During this century the United States has fought four major wars--World Wars I and II, the Korean conflict, and the Vietnam War. The Vietnam War, by far the longest and most divisive of these actions, forced Americans to confront a series of national moral and political dilemmas. It challenged the role of the United States in the world and raised grave questions about how wars should be conducted. The issue of a citizen's obligation to his country during wartime became an acute moral problem for many Americans.
The decade long Vietnam War(1964 – 75) was called by some observers „Johnson’s War“, but President Kennedy had significantly deepened U.S. involvement in Vietnam, where the North assisted the Vietcong in the South to advance the reunification of the country under a Communist government. It was Lyndon B. Johnson who Americanized the war.
For the U.S. proved to be the most damaging one they had ever fought. Washington threw its young men and national wealth into a war it could not and did not win in a country it did not understand. More than 58 000 Americans and some 1, 5 million Vietnamese died; civilian deaths in Cambodia and Laos numbered in millions; it cost the U.S. at least $170 billion and billions more would be paid out in veterans’ benefits. The nation suffered inflation, retreat from reform, political schism, violations of civil liberties, abuse of executive power. The post-traumatic stress disorder befell thousands of the 2, 8 million Vietnam veterans, making their lives a living hell (* Norton: 2001).And all this for what? The “arrogance of power” made Americans like Johnson believe they could run the world.
Growing numbers of people were troubled by the Americanization of the war, especially as television coverage brought it into their homes every night. Veterans publicized their deteriorating health. Feature films on the subject became very popular. Movies like Coming Home(1978), The Deer Hunter(1978), Apocalypse Now(1979), Platoon(1986) and Born on the 4th of July(1989) showed the soldiers’ Vietnam, but did they show also the real war as it was, or did they only present the “convenient” side of the conflict? People tend to close their eyes when things are not as they would like them to be; in the film industry this is especially true.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Historical Context of the Vietnam War
3. Hollywood's Representation of the Vietnam War
3.1 Apocalypse Now: Madness as Decoration
3.2 Platoon: The Realistic Portrait of Hell
3.3 Born on the 4th of July: The Long-Term Impact
4. Conclusion
Objectives and Topics
This paper examines the discrepancy between the historical reality of the Vietnam War and its portrayal in American feature films. It analyzes how directors have used the conflict either as a backdrop for artistic observation or as a vehicle for depicting the gritty, psychological, and moral devastation experienced by soldiers.
- Historical impact of the Vietnam War on American society
- Critical analysis of filmic representations versus factual events
- The portrayal of moral decay and "human madness" in cinema
- Psychological consequences for veterans and post-traumatic stress
- The role of Oliver Stone’s films in documenting the "hell" of war
Excerpt from the Book
Platoon: The Realistic Portrait of Hell
There is one movie though that shows us categorically like no other that war, and especially the Vietnam War, is hell. Writer and director Oliver Stone created this 1986 Academy Award winner for best picture based on his own experiences in Vietnam. In Platoon there are no real life people, nor any real events, but rather mostly everything that happens is fictional. However, the time period, the situation that the Americans were in, and the actual conditions in Vietnam at the time were depicted as they were back in the 1970s. Stone was not trying to make a movie that was based on factual events, but rather a movie that would help him picture a specific point, or idea. For instance, this movie tries to capture all of the uncertainty, blood, sweat, fear, and horror of the war in Vietnam during the late 1960s and early 1970s and to portray the point that war will always be there, for the rest of every soldier’s life.
The viewer is confronted with the horrific face of war from the beginning with the arrival of Chris Taylor (played by Charlie Sheene). The first thing he sees is rows of bodies being readied for shipment back to the U.S.; his idealism and view of war in general rapidly changes as he begins to understand he’s in a godforsaken place with nobody to care what happens to him. As one of the new guys, he is quickly sent into the jungle with his new platoon and even more quickly understands what thousands of other soldiers know for sure – that the U.S. was losing its grip. Taylor’s thoughts about the absurdity of all this strongly resembles the opinion of GIs in the 1970s.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Introduces the scope of the paper, highlighting the United States' involvement in the Vietnam War and the subsequent cultural impact of the conflict.
2. The Historical Context of the Vietnam War: Provides a brief overview of the war's timeline, the political climate, and the devastating moral and physical consequences for both American soldiers and the Vietnamese population.
3. Hollywood's Representation of the Vietnam War: Analyzes several influential films, contrasting the idealized or stylized versions of the war with more grounded, visceral depictions.
4. Conclusion: Summarizes the findings regarding how directors like Oliver Stone manage to portray the war as a personal memory rather than a grand, glorious legend.
Keywords
Vietnam War, Hollywood, Cinema, Apocalypse Now, Platoon, Born on the 4th of July, Oliver Stone, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, My Lai Massacre, Americanization, Historical Reality, Film Studies, War Atrocities, Moral Decay.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the primary focus of this academic paper?
The paper examines the representation of the Vietnam War in American cinema, contrasting historical reality with the narratives presented in popular motion pictures.
Which central themes are explored throughout the text?
Key themes include the moral dilemmas of the Vietnam War, the psychological toll on veterans, the failure of U.S. intervention, and the way the film industry filters these realities.
What is the ultimate goal of this research?
The research aims to determine if major films accurately portray the "hell" of the Vietnam War or if they merely present a convenient, sanitized, or romanticized version of the conflict.
Which methodologies are employed in the analysis?
The author uses a comparative analysis method, evaluating historical accounts against the cinematic narrative choices made in films such as Apocalypse Now and Platoon.
What topics are covered in the main body of the work?
The main body focuses on the historical context, a critical analysis of Coppola’s cinematic choices, and an in-depth examination of Oliver Stone’s realistic approach to depicting warfare.
Which keywords define this work?
Essential keywords include Vietnam War, Hollywood, Apocalypse Now, Platoon, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and Historical Reality.
Why does the author critique Apocalypse Now so severely?
The author argues that while the film is a masterpiece, it relies on stylized, almost psychedelic imagery that obscures the true brutality and "never-ending struggle" of the war.
What makes Oliver Stone’s approach to the Vietnam War different from other directors?
Stone's films are distinguished by his personal experience; he avoids glorification and metaphor, instead presenting the war as a raw, horrifying memory that permanently altered the lives of those involved.
- Quote paper
- Manuela Dimitrova (Author), 2004, Vietnam War: Reality vs. Motion Picture, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/32272
