Video

Lore of Humanizing Hitler - what downfall is really about (Film Analysis) momentum 100

Decapiation: woah too far. Home invasion, crippling someone and raping his wife in front of him: Nah, seems just right, Kubrick. Not a yard too far on that one. Don't want to underplay savagery when it comes to adolescenets, those bloodthirsty adolescents.

Wait till 2020

Most anti war movie end up glamorizing war example amarican sniper but this movie was brutally honest Maybe not the best produce but movie did its job to show the horror of war

I appreciate how philosophical the films are, but I never liked any of the sequels as much as the first. I think the sequels were too fantastic and unbelievable. The first had a better balance imo.

It was so good what is everyone yapping about

I always say this. If you could go back in time, why would you kill baby Hitler? You need to *save* baby Hitler.

I've loved this movie since it came out. Don't tell me what it's "really " about like I'm stupid and can't see with my own eyes.

It’s not entirely altruistic Fitzgerald after the failed shot is probably quick to realise keeping the boy alive may sustain his own survival around the next bend… fundamentally the Fitzgerald squirrel monologue is a window for the audience to see & sets the true inner character of Fitzgerald (incase by then the audience still had doubts about the antagonist’s moral rating..) & by mockingly equating God with some vermin food source we see without doubt Fitzgerald’s selfish character is rotten to the core & in sense serves as the perfect antithesis to that of Glass for the showdown finale…

Hitler was a human who took advantage of multiple bad circumstances, so as to take power to his own end and cause more destruction. That's it.

Best Kilgore in American Culture is Kilgore Trout

Empty movie by an empty reviewer

Bruno Ganz listened to Hitler speak normally from that train recording

I sometimes wonder what happened to the US Army between Korea and Vietnam

Maybe it’s just me but I feel like I have a Mandela effect going on with Kilgore, I never remember Robert Duval playing Kilgore.

I think each scene and each character represents a religion and the journy up the river is the search for god in religion

It’s about Steiner being late.

Your so wrong my friend wtf you speak about? Ar you mad ?

Deep down on bologna no less.

It's not "after the death of King". It's "after the death of MANNY!!!!!!!!" Come on man, get it right or don't bother. I stopped your video right there. I'm out!

Classic comedy, except for the ending. These films always fall off at the ending.

Yes he definitely pushes that woman good man bad thing and men will only destroy the world. F()ck th@t s#it. It’s not a male female thing it’s a human nature thing. Watch babies they’ll steal food and toys from the weaker baby.

I thought the director was kinda tricking everyone it has all the cookie cutter stuff but I thought nix or nob whatever his name was not only the moral of the story but truly the main character.

I really liked this movie but some things I don’t understand. Why does everyone see him killing Eric as bad he was going to kill him and Nadia. They pretty much tell you that with Bob stories when he says no he gotta disappear.

I think Vincent didn't mind dying and took wild risks cause he got off on the chaos where he thrived.

Love this movie actually true too history yet so damned funny

Bad video

My mother used to tell me “Sometimes man is scarier than monsters, those children books you read showing trolls hiding under bridges and wolves dressing as grandmas are nothing compared to the atrocities man can commit.”

What makes Kurtz so striking is that he understand the reality of war that the leadership, politicians, and public want so hard to avoid admitting, that war is about threatening to kill and killing. People want to hide behind excuses; nobility, heroism, righteousness, etc. However, the fact is that every strategy, tactic and action is, at its core, about killing. Kurtz is a threat because the more that the public sees the reality of the killing the more anti-war they become.

