Showing posts with label March Madness Vietnam War movies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label March Madness Vietnam War movies. Show all posts

Thursday, April 17, 2014

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
 
 











HAMBURGER HILL (1) vs. UNDER HEAVY FIRE (16)

 



VS.
 
 
 
 
 
***  THIS MATCH SLIPPED THROUGH THE CRACKS.  I BET EVERYONE WAS WONDERING WHO HAD WON THIS MATCH.

 
 
 ACTING

“Hamburger Hill” has a cast of actors who were unknown at the time, but some were at the start of significant careers. The cast is likeable and does not perform like a bunch of rookies. They are a bit too sincere in spots and their line readings sometimes indicate they do not understand the slang they have memorized. Although there was no Dale Dyeish “boot camp”, they do not look like actors playing soldier. Dylan McDermott is good as the sergeant who leads by example on and off the battlefield. His contract specifically mentioned “don’t touch the hair”. The standout in the cast is Courtney Vance as Doc. He chews a little, but it is a memorable performance. It was the first significant film role for both as well as the underused Don Cheadle. The only weak performance is Steven Weber as the platoon sergeant. B

“Under Heavy Fire” has a similar cast of unknowns, but they will remain that way. The “big” star is Casper Van Dien as the troubled, but ruggedly handsome Capt. Ramsey. You know you are in trouble when you wish that Casper would have given the others acting lessons. Carre Otis, as a documentary film bunny, succumbs to his charms. She is also ruggedly handsome. The rest of the cast should have gone to acting camp. They are typically sincere, but fortunately they save the foaming for the end. D

FIRST QUARTER SCORE
Hamburger Hill = 8
Under Heavy Fire = 6


PLOT

HH is a battle film that has two distinct parts. The first half deals with character development and tutoring the audience on what the soldiers had to go through. We are supposed to relate to the five FNGs and empathize with them. The second half is the payoff with the battle. Intense action interspersed with soldier campfire banter and bitching. The expository moments advance the theme that the home front can kiss these soldiers’ asses. The movie is clearly anti-anti-Vietnam War (as opposed to pro-war). The plot is the standard “who will survive?” variety. Don’t get too attached to the men. B

UHF has a daring plot. It starts twenty years after the war with a group of vets returning to Vietnam with a documentarian in tow. Meeting them there is their ex-commander who went from “Most Likely to Succeed” to “Most Likely to Make Us Bleed” during their time together. The first scene introduces us to a friendly fire episode for which Ramsey is blamed. The film effectively uses flashbacks to gradually flesh out the arc that led to the unit dysfunctionality. This builds to … a reenactment of the friendly fire incident! The movie closes poorly. B

HALF TIME SCORE
Hamburger Hill = 16
Under Heavy Fire = 14


COMBAT

HH has a high quantity of combat. It reminds a lot of “Pork Chop Hill”. There is an intense opening combat scene and then a patrol mission, but the core of the movie is the sequence of frontal assaults up the titular hill. The violence is graphic and the deaths are random and unpredictable. There is some pretty gory stuff, including decapitations. The film manages to avoid being repetitive. Probably only “We Were Soldiers” has higher quality and that could partly be explained by the higher budget. A

UHF does a good job with combat considering the production values. One thing you can be sure of – if it’s a flashback, there is going to be some action. The incidents portrayed are a greatest hits compilation. For instance, there’s a patrol with the trio of mortars incoming, spider holes, and a sniper. There is a briskly paced tunnel scene. The big set piece is in Hue during the Tet Offensive. The urban combat is pretty good and leads to an atrocity that sets up the full circle return to the friendly fire incident. There is little shooting from the hip and few hands thrown up in the air deaths. B

THIRD QUARTER SCORE
Hamburger Hill = 25
Under Heavy Fire = 22


REALISM

HH is one of the more realistic Vietnam War movies. The soldier behavior and camaraderie is on target for the army midway through the war. The bonding versus racial tensions is well played. The only discordant note comes from the dialogue put in the actors’ mouths. The screenwriter uses every slang term ever uttered in the Nam to the point that the dialogue feels forced. The battle is one of the more famous ones from the war and the movie is solid in its realistic depiction of it. One could complain about the exaggerated mortality rate, but that’s a war movie sort of thing that will always be with us. Besides, the actual battle did have a high casualty rate (just not Hollywood high). B

UHF has some problems with reality. Some of the combat scenes evidence either an ignorance of combat or more likely a disregard of reality for entertainment purposes. For example, when confronted by an NVA tank, Ramsey calls for a Skyraider to drop its fuel tank which the unit fires at causing an explosion that destroys the target! The behavior of the main characters both in the war and upon their return is the biggest problem. They are too melodramatic and one dimensional in response to the stresses they encounter. This leads to the laughable reenactment scene which degenerates into a cartoonish standoff. By the way, when you are shot an inch above the heart, you don’t run around unaffected like Ramsey does. D

