Talk:The Green Berets (film)

message: I can't speak as to whether or not Richard Pryor drives a jeep in the movie, but the "Richard 'Cactus' Pryor" credited in the movie is not the black comedian, but the Texas-based radio personality (and sometime actor), Cactus Pryor.
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by RowlandReed (talk • contribs) 19:13, 23 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Trivia: Richard Pryor

message: Is the "only pro-Vietnam-War movie made during the conflict" sentence really accurate? It seems highly unlikely to me that with all the output of Hollywood in the entire decade 1965–1975, this would be the only pro-war movie ever produced. [I assume that's the sense of the original poorly-worded sentence, since obviously there were plenty of anti-war movies, including M*A*S*H (1969) and Catch-22 (1970).]
:Its not accurate. But certain people have to keep the lie going. See for example the pro-vietnam war films: A Yank in Viet-Nam (1964), To the Shores of Hell (1966). There were very few films of any kind about Vietnam made during the first few years of the vietnam war (pro or anti). 
Perhaps "It was one of the most high-profile films of the decade to express strong support for the war in Vietnam." would be more verifiable. I personally have not seen the movie, nor was I alive to go to movies in 1968, so I'm not going to edit it any further myself. —12 Jan 2005
I beleive that it was the only pro-war movie made during the war that attempted to portray the war, instead of being an allegory for it. M*A*S*H and Catch-22 were allegories for the war, but The Green Berets was about the war.
: Thats wrong. 
:An allegory for war, set in war time, about soldiers? ;-) Catch-22 was not set in Vietnam, it was a WWII film, so that shouldn't be mentioned here. And M*A*S*H was set in the Korean War. The original sentence specifically said "pro-Vietnam War". Rufous 10:29, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Cinema is something of a reactive medium in the sense that it normally costs a great deal of money to produce a film, and the money men who ultimately control Hollywood for fairly understandable reasons want to put their money into a film that turns a profit (this objective is of course not always achieved). Film is reactive in the sense that the sort of films that get produced are the sort of films that the money men believe will turn a profit, so there is a marked tendency for Hollywood to follow public opinion rather than lead it. The Vietnam war was a controversial war that (in)famously divided American society about its merits, leaving Hollywood in a quandy. If one made a pro-war film, it would offend the doves and if one made an anti-war film, it would offend the hawks. So Hollywood essentially ignored the Vietnam war while it was going on. The height of American involvement in Vietnam was from 1965 to 1970, but one would never know it from looking at the vast majority of the films released during those five years. The war was simply ignored at the time. There were far more films made about the Vietnam war after the war ended in 1975 than ever were during the war. It is very telling that Wayne had to use his own money to produce this film. I don't have any RS off-hand, but it might be helpful to have this article talk about how Hollywood ignored the subject of the Vietnam war in the 1960s, and Wayne, who really wanted to make a pro-war film, had to use his money to get this film produced. The 1990 book the Power and the Glitter The Hollywood-Washington Connection by Ronald Brownstein might be a helpful place to start. The book is not about Wayne or The Green Berets per se, but Brownstein does write much about Wayne's pro-war activism in the 1960s-1970s. --A.S. Brown (talk) 20:49, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Only pro-war movie

message: I'd never heard that before. I'd always heard of it as a major defeat for the NVA and VC, though ultimately they would prevail after America left Vietnam. Anyway, I removed that particular sentence until some proof can be offered that Tet was widely considered to be a defeat for the Americans. Even my North Vietnamese wife knows that Tet did some serious damage to the Communists.Jlujan69 01:52, 18 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tet a defeat for the Americans?? 

message: Now, I never would have believed it, but there actually ARE pine trees in the Central Highlands. See these links to Lam Dong territory forestry and Nam Dong District --Habap 17:58, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pine Trees 

message: I'm enough of a Wikipedia newbie that without a clear style for citations to copy I feel uncomfortable adding them willy-nilly to the main page. That said, here's Ebert's Most Hated article from 2005 mentioned down in the "trivia" section, and here's a link (of questionable quality) which shows three movies that John Wayne directed, where "The Green Berets" grossed nearly three times the other two. DanLyke 21:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citations 

message: :Image:TheGreenBerets.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:45, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:TheGreenBerets.jpg

message: Would it be appropriate to include the fact that actual veterans right from the start laughed uproariously at this film's many Hollywood combat absurdities, and that for forty years DIs and other training NCO's have referred to some dumbass stunt likely to get you killed as a "John Wayne move?" Solicitr (talk) 22:56, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It goes all the way back to the 1940s. 2602:306:BC16:8700:8D0B:3D6F:52F4:9EFE (talk) 05:14, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

text: True. But the final scene was set in Northern South Vietnam (probably Da Nang) far from the provinces you mentioned. The wording is inaccurate, but the point about the scene not working (assuming it was a sunset rather than a sunrise) is still valid. 2602:306:BC16:8700:8D0B:3D6F:52F4:9EFE (talk) 05:04, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Military mockery? 

