329:question:329--week_13_questions_comments-2020
Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revisionPrevious revisionNext revision | Previous revision | ||
329:question:329--week_13_questions_comments-2020 [2020/11/19 07:48] – daniel_walker | 329:question:329--week_13_questions_comments-2020 [2020/11/19 14:26] (current) – [V. The "So, what?" question] 192.65.245.80 | ||
---|---|---|---|
Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
There were a number of details that the film got right about history. | There were a number of details that the film got right about history. | ||
- | I thought the movie did a good job of showing the brutality of war and portraying the struggles of soldiers coming back from Vietnam, facing a community that in the words of Ron's friend Stevie: didn't really care about what was going on abroad. Like we discussed in class, people were not involved in the war effort on the home front, as the economy was booming. Although, unlike other wars, people were more aware of some of the horrors abroad as in the movie Donna brings up the My Lai massacre. I think another thing that was good about the movie was it gave a good amount of nuance to the views of soldiers who had just arrived and the thoughts of protestors. Obviously, Ron was upset that he had lost his ability to walk in a war that was so unpopular at home, he had wanted to be seen as a hero, like the men in WWII, and didn't get that treatment. But as Ron comes to understand the point of view of the protestors, he realizes the horrors of the war, and begins to fight so other young men won't be sent without reason. -- Helen Dhue | + | I thought the movie did a good job of showing the brutality of war and portraying the struggles of soldiers coming back from Vietnam, |
This movie grabs you right from the very beginning with the first scene in Vietnam. When they approach the village after shooting it and see the women and children lying there it give you the same feeling in your stomach as the picture of the My Lai massacre does. Then the aspect of friendly fire thrown in immediately after. Then his supervisor telling him no to talk about it. It all feels real and it makes you angry. Then as the movie progresses they show the crappy hospital conditions and the mixed reception he receives back home. It is that beginning that appears to work very well as a secondary source that ropes you in immediately. I expected to see a film about living through the war during Vietnam, instead I saw a film about living life after the war in Vietnam.- Dan Dilks | This movie grabs you right from the very beginning with the first scene in Vietnam. When they approach the village after shooting it and see the women and children lying there it give you the same feeling in your stomach as the picture of the My Lai massacre does. Then the aspect of friendly fire thrown in immediately after. Then his supervisor telling him no to talk about it. It all feels real and it makes you angry. Then as the movie progresses they show the crappy hospital conditions and the mixed reception he receives back home. It is that beginning that appears to work very well as a secondary source that ropes you in immediately. I expected to see a film about living through the war during Vietnam, instead I saw a film about living life after the war in Vietnam.- Dan Dilks | ||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
This film works pretty well as a secondary source - though definitely for mature audiences - about the Vietnam war and the treatment of veterans after the war. It presents a very biting and bloody film contrasted with the glorification of war at the beginning of the film. //Born on the Fourth of July// does a good job of contrasting the treatment and views of WWII veterans with that of Vietnam veterans and how much less likely it was for them to get the massive parade demonstrations or the kinds of commendations that other veterans often received, particularly when the war was over and the United States had lost. It exemplifies many of the struggles that veterans suffered through medical treatment, permanent and long-lasting effects from the warlike PTSD and paralysis, and the struggle to reintegrate into society after the war, particularly with all of the anti-war protests at home. Additionally, | This film works pretty well as a secondary source - though definitely for mature audiences - about the Vietnam war and the treatment of veterans after the war. It presents a very biting and bloody film contrasted with the glorification of war at the beginning of the film. //Born on the Fourth of July// does a good job of contrasting the treatment and views of WWII veterans with that of Vietnam veterans and how much less likely it was for them to get the massive parade demonstrations or the kinds of commendations that other veterans often received, particularly when the war was over and the United States had lost. It exemplifies many of the struggles that veterans suffered through medical treatment, permanent and long-lasting effects from the warlike PTSD and paralysis, and the struggle to reintegrate into society after the war, particularly with all of the anti-war protests at home. Additionally, | ||
+ | I think that //Born on the Fourth of July// does a great job at capturing the mixture of emotions about joining the military and fighting in the Vietnam war. It shows both sides of Americans, those who believed that what they were doing was right, and those who disagreed with joining in the fighting. Even within Ron's household, you could see siblings who thought differently, | ||
