Standard batteries are in short supply in the army? How could it be even remotely possible to fuck that up?
A lot of the tension in the show is that the Recon team is sent into dangerous areas unnecessarily. They suspect that their CO’s want to get medals and promotions on their backs. Its rarely presented as “take this airfield or we’ll lose this war!” Because the military was not going to lose (the stand up fight portions) the war irregardless of what the Recon team did.
I’m sure their actions saved lives of other men and helped move the invasion along, but that is not how the tension of the show is built.
So far, the story-arc is the competent men and CO’s vs the over-ambitious and incompetent CO’s.
Just an observation about how the show (emphasis on the show) was constructed dramatically.
What? Did I say that wrong?
As shown in the firefight with the Syrian Jihadists, the Marines had much better equipment, training, discipline ect. They totally outclassed anything they were going to run up against. But Casey Kasem’s hoarding of batteries is presented as a major point that they return to.
Why? Because they knew they could have even better equipment, more of an advantage and a better chance to keep their own casualties to zero. Not that they were going to lose the war, or even a battle, but that they might lose even a man.
On a more pedestian level, better night vision would lower the chance that the Humvee drivers would wreck, which I believe has led to a lot of injuries/deaths.
I’ve always thought it was a bad idea to promote Milo Minderbinder.
Well, it’s always a welcome part of any care package. But I don’t think it’s a concern on the same scale now (OIF ?) as it was back in the day (OIF 1-4). It’s just one of those things that is normal in military life.
Interesting. Thanks
I see what you mean. It will be interesting to see how you feel at the end of the show. I’m sure Wright’s written version was structured purposefully as well, but I don’t remember it that well.
I’m re-watching it now on the DVDs, so hopefully it will be fresh if you have some questions. I guess sometimes I misinterpret metadiscussions about the themes and structures as skepticism that military life can be “that way”.
What? Did I say that wrong?
I guess I just misunderstood you.
Managed to watch the last two episodes last night.
I’m going to try not to get into specifics too much, because I could quickly get wrapped around the axle.
Excellent show, David Simon has written two of the best episodic television shows of all time. Off the top of my head, only Band of Brothers and maybe the first season of Deadwood, come close to the entirety of The Wire and GK.
I’d put I Claudius up there too, but that’s probably too old for you whippersnappers.
The interaction of the Marines was easily the best part of the show, probably the heart of it. Anybody who has ever been a part of a group of young men for awhile can recognize the abusive joking they heap on each other. My experience, (from high school and college football teams, where the intensity and gravity of the team goal pales, but the competition for alpha dog is no less intense) the abuse serves a lot of purposes. It serves to actually lower tension, increase bonding and allows people to speak truth about each other, shaded in humor, that would otherwise be unacceptable. Anyone who hasn’t been through it would have a hard time understanding how it works. Basically, a teammate (squad) can bust on your mom because you know that they have your back, your willingness to let your mom be busted on and not freak, shows that you have their back. Men in groups are weird.
I also appreciated the liquidity of their language. The story of how Trombley becomes “Whopper Jr” rang exactly true. That Trombley didn’t get upset at terrible implication of the nickname helped him be accepted by the squad. At the same time, the nickname helped the squad minimize his actions and accept him. Nicknames can also be used as shorthand to identify enemies and screwups. Nobody tells Captain America or Encino Man that they have nicknames, much less why they have those nicknames.
While I’m thinking of him, Trombley also rang very true. Dead eyed and quiet, but not introspective. I don’t think he had any malice towards any of the people he shot, he was just doing what he was told, even when he shoots the civilians. I would suspect that his type is viewed as a good, and necessary, soldier. (someone with actual military experience can correct me).
I had some issues with events, characters and conversations (conversations much more than events) that struck me as resulting from a writers interpretation. But not having read either of the books the show was based on, I tried not to worry too much about them. At least until I read the books. Which I will do before I re-watch the series*.
Looking forward to doing both.
*EDIT: I’m hoping between the two books and the series I can triangulate those characters and conversations that struck me as being the results of artistic license.
While I’m thinking of him, Trombley also rang very true. Dead eyed and quiet, but not introspective. I don’t think he had any malice towards any of the people he shot, he was just doing what he was told, even when he shoots the civilians. I would suspect that his type is viewed as a great, and necessary, soldier. (someone with actual military experience can correct me).
In the book, Wright makes a point of noting how happy he is that Trombley’s next to him with the SAW.
Wife and I rented this, just finished the last episode last night. My only–and really only–disappointment with this was the very end with the grunts watching the footage to Johnny Cash’s cover of “The Man Comes Around.” Maybe it was because I’d realized around Ep. 3 that Capt. Peterson was played by the guy who played CJ in Zack Snyder’s Dawn of the Dead and so the movie was very much in my mind.
