the cocky M-60 gunner.  Cracker (Glenn Morshower) is a hillbilly who is a lifer.  He’s the guy who is usually called “Pop” in war movies.  His best friend is the African-American OD.   The five are very tight knit in spite of their various backgrounds.  The mission is pretty standard for a long-range patrol.  The men hump through the boonies until they reach the enemy camp.  They call in artillery and then move to the egress point.  This is when things get complicated and the movie becomes a “who will survive?” story.



                Although the movie is called a “found footage” movie, I prefer to refer to it as a movie that was filmed completely in POV.  This makes it unique among Vietnam War movies.  There are several excellent movies set in the war, but none does as good a job of putting you in the grunts’ boots.  The movie is as micro as you can get, but you will learn more about the soldier experience than any other film.  It is like a tutorial on what a mission behind enemy lines would have been like.  You are on the mission with the men.  The movie is excellent on the details.  There are many small touches that prove that Duncan was a veteran of the war.  For instance, the men use C-4 to heat their rations.  The uniforms, equipment, and weapons are realistic.  The dialogue is authentic and not forced like in many Vietnam War movies.  Duncan throws in a lot of slang (“there it is”) and it helps if the viewer is already versed in how the soldiers talked.  Much of the dialogue is the unit members ribbing each other.  Few war movies are better at portraying the unique comradeship of American soldiers.  Part of the film involves interviews with each of the men.  This aides in character development and gives various perspectives of typical soldiers.  For example, Easy was “volunteered” for service by a judge.  You care about the men and the dynamics in the unit are fascinating.  Although there is some stereotyping, the movie avoids the trope of the incompetent and/or frag-worthy officer.  The conflict between LT and OD is not trite or predictable.  The acting is surprisingly good for such a no-name cast.  Brooks (“Law and Order”) and Morshower (Lt. Col. Matthews in “Black Hawk Down”) went on to respectable careers.  For “cherries”, the cast acts naturally and there are no histrionics. 

               The movie is mostly talking and marching, but so is war.  It builds nicely to the action-packed concluding act.  Easy stops joking as things get really serious and there are some gut-wrenching deaths (including a great twist).  The movie does not pull its punches and can be quite emotional.  Given the budget, the action is not up to other Vietnam War movies, but the “fog of war” aspect of the jungle setting ameliorates this. Besides, the object of the film is more drama than action.

                Most lists of the best Vietnam War movies overlook “84 Charlie MoPic”.  It can be argued that it is not the best, but there can be no argument that it is in the top five.  It is a must-see for any fan of Vietnam War movies. 

GRADE  =  A+ 

a trailer

the whole movie! 

 

THE WORST MOVIES I SAW IN 2014

5.  Heartbreak Ridge -  Clint Eastwood wins the war in Grenada with a motley crew of post-Vietnam Marines

4.  The Boys in Company C -  a motley crew of draftees fights the establishment and plays soccer in Vietnam

3.  The Inglorious Bastards-  going behind German lines with a motley crew of misfits

2.  Tank Battalion-  a tank crewed by some motleys gets caught behind enemy lines in Korea

THE WORST:  The Steel Claw  (1961)

                “The Steel Claw” is a George Montgomery movie set in the Philippines around Christmas time after the Japanese invasion.  That’s right, it’s a Christmas movie!  You couldn’t tell that from the title?  The movie was a labor of love for Montgomery and a gift for his multitude of fans.  He starred, co-wrote, produced, and directed.  The man was the Da Vinci of B movies.  Speaking of producing, it looks like he emptied his wallet to pay for the movie.  I mean literally.  He did have a crate of pineapples that he was able to use to hire some Filipino actors.

