- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Shakespeare in Love
Posted on 1/15/13 at 2:32 pm to LoveThatMoney
Posted on 1/15/13 at 2:32 pm to LoveThatMoney
Opum's character actually gets to everything I dislike about the film. He's the effete intellectual who is too big of a pussy to actually fight for his country, unlike the true Americans who are salt of the earth. It's just offensive. Like, World War I didn't crank out a high amount of great poets who fought with valor in that war.
It's just lazy. It's picking on the weak, nerdy kid in the audience, telling him that while these more virile men have bravery and courage, you're just a weak coward because you went to college.
The WWII cottage industry of the "Greatest Generation" is essentially the Baby Boomers growing up and realizing what jackasses they were to their parents, so they better apologize before they die. Since I'm not the one with daddy issues, I'm not really interested in the haliography. But Opum represents the Baby Boomers, who dodged the draft and went to college and are less of a man than those heroes who fought the Nazis. It is the ultimate in Spielberg wallowing in self-pity and talking about what a loser and a coward he is.
Opum is not only unnecessary as a character, he's downright offensive, as if one can't be both brave and intellectual. But he's in the film because after the Normandy Beach sequence, this is not a film so much about WWII, but about Baby Boomers feeling guilty about disrespecting their fathers. Which reaches its apex at the coda scene, which is cringe-inducingly terrible. Opum takes me out of the film almost entirely.
It's just lazy. It's picking on the weak, nerdy kid in the audience, telling him that while these more virile men have bravery and courage, you're just a weak coward because you went to college.
The WWII cottage industry of the "Greatest Generation" is essentially the Baby Boomers growing up and realizing what jackasses they were to their parents, so they better apologize before they die. Since I'm not the one with daddy issues, I'm not really interested in the haliography. But Opum represents the Baby Boomers, who dodged the draft and went to college and are less of a man than those heroes who fought the Nazis. It is the ultimate in Spielberg wallowing in self-pity and talking about what a loser and a coward he is.
Opum is not only unnecessary as a character, he's downright offensive, as if one can't be both brave and intellectual. But he's in the film because after the Normandy Beach sequence, this is not a film so much about WWII, but about Baby Boomers feeling guilty about disrespecting their fathers. Which reaches its apex at the coda scene, which is cringe-inducingly terrible. Opum takes me out of the film almost entirely.
2
Posted on 1/15/13 at 3:19 pm to Baloo
quote:
Opum is not only unnecessary as a character, he's downright offensive, as if one can't be both brave and intellectual.
This is where you lose me. I think you are wrong for two reasons:
1. As Captain Miller clearly shows, one CAN be both brave and an intellectual at the same time. He was obviously college educated, like Upham, and was also a school teacher. If that doesn't scream "intellectual" then I don't know what else does.
2. Upham is an essential character in the film as he is the one who helps flesh out the character of John H. Miller. They both identify with each other as they are both intellectuals and they seem to form some kind of bond that isn't present with the other men in the squad.
Upham was a non-combatant, having not held a rifle since basic training. The only reason he was pulled into the mission is because the translators Miller had in his company had been killed. Because he wasn't one of them, and because the guy had not seen a lick of action, the veteran guys in the squad were destined to pick on him.
Despite his weak and cowardly nature, Upham becomes the moral compass of Miller's unit on their quest to find Ryan. In fact…I would argue Upham is most instrumental in making the key part of the story happen. After Wade is killed in their assault on the German machine gun position everyone, including Miller, wanted to execute the German POW on the spot. Upham was able to change Miller's mind and the German soldier is set free. As we all know, this same German soldier goes on to be the one who fires the fatal shot that kills Captain John H. Miller.
My favorite scene of the movie is the one where Upham, having listened to Mellish getting killed from the confines of the stairwell, stares up at the offending German. Upham has a clear shot at this guy. The German has no rifle, just his bayonet, and is completely and utterly defenseless. Upham, however, breaks down into tears as he finds himself unable to take the man's life and allows the German soldier to pass him on the stairwell to continue the fight against his comrades in arms.
Posted on 1/15/13 at 3:30 pm to Baloo
I would agree with this except:
(a) the movie wasn't written by Spielberg and
(b) Hanks' character is clearly an intellectual who is not a coward.
Given that Hanks is himself an intellectual who is not only capable of heroic feats, but is capable of leading heroic feats, I think your notion that the film is an apology to the "Greatest Generation" for the baby boomers spitting on the country by dodging the draft is a bit tenuous.
Particularly since at the end of the film, Opum man's up and takes an entire firing squad captive.
So... not really sure how Opum is "Spielberg wallowing in self-pity," but I like your use of $10 words.
(a) the movie wasn't written by Spielberg and
(b) Hanks' character is clearly an intellectual who is not a coward.
Given that Hanks is himself an intellectual who is not only capable of heroic feats, but is capable of leading heroic feats, I think your notion that the film is an apology to the "Greatest Generation" for the baby boomers spitting on the country by dodging the draft is a bit tenuous.
Particularly since at the end of the film, Opum man's up and takes an entire firing squad captive.
So... not really sure how Opum is "Spielberg wallowing in self-pity," but I like your use of $10 words.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News