MovieChat Forums > The Deer Hunter (1979) Discussion > Analysis of the first hour - great or te...

Analysis of the first hour - great or terrible?

posted 10 years ago by nielw
48 replies | jump to latest

In my quest to watch all Best Picture winners, I just watched this movie for the first time, and I had no pre-conceived notions coming in. All I knew was that it had Robert DeNiro and some Russian Roulette in the Vietnam War.

I found myself getting bored 30 minutes in and wondering when things were going to pick up... 20 minutes later, I felt like I was watching someone's home movies, wondering when something interesting would happen. I stuck it out, and eventually it jumped from some of the slowest pacing in the world to the most intense scene I've ever seen: Russian Roulette in Vietnam.

Now, after looking back, I can't say I'm a fan of the first hour, but the contrast between slow American life and quick-paced war scenes is what really made this movie.

It's almost like the director is making you choose between the most boring small town life imaginable, and shooting yourself in the head.

A little surprised this won the Oscar for Best Editing, but I guess they nailed the contrast between the two settings of the movie so well that it couldn't be avoided...even though I found the slow pacing almost unbearable.

That said, I enjoyed the film overall, at least once it got out of home movie mode. The Vietnam scenes were some of the best I've ever seen in film.

Mirror inspector is a job I could really see myself doing.

[–] crm22 10 years ago

I see where you're coming from. I myself find the first hour slow and painful to sit through, and I agree with your statement about the pacing. However, I think the home-movieness of it all was deliberate and in the end, necessary. The Deer Hunter isn't so much about Vietnam, it's about these guys in this town. The first hour, for me, is all about getting to love the characters, and see their camraderie. The wedding sequence and everything before it isn't about the story or plot, it's about the relationship between the guys. It's full of little moments between the friends, like Stan crossing himself and Mike looks at him like "what are you doing? are you religious now, or something?" All the little looks the guys give each other during the group photo is about getting us to love the guys. It's all a big setup, so we feel devastated and crushed when that camraderie is destroyed. Stevie is broken mentally, preferring to stay in the VA than be with his friends, and of course physically. Michael can barely get through the hunting weekend with Stan and the others. The town that he used to love feels like an alien world to him. "I feel distant. I feel far away." And of course, the most devastating thing of all is how the war has annihilated that joyful, calm, serene, and loving person who is the emotional core of the film, Nick.

In conclusion, I say the first hour was long, but Cimino uses it to set us up to love these guys and their relationship, so he can crush what we've come to love with the war.

[–] nielw 10 years ago

Right... Knowing this now, perhaps I should watch the first hour again and see if I can pick up more on this relationship they were showing us... I guess I was too bored the first time to try and notice that's what the director was doing...

Mirror inspector is a job I could really see myself doing.

[–] photo66666 10 years ago

Well it all depends on "who was whom" at the Pittsburgh Playhouse and if the Mellon/Heinz family knew about such a place in Pittsburgh. Go over old "on site" records of settings used in and around Pittsburgh for the movie Deer Hunter and watch the Mellon/Heinz family come out of the woodwork.

[–] Darthmauler_megaa 10 years ago

Let's keep things in perspective here. Terrible is watching a Michael Bay's explosion fest for an hour.

The first time I saw Deer Hunter I admit I did start asking my Father, "So...we're still at the wedding?" Lol. But not once was I bored. I enjoyed watching genuinely gifted actors actually given the time to develop their characters as real people. It's kinda refreshing to see a 3 hour movie that is 3 hours for the sake of the actors, not the FX.

"Can it be that they are mad themselves who call me mad?"

[–] photo66666 10 years ago

I understand the film was longer then three hours. The cemetery officials at Versailles Cemetery in McKeesport state the film crew was at the cemetery and the cemetery owned funeral home for a week shooting. None of that footage was used.

By coincidence, a Cimino family is buried at Versailles Cemetery next to a Russian/Ukraine family with headstones in Russian.

Again there is some sort of connection to the Pittsburgh Playhouse and the Mellon/Heinz family who funded the Pittsburgh Playhouse.

