A Modern Art Masterpiece: The Untold Story of Full Metal Jacket, a documentary directed by Stephen Rigg and also produced by Matthew Modine, was assembled by collecting more than thirty new interviews with the people who worked on the film, including Vincent D’Onofrio and Arliss Howard. The most intriguing material is rumored to be the on-set footage it promises to deliver: thousands of behind-the-scenes photographs and rarely heard audio recordings of Kubrick during the actor rehearsals in 1986.
An opportunity to learn more about the making of the movie, certainly, but also to revisit one of the still most enigmatic questions: why does Full Metal Jacket appear to break in two at a certain point?
Before telling the war, Kubrick builds a soldier
When we picture a film about Vietnam, the jungle, the clashes, and the chaos of the battlefield feel almost inevitable. Kubrick, however, chooses to start much earlier, at a moment when the war is still distant and the protagonists are only youngsters just landing at Parris Island.
We watch them shed their hair, then their names, and gradually a portion of their identity dissolves. Under the shouts of Sergeant Hartman they learn to move as a single unit, endure pain, and, above all, cultivate a nearly sacred bond with their rifle. It’s a process of demolition and rebuilding that culminates in the most extreme consequence of Fatty.
Leonard arrives at Parris Island as the most fragile member of the group and paradoxically ends up becoming exactly what Hartman sought to create: a Marine capable of shooting with precision and killing without hesitation. Yet that violence, once forged, cannot be controlled. When Leonard kills Hartman in the barracks bathroom and then takes his own life, Kubrick has already shown us where that process might lead even before we truly take the step into war.
Even the title acquires a different significance. A full metal jacket is the metallic shell that surrounds the softer core of a bullet.
Precisely what happens to the boys at Parris Island: vulnerable humans whom training tries to armor with a shield sturdy enough to carry them to the battlefield and pull the trigger.
Why is Full Metal Jacket divided into two parts?
Then we reach Vietnam and everything changes. The colors, the spaces, the music, and even the pacing seem to belong to a different film. Yet that fracture doesn’t truly separate the two halves: it is, in fact, what keeps them together.
At Parris Island we watched the soldier being built; in Hue we see what happens when that soldier is left to endure the chaos of war.
Joker becomes central. Unlike Fatty, he continually tries to maintain distance from what surrounds him. He is a journalist, he observes the war, he reports it, and he uses irony almost as a shield. Yet on his body he bears an irreconcilable contradiction: the inscription Born to Kill on his helmet and the symbol of peace on his uniform.
When an officer asks him to explain, Joker speaks of Carl Jung’s “duality of man.” It is precisely the condition in which Kubrick has trapped him: on one side there is the man who wants to keep a conscience, and on the other, the Marine whom Parris Island has trained to kill.
The ending closes the circle begun at Parris Island
That contradiction can survive as long as Joker remains primarily an observer. In the end, however, he confronts a young wounded Vietnamese girl who pleads with the Marines to end her suffering, and it is he who pulls the trigger.
It is the moment when the two halves of Full Metal Jacket come back together. Fatty had already shown from the outset where the transformation imposed by training could lead; Joker had spent the entire film resisting it through irony and detachment, but in Vietnam the moment arrives when simply watching is no longer enough.
Moments later, the Marines march through a burning Hue, singing the theme from the Mickey Mouse Club. It is one of Kubrick’s most hallucinatory images: boys who have become soldiers, now capable of killing, who, surrounded by rubble, briefly return to a tune from their childhood.
The two halves of the film do not, as they might seem, tell two separate stories, but two moments in the same process: the first builds the weapon, the second pulls the trigger.
The new documentary now has the task of guiding us behind the scenes of that construction and, through material never seen before, revealing more about how Kubrick crafted one of the most unsettling war films of all time.
Comments