I was watching Jarhead the other day. That’s a pretty pro-war (or at least pro USMC) film. Even though there’s very little actual combat (a point made several times throughout the film) the film spends a lot of time focusing on the psychological struggles of being deployed and how the Marines overcome them to do their duty.
Any film that takes the piss out of American Imperialism is alright in my book. Satire or no.
This is something that’s a perennial problem for me with a lot of sf. Are we supposed to take into account the astronomical unlikeliness of the bugs hitting Buenos Aires with an asteroid into account when we assess the movie? Or is this just another movie that doesn’t really understand how big space actually is?
Yeah, my big problem with ST’s satire is it’s not really clear what’s being satirized. “American Imperialism?” Okay, but nothing about the movie feels like its talking about America. None of the characters are American, none of the film (I think) takes place in America, and the American government is just part of a wider global government. “Fascism?” Just saying “fascism is bad” isn’t that interesting a statement, unless you’re connecting it to some specific real-world analog, and I’m not sure who that’s supposed to be here.
I haven’t watched Jarhead since before my own military experience, but my impression at the time was it was trying very hard to be a modern Full Metal Jacket and not doing a particularly good job of it. I suppose I should watch it again.
The Federation probably engineered the collision. Not used a happy accident as a pretext.
It doesn’t feel like its talking about America? All the actors ARE (I assume for the most part) Americans and use American accents. Despite names like Rico, Flores, Ibanez…
A vast, overconfident army plunges headfirst into a war halfway across the wo…galaxy and promptly gets their asses handed to them by an underdeveloped backwards race? That doesn’t sound American?
Our stereotypical, beautiful leads are supposed to be the heroes, but they dress in Nazi-like garb, execute POWs, engage in massive propaganda (including asking kids to step on cockroaches at home??")
But again…I respect all opinions here.
FWIW…the director said its a satire on American Militarism…a close producer concurred but said its more about world history, the America specifically.
Interestingly, the director has directly stated that GotF is not intended to be an anti-war movie.
Like the asteroid strike, this is a good example of something in the movie where it’s not clear if it’s a creative decision, or just lazy film making. It’s a common trope in science fiction that everyone has an American accent, even when the character clearly isn’t meant to be American. Luke Skywalker has an American accent, but the audience isn’t meant to assume that he’s from America, it’s just understood that it’s easier and less goofy to have the actor speak in their normal voice instead of trying to make up a “space accent.”
In Starship Troopers, we know that the characters aren’t American, but America does exist in that universe. They’re just specifically not from there. But they have American accents. Is the audience supposed to view that as significant information, or is it just the standard “everyone in American movies has an American accent” trope?
Well, in the movie, they win, so no, doesn’t sound all that American.
Right, my point wasn’t that they don’t read as “fascist,” it’s that they don’t read as American fascists. I mean, they dress like Nazis, and are blonde and blue eyed Argentinians, which is clearly meant to be a reference to the Nazis who escaped to South America after the war. How is this about American fascism? It’s just German fascism again. It’s like that adage, “When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.” As a satire of American fascism, the film doesn’t have any real understanding of what fascism looks like in America.
Oh, I’m not doubting the intent, just the execution.
GD…I miswrote.
It should read “A close producer concurred but said its more about world history…NOT…America specifically.”
Also, in the movie they don’t win. They complete a very important mission, but its far from over.
Another thing that I’ve never seen mentioned but is an observation on my part. By the end of the film, the Feds are fielding former drill instructors and maimed classroom instructors.
I suppose that’s where we differ. While espousing political opinions I don’t agree with may make me like a movie less, having politics I do agree with won’t make me like a movie more. In fact, I will dislike any movie that I sense is preaching at me, even if I agree 100% with what it is preaching.
I just want the movie to be good. Anything else is incidental.
I doubt the intent. They tried to sell it to fans as the book, not a rip-off of the book. I was there. The producers showed up at World Con (LACon III) to build hype for the movie. They even recruited a bunch of fans to play the crowd for that stupid game they played in Act 1. Not once did they tell the truth about the film. (No wonder. If they had told the truth, we would likely have fed them to the lions.)
It’s not satire - it’s just a shitty movie made by a hack director.
What the director intended is often different than what the marketing guys sell.
Which is often different than what either ends up with.
I just saw this movie and you are most definitely exaggerating. The two main characters take out maybe a few dozen soldiers between them, probably half of those in surprise attacks where the opposition doesn’t even get the chance to fight back. There may be something like another 50 plus casualties in the big battle at the end, but the vast majority of those are not accomplished by the protagonists. It’s still all highly improbable, but it’s pretty standard action movie fare.
For more context:
The original book was a semi-autobiography and the director of the film says that he was not trying to create the film with some dogmatic agenda, nor does he expect the film to bring peace to the world.
I can certainly see that last. For some, it would be dispiriting to create a thing that explains why war is bad, and then everyone goes off and merrily engages in war. Better to just accept that you’re telling a story of war, and accepting that war is going to continue.
Personally, I’d say that he’s underselling himself, though. It is probably true that most people will never learn the lessons of war, because of films like Grave of the Fireflies. But I suspect that the number of people who are entirely or somewhat opposed to it will be just that ever bit so much larger because of the film - and that extra few might be the amount needed to keep things from getting out of control in at least some cases that are on the borderline.