Forrest Gump

               The movie Forrest Gump took place from the 1950's through the 1980's. in each decade, it showed a popular event happening. For example, in the 1950's it showed Forrest Gump with Elvis Presley. in the 1960's, it showed the Vietnam war. in the 1970's it showed Ping Pong Diplomacy with China. Tom Hanks played Forrest Gump. Forrest Gump was portrayed as stupid, but was mainstream and it seemed like everything always was in his favor. Jenny, the other main character, was portrayed as the other 10% and nothing ever went her way. she was a poor drug addict who had AIDS and Forrest was a recipient of the Medal of Honor and the owner of a very successful shrimping business and became a millionaire.  for the most part, the history was correct. the war was accurate, and the other significant events of the time period were accurate as well. I liked this movie and I thought it was made well. I thought Tom Hanks did a good job playing the dynamic character of Forrest Gump. although, I think they should have put more of the 1950's time period in rather than so much of the 1960's and 1970's.

Forrest Gump activity 1

John Drew Jenny Pollard


Elvis Presley was depicted as a regular guy who stayed at forest gumps house. It showed him on tv dancing like Forrest was dancing.

The desegregation of university of Alabama was depicted in the film. In the film it showed Forest at the conference, it showed actual footage and somehow they put Forest in there, to make it seem like he was really there.

Vietnam was depicted as a bad war and Forrest was shown as smart which is ironic because Forrest is really stupid.

How the pentagon shapes movies

How the Pentagon shapes movies

          The two sides of the argument are how the pentagon sensors it's information to film makers, or if the government is just out to get people who publicly display their 'artist expression'. I don't think the government cares about people's public expression. But I can understand why they don't want people making movies about the United States military looking bad. They don't just want to help out film makers that portray them (the United States military) as weak, losers, savages, criminals, or just bad people. I don't think it's nessisarily bad for the pentagon to not assist film makers if the film makers try to display the United States as bad. That being said, they can assist anyone, but they don't have to. I don't know why these liberals are getting mad if they won't help produce their films, the pentagon is not obligated. If they really needed help they shouldnt try to make their own country look bad. If they wanted to be a director then they should produce they're own movies instead of protesting and saying how the pentagon is 'trying to persuade young kids to join the military' or to 'go against their artistic expression'. I find it ridiculous and just pathetic that there is even an argument here. This is my own personal opinion. 

Platoon

Platoon

          The movie Platoon was a movie about the Vietnam War and the struggles that the United States faced at the time. They were divided between anti war protesters, black power groups, and the average US citizen. The United States interviened in Vietnam because of the heavy Soviet influence. They tried to turn Vietnam into a communist country and the United States tried to stop it. The war lasted 12 years and was mostly caught by black men, or poor men. The people who start the war are never the ones to fight it. Many found this unfair, and after they saw all of the videos of the crimes Americsn soldiers committed, they became anti war and started to protest. The United States started to become a nation divided for a second time. One of the reasons why the Vietnam war was so horrible was because the Americsns could not recognize a regular civilian from an enemy. They would come into an innocent looking town and find weapons. So the had to kill them because they could be part of the vc. When people in the Uniged States saw the videos it made them outraged, and within a few years, the U.S. pulled out of Vietnam. 

Against the Wall

Against the Wall 

        The Attica Prison riot was a riot in up state New York. It took place in 1971.  The prisoners rioted because of inhumane conditions such as, food quality, not 3 meals a day, filth conditions, one shower a weak, only can wash clothes once a weak, and abusive guards Who are currupt and racist. Over 2,000 inmates rioted and took several guards hostage and captured the entire prison. After a few days the police retook the prison yard and slaughtered both the inmates, and their fellow officers held captive. After the prison riot, many prisons made laws for officers to treat prisoners. The Attica prison riot was the tipping point or the spark that made the correction system change into more what it is today. 

Zero Dark Thirty

Zero Dark Thirty

1) we watched Zero Dark Thirty and it was an accurate description of the current war on terror and the assassination of Osama bin laden. This movie was mostly about interigation and how the CIA and other secretive orginazations obtain their information about important targets. 

2) the story took place mostly in Pakistan. It was from early 2000's through May 1st 2011. The story was about the small hints that lead to the famous assassination of Osama Bin Layden.

3) I think Jessica Chastain (Maya) was a good actor. I think she portrayed her character well. I think all of the actors did a good job in the movie.

4) I liked how it was a true story. I didint like how it was long and boring for a lot of it.

5) this movie was rated R and I think people who like history would like this. Not people who like war movies because this didn't show a lot of fighting.

6) I would give it 3 out of 5 stars ***

Glory

Glory

1) last week we watched the movie Glory. It was about black soldiers during the civil war. It accurately displayed the history of African Americans during the time period. 

2) this story took place in 1863 during the civil war. It was down south, the faught the confederate rebbles and proved that blacks could fight just as well as white soldiers. The main character was shaw, who was a colonel in charge of the 54th regiment. He had faith in the  black soldiers and lead them into battle and eventually died at the battle of fort Wagner. 

3)  Matthew Broderick (Colonel Shaw) did a good job of portraying his character. To me he came off as weak, I wasn't sure if that was the way Shaw really was, or maybe it was just Broderick. I feel like Morgan Freeman and Denzel Washington did a good job portraying their characters. 

4) I liked the story line in the movie. I thought it was a good story and the fact that it's true makes it that much more interesting. What I didn't like were the battle scenes because I felt like they were not well done. Also, I feel as if the regiment (and the war in general) was scaled down. 

5) I learned that even of you were free but disrespected, you can earn respect through battle. 

6) I feel like historians would like this movie since it was so accurate. The battle scenes were lacking however. 

7)  I give it a 3 out of 5 ***

8) overall I liked the film, but at times it was boring and hard to stay awake during.