The Korean War was not a joke!
I hate MASH, I really hate how they make the Korean War look like a summer camp. It was a war, people were killed. I can't stand how they make jokes about it the entire film.
shareI hate MASH, I really hate how they make the Korean War look like a summer camp. It was a war, people were killed. I can't stand how they make jokes about it the entire film.
shareOh Shut up you regular army clown !
shareI guess you just don't get it, and if that's the case, you probably never will. The humor is how they dealt with the horrors of the war. It was a way of preserving one's sanity, of coping with the death and suffering they were seeing every day, of trying to maintain some sense of normalcy under abnormal, horrific conditions. This film in no way glorifies war; in fact it's blatantly anti-war (as was Altman himself). Seems kind of obvious to me but I guess we each have our own POV.
Personally, I think the film is brilliant, and I feel kinda bad for anyone who doesn't see why. Altman was an effing genius and I miss him.
Let us take the risks of peace upon our lives, not impose the risks of war upon the world.
[deleted]
You do realize that the movie was actually about and against the Vietnam War...Don't You?
shareYes, Timinator, it was about the Vietnam War. Though I loved the movie when I first saw it in 1974, and still love it, one of the things that I think Mr. Altman did that detract from the movie is that he deliberately attempted to confuse the audience as to the setting. He wanted to make a personal statement about the ongoing Vietnam War. However, the novel on which the movie is based was written by an Army doctor in the Korean war, about Army doctors in the Korean war, and set during the Korean war, and in Korea.
"War is all Hell, there is no civilizing it," I think is a reasonably close paraphrase of General Sherman's statement on war. War is the worst thing that human beings do to each other. It's murder on a huge scale.
That being said, I would rather win a war than lose one, or to give up and leave, and I would rather fight than accept slavery or to allow us to be intimidated.
As I understand it he did not deliberately try to confuse the audience as to the setting, he was forced to include the Korea references by the powers that be because it was so anti-war & about a war that we were still engaged in. As a Disabled Infantry Combat Vet myself I agree with your other comments about war. I still struggle with my demons but would come if called by my Govt. if they needed me & without reservation. I was never better as a man then when I was a Combat Soldier. Regards, Tim
share1. This movie does not make fun of war. It does everything it can to show how horrible war is.
2. It just might, however, make fun of military bureaucracy. I do hope you see the vast difference between those two ideas.
3. It simply doesn't matter if it's literally about Korea but subversively about Vietnam, or vice versa, or something else entirely. He used the Korean War as the framework on which he hung his message, and I hope most people who see the film are smart enough to extract the universal message that can be applied to a number of wars, past and present.
That's your prerogative. You're not the only one. A lot of people have criticized Robert Altmann for this idea. Of course, there's no way in hell anyone would be allowed to do everything he put in the film other than the saving lives & watching people dying horrifically. It's a comedy, not a real occurrence.
War is senseless. It should always be a last resort, not immediate action unless you know damn well you will achieve your goals quickly & without mass casualties, otherwise what's the point.
Considering Altman is strictly a movie director, not a historian, he decided that he would make his own rules and put together a wicked spoof of his depiction of the Korean War & common US military practice and keep all the horrors but counter it by flipping the other component on its ass.
If you have a better idea how to keep from blowing your head off after seeing this, please share because most survivors if they're not maimed by the violence physically, they certainly are emotionally & most of the time it's permanent damage. Considering doctors are supposed to take care of everyone, the author & Altmann had this idea right.