I'm currantly working on an essay for my humanities class in colege and i was asked to watch full metal jacket by Steve Kubrik's and analyze it to find wether or not it is pro or con war, and to talk about how war emasculates men and the efects on women... the course title is "women and war" lol, i kinda took it without knowing what i was getting into

Anyhow, in the vietnam scene during the Tet offensive, we see Joker luging around an M60, but in the next scenes, while he is assigned to cowboys unit, he carries an M16.

Iam curious to know if its common in the army, specificly in the Vietnam War to change your weapon around. I was guesing that since Joker carries some female traits at the begining that these were somewhat set asside when he was with cowboys unit and that big guy (mother i think) who is now carrying the m60.... Now i do understand its usualy a crew weapon and the weight doesnt make it ideal to carry around, but basicly want to know if you'd go from operating an M60 to an M16 based on your assignment

Not sure how relevant, but id still like to get that straight....

So any help would be appreciated
Frank

LOL: I'd love to sit in on that discussion!

Most units had individuals assigned for specific roles: rifleman, LMG, radio, etc.

In his new unit, there may already have been someone fuflilling the role so he reverted to a rifleman. No hard and fast doctrine per se -- just circumstances demanding whatever.

There's nothing to read into it, IMHO.

(although some others in the class might???)

I'd agree, but in english i have understood nothing is done without a reason in literature which lets me presume their is a good reason for the switch. I understand why he might have changed now.

It is a little farfetched, but i think it would be plausible.

Frank

In the scenes that you are talking about, Joker is firing the M-60 at his main fire base. This could be because he is assigned the M- 60 as part of the base defense team. But his primary duty was gathering information for the Stars and Stripes newspaper and not as an infantry member. So he would have the M -16 or even only a 45 pistol. I was a truck driver and was issued a full auto M-14 with bi pod as my primary weapon. But when I was assigned to bunker duty (we all took our turns at this in our unit), I was assigned to the M 60 also. This was not uncommon for us in Nam.

Pro or con? I would have to say mostly neutral if that is possible. More than anything else I think Kubrick was trying tp point out how much war and training for war changes young men. I don't think anyone could argue with that.

Shaun

Thanks a lot for the help so far, keep it coming please! i love hearing about your stories and anecdotes

Shaun, you;ve studied english literature, do you think theirs a reason why joker was on the m60?

Dave, did mainly everyone have a turn rotating with the m60?

Would the m60's be left at the bunker or carried around? Because joker brings it back to the briefing...

And, on wikipedia it says the m60 is a team manned wepon, so why does it seem that mother character is hte only one operating it.... same for joker when hes on it... in other vietnam movies i have seen they are always two... one feeding hte belt usualy...


Frank

If the bunkers are manned 24 hours the 60 could be left at the bunker. If not it is brought back.

As far as the 60 being a crew weapon this is not really true. It was a squad weapon and was a single person weapon. A lot of the squad would carry extra ammo for the gunner. We called the 60 the pig gun. It can eat a lot of ammo in a very short time. A good gunner would control his bursts to conserve the ammo and make better placement of the impact of the bullets. If the weapon is used on a tripod, then it was usually served by a two man crew, the gunner and loader. We did not have this set up for our unit. We would keep our 60 mobile and used the M 2 50 cal as a crew served weapon on our gun trucks or in the bunkers.

What is "supposed" to happen is that every unit has what's called a "Table of Organization & Equipment" referred to as a TO&E. It defines on paper, exactly the number of people by rank and specialty that every unit is to have, and it defines exactly the weapon each of those people is supposed to be assigned. There are individual weapons, (rifle or pistol) and crew served weapons, such as an M60 machine gun. A person who is by position assigned to be a crew member of a crew served weapon is also likley to be assigned an individual weapon.

That's the "book" answer.

What ACTUALLY happens is a LOT less structured. I never got over to Vietnam, but it's my understanding that in many units, it didn't matter what the TO&E said, if you wanted to carry something else, and you could get your hands on it (as well as ammo) you could probably carry it. Other units were much more strict.

And for example, in a squad where you'd have several "riflemen" with an M-16, a couple of "grenadiers" with either an M-79 or M-203 grenade launcher, as well as a machine gun, it wouldn't be unusual for people to swap off.

Tom

Thanks for the info guys...

