[dgdhgjjgj]

/

[WXQMQFIr]

I plan to see "Jarhead" ...

Sam Mendes, who directed the film, is a talented director whoi knows how to get good performances from actors (although I'm not a huge fan of his last film, "Road to Perdition").

One of the few reviews of "Jarhead " that has been published (it doesn't open until Nov. 4) makes it sound pretty darned good: http://www.observer.com/culture_sarrismovies.asp

The book that this film is based upon was highly acclaimed:

[Inconykic]

the part I hate most is an actor protraying something he is not.

Isn't that the job description?

[GZFL2tDA]

I guess it can be viewed as "propaganda", but, for every "Jarhead" preview I've seen, I've seen one for "Paradise Now" and "Syriana."

If he is portrayed wearing body armor, well then, you know it's just Hollywood glamour.

[occurrini]

The logic escapes me.

Are we just talking about soldiers, or does an actor who portrays an airline pilot have to know how to fly?

What about computer generated actors? They don't know nuthin'.

[emily]

So L+O, you are saying that someone who is not a marine cannot play a marine in a movie?

that Actors should only be "allowed" to act what they have been in real life?

Isn't that the Kevin Costner rule?

[2puO4Rhf]

The fact is Jake Gylennhal (whose name is just too hard to even worry about spelling right) put a lot of time and effort into building up his scrawny biceps and concave chest and is now buff in this film. I'm not sure whether he did it because he is playing a marine in this film or a gay man in "Brokeback Mountain". I'm not sure whether being a marine and a closeted gay man are different. The issue to focus on is that he takes his shirt off. Does that help?

It's like Pam Anderson doing "Sophie's Choice." It would be a sad story with big breasts. After a while, the story would of be white noise in the background to a movie of big voluptuous breasts bouncing around pointing the way toward her future.

[amelveEnromma]

No, Im saying a person who isnt a marine shouldnt play a marine in a shitty movie. The book may be fine I dont know really dont care, but the movie sucks. I dont mind WWII movies where actors play soldiers and whatnot (old ones), but now its just stupid. The action movies now have people getting shot at by 300 cops and doing back flips and screaming and crap like that. If youve ever watched 24 and not been pissed at the show, then you will never understand what I am saying.

I am playing devils talent agency here LO.

So you are saying that a marine should play a marine in a crappy movie?

You say the movie stinks, but have you seen it, or are you just pissed that Jamie Fox is in it?

Are you getting a little too connected with this one and the aparent glorification of a rather small conflict? (sorry guys, GW1 was no Vietnam, Korea, or WW).

I am looking at the commercials myself and I am not too endeared at yet another seeming glorification, or patronization of the combatants in war, or anything resembling it in todays day and age. But that does not mean that this movie sucks.

Stick to the topic and do not make assumptions on it when you go on a rant and people might listen a bit longer.....

[movlabc]

Well, we know you haven't read it, so you can't comment on how successfully the screenplay was adapted from the book.

You haven't seen the movie, but you say it is "shitty." One the one hand, you seem to be blaming the lead actor for the shittiness of the movie, based on his lack of life-experience with the role.

On the other hand, you say the movie itself is shitty, and the...
person who isnt a marine shouldn't play a marine in a shitty movie To expand on that, no actor should accept a shitty script, unless he is a shitty actor and has to pay his shitty agent.

Somehow, I don't associate Sam Mendes with shitty.

Have you seen American Beauty?

[maonnjtip]

That's a horse, right?

[beneitpedro]

You listened Ninjahedge.

What?

[QbCp7LaZ]

So, has anyone seen Jarhead?

If realism in combat movies is the point of this thread, the director has more impact than the actors, discounting larger-than-life characters like Arnold Schwarzenegger.

Although combat depiction has become more realistic over the years, there is one aspect of warfare that is difficult to replicate without putting the audience to sleep - the long periods of absolute boredom interrupted by spurts of terror.

Each war has its unique landscape, but I can't think of anything more boring than a featureless desert,where hardly anything happens.

Some reviews:

http://www.accessatlanta.com/movies/...rhead/ajc.html

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/...VIEWS/51019007

http://www.boston.com/movies/display...=movie&id=7236

[Lån-Penge]

I saw it. I knew nothing about it going in (I was too late to see "Chicken Little").

I thought it was a beautifully filmed movie. As for Jake Gylynnal (?) - I thought he was excellent. It was interesting. I really expected the script to make some sort of statement on "war", "the first gulf war" or the current war. It really didn't. I think movie-goers were left to fill in the blanks with their own perceptions.

In the end, it was a movie about Marines, what is is to become one, what it is to go into combat as one and what it is to be one after the war is over.
It had some spectacular scenes and some real disturbing moments.

Surprisingly to some, I'd recommend it.

For a quick study of my tastes, here are recent movies I saw:

I thought the following were great: Good Night and Good Luck, The Shop Girl, The Squid and The Whale, A History of Violence

I thought these were good: Capote, Kiss Kiss Bang Bag

I thought this was over rated and forgettable: Wallace & Grommit