                It’s Christmas Day in 1941 in Manila.  Capt. Larsen (Montgomery) is visiting a brothel.  He’s a regular.  He is not in a Christmas spirit because he has recently lost a hand and has just a stump.  Now that his playboy persona and disability have been established, it’s off to a special mission.  Larsen has to go into the jungle to hook up with a rebel leader named Santana (Mario Barri).  Larsen is to ransom a captured American general for $5,000 (ironically, the same amount spent on the film).  At the rebel camp he meets a tramp.  Her name is Lolita (of course) and she is the type of girl who feeds the chickens while wearing high heels.  There is some painful to watch flirting accompanied by sappy romantic music.  Before setting off into the wilds, Larsen fashions himself a steel claw using the local blacksmith facilities.  Santana’s band joins a band led by the sexy Rosa (Carmen Austin).  She and Santana have something going on which makes four because Lolita insists on coming along in her high heels.  She is almost eaten by a giant snake and gets a spanking from Larsen.  Frolicking then ensues.   

                They ambush a train using Rosa disguised as a sexy water buffalo herder.  The train is used for an assault on the Japanese base.  This results in a wild fire fight with some of the most hilarious deaths I have ever seen in a war movie.  (And that’s coming from a war movie death aficionado.)  As if the action cannot get more intense, we are now treated to a train chase!  The general is rescued, but he is not who he appears to be.  Lolita is wounded and may not make it.  They are in a race against time to reach the rendezvous ship.

                When I saw that the movie starred George Montgomery I thought that since I had heard of this actor, the movie might be a step above the kind of WWII movies you can watch on You Tube.  Wrong!  The movie is incredibly bad, but does have the guffaw factor.  I laughed out loud several times, mostly at some of the ludicrous deaths which included a shark victim.  You have to give the extras credit for giving their all in their demises.  The movie appears to have been made without rehearsing and with only one take for each scene.  The acting is wooden with the exception of Barri who brings some panache to his role as Santana.  He outacts the gringo Montgomery.  There is a modicum of homage to the Filipino guerrillas and you do have the female rebel leader so there is some homage there (although I think it was probably due to Montgomery sleeping with Ms. Austin). The dialogue is what keeps the movie from being a messterpiece.  It is actually not horrible.  We do get the memorable line when they are waiting for the ship:  “Keep listening and listen hard.”  Unfortunately there are not too many howlers like that one.

                “The Steel Claw” is a must see if you are the George Montgomery fan.  Otherwise, avoid it like the plague.

GRADE  =  F-

THE CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH

Here are the other rounds:

ROUND 1

Boys in Company C (11) vs. Casualties of War (6)
84 Charlie MoPic (7) vs. We Were Soldiers (10)
Bat-21 (9) vs. Go Tell the Spartans (8)
Platoon (5) vs. Siege of Firebase Gloria (12)
The Deer Hunter (4) vs. The Green Berets (13)
Full Metal Jacket (3) vs. Platoon Leader (14)
Apocalypse Now (2) vs. The Tunnel Rats (15)
Hamburger Hill (1) vs. Under Heavy Fire (16)

ROUND 2

Hamburger Hill (1) vs. Go Tell the Spartans (9)
The Deer Hunter (4) vs. Platoon (5)
Apocalypse Now (2) vs. 84 Charlie MoPic (7)
Full Metal Jacket (3) vs. Casualties of War (6)

ROUND 3

Final Four #1
Final Four #2

CHAMPIONSHIP

 

 

MATCH

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

VS.

 

 

 

The survivors of this intense competition are “Platoon” and “84 Charlie MoPic”. One is a blockbuster that won the Best Picture award and the other is on the other end of the spectrum. One had a substantial budget, acclaimed director, and famous actors. The other has none of this. One is the best known Vietnam War movie. The other is virtually unknown. This is David versus Goliath! As per the tournament rules, the final match-up is a summary of all the categories (because there is no way I can think of four more) and to ensure I do not show favoritism in the finals. So here it is:

