Do all war movies have an anti-war theme?
It’s almost expected for a war movie to
have an anti-war agenda – morally correct. It doesn’t
matter if it’s patriotic or includes a great hero in a central role; they all
show how war invariably leads to death and destruction. However in
recent years there appears to be a select group of films (and TV series) that
show a less candid approach to the subject of war and those taking part in it.
Kathryn Bigelow’s Zero Dark Thirty follows Maya
(played by Jessica Chastain), a CIA operative who’s handed the job of hunting
down Osama Bin Laden. As the film
unravels Maya becomes increasingly more determined and obsessed with capturing
(and killing) Bin Laden, and even after her superiors try to focus her on more
pressing matters she stays fixated on finding him.
Although based
on the real life manhunt of Bin Laden, unsurprisingly the film it has been the subject of many
discussions.
Some believe
it’s pure propaganda and that Bin Laden actually died of a kidney
failure in 2001. Alternatively,
former Navy S.E.A.L Matt Bissonnette’s description (in his book No Easy Days: The Firsthand Account of the
Mission that Killed Osama Bin Laden) of a female CIA agent who was
recruited straight out of college and was the ‘go to analyst’ in terms of Bin
Laden intelligence, matches Chastain’s character.
However what
really interested me was Mark Boal’s (screenwriter) and Kathryn Bigelow’s
depiction of the Navy S.E.A.L. team and the CIA Operatives. Similar to their
previous film The Hurt Locker, the
soldiers appear to have a very ‘matter of fact’ attitude towards war and
killing – bordering on relaxed. Jason Clarke’s
character Dan, who has the job of interrogating suspected terrorists, is
dismissive about the personal affects of torture, devoid of what we might call humanity. The
only sign of emotion his character shows is when his monkeys are killed.
This attitude
towards killing and war seems not just real but professional, and doesn’t seem
to fit with many of the themes of the classic war films. Their lack of
any emotional regard to their protagonists was almost absolute to the point where some characters even seemed to get enjoyment out of
killing people.
This kind of
attitude is repeated in Generation Kill.
Not only is there
a racist and homophobic discourse, but the characters also talk candidly about wanting
to start shooting people and blowing things up. This is not to
say there isn’t any emotional response what so ever by any of the characters,
in fact in one episode the lead character Sgt. Brad ‘Iceman’ Colbert emotionally
breaks down, even though he’s notorious for being ‘cool’ under pressure.
So has there
been a ‘seed’ change in the way soldiers (especially US soldiers) are depicted
in combat situations?
In the classic WW1
film All Quiet on The Western
Front there are some similarities in terms of how soldiers are represented. The idea that soldiers waiting to fight live a mundane lifestyle is similar to Jarhead and Generation Kill. However in All Quiet… there's an attempt
by the director to humanize the opposing soldiers whereas in Jarhead and Generation Kill there's a less sympathetic approach.
Again in Saving Private Ryan there was an attempt
to show a connection between the US and German soldiers. After raiding a bunker
the American soldiers let one surviving German soldier go free, rather than
killing him – this seems to contrast with most factual descriptions of WW2 battles.
In American
cinema today there seems little attempt to make any connections between belligerents.
Part 2 coming soon