Too jerkish?

The film was unapologetically un-PC and spent no time trying to endear the characters to the audience, in stark contrast to the TV show. I understand being jarred by the film's brashness after being exposed to the cuddly-ness of the show, though I would say that if anything the show wasn't jerkish enough.

Actually, if you read the book, Hawkeye and Trapper are much nastier. They completely take advantage of the fact they cannot be arrested because their status as surgeons is required, and they act meaner towards authority figures and do some very mean-spirited things to people whose opinion slightly differs from them. At one point they crucify a chaplain who writes to the families of dead soldiers and assure them everything is fine (they don't kill him, but they act as if they're going to set the cross ablaze).

So in comparison, Hawkeye, Trapper and Duke are nicer in the movie than in the book.

They were first class jerks alright-- smug, condescending SOB's that I kinda wanted to smack in the face. And while that may be an obstacle to me liking the movie it is not insurmountable. I can think of other movies where I did not like the main characters but nonetheless enjoyed the film. To me MASH's biggest flaw was that it just wasn't funny. Even black humor has to have an element of humor to it and I just didn't see that in MASH.



"I don't want any Commies in my car. No Christians, either."

People always have trouble when they try to fit a complex director like Altman into a simple box.

People are not only one thing, with one cohesive motivation.

Hawkeye and Trapper were brilliant at saving lives and childish in their resentments. They didn't want to be there. They were honorable in the operating room when it came to their patients, but brutal to those they worked with but considered fools. They couldn't control their lives in the big picture -- they were drafted -- so they exercised control over stupid little things that really don't matter. They had no patience for those they disagreed with -- which isn't the same as saying they were justified to behave as they did.

Yes, they were anti-heros. And they had glimmers of character and humanity, and big swaths of crudeness and carelessness and cruelty. The shower scene wasn't "too close to sexual harrassment" -- it was sexual harrassment. We were supposed to be horrified by that. But they took risks to help people who needed help through no fault of their own -- Ho Jon's physical, the hospital scene in Seoul. They didn't do those things for their own benefit.

They were in a horrible situation, and dealt with it as they needed (or wanted) to, which was less than graceful. We can be pretty sure they did not behave like this in their day-to-day lives in the States.

Altman did a similar thing with the Hot LIps character. She's staggeringly irritating and unlikeable, but we also see she has truly devoted her life to her profession and her country, even if she can't see that the military bureaucracy is BS. So, we can't stand her, but the shower scene is is heartbreaking.

"Unfortunately the movie by and large depended on liking those guys for success".

Now, where would one get that kind of a strange idea?



"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan