Saturday, October 20, 2007
Sources
Author: Tim O'Brien
Title: The Things They Carried
Year: 1990
Publisher: Penguin
City: NY
Author(s): James West Davidson and Mark Hamilton Lytle
Title: After the Fact: The Art of Historical Detection Volume II
Year: 2005
Publisher: McGraw-Hill
City: NY
Thursday, October 18, 2007
10/17
As we discussed in class, we will be working with the first draft of the second essay somewhat differently than we worked with the first. By 5pm on Friday, October 19th, you will send a copy of your essay via email to both your peer review partner and myself. Then by 10am on Monday, October 19th, email a response (the parameters are outlined below) to both the partner and myself.
The Response:
I will not be grading or commenting on this draft, which will be the only draft of this essay before it is assigned a grade. That means that these peer reviews are terrifically important: you will not just be helping your partner with what you think will improve your paper, but also what you think I will be most interested in seeing in their work. We discussed what that means in class, but to recap: the specific requirements outlined in the prompt; attention to specific detail in texts and the appropriate films; and paragraphs which consistently demonstrate their purpose, involve textual and cinematic evidence, and connect back to the overall argument.
For the review itself, first read through the essay at least once, getting a sense of the piece as a whole. Then go through the manuscript using the tracking changes tool to make suggestions about the paragraphs...
(NOTE#1: as I said in class, do not go through making proofreading changes to the sentences--this is their job. Should there be a pattern of poor grammar that you notice, be sure to point it out. Otherwise, limit your comments to 'comments': that is, what in the paragraph is working and what isn't, rather than rewriting it.)
(Note #2: You are required to have at least one comment on each paragraph. Feel free to put the comments in terms specific to me: 'I think Prof. Henkle would have a problem with the second sentence here because...')
...After you've gone through and made your comments on the individual paragraphs, write a 200 or so word general comment on the essay, in much the same way you have seen me do with yours. Do this at the top of their essay, in letter format (addressing it directly to the author). If you're using the tracking changes format, this will appear in red.
A Few More Notes:
The preferred format is MS word, which will give your reviewer the opportunity to use the 'track changes function' I demonstrated in class. (If you cannot access MS word during this time, email me for other possibilities--still, MS word is going to be very helpful here).
The peer review groups have been assigned for anyone who was in class, plus Polina (who was assigned a partner to make up an odd number of students). Contact me if you need the email address of your partner. Those of you who were not in class, need to contact me immediately to be assigned a partner. If you have been assigned but have since forgotten your group member, the partner list is to the right.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
pearl harbor
The Battle of Ia Drang
Randal Wallace, the director and screenwriter of this movie, went to great lengths to authentically “recreate the war’s/battle’s historical context (418). The movie opens with actual news footage after the battle in Vietnam of an interview with the Col Moore expressing his gratitude to his men for their courage and sacrifices during the battle. He tells the interviewer with barely contained emotion to “convey to the American people what a tremendous fighting man we have here. He’s just an outstanding man and…I can’t tell you how highly I feel for them. They’re tremendous.”
These are some of the many things that were done to create that authentic feeling:
They used real equipment such as military helicopters and land vehicles and real napalm.
The used the clothing of 1965 for the non-military actors and the correct uniforms of the time and place for the military personal.
The portrayed accuracy in the appearance of the characters throughout the battle; everyone was dirty and bedraggled.
They used props that were used by the real characters during the conflict such as cigarette packs, books, and field equipment.
The not only acquired the period armaments the combatants used the also built AK-47’s from scraps for the North Vietnamese soldiers.
The depiction of wives getting telegrams telling them that their husbands were killed being delivered by cab drivers.
Yes there were thing that were done that didn’t happen during the battle such as using fireworks instead of bullets and computer generated airplanes but I don’t believe they are of great consequence compared to the things that Wallace got right. Gen. Hal Moore felt that this movie accurately portrayed what happen there so who are we to doubt him?
JarHead
Jarhead is a movie that is about the Gulf War but it doesn’t really focus on the war itself. The movie is more of a story-truth than a happening-truth. This would be called a
Platoon
The movie has a very depressing and mournful tone all throughout. There is nothing patriotic about it that flatters American decision in entering the war (especially through a very violent redneck character named Bunny, whose destructive nature emphasizes a terrible American stereotype). Furthermore we see that all the men, besides the character played by Charlie Sheen, are poor or unable to evade the war which shows how the War is inevitable for those who couldn't buy their way out of it. There is lack of pride within these men, as the men had in movies such as Green Berets, and their use of pot and deragotory speech of women show how little they favor being part of this war, hence making them characters easier to relate to and more personal. This, in turn, is the reason why Davidson adn Lytle would find this film, very authentic.
