Wiki for Dr. McClurkens Courses

You've loaded an old revision of the document! If you save it, you will create a new version with this data.

eYou should do a total of 2-3 comments/questions/observations this week.  You do not need to post to all areas. Please do include links to sources, clips, images that are relevant to your point. -- Dr. McClurken

====== I.	How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?  ======

This film was extremely accurate, from its portrayal of the war in Vietnam, to the pre-war culture that drove so many American men to sacrifice their lives, minds, and bodies on the altar of their nation. The film was also really good at portraying returning veterans treatment, the public’s opinion on the war, and the general feeling of resentment felt by many veterans. –Lucca Crowe.

This movie, however poorly Tom Cruise acted, did follow Kovic’s story fairly well. One thing that really stuck out to me was that Kovic actually did shoot a young corporal. That was a detail I expected to just be thrown into the movie for dramatic effect and to show the general mistreatment and uncaring of the US and superior officers when it comes to the treatment of the soldiers and the general attitude in Vietnam. However, this actually did happen and Kovic’s superior officers really did refuse to hear about it. So it really does a good job showing how terrible the Vietnam conflict was.-Teresa Felipe

This movie was pretty accurate to the history it portrayed, as far as the experiences of Vietnam veterans goes. The disconnect between the Vietnam veterans and their families upon returning home I thought was well-represented through Kovic’s feelings of isolation. I think the film overall did a good job of portraying the hostility that returning Vietnam veterans faced, not just from the American public, but from politicians as well who refused to give them the help they needed. Something I wanted to point out was the scene at the veteran protest, when Kovic is trying to talk to the news reporters, and someone spits on him. I liked this scene because it’s sort of gesturing the most iconic (if untrue) imagery of this time, that of Vietnam veterans being spit on, but showed that the party most hostile towards veterans were not hippies, as is usually assumed, but people in power who did not want the truth of the brutality of the war to be seen. - Maris Tiller

This movie works very well as a secondary source. It was pretty accurate in its portrayal of Vietnam and its aftereffects on soldiers. I think that especially the post-war emotions that were felt by the soldiers by those around them was well played out. The hostility from many of their fellow Americans was a true hardship for many of these veterans after they returned from some really traumatic experiences. -Margaret Jones

I believe the film to be an accurate representation of the Vietnam War and the reactions to it as well as the soldiers coming home. The people supporting the war were due to their fear of communism. I think the film did an accurate job portraying that especially in Kovic’s family. I think the film also does a good job portraying what happened to soldiers and what happened when they returned home. People's reactions being both positive and negative. I think it also showed how much the war affected soldiers' mental health. Ron really struggles after the war with his mental health and that is shown well in the film. -Sophie Weber

I think this film was very historically accurate in its portrayal of veterans and the mistreatment they endured and therefore , the ill feelings that they held towards society. -Erika Lambert

I think this film worked as a reasonable secondary source. Although it was not a great film (don't cast Tom Cruise), I really enjoyed seeing the post-war effects on the American soldiers and see the damage being done to the soldiers' psyches. It was great to see the movie portray the impact of war and PTSD on the soldiers and their mental health. - Zack Steinbaum

The portrayal of the veterans hospital was pretty accurate. Being understaffed, and underfunded by the government obviously contributed to the care that the veterans received. - Neonya Garner

This movie makes a good secondary source. In class, we talked about fragging and how enlisted men killed their officers while in combat zones, even still it was shocking to see this depicted in the movie. Another part of the movie that I believe was portrayed well as the soldiers coming home to a country that scorned them and the war they fought in and the PTSD that they brought home with them. I perfect example is when Ron is drunk and literally telling his Mom that he wished he was dead and she can’t see it. She does nothing and slaps him. Obviously, the situation was very tense, but Ronnie wasn’t getting all the help he should have. -Annika Sypher

I think that this film would serve well as a secondary source, as it treats a real Vietnam veteran’s story with a realistic approach. Kovic’s story and the PTSD he faces after he returns are all accurately depicted. In addition, the film does a great job of portraying the attitude about the war at the time, and how some began to realize that Americans should not be in Vietnam at all. -Burke Steifman