FINAL SCORE
Hamburger Hill = 33
Under Heavy Fire = 28


ANALYSIS

This match was a lot closer than I anticipated. I had never seen “Under Heavy Fire” before and assumed that it’s seeding at #16 meant it was the worst movie in the tournament. It by no means is a good movie, but it does take a different approach to the war. Unfortunately, friendly fire was a fact of life in Vietnam (“Hamburger Hill” has a scene where American helicopters fire on their own men) and to use an incident as the framework for a military mystery was intriguing. Of course, with the low budget and the poor actors, the idea did not match the execution, but it was a nice try. The categories used for this match-up did not lend itself to the strength of UHF. It uses a lot of POV footage which is overdone, but still effective. As far as HH, it may not deserve the #1 seed (which is based on generic movie reviewers), but it is still one of the more highly thought of Vietnam War movies. It has no spectacular elements like “Apocalypse Now”, “Full Metal Jacket”, or “Platoon”, but it also does not have some glaring weaknesses. It is a balanced movie overall.
 
 

Wednesday, April 16, 2014

HAMBURGER HILL (1) vs. PLATOON (5)



VS.
 
 
 



CLICHES
“Hamburger Hill” has several classic war movie clichés. Some are particular to the Vietnam War. There is a scene that emphasizes the cluelessness of the media about the true nature of the war. The soldier who is short is doomed to die before he can enact the joyful homecoming that he brags about. Two standards are updated for the war. A character receives a “Dear John” letter, but his girl friend advances one of the film’s themes by explaining that she is jilting him because of her anti-war college friends. There is the trite appearance of “Hanoi Hannah” who makes the obligatory reference to their unit. We also get the guy who talks about the car he is going to buy back in “the world”. Even though the movie focuses on the five replacements, that does not stop it from killing them off. On the other hand, the unit is not overtly heterogeneous and the grunt who shows off his girl friend’s picture does not die. C

“Platoon” also has several classic war movie clichés. In fact almost immediately we get a double dose with the fat guy ensuring his doom by showing off a picture of his girl. The movie helped establish some uniquely Vietnam tropes. The LT is green and incompetent. The sergeants run the platoon. There is a psycho in the unit who enjoys the killing. The incompetent leader calls in the wrong coordinates, resulting in a friendly fire incident. In one refreshing twist, the short-timer (King) is evaced before the final battle. The unit is heterogeneous, but not in a barracks identification scene sort of way. C

FIRST QUARTER SCORE

Hamburger Hill = 7
Platoon = 7


DIALOGUE

The dialogue in HH could be described as stilted and it tries too hard to sound authentic to the way the grunts talked. I have read a lot of eye-witness accounts and found several of the lines and the sincerity with which they were uttered to be laughable. There is a monologue by Worchester about his experience back home that is painful to listen to because it is so melodramatic. On the positive side, for those who have not read a lot on the war, you do get the greatest slang hits. C

“Platoon” was written by a combat veteran and although Stone can be faulted for excesses in many of his movies, his dialogue is restrained in this film. He interweaves slang into the soldier speak in a natural way. There are some fine dialogue driven scenes like when Elias explains the evolution of his war view to Taylor. The companion scene with Barnes in the doper’s bunker nicely bookends this. There are some great lines and they are spread a out among the characters. Some are critical of Taylor’s narration, but I feel that although flowery at times, it does add to the theme of lost innocence. A

HALF TIME SCORE

Hamburger Hill = 14
Platoon = 16


IMPLAUSIBILITIES

HH does not have any glaring implausibilities. The most ridiculous moment is a key moment in the film. Worcester recounts his return to the states and the litany of abuses he encountered. It is a montage of urban myths about the treatment of returning vets. Hippies throw dog poop on him, a hippie is shacked up with his wife, and everyone he meets is hostile. This is gross exaggeration pushed by the anti-anti-war movement. The film fulfills the short-timer must die by putting McDaniel on point. This would have been highly unlikely in reality. Similarly, when Duffy takes a bullet in the shoulder, he is not sent back off the line. The movie offers a lame excuse for this. As is typical for most war movies, artillery fire support is called in much too close to the friendlies. B

Much of the implausibilities in “Platoon” are designed to advance the main plot theme of the dysfunctional platoon dynamics. The whole idea of a platoon divided not only between two sergeants, but divided into dopers and boozers is clearly a plot device. Resolving this with two fragging incidents is pure Hollywood. However, most of the incidents that develop the theme are plausible, including the atrocity. B

THIRD QUARTER SCORE

Hamburger Hill = 22
Platoon = 24


EDUCATIONAL VALUE

You can learn a few things from HH.
1. The Chieu Hoi program encouraged VC to defect to the ARVN. (In the movie, the defector is NVA and he is helping the U.S. Army.)
2. The NVA were nicknamed “Nathanael Victor” as opposed to “Charlie” for the VC.
3. The NVA were respected by the Americans and were worthy adversaries.
4. Contact with a single enemy would bring an American unit to ground.
5. New guys (FNGs) were not welcomed with open arms.
6. There were racial tensions in units, but the closer to the front line, the more the men put color behind them. There was an unofficial segregation of the races in the rear areas.
7. The Battle of Hamburger Hill is pretty accurately portrayed, but the movie flubs a teachable moment by not including a post script pointing out that the hill was abandoned soon after its bloody conquest. Probably purposefully because this historical fact clashed with the theme of flogging the anti-war movement. B

Although not based on an actual battle, Stone insists the incidents and characters in his film are based on his Vietnam experience. Taken as just a tutorial on the Vietnam experience, “Platoon” teaches a number of things to an audience not well-read on the subject.

