The Quentin Tarantino Archives logo

Platoon VS Full Metal Jacket


#1

FMJ is an awesome movie - its first 45 minutes are great. In fact its first 45 minutes puts crap like “Tigerland” to shame. But then again i must say that FMJ is a flawed film. It tries to dehumanise the characters straight away - without us knowing anythign about the characters or their backstories, even the friendship between Joker and that other guy is hardly touched upon. In fact there is not much dialogue at all between the soldiers in the first part - so much so that it is hard to tell much of anything except that they are becoming soldiers. It would have been great to at least establish some backstories, motivations, and relationships between the characters - then dehumanise the soliders over the first 45 minutes - to break them down as young men full of life and then through Hartman’s training we see them become cold blooded soldiers. Admittedly Kubrick’s method works to some degree without showing us much about each character or their backstories - but its the lack of these things that plays up in the rest of the movie. It’s one of the problems or nigglings as it may be that i have with this movie.



The second part of FMJ kind of makes the first part obsolete in some regards. Joker trains to become a killer and even confesses his motivations to kill, then he becomes - a journalist for the war paper. He doesnt even experience the war to any much of a degree. Joker then talks about the duality of man with his peace sign and a helmet saying “Born to Kill”. Somewhere the message gets lost, Joker is the only character we know much of(which isnt much), and the sniper part takes over the rest of the movie. Dont get me wrong - great movie, but its these things i have a problem with in FMJ. Platoon is a better film IMO with a great cast, excellent performances all around, better direction, and a flawless storyline. Some of the scenes in Platoon such as the village killings are stark and shocking in their portrayals. Platoon is the better film, but plenty of people will put FMJ above Platoon because Sgt. Hartman and Animal Mother are such awesome characters.


#2

"This is my rifle, this is my gun. This one’s for fightinging, this one’s for fun!"



Full Metal Jacket all the way.


#3

Hard to pick. I can`t really. I really like them both.


#4

Definitely Platoon. FMJ starts out great (loved the boot camp half) but soon fizzles out in the second half. Platoon is a film that tells a great story and I love the performances/characters in it and the whole Barnes/Elias substory. The whole Cain and Abel duality thing is great!


#5

Platoon, Hands Down.

I love every single scene of that movie.



I might as well cast in my vote to say that the 2nd half of FMJ falls flat–Especially compared to the 1st act.


#6

Well, both are totally different movies.



While Platton is a harsh portrayal of a solider’s experience, FMJ is a satire on the war.



Platoon: Great actors, good action, the above discussed barnes-elias confrontation



FMJ: great dialogue, tons of subliminal satire on the war, good cinematography



I think both are great Vietnam War movies, and while they are totally different I think they can not be really compared. I think you could compare We Were Soldiers to Platoon, maybe. Both are “battle-movies”, but FMJ is something really different.



If you want to read my research-paper about Vietnam War movies, click here:



www.tarantino.info/researchpaper.htm


#7

I choose…Apocalypse Now. :stuck_out_tongue:


#8

I always prefered Full Metal Jacket. Its was and still is so completely and utterly unique to the war genre. It was an honest effort, I believe, by Stanley Kubrick to film a war movie from an almost entirely objective standpoint. He doesn’t give you backgrounds on the characters because he doesn’t want you to have too much of an emotional attachment to them as they progress through the story, he doesn’t entirely portray the political climate or even really the soldier’s real perspective on war - he doesn’t try to inject any real idealism into the movie other than the bullshit the drill sgts and officers spew out, and also notice that there is absolutely no music playing in the sniper sequence at the end, until the scene is practically over. No humorous events (what the characters say is certainly funny, but the situations are far from it), no severe emotional attachment to the chars, or even an attempt to see things from their view, etc.



There are no real emotional strings meant to pull you this way and that, in the end. Very unique and ambitious if you ask me, and I love it.



