Title/Year: M*A*S*H*/1970
Director/Birth Country/Year Born: Robert Altman/U.S.A./1925
Budget: $3,500,000
Gross: $73,200,000
Synopsis: Captain “Hawkeye” Pierce and the rest of the men and women of 4077 MASH unit try to keep things light in the midst of war and brutality during the conflict in Korea.
Narrative and Visual Keywords: war, satire, comedy, brutality, rebelliousness, anti-establishment, misogynist
Camera/lighting/editing technique:
Political/ Social Commentary: While the film clearly pokes fun at the military and the ones who run it, I feel that the film was truly a commentary about what was happening in Hollywood at the time. In my opinion, this film is depicting the indie new wave filmmakers and their struggle with the Hollywood establishment.
Historical Relevance/ Recognition: The overall consensus with this film is that it was going to be beat out by another satirical war film coming out at the same time based on the book Catch 22. MASH in the end prevailed over Catch 22 leading director Robert Altman to display a banner in his office that read, “Caught 22”. The film won 1 out of the 5 Academy Awards it was nominated for, winning best original screenplay. The film spawned one of the most successful and longest running television series in history.
Notable Collaboration: Robert Altman cast so many unknowns in the movie that after one or two known actors, the cast credits all say "Introducing"
1. Is the soldier/veteran depicted as being in control of his destiny? Give examples.
This one is a hard question to answer for me. I believe that it is due to the fact that this film has a very strange narrative structure of the film. The film is a collection of isolated “sketches” tied together by a very loose plot. When looking at the film though, I guess I would have to say that the soldier in this film is not in control of their destiny. There are many scenes where the main characters rebel against their superiors, such as in the opening when Hawkeye steals the jeep or when Hawkeye and Trapper take on the M.P.’s at the hospital in Japan. In the grand scheme of things though, the film portrays the soldier as simply stuck in this nasty situation called a war. The soldier simply has to find a way to get through it with his/her sanity.
2. What political sub-text, or overt theme is the film exploring?
As I stated above, the overt theme of the film is obviously a satirical review of the ridiculousness of war and how the men and women fighting them manage to keep their sanity. Underneath it all though, I see this film as a depiction of what was happening in the independent film wave that was immerging during the 60’s and 70’s. For me at least, the parallels are very clear. With the new wave of indie filmmakers in this era, we see new, fresh faces that are trying to tackle cinema in different ways. They are still attempting to entertain & educate, but they are doing it their own way. With that said, in order for these films to see the masses, these indie filmmakers still had to play ball with the distributors. For them it was a careful balance between artistic vision and exposure. Now when we look at M*A*S*H*, we see a very similar idea. Very talented surgeons, trying to do their job but on their terms, in their own way, all the while having to butt heads and work around the system that they are confined to.
3. How are masculinity and patriarchy displayed through the main character(s) -- broken and dissociated or reinstated and productive. Please give examples
Director/Birth Country/Year Born: Robert Altman/U.S.A./1925
Budget: $3,500,000
Gross: $73,200,000
Synopsis: Captain “Hawkeye” Pierce and the rest of the men and women of 4077 MASH unit try to keep things light in the midst of war and brutality during the conflict in Korea.
Narrative and Visual Keywords: war, satire, comedy, brutality, rebelliousness, anti-establishment, misogynist
Camera/lighting/editing technique:
Political/ Social Commentary: While the film clearly pokes fun at the military and the ones who run it, I feel that the film was truly a commentary about what was happening in Hollywood at the time. In my opinion, this film is depicting the indie new wave filmmakers and their struggle with the Hollywood establishment.
Historical Relevance/ Recognition: The overall consensus with this film is that it was going to be beat out by another satirical war film coming out at the same time based on the book Catch 22. MASH in the end prevailed over Catch 22 leading director Robert Altman to display a banner in his office that read, “Caught 22”. The film won 1 out of the 5 Academy Awards it was nominated for, winning best original screenplay. The film spawned one of the most successful and longest running television series in history.
Notable Collaboration: Robert Altman cast so many unknowns in the movie that after one or two known actors, the cast credits all say "Introducing"
1. Is the soldier/veteran depicted as being in control of his destiny? Give examples.
This one is a hard question to answer for me. I believe that it is due to the fact that this film has a very strange narrative structure of the film. The film is a collection of isolated “sketches” tied together by a very loose plot. When looking at the film though, I guess I would have to say that the soldier in this film is not in control of their destiny. There are many scenes where the main characters rebel against their superiors, such as in the opening when Hawkeye steals the jeep or when Hawkeye and Trapper take on the M.P.’s at the hospital in Japan. In the grand scheme of things though, the film portrays the soldier as simply stuck in this nasty situation called a war. The soldier simply has to find a way to get through it with his/her sanity.
2. What political sub-text, or overt theme is the film exploring?
As I stated above, the overt theme of the film is obviously a satirical review of the ridiculousness of war and how the men and women fighting them manage to keep their sanity. Underneath it all though, I see this film as a depiction of what was happening in the independent film wave that was immerging during the 60’s and 70’s. For me at least, the parallels are very clear. With the new wave of indie filmmakers in this era, we see new, fresh faces that are trying to tackle cinema in different ways. They are still attempting to entertain & educate, but they are doing it their own way. With that said, in order for these films to see the masses, these indie filmmakers still had to play ball with the distributors. For them it was a careful balance between artistic vision and exposure. Now when we look at M*A*S*H*, we see a very similar idea. Very talented surgeons, trying to do their job but on their terms, in their own way, all the while having to butt heads and work around the system that they are confined to.
3. How are masculinity and patriarchy displayed through the main character(s) -- broken and dissociated or reinstated and productive. Please give examples
M*A*S*H* walks a fine line when it comes to its depiction of masculinity and patriarchy. On one hand we see talented young men and women doing what they do best, saving lives. On the other though, we are presented with complete ineptitude. A prime example of this would be the Colonel who commands the unit. He is always three steps behind his assistant Radar. The Colonel spends more time tying flies in his tent than actually running anything. In fact, every encounter we have with a character that represents the classic masculine ideal in the film, that character ends up “losing” in some way. Maj. Burns is the wise, god fearing, intellectual surgeon in the unit. After his sex act with Maj. O’Houlihan is broadcast over the camp’s P.A. system, he attacks Hawkeye. Instead of the perpetrators of the broadcast being punished, it is Burns that is taken away in a strait jacket. Later in the film we see the strong General, being fooled in a game of football against the ragtag MASH unit. It is depictions like these that have me leaning more towards the display of masculinity as more broken and dissociated.
No comments:
Post a Comment