1. Replacement soldiers (i.e. Cherries) were treated like dirt.
2. Sergeants ran the platoons in many cases.
3. Every soldier knew how many days that they had left in their tour.
4. If a Vietnamese civilian ran, it was assumed they were the enemy and you could shoot them.
5. Villages were burned if they were considered sympathetic to the Communists.
6. Some soldiers injured themselves to get out of combat.
7. Volunteers felt they were fighting for our society and freedom.
8. Latrine waste was burned using kerosene.
9. Drug and alcohol use was common in rear areas.
10. Young Americans sometimes committed atrocities due to stress or revenge.
11. The Vietnam War gave some sociopaths an outlet. A

FINAL SCORE

Hamburger Hill = 30
Platoon = 33


ANALYSIS

This is my fourth March Madness tournament and once again the #1 seed does not win. I suppose this is partly explained by using “Rotten Tomatoes” for the seeding. My theory is that generic movie critics look at war movies differently than I do. I’m a lot more specific to what makes a movie good within the genre. That is not to say that HH is not a very good movie. It deserved to be highly seeded. On the other hand, “Platoon” was criminally seeded at #5. Four Vietnam War movies better than “Platoon”? No way. I am aware that the film is polarizing and its victory will upset people, but I think that I am on firm ground here. Fire away.

Monday, April 14, 2014

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.
 

Thursday, April 10, 2014

FULL METAL JACKET (3) vs. CASUALTIES OF WAR (6)



VS.
 
 
 




CHARACTERS
“Full Metal Jacket” has one of the iconic characters in Vietnam War movies. Gunnery Sergeant Hartman, as played by R. Lee Ermey, is mesmerizing. He is the main reason the first third of the movie is so strong. However, I do need to point out that Ermey was basically playing himself and many of his lines came directly from the novel “The Short Timers”. “Pyle” is another iconic character. His evolution from sad sack to boot camp graduate to psycho is fascinating and chilling. The rest of the characters are fine, if unspectacular. Modine’s “Joker” has the right amount of cynicism, panache, and wit to anchor the last two thirds. Having a writer for “Stars and Stripes” get involved in the fighting in Hue was a grand idea. Of the “Lust Hog” squad, Cowboy is a likeable and sympathetic character, but “Animal Mother” is the standout. B

“Casualties of War” is a character driven movie. There are only six significant characters in the film and each is distinct. Although based on a true story, it is obvious Hollywood differentiated the characters to service stereotypes. Still, it’s an interesting mix. Fox’s Eriksson is appropriately naïve and principled. Clark is the psycho creep meant to represent young American boys corrupted by the war. Brule is the country hick. Diaz is Eriksson without the guts to resist peer pressure. The problem is Penn’s Meserve. His eccentric performance drains the character of credibility. His sudden change from savior to sociopath is loopy. C

FIRST QUARTER SCORE

Full Metal Jacket = 8
Casualties of War = 7


BEHAVIOR

FMJ is not meant to be a realistic take on soldier behavior, but it actually is fairly authentic. The boot camp scenes were accused of going over the top and were one reason why the Pentagon declined to cooperate with the film. However, in reality Marine training was harsh and not only verbally, but physically abusive. The military also objected to the language which is ridiculously prudish since the grunts in the film talk very much like soldiers. The behavior of Joker and Rafterman as correspondents feels right. The camaraderie of the men conforms to the macho attitude of American boys in Vietnam. The banter is not forced like in “Hamburger Hill” and the lusty humor is characteristic of the U.S. military for most of the 20th Century. The behavior of the Lust Hogs in Hue seems spot on to me. B

COW deals with an actual atrocity, but the incident was atypical. It is unfair to lightly assume American soldiers would kidnap a girl for sexual purposes and with the intent of murdering her at the end. This was also extremely unlikely behavior for a LRRP. The behavior of the men is an aberration. In fact, this was one sorry ass patrol. If the movie was not based on an actual atrocity, I would be tempted to complain about the caricatured depiction of American soldiers by a clueless liberal. C

HALF TIME SCORE

Full Metal Jacket = 16
Casualties of War = 14


WEAPONS AND TACTICS

The weapons highlighted in FMJ are authentic, with a fairly significant exception. In boot camp the recruits use M-14s and it is the weapon used on Hartman. However, in Vietnam the actors are armed with M-16s, not the appropriate M16A1s. Animal Mother is armed with a M-60 and although shooting from the hip was rare, it was not unbelieveable. It does seem unlikely that Joker would have been designated to fire an M-60 during the sapper assault on his base, but it’s possible. As far as tactics, the actions by Americans in Hue leave something to be desired. When the unit, supported by tanks, is entering the city and encounters fire, they proceed forward without calling in artillery fire on the suspected enemy position. This would have been unlikely considering the tendency of the Americans to plaster any threats, especially after casualties had resulted. The duel with the sniper has a truer feel to it. You would expect the men to go to great lengths to rescue a wounded comrade even if he was clearly sniper bait. C

