# The Deer Hunter, over rated shit or WTF?



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

I just wasted three fucking hours on this, I mean why the fuck is it soo massively rated, it's slow, dull and essentially patriotic apologist tripe.

I couldn't decide if the characters were so underdeveloped as a commentary/reflection on blue collar masculinity or because the film just fails, I suspect it might be a bit of both. 

The treatment of the Vietman war is all over the shop, sometimes approaching it from a wider perspective with shoots of refugees and the embassy cut with real news footage but then cutting straight to a very narrow personal narrative only loosely bound up in the political situation. The Vietnamese themselves are of course not so subtly portrayed as brutal degraders of these good old small town American boys, whether it's the one dimensional Viet Cong (who are shown to blow up villagers locked in a bunker with a hand grenade, more a typically American activity) or the punters in the Saigon Russian Roulette rooms.

It was 3 hrs with very little development of anything, Nicky's experience could have been a lot more interesting but instead we get to see Michael return home and fuck about in some courtly love with Nicky's girlfriend. Then we get the end scene where they all gather round after Nick's funeral and sing some patriotic shit about America, a not so subtle suggestion that whilst the US might be fucked up and dysfunctional it's our fucked up and dysfunctional family.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

I haven't watched it since it came out and I saw it at the theatre. My recollection was that it was overhyped. Also, I haven't had any desire to see it again in the intervening years, which means that I found it less than impressive the first time through.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

The amount people wank on about it I thought there was something wrong with me that I wasn't 'getting it' or wasn't in the mood for it, but after 2 hours I just resigned myself to the fact it is a load of shite.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

I remember scenes with someone out hunting with a deer rifle: de Niro, Walken - somebody. It seemed superfluous to the film. I remember thinking that this could be a good plot device: a comparison between the solitary lessons learned when out hunting in the backwoods, and the lessons learned in the jungle in vietnam. But they never got there with the plot.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

I really like that film. i think you've missed the point of the film revol. war brutalises everyone. it begins with a very familiar scene of a bunch of boys who just do normal shit like go to the bar, get drunk, act like fools etc and then they are sent to vietnam and everything is destroyed

the vietnamese in the film are total cunts, but so are the americans. it's meant to show war destroying lives

and johnny, the hunting scene is crucial to the film. it is a meditation on the beauty of violence. like these two beautiful things pitted against each other in a competition. like he murders the deer, but he loves it. it's a really obvious symbol of needless death, but up in the hills in america it's beautiful because there is no comeback. then that violence comes back to them and it is incredibly ugly

i thought the deer was meant to be nicky. like him killing the deer for fun was ok, but then when it all becomes real and they become the prey it is ugly and brutal as fuck

tbh revol i think you should resign yourself to not getting lots of stuff. you don't seem to be prepared to enage with much


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> I really like that film. i think you've missed the point of the film revol. war brutalises everyone. it begins with a very familiar scene of a bunch of boys who just do normal shit like go to the bar, get drunk, act like fools etc and then they are sent to vietnam and everything is destroyed
> 
> the vietnamese in the film are total cunts, but so are the americans. it's meant to show war destroying lives
> 
> ...



Being patronising by you is fucking hilarious, the fact you think that I am missing some deep truth in the fact that films is saying that war brutalises and destroys lives is laughable, the fact you think this is something profound says more about you than it does with my inability to engage with things.

Of course I noticed these oh so profound points, of course I noticed that Vietnam destroys this small time, rupturing it's naive and childlike innocence and that is one of the major reasons I think the film is sentimental tripe. Poor American boys lose their innocence in brutal Vietnam, how terrible, look what this War has done to our imagined innocence and community.

This review sums it up quite well,




			
				Jonathan Rosenbaum said:
			
		

> A disgusting account of what the evil Vietnamese did to poor, innocent Americans stands at the center of this Oscar-laden weepie about macho buddies from a small industrial town (Robert De Niro, Christopher Walken, John Savage, and John Cazale, wasted in his last screen performance). It begins with an extended wedding sequence cribbed from Visconti and ends with a world-weary rendition of “God Bless America.” While the results are far from unprofessional—the cast is uniformly good, including a characteristically slapped-around Meryl Streep, and the two deer-hunting sequences mark director Michael Cimino as an able student of Disney's Bambi and Riefenstahl's The Blue Light—the male self-pity is so overwhelming that you'll probably stagger out of this mumbling something about Tolstoy (as many critics did when the film first came out in 1978) if you aren't as nauseated as I was.



It's as deep as a fucking puddle and wanked on about by the kind of wannabe middlebrow twats who take Empire's word as gospel.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> I really like that film. i think you've missed the point of the film revol. war brutalises everyone. it begins with a very familiar scene of a bunch of boys who just do normal shit like go to the bar, get drunk, act like fools etc and then they are sent to vietnam and everything is destroyed
> 
> the vietnamese in the film are total cunts, but so are the americans. it's meant to show war destroying lives
> 
> ...





It's good that you liked it. That means that it was time/money well spent for you. I just recall the movie as sucking. I tried hard to inject all the deeper meaning into it, but I just found it to be flawed. I can't discuss specifics, because it's been decades since I saw it. But I do recall that at the time, I thought that it didn't deserve all the hype it got for being one of hollywood's first attempts at tackling the Vietnam issue.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

I just looked it up. It came out in 1978. That's when I saw it. It was just three years after the Vietnam War ended, and the US was still seriously torn up about the whole thing.

The makers of this movie tried to be courageous and deal with this touchy topic, but in true hollywood fashion, they couldn't go too far in any direction, and risk offending large sections of the population, thereby jeopardizing box office receipts.

So what happened, imo, is that they made a movie that has no true direction or meaning, because that would have required taking a stand on the war, and that would have been too risky, in 1978 USA


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> It's good that you liked it. That means that it was time/money well spent for you. I just recall the movie as sucking. I tried hard to inject all the deeper meaning into it, but I just found it to be flawed. I can't discuss specifics, because it's been decades since I saw it. But I do recall that at the time, I thought that it didn't deserve all the hype it got for being one of hollywood's first attempts at tackling the Vietnam issue.