ACTING                                            Platoon = 10                 MoPic = 9
PLOT                                                 Platoon = 9                   MoPic = 9
COMBAT                                          Platoon = 9                   MoPic = 8
REALISM                                         Platoon = 8                   MoPic = 10
CHARACTERS                               Platoon = 9                    MoPic = 9
BEHAVIOR                                     Platoon = 9                    MoPic = 9
WEAPONS AND TACTICS          Platoon = 8                    MoPic = 8
ACCURACY                                    Platoon = 8                   MoPic = 8
CLICHES                                         Platoon = 7                   MoPic = 8
DIALOGUE                                     Platoon = 9                   MoPic = 9
IMPLAUSIBILITIES                     Platoon = 8                   MoPic = 9
EDUCATIONAL VALUE              Platoon = 9                   MoPic = 9

FINAL SCORE

PLATOON = 103
84 CHARLIE MOPIC = 105

ANALYSIS

I have to say truthfully that I am shocked by the results of the tournament. I know that seems fake because I set the rules and do the reviews, but I seriously did not see this coming. When you look at the field, two things were apparent from the beginning. First, there are some great Vietnam War movies and several have strong claims for being the best. They also have fan bases that insist they are the best and their challengers suck. Second, there are some movies in the field that had no chance of winning. In between, there was a little movie called “84 Charlie MoPic”. I first saw this movie on PBS more than thirty years ago. I managed to tape it on VHS and even showed it to my classes occasionally. I had not seen it for decades. Thank God for You Tube! If ever there was a forgotten gem, this is one. I hope this tournament encourages people to view this movie. (I have posted the You Tube link below). By the way, I personally think “Platoon” is the best Vietnam War movie. I also think Florida had the best basketball team this year.



 

 84 Charlie MoPic

 

 

THE FINAL FOUR

The Final Four is set.

Hamburger Hill (1)
Platoon (5)

Full Metal Jacket (3)
84 Charlie MoPic (7)

Two very intriguing matchups! Hopefully I will have time in my crowded weekend to post the next round. Thanks to everyone who has stuck around this long. I appreciate it.

Here is a preview of the categories:
Cliches
Dialogue
Implausibilities
Educational Value

 

 

VS.

 

 

 

CLICHES
I went back and reviewed my old post on war movie clichés (which I need to update) and found few that apply to “Full Metal Jacket”. One that appears is the main character (Joker) is an intellectual who is above all the militaristic macho behavior and is snarky. And, of course, the fat guy dies (albeit in a unique way). The drill sergeant is an a-hole. Not one, but two, BFF couples are decoupled (Joker/Cowboy & Animal Mother/Eight Ball). The noncombatant who wants to get in the s*** (Joker and Rafterman) learn that its not called the s*** for nothing. However, for the most part the movie is not only free of clichés, but even flips some standard tropes. For instance, Joker does not turn Pyle into a competent soldier. There is no redemption arc for Pyle. There are no boot camp enemies that become buddies. The boot camp unit and the Lust Hogs are not overtly heterogeneous. The movie did contribute to purely Vietnam War movie clichés: A member of the unit is a psycho who revels in killing (Animal Mother). B

“84 Charlie” has a few clichés. The unit is pretty heterogeneous. There is a wiseacre and a hick. Another cliché is one of the BFFs dies, but not saving the other. It has the Vietnam trope of the sergeant running the unit instead of the Lieutenant. However, in this case the LT is stereotypically green, but not incompetent. We do have a short-timer (Easy), but he does not die. Most of the characters that die are not predictable. B

FIRST QUARTER SCORE

Full Metal Jacket = 8
84 Charlie MoPic = 8

DIALOGUE

Obviously FMJ is most remembered for the foul-mouthed DI. His dialogue is the one thing everyone remembers about the movie. Since R. Lee Ermey was a drill instructor, the words spewing out of his mouth are authentic to the type. The rest of the dialogue in the film is not bad, it’s just forgettable in comparison. The soldiers have the rough camaraderie of Vietnam grunts. Joker’s first confrontation with Animal Mother is typical of this. The Vietnam locker room slams are amusing. The movie does not go overboard on the Vietnam slang. One weakness is the narration by Joker is flat. B

