3 registered members (furio_from_naples, 2 invisible),
91
guests, and 38
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums21
Topics43,470
Posts1,090,194
Members10,381
|
Most Online1,254 Mar 13th, 2025
|
|
|
Re: Jarhead
#135268
11/07/05 01:58 AM
11/07/05 01:58 AM
|
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,246
MistaMista Tom Hagen
Underboss
|
Underboss
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 4,246
|
I had been looking forward to seeing this since the summer, when I first saw the preview, which is probably one of the best previews Ive ever seen next to Casino's.
Anyway, I had these incredibly high expectations built up in my head, and about a week ago once the reviews started coming out, which were about half and half good/bad, they lowered a bit, but I still had high hopes.
I thought it started out nicely. I had no problem with the humor, which I completely wasnt expecting, as it was a lot funnier then I thought.
But my real problem was, I only wanted humor for like the first half or so, and then I wanted it to get serious, which I really felt it didnt. I almost jumped out of my seat and freaked out when Swofford, the main character, was talking about losing his mind, because there had been NOTHING to show the viewer that he was going through anything like that.
I really wish they wouldve done some crazy psychological mind study shit, but we got nothing of the sort. I got my hopes up again when Swofford has the dream where he vomits sand, but it lasted like 10 seconds and that was the only time they did anything like that.
I think had I gone in with different expectations, not already thinking I knew what I was going to see, and perhaps not expected a really deep film, I wouldve been more happy. I was looking for something in the vein of Taxi Driver or Fight Club or something, a real study of the main characters mental deteoriation, but I got nothing like that.
I'll probably give it a rewatch in a year or so, but I was ultimately very dissappointed.
I dream in widescreen.
|
|
|
Re: Jarhead
#135270
11/07/05 10:16 AM
11/07/05 10:16 AM
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 485
Mad Johnny
BANNED
|
BANNED
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 485
|
It was a good movie, but had that whole "Full Metal Jacket" divide with training and then combat.
Then again, the combat scenes in this movie provide a new aspect not usually in war movies. I don't want to ruin for everybody though...
Officially the victim/target of the first and third Non-Aggression Pact attacks #2 is Fathersson # 4 is Double-J
Proud Member of the Gangster BB Bratpack - Fighting Elitism and Ignorance Since 2006
Double-J: may you serve us better from above, smile on from heaven
"Buh-Bye"
|
|
|
Re: Jarhead
#135271
11/07/05 08:21 PM
11/07/05 08:21 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 924 toronto
mr. soprano
Underboss
|
Underboss
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 924
toronto
|
i think its a good character study, but done in a different way then in taxi driver. its a little more subtle. it was great, and the humor does stop about halfway through the movie, more or less after they swoffard starts worrying about his girl at home. it was a good movie, it won't beat out movies like platoon, or apocalyse now...but definatly better then full metal jacket. and i understand that you think its a copy of full metal jacket...but hey its based on a book, which is based on a true story, so what are you gonna do?
"strange things happen all the time, and so it goes and so it goes. and the book says, 'we may be through with the past, but the past is not through with us'" - MAGNOLIA
|
|
|
Re: Jarhead
#135273
11/07/05 09:53 PM
11/07/05 09:53 PM
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 924 toronto
mr. soprano
Underboss
|
Underboss
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 924
toronto
|
i really think that some of you didn't get what its about....its about waiting to fight a war you aren't needed in. ok, that's the point...it's not a movie with subplots, its straight forward. and its a character study. last i checked citizen kane magnolia didn't have much of a plot either, but didn't stop it from being a good movie. or american beauty. character studies!
"strange things happen all the time, and so it goes and so it goes. and the book says, 'we may be through with the past, but the past is not through with us'" - MAGNOLIA
|
|
|
Re: Jarhead
#135276
11/25/05 06:43 PM
11/25/05 06:43 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,155 Some anonymous motel room.
Don Vercetti
|

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,155
Some anonymous motel room.
|
But my real problem was, I only wanted humor for like the first half or so, and then I wanted it to get serious, which I really felt it didnt. Serious? I'm glad it didn't get serious to the point of being an unrealistic melodrama. It felt perfectly authentic and had a lot of humanity. The main characters weren't great men, they were guys who had nothing to look forward to in life except being in a war and wanting to kill people. As for having nothing to go crazy for, go into the Marines, go through VERY disciplined and difficult training. Finally go to a war where you're doing nothing but wandering around the desert while the Air Force is cleaning up the land before you go through it. Jake Gyllenhaal himself was going crazy in the desert screaming at fellow workers because of the high temperatures (which is another thing to consider) alone. Now imagine being in war with those high temperatures being the least of your worries. I really wish they wouldve done some crazy psychological mind study shit, but we got nothing of the sort. I got my hopes up again when Swofford has the dream where he vomits sand, but it lasted like 10 seconds and that was the only time they did anything like that. Sounds more like you were hoping for a cliche. --------------------------------------- As for the film, my proview is in the Movie thread. I think it was a great film just short of being a masterpiece. I think it screamed authenticity, especially in it's acting and humor. I can't think of another war film that depicts The Suck, and even includes the Dear John letters and infidelity videos.
Proud Member of the Gangster BB Bratpack - Fighting Elitism and Ignorance Since 2006
|
|
|
|