But like it's deep and shit, it's like trying to say that war is like bad and stuff and it like does this by taking like really ordinary small town guys and showing how it like affects them, it's like super clever how the guys all go hunting before before being shipped out to Vietnam and they are all goofing about and drinking and shit but then like it just cuts to Vietnam and it's brutal and everything and there's no goofing around and then when the main guy Mike comes back he goes hunting again but this time he can't bring himself to shoot the deer cos like now he knows what violence and killing really is and there is no beauty in it.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

but you miss it don't you. you always miss it with your stupid anti american shite

maybe the vietnamese are included in this

always always this sarcastic 'oh these poor americans' but they aren't americans they are just normal people

just like how the boys from america go up to the mountains to kill deer for fun. the boys from vietnam are murdering GI hostages for fun

it's about this thing being inflicted on america and vietnam. what i got out of it was that 'oh, the boys in vietnam were probably just a bunch of normal guys doing whatever they did in vietnam as well before the war. nobody asked for this'

vietnamese or american the war was for the most part just a bunch of people who don't have any idea why being made to kill each other for no reason. 

of course it focussed more on an american community than any vietnamese community, but that doesn't mean that it is saying that american communities are more important than vietnamese communities. just since it's an american film it shows an american community being destroyed. 

there is bound to be a vietnamese film about the war ruining a vietnamese community for you to slate as well because it doesn't show how american communities were ruined by the war too....


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

It was another decade before the US had licked its wounds enough to accept real impact movies from artists unafraid to let the audience have it: Platoon, Full Metal Jacket.

Compare those movies to Deer Hunter, and DH comes up lacking, imo.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> It's good that you liked it. That means that it was time/money well spent for you. I just recall the movie as sucking. I tried hard to inject all the deeper meaning into it, but I just found it to be flawed. I can't discuss specifics, because it's been decades since I saw it. But I do recall that at the time, I thought that it didn't deserve all the hype it got for being one of hollywood's first attempts at tackling the Vietnam issue.



it's very flawed. it's a very clumsy movie.

but it's just an anti war movie

it shows a group of normal people brutalised by a war. it could be about the franco-prussian conflict or the korean civil war or greece invading troy or anything

i don't think the plot is exceptional or it's the best movie ever or anything. i just think it's a parable which is remembered well because it has robert de niro and chris walken both on top form and it's really well shot and paced for the most part


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> It was another decade before the US had licked its wounds enough to accept real impact movies from artists unafraid to let the audience have it: Platoon, Full Metal Jacket.
> 
> Compare those movies to Deer Hunter, and DH comes up lacking, imo.



have you watched platoon recently?

i loved it when i was young but watching it recently i still love it for some of the characters, but it's incredibly pompous

it's a lot more what revol is on about imo, saying that vietnam was really all about where america was going and totally ignoring the fact that it was inflicted on vietnam

it's a bit like a high school movie with lots of brutal violence 

and private ryan upped the ante and now the brutal violence in platoon looks  tame....


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> but you miss it don't you. you always miss it with your stupid anti american shite
> 
> maybe the vietnamese are included in this
> 
> ...



Oh look the naive ideological whine of 'it's just a movie from one perspective, oh ordinary GI's', fuck me could you get anymore cretinous?

Firstly the film doesn't show the brutality of the US, it shows the Viet Cong throwing a hand grenade into a bunker of villagers and Michael our 'hero' running out to take revenge on him and getting captured in this fit of heroic contempt for self preservation (oh my is that a metaphor for poor America getting itself caught up in a nasty war that was none of it's own making other than it trying to help?).

Then when they are captured we see them forced to play Russian Roulette by the vicious and brutal Viet Cong (a portrayal that would be scoffed at as ridiculously one dimensional and over egged if applied to Waffen SS troops) before they heroically escape.

The film is part of the myth of America losing it's innocence in Vietnam, getting itself caught up in a brutal war through it's naive desire to do good.

Mark Kermode has the Deer Hunter nailed with this summary,



> The Deer Hunter is one of the worst films ever made, a rambling self indulgent, self aggrandising barf-fest steeped in manipulatively racist emotion, and notable primarily for its farcically melodramatic tone which is pitched somewhere between shrieking hysteria and somnambulist somberness. It is a monument to everything that was wrong with American cinema in the mid-seventies, and a testament to the fact that, if allowed to do whatever they want, filmmakers will take their cameras and crawl up their own backsides.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

Oh and as for claiming I can't appreciate a film cos of my 'Anti Americanism', well that's bullshit, I thought Jarhead was really good, Three Kings was unexpectedly very good and fuck even racist shit like Black Hawk Down is a cut above the drawn out dross of The Deer Hunter.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> it's very flawed. it's a very clumsy movie.
> 
> but it's just an anti war movie
> 
> ...



It is just another anti war movie, and a clumsy one at that. But imo it received unwarranted lionization, for being the first, or one of the first to tackle Vietnam, no matter what its merits were as a film.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> have you watched platoon recently?
> 
> i loved it when i was young but watching it recently i still love it for some of the characters, but it's incredibly pompous
> 
> ...



It's not just about how much blood they can get in. Ryan is about a different topic: the brutalization of ordinary people sent to war. Platoon is about that, plus about the dislocation of going to war when half your country hates you for it, to fight for unclear objectives, with indeterminate orders and parameters. It was about the schizoid character of the country at the time, personified in the Dafoe and Berenger(?) characters.

As you know, Vietnam and WW2 were quite different, and the two movies do a fairly good job of highlighting how they were different.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

well i liked it. i thought it was a sentimental sad film about a group of couple of normal lads being fucked up by a war which affected me because i thought it communicated the fact that they were 'normal really well and then the fact that going to war was really brutal and fucked everyone up

now you've told me that it was really bigoted propaganda and backed that up with what some film critics think of the movie i've realised that i shouldn't have enjoyed it at all 

cheers!