84 CM has surprisingly good dialogue for a low budget film. This is important because the movie is very dialogue driven. The soldiers speak like American grunts. It is natural sounding. Their jokes are appropriately low brow. The dialogue is peppered with Vietnamisms, but it does not lay it on thick in a showy way. They use the catch-phrase “there it is” without making a big deal out of it (compare this to Hamburger Hill’s use of “it don’t mean nothing”). The interviews with the men are heart-felt, but not schmaltzy. The screenplay was written by a vet (who later wrote “Courage Under Fire”). A

HALF TIME SCORE

Full Metal Jacket = 16
84 Charlie MoPic = 17

IMPLAUSIBILITIES

FMJ: 1. The same prostitute that Joker encounters in Da Nang shows up in Hue. Hue during the Tet Offensive – the go-to place for prostitutes. 2. That sniper is an amazing shot with a standard AK-47. 3. Were the Marines that desperate for recruits to put up with Pyle all the way through boot camp? For a Kubrick film, there is not too much that is implausible in the film. B

84 CM: 1. The sarge points his M-16 at the LT. This is the only thing I can think of. A

THIRD QUARTER SCORE

Full Metal Jacket = 24
84 Charlie MoPic = 26

EDUCATIONAL VALUE

Things you can learn about the Vietnam War from FMJ: 1. Marine boot camp was mentally and physically abusive (but not as bad as the movie depicts). 2. A “blanket party” could be used to punish a troublesome recruit. 3. “Stars and Stripes” had a party line that it pushed. 4. American soldiers had a low opinion of the ARVN. 5. Civilians were executed by the Communists in Hue. 6. American soldiers in Vietnam would go to great lengths to rescue wounded comrades. 7. Hue was destroyed in the process of retaking it. 8. Vietnamese prostitutes were “honny”. B

Things you can learn from 84 CM: 1. Soldiers would duck tape their gear to cut down on noises. 2. The film shows various booby traps like punji stakes. 3. Americans called the VC “Chuck”. 4. Officers wanted combat duty to enhance promotion. 5. Soldiers used C-4 to heat their MREs. 6. Marijuana use was discouraged in the bush. Most importantly, the viewer gets a good picture of what a LRRP was like. A

FINAL SCORE

Full Metal Jacket = 32
84 Charlie MoPic = 35

ANALYSIS

This upset came down to the fact that 84CM is a better story about the Vietnam War and the soldiers that fought it. Placing the audience with them from a POV standpoint was genius. That one cinematography stunt makes up for all the big budget fireworks Kubrick throws at us. That is not to say that FMJ is not a great movie. Some of the things that make it a near masterpiece make it an unrealistic account of the war. It is the kind of movie experience you hope to have when you settle into your seat in the multiplex, but it does not take you into the screen like 84 MoPic does.

 

APOCALYPSE NOW (2) vs. 84 CHARLIE MOPIC (7)

 

VS.

 

 

CHARACTERS
“Apocalypse Now” has some strong characters. Two are in the top ten Vietnam War movie characters – Willard and Kurtz. Willard is the burned out assassin who is questioning his avocation. Kurtz is the Pattonesque commander who is obsessed with surfing. Kurtz is the classic scene-stealer and Willard is the rock that the story buffets. The crew of the patrol boat are distinct characters and likeable, but none grab your attention. On the other end are Kurtz and the photojournalist. Kurtz could have been a mesmerizing figure, but Marlon Brando’s lethargic performance drains the character. The same happens with Dennis Hopper’s photojournalist as the actor plays him as the opposite of lethargic. C

