Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 329:question:329--week_11_questions_comments [2016/11/15 05:37] – khaynes3
+++ 329:question:329--week_11_questions_comments [2016/11/15 13:55] (current) – [1 Errors in fact] jmcclurken
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 ====== 1 Errors in fact ======
 An error in the film is when people are depicted as believing that the war caused many soldiers to be left out of work and believe that their job would not be waiting for them. **In reality, due to many bills enacted during the war, returning vets were guaranteed their jobs after returning (unless the company got bought out, etc.)** and could receive some unemployment up to 52 weeks. However, considering this film was made in 1946, many people believed that unemployment would be high for returning vets and that it would be difficult for them to find jobs.   --- //[[lkacoyan@umw.edu|Kacoyanis, Leah F.]] 2016/11/08 13:39//
 Okay so this is nit picky, but in the beginning of the film at the ATC all the marines had their hats on. In reality, when indoors officers and lower ranking personnel would take off their hats indoors. They would not have kept their 'lids' on indoors. Instead, they would probably wear a cover, which some wore in the ATC. However, they wouldn't wear their brims indoors. Another nit picky error was that Fred wore his uniform although marines are not supposed to wear their uniforms in public. He was instructed by his wife early in the film to do so, but he would have known not to wear his uniform in public.
@@ Line 113: / Line 113: @@
 I think the movie was very spot-on when it came to the realities of men returning from war, especially post-World War II. I think these days more is known about the psychological effects of war so the men in the film likely would have not gotten help for their PTSD. As we talked about in class, many had struggles finding their place back in their families and towns after their return.  --- //[[khaynes3@umw.edu|Haynes, Kelly E.]] 2016/11/14 23:34//
+The homecoming in the film was definitely filled with tension. In some ways it reminded me of the American version of the recent film //Brothers//, albeit toned down with 1940s attitudes, but the film definitely pushed the envelope compared to other classic films I've seen. Nobody is quite comfortable, especially Homer. The film is complicated, and the characters know they have changed, and that the only way to move on is to acknowledge that.
+ --- //[[dhawkins@umw.edu|Hawkins Daniel C.]] 2016/11/15 07:06//
@@ Line 134: / Line 137: @@
+The film was an extremely accurate portrayal of the era, simply because of the time it was made in.  If a movie about 2016 was made in the year 2016 it would probably be very accurate simply because there is no research needed.  This movie captures the essence of the 1940’s better than we ever can because all we can do is look at primary sources, whereas the people acting actually experienced the culture they were depicting. -Christian Trout
-**
+The film was about as accurate as I think it could possibly be. Unlike the other films we have been watching, The Best Years of Our Lives is not based on a fictional account from a story or set in a time period decades earlier. It was a contemporary film, which meant that the production staff could simply insert aspects of their own everyday lives into the film and be completely authentic to the time. --- //[[ccooney@umw.edu|Cooney, Corey R.]] 2016/11/15 02:45//
+**
 What do you think about the portrayal of Homer Parish as a character? How does the film depict 1946’s opinions on physical disabilities?**
@@ Line 146: / Line 152: @@
  --- //[[ejames@umw.edu|James, Emily B.]] 2016/11/14 22:28//
+In 70 years, the the general reaction to physical disability has not improved greatly. There is still a sense of awkwardness or even unintentional pity leveled at these people, despite them simply wanting a normal life again.  --- //[[ccooney@umw.edu|Cooney, Corey R.]] 2016/11/15 02:45//
 **In class we discussed how the director wanted to create a realistic film that was a departure from the patriotic propaganda. Does the film reflect this? Consider the film’s ending.
 **
@@ Line 160: / Line 165: @@
 From what I have gathered from the movie it seems to me that it truly does show the good, bad, and the ugly. There are times when were are forced to see the nasty parts of America after WWII. It shows that the true picture of post WWII America was not all about waving flags and throwing parades, but it was about readjustments and awkward interactions. I’m really glad that the movie, for the most part, was able to keep a realistic image of citizens after a gruesome war. --- //[[abrooks6@umw.edu|Brooks Anna R.]] 2016/11/14 17:49//
+I think the film showed war and the post-war era that was something that was ambiguous and difficult for returning veterans and for their friends and families. We learn that all of the veterans in the film have seen terrible things and experienced terrible things, and that fitting back into civilian life is very difficult for them. They don't come home to parades and excitement, but to other people trying to scrape by. Injury, PTSD, and having trouble finding a place in society after the war were all things that the propaganda ignored or misrepresented, and this film showed all of those in a realistic way.
+ --- //[[mcarey@umw.edu|Carey Megan A.]] 2016/11/15 07:11//
@@ Line 170: / Line 179: @@
-At this particular point in history there are no concrete setting of a family. Men are coming home from war and the women are coming back from the work force. It’s an awkward transition time where no on really knew what was going to happen. The men were expecting their jobs back, but the women enjoyed working outside of the home. There had been the great depression where almost everyone was out of work creating a family where both parents stayed home or both went to work. It wasn’t until the war where everyone was told the role they were suppose to play. When the war was over they didn’t know what they should go back to. It wasn’t until the 50s where there was a great push to make what we would consider the ‘traditional’ family, where the mother stays at home and takes care of the house and children and the father goes out and works. So when the movie shows the four different types of family it is really showing that there was no set standard for a family and that there was a time in American history when we were very uncertain as to what was going to happen with the family.  --- //[[abrooks6@umw.edu|Brooks Anna R.]] 2016/11/14 17:44//
+At this particular point in history there are no concrete setting of a family. Men are coming home from war and the women are coming back from the work force. It’s an awkward transition time where no on really knew what was going to happen. The men were expecting their jobs back, but the women enjoyed working outside of the home. There had been the great depression where almost everyone was out of work creating a family where both parents stayed home or both went to work. It wasn’t until the war where everyone was told the role they were suppose to play. When the war was over they didn’t know what they should go back to. It wasn’t until the 50s where there was a great push to make what we would consider the ‘traditional’ family, where the mother stays at home and takes care of the house and children and the father goes out and works. So when the movie shows the four different types of family it is really showing that there was no set standard for a family and that there was a time in American history when we were very uncertain as to what was going to happen with the family.  --- //[[abrooks6@umw.edu|Brooks Anna R.]] 2016/11/14
+:44//
+I feel like the interactions provide a good snapshot of family values in the late 1940’s.  At the end of the movie Homer marries the woman he loves, and shows some quality character development along the way.  Al on the other hand turns into a heavy drinker, showing the opposite side of the family spectrum.  And Fred is still not happy at where he is in life, but still happy to be back stateside.  Three different men, three different stories, and I think they show three different sides to the family dynamic.  -Christian Trout
+We see characters hold onto traditional American family values, but we also see those values tested and adjusted to fit a changing world in 1946. Women working, women deciding who they want to marry despite their parents' wishes, men discussing deep, personal feelings--all of this adds up to a new view on family values in post-war America.
+ --- //[[dhawkins@umw.edu|Hawkins Daniel C.]] 2016/11/15 07:04//