Davidson and Lytle themselves interpret Platoon as "the first commercially successfful films to look thhe war itself. to see Vietnam as history." With this quote Davidson and Lytle seem to convey the idea that seemingly historical facts within a movie allow it to become more authentic rather then a movie that prides itself on effects, just because they can use them, or the element of love to capture the audience. In Platoon there is really no sign of victory, regardless of the little missions the platoon does succeed in, theres still constant silence, with mere crickets adding to the jungle effect. The only music we hear is the solemn and depressing adagio for strings that just speaks for the characters most of the movie.
The only happiness we see in all these men is when they are diving themselves from the war entirely , just trying to escape, which i find to be the most authentic feeling. Their struggle with natural obstacles or the kidn of treatment they receive from one another consdiering the time it is based on, allow even more authenticity to pour through. EVerything from red ants, to race, to illegal killings become a dispute, which seems to me as the unhealthy animal instinct humans may have, especially trapped in such violent conditions.
Apocalypse Now - authentic
This movie is not pro Vietnam. The director of this movie wants you to think that war is addictive, that it in reality it drives you nuts. It wants you to understand that when your fighting, you want to be home, and when your home, you want to be fighting.
The movie opens up with the forest being bombed. You then see a quiet, but dark room. The only source of light entering that room is from a half opened blinds on the window. Outside of the room, it is very light. In the background nothing is heard, except a helicopter flying is heard in his head. He is at home, but wants nothing more than to be back in the forest, fighting. The music in the beginning of the movie is very peaceful. This movie makes you conclude that people at war do pointless things. It makes war seem absurd. The people fighting make a battle that has no actual gain it, other than a personal gain, which in this case would be surfing with the good tides.
Pearl Harbor
Reality in war films
"Flags of Our Fahter" is rather a personal memoir than historical presentation. But in some specific fields, it is even more accurate than those historical presentation film. Memoir as a first hand document is considering as accurate as diary and letters. The mian character in this film is a retired soldier who was once fighting for the United States during WWII against Japanese armies. When the war ended, the soldier himself is treated as a national hero because he was the one who swings the flag after the victory. Newspapers and TV shows were talking about him all over the time that put him in a position as hero. But himself, in the other hand, did not satisfied because he was not the one who bring victory to the U.S. He was a soldier that fight the war with all other soliders. Those who died in war were the heroes that sacrificed their lives to the victory. News reporters were miss reported the fact and showed no respects to those who died in the war. According to the main character and also the way i agreed that war heroes are not the one who survived in the war but the one who sacrificed their own lives in order to bring up the victory to the country.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Born on the Fourth of July
The film is easier to be able to pick out the exaggerations then a text. In this film the lighting, color, music and clothing all emphasis the idea that the war was a mistake. The changes of setting was more interesting then just seeing the Vietnam war and all the fighting. The love scenes were included to sell the movie as said by Davidson and Lytle “To justify the a budget of millions, a film must make money, and over the years box-office receipts have proved that audience are attracted to plot with an element of romance” (404).
Windtalkers
The film is titled Windtalkers, however if you've seen the movie the two Navajo code talkers are just sideshows compared to how much attention they put on Sgt. Joe Enders. And just because of that the film loses a chance it could have had at being authentic, instead of telling a story or an account of these Native American code talkers, it decides to focus on Sgt. Joe Enders, the defender of the codetalkers. The battle scenes are quite action packed and intense, but a little too unrealistic. In the first battle scene with the slaughter of then Cpl. Joe Enders, as the last soldier is killed in front of Enders, Enders takes a brief pause and screams for a good minute, also the bullets have stopped coming, but after the end of his yell a grenade in slow motion
flies through the air and explodes in front of Enders. I think Davidson and Lytle would agree that this is a little too dramatic. Though there are some historical accuracy that Windtalkers displays, the other's are just plain inaccurate. This film could seem like an authentic piece, but I doubt Davidson and Lytle would agree on that.
Authentically Saving Private Ryan
The word “authentic” according to Davidson and Lytle refers to historical accuracy. According to these authors, authentic contrasts with the word “mythical,” explained by Davidson and Lytle as “deals with expectations rather than reality. (417)” The authenticity or reality of war is extremely well presented in this film.
Saving Private Ryan is about a group of soldiers during World War Two, who are sent on a mission to find and bring Private James Ryan home back to his mother. He is ordered to come home after his three brothers are killed during the war. This movie is mainly composed of Captain John H. Miller, played by Tom Hanks, along with his group of troops, encountering many different military obstacles on their conquest or wild-goose-chase, trying to reach Private Ryan.
This movie was shot in such a way that authenticity is very easily seen. There are many crucial details that may be overlooked, but in fact help prove or support the validity in this film.
