As Unfocused as the Gulf War Itself

Rating: 7/10 (15 November 2005)

"Jarhead" is like a "best-of" compilation film of other classic war movies. At different times, it reminded me of "Apocalypse Now," "Full Metal Jacket," and David O. Russell's "Three Kings," among others. The problem is that it never achieves a style or point of view of its own. As a narrative, it's as unfocused and messy as the war it's about. However, it does manage to send you out of the theatre remembering specific images or moments, so in that way it's effective.
Director Sam Mendes obviously wants us to feel the way Martin Sheen's character does in "Apocalypse": adrift in a surreal nightmare. However, the difference between Coppola's film and this one, and what made the former successful and this one less so, is that even among the madness of Vietnam, the protagonist of "Apocalypse" had a distinct purpose. The movie was moving toward an eventual goal, which gave the chaos of the rest of the film some foundation. In "Jarhead," it's all chaos and no apparent goal, which Mendes seems to be saying is the point of the Gulf War in general, but that doesn't necessarily make for a compelling film.
It doesn't help that the characters in "Jarhead" remain virtual nonentities. They are the stock characters of any war film, easily described in one-word summaries: the "crazy" guy, the "sensitive" guy, the "jaded" guy. We really learn nothing about the central character played by Jake Gyllenhaal, and what we do learn about him is wildly inconsistent.
The entire film feels vaguely critical of American military policy in the Middle East, but it never sharpens its critique into any point that has impact. This isn't the first time Mendes (a British director) has pointed his criticism at American values and left me wondering what point he's trying to make. David O. Russell does a much better job in "Three Kings," because he introduces an opposing point of view to American actions. "Jarhead" is so insular, so focused on a bunch of kids that don't have any point of view, that we don't really have a point of view either.
But as I said earlier, there are some very memorable sequences in this film, and even if they never really coalesce into anything of substance, taken on their own they have their own emotional impact. I particularly liked the sequence in which the soldiers are being interviewed by American media, but are coached beforehand on what they are and are not allowed to say. That's a much-needed reminder that we at home are likely never really getting the true story of what's going on in foreign lands. Other images, like a horse covered in oil, wandering through burning oil fields; or a highway full of charred cars and bodies, everything still frozen in the exact position it was in at the moment of destruction, come close to equaling some of the images Coppola gave us in his film.
America has dug itself into a hole in the Middle East, and who knows how or when we're going to be able to dig ourselves out of it. "Jarhead" wants to add yet one more dissenting voice to our country's actions, but it doesn't really have anything new to say. If its words were as good as its images, I would say it could be a terrific movie. As it is, it doesn't have the stuff to join the list of all-time great war films.
Grade: B