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> It is just another anti war movie, and a clumsy one at that. But imo it received unwarranted lionization, for being the first, or one of the first to tackle Vietnam, no matter what its merits were as a film.



i wasn't around at the time

i do remember it being a sort of cult movie in the 90s seemingly based on that poster which was a pencil drawing of chris walken holding a gun to his head

'oh that MUST be a cool film'


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> It's not just about how much blood they can get in. Ryan is about a different topic: the brutalization of ordinary people sent to war. Platoon is about that, plus about the dislocation of going to war when half your country hates you for it, to fight for unclear objectives, with indeterminate orders and parameters. *It was about the schizoid character of the country at the time, personified in the Dafoe and Berenger(?) characters.
> *
> As you know, Vietnam and WW2 were quite different, and the two movies do a fairly good job of highlighting how they were different.



that's kind of what i mean

it's about america during that time and the war is just a backdrop for that

like the scene where they burn the village and it's just about different types of american people, the villagers are basically props


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> well i liked it. i thought it was a sentimental sad film about a group of couple of normal lads being fucked up by a war which affected me because i thought it communicated the fact that they were 'normal really well and then the fact that going to war was really brutal and fucked everyone up
> 
> now you've told me that it was really bigoted propaganda and backed that up with what some film critics think of the movie i've realised that i shouldn't have enjoyed it at all
> 
> cheers!



Personally, I haven't taken any bigoted propaganda into consideration. I just don't like how the writers/directors/producers handled the topic.

It was directed by Michael Cimino, who had a good first start as a director under Clint Eastwood with Thunderbolt and Lightfoot. Then he did Deer Hunter, and got what I consider to be unwarranted praise.

Because of that praise, they gave him Heaven's Gate, the product of which bankrupted the movie company that made it, and which became synonymous with out of control hollywood at that time. Imo, it was proof that the man didn't have the talent attributed to him for the 'masterpiece' Deer Hunter.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

Johnny Canuck2 said:


> Personally, I haven't taken any bigoted propaganda into consideration. I just don't like how the writers/directors/producers handled the topic.
> 
> It was directed by Michael Cimino, who had a good first start as a director under Clint Eastwood with Thunderbolt and Lightfoot. Then he did Deer Hunter, and got what I consider to be unwarranted praise.
> 
> Because of that praise, they gave him Heaven's Gate, the product of which bankrupted the movie company that made it, and which became synonymous with out of control hollywood at that time. Imo, it was proof that the man didn't have the talent attributed to him for the 'masterpiece' Deer Hunter.



i think it's important to seperate the movies from the soap opera that is hollywood. from what i've read the lives of the big name producers and directors are much more insane than their movies

i just think it still stands up as a movie, mainly because of how it portrays working class americans i spose

i agree it isn't a work of genius or anything, but it's definetely still worth watching


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

post 21 was at revol by the way


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> like the scene where they burn the village and it's just about different types of american people, the villagers are basically props



I suppose there's only so much you can do in one movie. And the step of showing the 'gook enemy' as thinking feeling humans, still wouldn't come for awhile. And even then, I don't believe it's ever been done in the context of Vietnam. I think it's been done allegorically, once by Sean Penn, I think it was Thin Red Line, and more recently by Eastwood in Letters from Iwo Jima.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> > i think it's important to seperate the movies from the soap opera that is hollywood. from what i've read the lives of the big name producers and directors are much more insane than their movies
> 
> 
> Probably, but one of the conceits of hollywood, is to heap unwarranted praise on someone for who knows what political etc reason, then watch the Peter Principle go into action as that person rises above his own competence level.
> ...


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

casualties of war and good morning vietnam are both pretty good for getting across americans actually bothering to try and step out of being an invading army and try and just be humans

i'd imagine the reason that there aren't many films about GIs getting to meet the vietnamese as people rather than 'the enemy is that it was probably incredibly rare for that to happen


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

Johnny Canuck2;9435627][QUOTE=isitme said:


> Probably, but one of the conceits of hollywood, is to heap unwarranted praise on someone for who knows what political etc reason, then watch the Peter Principle go into action as that person rises above his own competence level.
> 
> 
> 
> My recollection was that it was an oversentimental, two dimensional portrayal of middle class americans, but that's just me.



hollywood has to have a genius every year.....

they weren't middle class tho. they were a bunch of hicks who worked i a steel mill or something


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme;9435631][QUOTE=Johnny Canuck2 said:


> hollywood has to have a genius every year.....
> 
> they weren't middle class tho. they were a bunch of hicks who worked i a steel mill or something



yeah but north americans buy into that notion that having a job and a car makes you middle class.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68;9435635][QUOTE=isitme said:


> yeah but north americans buy into that notion that having a job and a car makes you middle class.



well this is why class is such shite

not that it doesn't exist, but noone seems to be explain class in a useful way

i would love some of the working class heroes on here to try to explain to someone from rural china who comes to a rich city in west china and works 12 hours a day how they are oppressed too cos it's hard to find a job that they feel fulfills them so they are forced to sit in their central heated brick house with hot water and everything drinking beer and smoking all day


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme;9435642][QUOTE=revol68 said:


> well this is why class is such shite
> 
> not that it doesn't exist, but noone seems to be explain class in a useful way
> 
> i would love some of the working class heroes on here to try to explain to someone from rural china who comes to a rich city in west china and works 12 hours a day how they are oppressed too cos it's hard to find a job that they feel fulfills them so they are forced to sit in their central heated brick house with hot water and everything drinking beer and smoking all day



this is because you are an idiot...


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

no it's cos you're a mouthy little gnome


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> no it's cos you're a mouthy little gnome



you haven't a clue about class because I'm a mouthy little gnome? 

life tip; read a fucking book.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

yeah great answer. i'm not going to engage cos i'm too clever. 

you started the abuse saying i'm an idiot then i give you some back and your comeback is 'read some propaganda then you'll understand'

it's an opinion based on experience. i find the position on here of treating the working class as some sort of 'blessed are the meek' thing pathetic and for all this posturing and shit it really isn't a wonder that even complete fucking idiots like the BNP do better than any working class based organisation based on the opinions on here


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> yeah great answer. i'm not going to engage cos i'm too clever.
> 
> you started the abuse saying i'm an idiot then i give you some back and your comeback is 'read some propaganda then you'll understand'
> 
> it's an opinion based on experience. i find the position on here *of treating the working class as some sort of 'blessed are the meek' thing pathetic* and for all this posturing and shit it really isn't a wonder that even complete fucking idiots like the BNP do better than any working class based organisation based on the opinions on here



Well I agree with you except your post above about chinese workers suggests you think of the working class as a category of moral suffering, with those in the shittist conditions being the 'real' working class against the pampered western working class.

