Media Battle, 30 seconds of good - 2 hours of bad
Posted on February 6th, 2008 in Uncategorized
On the first day of class we discussed the British poet Rupert Brooke. He wrote amazing patriotic poems about the honor and privilege of being a soldier and was the best “recruiter” of his time. His poem, “The Soldier” is what we went in depth in.
- “If I should die, think only this of me:
- That there’s some corner of a foreign field
- That is for ever England. There shall be
- In that rich earth a richer dust conceal’d;
- A dust whom England bore, shaped, made aware,
- Gave, once, her flowers to love, her ways to roam,
- A body of England’s, breathing English air.
- Wash’d by the rivers, blest by suns of home.
- And think, this heart, all evil shed away,
- A pulse in the eternal mind, no less
- Gives somewhere back the thoughts by England given;
- Her sights and sounds; dreams happy as her day;
- And laughter, learnt of friends; and gentleness,
- In hearts at peace, under an English heaven.”
We also watched army and marine recruiting commercials. They are very proud pieces of media and gave me chills. Although embellished and very biased to only the “fun” exciting parts of being in the armed forces, they are positive messages. But there is other media that is contradicting that warm, fuzzy and proud image.
In 1998 “Saving Private Ryan” hit the screens and it was the first big war time production. There were many stories of veterans having to leave the theater because of it’s astonishing likeness. The movie was reported as very authentic and was inspired by the true story of the Niland brothers. After this movie, other war time movies were captured on film. “Pearl Harbor” was released in 2001. These movies were cool because it put a twist on history and helped ignorant teenagers learn about all of the big points they sleep through during class. Two years after 9/11, there were at least four movies (United 93, Fahrenheit 9/11, 9/11: The Twin Towers, Sorry, Haters), there were also countless military movies, like Jarhead and others that seem to escape me. These movies weren’t so cool, at least not to me.
There are so many differences between these two groups of movies. I liked the older stories because they had follow up information after the movie but before the credits but also, they were all resolved. The 9/11 movies were too new to have that kind of big information, except for casualties. The tragic event was just barely history.
I don’t think Rupert Brooke would appreciate these movies undoing everything is poetry achieved. There is one movie imparticular that i am referencing to, “Stop Lost.” This movie is about soldiers going home and thinking that they were done serving but now the government is instructing them to do another tour of Iraq. It shows the turmoil of the soldiers and families. In Testament of Youth, you read how much Vera missed Roland’s physical presence. There’s a line in the trailer, the army wife to the main character says, “I can’t go another year without him touching my face.”
For those of you who don’t know a lot about the military, this does really happen. (i know, weird right? that MIGHT be why they’re doing a movie about it!) But to me, this seems like one of the things the army doesn’t want everyone to know about, just like how every day of being in the army isn’t EXACTLY like the commercial.
It, in a way, angers me that they advertise this kind of thing. Yeah, it’s negative and it sucks but I think now, more than ever, we shouldn’t be discouraging youth from going into the armed forces. Our numbers are down, which is one of the reasons the military is pressured to pull crap like this, and I don’t think we need any more reasons for people not to go.
It sucks more than I can image to have a loved one overseas and then once you think you have them back, they’re ordered to ship off again but what else are we going to do?
April 6th, 2008 8:39 pm
With the recent war in the Middle East the amount of war film has dramatically increased however, the number of individuals signing up for the military has decreased does this have anything to do with the vivid images represented in these movies? The first major motion picture depicting war was “Saving Private Ryan” I know of several veterans that had a difficult time watching this movie because the reality and graphics in the movie. Personally after an individual were to watch this movie I would not understand why they would want to sign up for the military. This is why the army, navy, coast guard, and the marines have to create advertisements that show only the positive effects of war because these motion pictures are doing a great job of showing the negatives affects.
April 9th, 2008 8:48 pm
I agree 100% with what you are saying the media has a way of showing how the military is screwing these guys over when part of the truth is it US as Americans that are doing the screwing, by not given the war the same type of support that the military received in WWII and as recent as the Gulf War. Instead we have let the media split us much like it did during Vietnam so those we did sever now must serve longer. The other night I was at a Support the Troops and Win the War rally both speakers said they know how the war has dived America and this sadden them, because as a soldier all they want to do is WIN and have the opportunity to do so. So I guess if we want our men and women home sooner maybe we need to push them toward victory not away from the recruitment centers
April 14th, 2008 9:53 pm
I definetely agree with the idea that the Iraq war and 9/11 movies came too soon, the pain of the events of september 11th are still way too near for anyone to put it onto the big screen. Also, I don’t think they should be making movies on Iraq when many people in the media, political and military positions are saying that we are far from an end to Iraq, so why are we making movies about them already. Everyone knows that the Government of the US has protocols to not release some key information about certain situations until much later after the fact, when they become declassified. So, I’m sayin how can we make movies on something when we don’t even know the entire story of what’s going on? I think I have discovered why, and the reason is money, I think some people in the movie business are thinking they can make good money by releasing a movie on 9/11 because most people will feel ethically drawn to watching it because of the very personal connection that many have to those actually involved in these events. But I still think that it is simply too near to be reflecting on these events, especially when they haven’t even been resolved yet.
April 15th, 2008 12:24 pm
I’ll have to disagree here. Often with “historical movies” the facts are twisted to provide better entertainment. Even while watching “Saving Private Ryan”, a movie I actually enjoy, I get a bet annoyed. I keep thinking to myself “Now I’m learning history… now I’m being entertained… now I’m learning history again.” I try not to take much fact from any movie, but it can be hard when they contain actual letters written by Abraham Lincoln.
The worst movies, however, are the ones aimed at teens. The 1984 move “Red Dawn” is one of them. It is about a group of teenagers (the “Wolverines”) who organize guerrilla attacks after a Russian occupation of America. Its like a “Take Your Kids to War Day.” A lot of these movies actually glorify war.
Take the 9-11 movies. Particularly “United 93″, “The Twin Towers”, and “World Trade Center”. I feel that they serve the purpose of reminding people about the events of that day. This probably does more to help military recruitment than anything. They glorify military service. There are some anti-war movies, and there are some “support the troops” movies. I don’t think either of these ideologies have a monopoly on Hollywood films.
April 16th, 2008 6:09 am
[...] Media Battle. . . — by Grace [...]