I’m not sure if it was a very unfortunate oversight, or what–the montage is edited a lot like the opening of the opening montage of Dawn–but it marred the ending for me.
I’m still gonna end up buying this damn thing on DVD so I can rewatch and tuck into the personal features, though.
I had a different reaction to the reservist in that scene. He didn’t know (and how could he) what a gaping A-hole Captain America was, and he couldn’t know how much time Cap’s team spent trying to keep him from doing insane shit like this. What he saw was a team leader abuse a prisoner and, maybe because he wasn’t regular military, he didn’t let it slide.
Unfortunate that innocent men got swept up in it, but they were exonerated by the end. (and in reality one of them - Koechner (?) - went on to become the military adviser for the series).
Loved the actors who played the screw-ups and the bad guys. Captain America in particular. Not a bad looking dude without a helmet on, but with one on he looked wildly overwhelmed. The look he gives after one of his men says, “Damn Sir, your hamster must have fallen off its wheel.” was priceless.
I also loved every minute Sixta was on screen. The willful mispronunciation of words (“ass” becomes “eeayyss” ) and hard ass routine just killed me, even before the big reveal.
I’m about 65 pages into Wright’s book and he makes two things clear that the series doesn’t.
The Recon Unit was being used recklessly on purpose. They were being thrown far ahead of the rest of the Invasion to actually try and draw fire and discover where the opposition was. For some reason the Recon Unit was never told this. The series is essentially from Recon’s point of view and shows how confusing their orders must have felt to them.
(It is possible that this stuff is made clear during Godfather’s briefings and I was just too distracted by his voice to understand.)
The other point that Wright makes is that the three “bad guys” - Captain America, Encino Man and Casey Kasem - would not ordinarily go out on missions with them. It was because Recon’s role had changed that they were even with the teams. I wonder how much the perception of them by the team was affected by this. They were essentially “outsiders” to the more cohesive combat-tested units.
Some of it is, and I think to a certain extent they lay on the big picture pretty thick by the last couple of episodes. They give a hint, here and there, of what exactly is happening purposefully and what is dumb bullshit. My favorite early example is the way the Colonel messes with Lt. Fick about the cook stove incident, which provides a much better base to understand him and see the later reveals in that light.
The contradiction for many Marines, E5 and O2 and below in the chain, is that many of us are fully cognizant of the rationale for why the Corps is like it is. And in many cases, we are not ignorant of the broader strategic picture that is influencing what may appear to be irrational decisions at our level. But often there is clearly bad leadership and judgment at play, and it’s very frustrating to see it all guarded by command under the same monolothic aegis as the merely tough calls (see: the Captain America explanation by Godfather at the end). It seems impossible to separate from the need for unity of command and discipline above all others, so we accept it and make our peace with it or tolerate it until we get out, but it’s something else to see this rebirth of interest (well, three things at least, One Bullet Away/Fick, Jarhead, and Gen Kill) in recent years and get a chance to talk about it with outsiders using visual aids, so to speak.
But it’s definitely a bottom level view for the most part, and that emphasis suits the tv series well. It gives it a lot of room for growth in my mind as I revisit moments from it.
The other point that Wright makes is that the three “bad guys” - Captain America, Encino Man and Casey Kasem - would not ordinarily go out on missions with them. It was because Recon’s role had changed that they were even with the teams. I wonder how much the perception of them by the team was affected by this. They were essentially “outsiders” to the more cohesive combat-tested units.
I would venture to say it was hugely influential. A big part of the recon “deal” is the concept of being a team of somewhat independent operators that are entrusted with a great deal of responsibility in return for meeting higher standards and enduring the rites of passage.
I would argue that one interesting paradox that arises from Iraq is that, unlike Vietnam where special capabilities units were really set loose, the general Marine infantry has had the biggest boost in independence at the enlisted level. The term used to describe it is “distributed operations”, where squads are expected to function at the level of independence that platoons and companies would have in a more conventional engagement, in order to successfully conduct an effect counterinsurgency (this was a big part of the whole Petraeus “more risk in the short term thing” imo). I would expect similar stories from the Army units that were used in similar environments for counterinsurgency as part of the surge .
In contrast, Marine specialty units have had their independence cut down significantly for a host of reasons. The most visible example for me was the role of snipers, where they went from having the concept of small teams working on the deadly fringes of the AO originally, to the large near squads and restricted movements circa Fallujah 05, to essentially serving as skilled additional manpower (again in squad size versus teams) for operations where they were directly attached to infantry squads like mine for prolonged periods circa Ramadi 06-07.