The fact that in your experience you have been unable to come to some sort of useful or adequate understanding of class doesn't make class bullshit, it means you need to expand your knowledge, I'd suggest reading some decent stuff on class, best to start with Marx.


----------



## Pie 1 (Jul 20, 2009)

He right though. You are a fucking gobshite, r68.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

Pie 1 said:


> He right though. You are a fucking gobshite, r68.



what an insight.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Well I agree with you except your post above about chinese workers suggests you think of the working class as a category of moral suffering, with those in the shittist conditions being the 'real' working class against the pampered western working class.
> 
> The fact that in your experience you have been unable to come to some sort of useful or adequate understanding of class doesn't make class bullshit, it means you need to expand your knowledge, I'd suggest reading some decent stuff on class, best to start with Marx.



you need to read what i said again and maybe think why i said that. i wasn't saying what you just said i said i was saying something else

if i keep arguing with you in this vein it will go on for hours and will be pointless. especially in relation to your interpretation of 'The Deer Hunter'

I have to go and do stuff, but if you want to carry on with this argument I would suggest that you reread my posts a couple of times and try to think what they could mean rather than just calling me stupid and telling me to read Marx lol


----------



## upsidedownwalrus (Jul 20, 2009)

I saw it years ago and thought it was OK but a bit tedious.


----------



## London_Calling (Jul 20, 2009)

Pie 1 said:


> He right though. You are a fucking gobshite, r68.


Not great at having his pov critiqued, is he.



isitme said:


> tbh revol i think you should resign yourself to not getting lots of stuff. you don't seem to be prepared to enage with much


revol - it's not the end of the world. You're not going to have a better grasp  than everyone of everything all the time, and certainly not in relation to this film.

Aside from the macho flexing, a good discussion.


----------



## Pie 1 (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> what an insight.



You're welcome.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> I'd suggest reading some decent stuff on class, best to start with Marx.



what else is a good read

i read the manifesto and the book about revolutions and maybe its cos it's of it's time but it didn't really inspire me (his focus on the physical needs of the working class coming to a point where capitalism was unable to provide the 'payoff' seems a bit incongruous with the british definition of working class which is more about self image etc

maybe you could reccomend some more contemporary books about class in general?


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

London_Calling said:


> Not great at having his pov critiqued, is he.
> 
> 
> revol - it's not the end of the world. You're not going to have a better grasp of everything than everyone all the time, and certainly not in relation to this film.
> ...



Eh the problem isn't not getting the film, the problem is there is very little to get from it, I mean once you take away the racism and patriotic apologism all you are left with is a self indulgent 3 hour fable that "War is brutal m'kay", there's nothing there that you wouldn't get from a shitty TV movie on Living, well other than De Niro and Walken.

Perhaps you will get round to counter the points I made about it being self pitying, overly sentimental, racist apologist tripe. I mean what sort of film wanting to depict the brutality/reality of war and it's impact on the psyche of the young men caught up in it and the repercussions this had back home would base itself on totally made up shit about forced games of Russian Roulette? Isn't the reliance on this fictional device not actually a total cop out from the real brutality of the war and the actual experiences of young soldiers?


----------



## Pie 1 (Jul 20, 2009)

Michael Cimino the director, is also one who was never shy of silly pretention & spoon blunt symbolism. 
DH was actually pretty much his only coherent movie & he pissed it's success up the wall quite spectacuarly with Heavan's Gate.
I heard someone once discibe him as the M. Night Shyamalan of his generation


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Eh the problem isn't not getting the film, the problem is there is very little to get from it, I mean once you take away the racism and patriotic apologism all you are left with is a self indulgent 3 hour fable that "War is brutal m'kay", there's nothing there that you wouldn't get from a shitty TV movie on Living, well other than De Niro and Walken.
> 
> Perhaps you will get round to counter the points I made about it being self pitying, overly sentimental, racist apologist tripe. I mean what sort of film wanting to depict the brutality/reality of war and it's impact on the psyche of the young men caught up in it and the repercussions this had back home would base itself on totally made up shit about forced games of Russian Roulette? Isn't the reliance on this fictional device not actually a total cop out from the real brutality of the war and the actual experiences of young soldiers?



which 'shitty' TV movies would you reccomend which show the brutality of war?

i know it's a bit sentimental etc but i do like those movies which show the brutality of war and people pulling together etc when they are well done

which ones would you reccomend?


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 20, 2009)

I watched it when I was about 16 and thought it was tedious, overlong, senitmental, liberal-partiotic dross and couldn't understand why it had been so it highly praised. 

Agree that the US has yet to produce a film which honestly depicts the war for what it was - a genoicdal act of imperial hubris. 

Denied of a feel good angle, the  hollywood focus is always on the damage it did to the US - in partiuclar the young men who fought the war. 

The damage it did to the people of Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos - millions dead, social/political turmoil leading to monsters like Pol Pot, unfathmonable environmental  damage, utterly ruined countries - is barely touched upon. Rather the Vietamese are faceless, nameless savages who are either isolated objects of pity to be saved by our brave heroes (like the famous napalmed girl) or fanatical barbarians who drag our blue eyed boys down to their level.
you can see the same discourse being played out with regards to the current act of genocidal hubris being played out in Iraq. 

Class - essentially society is divided into a small number of people who have a great deal of wealth, status and power, a large group who have very little and a medium sized group inbetween. Those crazy Marxists would argue that society is organsied and run primarily for the benefit of the first group at the expense of the second. Sorry if thats too complicated.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> which 'shitty' TV movies would you reccomend which show the brutality of war?
> 
> i know it's a bit sentimental etc but i do like those movies which show the brutality of war and people pulling together etc when they are well done
> 
> which ones would you reccomend?



'Battle of Algiers' - probably the best war film ever made.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> which 'shitty' TV movies would you reccomend which show the brutality of war?
> 
> i know it's a bit sentimental etc but i do like those movies which show the brutality of war and people pulling together etc when they are well done
> 
> which ones would you reccomend?



funny I couldn't name any off the top of my head, possibly because they are inane shite. But seriously are you trying to suggest that Deer Hunter is unique in saying war is brutal?