Right now I feel three films are connected to Pittsburgh. Gone with the Wind, Deer Hunter, and 12 years a Slave all with roots in Pittsburgh, Buffalo NY and the Purchase of Alaska for 7.5 million.

[–] Bartlett96 10 years ago

Yeah, it's all about character development. Cimino isn't just rushing through a three hour movie, making it seem like it goes for an hour and a half. A story is being told, and that wedding is an important part of the story. Apart from the hunting scene, that wedding is The last supper for them. It is essential. And every time I watch the wedding, there's a lot of new details that I pick up, that I previously hadn't noticed, i.e. the possibility that Walken's character may have cheated on the bride subplot, the veteran at the bar etc.
The first hour is basically the last few days of their normal lives.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nielw 10 years ago

From what I understand, this movie is not exactly supposed to be an accurate representation of the Vietnam war. In fact, all the Vietnamese characters are played by Thai actors. Russian Roulette supposedly never happened in the war either.

So, with that perspective, I kind of liken this movie to another Best Picture winner, Shakespeare in Love, which is basically just using the backdrop of Elizabethan England to make up a love story about Shakespeare. It's not even remotely historically accurate.

Both these stories tell a new story that's sort of set in a time period people are already familiar with... Everything else is made up.

Mirror inspector is a job I could really see myself doing.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Jakezen 8 years ago

So you're telling us.... you loathed this movie, right?

[–] ccs-5 7 years ago

my sentiments exactly

[–] musicbymartin 10 years ago

There is a phenomenal amount of alcohol consumed in the first hour. Certainly a contrast to the cold hard reality of the second part. I think this also reflect the nature of their small town life, helps explain a little bit why there will always be young men willing to fight in distant wars.

[–] Nikon11 10 years ago

I love the first hour, as well as the whole movie.

I guess that it depends what you're looking for or expecting here. If you're after seeing just a war movie, then you might be disappointed.

It's more about the characters, interactions, and how they're affected by the war.

[–] martin-ellicott-965-609718 10 years ago

The first hour for me is essential watching. It makes the final 2 hours work. Without it it would be another war movie with characters being effected by war etc but who we know little about to care for them

The first hour is also just a good example of a film about a community and is good in itself for that. Not every film has to be fast paced with ablatant specific reason. I remeber enjoying Jacknife (de Niro and Ed Harris film about dealing with life after Vietnam War) and enjoyed the slowness of it.

[–] FrankBooth_DeLarge 10 years ago

I can understand why someone would be bored or flat out hate the first hour, but I loved it. I found it very engaging and it really made me care more about the characters in the long run.

My first feature: available here!
http://www.indiereign.com/v/c3c4d

[–] judithw100 9 years ago

if you grew up in that era, in a blue-collar ethnic community, the wedding scene is phenomenal. No scripted choreographed production of "tastefulness" - just a screaming grab-assing dancing-til-you-drop affair. No one can appreciate how good an old Polish wedding (or in this case, Russian) in a VFW hall really was.

[–] Leepal 10 years ago

I watched this yesterday for the first time in about two decades..in fact, I'm not sure if I ever watched it all properly before although parts of it are familiar. The wedding scene was even longer than I remember and I found it pretty excruciating.

So basically I agree with the OP, the wedding scenes could have been edited down and the Vietnam scenes were excellent.

[–] kenny-164 10 years ago

Count me as one who enjoys the first hour at least as much as the rest of the film. As others have noted this is not really about the Vietnam War specifically as it is about what effect the War had on these young men. The film's approach requires the character development we saw in the first hour. We need to experience both the camraderie and shared experiences but also the growing alienation they experience. That includes an incipient recognition that they must grow up, even their going to Vietnam aside. In that connection the groundwork for the relationship between Michael and Linda in effect replacing Nick and Linda had to be established. Another plot feature was the nature of the marriage between Angela and Steven that also had to be established. The whole feel of the town, the sense of finding one's self as hte descendents of immigrants in the shared experience of serving America's military was also covered.

And of course perhaps most significantly the relation between the violence of hunting and the violence of war (which ftr i mean by comparison, not to say they are equivalent, but I digress).

Imo the first hour is essential to the film. I wouldn't change any of it.