====== II. Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ====== | ====== II. Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ====== | ||
Line 33: | Line 34: | ||
I also saw that he didn't speak at the fourth of July speech, which I think is important to note, as in class we discussed that Vietnam soldiers often didn't get parades or praise from the community. I think the movie still stays fairly true to the overall disapproval towards the war, as during his speech the audience boos him. --Helen Dhue | I also saw that he didn't speak at the fourth of July speech, which I think is important to note, as in class we discussed that Vietnam soldiers often didn't get parades or praise from the community. I think the movie still stays fairly true to the overall disapproval towards the war, as during his speech the audience boos him. --Helen Dhue | ||
+ | One aspect of the film that I thought was misleading is that it only really showed Kovic as a widely recognized leader in the peace movement after the writing of his book. However, it's important to note that Kovic was a leader in the peace movement not long after he returned home from Vietnam (not just a reluctant, hap-hazard follower as the film shows) - Ethan | ||
====== III. How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ====== | ====== III. How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ====== | ||
Line 39: | Line 41: | ||
I thought the movie was pretty accurate to the scholarly sources. One of the interesting things the sources pointed to was the Kennedy quote "Ask not what your country can do for you.." and discussed how this sentiment was strong in the minds of many young men. In the movie, Ron watches the same speech and is inspired. As well, the sources describe a **nostalgia many men felt towards Vietnam** even though it had been a scarring experience. I think we see a little bit of that in Ron, even though he suffers greatly, upon his arrival at home he seems to have some bit of nostalgia towards his time there. --Helen Dhue | I thought the movie was pretty accurate to the scholarly sources. One of the interesting things the sources pointed to was the Kennedy quote "Ask not what your country can do for you.." and discussed how this sentiment was strong in the minds of many young men. In the movie, Ron watches the same speech and is inspired. As well, the sources describe a **nostalgia many men felt towards Vietnam** even though it had been a scarring experience. I think we see a little bit of that in Ron, even though he suffers greatly, upon his arrival at home he seems to have some bit of nostalgia towards his time there. --Helen Dhue | ||
- | Like Cat, I feel as if I noticed more similarities than differences between the historical sources and the movie Born on the Fourth of July. I particularly enjoyed reading the prologue to Philip Caputo’s Rumor of War because he talked about how the war was a long experience for soldiers during and after the War or even when they had left the combat zone. I feel as if the movie captures that concept by having it span over Ron Kovic’s experience after he was injured. Additionally, | + | Like Cat, I feel as if I noticed more similarities than differences between the historical sources and the movie Born on the Fourth of July. I particularly enjoyed reading the prologue to Philip Caputo’s Rumor of War because he talked about how the war was a long experience for soldiers during and after the War or even when they had left the combat zone. I feel as if the movie captures that concept by having it span over Ron Kovic’s experience after he was injured. Additionally, |
+ | |||
+ | Like mentioned before, I think that this film actually stayed fairly true to the readings. I think that it did a good job of showing the excitement and romanticization people had of war before becoming a part of it; later, it did a good job of showing how those feelings changed. Other issues such as PTSD, life-long injuries, and the death of fellow soldiers, were also bought up in the film as well. I think that it did a good job of portraying the same issues and feelings that were written about in the primary sources. -Mariah Morton | ||
====== IV. How does this movie work as a primary source about the time period in which it was made or the filmmakers? ====== | ====== IV. How does this movie work as a primary source about the time period in which it was made or the filmmakers? ====== | ||
Line 54: | Line 58: | ||
As a primary source of the time period, //Born on the Fourth of July// offers an interpretation of the changing opinions in America' | As a primary source of the time period, //Born on the Fourth of July// offers an interpretation of the changing opinions in America' | ||
+ | |||
+ | Oliver Stone has made many movies about Vietnam and is one of the most famous directors of the last several decades. | ||
