Plese, help me put together the two parts!

[deleted]

I agree. It was like 2 short films pasted together. Kubrick always seemed to have that problem: come up with an enticing idea and film it but never quite thought out a satisfying way to bring it all together in the second part. It was like that in The Shining and Dr. Strangelove to name just 2.
SAVE THE IMDB MESSAGE BOARDS.

Imagine if the film had less scenes in Vietnam so that it could have a second act consisting of courtroom drama over the murder of Hartman and the suicide of Pyle.

I first watched this movie with my dad, who was in the U.S. Army and fought in Korea. We both loved the movie...my dad's take was that the second half of the movie showed why Gunnery Sgt. Hartman was the way he was and that he was "right" after all.

I think when you first watch this great movie, Hartman is obviously seen as the "villain"/"antagonist" of the movie from the beginning. He's so mean and seemingly unnecessarily cruel to Pvt. Pyle (and the others), to the point where what happens to him at the end of the "first half" of the movie seems justified.

However, the second half of the movie shows just how hard and rough war is. I've always felt that Hartman's presence (even though he's been killed and no longer is featured) "hovers" in the background of the second half. You start to see why Hartman was so rough on Pyle and the others. Hartman knew the horrors of war (I figure he probably fought in Korea, like my dad did) and was trying to get them ready to face those horrors.

As to why Hartman is never referred to or mentioned by name in the second half...my dad rarely talked about his experiences in Korea. People back then didn't seem to talk about "painful incidents." However, I kind of think this was deliberate on Kubrick's part also. As I mentioned earlier, I think one feels Hartman's presence hanging over the second half of the movie anyway...that ties the second half to the first half (and vice versa).

I'm one of those that like the first half better than the second half. I think the second half is still a very good movie...but the first half contains some of the most powerful scenes ever captured on film, IMO. R. Lee Ermey and Vincent D'Onofrio were so great in this movie.

We are given some clues about what this film's deeper meaning might be in the scene where Private Joker mentions the "Jungian duality of Man" when explaining why both "Born to Kill" and the peace symbol are on his helmet. Like Carl Jung's theories about the "shadow self", the film is divided into two halves.

Unlike yourself, I happen to be a cinema expert, am very bright and English just so happens to be my native tongue. Its custom that once you go overseas to a war zone, your past training is not allowed to be spoken of ever again. The men were following orders that nothing from the first half of the film should be referenced.

I dont understand why people have such trouble connecting both halves. Both parts are about losing your individuality (and some would say, humanity, but I dont think mercy-killing an enemy sniper is really such an inhumane bad act?) to become part of something bigger. Dont understand why people say the movie should end after the boot camp. This movie is literally spelt out from start to finish and follows the same quite direct plot.

I love the ending. The mickey mouse song, I believe, expresses a degree of carelessness of the soldiers what they're even fighting for, as long as they strip off their human fears and worries about a world full of shit. I mean, I'm just paraphrasing here, in slightly different words, what Joker literally says anyway, thinking that maybe it helps answering your question from 7 years ago.

I dont quite understand what people would only watch the bootcamp sequence for.

There's a little sideplot with Private Paula, I always had the impression that he was initially very happy to join the army. With his slight mental retardation he may have been an outcast in school etc and thought he'd finally join a group where everyone is equal. But then finds out he still doesnt fit in and offs himself out of disappointment and anger. So... that's kind of the opposite.. of the happy people.. at the end..

Thats what I interprete into the movie. Its not super deep.. it is what it is.


On that "inhumane" part:
In my opinion the most inhumane thing that I remember from the movie (been a while) is not the allegedly very symbolic killing of the sniper. She was going to die anyway... didnt sound like a medic was around etc, so I dont get the big deal there. Maybe someone else can explain why that was supposedly so inhumane but in my opinion they... kindly did the needful lol.
I guess the most inhuman thing around in the movie was incorporated as Animal Mother who is very raw/brutish in his speech, sits next to a corpse of his enemy and carries a very big gun. He's kinda cartoonishly "bad". And that's the type of person Pvt. Joker walks in line with at the end. So if I were looking for some kind of proof about Joker's.... spiritual "downfall" or something like that, that is the course I could agree with. I don't think he'll ever turn into a complete dumb brute though. He's just walking in line because that's comforting.