Any fans of this Stanley Kubrick film?

Hard to believe it's already 25 years old.

I may be one of the few people here willing to defend the post-Paris Island material. I recognize that there is a jarring shift in the movie, but I think it's insanity for people to say that it's so bad that the Paris Island sequence is the only part of the movie worth watching.

I don't think the second half is bad. I like the stuff with the sniper in Hue city.

The second half isn't bad compared to the majority of movies, but it is quite a letdown from the first half. Completely worth seeing, of course, but the overall film itself falls short of greatness due to that second half.

I always saw it as being in three acts. First act: Parris Island. Second Act: Post arrival in Vietnam. Third act: Sniper showdown.

The first act is definitely excellent. The second one is slower but has some memorable (the prostitute) and amusing ("Substitute sweep and clear for search and destroy") moments. The third part is better than the second and an effective summation of what seems to be Kubrick's overall point.

I like FMJ. On the whole it's not on the level of Platoon or even the underrated Hamburger Hill which came out around the same time. But it's still a pretty good war picture.

I also like that crazy helicopter gunner in the second one. "Anyone who runs is a VC! Anyone who stands still is a well-disciplined VC!" Get some!

My favorite war movie of all time and the only Kubrick film I really love.

The most memorable scenes were from the boot camp, especially Pyles (Vincent D'Onofrio) and the drill sgt (R. Lee Ermey), but I also liked the rest of the film. To think that a young Adam Baldwin was in it before he went on to do Firefly.

When I showed it to my wife, I turned it off right as "These Boots Are Made for Walking" played.

You know, this reminds me of a time when I talking to a friend about crazy ideas for Valentine's Day cards. The one I idea I came up with was based off that scene in the film:

On the front of the card it says, "When I look at you, I'm reminded of that magical first meeting and what you said....", flip to the inside of the card and it says, "...'15 dollas! Me love you long time, Joe!'".

Needless to say, this is something that I wouldn't really try with my g/f unless I wanted to sleep on the couch for the rest of the year.

I think that ‘Full Metal Jacket’ is one of the best war movies ever made, although it isn’t without flaws. I particularly like about the movie that it doesn’t have the simple (if not wrong) message of “war is bad/ a waste of lives”, but that it focuses on the dehumanisation or rather infantilisation of soldiers by military training as well as the connection between violence and sex.

The biggest criticism raised against ‘Full Metal Jacket’ is the impression that there is a jarring tonal shift between the training sequence, which is generally considered to be excellent, and the Vietnam War scenes, which people dislike because it is not as good as the first act. I would agree that it isn’t quite as good, but the somewhat scattershot and chaotic nature of the second act is the result of a deliberate and correct decision by the filmmaker, I believe, because it provides a contrast to the orderly “us against them” worldview drilled into the recruits, which is shattered by the murder-suicide at the end of the first act and then completely obliterated by the realities of the war.

I think the way that Modine's character handled the situation at the end with the sniper provided a link to the training in terms of his dehumanized response to what he did.

However, I'd bet that we can all agree that Platoon was the better Vietnam War film (I don't even rate Hamburger Hill).

My introduction to Full Metal Jacket was as a child when my sister and her friend kept replaying the "me so horny" scene because 2 Live Crew was popular at the time. Of course, every time they'd rewind it I'd get to see some dude blowing his brains out on the toilet. Yup.

As for the movie I tend to agree with the consensus that the basic training scenes are head and shoulders above the rest. Still, any movie that has a character named Animal Mother is a-okay in my book.

The whole thing is great and the second half change of pace and contrast is welcome, even though the first half is superb.

I watched this film yesterday after watching Platoon last week and still stick by my guns that FMJ is the better film. Yes, okay Platoon may be a defintive war movie in the obvious/biographical sense whilst FMJ deals with the conflict in a more sort of abstract way, but when watching FMJ it is abundantly clear that Kubrick majorly kicks Stone's ass in the art of film making.

[quote="Ragnarok73"
However, I'd bet that we can all agree that Platoon was the better Vietnam War film (I don't even rate Hamburger Hill). [/quote]

I actually prefer 'Full Metal Jacket' to 'Platoon', which is still a fine movie. If you mean that 'Platoon' captures the actual combat experience of the Vietnam War better, you may well be right, as 'Full Metal Jacket' is a more universal movie and could have been set in another war as well.

I actually prefer 'Full Metal Jacket' to 'Platoon', which is still a fine movie. If you mean that 'Platoon' captures the actual combat experience of the Vietnam War better, you may well be right, as 'Full Metal Jacket' is a more universal movie and could have been set in another war as well.[/quote]

Especially since Full Metal Jacket was so obviously filmed not in Southeast Asia. Hell even Forest Gump's scenes look more convincing

This might be one of those "Reality is Unrealistic" things, considering that not every second of the Vietnam War was fought in the jungle, which is what most Vietnam movies seem to think.

(Note: this does not necessarily absolve FMJ for not really looking like Vietnam... which doesn't necessarily need absolution.)

I agree with you in that FMJ is more about making a general statement about war regardless of which one. However, it is indeed set in Vietnam, and Platoon captured the essence of American involvement in that conflict at a more personal level, largely due to it being based on the recollection of an actual participant.

I agree with you in that not all of Vietnam was fought in the jungle- the Tet Offensive is a great example of this, given that much of the fighting took place in cities like Hue and Saigon. I don't know that I'd criticize FMJ for not looking like it took place in Vietnam for that reason.

Am I the only person who did not notice the alleged drop off in quality between the first section and the last? When I watched it the first one, I had never heard of any such thing, didn't notice it and re-watching it again, I failed to see what could have caused the two sections to have such widely differing reputations. Anyone care to explain?

I think it's a well made movie from start to finish.

-Jeremy