|
Rating:  - Welcome home, soldier
A dark and disturbing movie, but in many ways, Tom's best work yet. Stone's epic quasi anti-war movie quite rightly shows how the Nam Vets were never honoured for the heroes that they truly were - and that includes the 10,000 Army nurses and Red Cross SRAO women.
This movie exposes the Government hypocrisy in many ways, yet perhaps the most powerful commentary is on the state of the Vets hospitals. It's hard to say which scenes are the most harrowing - the ultra-graphic scenes in the Surgical Hospital in Nam, in which the staff had to follow strict Triage protocols and decide who would live and who would have to die (for reasons of resources and time) - or the scenes in the Vet hospital with its almost nineteenth century barbarism.
Perhaps the most shameful part of the Government's conduct of the War is that Nixon got elected in 68 on the basis of bringing the boys home, yet he waited until December, 1972 to unleash Linebacker II, the only effective and unrestricted strategic bombing campaign of the entire war.
Some years ago I read Robert Bly's Iron John, in which he mentioned that even at that time, more Nam Vets had committed suicide since the end of the War than died during the War itself (more than 58,000). Around the same time, I heard a report that about one third of America's homeless were Vietnam Vets.
Watching this movie, you can understand how both of these tragedies have unfolded. I am not a pacifist by any means, but movies like this should be required viewing for people who are considering a career in the military. Not to put them off, but to give them a sense of how badly things can go, so that they may go in with their eyes open.
Ron Kovic is a man of tremendous strength and integrity, and he is just one of many many thousands of Vets who were never honoured by their country, and who never heard the words "Welcome home, soldier."
There is still time to honour the Vets. We just need to find more ways to do it.
Rating: - great movie
When it comes to great powerful movies in history look
no further then Oliver Stone the academy award winning
director of JFK,PLATOON,WALL STREET,and this masterpiece.
With horrific battle scenes and anger filled foul dialogue
used casually and emotional tear filled scenes this is one
of the greatest after war view that is supierior to THE DEER
HUNTER.With powerful performances by Tom cruise,Frank Whaley,
and the great Willem Dafoe this deserved more then it got.
It's a crime this didn't win best picture,best actor,and best
supporting actor for Dafoe personally I think this is in the
top five best films of the 80's.And is really the only movie
where Tom Cruise is a ugly looking man and this is his best
performance ever.So if you liked THE DEER HUNTER,COMMING HOME
or PLATOON you will like this one.Don't be dumb watch this movie
Rating:  - Powerful Anti-War Movie
This is the only film starring Tom Cruise that I like.
Compare his Ron Kovic character in this movie to his "Maverick" character in Top Gun (1986). You aren't so cocky and egotistical now, are you, Mr. Cruise?
Becoming paraplegic for life really stinks, and Oliver Stone realizes this. Yet each individual copes with life-long, severe, disability differently. What we see in "Born on the 4th.." is almost a worst case scenario.
Everyone in the United States should watch this film. However, most people would soon become too depressed to finish the viewing.
The ending is Kovic speaking before the 1976 Democratic convention. Yet there is no real feeling of redemption, even with a flashback of Ron's mother telling him as a little boy, "I dreamed that you were speaking in front of a very large audience of people".
By 1976, US armed forces had pulled out of Vietnam.
In 1991, the real Ron Kovic could not prevent US armed forces from attacking Iraq.
Rating:  - Hate war, but honor veterans
While most war movies focus on the courageousness and bravado of the combatants, this one shows what life is like for wounded veterans. Anyone thinking about joining the military should be interested, because anyone joining the military should be not only be prepared to fight, but be prepared for the consequences.
A good question posed in this movie comes when the main character is getting drunk and having a tantrum at a local bar. A solid WWII former Marine who fought in Iwo tells him "we lost 6,000 guys the first day, what are you crying about?" Well, I think the answer to that question is that the US won WWII, Americans were proud of the veterans, and this provided wounded veterans with a justification for their suffering. We lost Vietnam, we didn't gain any territory, and Americans didn't display the same support for Vietnam vets as they did for WWII vets. Wounded Vietnam vets are constantly plagued by the thought that they sacrificed so much for so little, and it's more difficult for them to accept their loss.
Of course, regardless of their war, the capabilities of wounded vets depends largely on the vet's mentality. But, regardless of their individual ability to cope with their wounds, no one can argue that the nation shouldn't support them generously.
Anyway, this is a pretty good flick, and definitely an important one to watch, since hardly any war movies deal with life after the bullets stop flying, except maybe a couple foreign flicks and "Johnny Got His Gun."
-- JJ Timmins
Rating: - Stone's masterpiece
This is a great towering and emotionally devastating film that has something important to say not only about the Viet Nam war but also about war in general and even the war protesters. In fact it's easy to take this movie as more of an anti-war statement than as a specific slap at Viet Nam.
From the beginning we see veterans marred and disabled cringing at the pop of a gun. Then later we see Tom Cruise actually wondering if anything was worth the loss of his body. Stone makes it clear that while the men that fight wars are heroes, war is anything but heroic: At times it's an ugly necessity. The crime of Viet Nam is that it wasn't a necessity. Unlike Stone, I do believe the US got into the war with the best intentions but the war did not really fit the definition of a "must fight".
The script challenges everyone. The hypocrisy of the United States government is exposed by the hospital scenes. They ask us to honor the Vets yet treat them like garbage. At the University Stone goes even further showing a government that purports to fight for freedom a world away yet shuts down expression here. The apathy of the American public is also taken to task. No one treats Kovic or his fellow vets with any sort of compassion. Even Kovic's girlfriend- the war protester- only wants to use him for her own ends. Fighting the war is just a cause to her and she's forgotten the reasons for the battle.
Stone makes all these points in the most artful way possible. This a technically dazzling piece of work beautifully photographed, (Stone's judicious of slow motion gives the film an almost lyrical power.) edited, scored (by John Williams) and acted by almost everyone in the cast. Cruise of course is the standout. He doesn't always give the most technically accomplished performance, hurrying a few too many of his lines, but he makes up for it with an almost brutal emotionalism. By the time he and Stone finish with you you're spent inside.
Like all Stone films this one has flaws. I never understood the scene where Kovic meets with the family of the boy he killed. It's not in the book and lessens our sympathy for the Kovic character. We understand why Kovic does it psychologically but it makes him seem selfish. The family would have been better off not knowing what happened. Also there are Stone's inaccuracies and anachronisms. Though they are relatively few and most are minor, there are few that undercut the director's credibility. The chief villain here is the scene at the Republican Convention. Extracted from reality it makes a powerful statement about Kovic, the war and the government's attitude towards the veterans. Knowing it didn't happen dampens some of that power. But if you can pull yourself away from the history books even this works since many veterans probably faced that kind of treatment from those that were supposed to be honor them though not at the Republican Convention.
Finally, I worry about Stone's penchant to topple over into propaganda. Kovic's speech at the convention, while it subtly hits on the concept of war and this war in particular, makes you wonder if Stone's sees Kovics journey as simply a trip to the right side of the argument: Stone's side. But this is not a treatise this is a movie and where movies count emotional power, provocative ideas and riveting entertainment this one hits the mark.
Look for Seinfeld's Wayne Knight, Charmed's Holly Marie Combs, Stephen Baldwin and the guy who played Joey on Roc all in small roles.
|
