Not About War

Rating: 9/10 (23 January 2013)

I'll get the primary criticisms out of the way first. Thanks to all the other intelligent reviewers, for their insightful takes on this classic.
These guys are way, way older than most recruits and volunteers for Vietnam.
Considering their age, why were they sharing a crappy trailer and still unmarried? A job at a mill in those days would have paid reasonably well, and by age 30, they would have put some money down on a house. Small town people are also notorious for marrying young. The two unmarried guys in this one must be 33. Enough on that.
Although their hometown was quite close to West Virginia, "The Mountain State," the mountains there would not look anything like the Washington State Cascades, which is where the mountain sequences were filmed. It was gorgeous, but they should have stuck to the Alleghenies or whatever mountains are close to where they lived.
One other reviewer mentioned that the DeNiro character was disgusted with his friends for behaving like sophomoric jerks in a quasi-holy place like the pristine wilderness. I agree, but I also think he was disgusted because he took Deer Hunting very seriously, and apparently they did not. He was like the way some surfers are spiritual about battling nature, while simultaneously being in harmony with it.
How could the Walken character have lasted as long as he did in Saigon, doing what he was doing, and then have his gig come to an end when his friend joins him? That requires some suspension of belief.
Did anyone think it was interesting that the characters were Russian-Americans, the war was against Russian-backed Vietnamese, and the characters were forced to play "Russian Roulette?" Was this on purpose? They could have been Polish or Czech.
Why did John Savage's character have a New York accent, when none of the others did? It was Southwestern Pennsylvania.
Didn't the DeNiro character have any parents or family? I would like to hear more about why these guys volunteered for the military. Clearly it was a patriotic town, given the people's gratitude for being in the opposite of Russia. But I needed some dialog from the guys regarding their political feelings, or their desire for adventure.
Beyond being a sociological portrayal of steel town life, this movie was about different types of men, and how they react to pressure, adversity, and despair. The "alpha" dog usually prevails. That's the way nature intended it, and DeNiro's "Mike" was the alpha here. The alpha does not necessarily have to be the best human being, just the toughest, shrewdest, and most adaptable.
I didn't mind the long wedding scene, or the three-act nature of the film. It made perfect sense. Having said that, I wouldn't have minded if they shortened it.
I liked the way they portrayed these working class guys as slobs with a a heart. No matter how mean they were to each other, they loved one another and that stood out. I also liked how Russian American culture was portrayed. I've never really scene that in such detail.
Despite my recognition of the heart of these guys, I will admit that if nothing dramatic happened in their lives, they would probably have continued on as rather crude and shallow individuals. Adversity matures us.
I read about all the controversy which accompanied this film back in the day. Especially about the Russian Roulette aspects, and the portrayal of the Vietcong as sadistic barbarians. I know I get upset when Americans are portrayed that way in Vietnam movies.
But I don't doubt that some hardened communist soldiers in a third world jungle could produce a few sadists.Nor do I doubt that some Americans were equally sadistic. But regardless of whether any Viet Cong forced enemy soldiers to play Russian Roulette, it is a believable scenario. Why not, especially since the Russians were backing them.
The use of classical guitar music for the melancholic scenes back home was very effective. Of course in real life, we don't get a soundtrack to follow us around, so by its' very nature, music in film is manipulative.
De Niro and Cazale were no strangers to ethnic scuzball roles. Walken was good, but his character didn't have that much screen time or dialog. John Savage stole the show. I didn't see any comments about this. Meryl Streep was sweet and believable.
There really were not many war scenes. You got just enough feeling for what it was like, and very few clichés. I appreciated that.
Weaving the "one shot" theme into the film via Deer Hunting and Russian Roulette was an interesting plot device. One shot stood between the pastoral life of a delicate buck and death. It also stood between the domestic life of small town men and a bloody mess.*** More importantly, we only get one shot at life, so we better do it right.
I think that the Walken character felt ashamed of the way he backed down from Russian Roulette in the classic war scene. That would explain why he became obsessed with challenging himself in this way forever more.
Overall, great flick. Watch it, and please tell the next generation to watch it. Sometimes it seems like they have no sense of film history.