Israel springs to mind

I think the overall theme of the movie is that the deeper into war (aka. deeper into the jungle) that you get, the further away from civilization you get. The more savage you become. Willard starts in Saigon, in the heart of the most civilized part of the war. Then he gets into the militarized zone, and things start becoming less civilized... he's asked to go execute someone with "extreme prejudice". They start heading up the river, and the first major stop is Kilgore's part of the film. He represents the part of war that still has as many parts of civilization still held onto as much as possible, even though they're slipping away due to their own actions... they're more removed from the killing, doing it from a distance from helicopters, playing loud music, letting the napalm planes take care of most of the job, while they go surfing, etc... they're not that deep into the jungle yet, and there's still a lot of civilization, even though they're a part of destroying that civilization. They got the latest high-tech weapons and equipment and everything, though. Still quite "civilized", despite being in war. Kilgore gets a feeling of joy from smelling the "gasoline smell" of napalm, because it lets him know he's on the more "civilized" side that's using the modern oil products of American capitalist culture. He doesn't even have to do the killing himself, he can just stroll through afterwards where "not one body" is left and just bask in feeling the "victory". This is him telling himself that he's on the civilized side, and the savages are the ones who don't surf. Then as they head further down river, more and more of civilization dissolves into the jungle and madness starts taking over more and more. Savagery. Giving into baser instincts like horniness and attacking women and dangling from a helicopter just to get at some sexual pleasure. Being more directly involved in killing and death. Losing your mind more and more the further up the river you go, deeper into the jungle... deeper into war and further from civilization. The Roach turns off the music because civilization has to go away for him to focus on being a savage now. The other guys are still just kids who are playing at war, thinking they can still hold onto civilization, but it makes them shitty soldiers. He turns off the civilized part of himself and just goes savage and becomes the perfect soldier to get the job done. I wouldn't even say "dispassionate" is the right word for it, because "motherfuckers" is definitely passionate... he's calm... but he's savage. When they get to Kurtz, all civilization is gone and they're completely savage. Completely mad. War/jungle has eaten everything civilized or high-tech, and they're just left as primitive animals again. This is what war leaves behind. The death of civilization and turns men back into animals. The killing of the bull timed with the killing of Kurtz represents Willard's last act of having fallen victim to war just like the men before him, both Kurtz and the previous guy sent to kill Kurtz... and everybody who's followed Kurtz... they all went savage, and now Willard has too. He replaces Kurtz as the idol of savagery. Him getting back on the boat and starting to head back is, I think, representative of him turning away from embracing what Kurtz embraced... he could become the new leader of this savage tribe, but he rejects it and leaves. He wants to head back to civilization. The movie ends, and we don't know if he ever gets there, because that's not the point.. just the fact that he got to the point that he did is meant to represent that no man can escape from at least getting there during war, even if they do manage to return home and regain some semblance of civility again. They're probably gonna stay in the jungle in their minds. Some theorize that you can even loop the film, as the montage from the beginning starts again, and it's like the whole thing is a fever dream replaying the memories of Nam in Willard's head over and over again. Which is why the beginning starts with "This is the end." War is the end of civilization, and the beginning of the film is also the end of the film, because humanity just keeps going in this circle of war over and over again. And as civilized as we can get, some part of us will always be stuck in the jungle. So what I believe Killgore represents in contrast to Kurtz is just different stages of the journey from civilization to savagery during war. Kurtz being the most highly regarded and decorated soldier from a time before the movie begins, but having gone the way he did since then... I think is meant to represent "It happens to the best of us.", so if it happened to Kurtz, it'll DEFINTELY happen to any lesser men than him. It'll definitely happen to Kilgore the longer he stays in war. It'll happen to Willard. It'll happen to everybody. Kilgore is on the edge of embracing savagery, but still holding onto civilization... enough to recognize that the war will end and he'll have to go back to it. But for Kurtz, the war will never end, because he's too deep into it, too far gone. It's his entire reality now. The savagery of war is what he's become, to the point that it's a religion for him and he's become pious about it. Kilgore and his men still look down on savagery and haven't embraced it as the way of war yet... they like to stay more removed and kill from helicopters while calling those who kill more up-close "savage", like with the grenade woman. They don't view their own killing as being unacceptable, because they don't view it as "savage"... as Kurtz points out, they view swear words as more obscene than their own killing, while a woman blowing up a helicopter that's attacking her is "savage" in their eyes because she's on the "savage" side. But they're just fooling themselves, because they ARE already every bit as savage as anybody in the war... more savage than the innocent people they're attacking... they just haven't come to terms with it yet and are still in denial about what they've become or are becoming. Kilgore saying "Charlie don't surf." means "The Vietnamese are savage. We aren't savage, because we surf. Savages don't surf!" It's all projection and coping mechanisms for trying to think of yourself as civilized and better than your enemy, despite the opposite being reality. The scene of passing under the tail of the downed B-52 is the "threshold" moment. When they pass under that, it's like they're entering the threshold to the underworld. They've crossed the point where civilization has been left behind and they're now into the realm of open savagery. Before that point, they were killed by bullets... after that, they get killed by spears and have arrows shot at them. This happens soon after Lawrence Fishburne's character is killed (the guy who played the music, holding onto civilization the most), because a member of their squad being killed is the point that most soldiers start getting in too deep, because now they're vengeful and more hateful against their enemy. This makes them lose their civilized nature all the faster, which is why they cross the threshold in the next scene. (it's also part of why the Redux is worse, because the French plantation scene totally interrupts this progression and makes it feel like they're back to civilization again... theatrical works best for this reason, IMO)