This film is a great primary source for the time period in which it was made because it represents societal change on the views of Vietnam Veterans and their treatment both in the field and upon returning home. As referenced in class and in the reading, Vietnam veteran’s experience was intensely different than that of American soldiers before them. The raw and real experiences of soldiers featured in this film are incredible because it really shows the struggles some Vietnam veterans went through. While this was just the story of Ron Kovic, it shows the horrors of the Veterans treatment from both the government and the American people, which is **something 10 years prior to 1989, just after the war ended, the nation would have never really admitted** and the American people certainly would have tanked this movie.** The success that it had in 1989 was remarkable in and of itself simply because of how graphic, raw, and uncomfortable** the movie is for Americans as it exposes the ugly truth of being a Vietnam veteran and returning to the country veterans risked and lost so much for. -Morgan Gilbert | This film is a great primary source for the time period in which it was made because it represents societal change on the views of Vietnam Veterans and their treatment both in the field and upon returning home. As referenced in class and in the reading, Vietnam veteran’s experience was intensely different than that of American soldiers before them. The raw and real experiences of soldiers featured in this film are incredible because it really shows the struggles some Vietnam veterans went through. While this was just the story of Ron Kovic, it shows the horrors of the Veterans treatment from both the government and the American people, which is **something 10 years prior to 1989, just after the war ended, the nation would have never really admitted** and the American people certainly would have tanked this movie.** The success that it had in 1989 was remarkable in and of itself simply because of how graphic, raw, and uncomfortable** the movie is for Americans as it exposes the ugly truth of being a Vietnam veteran and returning to the country veterans risked and lost so much for. -Morgan Gilbert | ||
Line 72: | Line 78: | ||
This movie represents the veterans perspective of events they witnessed in Vietnam, as well as the aftermath. Vietnam is as unpopular as wars get, yet finding an accurate take on the conflict from a veteran' | This movie represents the veterans perspective of events they witnessed in Vietnam, as well as the aftermath. Vietnam is as unpopular as wars get, yet finding an accurate take on the conflict from a veteran' | ||
+ | |||
+ | One important aspect of this movie is the view it provides of a soldier trying to readjust back to life on the homefront. | ||
Compared to other movies we talked about in class on Tuesday, //Taxi Driver//, //Coming Home//, // | Compared to other movies we talked about in class on Tuesday, //Taxi Driver//, //Coming Home//, // | ||
Line 81: | Line 89: | ||
Coming out of the Vietnam era many Americans felt they had been cheated and lied to, this is shown in the film quite well, and many Americans felt really negatively about the conflict and the government all together. However, most of these Americans never experienced the war. The film as well as the primary sources explore the relationship veterans had with the war and the disconnect they felt returning to civilian life. I think this film did a great job trying to bridge the gap between the veteran and civilian perspective. Tons of Americans knew the war was wrong, granted many still believed in it even by the end, but the trauma and hardships faced by returning vets was something that was almost impossible to understand for civilians. The film is still relevant today for that same reason; it explores the pain, nuance, and trauma faced by vets who couldn' | Coming out of the Vietnam era many Americans felt they had been cheated and lied to, this is shown in the film quite well, and many Americans felt really negatively about the conflict and the government all together. However, most of these Americans never experienced the war. The film as well as the primary sources explore the relationship veterans had with the war and the disconnect they felt returning to civilian life. I think this film did a great job trying to bridge the gap between the veteran and civilian perspective. Tons of Americans knew the war was wrong, granted many still believed in it even by the end, but the trauma and hardships faced by returning vets was something that was almost impossible to understand for civilians. The film is still relevant today for that same reason; it explores the pain, nuance, and trauma faced by vets who couldn' | ||
- | I feel like particularly with its focus on the anti-war protests,// Born on the Fourth of July// is still very relevant in discussing police brutality and this very tempestuous period of protest and rising conservatism. The scene with the 1972 Republican National Convention well-established the contrast of Nixon' | + | I feel like particularly with its focus on the anti-war protests,// Born on the Fourth of July// is still very relevant in discussing police brutality and this very tempestuous period of protest and rising conservatism. The scene with the 1972 Republican National Convention well-established the contrast of Nixon' |
+ | |||
+ | While one could argue that this film still played into certain stereotypes about Vietnam vets, overall it did something arguably important: **it portrayed a disillusioned vet as not as someone who hated his country, but as someone who opposed the war because he loved it.** It seems like many films portray dissenting Vietnam vets as people who are just disillusioned with the US as a whole (whether the viewers are intended to sympathize with that point of view or not), but I think it's important to show the perspective of many soldiers: they loved their // | ||
329/question/329--week_13_questions_comments-2020.1605772083.txt.gz · Last modified: 2020/11/19 07:48 by daniel_walker