Jarhead (2005) Dir: Sam Mendes

Instagram post:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DN3AMi42uZK/?igsh=MTczMHI3ZTVpcWk1Mw==

This 2005 war film, directed by Sam Mendes, depicted events based during the infamous 'Desert Storm' operations of the Gulf War, and is one of those films that gets talked about a lot as one of those 'must-watch' war films. I, typically speaking, am very weary of war films as a whole. Far too many of them glorify their violent content, and encourage colonialism, prejudice, and copious amounts of bloodshed. I was hoping to see something a little more nuanced and, of course, anti-war.

From an aesthetic perspective, this film looked fairly standard for war films set in the Middle East. In other words; it was mostly comprised of brown, pale and dull shots. The film was at least accompanied by an admittedly excellent and varied soundtrack, which I enjoyed a lot, but I can't help but feel like the film could have been a lot more visually stimulating. I know the colour palette is fairly set in stone, but there are definitely more creative ways to show the environment.

I worry about war films a lot, mainly because of how they portray themselves, or how they attempt to portray being in the military. What this film did was pretty disturbing. It fetishised the suffering of the marines, and romanticed them in the same kind of way that some people romantice mental health issues. There was a self-indulgent masochism to the way the film portrayed the military. It tried to make what was a grim hive of toxic masculinity into something appealing.

I wanted this film to be some sort of criticism of war, and of the United States' notably controversial presence in the Middle East, but, if anything, this film felt as pro-war as the US government is often accused of being. I won't pretend like elements of the film weren't good, because they were. The characters had compelling dynamics, and the narrative focusing in on some of the more fringe soldiers was an interesting idea, but the implicit nature of the film was deeply unsettling for me. The film seemed to want to be anti-war, without actually managing to be it.

Jake Gyllenhaal leading performance was typically brilliant, as is usually the case with a man of his acting calibre. There are many things I found issue with in this film, but Gyllenhaal's acting was not one of them. He felt extremely real, right down to his bones, which was both impressive and concerning. His narration was also really strong, which only made his performance feel even more complete.

The supporting cast also boasted some.impressive performances, with the very best ones coming from Jamie Foxx and Peter Sarsgaard, who both excelled at bringing their characters to life, and exploring the ways they operated. I also think the pair of Scott MacDonald and Chris Cooper deserve mentions for their respective supporting performances, albeit to a lesser degree.

Overall, I must say, I have very mixed feelings about this war film. I think it did have some very good qualities to it, especially in regards to the acting from the main cast, but it failed to show much in the way of contextual self-awareness, which is a dangerous thing, particularly for a film that was released during another of America's controversial forays into the Middle East. From a purely filmmaking point of view, it's a decent film, but I can't pretend like I didn't have issues with it.