US war hero a villain?


Yes I know that this movie was released 2 years after the end of the Vietnam conflict but come on in the 40s that was waay before Vietnam let alone Korea.
This is my observation:This Larry character was a reflection of the unpopularity of Vietnam vets at the time of the movie's release.
Larry is nothing more than a Vietnam vet DISGUISED as a World War 2 hero-turned villain.
The book depicts many of Larry's war heroics(I will bring that up in another post)
along with the resurgence of World War 2 heroes in movies in the likes of Midway and A Bridge Too Far.
No way this would be remade today because we are still in the Afghan conflict and we can't afford negative depiction of the military on screen.

reply

Your take is interesting. I didn't see any political agendas to his character.

He was just another bastard trying to get into a young girls pants. What made him a villain was the lengths he went to to con and bamboozle her desire for love. Hadn't she already been sold by her father to a man who raped her? What was the reason for the fantasy BS? If he wanted 'no strings' then he should have paid a hooker, or better still, spared any woman his usurous attentions and gotten off with his hand.



_______________________________________
"ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED??!!"

Maximus Decimus Meridius

reply

Your take is interesting. I didn't see any political agendas to his character.

He was just another bastard trying to get into a young girls pants. What made him a villain was the lengths he went to to con and bamboozle her desire for love. Hadn't she already been sold by her father to a man who raped her? What was the reason for the fantasy BS? If he wanted 'no strings' then he should have paid a hooker, or better still, spared any woman his usurous attentions and gotten off with his hand.



_______________________________________
"ARE YOU NOT ENTERTAINED??!!"

Maximus Decimus Meridius

reply

What made him a villain was the lengths he went to to con and bamboozle her desire for love...What was the reason for the fantasy BS?

.
.
SPOILER



I know. This is really the only weak link in the (otherwise fabulous!) book. It doesn't make sense that Larry would promise to return and send Noelle off with money to buy a wedding dress...he's not sadistic, just selfish!

If he only wanted to ditch her, he could have just ducked into a dark alleyway and taken off. In the book when they are reunited, we get something like, "As she spoke of this past, he had the stirrings of dim memories of a girl...but there had been so many girls."

Ohhhh-kaaaaaay....so Larry just habitually ditched girls with promises of marriage all the time, and sending the dewy-eyed hopefuls merrily off to buy wedding dresses was nothing UNUSUAL that he just MIGHT recall??

Anyway, I love this majestically trashy book. It's too bad the movie version isn't stronger, though Susan Sarandon is great, and very amusing in her chatterbox way : )
.

reply