I wouldn't say it "shows the brutality of war" at all, it shows fictionalised bullshit as a means of avoiding actually addressing the real brutality of what was going on in Vietnam, like JC2 said Hollywood wasn't ready for such home truths.

It really is a hideous piece of shit the more I think about it, not only a bloated pile of sentimental tripe but an ethically and politically repugnant and dishonest one that allowed for some pseudo cathartic wailing about the 'brutality of war'.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

no, i never said it was unique. i just said that i thought it was a good film and that was what i got out of it


----------



## London_Calling (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Perhaps you will get round to counter the points I made about it being self pitying, overly sentimental, racist apologist tripe. I mean what sort of film wanting to depict the brutality/reality of war and it's impact on the psyche of the young men caught up in it and the repercussions this had back home would base itself on totally made up shit about forced games of Russian Roulette? Isn't the reliance on this fictional device not actually a total cop out from the real brutality of the war and the actual experiences of young soldiers?


I can't really as I haven’t seen it for more than 10-15 years but I remember – as a younger man – not being overwhelmed with events in Vietnam; back then that aspect felt clumsy and clunky.

I do recall  very much enjoying the portrayal of the small town mentality and community in the industrialised north which seemed very well observed. Even now that resonates, for me,  in the emerging coffin returning culture in the UK: They don’t know what they’ve fighting for except for some blurry and externally imposed concepts of ‘right’ and serving the country. We can see that impact on UK wives and families on the news almost every evening now. 

I recall feeling many references to the Crusades, but that was probably because I was interested in the Crusades back then. I suppose the same motifs and propaganda are applicable throughout history.

Anyway, it might be interesting to revisit it again. Fwiw, the portrayal of community has actually remained with me in some detail. 

Perhaps a film of two halves - back to the studio and  Gary.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

Kaka Tim said:


> 'Battle of Algiers' - probably the best war film ever made.



that is a great film

i wouldn't put derr hunter up there with that, i was just saying that i thought it was good and i thought it communicated war fucking people up pretty well. specially robert de niro's performance


----------



## paulhackett (Jul 20, 2009)

When it came out, it was stunning (at the time) albeit overlong.. if I recall, a lot of the hype for teenage boys was based simply on the, for the time, shocking Russian Roulette scenes.

No sillier than _Apocalypse Now _(or the _Making of Apocalypse _Now now I think of it).

Try the Kubrick _Paths of Glory _with Kirk Douglas or rather than watching cinematic portrayals, watch some docs.. I think things like the World at War should be shown in schools..


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> that is a great film
> 
> i wouldn't put derr hunter up there with that, i was just saying that i thought it was good and i thought it communicated war fucking people up pretty well. specially robert de niro's performance



Yeah it does a good job of showing how witnessing Viet Cong troops blowing up trapped villagers and then being taken captive and forced to play Russian Roulette will seriously fuck you up, unfortunately these things have very little to do with the reality of the Vietnam war or the trauma of returning soldiers, many of whom would have been involved in the slaughter of civilians and the razing of villages.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Yeah it does a good job of showing how witnessing Viet Cong troops blowing up trapped villagers and then being taken captive and forced to play Russian Roulette will seriously fuck you up, unfortunately these things have very little to do with the reality of the Vietnam war or the trauma of returning soldiers, many of whom would have been involved in the slaughter of civilians and the razing of villages.



it's not the specifics. it's more just the idea of a bunch of unimaginable stuff happening to a bunch of really normal lads

the things that happen in the film may or may not have happened, that isn't the point


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> it's not the specifics. it's more just the idea of a bunch of unimaginable stuff happening to a bunch of really normal lads
> 
> the things that happen in the film may or may not have happened, that isn't the point



They didn't happen, there was never any documented cases of it reported. Like I said it's made up self pitying shit that makes the good old American boys the main victims of the war and totally misrepresents the traumatic and brutalising things they did or experienced. Hollywood sucked the cock off The Deer Hunter because it allowed them to be vaguely anti war without coming to terms with the real role America played in it and the actions of it's troops.

How would a German movie about the 2nd World War go down that 'portrays the brutality of war' by inventing fictional circumstances in which Jewish partisans are blowing up Warsaw gentiles and a group of Waffen SS troops get caught whilst avenging this act of Jewish brutality and then are shown to be brutalised by a bunch of sadistic Jews? 

Would people defend it on the grounds that it is simply trying to show the brutality of war on the basis of what 'unimaginable things' could happen to a bunch of really normal lads?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 20, 2009)

It is total rubbish


----------



## Flashman (Jul 20, 2009)

Walken is brilliant.

But the film bores me.

The "God Bless America" end was vom.


----------



## IMR (Jul 20, 2009)

The theme tune is really bad as well. Buskers with guitars prolonged the agony by playing it for years after the film was released.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jul 20, 2009)

I never made it past the neverending wedding scene. Totally TL;DW


----------



## _angel_ (Jul 20, 2009)

Directed By Ken Loach


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

_angel_ said:


> Directed By Ken Loach


----------



## internetstalker (Jul 20, 2009)

The deerhunter:

Not one of Deniro's greatest films. It's about an hour 2 long. It's a very slow film.

Not great, OK


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

revol, you seem scarred by watching 'the deer hunter'. perhaps you've got ptsd from the experience.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> revol, you seem scarred by watching 'the deer hunter'. perhaps you've got ptsd from the experience.



Three fucking hours, of course I'm scarred, I'm also suffering from victims guilt, "Why did I let it go on and on, why didn't I stop it, was part of me enjoying it..."

I reckon it's the worst 'rated' movie I've ever seen.


----------



## London_Calling (Jul 20, 2009)

Post Teves Stress Disorder?


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Three fucking hours, of course I'm scarred, I'm also suffering from victims guilt, "Why did I let it go on and on, why didn't I stop it, was part of me enjoying it..."
> 
> I reckon it's the worst 'rated' movie I've ever seen.


if that's the worst thing that happens to you this year you've got off lightly.


