Over the weekend I got to see "Jarhead," the new movie about the experiences of a Marine named Tony Swofford during the first War in Iraq (based on the book of the same name).
I'm interested to see what other people thought of the movie. I thought it was quite powerful and very effective at showing what it was like for the characters involved. Certainly, I think no one could leave this movie without seriously considering the hell that young men and women go through so that leaders may wage war. What I think is so beautiful about the portrayal of Swofford and his experience is that the overarching plot lines of the war are rarely mentioned, and when they are, it's only as they directly enter Swofford's reality.
For me, this narrow focus was perfect - it made me feel, deeply, what it can be like to participate in a war. I'm around the same age as Swofford and his companions, and I consier myself to be blessed with fairly good physical health and mental health, but I have no doubt I would probably lose one or both of those if I faced what Swofford did. I think this is exactly what the movie was intended to do: simply to convey one soldier's experience in one war as a means of understanding in general what war feels like to those who participate in it. The timing of it is vitally important as well, since many of our friends and family are going through similar experiences to Swofford as we speak.
Some have criticized the movie for being anti-soldier or unrepresentative of what Marines really experience, but I think those criticisms are shallow. One example of such a criticism is:
"Sam Mendes' specious adaptation of Anthony Swofford's Gulf War memoir is both antiwar and anti-soldier."
--Stephanie Zacharek
Another example, from the NYT critic A.O. Scott:
"Jarhead is a movie that walks up to some of the most urgent and painful issues of our present circumstance, clears its throat loudly and says nothing."
-- A.O. Scott, NEW YORK TIMES
Needless to say, I was surprised to read these, as they differ so widely with my reaction to the movie. On the other hand, there was a great letter to the editor
in my local paper that affirmed my initial feeling toward the movie:
An honest look
EDITOR: I would like to respond to a letter published on Veterans Day regarding the movie "Jarhead" and it's unreal depiction of the Marine Corps. I am a former Marine who served in an infantry company just like those depicted in the movie. The movie "Jarhead" in no way dishonors the memory of those who have served our country.
The image of the Marine Corps throughout the world seems to be that of a clean-cut young man holding a sword and wearing his dress blue uniform. Although Marines clean up nicely, we don't wear that uniform 24/7. In fact, what you see my fellow Marines in "Jarhead" wearing throughout the movie is what someone in the infantry wears every day.
"Jarhead" is a movie about being a Marine. It was written by a Marine, about a Marine and his experience in the Marine Corps. What you see in the movie is the Marine Corps that I knew and that is the Marine Corps that I personally experienced. Vehicles broke down, radios didn't work, equipment was in short supply, was old and either didn't work properly or didn't work at all. And despite all of these problems, despite the hurry-up-and-wait philosophy and despite every obstacle that is placed in front of each individual Marine every day, we adapt and we overcome.
"Jarhead" isn't a dishonest or dishonorable depiction of the Marine Corps. It's an honest look into what real Marines see, feel and have to deal with every single day. I know this because I am a former Marine, not someone's wife or daughter looking in from the outside. Ooh rah.
MIKE T
For soldiers, I think the war is often not a global event as we tend to see it through our television screens, but more a personal event - of oppressive heat, boredom, exhiliration, disorientation, missing loved ones, etc. It's not coherent. I think "Jarhead" is a great movie for precisely this reason; it feels rushed, purposeless, jarring, and incohesive, because that's the reality of the experience, and I think it's an important experience to understand.
Roger Ebert pinpoints the meaning of the movie in this passage:
The most dramatic scene in the movie comes when Swofford has an enemy officer in the crosshairs of his gunsight and is forbidden to fire because his shot may give advance warning of an air strike.
His spotter, Troy, goes berserk: "Let him take the shot!" Let him, that is, kill one enemy as his payback for the hell of basic training, the limbo of the desert, the sand and heat, the torture of months of waiting, the sight of a highway traffic jam made of burned vehicles and crisp charred corpses. Let him take the shot to erase for a second the cloud of oil droplets he lives in, the absence of the sun, the horizon lined with the plumes of burning oil wells. Let him take the goddamn shot.
Ebert also emphasizes what I think is one of the most important themes of the movie - the lifelong effect of war (even for someone like Swofford who never actually killed anyone):
For the rest of his life, Swofford tells us, whether he holds it or not, his rifle will always be a part of his body.
These are incredibly important ideas for us as a society to discuss while our young men and women remain (until who know when) in Iraq, missing home, and in some cases killing and dying. I think a more accurate summary of the movie is:
"A humor-tinged but ultimately haunting drama that examines the psychology of a Gulf War veteran as carefully and insightfully as any film has done."
-- Eric D. Snider, ERICDSNIDER.COM
Another reviewer summed up my argument about the importance of this movie pretty well:
"Some criticize Jarhead for ambivalence and ambiguity. But that's what Swofford's experience was about."
-- Mike Ward, RICHMOND.COM
Exactly. A friend of mine, Ryan, is in Iraq right now, and it makes me feel a little better having some idea of what he may be going through. That's a good enough reason for a movie as far as I'm concerned.