Skip to main content

believe the hype


Go see Jarhead.

Go see it at the next available opportunity, don’t waste time thinking about it. That’s an order.

I didn’t actually go out with the intention of seeing jarhead tonight. I had meant to go see Good Night and Good Luck, which I still intend on doing. As it happens, I made a typically lazy decision. Good Night wasn’t playing at a theatre convenient to where I was at that specific moment in time, so I opted to go see the other movie I was interested in, Sam Mendes’ Jarhead. It wasn’t really a close second, because I tend to find movies about being in the army a little alienating. It’s like watching a room full of the people I used to hate in high school from the safe side of one-way glass. Kind of entertaining, but the people inside still seem vaguely dangerous to someone like me.

I guess this change in plans is what one would call providence, because Jarhead is one of the best movies I’ve seen in years. I am going to have to see it again, because I’m still marveling at what a masterful, controlled piece it is.

Based on the memoirs of a real-life Gulf War vet (the first one), Jarhead is one of the only army films that doesn’t rely on predictable caricatures of military types to connect you to a larger story being told by the director. The story in this case is the soldiers- wide-eyed, stupidly courageous, openly vulnerable boys thrown in a situation that is completely foreign to both their civilian lives and their army training.

Don’t believe the comparisons that you here between Jarhead and other war movies, because it simply isn’t like most other war movies. There’s no war, for starters. When most people think of recent movies about war, they think about the preponderance of films about Vietnam, films that showed the full horror of war, the battles, the massacres of civilians, the gory injuries. The soldiers in Jarhead don’t see battle. They see accidents and aftermath, but the war is as bloodless as the parched desert landscape.

Because the first Gulf War, from the perspective of those of us who watched it from our sofas, was surgical, quick, painless, there is a tendency to dismiss it in comparison with the debacle that was Vietnam. The war was fought with overwhelming popular support (although some of us still walked in the streets and screamed “no blood for oil” to deaf ears), it was over quickly and it was a victory. It lacked the cultural impact of Vietnam (something which is touched on with particular finesse in the movie) and as a result, the soldiers were simply expected to come home and go back to regular life. The point the film makes, very eloquently, is that this is an impossibility. The gun, as the narrator points out, is the soldier’s phantom limb, no matter what war he has been through. It’s what he always reaches for.

In the same way that the first Gulf War was different than the Vietnam war. Jarhead is very different from films about the Vietnam war. This is no Platoon or Full Metal Jacket. It could be compared to the Deer Hunter, but the most apt comparison, in terms of war films, is to the 1930 masterpiece All Quiet on the Western Front, a film that (for different reasons) managed to get inside the mind of an average soldier in a way more unsettling than any number of scenes drenched in blood.

Comments

Ludovic T. said…
thanks for the info, l'll check it. Yesterday l watched 2010 space odyssey-first contact. l like much this film, pictures are great and the philosophy of life too. And to stay in a war trip, Enemy at the gate is one of my favourite film.

Cheers.
flora_mundi said…
I haven't seen 2010 yet, although, since I've seen 2001 a few times, i must get around to it... thanks for the reminder :-)

as long as you're here, why not read more?

jihadvertising?

i keep seeing this ad for tictac candies:



am i the only one who finds the suicide bomber clown at the end a little unnerving? all the nice natural things like the bunny and the [extinct] woolly mammoth and the fruit get devoured by a trying-to-appear-nonthreatening-but-obviously-psychotic clown who then blows himself up. congratulations, tictac, i think this ad has landed you on about a dozen watch lists.

oh and by the way, showing me that your product will somehow cause my stomach to explode in a rainbow of wtf makes me believe that doing consuming tictacs would be a worse dietary decision than the time i ate two raw eggs and a half a bottle of hot sauce on a dare.

mental health mondays :: employee of the month

one of the things that makes mental health difficult to manage is that it can be difficult to tell which are the symptoms and which are the root causes of a disorder. another is that sometimes the symptoms can disguise themselves as things we normally value. both of those things collided for me reading this piece in the atlantic, which deals with the possibility that work addiction may be a coping mechanism employed by people with post-traumatic stress disorder.

the idea isn't particularly farfetched; after all, 52% of men and 28% of women with ptsd will at some time in their lives meet the clinical criteria for addiction. and ptsd is often first identified through habits linked to displaced anxiety. and what gets linked to anxiety more than a demanding job? but drawing the line between the two isn't quite as easy as it looks.

work addiction isn't accepted as an addiction disorder in the way that alcoholism and drug addiction are. that makes it a little difficult to talk …

mental health mondays :: the dangers of diagnosing

when you take a look at any reputable online source of information about mental health, it comes with a warning that anything you read on the site should not be considered a substitute for evaluation by a medical professional. so why are so many people jumping on the bandwagon to diagnose donald trump?

it's not uncommon for people to make glib judgments about the mental health of others, because we think that we understand what disorders entail. when i was working in offices, i noticed a lot of this: an immature and garrulous employee being labeled and partially excused because others were certain he had adhd, or a moody and indecisive boss dismissed as bipolar. [as you can imagine, that one struck me as particularly ignorant and, since i was the audience, ironic.] but in the case of trump, even professionals are weighing in on the subject. no fewer than twenty-seven psychiatrists have collaborated on a book called the dangerous case of donald trump. up to now, it's been unde…