3 ms·
Why do you assume it would be to tick a box? A movie that reckons with war should reckon with the people it leaves behind. I don't see how that's "ticking a box
by hardwaregeek 4y ago
Why do you assume it would be to tick a box? A movie that reckons with war should reckon with the people it leaves behind. I don't see how that's "ticking a box".
- dekhn 4y agoYou completely and fundamentally misunderstand the point of the book and the movie.
- hardwaregeek 4y agoOkay...please elaborate? I don't believe this is a productive comment unless you explain.
- junofan 4y agoIt’s not a war film. The social commentary you crave is actually implicit.
- serf 4y agoYou may think it's an unproductive comment, but some may think that you yourself have not put the leg-work into understanding the movie, either. The war itself and suffering depicted in that movie are tools that are used to explore the different levels and depths of human consciousness and insanity depicted by the varying characters that must endure such conditions. In the context of this journey any suffering conditions could have been used as such a tool. Vietnam was a powerful choice for the media released at that time as it had a large impact on the audiences interested and the people at the time. Now, it can be said that the same suffering from the opposite side could have been used just as easily -- that's true -- but it's at that point that we must explore the fact that Western film-makers are interested in making Western successes. Perhaps 'Apocalypse Now' produced by an SE-Asian crew would have looked a lot different -- but I wouldn't have faulted them for not exploring my Western perspective in that movie, either. When a movie tries to be all things for all people it usually 1) ends up with a 4 hour run-time and 2) satisfies no-one.