Dave, i just looked at the bunker part again, and the soldiers rush their and their's no one already in hte bunker...

Btw, can anyone tell me about the micky kouse craze? their are micky figureings and pistucres here and their, as well as the micky theme song, what was going on with mickey during the war ? was it a song units usualy sang?

As well, why is Joker always talking aobut John Wayne, i know he's an old actor, but what did he do?

Thanks a lot guys!

Frank

Frank -

I'll try to add a bit based upon my experience.

I think a lot of what the author, director and actors did in that film was to attempt to accurately portray what the experience was really like. I have to say I think they came really close. Lee Ermey did a fantastic job of making the recruit training portions of the film as good as any film that has ever been done.

With regard to the combat scenes (it has been a while since I last saw the film so pardon me on the details), the thing that struck me most was the reality of the confusion that was portrayed. I don't care who you are, when the rounds start flying, no one really knows what is going on. You have to fight the myopia all the time to see and understand what is going on around you.

The impact of taking casualties both on the organization and on the individual Marines was also very well done in my opinion. When that (taking casualties) happens the individual is faced with sudden, significant losses. If it is a leader that goes down, everyone in the squad is affected. What happens to the plan of patrol/attack? What changes are made in the roles everyone plays to make up for the losses? Who really takes over?...and do I trust him with my life? Rank only counts for so much when you are being shot at.

To be honest, I don't really get the male/female angle of the analysis, except for the female VC. The lesson there is that women can make good soldiers...or not...depends upon the woman.....just like men. The women I ran into in Vietnam were Army and Navy nurses and Red Cross workers (doughnut dollies). There were all solid performers, even in very difficult circumstances. (I later married a Navy Nurse, but that is a different war story.)

I think "Full Metal Jacket" was the best Vietnam flick made.

With regard to John Wayne, watch the movie "Sands of Iwo Jima". John Wayne starred in it as a Marine sergeant. It was a time when he wished he was a Marine.

Semper Fi,
Dave

Hey Francois, I love that movie.

In the scene with Joker and the M60, as you point out, they arrive at the bunker and man the wepon cos no one's there. It's a surprise attack on the base at the beginning of Tet, and everyone just grabs whatever weapon they can.

Later, though Mother is the machine-gunner, I think the black guy (who later is killed by the sniper, can't remember the actor's name) is the a/gunner.

I don't think there's a real literary reason for Joker being on the pig, but if at all, it might be a way of showing him being pitched right into war. This was his first combat situ, and he gets the chance to deal death on a large scale with a heavy-duty weapon. So that might have been the intention.

I also love the fact that there were no Hueys in the movie. Watching most Nam movies you'd think that was all the Yanks flew over there. Also, no paddies. Cool.

Francois,

I think the important thing to remember is that when 2 or more people see the same event, they each can place a vastly different meaning to what they saw. That's why I liked most of my history classes and probably why I majored in history. You can discuss events all day and into the night and no one can prove that your interpretation is wrong.

Regards,

Larry

PS
Kubrik's first name is Stanley. Factual errors vs difference of opinion illustrated.

Let me chime in here. From an Army perspective. I had two tours in Vietnam one with the 1st Cavalry Division and the other with the 101st Airborne. Rifle Platoon Leader during both adventures. When we manned the fire base, assuming the bunkers were built, we utilized our platoon weapons to man the positions. Thus, the two M-60 gunners and assistant gunners retained their weapons as part of the defense system. When we got back to the field, we continued to carry these weapons. Guys who carried the M-60 usually did (I cannot think of a single exception) it because they wanted to man the weapon and did not give it up until they left the platoon. I can appreciate that in the movie, Modine mans the bunker weapon. He grabbed whatever was available to fire on the bad guys. What I never liked about the movie was the inability of the drill sergeant to form a team out of his recruits. Guys in pressure situations (basic, Ranger School, etc.) form a bond if for no other reason than to survive the main antagonist or torture master. I failed to see that reflected in the film. It is a negative view of what for most of us was a positive experience in the end and one upon which one should reflect upon with pride. It was not easy, but we did it. Pride and team work are the resulting products. The film emphasized the inability of a group to interact. Not the guys I knew and loved. But, I never was a Marine. However, those tough hombres I know usually say the film does not portray the Corps they love and serve.