I know secondhand Recon would continue to feel severely misused as Colbert frequently states, at least at the level of Battalion Reconnaissance. I don’t know enough Force guys well to know what they were up to, but from what I saw of the implementation of SEALS and other OCF (“other coalition forces” as they are euphemised for people outside of the need to know in briefings), where they weren’t actually, obviously misused what they did do was along the lines of the “ferrari in a demolition derby” line. They have specific, unique skill sets that can be very useful, but too often they are just regarded as better infantry and used accordingly by shortsighted leaders. It’s just not that simple in a war like this one, where sometimes familiarity and experience with an AO can be a much more important factor in mission success than potential ability.
I’ve just started watching this. Rather enjoying it, but I think I’ve started in the middle of the series. Anyway, thanks to the ex-servicemen who have contributed to the thred.
I’ve been asking British officers and WOs what it’s like for them out there, so I’ve got another side, literally. They mentioned that their RSM gives you twenty-four hours on return from exercise to clean your kit, shave and wash. They have a very different atmosphere and way in the British Army, though.
I watched the first three parts of this over the weekend and found it to be absolutely fantastic. It makes The Hurt Locker look a little silly in comparison, though I really enjoyed that as well. Where The Hurt Locker doesn’t appear to be going for an ultra realistic vibe, Generation Kill, being based on a true account, comes off (to someone with no first hand knowledge at all) as much more authentic.
One of the things that’s really struck me about Generation Kill is how incompetent the leadership appears to be. Every time Captain America is featured, I wonder how a guy like him not only got into and passed Recon school, but was also promoted to the rank of Captain. Same goes for Encino Man. How does that happen? If every other Marine can see these guys are morons, how do they continue to get promoted? I’m not sure if Evan Wright combined the foibles of multiple people into a couple of extremely ridiculous characters to illustrate a problem he perceived with command or if these guys truly existed. I hope for the former.
Something else I love is the constant and pervasive use of jargon. I read through the entire glossary provided on the Blu-ray and sort of reveled in decoding the radio chatter.
The second disc of this is on its way from Netflix and I can’t wait. I’m definitely buying the Blu-ray set if I don’t end up getting it for my upcoming birthday, along with the book and Fick’s book as well.
Neither Encino Man or Captain America were amalgamations of different officers but are actually real people. The only officer that comes to mind was probably the Major, and that’s only for one sequence (in episode 5).
Just as there are incompetent soldiers, there can be incompetent officers. Not to give too much away here, but Captain America has some connections, and Encino Man has the support of upper-rank NCOs backing him up (Casey Kasem in particular, also a real person). When you get to the end, you may understand a bit more why they are still around and in positions of command. It adds a bit of perspective.
— Alan
Wait a minute, are you saying that even though two movies might be set in the same location, they might be completely different genres? Why I never…!
Glad you’re digging Generation Kill. It gets even better. Are you watching it on Blu-Ray? It looks fantastic in HD. And when you’re done, there’s some really nice reading in this thread about the series.
-Tom
Yep, watching it on Blu-ray. I watched the first three parts in a row. I could not break myself away from it. It’s just fantastic.
I started reading through the entire thread, but decided to hold off a bit to avoid spoilers. Part of the appeal is the moment to moment tension of not knowing what’s going to happen next.
With regard to inevitable comparisons to The Hurt Locker, I’d say it has more in common with The Kingdom (which I loved) than Generation Kill. All three of them have instilled a pervasive sense of dread, tension, and anticipation in me during my viewing, which I weirdly enjoy.
I have read Generation Kill and One Bullet Away (the Lt’s book).
The “Bad Guys” in GK the series, don’t come off nearly as badly in in OBA or even the book version of GK. The essentials of the story are the same though. Simon certainly used some creative license to create additional tension in the narrative because - SPOILER - the US wins the shooting portion of the war.
Not to say Captain America et al didn’t do some crappy stuff, but that Simon seemed to have taken different stories of mid-level incompetence / dickholeyness from all over the campaign and poured them into these characters.
I didn’t read this thread until now, as I came to it late on DVD and am only reading the actual GK book at the moment… but crikey. Really strong stuff. Thanks for those who contributed.
KG
Just watched this again via HBOGo - god this was a good series. Also a good thread, it was nice to reread it.
Ten year anniversary of Generation Kill.
I just watched the full seven episode series, and I dunno. It didn’t carry the emotional or moral weight I thought it would. To me it’s well understood that the Iraq war had very sketchy underpinnings from the beginning and was mostly a US promotional exercise to deliver abstract “shock and awe” punishment to someone, or in this case some country, for the 9/11 attacks.
So seeing all the “war is random events mixed with a solid dose of human incompetence and we call that hell” subtext, well… I knew that already?
James Ransone and of course Alexander Skarsgard were great in their roles. And the show indeed had its moments. It’s worth watching, but it’s nowhere near the first tier of “must see” HBO, in my opinion.