Recently I watched for the second time. A first class depiction of the Vietnam War era. Tom Cruise starred as Ron Covic. Character developments were masterful as father, mother, friends, brothers and sisters etc. Very good job done by Oliver Stone.
195 Reviews
Reality hurts
anupamsatyasheel4 February 2007
When you see a war veteran campaigning against the very war in which he was willing to die once, you begin to have second thoughts about the intent behind the war. Many Americans went deep into this deliberation when veterans like Ron Kovic went on record questioning the wisdom behind US's offensive against Vietnam. Regardless of historical outcome of the war, the question will haunt USA forever -was the Vietnam War a noble and just cause. Your answer could be anything depending upon your political and ideological preferences, but the reality of thousands who lost their lives and limbs continues to hurt.
Oliver Stone's Born on Fourth of July - based on the true story of Ron Kovic - takes the audience through the triumph and trauma of a crusader who went from one side of the war debate to the other. Ron wanted to fight for his country and stop the evil force of communism dead in its tracks. He went to Vietnam to defend his nation but came back soon, injured and doomed to suffer further. In the inadequately equipped hospital, his dreamer instincts crashed against the harsh realities of political ambivalence, not for the first time though.
Over next eight years that are depicted in this masterpiece, the character of Ron Kovic (played by Tom Cruise with unprecedented brilliance) goes through the trauma of knowing that no one will "love him now", that even his own sibling is not on the same side of ideology, that the government had more pressing issues than taking good care of war veterans, that his countrymen did not necessarily endorse of his view point. The reality that he killed a soldier from his own army, the reality that he was the unfortunate one to butcher children and women in Vietnam, the reality that he would not be able to father a child, the reality of his realization that his government had made a wrong case for the war - it all kept gnawing at his conscience. It kept gnawing him until he opened up to speak about what was wrong about this war. Thus 'ended' the patriotic fervor of a driven person, but he continued his passion as an antiwar activist.
Born on Fourth of July may have been the story of one Ron Kovic, but there are many others whose sentiments would echo with this veteran's. At the end, there is no easy way out of this debate. War always comes with its baggage of pain, trauma and hurt. Whether Vietnam was a mistake or not - the arguments would go on forever. So would the history of people who aspired to be motivated by JFK's historical urge - Ask not what your country can do for you, See what you can do for your country - only to realize that in every war there is only one casualty - the human spirit. And this reality hurts.
Oliver Stone's Born on Fourth of July - based on the true story of Ron Kovic - takes the audience through the triumph and trauma of a crusader who went from one side of the war debate to the other. Ron wanted to fight for his country and stop the evil force of communism dead in its tracks. He went to Vietnam to defend his nation but came back soon, injured and doomed to suffer further. In the inadequately equipped hospital, his dreamer instincts crashed against the harsh realities of political ambivalence, not for the first time though.
Over next eight years that are depicted in this masterpiece, the character of Ron Kovic (played by Tom Cruise with unprecedented brilliance) goes through the trauma of knowing that no one will "love him now", that even his own sibling is not on the same side of ideology, that the government had more pressing issues than taking good care of war veterans, that his countrymen did not necessarily endorse of his view point. The reality that he killed a soldier from his own army, the reality that he was the unfortunate one to butcher children and women in Vietnam, the reality that he would not be able to father a child, the reality of his realization that his government had made a wrong case for the war - it all kept gnawing at his conscience. It kept gnawing him until he opened up to speak about what was wrong about this war. Thus 'ended' the patriotic fervor of a driven person, but he continued his passion as an antiwar activist.
Born on Fourth of July may have been the story of one Ron Kovic, but there are many others whose sentiments would echo with this veteran's. At the end, there is no easy way out of this debate. War always comes with its baggage of pain, trauma and hurt. Whether Vietnam was a mistake or not - the arguments would go on forever. So would the history of people who aspired to be motivated by JFK's historical urge - Ask not what your country can do for you, See what you can do for your country - only to realize that in every war there is only one casualty - the human spirit. And this reality hurts.
BURNED IN THE FIRE OF JULY
MadamWarden11 July 2022
A very moving anti war pic. So topical given the USA's relentless invasions of foreign lands all in the name of capitalism and at the expense of young American soldiers and defenseless, innocents in those lands.