COW gets the M16A1s right. The squad also has an M-79 (Eriksson) and an M-60 (Clark). In an early scene, Eriksson hits an incoming grenade with is M-79. Unbelievably, this incident actually happened. As far as tactics, the movie has some problems. This is apparent from the beginning when Eriksson is sent off to defend part of the perimeter by himself and armed with an M-79. The foliage is thick and it is ridiculous to think he could have done anything with that weapon. The movie covers the tactics used on the mission fairly closely. The problem is that the tactics shown in the film are not true to a normal LRRP mission. These guys go stumbling around in the jungle like a herd of elephants. At one point, Brule shoots at a water buffalo and Meserve does not seem to mind (at least in the book, he scolds him). Their “love shack” is laughably indefensible. The final “battle” is pure Hollywood and far from the actual incident. What the Hell is the gunboat doing there? D

THIRD QUARTER SCORE

Full Metal Jacket = 23
Casualties of War = 20


ACCURACY

FMJ is not meant to be historically accurate. It is based on a novel, but Hasford was a correspondent in Vietnam and supposedly based the book on personal experiences. The Joker character is apparently based on him. The boot camp segment is realistic as to Marine boot camp in 1967. If anything, the movie underplays the physical abuse. (The DI in the book is more brutal.) The “Stars and Stripes” reporting strategy is accurate. Da Nang was one of the targets for the opening Tet attacks (note the fireworks in the background –nice touch). As far as Hue, civilians were executed by the Communists. There was a sniper problem as part of the urban house-to-house combat although the movie does not refer to a specific incident. Last, but not least, there were hookers in Vietnam that offered to sucky sucky for ten dollars. My only real problem is I doubt the sniper could have been that accurate using a standard AK-47 from that distance. C

COW is based on an atrocity investigated by a reporter for the New Yorker magazine. I read the resulting book and the movie is very hit and miss. The opening scenes that are designed to establish Meserve as a hero who cracks are patently Hollywoodized. He did not save Eriksson’s life, thus creating a dilemma for Eriksson later in the movie. However, the kidnapping and rape are accurate up until the murder which was not nearly as dramatic and action packed. The fire-fight that transpires parallel with the murder is way overblown. In actuality (true to Vietnam), the skirmish resulted in the search for one KIA. Boring! The court-martials are accurate although the cover-up is clichéd. Oh, and there was no fragging incident. B

FINAL SCORE

Full Metal Jacket = 30
Casualties of War = 28


ANALYSIS

This was closer than I anticipated although “Casualties of War” has its fans. I call them Brian DePalma fans. It is a good little movie and tells a story that needed to be told. Watching it reminds one of how Hollywood takes interesting stories and makes them more interesting by playing fast and loose with the facts. Did I mention John Reilly’s character was added? Ironically, “Full Metal Jacket” does the opposite by taking a fictional story and making it less entertaining than the source material. Even though the screenplay could have been better, it is still an outstanding film. It is uneven, but its strengths were enough to defeat a pesky underdog. It will be interesting to see if its weaknesses cost it in the next matchup.

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

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.

Sunday, April 6, 2014

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.

Saturday, April 5, 2014

HAMBURGER HILL (1) vs. GO TELL THE SPARTANS (9)

          The first round is completed and we have 8 movies moving on. There were no major upsets, but the upcoming matchups look intriguing.

Hamburger Hill (1)
Go Tell the Spartans (9)

The Deer Hunter (4)
Platoon (5)

Apocalypse Now (2)
84 Charlie Mopic (7)

Full Metal Jacket (3)
Casualties of War (6)
 
 
vs.
 
 
 
 
CHARACTERS
“Hamburger Hill” is balanced in its characters. There is a good mix of whites and blacks, veterans and replacements. The unit is heterogeneous, but not in a blatantly clichéd way like you see in 1940s and 1950s WWII movIes. No one is from Brooklyn. The movie concentrates on the five cherries, but the rest of the men are developed fairly well. Sgt. Frantz (McDermott) exemplifies the leadership of most Vietnam War sergeants. Doc aptly represents the stressed out medics who had to contend with the horrors inflicted on their charges. Biletsky is the FNG who has to grow up fast tempered by the cauldron of combat. A

“Go Tell the Spartans” is also a small heterogeneous unit movie, but it is much more clichéd. Col. Barker (Lancaster) is one of the top ten Vietnam War characters. He is the grizzled colonel who is a great leader, but not adept at playing the promotion game. Courcey is an interesting figure. He starts off as an enigmatic intellectual who appears to be out of place, then he goes native, but turns out to be a competent warrior. The rest of the men are stereotypes and badly written ones at that. The green, gung-ho LT, the druggie medic, the burned out vet. The most intriguing character is Cowboy – an ARVN corporal who is ruthless in dealing with any Vietnamese he assumes are VC. The twist to this odious guy is he is usually right. He is a portent to how Americans will come to view VC suspects”. C