----------



## 1927 (Jul 20, 2009)

Over rated it may be, but its not even the most over rated Nam film.

Apocalypse Now, wtf, now that's an over rated film!


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> if that's the worst thing that happens to you this year you've got off lightly.



Thankfully my girlfriend doesn't want to see "My Sisters Keeper", so I should be fine.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

1927 said:


> Over rated it may be, but its not even the most over rated Nam film.
> 
> Apocalypse Now, wtf, now that's an over rated film!



Apocalypse Now is massively overrated but it's not as fucking dull and dire as The Deer Hunter.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

1927 said:


> Over rated it may be, but its not even the most overrated Nam film.
> 
> Apocalypse Now, wtf, now that's an over rated film!


apocalypse now does of course have the benefit of a decent cast, a top script and a reasonable plot.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> They didn't happen, there was never any documented cases of it reported. Like I said it's made up self pitying shit that makes the good old American boys the main victims of the war and totally misrepresents the traumatic and brutalising things they did or experienced. Hollywood sucked the cock off The Deer Hunter because it allowed them to be vaguely anti war without coming to terms with the real role America played in it and the actions of it's troops.
> 
> How would a German movie about the 2nd World War go down that 'portrays the brutality of war' by inventing fictional circumstances in which Jewish partisans are blowing up Warsaw gentiles and a group of Waffen SS troops get caught whilst avenging this act of Jewish brutality and then are shown to be brutalised by a bunch of sadistic Jews?
> 
> Would people defend it on the grounds that it is simply trying to show the brutality of war on the basis of what 'unimaginable things' could happen to a bunch of really normal lads?



i doubt it would be popular tbh but it could work. das boot made you sympathetic towards a german uboat crew because it showed that they were just normal lads involved in the war even tho they were on the wrong side


----------



## tar1984 (Jul 20, 2009)

Boring shit, never made it to the end.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> i doubt it would be popular tbh but it could work. das boot made you sympathetic towards a german uboat crew because it showed that they were just normal lads involved in the war even tho they were on the wrong side



Don't be a disingenuous prick, of course it fucking wouldn't work, it'd never get into fucking production for a start!

Das Boot is hardly fucking comparable.


----------



## _pH_ (Jul 20, 2009)

Is the deerhunter a documentary?


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

there is that film iron cross about german soldiers. i haven't seen it

but you could make a parable style film about nazi soldiers who are normal lads who go to war and one of them gets killed. of course they wouldn't dare, but it's not to say that they couldn't or shouldn't

letter from iwo jima showed an incredibly sympathetic portrayal of japanese soldiers who were just as bad as the nazis, probably worse, admittedly in that battle they weren't, but it does make the japanese army look very much the honourable normal guys suffering from the insanity of war....


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> there is that film iron cross about german soldiers. i haven't seen it
> 
> but you could make a parable style film about nazi soldiers who are normal lads who go to war and one of them gets killed. of course they wouldn't dare, but it's not to say that they couldn't or shouldn't
> 
> letter from iwo jima showed an incredibly sympathetic portrayal of japanese soldiers who were just as bad as the nazis, probably worse, admittedly in that battle they weren't, but it does make the japanese army look very much the honourable normal guys suffering from the insanity of war....


cross of iron, you mean.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> there is that film iron cross about german soldiers. i haven't seen it
> 
> but you could make a parable style film about nazi soldiers who are normal lads who go to war and one of them gets killed. of course they wouldn't dare, but it's not to say that they couldn't or shouldn't
> 
> letter from iwo jima showed an incredibly sympathetic portrayal of japanese soldiers who were just as bad as the nazis, probably worse, admittedly in that battle they weren't, but it does make the japanese army look very much the honourable normal guys suffering from the insanity of war....



Do any of those films only show horrors and brutality inflicted by the Allies? Do they invent fictional forms of abuse and torture for the Allies to carry out?

Do any of them have the cheek to shoot a scene that is almost identical to the world famous picture of the South Vietnamese officer shooting an unarmed man in the head, and reverse it so it is being carried out by the Viet Cong?

Stop making excuses for a piece of shit film.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Do any of those films only show horrors and brutality inflicted by the Allies? Do they invent fictional forms of abuse and torture for the Allies to carry out?
> 
> Do any of them have the cheek to shoot a scene that is almost identical to the world famous picture of the South Vietnamese officer shooting an unarmed man in the head, and reverse it so it is being carried out by the Viet Cong?
> 
> Stop making excuses for a piece of shit film.


have you considered getting some help with anger management?


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> have you considered getting some help with anger management?



i'm sweet as a nut mate, chilled like tropicana.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

do *you*?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 20, 2009)

I blame Platoon, Deer Hunter and also Tour Of Fucking Duty for stopping me watching Full Metal Jacket for ages, as I'd decided that Vietnam films were all self-indulgent mawkish apologist tripe.

Actually come to think of it, when I first got exposed to the genre, I didn't know much about the Vietnam War apart from that that Yanks went on about it all the fucking time, and even as a pretty dense teenager I watched this stuff and thought "hang about, I keep seeing all these fucking noble Americans, why were people shooting at them then? this can't be right" and read a bit more and yeah, it wasn't. So perhaps it was educational.


----------



## bmd (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> i'm sweet as a nut mate, chilled like tropicana.



lol

I was just thinking how you were right about The Deerhunter and what I liked about it was the drama of the Russian Roulette bit and the whole capture part and the escape and maybe a little bit of the rest but really, it was dull and I liked it because of those bits, not because it was a good film.

I was wondering how a country like the US can delude itself into thinking that their experience is somehow so much more right than anothers, even though they're the aggressors and then I thought that they just don't have that level of self-awareness as a country.

You're the US revol.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

it's a bit like how films about the roman empire tend to gloss over the atrocities they commited in northumberland and palestine


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> it's a bit like how films about the roman empire tend to gloss over the atrocities they commited in northumberland and palestine


eh?  atrocities in northumberland you say?  like what?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 20, 2009)

Bob Marley's Dad said:


> I was just thinking how you were right about The Deerhunter and what I liked about it was the drama of the Russian Roulette bit and the whole capture part and the escape and maybe a little bit of the rest but really, it was dull and I liked it because of those bits, not because it was a good film.