Cruise is fabulous and I would think it would be one of his greatest performances.
A fascinating look inside middle American families and their religious fanaticism. Still so real now and, possibly, growing in an increasingly polarised country.
35 years old and still so very relevant. A disturbing but powerful watch!
Cruise is fabulous and I would think it would be one of his greatest performances.
A fascinating look inside middle American families and their religious fanaticism. Still so real now and, possibly, growing in an increasingly polarised country.
35 years old and still so very relevant. A disturbing but powerful watch!
Harrowing but breathtaking!
The Flawed Genius18 February 2002
I remember when i first watched this film I became totally absorbed in it. I had to search out songs that I heard in the move.....I had to see other Vietnam movies again.....I had to watch other Stone movies. Its a superb film. Cruise gives the best peformance he ever will in a film as Kovic.....the golden boy who comes home paralysed and confused at the way his country is reacting to Vietnam. Some of the scenes in the film are very disturbing but the ones that affected me the deepest were not any battle scenes. When Ron comes home and looks at himself as a young boy in his wrestling kit was almost unbearable to watch. Also, the scene when he is drunk in the bar and comes out of his wheelchair had me turning away from the screen. This is a true epic film and the support cast and soundtrack are also superb. 5/5 easily.
Part of Oliver Stone's Vietnam Trilogy
Hollywood_Yoda4 July 2017
Tom Cruise gives a great performance as Ron Kovic, a veteran who virtually lost everything, including his legs, fighting in Vietnam. After his return, he becomes an advocate against the war. Both Oliver Stone, the director, and Ron Kovic, the writer both served in the war.
Stone gives us a gruesome inside look into the horrors of war, including the return to civilian life after. The return for many was difficult, leading many to commit or attempt suicide. The country they came back to was changed was ungrateful (at the time) of their service, slamming them as "baby killers" and such. They came back to their fellow citizens who were against the war. Some veterans were, as well. Kovic was one.
After his return, Kovic championed for human rights and fought against the Vietnam war. Eventually, he wrote the book in which this film was based. Every day, especially July 4th, thank a veteran for their service, it wasn't always their choice to go fight. Nor, were all conscientious objectors who got out of going.
Thank you to all veterans!!
Stone gives us a gruesome inside look into the horrors of war, including the return to civilian life after. The return for many was difficult, leading many to commit or attempt suicide. The country they came back to was changed was ungrateful (at the time) of their service, slamming them as "baby killers" and such. They came back to their fellow citizens who were against the war. Some veterans were, as well. Kovic was one.
After his return, Kovic championed for human rights and fought against the Vietnam war. Eventually, he wrote the book in which this film was based. Every day, especially July 4th, thank a veteran for their service, it wasn't always their choice to go fight. Nor, were all conscientious objectors who got out of going.
Thank you to all veterans!!
Haunting and disturbing, but ultimately redemptive
DennisLittrell23 October 2003
I avoided this when it came out in 1989 having seen Coming Home (1978) and not wanting to revisit the theme of paraplegic sexual dysfunction and frustration. I also didn't want to reprise the bloody horror of our involvement in the war in Vietnam that I knew Oliver Stone was going to serve up. And Tom Cruise as Ron Kovic? I just didn't think it would work. Well, my preconceptions were wrong. First of all, for those who think that Tom Cruise is just another pretty boy (which was basically my opinion), this movie sets that mistaken notion to rest. He is nothing short of brilliant in a role that is enormously demanding--physically, mentally, artistically, and emotionally. I don't see how anybody could play that role and still be the same person. Someday in his memoirs, Tom Cruise is going to talk about being Ron Kovic as directed by Oliver Stone. And second, Stone's treatment of the sex life of Viet Vets in wheelchairs is absolutely without sentimentality or silver lining. There are no rose petals and no soft pedaling. There was no Jane Fonda, as in Coming Home, to play an angel of love. Instead the high school girl friend understandably went her own way, and love became something you bought if you could afford it. And third, Stone's depiction of America--and this movie really is about America, from the 1950s to the 1970s--from the pseudo-innocence of childhood war games and 4th of July parades down Main street USA to having your guts