Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 18:38:06 -0400
From: Linda Grant De Pauw,
H-MINERVA
Subject: COMMENT: Courage Under Fire
I took myself to the movies this afternoon and saw the widely publicized film Courage Under Fire. I was disappointed. I am curious to know how subscribers to this list feel about the movie.
Linda Grant De Pauw
I saw the movie this past weekend. I felt they did not develop Ryan's character enough, I was disappointed with this. I would have liked to have seen more done with her mothering role. As for the pilot portrayal, its hard to say pilots are a bit mouthy. I can't say it gave me any warm fuzzies or positive images of women in the military as far as "mouthy butch type". That was the only side they developed, if she wasn't mouthy and vulgar she was crying, even if it was tension. I do at least say that the Lou Diamond Phillips comment and attitude referring to Ryan was accurate portrayal of the attitude that still exists in the military, "c@$*".
The movie left me with mixed feelings; it showed the true face of senior military, and the pressure to get along, get promoted "shut up, sit down and agree" but it also showed the few who will not sell out at any cost. It brought home something I have felt for years, "integrity is not like a hat you can take of and on, if you have it, it is to the bone." I appreciated the line, "it doesn't matter how ugly the truth is, it needs to be told."
So, while I think they could of developed Ryan's character more, the rest of the film was pretty accurate.
About COURAGE UNDER FIRE. While it's advertized as being about
a woman in combat, both her character and experience are
literally drowned out by the sound of her helicopter and
barrages of fire, by Denzel Washington's character and story,
and finally, by the narratives of the men who serve under her
and who interpret her character for the plot. We never see
her speak for herself or act in any way other than through
their highly self-serving eyes.
Phyllis Lassner
Women's Studies
Northwestern University
>I took myself to the movies this afternoon and saw the widely publicized
film
>Courage Under Fire. I was disappointed. Linda
Don't write it off so quickly. Understanding it's only a movie and how media works, I thought it touched well on the male ego and their own head trips when the SGT started his so-called 'mutiny' in the desert with the female CPT. The cover up stories and the guilt in leaving her behind was felt by a lot around me in the theatre (went several friends). It's still difficult enough - right now - for many minds to accept a woman beside a man in combat, let alone leaving her behind and lying about the situation. Funny, a female CPT was sitting beside me, I'd just met her that evening - she's a Chem Officer. She made the strangest comment that really hit home for me, having been there too (and her husband, an FA CPT, could not understand what she was saying because he's never been in the position) - " that's just another reason against women in combat, we're not taken seriously" ......... I've been there. l remember putting out tasks, going back at time of the suspense, to find it hadn't been done, even a second time.... and I remember standing outside shaking my head to myself when my 1SG walked up. I asked him, am I the Commander? And he said , yes ma'am, looking rather curious at to where that was going. .... then I asked, then why is it when I put out something, it doesn't seem to be considered important enough to do by a given suspense? Is being a commander mean jack shit? I'm not relaying this incident to discuss in depth - I know everyone has explanation and a finger to point - that's not what I'm getting at. I had never seen that happen to the men around me when they put out taskers. I eventuallly got them to do what was needed - don't worry, I didn't beat anyone up - - - but my answer to the CPT beside me was - "funny how we'd be taken serious if we had a gun on us too.............." It was just a movie but I think it "touched" on some underlying issues.
Even for the LTC who did the friendly fire. The Army/Pentagon DOES handle things like that. I've seen it around here on other issues - even down in the units - the little things are just as much as the big things - from covering up officer's weight problems to "losing" DUI charges and paperwork............... not surprised. I guess it's all in 'where' you sit when watching the movie.
Eloise Prendergast
>We never see her speak for herself or act in any way other
than through
>their highly self-serving eyes. Phyllis Lassner
She's DEAD!!!!!!!!!!!!! How's she going to give a narrative or speak for herself? Atleast that part was done realistically. What else do you expect someone investigating a Medal of Honor to get for the records on a posthumous award.
Eloise Prendergast
On COURAGE UNDER FIRE:
Since much of the case on the female hero is conducted through
flashbacks, indeed several scenes show her when she was alive,
cuddlling her daughter, in training, etc., it would have been
all too easy to also show flashbacks of her speaking
intelligentlyto other adults, to other professionals.
Phyllis Lassner
Being a southerner I was most disappointed in Meg Ryan's overdone southern accent. Also, in the scene where she receives her commission I think she should have practiced her walk a little more (she looked like a hooker in a uniform). But most disappointing was the depiction of a woman in charge of an all male unit under fire who was overruled by the seasoned male sgt. and the depiction of her as distraught and tearful under pressure. Not a realistic film to me.
Vickie Riggan
my initial impression walking out of the theatre was mostly confusion--the director and his editor attempts to cover too many topics--from gender issues to friendly fire to military families to military bureacracy to ptsd to trying to maintain ethnic political correctness in the foxhole (think about the ethnic distribution during the firefight and even in the tank)--all of which are simultaneously overdone and superficial...i suspect the majority of the development of the characters is on the cutting room floor...however, reflecting back, i think the most socially redeeming feature of the film is its subtext of death and dying issues and not the major focus on the captain and gender---death in films without grief and bereavement is much like sex in films without intimacy--it becomes pornographic and harmful...in most cases, the film deals with post-death issues (except in a couple of cases) in a military context in a timely way that we have not seen in most military oriented films...i may show it in my death and dying course...my .02 cents...
morten g. ender
assistant professor
department of sociology
university of north dakota to be is to be related
grand forks, nd 58202-7136
701 777 4987 someone said
ender@prairie.nodak.edu
I can't speak for the southern accent I will defer to the southern for that, but on the other areas; I've seen 90 OTS grads who do walk like, well aren't professional in their stature. Then there is of course the over rule by a seasoned sgt, been there, done that....but in the end as a Commander my fairness, firm resolve and honesty with the troops won out. The tears in a war situation, well it didn't take away from the facts she still performed her duty. Maybe if documented facts about males in the military were much more honest about what occurred to them in war ---I am sure history would show men crying, men who were raped as POWs, on and on. Women wouldn't be considered so inferior to their male counterparts as what we in the Western World would lead everyone else to believe. Movies are amazing aren't they?
Return to H-MINERVA Home Page.