SummaryIn 1965, an unorthodox and irreverent DJ named Adrian Cronauer begins to shake up things when he is assigned to the U.S. Armed Services radio station in Vietnam.
SummaryIn 1965, an unorthodox and irreverent DJ named Adrian Cronauer begins to shake up things when he is assigned to the U.S. Armed Services radio station in Vietnam.
This film is a comedy set in wartime and based, very fictionally, on the life of a real person, radio announcer Adrian Cronauer, who spent some time in South Vietnam, in Saigon, in the service of USAF Military Radio. Despite the truthful bases, most of the things we see in the movie are fiction, as Cronauer himself mentioned. However, without this fictional component, I doubt the film would have been as successful.
The film's story begins with Cronauer's arrival in Saigon to take up a radio job. He will soon capture the soldiers' sympathies, with his contagious joy and a rebellious, sharp and irresistible sense of humor. However, it also becomes evident that he will not be easy to control, and high ranks will have difficulties in dealing with him and imposing the limits they think he must respect. At the same time, he will socialize with the Vietnamese, learn local customs and even teach English. But the enemy is subversive, and not even in the city they can know where he will attack, or where he will be.
Despite being a comedy, the film does not treat war lightly. There are several moments when we feel that danger lurks, and enemy agents can be anywhere. Despite the way Cronauer wins friends, the grim faces of the population reveal the prevailing antipathy, understandable among a population that feels that their land has been occupied by foreigners who, supposedly, came to help them defend themselves, but who then treat them with suspicion, when not with violence. The film paints an acidic portrayal of the war in Vietnam, with cruelties committed by both sides. By the way, there is one scene that is particularly critical, and where war scenes are accompanied by the Louis Armstrong song “What a Wonderful World”. To be more ironic, it's impossible.
Robin Williams was the ideal man to bring Cronauer to life, and the right person to revive his sense of humor. With this character, Williams was able to let his imagination run wild and invent the craziest puns and jokes. It is not by chance that the film became a classic of the 80s comedy, and one of the most memorable films of this actor's career. With him, we have an excellent Forest Whitaker, a great Robert Wuhl and an obnoxious, but equally funny, Bruno Kirby. The film also features splendid collaborations by Tom T. Tran, Noble Willingham and J.T. Walsh.
Technically, the film doesn't have any major demerits, but it knows how to keep a low profile, leaving humor to take center stage. Even so, I think it's fair to highlight the exquisite quality of the visual and special effects and the exceptional soundtrack, with a series of songs that we can easily recognize. Set in a military context, the film has good props, costumes and sets that automatically transport us to that environment and period. Finally, a word of praise for the cinematography and editing.
I can't think any single actor who can play Adrian Cronauer besides Robin Williams, the man was perfect for the role, he's talented, he can improvise, and he is energetic, Good Morning, Vietnam is not only fills with Williams amazing performance, the movie fills with an incredible performance by the supporting actor too, especially Forest Whitaker, Good Morning, Vietnam is a truly solid film, is a very very must watch.
The first comedy about that war, Good Morning, Vietnam manages to be uproariously funny without ignoring or trivializing the tragedy. It's awkwardly contrived here and there, especially during its recon patrols into Vietnamese life, but for the most part Mitch Markowitz's skeletal script is smart enough to dig in, hunker down and stay out of Robin Williams' line of fire. [22 Dec 1987]
Good Morning, Vietnam stumbles whenever Williams isn't behind the mike, placing him in melodramatic, hackneyed situations that become increasingly predictable and preposterous, and director Barry Levinson's seemingly endless reaction shots of listeners grooving to the DJ's antics become irritating. Levinson manages, however, to be one of the few filmmakers to show the Vietnamese as complex, cultured people, rather than as helpless victims or the faceless enemy.
The film itself--a dramatic comedy based on the 1965 Saigon gig of irreverent Armed Forces disc jockey Adrian Cronauer--is good-hearted but shallow. It's a piece of programmed irreverence, photogenic torpor, prefab compassion. But Williams, as Cronauer, is so blazingly brilliant that he detonates the center, exploding it in berserk blasts of electronic-age surreality.
There's still enough hardcore Williams-when he's sitting by himself in his studio-to make Good Morning, Vietnam worthwhile, but the alarm bells are sounding. Heres another comic who wants to play Hamlet.
This is quite a well known film, one I'd been aware of for many years but hadn't actually sat down to watch in full before. I can see why people like it, as it has an interesting mix of both comedy and drama, being almost painfully serious in some scenes and very irreverantly, did he just say that? type silly in others.
This won't be to everyones tastes but I found it pretty entertaining. The story is pretty easy to follow, if a bit predictable perhaps, although im led to believe that its based on a true story, which is interesting but I don't know enough details to be able to ascertain to what extent this is a true story. I found it to be an entertaining watch - its surprising that Adrian is allowed to stay as DJ for so long, given his flagrant shrugging off of the rules.
It'd be true to say that the story is a bit worthy perhaps - the local eccentric rebellious American sees what the pompous authority figures don't see, the human side to war and decides to arm the local community, tries to warn people about whats going on but is challenged and complained about. Obviously he's coming from things at a different perspective than others - he's an underdog character, which seems to be a typically popular character trait when it comes to American films and perhaps in American society in general. I have to say, I did find myself rooting for Aidan - he's irreverant and pushes the boundaries but, of course, he doesn't mean any real harm and is shown to be very popular with the troops, improving the morale. The main plus point being that he tries to arm the local community, not physically with weapons or militarily but by teaching them English in quite a witty way, to hopefully make them seem more assertive, after witnessing them struggle to stand up for themselves against other Americans.
There is some fairly witty dialogue present, although I wouldn't say this is a film to watch and analyse to very many levels, if you know what I mean. I'd say this is more of a basic general watch - you can sit back, switch your brain off a bit and enjoy it for what it is. If you like comedy that pokes fun at somewhat pompous authority figures, irreverant, erratic, visual comedy then you'll likely enjoy this but it won't be for everyone. I could again make comparisons with it to the Police Academy films, in terms of the sort of comic nature of the characters and the tone of the comedy, although unlike the Police Academy films, there's definitely a serious side to the storyline as well. I suppose it reminded me of the character in the Police Academy films who is a voice contortionist, throwing his voice around a lot as Adrian pretends to hold conversations with other people while on air, when of course in reality its all him - you could call it professional improvisation, or some may think more along the line of irritatingly hyperactive?.
I particularly enjoyed the scenes involving Adrian and Edward Garlick - it was interesting seeing Forest Whitaker in a role from back then (this film dates from 1987) and the way they interacted, it seemed they had an unspoken mutual respect for each other which came across well. This film covers some important messages and is amusing in parts but its also perhaps a little predictable, although it feels a little harsh to say so given the fact its apparently based on a true story and also I felt the ending arrived frustratingly suddenly. People could also criticise the fact that the violence tended to be shown a lot more frankly in relation to the Vietnamese, moreso than the Americans, although perhaps that is more fair than if an American film had portrayed themselves to be the main victims of that war? as I say, I don't think its a film to really over analyse. I also felt that the authority figures came across as perhaps a bit 2D, there were stereotypes at play that maybe wasn't entirely fair but I don't know a great deal about the subject to say with any real expert knowledge.
Overall yes, I would recommend this film.