Those bits are good, sure. The Russian Roulette stuff is a great idea, very dramatic scenes - the whole concept of somebody becoming an expert at Russian Roulette, too, that's great.

They are utter fantasy though. It's got one of the most fantastical portrayals of Vietnam as a testing ground for US youth / place where bad things happen to good people / etc of any film I've seen which pretends to be about real life (i.e. Apocalypse Now doesn't count).


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

The Russian Roulette stuff was a fucking awful idea.


----------



## bmd (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> it's a bit like how films about the roman empire tend to gloss over the atrocities they commited in northumberland and palestine



Exactly! Where's the bit in Gladiator about how many died building Hadrian's Wall? On the cutting room floor, that's where.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

Pickman's model said:


> eh?  atrocities in northumberland you say?  like what?



they used to send soldiers past the wall and kill all our sheep at night so we wouldn't be able to go and throw axes and bits of shit at the wall


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> The Russian Roulette stuff was a fucking awful idea.



Well I thought it was a good basic idea, even if the way it was put on screen was a load of racist balls.


----------



## bmd (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> The Russian Roulette stuff was a fucking awful idea.



It was a good shorthand dramatic way to portray how war can send you nuts I think. It's not supposed to be reflecting an actual event, is it? 

I agree that the way the Vietcong were portrayed was pretty shite though, but put it in context and it's understandable.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

didi mao!!


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

this whole thing that it's racist

you probably would think that the vietnamese were a bunch of cunts if you were a POW 

'fuckin gook cunt just stabbed nicky in the head with a poisonous eel'
'careful now, you're starting to sound like a racist, i'm really going off you'


----------



## bmd (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> this whole thing that it's racist
> 
> you probably would think that the vietnamese were a bunch of cunts if you were a POW
> 
> ...



And what about the eel? 

((((eels)))))


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> this whole thing that it's racist
> 
> you probably would think that the vietnamese were a bunch of cunts if you were a POW
> 
> ...



Not if they did entirely fictional things to me, I'd probably be happy enough with that.


----------



## bmd (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Not if they did entirely fictional things to me, I'd probably be happy enough with that.



Yes but isn't that ok in a film? To portray stuff that didn't actually happen?


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Not if they did entirely fictional things to me, I'd probably be happy enough with that.



you're too small to join the army, they'd just use you as a tank shell or something


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> this whole thing that it's racist
> 
> you probably would think that the vietnamese were a bunch of cunts if you were a POW
> 
> ...



The Deer Hunter was made by POWs?


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The Deer Hunter was made by POWs?



no but it's from the perspective of a POW


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

Bob Marley's Dad said:


> Yes but isn't that ok in a film? To portray stuff that didn't actually happen?



When it's heralded as piece of cinematic legend depicting the brutality of war and the experiences of US soldiers, I'd imagine it's pretty fucked up to invent bullshit forms of torture and to present the US as protecting villagers from marauding Viet Cong volunteers determined to raze them.

It's a piece of shit liberal apologism for the barbarism the US unleashed in South East Asia, a barbarism that the US has never had to come to terms and never will whilst shit like this is heralded as anything more than racist shit.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> you're too small to join the army, they'd just use you as a tank shell or something



They don't have a height restriction in the army you daft twat, infact with my brains and size I'd be probably stuck in a tank firing depleted uranium at schools.

I wouldn't mock anyone's physical appearance if I were you


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

it's dramatic licence. it doesn't focus on the atrocities that US soldiers commited in Vietnam it focuses on the experience of two soldiers 

it's anti war from an american perspective

even tho the things that happen aren't fact, it isn't exactly unimaginable that something like that could have happened to POWs.


----------



## _pH_ (Jul 20, 2009)

Bob Marley's Dad said:


> Yes but isn't that ok in a film? To portray stuff that didn't actually happen?



^ this


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> They don't have a height restriction in the army you daft twat, infact with my brains and size I'd be probably stuck in a tank firing depleted uranium at schools.
> 
> I wouldn't mock anyone's physical appearance if I were you



yeah but you aren't me you're a shortarse little idiot


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> it's dramatic licence. it doesn't focus on the atrocities that US soldiers commited in Vietnam it focuses on the experience of two soldiers
> 
> it's anti war from an american perspective
> 
> even tho the things that happen aren't fact, it isn't exactly unimaginable that something like that could have happened to POWs.



No anti war from an american perspective doesn't mean simply acting as apologism for the actions of US troops, it means showing their actions within a context, showing the guilt, anger, and fear those soldiers experienced whilst not absolving them of their actions.

The facts are that these things didn't happen to POW's and by inventing this shit they are not only insulting the Vietnamese but the real and actual experiences of POW's.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> They don't have a height restriction in the army you daft twat, infact with my brains and size I'd be probably stuck in a tank firing depleted uranium at schools.
> 
> I wouldn't mock anyone's physical appearance if I were you


with your brains and size they'd have you in one of those target tanks on a proving ground having depleted uranium fired at you.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> yeah but you aren't me you're a shortarse little idiot



and you're an ugly troll who has to go half across the world for female attention, such is life.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> No anti war from an american perspective doesn't mean simply acting as apologism for the actions of US troops, it means showing their actions within a context, showing the guilt, anger, and fear those soldiers experienced whilst not absolving them of their actions.
> 
> The facts are that these things didn't happen to POW's and by inventing this shit they are not only insulting the Vietnamese but the real and actual experiences of POW's.



but there were probably soldiers who that was realistic for, they go to war, get captured, get tortured and then escape or don't without getting the chance to commit any atrocities


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> and you're an ugly troll who has to go half across the world for female attention, such is life.



no i don't i just have a better job over here than i can get in england. and i'm not ugly. of course it's subjective but i've never had much of a problem getting female attention over here or back home 

you are a shortarse tho. that isn't subjective.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> but there were probably soldiers who that was realistic for, they go to war, get captured, get tortured and then escape or don't without getting the chance to commit any atrocities



Yes, some US soliders heroically tried to protect a village from a murderous Viet Cong troop, then get caught and are forced to play Russian Roulette, all before they ever take part in any brutality, bombing,, razing, or beating of civilians or Viet Cong pow's.