spilled in a foreign land and your brothers-in-arms being sent home in body bags--was as indelible as black ink on white parchment. He takes us from proud moms and patriotic homilies to the shameful neglect in our Veteran's hospitals to the bloody clashes between anti-war demonstrators and the police outside convention halls where reveling conventioneers wave flags and mouth phony slogans. I have seen most of Stone's work and as far as fidelity to authentic detail and sustained concentration, this is his best. There are a thousand details that Stone got exactly right, from Dalton Trumbo's paperback novel of a paraplegic from WW I, Johnny Got His Gun, that sat on a tray near Kovic's hospital bed, to the black medic telling him that there was a more important war going on at the same time as the Vietnam war, namely the civil rights movement, to a mother throwing her son out of the house when he no longer fulfilled her trophy case vision of what her son ought to be, to Willem DaFoe's remark about what you have to do sexually when nothing in the middle moves. Also striking were some of the scenes. In particular, the confession scene at the home of the boy Kovic accidentally shot; the Mexican brothel scene of sex/love desperation, the drunken scene at the pool hall bar and the pretty girl's face he touches, and then the drunken, hate-filled rage against his mother, and of course the savage hospital scenes--these and some others were deeply moving and likely to haunt me for many years to come. Of course, as usual, Oliver Stone's political message weighed heavily upon his artistic purpose. Straight-laced conservatives will find his portrait of America one-sided and offensive and something they'd rather forget. But I imagine that the guys who fought in Vietnam and managed to get back somehow and see this movie, will find it redemptive. Certainly to watch Ron Kovic, just an ordinary Joe who believed in his country and the sentiments of John Wayne movies and comic book heroics, go from a depressed, enraged, drug-addled waste of a human being to an enlightened, focused, articulate, and ultimately triumphant spokesman for the anti-war movement, for veterans, and the disabled was wonderful to see. As Stone reminds us, Kovic really did become the hero that his misguided mother dreamed he would be. No other Vietnam war movie haunts me like this one. There is something about coming back less than whole that is worse than not coming back at all that eats away at our consciousness. And yet in the end there is here displayed the triumph of the human will and a story about how a man might find redemption in the most deplorable of circumstances. --Dennis Littrell, author of "Cut to the Chaise Lounge or I Can't Believe I Swallowed the Remote!"
Don't overlook the story
andrew714 February 2002
You've heard the express "can't see the forest for the trees", right? It refers to someone who gets so caught up in details, they miss the big picture. Reading other comments on IMDb regarding "Born on the Fourth of July", I think people have the opposite problem with this film. So many people seem to get caught up in talking about Vietnam, war, Nixon, America, Communism, and hippies, that they totally overlook Ron Kovic.
Ron Kovic is the center of this film. In "Platoon", war was the center, and the central character (Charlie Sheen's Chris Taylor) was merely a POV character through whose eyes we could see war. Not so in "Born on the Fourth of July". Vietnam is the setting, the context, and the backdrop. But Ron Kovic is the story.
Oliver Stone really understands a character arc. Look at Kovic's life, where it starts, where it ends. The film is the journey, how he got from A to B. It is a dramatization of a life, as opposed to an actual life, but it still rings true. It feels true. It reaches an artistic level of truth, even if some literal truths are overlooked, distorted, or rearranged. That's what Stone is trying to do. People who quibble about the facts miss the point. (This is a theme I will take up again when I review some of Stone's other films, as Stone is constantly being bashed for historical inaccuracies.) The connections from one point to the next work admirably, and the progression is completely believable, which is quite a feat for such a dramatic change of attitude (compare to "American History X", where the main character goes through a similar about face with scant motivation).
Anyway, what impresses me about this film is the honesty and respect with which Stone presents the opposing views of the film. Say what you want about Stone's political beliefs, but the argument in this film is presented in a very neutral light. It's a story about Kovic's choices, Kovic's politics, Kovic's judgments. And the anti-Vietnam beliefs he finally supports in the final act are a very natural and believable outcome of the story. This film isn't anywhere near as didactic as some people like to imagine.
