Differences

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

--- 329:question:329--week_11_questions_comments [2016/11/15 13:06] – [Additional Questions:] dhawkins
+++ 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 152: / Line 155: @@
 **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 163: / 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//