Why the fuck can't you accept what is so plainly obvious it's a shit piece of US apologism, a film with repulsive politics and dire dragged out direction.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> no i don't i just have a better job over here than i can get in england. and i'm not ugly. of course it's subjective but i've never had much of a problem getting female attention over here or back home
> 
> you are a shortarse tho. that isn't subjective.



Well if I was in China I wouldn't be a short arse, just like in China you aren't an overgrown geek.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Well if I was in China I wouldn't be a short arse, just like in China you aren't an overgrown geek.


if you were in china you'd be the man holding the ground zero marker at lop nor.


----------



## bmd (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> When it's heralded as piece of cinematic legend depicting the brutality of war and the experiences of US soldiers, I'd imagine it's pretty fucked up to invent bullshit forms of torture and to present the US as protecting villagers from marauding Viet Cong volunteers determined to raze them.
> 
> It's a piece of shit liberal apologism for the barbarism the US unleashed in South East Asia, a barbarism that the US has never had to come to terms and never will whilst shit like this is heralded as anything more than racist shit.



I imagine that the film reflected the prevailing US opinion at the time and anyway, the US still sees itself like that now, fighting for freedom against the nasty brown dudes.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Yes, some US soliders heroically tried to protect a village from a murderous Viet Cong troop, then get caught and are forced to play Russian Roulette, all before they ever take part in any brutality, bombing,, razing, or beating of civilians or Viet Cong pow's.
> 
> Why the fuck can't you accept what is so plainly obvious it's a shit piece of US apologism, a film with repulsive politics and dire dragged out direction.



well i haven't seen it for years i'm just speaking from my interpretation of the film years ago which i just thought was about the horror of war and just showed some normal lads going off to war and getting completely fucked over

maybe if i watched it again i would think of it differently and would agree with you, but i'm just arguing because art is so subjective and your interpretation of the film isn't the only one and it isn't highly regarded because it shows the brutality of the vietnamese, it's highly regarded because it show the brutality of war in general

ya know, it's a bit like 'harry potter is a disgusting glorification of the bourgeoise and priveledge'


----------



## revol68 (Jul 20, 2009)

Bob Marley's Dad said:


> I imagine that the film reflected the prevailing US opinion at the time and anyway, the US still sees itself like that now, fighting for freedom against the nasty brown dudes.



Yes which doesn't mean the film isn't a pile of racist, apologist shite.


----------



## isitme (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Well if I was in China I wouldn't be a short arse, just like in China you aren't an overgrown geek.



yes you would


----------



## bmd (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Yes which doesn't mean the film isn't a pile of racist, apologist shite.



I agree, it's the American way. But it's hardly unique to them though is it?


----------



## lighterthief (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> ya know, it's a bit like 'harry potter is a disgusting glorification of the bourgeoise and priveledge'


Personally I find the Harry Potter films 'anti-muggle' stance shocking, tbh.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 20, 2009)

isitme said:


> no but it's from the perspective of a POW



It's the made-up perspective of a made-up POW. Even if everything there _did_ happen to somebody at some point, the author picked _those specific bits_ and put them together as a story, to promote a myth.

I suppose if it was in the context of loads of films accurately portraying the Vietnam war you might be able to see it in a different light but it's not is it? It's fantasy Vietnam, the gooks aren't real people they're demons and plot devices, the Yanks are all that matter and they're just ordinary blokes didn't mean nobody no harm, war is hell god dammit.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 20, 2009)

Bob Marley's Dad said:


> I agree, it's the American way. But it's hardly unique to them though is it?



This country's doing the same myth right now this instant.


----------



## Upchuck (Jul 20, 2009)

The Deer Hunter is a fantastic film.  It does represent what happend during the Vietnam War and the types of young men who served and the communities they came from.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

Pie 1 said:


> Michael Cimino the director, is also one who was never shy of silly pretention & spoon blunt symbolism.
> DH was actually pretty much his only coherent movie & he pissed it's success up the wall quite spectacuarly with Heavan's Gate.
> I heard someone once discibe him as the M. Night Shyamalan of his generation



Thunderbolt and Lightfoot was coherent, and later, so was Footloose. He was better at the smaller movie.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> Yeah it does a good job of showing how witnessing Viet Cong troops blowing up trapped villagers and then being taken captive and forced to play Russian Roulette will seriously fuck you up, unfortunately these things have very little to do with the reality of the Vietnam war or the trauma of returning soldiers, many of whom would have been involved in the slaughter of civilians and the razing of villages.



The truth for american pows was tiger cages, not fictionalized games of Russian Roulette with some asian guy screaming "Mow! Mow!"

Whatever that means. I think the russian roulette scene was a spoof on  every american tourist's worst nightmare: being in a restaurant in a foreign country where the waiters don't speak english, and you think you ordered the omelette, but they bring you a plate of uncooked beef.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

1927 said:


> Apocalypse Now, wtf, now that's an over rated film!


No, you're wrong about that.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 20, 2009)

revol68 said:


> They don't have a height restriction in the army you daft twat, infact with my brains and size I'd be probably stuck in a tank firing depleted uranium at schools.
> 
> I wouldn't mock anyone's physical appearance if I were you



I think you'd be in a submarine.


----------



## London_Calling (Jul 20, 2009)

In the topedo tube.


----------



## Dillinger4 (Jul 20, 2009)

torpaedo tube.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 21, 2009)

its fantastic.

Polish American immigrant culture set aginst a colonial war, exploring identity, dissolushionment and the sense of belonging.

fuckin great stuff.


----------



## weltweit (Apr 26, 2014)

The Deer Hunter is on the gogglebox again tonight. Now actually.

Shall I watch it? I am not convinced. I have seen it a few times and honestly I am just not sure!


----------



## Kaka Tim (Apr 26, 2014)

nearly four fucking hours of snail paced, middle american naval gazing - 'wah wah wah  - bombing the fuck out of millions of foreign types has really screwed us up'. 

I'll give it a miss I think.


----------



## zoooo (Apr 26, 2014)

There are some bloody slow bits (the sections set in America) but the main part of the film is fucking stupendous. Well worth the boring sections I'd say.


----------

