I never thought about it before but Full Metal Jacket is kind of retrograde the way it portrays the guy who blasted his CO as a sobbing incompetent moron. In reality there was a lot of resistance and direct murder of COs by GIs during the Vietnam War, but it wasn’t done by antisocial mouth-breathing idiots but principled resistors.
Well, Gomer Pyle is not supposed to be a depiction of a "principled resistor". He's supposed to be a depiction of a guy who is obviously mentally disabled, but got pushed through medical examination anyways due to lowering recruitment standards. As I understand that was also a hot-button issue at the time.
That said, I would personally prefer that you did not speak so frankly on your opinions regarding Mr. Pyle. Comparison with the character is actually one of the ways people where I live used to use to try to get at me.
I know he's not supposed to be a depiction of a principled war resistor, but he is supposed to be a depiction of a GI that blew away his commanding officer. I'm just saying it's an ahistorical representation of the type of person who actually did that.
I’m just saying it’s an ahistorical representation of the type of person who actually did that.
That's fair enough, and I think I understand what you mean in that context. That's also not really the part of the take that I was objecting to I guess. :shrug-outta-hecks:
Well, Gomer Pyle is not supposed to be a depiction of a "principled resistor". He's supposed to be a depiction of a guy who is obviously mentally disabled, but got pushed through medical examination anyways due to lowering recruitment standards. As I understand that was also a hot-button issue at the time.
That said, I would personally prefer that you did not speak so frankly on your opinions regarding Mr. Pyle. Comparison with the character is actually one of the ways people where I live used to use to try to get at me.
I know he's not supposed to be a depiction of a principled war resistor, but he is supposed to be a depiction of a GI that blew away his commanding officer. I'm just saying it's an ahistorical representation of the type of person who actually did that.
That's fair enough, and I think I understand what you mean in that context. That's also not really the part of the take that I was objecting to I guess. :shrug-outta-hecks: