• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Jarhead?

burk48237

Supporting Member
Nov 22, 2004
9,850
3,568
68
Oak Park, MI
Has any of our great movie critics seen this flick and what were your thoughts?

I have two:

1) Peter Sarsgard is one of the most underrated actors on the planet. HE NEVER overplays a role, in acting subtile is good. The first time I saw him was in "Shattered Glass" (the Philip Glass story) and I knew then he was going to be a great actor.

2) What was the point? To me the whole story of the movie was war is weird, I didn't need three hours of seeing Jake Gylenhaal looking at the screen with a blank look to come to that conclusion. Some conservatives criticized the movie, I have no idea why, it didn't say anything, very disappointing.
 
burk48237 said:
It was Stephen Glass, My bad! He was the writer at New Republic who contributed a bunch of human interest pieces that were all made up. It was a fascinating story.

Oh ok. At the same time as I was typing that I was thinking "Shattered Glass" sure sounds like a title for some tragic story and I didn't think that Philip Glass had a tragic life. :)

bc
 
Although I understand your perspective I personally thought it was a very well done movie. It's been awhile (I saw it in the theaters) and I was the only one out of the group of 4 that liked it. For some reason the overall message didn't get old to me. However, I am a bit of a war movie junkie and though it was described to me as a war movie without the war, I still had the war movie mentality going into it. I know it didn't do much for many people, but I liked it a lot and look forward to picking the dvd up. I also am a huge Peter Sarsgard fan (I was hooked after Garden State).
 
When they start walking on the desert, it is one of the most beautiful scene I've seen in a movie. The way they shoot the movie is just amazing. The movie isn't so much about the war but the soldiers in it. I found it really funny when I saw a mom who brought her two kids to see the movie. Whenever there's a sex scene or something sexual, she would make her kids leave. It's ironic to see the mom being so open w/ cursing or killing, but not so much for anything sexually explicit.
 
Ive not seen it, but from what a couple of my mates were saying, it isnt that war is wierd, it was more a dig at the gungho-ness of american attitudes, expecting the conflict to actually involve more conflict and such, and the boredom of the soliders when they see what the gulf war was like

I still want to see this tho, dont know if it'll rival my fave war film of all time tho, full metal jacket . . . theres a war film! :D
 
I had mixed emotions about it. I thought it was interesting, but I don't think I'll watch it again. They did do a great job of showing what happens when you engineer men to kill without remorse, put them in a war, and don't let them kill. It also showed the vast difference between the wars of our fathers and grandfathers and modern warfare.
 
I dunno, it seemed like the thing that they DID manage to cop was a very Vietnam era vibe. The whole "why the **** am I here?" mentality and the repercussions of being in harm's way for primariy political reasons that have more to do with finance than defending the country.
 
Ed Fuqua said:
I dunno, it seemed like the thing that they DID manage to cop was a very Vietnam era vibe. The whole "why the **** am I here?" mentality and the repercussions of being in harm's way for primariy political reasons that have more to do with finance than defending the country.
YES, YES, YES.

"More to do with finance than defending the country". Exactly! And we should learn from that Vietnam Vibe. Everytime a conflict is suggested we should be asking, "Where does the money flow?".

If I say anymore on this .... (well, you know).