Born on the Fourth of July - Special Edition

Rating:
Summary: Debunking a lot of dangerous myths
Review: In PLATOON, director Oliver Stone showed us the horrors of the Vietnam war from ground zero. Three years after that, with BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, he takes us to what the war did to America and has us see it through the eyes of another Vietnam vet, Ron Kovic, who co-wrote the screenplay with Stone from his own 1976 memoir. Tom Cruise portrays Kovic, and gives one of the best onscreen performances of modern times.

Kovic was a kid from Massapequa, New York who grew up believing in the post-World War II beliefs of American superiority, anticommunism, and John Wayne, and who wanted to serve his country. But in Vietnam, he had the tragic misfortune of being shot by a VC bullet and paralysed from the waist down. He would now never be able to have children, and he would never walk again. Like a lot of Vietnam vets, he was met either with indifference or hostility to his suffering. He became embittered and hostile in his own way.

But he soon learned that his experience could be used for a greater purpose than war: to educate Americans about the realities behind the myths that helped tear America apart during the 1960s and 1970s.

Although a long film at 140 minutes plus, BORN is a stunning look not only at Kovic's personal experiences, but the experiences of our nation when we moved from braggadocio and John Wayne patriotism to cynicism and political violence. Never in this movie do Stone or Kovic ever say that Vietnam vets didn't serve their country proud. They do, however, indict the culture of paranoia and anticommunism that worshipped a supposed "patriot" like John Wayne, who NEVER saw any combat action in his life. And on that count, they must be commended fully.

It is an honor to serve one's country, but when you don't know the truth about what you're supposedly fighting for, the results can be devastating. That is what Stone and Kovic say was wrong with America's Vietnam experience, and I can't help but believe they were 200% right.

Rating:
Summary: The Dark Side of War
Review: This is a movie from Oliver Stone based on The brutality of Vietnam, and how the soldiers who fought paid the most dearly. This film stars Tom Cruise as Kovic, whose gunshot embittered by neglect in a veteran's hospital and by the reality being in an America where most of America doesn't seem to even care about the war. He soon leaves the veteran's hospital to return home where he soon falls into deep depression and alcholism. After being home for just a short while he heads to Mexico and searches for something other than neglect. While in Mexico he discovers there that he can never satisfy a woman sexually. Kovic joins the Vietnam movement of antiwar protest, and a appearance at the 1976 Democratic National Covention. This is a great movie that I glady give 5 thumbs up and, recommend this younger generation that thinks war is cool to watch. Oliver Stone does it again with one of his wonderful movies.

Rating:
Summary: Not quite sure about this one.
Review: I finally watched this after hearing my mom hype it for years. I have always understood it to be a war movie - but it isn't, not in the traditional sense of the word. There are about 10 minutes of war footage in this movie. The rest is (prior) about Ron's growing up loving to fight and being patriotic, and (after) Ron's adjustment to life and redefining patriotism.

There is one problem with the DVD - the case says it's 1 hour and 25 minutes long. I have been watching for 2 hours and there's no end in sight. I'll save the end of it for another day, but beware if you think it's a quick watch.

Rating:
Summary: Wow
Review: To sum it all up....I cant believe Cruise didnt win the Academy Award for this one. Just an incredible performance.

Rating:
Summary: 4 STARS TO THIS GOOD AND CONTROVERSIAL MOVIE.
Review: In "Born On The Fourth Of July", we follow the life of Ron Kovic (played by Tom Cruise), divided in episodes. First, we see him as a little child, playing with his buddies with weapons (toys, of course). Then we see him as a teenager, whose main concern is to finish school, go to the prom and dance with his love interest, a girl named Donna. At this point the movie seems like a TV series episode, but the story changes radically once the young Ron hears the speech of a recruiting Sergeant.

Now the only thing that Ron can think about is to go to the Vietnam War and fight for his country. So he goes to Vietnam, and in the process he is witness of horror, death, tragedy and injustice. He also gets badly injured and becomes paralyzed from the chest down.

He returns home and finds that the new generation is very different in ideas, they hate the war and criticize the USA government. Initially he defends "Uncle Sam" ideas and repudiates the lack of "patriotism" of the young hippie generation. But gradually he discovers that the war is absurd and ridiculous, and he fells used and frustrated.

"Born On The Fourth Of July" shows how the young people was wasted in the Vietnam war; some of they lost their lives, some of them were mutilated, but all of them were damaged both physically and mentally.

Once again, Oliver Stone repudiates the Vietnam war in this movie, and in the process, he makes a criticism to some establishments of the American way of life, the USA government, the paranoia about the communism, the "Uncle Sam Wants you" mentality, and above all, the use of young people to fulfill political ambitions.

The only part that I personally hated were the scenes in Mexico; those scenes were boring, pointless and were made with incredible bad taste, but in general the movie is well made and provokes different emotions and thoughts.

Rating:
Summary: The best movie yet about the Vietnam War
Review: Oliver Stone's second entry in his intended Vietnam trilogy (the first being the extraordinary and revisionist Platoon, the last the under-whelming Heaven and Earth) is a powerful, moving and politically uncompromising adaptation of Ron Kovic's autobiography of the same name. Charting Kovic's transition from blindly patriotic, gung-ho high school senior to bitter, cynical war veteran and anti-war activist, Stone paints a convincing and depressing portrait of a generation betrayed by their political leaders, leaving you emotionally devastated and politically angry. A totally disarming career best performance by Cruise, who - in any other year - would have walked away with the Oscar for Best Actor (as it was at the time, he was up against the world's greatest living actor, Daniel Day Lewis in My Left Foot). Weighed down slightly by an ill-judged and arguably unnecessary diversion into Kovic's drinking, whoring and cussing experience of Mexico. Such is the power of the rest of the film, that the indulgence hardly costs it a deserved five stars. Cruise's performance is undoubtedly the heart of the movie and he delivers impressively with a performance of unexpected maturity and depth. Stone reinforces a convincing claim to being one of the last true remaining auteurs of American cinema. Long may he continue to shake the mainstream out of its complacency.