FIRST QUARTER SCORE
Hamburger Hill = 9
Go Tell the Spartans = 7


SOLDIER BEHAVIOR

HH tries hard to be realistic in its portrayal of soldier life. The movie uses the replacements to tutor the audience in Vietnam War 101. The dialogue tries too hard to jam slang into every conversation. The unit dynamics are a strength. The movie has a good feel for black/white relations in a combat unit. There is tension, but they realize they depend on each other in the bush. The men evidence a fatalism that is reflected in the unit’s pet phrase: “It don’t mean nothing.” The men are not enthusiastic about the war, but they do their jobs. B

GTS is a bit anachronistic. Set in 1964, the attitudes of most of the main characters are more appropriate for later in the war. Barker is too pessimistic about the war, for instance. It is also jarring to have a drug addict in the unit. Lt. Hamilton does behave like the typical shavetail who thinks what he was taught in Officers Training School actually could be applied to that unconventional war. The film does not overdo the slang. C

HALF TIME SCORE
Hamburger Hill = 17
Go Tell the Spartans = 14


WEAPONS AND TACTICS

HH is based on an actual battle in Vietnam in 1969. The movie equips the actors with appropriate weapons, but several are armed with a later model of the M-16 than was available in the battle. Others are armed with M-60s and M-79 grenade launchers. The enemy are armed with AK-47s. There are no recoilless rifles even though in the actual battle they were keys to neutralizing the enemy bunkers. As far as tactics, the film is true to the frontal attacks that were forced by the American general that insisted on capturing the hill in spite of the fact that the terrain negated American mobility and fire support. B

GTS is not based on a real battle. The weaponry is circa 1964. Lt. Hamilton carries a Thompson, as do some of the ARVN. Barker is armed with a M3 grease gun. Most of the Americans have M1 Carbines and the ARVN mostly use M1 Garands. These weapons appear to be spot on (although I question the Thompsons in the hands of Vietnamese grunts). One discrepancy is the use of mortars to hit targets ten yards away. The movie makes a point of questioning American tactics explicitly (unlike the implicit criticism of HH). Barker is flummoxed by higher command’s desire to garrison an unimportant base in the middle of enemy controlled territory. The tactics used in defending the outpost are simplistically depicted, but not far off. Patrols are sent out and the enemy assault is a typical frontal attack at night that is defeated by firepower. C

THIRD QUARTER SCORE
Hamburger Hil =l 25
Go Tell the Spartans = 21


ACCURACY

HH is a micro view of the Battle of Ap Bia Mountain (Hill 937). The movie does not try to give the big picture and the audience is left in the dark about the strategy necessitating what is depicted on the screen. The recreation of the battle is as close as you could ask for. It even has one (there were at least three) of the friendly fire by choppers incidents (although in reality the fire was rockets, not machine guns and less men were killed). Although the movie exaggerates the death rate (what war movie doesn’t?), the battle was actually very brutal and costly. One inaccuracy is between assaults, the men sit around in safety when in reality the battle was noted for having no front line and the enemy did a lot of infiltrating. B

GTS attempts to replicate the advisory period of U.S. involvement. It is based on a novel which was written by a war correspondent who was in S. Vietnam during the time period. He went on a mission to evacuate a village which was discovered to be abandoned and then imagined what it would have been like if the village had been converted into an outpost and had then come under enemy attack. One can question the accuracy of the attitudes at this stage of the war. The U.S. was arming and training the ARVN and local defense militias were incorporated. The corruption of S.V. high command is accurate as is the overconfidence of American leadership. The big problem is that the attitudes of most of the Americans is more appropriate for 1968 than 1964. C

FINAL SCORE

Hamburger Hill = 33
Go Tell the Spartans = 28


ANALYSIS

“Go Tell the Spartans” is a movie that was overshadowed by two other Vietnam War movies when it came out in 1978 (“The Deer Hunter” and “Coming Home”). It could definitely be argued that it is superior to those two bloated epics. It is hampered by its low budget and some shoddy acting, but its heart is in the right place and has a cogent comment to make about the quick sand that the war devolved into. “Hamburger Hill” is the better movie overall because of superior acting, action, and accuracy. Interestingly, HH is more graphic in its combat, but less anti-war than GTS. By going micro, it fails to illuminate the misguided strategy involved in the battle. In this respect, it fumbled the chance to be an “after” to GTS’s “before” perspective.
 
 

Thursday, April 3, 2014

APOCALYPSE NOW (2) vs. TUNNEL RATS (15)





VS.
 
