Movie takes a completely different view than the novel

Rating: 6/10 (11 December 2005)

As far as war movies go, this one isn't bad. The cinematography is absolutely stunning, and the way Mendes plays with colors is truly beautiful. The marine language is real. But, if you're looking for something meaningful, you probably won't find it.
I read the novel before seeing the movie, and the two are completely different. Perhaps the most important change that Mendes made was to move chronologically. Jarhead the novel is more like a bunch of short stories that share a common thread, and its disjointed time line helps emulate what Swofford must have felt as a soldier in a war that he didn't understand or know much about when he went.
Another important difference is the way Mendes portrays Swofford. In the movie, Swofford is portrayed as the typical, uninsightful grunt, but in his memoirs, Swofford shows far more intellect and poise. Although Jarhead is about the first Gulf War, much of what it has to say unintentionally relates directly to the current war and the culture of the military. The only remnant of this dialogue comes in Gyllenhall's epilogue before the credits roll. The novel also illustrates the seemingly endless cycle of family enlistment.
I guess the movie's portrayal of war is as real as it can be if you don't mind the omission of the effects on US soldiers. Details like the government forcing soldiers to take pyridostigmine bromide (PB pills), which are now under scrutiny for potentially having contributed to Gulf War Syndrome; jungle camouflage being issued for desert combat; UN conventions that hinder soldiers from doing their job; and Swofford's true reflections as a grunt, were omitted. In his memoirs, Swofford goes in depth about all this and more.
The movie chooses to focus only on Swofford's time in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, but only briefly looks at Swofford's life before and after the war. Before and after are when Swofford has the most pertinent commentary about war and the effects of war on soldiers and himself. Whereas in the movie the viewer feels like Swofford comes out mostly unchanged, Swofford's memoirs show him to be profoundly affected by what he did and didn't do in the war, his experiences with Post Traumatic Stress, and his difficulties readjusting to civilian life.
Although the novel is not anti-war, it is certainly not pro-war. Although Swofford clearly has his own opinions, he remains objective in providing depth, context, and understanding of the Gulf War and all wars. The movie seems to take the stance that war exists. Many of the characters from the novel were left out in the movie or their roles changed, and many events changed to either keep the movie short or change its end effect. Unlike Apocalypse Now, Platoon, and Full Metal Jacket, which are legends not necessarily because of their political views, but because of their originality in showing the lives and dilemmas of soldiers, Jarhead falls short.
Once again, the best part of the movie was the stylized cinematography. Cool, grainy colors were used for the desert, which helped make it seem realistic even though it was filmed in Cali. and Mexico. What I liked most about the movie was seeing the visual manifestation of Swofford's writing. Despite criticism for being too left wing, Hollywood has a tendency of making movies that seem a bit like propaganda and focus more on explosions and "hooah" moments rather than characters . Perhaps after all is said and done with the Gulf Wars, movies about them will begin to be more reflective. So it goes.