Differences

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

--- 329:question:329--week_13_questions_comments-2020 [2020/11/19 13:44] – 76.78.225.132
+++ 329:question:329--week_13_questions_comments-2020 [2020/11/19 14:26] (current) – [V. The "So, what?" question] 192.65.245.80
@@ Line 41: / 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
-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, the prolog talks about “the pride and overpowering self-assurance” that the young men had at the beginning when they signed up for the war. Additionally, the prologue talks about how the men were disillusioned of war and were partially “seduced” into a uniform by Kennedy. I feel like these are things expressed in the film, however, I feel as if the influence that Kennedy played on these young men's lives was downplayed in the film. -Megan Williams
+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, the prolog talks about “the pride and overpowering self-assurance” that the young men had at the beginning when they signed up for the war. Additionally, the prologue talks about how the men were disillusioned of war and were **partially “seduced” into a uniform by Kennedy**. I feel like these are things expressed in the film, however, I feel as if the influence that Kennedy played on these young men's lives was downplayed in the film. -Megan Williams
 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
@@ Line 89: / 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't or wouldn't talk about those things themselves. - Wilson
- 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's words about treating Vietnam veterans well at the same time Ronnie and the other veterans were being abused by Republicans, security, and the police. The primary complaint I had of this film was that it still gave a happy ending, that Ronnie was able to be successful and that him going to the Democratic National Convention in 1976 was somehow going to fix everything. Overall, I thought it was a good film on the horrors of war and the aftermath, but I wish they had addressed that some of the veterans never recovered. I don't know that this helped too much about the consistent portrayal of the crazy Vietnam veteran, but this movie at least provided more understanding and context to what could cause that in veterans and the kind of trauma they went through. - Ashley Dimino
+ 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's words about treating Vietnam veterans well at the same time Ronnie and the other veterans were being abused by Republicans, security, and the police. The primary complaint I had of this film was that it still gave a happy ending, that Ronnie was able to be successful and that him **going to the Democratic National Convention in 1976 was somehow going to fix everything**. Overall, I thought it was a good film on the horrors of war and the aftermath, but I wish they had addressed that some of the veterans never recovered. I don't know that this helped too much about the consistent portrayal of the crazy Vietnam veteran, but this movie at least provided more understanding and context to what could cause that in veterans and the kind of trauma they went through. - Ashley Dimino
-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 //country//, but felt that the //war// was wrong. - Ethan
+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 //country//, but felt that the //war// was wrong. - Ethan