 
 



ACTING
The acting in “Apocalypse Now” is top notch overall. Martin Sheen is perfect as Willard. It’s easy to overlook his narrative readings which added greatly to the film. He portrays Willard as a weary assassin who is good at his job and aware of its moral ambiguities. The supporting cast is strong. Duvall shows the range that made him one of our great actors. His performance is iconic and he dominates his screen time. The PBR crew is solid. However, Fishburne does come off as a rookie actor and Bottoms was only partially acting since he was literally on drugs for most of the shoot. As far as Hopper, the film did revive his career, but you get the impression he is simply playing himself. The elephant in the room (get it?) was Brando. He almost drags the last part of the film down. B

“Tunnel Rats” has a cast of some of the best stars ever to appear - in a Uwe Boll film. In other words, the actors are terrible. The only halfway recognizable name is Michael Pare. His previous movie before this one was “Ninja Cheerleaders”. Nuff’ said. The rest of the cast is now working at McDonalds. D

FIRST QUARTER SCORE
Apocalypse Now = 8
Tunnel Rats = 6


PLOT

The plot of “Apocalypse Now” is based on Joseph Conrad’s “Heart of Darkness”. The protagonist, Willard, is sent deep into the tiger-infested bush to terminate the Montagnard command of the off the reservation, formerly team-player Col. Kurtz. The first two-thirds of the film are mesmerizing. The odyssey format works well and the flow from exposition to intense action is fine. The vignettes are bizarre. The movie builds eerily to arrival at the final act. There is suspense and pathos. Most of the scenes are unforgettable. Unfortunately, the final act stumbles around in search of an ending. B

“Tunnel Rats” is exactly the opposite. There are no frills in its plot. It is a straight-forward march to oblivion for all the characters. The arc involves the attempts by an “elite” American force to ferret out the enemy in their tunnel system near their jungle base camp. The haunted house / “Saw” approach to the tunnel scenes are joined by a rip-snorting VC assault on the camp. The numerous deaths do have a variety to them. Much of what happens is preposterous, but the movie does flow in a “what do you expect from a movie like this?” sort of way. D

HALF TIME SCORE
Apocalypse Now = 16
Tunnel Rats = 12


COMBAT

“Apocalypse Now” is not really built around combat, but it does have one of the great combat scenes in cinema. The helicopter assault on the Viet Cong village to the tune of “Ride of the Valkyries” is unmatched. While it is search and destroy on steroids, it does accurately reflect the ability of the Air Cavalry to rein death on relatively stationary enemy positions. Its moments like this that made Americans think we were winning the war. The other two scenes that could be called combat are too surrealistic to be taken seriously. The bridge that is rebuild during the day and blown up night in an LSD haze and the ambush of the gun boat via arrows and one spear are allegorical. B

“Tunnel Rats” is combat porn. It has cursory banter and character development so we will care when the Americans die. The violence is extreme and the second half Is full of it. The movie is a little outside the box because a lot of the combat is underground in the tunnels. This action is fairly interesting. As far as the above ground action, quantity is the only goal. It is the firing M-60s from the hip style. The deaths are the type you see when the actor feels this may be his last acting performance so let’s make it memorable. With this said, after seeing so many Vietnam War movies that don’t put much emphasis on combat, you have to credit the film for having plenty of it. B

THIRD QUARTER SCORE
Apocalypse Now = 24
Tunnel Rats = 20


REALISM

Although Coppola claimed that his film was reality, no one believes that. It cannot really be judged fairly in this category. The central premise of an American officer being frustrated with the war effort and going off to create his own private army is clearly fantasy. Would the Army have sent out an assassin? I would not discount that considering what we know about the Phoenix Program. As far as the various vignettes, you cannot take them seriously. Other than the use of speakers to blast Wagner at the village, the helicopter assault is ramped up but realistically depicts the mobility and firepower of the U.S. Army in Vietnam. Surfing during an artillery barrage? Come on, dude. C

There are people who claim that “Tunnel Rats” is the most realistic Vietnam War movie. [Insert snarky comment.] They cannot be serious… or sane. There should have been a good movie made about the remarkable men who volunteered to go down into the tunnel complexes, but you don’t put it in the hands of Uwe Boll. If you interviewed all the men who went down into the tunnels, you would find no equivalence to most of the incidents depicted in the film. The fact is that Boll did not care about reality. I doubt he did any research and it is telling that there was no technical adviser for the film. Who does not know that base camps were not located in the middle of the jungle with no fields of fire? Who hires tall actors to portray tunnel rats? F

FINAL SCORE
Apocalypse Now = 31
Tunnel Rats = 25


ANALYSIS

Even though the last two categories were not strong ones for “Apocalypse Now”, it still comfortably won this match-up. I was not familiar with Uwe Boll’s reputation as one of the worst directors until I started researching his film. I have not seen any of his other movies, but most who have believe “Tunnel Rats” is a cut above his usual product. This sounds about right because the movie is entertaining in a brainless way and is not the worst Vietnam War movie ever made. However, Boll versus Coppola – you can’t get more extreme than that! “Apocalypse Now” is a flawed masterpiece and has its detractors, but no one can argue that “Tunnel Rats” deserved to win this matchup.

Wednesday, April 2, 2014

FULL METAL JACKET (3) vs. PLATOON LEADER (14)



 
VS.
 