And besides, Mathew Modine pwnz Charlie Sheen. :wink:


#9

[quote]In fact there is not much dialogue at all between the soldiers in the first part - so much so that it is hard to tell much of anything except that they are becoming soldiers. It would have been great to at least establish some backstories, motivations, and relationships between the characters - then dehumanise the soliders over the first 45 minutes - to break them down as young men full of life and then through Hartman’s training we see them become cold blooded soldiers. Admittedly Kubrick’s method works to some degree without showing us much about each character or their backstories - but its the lack of these things that plays up in the rest of the movie. It’s one of the problems or nigglings as it may be that i have with this movie. [/quote]

I think that FMJ turned out great, but a lot of subliminal messages did take part in the story going in the direction that it did. The reason for little dialogue at the beginning: they were like babies brought into the world, they were scared, alone, and had a lot to learn before they felt comfortable in they’re new world. I think the first act was brilliant, and the 2nd act was a good depiction on how the person who wrote the movie saw Vietnam, and our reasons for being there. A felt a very anti-war theme, and I’m sure that was the intention of Kubrick and the writers, and that is the story told. It didn’t need a lot of action to get that point across, because they did it with more subtlety, and more emotion. After all that is said, I still like Platoon more, so all that up there was eritten for nothing. Fuck


#10

I’m gonna take the cheap way out and say they tie. I’d feel too bad if I had to choose just one.


#11

platoon no question

i love the boot camp part of jacket but the rest is garbage

unpopular opinion but its mine


#12

Platoon the action and the story are what make this one better then Full Metal Jacket. And unlike jacket this one is good the whole way through, full metal jacket dies on the second half the second half is unfocused and less gripping then the first part. Platoon had the great music, great performaces by Willam Dafoe, Tom Beringer, Charlie Sheen and the outside soilders. Platoon shows the raw brutality and the emotional pain one must suffer thru war (but in the end they ALL are about that). Full metal jacket was actually going somewhere until the war parts started. The boot camp half was a real h00t to watch. Beats the fuck out of Tigerland.



But as Scarface said NOTHING beats Apocalpyse now.


#13

Platoons better, but FMJ is more memorable:

“Sucky sucky 10 Dollars!”


#14

I think FMJ is better as a movie…but I LOVE Platoon…its so much more fun to watch Platoon…I love movies where it feels like you are part of the crew…Platoon does that in a very good way :smiley:


#15

From those two I’d pick FMJ. Platoon is a GREAT movie no doubt but it suffers from what every other Oliver Stone film suffers; it desperately tries to get a message across to the viewer as if the viewer is some kind of idiot. It’s like Oliver Stone is sitting on his high chair and is “educating” us mere ignorant mortals. I hate that. This fact is more omni-present in other Stone movies than Platoon mind you, but Platoon is not completely oblivious to it.



FMJ on the other hand is a one of a kind Vietnam film. You spend all the first part of the movie with these poor young guys at training camp, and then just seconds later…voila’…they’re on their own on the battlefield. Just brilliance. No explanation to why they’re there, no pretentious bullshit preaching about the horrors of war…they just find themselves fighting not for their country, not for their honor, but mainly for their LIVES. They’re just put there amidst the horror of Vietnam, without being given concise justifications to why they’re there, and they’re just asked to survive. That’s what expected of them…just to survive. FMJ is not about the political message, it’s all about the experience. There’s no other war movie dealing better with this theme of loss of innocence on a battlefield than FMJ. Master Kubrick, I salute you!


#16

I’m not a big Kubrick fan but I like FMJ, I think it has some good sequences. I actually like the first half in the boot camp better than the actual Nam half.



Platoon was based on Stone’s own time in Nam, Sheen’s character is Stone’s alter-ego actually, so out of all the movies hes been preachy about this one I can accept from him in that way. Theres nothing preachy about being a Nam veteran and making a film for the guys whos lives were torn apart by that war. I gotta go with Platoon over FMJ.



My top 3 favorite Nam war films: 1. Apocalypse Now 2. The Deer Hunter 3. Casualties of War



Note: I just re-read this topic and noticed I answered the same way 3 years ago. haha!


#17

“The dead only know one thing - that it is better to be alive” - Private Joker

Platoon sucked ass.


#18

This topic should be expanded to Platoon VS Full Metal Jacket vs Apocalypse Now vs Jarhead vs just about every other war film… in fact why not just call it whats your favorite war film?


#19

<LINK_TEXT text=“http://www.tarantino.info/forum/index.p … 078.0.html”>http://www.tarantino.info/forum/index.php/topic,1078.0.html</LINK_TEXT>


#20

FMJ beats them all