The tragedy of Oliver Stone is that, because he has been so edgy, so controversial, so deliberately provocative, no one can really just sit down and, with a neutral eye, watch his films. They have become so burdened by this giant, irrelevant, political squabble. The films have been subsumed by the very issues they sought to raise. And it's a shame, with this film especially, because it is excellent.
Tom Cruise gives possibly the greatest performance of his career (I can't think of anything that tops it, though his performance in "Eyes Wide Shut", for very different reasons, is just as remarkable). The script is fantastic, taking time where it needs to take time, but not overly deliberate in its approach. It's very economical with time. It knows what each scene needs to say, and says it without any excess baggage, wasted space, or dead time. The direction is excellent, as is the editing and cinematography. The supporting cast is excellent.
But this movie would be nothing without the remarkable, heart-rending, true story of Ron Kovic. So, while we admire the technical achievement of the film, while we debate the points raised, while we enshrine or excoriate the director (as the case may be), let's not forget the story. Let's not get so fired up about Vietnam that we forget Ron Kovic. He is the heart and soul of this film.
One final note: I bristle when people call this an anti-war film. That really diminishes it, I think. It's so much more than that. It's not just saying that war is brutal, nasty, and horrific. It's saying something far more specific about a specific war, and about the effect of that war on a specific man.
Ron Kovic is the center of this film. In "Platoon", war was the center, and the central character (Charlie Sheen's Chris Taylor) was merely a POV character through whose eyes we could see war. Not so in "Born on the Fourth of July". Vietnam is the setting, the context, and the backdrop. But Ron Kovic is the story.
Oliver Stone really understands a character arc. Look at Kovic's life, where it starts, where it ends. The film is the journey, how he got from A to B. It is a dramatization of a life, as opposed to an actual life, but it still rings true. It feels true. It reaches an artistic level of truth, even if some literal truths are overlooked, distorted, or rearranged. That's what Stone is trying to do. People who quibble about the facts miss the point. (This is a theme I will take up again when I review some of Stone's other films, as Stone is constantly being bashed for historical inaccuracies.) The connections from one point to the next work admirably, and the progression is completely believable, which is quite a feat for such a dramatic change of attitude (compare to "American History X", where the main character goes through a similar about face with scant motivation).
Anyway, what impresses me about this film is the honesty and respect with which Stone presents the opposing views of the film. Say what you want about Stone's political beliefs, but the argument in this film is presented in a very neutral light. It's a story about Kovic's choices, Kovic's politics, Kovic's judgments. And the anti-Vietnam beliefs he finally supports in the final act are a very natural and believable outcome of the story. This film isn't anywhere near as didactic as some people like to imagine.
The tragedy of Oliver Stone is that, because he has been so edgy, so controversial, so deliberately provocative, no one can really just sit down and, with a neutral eye, watch his films. They have become so burdened by this giant, irrelevant, political squabble. The films have been subsumed by the very issues they sought to raise. And it's a shame, with this film especially, because it is excellent.
Tom Cruise gives possibly the greatest performance of his career (I can't think of anything that tops it, though his performance in "Eyes Wide Shut", for very different reasons, is just as remarkable). The script is fantastic, taking time where it needs to take time, but not overly deliberate in its approach. It's very economical with time. It knows what each scene needs to say, and says it without any excess baggage, wasted space, or dead time. The direction is excellent, as is the editing and cinematography. The supporting cast is excellent.
But this movie would be nothing without the remarkable, heart-rending, true story of Ron Kovic. So, while we admire the technical achievement of the film, while we debate the points raised, while we enshrine or excoriate the director (as the case may be), let's not forget the story. Let's not get so fired up about Vietnam that we forget Ron Kovic. He is the heart and soul of this film.
One final note: I bristle when people call this an anti-war film. That really diminishes it, I think. It's so much more than that. It's not just saying that war is brutal, nasty, and horrific. It's saying something far more specific about a specific war, and about the effect of that war on a specific man.
An underrated film
j_jamison23 November 2005
Someone once posted:
"To view this movie is an exercise of visual torture coupled with the bleed through view points of O. Stone. Some movies shouldn't be made but since this piece of garbage was, then it shouldn't be viewed. Naturally this is just my opinion and generally I am not a flamer but I see no redeemable value in this film whatsoever."