“84 Charlie MoPic” is a heterogeneous small unit movie. It has only seven characters with speaking roles. Each character is given a distinct personality and there is little stereotyping. The strongest characters are OD and Easy. OD is the tough as nails sergeant who cares deeply (in an alpha male way) for his men and is very averse to strangers messing with his unit dynamics. Easy is the humorous radio operator who is short not only in time left but in his tether. It is noteworthy that the LT is honest about his promotion quest and starts out incompetent and ends up growing into leadership. The others all have their moments in a movie that is intimate. A

FIRST QUARTER SCORE

Apocalypse Now = 7
84 Charlie MoPic = 9

SOLDIER BEHAVIOR

“Apocalypse Now” is not meant to be a realistic portrayal of soldier behavior. Bizarre would be the best way to describe much of the behavior. Willard seems to behave as an operative would and the crew of the boat are typical of young Americans thrust into a war they do not understand. However, everyone they run into is not typical. Anyone familiar with the USO shows knows that the soldiers did not riot when they saw a sexy woman. At no time in the war did American soldiers toting suitcases wade out to a patrol boat (heading deeper into dangerous territory) to escape from their post. Oh, and no soldiers surfed deep in VC territory. I’ll give it a default C because it is supposed to be bizarre. C

“84 Charlie MoPic” is one of the best movies when it comes to soldier behavior. The dialogue is natural and is not filled with slang the screenwriter found in a Vietnam Soldier’s Dictionary. The viewer is on a long range patrol with the squad and we see and hear a realistic depiction of that kind of mission. The bonding of the men is true to the situation. OD and Cracker are best friends even though they are of different races. Each character represents an archetype well. The only false note is ODs belligerence toward the LT. A

HALF TIME SCORE

Apocalypse Now = 14
84 Charlie MoPic = 18

WEAPONS AND TACTICS

“Apocalypse Now” is unique in centering the movie on a PBR. The armament displayed is accurate for a patrol boat in Vietnam. The crew uses the twin Browning .50 calibers (Lance) as well as the shielded .50 cal (Chef). There was also a mounted M60 that Mr. Clean is firing when he is killed. In the ville assault, the Hueys (belonging to the Philippine Army) are armed appropriately. The movie does a good job of depicting the variety of weapons available on Hueys. We see the M-6E3 weapons system, a mini-gun, the M3 Aerial Rocket Artillery, among others. The infantry are predominately armed with M-16s, but the curved clips should not have been so prevalent. There is one notable use of the M-79 grenade launcher by The Roach to silence the gook in the wire. As far as tactics, it’s not that kind of movie. The ville assault is ramped up on steroids. A napalm strike would have been called in to silence the incoming fire on the surfers, but it would not have been F-5s. (Obviously the Pentagon did not provide appropriate air craft for the film.) B

“84 Charlie MoPic” was written by a Vietnam veteran, but I could not find out anything about his experiences. The weaponry is fine. Cracker carries a shot gun and a sniper rifle. Hammer has the “pig”. Pretty Boy has a M-79. The rest are armed with M-16s. The movie is tactically sound. The squad is dropped off by chopper and then hump through the boonies. Their noise discipline is wanting, but the movie is dialogue driven so it’s understandable. They discover a NVA base camp and call in artillery. They set up their own booby traps for the egress. They rush a group of VC blocking their path after discussing the options. This makes sense. B

THIRD QUARTER SCORE

Apocalypse Now = 22
84 Charlie MoPic = 25

ACCURACY

Francis Ford Coppola once claimed his movie was a realistic view of the war. He could not have been serious. Although clearly fictional, very little that happens in the movie could actually have happened in the Nam. The central premise of a rogue colonel with his own private army is not even loosely based on anyone. The most inaccurate scene is the bridge sequence. The panicked Americans trying to escape and the whole premise of the bridge being destroyed and rebuilt each day is ludicrous. C