Based on what I gathered from the readings, this film did a pretty decent job as a secondary source when it came to the accuracy of the veterans. From the very beginning of the film we notice the results war can have on individuals such as symptoms of ptsd or being disabled. This same concept is carried out throughout the movie when Ron gets paralyzed and the many hospital scenes we are given. Another thing to mention is how many individuals would copes, whether healthy or unhealthy. The movie provides a variety of perspectives from many individuals who believed very different.- Paula Perez

====== II.	Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ======

The detail where Kovic goes to the parents and widow of the man he accidentally killed to confess and ask for forgiveness did not actually happen, and was added as an emphasis to Kovic's guilt over the incident. Director Stone claimed that he added the scene to give Kovic some closure, but that doesn't seem like something to be used as a cinematic device, as Kovic really did mistakenly kill a marine. Although there aren't many details on the making of this scene, it's probable that the parents of the corporal killed were not consulted. This scene just seemed too idealistic even with the widow refusing to forgive him. -- Jane Michael

The film seems to imply that Kovic’s influence was part of what led to an organized anti-war protest movement from Vietnam veterans. Donna’s statement earlier in the movie, saying if he joined up with them he might lend them more credibility, seems to imply that there were not already organized Vietnam veterans also protesting the war. Perhaps this is a flaw in the overall structure of the film; we don’t really see the formation of the veterans’ protest group, we just see the protest itself. Maybe it wasn’t meant to be implied that Kovic had a major role in the formation of this group, but it was nonetheless. - Maris Tiller

Born on the 4th of July does a really good job showing how easy it was for Vietnam veterans to become disenfranchised with the American governemt +the Vietnam War itself. -Katherine Rayhart

====== III.	How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ======

====== IV.	How does this movie work as a primary source about the time period in which it was made or the filmmakers? ======

This film was released in 1989, a little over ten years since the war ended. After a quick Google search, I saw that several films about Vietnam were released within this decade. Full Metal Jacket was released in 1987, Platoon was released in 1986, Casualties of War in 1989, and the comedy film Good Morning, Vietnam was released in 1988. This clearly reflects a trend in American media throughout the late 80’s and 90’s. This film is only able to reflect on the ten or so years following the war, which I feel like limits it in some ways. The director, Oliver Stone, is a Vietnam veteran himself, which I think is incredibly interesting. While this film is based off of a real story, I can only imagine that this was Stone’s way of telling his own experiences as well. Along with this film, Stone has made two other films about the Vietnam War, Heaven & Earth and Platoon. –Olivia Foster

Personally I feel that during the time period the film was released, there was an interest in the Vietnam War and therefore , the film caught the attention of society. - Erika Lambert

I also so the trend in Vietnam movies being made, but I have to wonder if a bigger indicator of the time period it was made could have been shown in how PTSD was portrayed. This movie was made basically in the 90s and PTSD was just starting to be excepted which was first given its current name in 1980. Groups were formed during this time to raise awareness. The movie might have been capitalizing on this relative newness for the shock factor or they could just be backing a social justice movement. -Annika S

The film really shows how perspectives of the Vietnam War changed over time and how anti-war organizations form. The war was still relatively recent in 1989, and most people watching this movie could recall what it was like when the war was going on. The portrayal of a struggling veteran does a lot to help outsiders’ perspectives on the war. The filmmakers do a great job of creating sympathy for men who really did not know what they were getting themselves into, as we discussed in class. -Burke Steifman

====== V. The "So, what?" question	======

First of all, the directors and producers cast big name actors, such as Tom Cruise, and it did not work in their favor. Cruise’s acting consisted of him yelling, acting drunk, and making crazy eyes the entire movie. They probably chose to portray Ron Kovic that way to show the hardship that Vietnam veterans went through and the fast drastic changes they experienced going from domestic life to a war zone and back. However, Tom Cruise is just so annoying and does not do a good job portraying this in my opinion. His crazy eyes were incredibly off putting and his yelling and overall demeanor really distracted from the actual hardships and struggles that many veterans went through and the actual story of Kovic. I believe the choice to have a big name actor meant sacrificing good acting and thus sacrificing having an actually good, meaningful movie. -Teresa Felipe