In this world of snowflakes it would definitely be too overwhelming for them. I think it would have been a good ending

you can replace every reference of Hitler with Trump in this video and the characterization aptly applies to Trump, a delusional self centered far right incompetent bigot

U.S.A. Watch Europe: The Last Battle.

Salieri could’ve been working & composing with Mozart the whole time, lol. He would’ve been so much happier during his life in doing so. What a dumba-s.

Amadeus was the rock star of his age.

Your analysis of the scene at 8:28 is missing some nuance in my opinion. As you note, up until that point the aesthetics of the Marines' indoctrination is "balanced out" by identifying those deserving of being killed by Marines as foreign and the viewer understands "Commie" to mean Viet Cong (or Soviet, etc.) But rather than "diluting" the anti-communist message, the targets Hartmann identifies as victims of violence enacted against Americans without passing judgement on the murders were college students and a progressive-leaning president. It's no coincidence that a Marine trained in such a system would choose such victims. There are obvious parallels to the politics of today's college students or progressive politicians.. You don't have to look far to find the word "commie" being used against them by right-wing figures as justification to physically attack or even kill them.

"Governments are becoming more centralized by the day"??!!?! What on earth . . .

Life Is A Story should do a video of the HBO mini series The Pacific.

As a person who watched the movie in its original language, I'm really sad to see that the translation in subtitles is... Bad. Quite bad. It's a shame how bad it is, to be honest.

That is why people love trump ( 10 minutes) Trump never admits a mistake!

A question: So they tell me I have a shadow in me, even if I'm the nicest person in the world, and even if I think I know myself and do not think I have a shadow?

The ending is haunting. The way the camera flyers aimlessly through the woods to ghostly music and it finally finds Flora who joins the Partisans then they disappear the trees.

Why make the journalists American? What would make an American citizen want to go and report on a war that is happening in their own country? I would imagine one would either want to fight in the war or escape it, not document it. Foreign reporters make sense because they are an uninvolved 3rd party and are many times left alone by the armies at war. I just don't buy into the idea of American reports, doing this during a conflict within this country. If the director would have made the journalists from Canada or Mexico then I think it would have been more believable for me.

Movie show how illuminati

Yeah funny how the murderer is the he “hero”. If Journalists were just propagandists, it would be worth defending but it changed once they criminalized Julian Assange.

Baby hitler was a blank slate, tabula rasa. To inflict an evil deed upon him would make you just as bad as him. Violence begets violence.

These types of videos are interesting to me on a personal level. They're about attempting to make sense of war and human nature, which are each as equally impossible and futile. What's the purpose? What does it accomplish other than to expose the fact that every individual has their own opinions? I find it very difficult to understand the reasoning or logic behind it. People who try to make sense of certain aspects of reality never succeed in it, they only confuse themselves even more or at most come to their own personal conclusion.. which is only their own reality, not a true reality for anyone else.

I saw this film for the first time back in the 80s. It is devastating and was an awaking simultaneously. The impact was and is unforgettable. Your video summary is a terrific precis of it. Thank you.

One of my uncles who served in Vietnam said it was a big mess of chaos, confusion, mistakes, and incompetence on all levels.. like being stuck in someone else's nightmare where nothing made sense, and everything was surreal, scary, and horrifying. He said it visibly and deeply changed most people who were tossed in.. which is the same for every conflict/war, but Vietnam was on a completely different level, and more similar to the Pacific during WW2.