“84 Charlie MoPic” is not based on an actual LRRP mission, but it does adhere to a typical mission. The goal of locating an enemy base camp fits one of the roles assigned to these patrols. Having the veteran sergeant take charge instead of the new LT is realistic. The sniper incident fits enemy sniper tactics. The decision to call in a fire mission and then diddy mao is accurate. B

FINAL SCORE

Apocalypse Now = 30
84 Charlie MoPic = 33

ANALYSIS

I am a big fan of “Apocalypse Now”. It is a flawed masterpiece and a great movie in spite of its flaws. With that said, it is not a great Vietnam War movie. It is Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness” placed in a Vietnam setting. The surrealistic approach used by Coppola in several scenes makes for mesmerizing viewing, but pulls it further away from reality. “84 Charlie MoPic” could not be more different. It is amazingly good for such a low budget film and the no name actors are much better than anyone could have expected. The movie feels right and the POV style really works well. You feel like you are on the mission and care about the men more than your typical “who will survive?” film. This result will appear to be a huge upset, but not to those who have seen this obscure gem of a movie.

THE DEER HUNTER (4) vs. PLATOON (5)

vs.

 

 

 



CHARACTERS
The Vietnam War sections feature only two characters but they are iconic. Mike (DeNiro) was born to lead and was in his element in the Nam. He comes up with the plan to save the trio from captivity and then tries to hold together the group afterwards. DeNiro is perfect in the role and the character represents the guys who cannot be blamed for us losing the war. As tough as he is, he comes back damaged goods. The other dominating character is Nick. Christopher Walken won a Best Supporting Actor award for his searing performance. Nick is the PTSD poster boy. They represent two extremes in a movie that is not noted for subtlety. The problem is the movie tells us nothing about the characters from enlistment to captivity. B

“Platoon” is also dominated by two characters – Elias and Barnes. Elias is the disillusioned older brother and Barnes is the alcoholic uncle. However, it is definitely an ensemble piece. The roles run the gamut of soldier types. In that respect it reflects the standard small heterogeneous unit with Taylor playing the cherry who has to learn quickly to survive. His character arc is the central outline of the film. The movie has several other memorable characters – the psychotic Bunny, the ass-kissing O’Neill, the stolid Rhar. Repeat viewings reward because some of the characters are indistinct at first. The key to the film is the division of the platoon into the competing cliques of the dopers and the boozers. Although a bit heavy-handed, the use of the two factions is a useful metaphor for the hawks and doves. A

FIRST QUARTER SCORE

The Deer Hunter = 8
Platoon = 9

BEHAVIOR

It is problematical to discuss TDH in terms of soldier behavior because when we first see Mike, Nick, and Steven in Vietnam they have been there for several months and are immediately captured. The movie is not interested in portraying the soldier experience. It does a seemingly good job depicting the behavior of typical young males from a steel town before and after their experience (provided their experience is uniquely horrible). I’m going to go with a default C for this one. C

“Platoon” was lauded for its realistic representation of Vietnam soldiers when it was released. The praise was too strong, but the film deserves a lot of credit for being one of the best tutorials on grunts. There are many things the viewer can learn about soldier life from the film. Some examples are: the treatment of new guys, the use of drugs in rear areas, the role of sergeants. Most importantly, the movie depicts the different ways soldiers reacted to stresses. The camaraderie and banter is not forced like in other Vietnam War films. A

HALF TIME SCORE

The Deer Hunter = 15
Platoon = 18

WEAPONS AND TACTICS

As with the behavior category, TDH is hard to grade here. There is a very brief segment where Mike is participating in either attacking or defending a village. He uses a M2 flamethrower to roast a NVA regular. That seems an unlikely weapon for him to use. The soldiers that arrive soon after, including Nick and Steven, are all armed with M16A1s. As far as tactics, there are none shown. This would be an appropriate place to mention that the enemy tactic of forcing captives to play Russian roulette for sport was bull crap. D