 
 






ACTING
The acting in “Full Metal Jacket” is great, especially considering that the cast is far from all-star. Modine does a good job as the main character and he is likeable and witty. D’Onofrio as Pyle owes his career to this movie. For a debut, he knocks it out of the park. His transition from grinning buffoon to malevolent nutcase is amazing. Although Ermey had acted before (starting with 1978’s “Boys in Company C”), FMJ was his breakthrough. He completely dominates all his scenes. Watch him closely – the dude never blinks! It is important to note that he is not really acting. As far as Baldwin, he is perfect as Animal Mother and should still be kissing his agent’s ass for getting him the part. A

Now for something completely different. “Platoon Leader” stars Michael Dudikoff as Lt. Knight. The best that can be said for the perpetual B movie star is he performs well in comparison to the rest of the cast. There is some truly abysmal acting going on here. Some of the overwrought reactions to comrades’ deaths are painful to watch. F

FIRST QUARTER SCORE
Full Metal Jacket = 9
Platoon Leader = 5


PLOT

FMJ is divided into three parts. The first is the justifiably famous boot camp sequence. It is brilliant in every way and the rest of the film cannot ascend those heights again. Not that the rest of the film is weak. The second part finds Joker (Modine) is Vietnam as a Marine correspondent. He goes off to Hue to get a firsthand look at the Tet Offensive. It is there that he hooks up with Cowboy’s Lust Hog squad. Here we get the bonding of veterans as opposed to the virgins of boot camp. The third part is the duel with the sniper. This part hammers the war is hell theme and the loss of innocence. B

“Platoon Leader” has a trite plot and breaks no new ground. Knight is the green lieutenant that has to win the respect of his men. His men are misfits who need to be shaped by combat and good leadership. There are clichés at every turn. The movie is predictable all the way to the reunion of battle-bonded buddies in the last frame. The only redeeming factor is the predictably low budget, over-the-top combat. The plot is not going to tax your brain and sometimes it needs a rest. D

HALF TIME SCORE
Full Metal Jacket = 17
Platoon Leader = 11


COMBAT

FMJ is not really a combat movie. There is a brief scene where Joker helps defend his base against a sapper attack at the opening of Tet. It’s a night scene and has some fun pyrotechnics. The takeaway is the look of exultation on Joker’s face as he enjoys American firepower. The action in Hue builds from scenes of the results of urban combat to combat itself. It is the micro view as the Lust Hogs appear to be the only American fighting in the city. The sniper scene is intense and suspenseful. A group of comrades lose their faux swagger in the maelstrom. It may be one against eight, but it is a fair fight. C

“Platoon Leader” is not the first Vietnam War movie to choose quantity of combat over quality. Not that quality was an option given the production. You could blame the low budget, but they spared no expense when it came to blanks and explosions. There is a commendable variety. We get the patrol that encounters a sniper, a tunnel, and a booby trap. The trifecta. We get the ambush / ambushed scene. Have you ever seen six men throw 30 grenades onto chilling Congs? Naturally we get the reenactment of the Alamo as the sneaky hordes try to get gooks in the wire. And it’s on to the big “it sucks to be a villager” climax. You’ll smile as you shake your head. C

THIRD QUARTER SCORE
Full Metal Jacket = 24
Platoon Leader = 18


REALISM

FMJ is not surrealistic like “Apocalypse Now”, but it does not try to be a realistic. Surprisingly, the boot camp scenes are actually the most realistic of the film. People ignorant of the Marine Corps methods of molding men found this part of the movie to be exaggerated, but in reality Ermey was basically reenacting his own experiences. If anything the abuse is toned down. Joker’s stint as a correspondent dueling with the military’s puff machinery is true to the official coverage of the war. The soldier interactions accurately reflect the macho attitudes of young Marines who mask fear with bluster. The Hue set is appropriately rubbleized. The attitudes of the young Americans seasoned by their descent into Hell rings true. The sniper’s tactics are realistic although the duel spins off into fantasy. B

“Platoon Leader” is based on an excellent memoir by an officer in the war. The screenplay veers far from the true story which is a pity because a closer adaptation would have been superior to the finished product. The movie throws in characters and incidents that screenwriters who are ignorant of the war think are true to its nature. Nothing happens that could not have happened, but not all to the same unit and in such poorly executed fashion. C

FINAL SCORE
Full Metal Jacket = 32
Platoon Leader = 25


ANALYSIS

A match between the two books would have been much closer and more intriguing. The battle between was a foregone conclusion. Unlike some of the other lambs led to the slaughter (like “Siege of Firebase Gloria”), “Platoon Leader” has no delusional fans who argue for its greatness. “Full Metal Jacket” is similar to “Apocalypse Now” in its polarizing nature, but even with its uneven three act structure it is clearly one of the best Vietnam War movies. Is it the best? That is what this tournament will determine. Stick around.

Sunday, March 30, 2014

The Deer Hunter (4) vs. The Green Berets (13)



VS.
 
