Plese, help me put together the two parts!

[deleted]

I agree. It was like 2 short films pasted together. Kubrick always seemed to have that problem: come up with an enticing idea and film it but never quite thought out a satisfying way to bring it all together in the second part. It was like that in The Shining and Dr. Strangelove to name just 2.
SAVE THE IMDB MESSAGE BOARDS.

Imagine if the film had less scenes in Vietnam so that it could have a second act consisting of courtroom drama over the murder of Hartman and the suicide of Pyle.

I first watched this movie with my dad, who was in the U.S. Army and fought in Korea. We both loved the movie...my dad's take was that the second half of the movie showed why Gunnery Sgt. Hartman was the way he was and that he was "right" after all.

I think when you first watch this great movie, Hartman is obviously seen as the "villain"/"antagonist" of the movie from the beginning. He's so mean and seemingly unnecessarily cruel to Pvt. Pyle (and the others), to the point where what happens to him at the end of the "first half" of the movie seems justified.

However, the second half of the movie shows just how hard and rough war is. I've always felt that Hartman's presence (even though he's been killed and no longer is featured) "hovers" in the background of the second half. You start to see why Hartman was so rough on Pyle and the others. Hartman knew the horrors of war (I figure he probably fought in Korea, like my dad did) and was trying to get them ready to face those horrors.

As to why Hartman is never referred to or mentioned by name in the second half...my dad rarely talked about his experiences in Korea. People back then didn't seem to talk about "painful incidents." However, I kind of think this was deliberate on Kubrick's part also. As I mentioned earlier, I think one feels Hartman's presence hanging over the second half of the movie anyway...that ties the second half to the first half (and vice versa).

I'm one of those that like the first half better than the second half. I think the second half is still a very good movie...but the first half contains some of the most powerful scenes ever captured on film, IMO. R. Lee Ermey and Vincent D'Onofrio were so great in this movie.

We are given some clues about what this film's deeper meaning might be in the scene where Private Joker mentions the "Jungian duality of Man" when explaining why both "Born to Kill" and the peace symbol are on his helmet. Like Carl Jung's theories about the "shadow self", the film is divided into two halves.

Unlike yourself, I happen to be a cinema expert, am very bright and English just so happens to be my native tongue. Its custom that once you go overseas to a war zone, your past training is not allowed to be spoken of ever again. The men were following orders that nothing from the first half of the film should be referenced.