Posted on 11/01/2005 11:10:17 AM PST by laney
Part coming-of-age story, part military-training horror show, part bawdy male-bonding romp, and part poetic meditation on the murderous impulses of men at war, director Sam Mendes' Jarhead (opening Nov. 4) doesn't offer much in the way of conventional, audience-pleasing payoffs.
It's about being worn down by fear in a combat zone where the war could start at any minute, but doesn't in fact commence for months after deployment. Jake Gyllenhaal stars as a grunt who's molded into an expert sniper, then left with no chance to strut his stuff because the Gulf War is over in a flash. Peter Sarsgaard is his loyal, hard-nosed sniper-scout partner, but it's not a warm-fuzzy, buddy-buddy kind of relationship — no cute clips to push on that score — while Jamie Foxx (pictured with Gyllenhaal), the Oscar-winning star of Ray, takes a peppery supporting turn as a tough-love sergeant.
As journalists take in the film for the first time, Mendes is suddenly realizing that misperception could be an issue. ''I can feel people talking about the movie they expected to see,'' he says. ''They expected a much more specific political commentary about what's going on in Iraq right now. I think they were shocked that it was so comedic, and that it was so specifically about Desert Storm.'' The director, in turn, has been taken aback to see prerelease articles writing off Jarhead's impact sight unseen. ''I've read pieces about why this movie's already in danger of becoming irrelevant,'' he reports, looking incredulous. ''That the problem is, real-life events are going to overtake it. Huh? It's about Operation Desert Storm! How can events overtake it?''
"there has to some subtle anti-religious sentiment."
Actually, in the movie they show him reading the bible on the plane to Saudi...right after he told his Marines in sniper school, "the good book says thou shall not kill. F#@! that!"
Oh, they're remaking "Born on the Fourth of July?"
Actually I liked the movie Born on the 4th of July prior to Tom Crusies' extreme weirdness! Many of the Vietnam movies were well done and showed the pros and cons of the Vietnamn War and the world what it was like in that era.
They are now trying to duplicate war movies in Hollywood concentrating on the Middle East prpblems and not doing very good at these flicks.
I think you're thinking of Behind Enemy Lines - Navy pilot shot down over the Balkans. That definitely was an odd role for him.
The only song off the songtrack I've heard is Kanye Wests....and he's definitely on my stinker list.
"But I can vouch for DOOM. I can't wait for it to come out on dvd so I can drool over Karl 'Reaper' Urban, in the privacy of my own home. Hot diggity, what a fine specimen of the male sex he is. I'm off to get a glass of cold water. :-)"
Girl, you and me both. I had to see DOOM twice just for him. I am PRAYING for a sequel! I definitely need to see more of The Reaper!
Worst movie I ever saw.
If anyone sees this movie, please post your impressions/opinions. If it's good, I'll go.
Bet a hundred bucks that's exactly what it is. First, a liberal veteran friend of mine has been enamored with JARHEAD the book since it arrived, which told me instantly that it was an anti-military piece of work. Second, I feel QUITE comfortable saying the Hollywood establishment wouldn't dream of promoting a pro-current-military movie with the unyielding zeal we've seen them employ in the JARHEAD campaign.
MM
see my post 160 above.
My little brother was Marine Recon in GW1. We're going to see it together then hit a bar and talk.
It was not ovrtly political as far as I realized....but I amy have been daydreaming as to if the movie was going to get interesting at any point of my 2 hour theater stay.
OK. I might give it a try, only because I'd like to see movies about the military do well, and I'd particularly like to see films on Afganistan and Iraq.
((NY POST))
DESERT SCORN
By KYLE SMITH
November 4, 2005 --
Rating:
JARHEAD
Welcome to the suck.
Running time: 115 minutes. Rated R (profanity, violence, strong sexual content). At the Empire, the Lincoln Square, the Kips Bay, others.
AFTER a review of Anthony Swofford's 2003 Desert Storm memoir "Jarhead" appeared in The Wall Street Journal, one old grunt wrote to the paper, "I remember hearing exactly the same stories about Korea and Japan from the NCOs when I went in, and I admit that I passed on my own versions of those legends to the replacements who came through Vietnam. Of course, gullible civilians were always fair game."
Apparently not much happened to Swofford when he was in the Marines in the Gulf, and his disappointment is palpable in Jake Gyllenhaal's portrayal in the movie of "Jarhead." Swofford wanted some hard-core guts-and-glory, and if he didn't see some he'd create it in his head. The rest of us who served in Gulf War 1.0 (I was a lieutenant in a unit attached to the Second Armored Cavalry Regiment in northern Saudi Arabia) were glad the war turned out as uneventful as it did.