This film was not only not that great, but felt very disconnected in the way that it chose to follow Kovic's life. The scenes of him as a child and teenager seemed too long and convoluted, and though they were obviously included to emphasize how young Kovic was when he went into the Marines, it does not come off that way. After the war, the relevant scenes got strangely far apart with no explanation as to how he was getting there or how he had found out about anything or anywhere he was going. It really made it seem like Kovic was just sort of being dragged around and ended up in places arbitrarily, and then was like 'hey I like this!' Since he was an activist, it felt like a disservice to the actual Kovic to portray him as a man obsessed with no real direction until he ended up in one. It also felt like a disservice to the college anti-war movement to portray them in such a contrast to Kovic, as although the VVAW was certainly a more effective body for protest, the college anti-war movement was still very organized. -- Jane Michael

This film was really powerful in its capture of the motivations and emotional shifts felt by many American soldiers. Certainly the script and performances in the film went a long way in communicating the themes of the film, but what stud out to me most was the camera work. The scenes featuring Ron Kovic in Vietnam are all filmed in this fast, shaky, camerawork that leads the viewer feeling just as confused and disoriented as Kovic; the style is never repeated and contrasts sharply with the far more traditional camerawork of the rest of the film. Also for many of the scenes after Kovic is paralyzed, the camera is set at his level, forcing the audience to look up at the people around him; it’s a really neat trick and does a lot to put the audience in Kovic’s state of mind. –Lucca Crowe.

The movie felt all over the place and kind of random at times. It was hard to follow his life once he was discharged from rehab. I think the main point from this film was the mental health of soldiers and how much the war affected them. I think it was strong in that portrayal because you could understand how much pain the soldiers were in throughout. It also accurately shows the fighting back home and shows how powerful and dangerous it was for people protesting the war. -Sophie Weber

I feel like a majority of the films made about Vietnam are incredibly more violent than other war movies. It may be a skewed perspective on my part, but I feel as though movies about Vietnam appear more violent to mirror both the realities and the public feelings about the war. Movies about the war have been made relatively close to the end of the war, while a majority of veterans were still alive and young. As I mentioned beforehand, I feel like making these films so close to the actual events limits the time and perspective to tell an impactful story about the effects of coming home from Vietnam. I think the difference is that the media has always been a crucial part of the Vietnam War, it was one of the first American-fought wars that was highly publicized to the public, and that is why we see so many movies about it. –Olivia Foster

Tom Cruise's abysmal acting made it really hard to care about anything shown on screen. This is a very important story to tell and I can't focus on it because Tom Cruise is incredibly annoying. His portrayal as Kovic comes across as a whiny, excessively vulgar (and that's coming from a person who swears a lot), man-child who lashes out at everyone around him. - Katherine Rayhart

I thought that this film was really effective and impactful in the way that it portrayed the Vietnam War and its impact. What stood out to me the most was the hardship and emotion faced by Kovic in his experience. He had a really interesting story, and I think that it’s really important for these stories to be told to the broader US audience. Things such as these are very important in shaping our perceptions and culture. -Margaret Jones

Overall, I thought this movie really captured the time period it was written about , especially with the veterans and was an overall interesting story that explained to me the hardships that veterans faced after the war. - Erika Lambert

I thought the film worked very well in the way it showed the impact of trauma and hardships on the Vietnam veterans. I really saw this in Kovic's aggression towards others, habit of over-drinking, and swearing; all these were used as coping mechanisms to deal with the war. - Zack Steinbaum

I find this film extremely intriguing because it is the first film that I have seen that does not depict an American War as a great American feat. I know it's because of how this war is remembered in history, but it still is important that we depict realistic stories that don't show America in an amazing light. - Neonya Garner

The mechanics of the film really weren’t great, but the message gets across well and the idea itself is unique. It is interesting to see a war film that treats the war as a mistake, not a glorious battle. -Burke Steifman

At first I didn’t quite understand the constant yelling in the film, but when I thought about it more I think it shows just how much frustration individuals had because of how others would try to silence there opinions about the war or just how much Ron for example was conflicted because he grew up on this notion on how America was so great to the point where it was invincible. All he knew ended up being put to dust and questioned. Don’t get me wrong his character could have been depicted differently and way better but at least from this standpoint I think I understand him better.- Paula Perez

Edit summary

Note: By editing this page you agree to license your content under the following license: CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International