message: I feel like this section is one-sided, and should instead be reworked into an "Accuracy" section. It does not mention the many things this movie gets wrong. Brutannica (talk) 03:40, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Like the sunset at the end of the movie out over the ocean. Despite the fact that Viet Nam has no western coastline.  Mpoyer1705 (talk) 00:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: It does have a western coastline, at it's most southerly tip, but that was nowhere near where the characters in the movie are likely to have been at that time. HiLo48 (talk) 01:03, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: "Realism" section

message: When Wayne cashiers Jim Hutton's character then makes him a sergeant, he is shooting clay pigeons with a real officer at Fort Bragg. Is it Hal Moore? He only speaks once, laughing out the line "That's right, Mike" to Wayne. Looking at the images, I would say from the build and appearance this is Moore? The legendary US officer who led the 7th Cav in the famous Battle of Ia Drang. Anyone agree with this assessment??  86.157.48.190 (talk) 18:41, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Hal Moore is not depicted.  The officer shown is the Jump School Brigade Commander Col. Welch.  I remember seeing the movie while attending Jump School at Ft. Benning, GA (1968).  While the Skeet shooting scene could have been at Ft. Bragg, NC, it was probably done while at or near Ft. Benning, GA.  I always thought the scene kind of out of place, and done more as a good will gesture than anything else.  If I can find my Jump School photo album, I will upload a picture of him.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DPatrickMulg (talk • contribs) 20:36, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hal Moore? 

message: Special Forces did a lot of things, and proportionally as a unit took a lot of casualties.  Special Forces crossed denied boarders, and many died doing so.  Special Forces often operated in areas outside the reaches of air and artillery support, and had no reserves standing-by to pluck them out of danger.  When those who crossed denied borders were lost, they were lost, gone, the end (period).  John Wayne attempted to show this in his movie.  The movie attempts to show what Special Forces did in the war.  However, by attempting to please the Army, and by covering too much ground, the movie is in fact lacking in focus.
Taken in context, it is important to remember that this is about the time that public opinion not only swung against the War, it was also beginning to turn against the American Soldier.  It is also about this time that I completed Special Forces Training.  During this time, SF were called baby killers and storm troopers, and sometimes people referred to us as SS.  John Wayne attempted to show some of the good things we were doing, and trying to show some of the hardships and dedication to duty.
While it could be considered to be a pro-war movie, at about the time that the movie was actually being produced (1967), guys like me going into service were being congratulated and encouraged for entering (whether drafted or enlisted).  By 1968 I remember hearing people making very rude remarks about men in uniform while waiting for stand-by flights home, at the airport. So, in this context, the movie was in production while the war was still semi-popular.
This fact about the War in Vietnam's popularity, during the early years of engagement, is lost in the wind, largely due to the fact that no one in their right mind is going to cop to being in favor of an enterprise which ended with so famous a failure.  WWII was the good war, Korea the forgotten war, and Vietnam the war everyone--including me--would like to forget.
While the movie was not great, it was an attempt at something good.  While you may find inaccuracies in every film ("Platoon" included), there are also a lot of accuracies in the movie "the Green Beret".  And it attempted to promote the image of Special Forces (Green Berets).DPatrickMulg (talk) 22:02, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Image of Special Forces (the Green Beret) 

message: Training for Green Berets was conducted at Pisgah National Forest, NC and Uwahrrie National Forest, NC.  The Introduction at Gabriel Demonstration Area is shown in the movie "the Green Berets".  Not shown in the movie were the displays, mock villages and skills performed by Green Berets.  There was no training for Green Berets going to Vietnam conducted in Georgia.  Other elite troops and OCS candidates may have trained there, but not Army Special Forces.
The Gabriel Demonstration area was in honor of Specialist 5 James Gabriel, executed after capture.  The area has since been removed, and plaques honoring him moved to Ft. Campbell, KY, the present home of 5th SFGA.  While Spec 5 is the same pay grade as Buck Sergeant, he has been wrongly referred to as Sergeant Gabriel.DPatrickMulg (talk) 15:37, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Training Areas For Special Forces (Green Beret) and Gabriel Demonstration Area 

message: :However I gave this page on the article plot the names of the A team sent to camp 2-9nr sentry, also I had to write that Provo is one of the guys in the plot whom dies you forgot to edit since it's part of the story in memoriam name is added later in the film for him, other members of the team you missed where Sergeant Parks, and Sergeant Watson, whom are important in the film, Trooper201 (talk) 08:32, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Characters introductions

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on The Green Berets (film). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090903132246/http://sonobeatrecords.com/sonobeatartists1.html to http://sonobeatrecords.com/sonobeatartists1.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130728075129/http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow%2Fdemnow%2Fdemand%2F2007%2Faug%2Fvideo%2FdnB20070807a.rm&proto=rtsp&start=00%3A10%3A45 to http://play.rbn.com/?url=demnow%2Fdemnow%2Fdemand%2F2007%2Faug%2Fvideo%2FdnB20070807a.rm&proto=rtsp&start=00%3A10%3A45
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:38, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This film is in :Category:Films directed by Mervyn LeRoy - but his name isn't mentioned in the infobox or the body of the article. According to IMDb he chose not to be credited - perhaps the article should mention this. Muzilon (talk) 14:25, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mervyn Leroy