Rating:
Summary: An Intese Look at the After-Affects of Warfare
Review: As other reviewers have said, this movie does have a liberal bias. However, that bias is pretty much irrelevant to the plot, which I think was very well done.
This move details the life of Ron Kovic, a patriotic young man who enlists in the marines, and goes to Vietnam. He is wounded, and ends up paralyzed from the waist down. As he struggles with his new handicap, he slowly comes to realize the folly of his patriotism.
As a libertarian, I see this as a story of learning to distrust the government. At the end of this story, I think Ron still loves his country, but he learns to understand the difference between country and government. I recommend this movie to anyone interested in the war, specifically from the veterans point of view.

Rating:
Summary: Powerful Acting, Phenomenal True Story!
Review: After movies like TOP GUN and DAYS OF THUNDER, Tom Cruise really proved himself as a serious actor in this powerful role. I can't imagine anyone else playing it better. Ron Kovic's brilliant autobiographical portrait is brought to life on the screen by acclaimed director Oliver Stone. While the Vietnam War is integral to the plot, the movie really illustrates what happened to our country during the Sixties, shown through the eyes of a paralyzed Vietnam veteran. His touching struggle to make peace with God, himself, his family, and his country are powerfully portrayed. While I disagree with some of the politics of the movie, I can not deny its excellence or its effect on how I view the Vietnam War. Should be required viewing by every high schooler. A masterpiece!

Rating:
Summary: THEY ALWAYS BLAME AMERICA FIRST
Review: In 1989 Oliver Stone came out with "Born on the Fourth of July", the true story of Ron Kovic, a gung-ho Marine who is paralyzed in combat in Vietnam. The film is realistic and compelling. Stone is a master and Tom Cruise as Kovic gives one of his best-ever performances, proving him to be a bona fide acting talent. The film depicts the heartbreaking American experience in Vietnam, and the character arc of Kovic is as complete as any ever captured. He returns home, desperate to believe that his sacrifice was in a noble cause, but this is chipped away by the well-known elements of '60s radicalism. The "generation gap" between longhaired youths and crew cut, religious parents is profound. Kovic sinks into the depravity of drugs and alcohol, but battles back to become a "hero" of the anti-war Left. He wheels into the 1972 Republican National Convention, where he tries to tell the clean-cut, well-heeled patriots that they are wrong and he is right. The idea is that they are all warmongers who have not fought, while he is a pacifist because he has. While there is truth to the premise, in choosing to tell this story, Stone establishes Hollywood as the home of solidly liberal ideas. In 1972, Nixon won 49 states over the ant-war McGovern. The idea that all those Americans, subject daily to reports from Peter Arnett and Dan Rather, the bias of Walter Cronkite, and the hate of the New York Times and the Washington Post, chose Nixon because they were bloodthirsty imperialists is just malarkey. Furthermore, Nixon had made 18-year olds eligible to vote. The concept that all of American youth protested in the streets is a myth. The anti-war movement was propped by TV that made pockets of outrage look like a widespread movement. The Silent Majority spoke out in '72. Big time.
Stone's depiction is fair in and of itself, but he takes advantage of the power of his medium in creating a mindset that such horrors as Kovic experienced are just part of the "Vietnam experience." Kovic's life mirrors soldiers going back to the Roman Legion and beyond. The Left has taken Vietnam as one of those core issues and stuck to it, just as they found themselves wedded to Alger Hiss, Bill Clinton and now the losing side of the War on Terrorism. McCarthy was going after genuine Communists, and genuine Communists were trying to enslave South Vietnam. It took some fighting to stop them. Nixon and Kissinger had the best plan available to them at the time, and the public recognized it. Watergate killed them and the Democrats used it to abandon our allies. Millions died because of them. Democrats will have you believe that we "created" the "killing fields." They have to say things like that, to cling to this nebulous theory, somehow unable to blame the rabid haters and murderers of Communist history, apparently because they are wedded to McCarthyism. Their movies are their best tool in perpetuating their lies. Not on my watch.

STEVEN TRAVERS
AUTHOR OF "BARRY BONDS: BASEBALL'S SUPERMAN"
[e-mail]

Rating:
Summary: Physically Well- Crafted, but Agenda Driven
Review: I was once a fan of this film, back in high school and when I was ignorant of history. Call me biased, but here are the facts of this film:

In the opening, we are treated to moving, idealistic portraits of modern life. One of them is a shot of the film's protagonist, Ron Kovic, sitting spellbound by Kennedy's famous inaugaral speech; "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country." This is the logic, and the president, who got the US into Vietnam. Yet the film NEVER takes a critical look at this man or his policy.

As we know of history, American deaths in Vietnam soared to an all-time high when Lyndon Johnston was president. His name is barely mentioned in this film. The most violent anti-war protests took place at the 1968 political conventions. I'm not sure of whose party headquarters (probably the Democrats) but I'm sure of the year.

Stone's film, however, shows the vehement protests of the war taking place in 1972, at the REPUBLICAN national convention. This was on the eve nof Nixon's second term, the subtext is as subtle as a sledge hammer; "Tricky Dick" Nixon was to blame for the Vietnam debacle.

Oliver Stone is a liberal, and I respect that. But using films to tell blatant lies, (for the purpose of advancing a political agenda), is shameless and evil. Hitler and Stalin did such things. People should be aware of this deception.