Swofford and director Sam Mendes, who comes nowhere near even getting the uniforms right, approach this non-story about inaction by passing the time with macho posturing, pornographic fantasies and feverish imaginings borrowed from other war movies. I'm not saying "Jarhead" exaggerates. I'm saying it lies from beginning to end.
The opening drill-sergeant scene, which is set in 1989, the year I joined the Army, is pure fiction that plagiarizes "Full Metal Jacket"'s famous profane tirades. But drill instructors were forbidden to use profanity years before 1989. Then Swofford watches a Marine killed during a training exercise that uses live machine-gun fire. This does not happen. The military doesn't waste lives on pranks. I was once severely reprimanded because one of my soldiers twisted an ankle while jumping off a truck.
But the movie wants to drum up some gorgeous horror and grim ironies. Troops keep going dramatically bonkers when they aren't even under fire. Peter Sarsgaard plays a whiny sniper who tries to sound tough by saying, "Welcome to the suck" but pitches a hissy because air power erases his target.
Also, the Marines party. At a Christmas Eve blowout, they guzzle liquor out of a 5-gallon fuel can, play loud music, light fires outdoors. I say again: this did not happen. Saudi Arabia is a dry country and even if you could sneak in a little liquor, no officer or senior sergeant would allow his men to get drunk in a combat zone. In the same scene a guy roasting weenies sets off boxes of flares, but ammo and flares are not left lying around to provide amusing hijinks. And you don't light fires or make noise because you don't want the enemy to know where you are.
There seem to be no officers in Swofford's company, and the only leader around much is a staff sergeant played by Jamie Foxx. Like all of the other characters, he talks exclusively in profane tough-guy movie patois. Real military talk (since profanity is banned, at least officially) offers more interesting opportunities for satire: it's an anodyne techno-corporate speak straight out of "Office Space."
The Marines' women back home are portrayed as massively, even belligerently, unfaithful. This is a notion taken from movies about WWII, which separated men from their sweethearts for months or years. In "Jarhead," every swinging Richard has been dumped after eight weeks in country. But the war did not instantly transform our girlfriends and wives into sluts. I never heard of anyone being dumped while he was in the Gulf.
Marines did not play football in full anti-chemical suits in 112-degree weather; men would have been collapsing and perhaps dying because it was so hard to breathe in the gas masks.
Do I quibble over details? Details are all the movie offers. There isn't a story, just Gyllenhaal's shirtless strut and small groups wandering through the pretty vistas, as if this highly mechanized war were fought on foot, like the American Revolution. Toward the end we zip through a Greatest Hits package of what you already knew about the war: the Highway of Death, the burning oil wells. That's it.
Only for a few bland moments does the film deal in reality; lower ranks did indeed burn the human waste of their superiors and troops were given mysterious anti-nerve gas pills and a waiver to sign. (I pretended to swallow mine every day, then threw it out.) It's also true that military men cheer through the bloodiest parts of anti-war movies. But what's it worth to watch Gyllenhaal watch "Apocalypse Now"?
It is a fictional story told from one person's view.
Some of the criticisms are valid in the NY Post review...but this review is just not accurate in so many places. I saw the movie. I am not a veteran or a Marine.
The "reality" I have heard about from veterans is that a lot of combat is 'unreal", crazy and insane at times. War is ugly and at times, incredibly "boring" with waiting. Young men in combat do weird, goofy stuff at times.
The movie did not make Marines out to be "monstors " or fools. Only automatons, not real men out to do a very difficult job under the worst of conditions, would not ever have any fears or ambivalence. Jamie foxx commenting on why he chooses to stay in active combat duty in the Marines was very strong.
It is a f'ng movie, not a documentary! Sure there was stupid stuff going on, and at times they guys were not "John Wayne". But the Movie also showed their feelings of pride in their mission, the Marines and in each other. I guess this reviewer missed many scenes of the Marines' commraderie and deep committment to each other. I guess he missed the scene of the guy so proud of his pregnant wife and his child.
And yes, it is ALSO about oil. I don't think there was an "endless liberal commercial" about the oil connection.
But the oil in the mideast IS a reality and a PART of our conflict there. It is not the only reason we are in the mideast and the movie did not make that "the only reason we're there is cause of the oil" yapping. No, they showed the young boy --a Kuwaitee--who had been gassed by Sadaam.
I thought the movie was well produced and directed and will most likely positively impact Americans regarding our military and their missions. The liberals will of course not see that.
Now, all the combat experts can flame me about missing the fact that the director didn't get the uniforms right!
Did you read number 55?
I believe you meant to ask if I had "written" post #55. No sir, I didn't. I merely copied and pasted one of the less than stellar critiques a reader had posted at Amazon.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.