One detail that is very important is how the cameras were used throughout the movie. During all of the fighting scenes the cameras actually move with the actors. The cameras give the viewer the feeling that they are actually part of the group, following the soldiers with their every step. This proves authenticity in the way that the cameras were positioned in angles that the real feeling of what it was like to be part of the action could really be experienced by the audience. Also, at certain points in the film, during various fight scenes, the cameras zoom in on Captain Miller. The lighting becomes a little tinted and the view becomes a little fuzzy. From there the camera shoots as if it is Captain Miller looking around almost in slow motion. Miller and the audience are able to see the atrocities that occur during war, with the slow motion to emphasize reflection on the historical reality.
The blood and guts throughout the movie also help support the idea of “authentic”. The producer of this movie is not trying to hide anything that really occurred during war. Spielberg shows the viewer the incredible amount of gore in order to show what actually occurs on the battlefield at time of vicious fighting. At one point in the first battle seen, Tom Hanks’s character gets sprayed with a comrade’s blood, and then lifts his helmet from the ground and empties it of blood. This detail shows the historical realness of what really happens during war.
Although there are many more details the few definitely helps to prove the idea that historical accuracy is demonstrated in this film. This gives support to the claim that Davidson and Lytle would view Saving Private Ryan as “authentic”.
The Patriot
I didn’t need to finish this film to know that if Davidson and Lytle were sitting right next to me, they would find many reasons to call this movie a huge myth. The picture that The Patriot paints is “Americans are amazing, just good men while the British are tyrannical monsters”. Colonel Tavington is delineated as a man without a conscience in this movie. It just happens that he kills off two of Benjamin Martin’s sons to further grip the viewer’s heart. One scene to take note of is when Tavington barges into a church and promises to spare the lives of those who give the whereabouts of the militia. When a man, out of fear, gives the hard kept secret away, Tavington leaves the church, locks the door and burns everybody inside to the ground. The camera goes into the burning church to show the panic and pain of the people while we also see the face of Tavington show no remorse. Even more heart gripping is the fact that the eldest son of Benjamin Martin’s wife and family burned in the church as well. A blossoming love story is crushed by the main villain; where have we seen that before?
Martin is portrayed as a superhero throughout the movie. He takes down countless British soldiers, even when the odds are against him. Of course, the hollywood explanation behind his sudden power boost is that he needs to rescue his eldest son from being hanged. The last battle is twisted up with music and slow motion action to make Martin’s victory more epic than it should be. All in all, The Patriot is as authentic as my chances to attend Harvard.
Braveheart-mythical
On the other side we see Gibson in an authentic light when we hangs on to the handkerchief of his lover, which helps him get through the war. It gives him strength to give a pep talk to his fellow soldiers and keep them going. However on the other hand one might look at the actual battle scenes and notice that the Scottish have no armor, all they have is rakes and sticks to fight while the English have Armor, and real weaponry. Davidson and Lytle point out that just as Gibson and soldiers in Braveheart lack everything essential for war, making this an evidential myth, “Cimino went to extreme lengths shooting these sequences, not so much to re-create historical reality as to obtain the proper “look” for this myth. And because myth deals with expectation rather then reality, Cimino obliged. {417} Myths keep an audience more entertained because they are films where the audience expects something to happen and it usually does. This gives satisfaction to the audience and at the same time, a successful movie.
Saving Private Ryan
Davidson and Lytle would be very pleased with the work Steven Spielberg did in making saving private Ryan a accurate account of what happened. The movie was in the point of view the soldiers. This was done to show the viewers the reality of war. The main thing here was there were no sides just plain facts. Dispite what people say the movie companies are better off get the histroical facts right because that will get more viewers.
Monday, October 15, 2007
We Were Soldiers
The battle of the Ia Drang valley was the first battle where the Viet Cong were directly fighting Americans, and it lasted for 56 hours straight ending in an American victory. This is the basic plot of the movie and it is factually correct. But what wasn’t factually correct was a multitude of things. The actual conversations, the love stories (although I’m sure they had wives and families waiting for them), and the way the battle actually took place. The movie even shows the Viet Cong plotting their attacks. How would the American Army have any clue what conversations these Vietnamese men had with each other? This was probably added to round out the plot, or some other crazy artistic decision.
Something that Davidson and Lytle mention, is that mythical war stories always show the enemy as vicious and the Americans as the superior ones. In We Were Soldiers there are quite a few scenes that humanize the VC soldiers, in example a young soldier writing in a journal that holds a picture of his wife and gets brutally murdered, later the Colonel mails the wife a letter telling her he was an honorable man.
This movie may be an exaggeration of the truth but it's still the truth.
10/15
As always, any responses less than 250 words do not count for credit.