“Platoon” has a variety of weapons as would be typical of a platoon. Most of the men are armed with M16A1s and King has a “Pig” (M-60). One messup has the sergeants armed with the Colt Model 653P in an apparent attempt to arm them differently than their charges. This model was not used in Vietnam. The movie does a good job featuring Claymores. Tactically, the movie has several scenes that show a variety of tactics. The night ambush is fine. The search and destroy that results in the location of the tunnel and the subsequent activities in the village fit the war. Sending the platoon back in as bait to make contact with an enemy force and having them walk into an ambush is true to the war. The big battle at the end is similar to several in the war and includes a “broken arrow” reference. B

THIRD QUARTER SCORE

The Deer Hunter = 21
Platoon = 26

ACCURACY

TDH is totally fictional and it is more of a character study than a war movie. The scenes set in Vietnam have some accuracy problems. I already mentioned that there is no evidence that the VC forced their captives to participate in Russian roulette tournaments. In fact, there is little evidence that Russian roulette was played even in the anything goes atmosphere of Saigon. Not to mention that Nick would have been playing for years by the time Mike returns during the fall of the capital. D

“Platoon” is also fictional, but supposedly semi-biographical from Oliver Stone’s experiences in the 25th Infantry. Some of the vignettes are supposedly based on incidents that he witnessed or had happen to him. The most that can be said is that everything that happens in the film probably did happen to some platoon at some time. It’s the accuracy of the portrayal of the soldier experience that makes the movie accurate. B

FINAL SCORE

The Deer Hunter = 27
Platoon = 34

ANALYSIS

This is an upset only to Rotten Tomatoes reviewers. Keep in mind that most critics reviewed “The Deer Hunter” as a movie, not a Vietnam War movie. It is undoubtedly a cinematic masterpiece, but as a war story it has weaknesses. It tells you very little about the Vietnam War and some of what it tells is false. It is much better as a home front movie which means the categories that I have chosen were not its strengths. I questioned whether it should have been in the tournament to begin with but included it because I could not get some more obvious choices (like “A Rumor of War”) and it is hard not to include one of the most famous Vietnam War movies. On the other hand, “Platoon” is still the Vietnam War movie for most of the public. Both films won the Best Picture award (the only Vietnam War films to do so), but I think it is clear that “Platoon” is the superior film.

84 Charlie Mopic (7) vs. We Were Soldiers (10)

 

VS.

 

 

 



ACTING

                “84 Charlie Mopic” is a low budget movie that has actors it could afford.  A couple of the cast went on to moderately successful TV careers and several were in “84 Charlie Mopic”.  All things considered, the guys do an excellent job.  Each does a good job developing his character and no one drains the momentum in the numerous moments when it’s just the camera and them.  The facial reactions (it is an intimate movie) are especially impressive.  Standouts are Nicholas Cascone as the impish RTO and Richard Brooks as the hard core OD.  This movie does death scenes well.  A

                “We Were Soldiers” is dominated by Mel Gibson as Col. Moore.  This happens to be a good Gibson performance.  He tones it down and does not insist on being tortured.  Sam Elliott has a lot of fun playing the crusty sergeant and injects some welcome humor.  Barry Pepper is solid as the photographer Joe Galloway.  Greg Kinnear is dashing as a helicopter pilot with balls of steel.  The rest of the cast carries water satisfactorily.  The movie stands out among Vietnam War movies in its depiction of the wives of the officers.  Madeline Stowe is excellent as the sorority mom and she is ably supported.  A

FIRST QUARTER SCORE

84 Charlie Mopic               9

We Were Soldiers             9

PLOT  

                “84 Charlie Mopic” is the story of a Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol with the twist that the unit is accompanied by a motion picture cameraman referred to as MoPic.  The Army wants a documentary of a typical mission.  To add to the abnormal dynamics, the tightly knit unit (with its tightly wound sergeant OD) has to cope with a green LT hoping to “punch his ticket” to higher command.  The routine mission turns out to be tragically less than routine.  Thank goodness or this would have been a pretty boring mission.  The plot is mostly exposition, but the dialogue flows well.  The action picks up after the characters have been developed to empathy level.  There is a nice buildup to the tense finale with a cool twisty ending.  A

