Differences

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

--- 329:question:329--week_11_questions_comments-2026 [2026/11/05 15:32] – [How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made?] 70.62.154.116
+++ 329:question:329--week_11_questions_comments-2026 [2026/11/11 07:39] (current) – [The "So What" Question -- Why should we care about the movie and its version of history?] 76.78.172.49
@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 ======How does this movie work as a secondary source about the past? What does the movie get right about history?======
+//The Best Years of Our Lives// gets a lot right about the experiences of returning World War II veterans, but at the same time, it cannot be considered a true secondary source. A source is considered secondary if it is created after the event it is analyzing, and this movie was made in 1946 and depicts events and attitudes of the post-war period. Nonetheless, it accurately - and in a rather novel way for films of this time period - addresses the historical record about many of the challenges faced by veterans at the time. These included mental health struggles, alcoholism, unemployment, and the difficulty many soldiers had reintegrating into society and navigating relationships with others who could not really understand the ordeal they had endured. In this sense, it is a useful lens for viewing this part of U.S. history. - Charles Salcedo
 The movie obviously did their best to cover as many different veterans experiences as possible. The 3 main characters are all different ages, at different life stages, and are from different branches of the military. Homer who lost his hands really humanizes disabled people, who have typically been excluded from daily life. The movie really does portray the integration back into “civilian” life very well. They are disconnected emotionally and mentally, and it takes a lot of time for the characters to get back into how things used to be. This film really shows how important representation is, especially post war when millions of people have been affected. This movie is relatable to many, and also portrays PTSD and mental health issues. While there are still elements of its time particularly in gender relations, the movie was very empathetic to veterans issues and portrayed clearly the dilemmas faced by veterans integrating back into society. - Katie D.
@@ Line 20: / Line 22: @@
 This movie works particularly well as a primary source of the time because it was made directly following World War II as a snapshot of the current moment.  I find it very interesting how the film deals with disability and how it was viewed following the war versus how it is viewed now.- Tyler J.
+I think this movie is important to consider as a secondary source about the post World War II era in the US. It very effectively shows the effects that the war had on those who returned from the war as well as those who stayed behind. It shows the human cost of a major conflict in an empathetic way that is true today too and can almost be taken as a warning that the fight can continue even after fighting has ceased. -Kendall B.
@@ Line 84: / Line 88: @@
 This movie is unique compared to other movies we have watched because it was released in 1946 and is set after the end of World War II in 1946. This sets it up to be an excellent primary source about the post World War II era as the creators of the movie were setting the scene of very current and real issues. Fears about financial burden, changing family dynamics, and the struggle to adjust to post-war life are effectively demonstrated in the movie as real contemporary issues to the time. -Kendall B.
 ======The "So What" Question -- Why should we care about the movie and its version of history?======
+In a 2020 interview with AFI Movie Club, American director, producer, actor, and World War II veteran Mel Brooks called The Best Years of Our Lives a “healing picture.” Brooks asserts that the movie perfectly captured what America was feeling after having experienced the “catastrophe” that the country had just endured during World War II. He called it healing because it explored all of the challenges that everyone from the soldier, to the girl left behind, to helpless-feeling families found themselves facing after the war and taught them how to make “peace with the world, in our souls, and with each other.” This is the value he sees in this movie, and I agree that it is why we should care about it. - Charles Salcedo
 This movie so intimately and accurately shows the often-forgotten story of what happens next after war. Throughout the war, Americans were being fed very pro-American material to encourage the nation to hold fast in their support on both the home and war front. That is juxtaposed with this film where not everything is happy go lucky, it confronts the harsh and unpredictable reality of the nation in 1946. A very interesting question that I think this movie poses is what do we do with a population that has seen so many horrors and integrate them back into a population who has not gone through such things? While many movies cover the contemporary moment, this movie is unique because it seems to understand the importance of the time. It doesn’t sugar coat the issues and covers factors that would end up being very important for the post-war period, including the effects of the GI bill, the soon-to-come baby boom, the effects that war would take on the large veteran population, as well as the fear of new atomic weapons. We should care because this movie shows what it was like to live a typical messy human life after WWII and we should be grateful we have this artifact of the time. – Nora M.