Depiction of War

William Broyles Jr. brings up an interesting point in his Vietnam: How the War Became the Movie: it is basically impossible to describe war to individuals who have not encountered it for themselves. I respect the attempt of all of the individuals who have been in these kinds of circumstances, especially in Vietnam, but unless it is to force a political movement or a person attempt at catharsis, I don't really understand why it is that movies are produced on Vietnam. With the comparisons of Iraq to Vietnam, I can understand the recent surge of fascination with Vietnam, but I feel that when something as serious and extraordinary as a prolonged war is to be displayed to the general public, the issue of the meaning of the movie goes more into the question of the purpose of film. Is the purpose of the film to educate, to purge from oneself, or to make money. There are many different kinds of movies throughout the group of movies that have been made about the Vietnam War. Some are absurd with the glorified brutality, such as the Rambo series; however, some try to show the horrors of war. I am confused in that I understand that on a profiteering front, a cathartic front, and a artistic front that the Vietnam War is rich with material that will shock moviegoers. Because I am simply eighteen years old, I can only percieve the Vietnam War through what appears to be the aftershocks of a culture clash that have been softened and perverted by time and interests. Young people nowadays go to war movies to see the action of war, not to truly absorb the meaning and horrors of what happens. This is why I question what the meaning of these kinds of Vietnam films really is.