                “We Were Soldiers” is based on the acclaimed book about the first major American battle of the war.  The plot covers the development of the air cavalry concept through training and then plunks the unit into a jungle clearing in “Indian territory”.  They are soon in the middle of a s*** storm.  Its “Zulu” without the buildings and with sympathetic coverage of the enemy.  The movie does a great job of intercutting with the wives back at the base in the States.  The plot follows the book admirably closely with the glaring exception of the ridiculous tacked-on happy Hollywood ending.  The plot also can be criticized for shoe-horning religion into the equation.   B

HALF TIME SCORE

84 Charlie Mopic               18

We Were Soldiers             17

COMBAT

                “84 Charlie Mopic” is really constrained by its low budget when it comes to depiction of combat.  This is partly alleviated by the unique POV perspective.  Although the combat is not balls to the wall, it is realistic to this type of patrol.  It does lead to some very poignant deaths.  B  

                “We Were Soldiers” has some of the most intense action of any Vietnam War movie. We get some breathers once the battle begins. This is welcome because the violence is draining.  Believe it or not, the battle is less frenetic than the actual Battle of Ia Drang.  The tactics of both sides are spot on.  There is no better film for understanding a conventional battle in Vietnam. There’s no surrealism.   Just turn it off before the feel-good ending.  A

THIRD QUARTER SCORE

84 Charlie Mopic               26

We Were Soldiers             26

REALISM

                “84 Charlie Mopic” puts you with a LRRP.  Granted, what is supposed to be a routine mission is far from it.  However, everything that happens could have happened on a mission like this.  The soldier behavior is authentic and the dialogue is not forced.  The dynamics are a strength of the film.  The squad has a bond in spite of their various backgrounds and personalities.  For instance, OD and Cracker are best buddies when in the World they would hardly have been so.  The jocularity of the soldiers is true to American warriors.  The relationship between the rookie LT and OD has been jazzed up but accurately reflects the role of veteran sergeants in leading units and the fact that many officers sought temporary combat to enhance their careers.  A+

                “We Were Soldiers” is a realistic depiction of conventional warfare in Vietnam.  It sticks to the basic facts of an actual battle until it goes off the track in the end.  The movie concentrates on Lt. Col. Moore and he was a technical advisor so we can assume he vetted the command decisions and Gibson’s portrayal.  Although the religiousity is pushy, it does match Moore’s strong faith and reflects the stronger religious beliefs of the Army in 1964.  The lack of cursing by the soldiers is unrealistic in spite of the supposed Kennedyesque innocence of the enlistees.  The movie saved the R material for the bloodshed.  Kudos to the realistic coverage of Moore’s Vietnamese counterpart Col. Anh.  The realism breaks down at the end when the movie sends a message that belies its theme that America was in for a load of trouble in Vietnam.  B

FINAL SCORE

84 Charlie Mopic     36

We Were Soldiers   34

ANALYSIS

                This was an awesome match-up for an opening round duel.  It is a shame one of them has to exit the tournament this early.  The films could not have been more different.  WWS is big budget, with an all-star cast, and covers an entire battle.  84 CM is small budget, no-name cast, and covers one mission.  Both do a great job achieving their cinematic goals.  WWS is a bit heavy-handed in parts and is hurt by the atrocious ending bayonet charge.  Contrast that with the unpredictable and somber ending of 84CM and you can see why it deserved to win.  Sometimes smaller is better, especially when smaller is the underdog.  Both movies are great history lessons, but you can read a book about the Battle of Ia Drang to get the historical facts whereas 84CM puts you in the boots of the soldiers.

 

 

 

watch the winner!