 
 




ACTING
It would be hard to find a Vietnam War movie with a better cast than “The Deer Hunter” although a couple of the stars (Walken and Streep) were early in their careers. Walken deserved the Best Supporting Actor award he won. He is absolutely amazing. DeNiro anchors the film although the film is something of an ensemble effort. He earned a Best Actor nomination. John Cazales is his usual solid self in what was sadly his last role. Streep clearly shows why she became a superstar. There is not a weak performance to be found. A+

“The Green Berets” is a John Wayne movie, ‘nuff said. Wayne plays Wayne and this is the movie that cemented his reputation as the iconic American warrior as far as Vietnam grunts were concerned. Wayne is pretty subdued and does not dominate, which may have been a mistake because the rest of the cast is weak. David Janssen embarrasses himself as the cynical newsman. He spends most of his scenes with his chin on his neck. Jim Hutton is almost as bad as the stereotype scrounger and comic relief. The rest of the cast is low rent with exception of the super cool Aldo Ray as a tough sergeant. C

FIRST QUARTER SCORE
The Deer Hunter = 10
The Green Berets = 7


PLOT

“The Deer Hunter” is different than all the other movies in the tournament. The plot is divided into three parts. The first is an extended wedding sequence that establishes the main characters and the steel town atmosphere they are leaving to go to the Nam. In Vietnam, they are scarred in different ways by a stint as VC prisoners. Two of them return home to a world they no longer fit in while the third remains in Saigon playing Russian roulette. The themes are hammered in. War impacts not just the warriors. There are different types of wounds – physical and mental. Cimino comments on working class patriotism and male bonding in a knowing way. B

“The Green Berets” is essentially a Western set in the East. Wayne’s Col. Kirby heads off to S. Vietnam with a Green Beret unit and is charged with defending a strategic hamlet / base camp. Newsman Beckworth is in tow to evolve from dove to hawk. The film features an Alamo-like defense of the camp and a behind enemy lines mission to kidnap a VC general. Numerous clichés are thrown in to hammer the theme that the Communists are taking. D

HALF TIME SCORE
The Deer Hunter = 18
The Green Berets = 13


COMBAT

“The Deer Hunter” has very little combat in it so it is hard to judge this aspect of the film. I almost did not put it in the tournament for this reason, but I could not leave out one of the seminal Vietnam War movies and a movie that won Best Picture. If we stretch to call the scenes where Mike, Nick, and Steven are forced to play Russian roulette combat scenes, we do get one spectacular scene where Mike engineers the trio’s escape. I’m going to have to go with a default C in this category. C

“The Green Berets” certainly has a higher quantity of combat. The VC assault on the camp is one of the longest battle scenes in the tournament. It’s basically your human wave variety similar to what you see in “Siege of Firebase Gloria” and just as laughable in spots. There’s a very fake helicopter crash and an equally faux tower collapse. The enemy deaths are rote and the American deaths are melodramatic. Just like in a Western, the cavalry arrives in the form of Puff the Magic Dragon with its Gatling guns. Any red-blooded American commie-hater got his fill of action from the film and the movie was popular partly because of the combat. C

THIRD QUARTER SCORE
The Deer Hunter = 25
The Green Berets = 20


REALISM

“The Deer Hunter” is bipolar when it comes to realism because the home front scenes seem true to the environment of a steel town in Pennsylvania and the Greek Orthodox culture. The trio that go off to war are all volunteers and patriotic. The movie reflects the attitudes of the “silent majority” through the first half of the war. The movie vividly contrasts their relationships with family and friends from before they leave to when they come back. On the other hand, the scenes in Vietnam have little foundation in reality. There is no evidence that the VC forced prisoners to play Russian roulette. It makes for great drama, but is ahistorical. Also the time frame is completely messed up. Nick would have been playing the game for years before Mike finds him. That’s some incredible luck. C

“The Green Berets” is a realistic view of the war if you are looking at it with hawkish glasses on and the year is 1968. If not, it is a anti-commie, pro-Saigon propaganda piece. It is as realistic as a 1940s Western. In fact, it is a 1940s Western! Hell, the camp is nicknamed “Dodge City”. I’m no fan or apologist for the VC, but they get trashed unfairly in this movie. They are punji-staking, booby-trapping, civilian-torturing, ugly-ass, barbarians. Oh, and they kill the cute little mascots dog! With that said, the big battle is not too far from an assault by VC forces in a Tet Offensive scenario. As far as the mission to kidnap the VC general, give me a break! It does give us the hilarious visual of Wayne escaping in a French Citroen. D

FINAL SCORE
The Deer Hunter = 32
The Green Berets = 26


ANALYSIS

I have to admit that I had not seen “The Green Berets” since it came out. I had avoided it partly because of the incredibly bad reputation it has acquired over the years. It has one of the iconic bad movie moments with the sun sinking in the east in the final shot. On second viewing, it is not as bad as its reputation. There are some LOL moments, but overall it is a decent Western that makes the mistake of trying to be historical and relevant to the concurrent events it covers. It also takes an untenable position on the nature of the war. “The Deer Hunter” is on the other end of the spectrum. It is art! Flawed art. Slightly bloated art. It deserved the Best Picture award and you would have to be Rush Limbaugh to think “The Green Berets” should have won this match.