My take on Born on the Fourth of July:
As a moviegoer, I wouldn't criticize this film as simply a "piece of garbage", but yes, what the above poster had mentioned, Born on the Fourth of July is rather an "exercise of visual torture". The movie's slow, there are grotesque scenes, violence, profanities, etc.
This film tells the true story of Ron Kovic, a Vietnam-war veteran's tortuous life after the war, and what we see here is basically the aftermath of how the Vietnam War has transformed him(mentally, physically, emotionally), shaped his attitudes of war, affected his self-esteem, and so on.
However, in my opinion, for the above poster to "see no redeemable value in this film whatsoever", is a pitiful remark of one's unfamiliarity with facts and unawareness about history.
Prior to Platoon, Oliver Stone may not have done a great job directing this movie. But Born on the Fourth of July is THE kind of film that had to be made for the story had to be told - what the Vietnam War did to people, in this case the main protagonist, Ron Kovic, was devastating. The wounded or suffered were innumerable. Thousands and thousands of Vietnam-war veterans were permanently scarred, physically and psychologically, and they found it difficult to return to civilian society, while Ron Kovic was just one of many who were guilt-ridden about their role in the war, paralyzed, and suffered from post traumatic stress disorder.
In all, contrary to what the above "someone" mentioned, this film DOES have a redeemable value, for it tells an American tragedy through the perspective of Ron Kovic.
"To view this movie is an exercise of visual torture coupled with the bleed through view points of O. Stone. Some movies shouldn't be made but since this piece of garbage was, then it shouldn't be viewed. Naturally this is just my opinion and generally I am not a flamer but I see no redeemable value in this film whatsoever."
My take on Born on the Fourth of July:
As a moviegoer, I wouldn't criticize this film as simply a "piece of garbage", but yes, what the above poster had mentioned, Born on the Fourth of July is rather an "exercise of visual torture". The movie's slow, there are grotesque scenes, violence, profanities, etc.
This film tells the true story of Ron Kovic, a Vietnam-war veteran's tortuous life after the war, and what we see here is basically the aftermath of how the Vietnam War has transformed him(mentally, physically, emotionally), shaped his attitudes of war, affected his self-esteem, and so on.
However, in my opinion, for the above poster to "see no redeemable value in this film whatsoever", is a pitiful remark of one's unfamiliarity with facts and unawareness about history.
Prior to Platoon, Oliver Stone may not have done a great job directing this movie. But Born on the Fourth of July is THE kind of film that had to be made for the story had to be told - what the Vietnam War did to people, in this case the main protagonist, Ron Kovic, was devastating. The wounded or suffered were innumerable. Thousands and thousands of Vietnam-war veterans were permanently scarred, physically and psychologically, and they found it difficult to return to civilian society, while Ron Kovic was just one of many who were guilt-ridden about their role in the war, paralyzed, and suffered from post traumatic stress disorder.
In all, contrary to what the above "someone" mentioned, this film DOES have a redeemable value, for it tells an American tragedy through the perspective of Ron Kovic.
Absorbing Piece of Work
ReelCheese13 August 2006
Let's start with the good news. "Born on the Fourth of July" is an absorbing piece of work, based on a true story, about Ron Kovic (Tom Cruise), a gung-ho Marine-turned-war-protester. We first meet Kovic as an all-American boy as strong in his faith as he is in his will to succeed. After high school he proudly joins the Marines, hoping he'll be shipped to Vietnam to stop the spread of communism. But the barbarities of war, including civilian casualties, friendly fire and a paralyzing bullet through the chest, gradually turn him against the conflict. Director Oliver Stone's method of telling Kovic's story over a period of several years is highly effective and convincing. Cruise is at his best as Kovic, portraying a wide range of emotions and developing apathy with the viewer. The audience feels what he feels, from confusion on the battlefield to the terror of being paralyzed from the waist down.
Now for the bad news. The picture is overly political, with Stone once again (and unnecessarily) casting Republicans as the bad guys and Democrats as the good guys (seemingly ignoring that the Dems initially sent the troops to 'Nam). The film also takes a while to build up steam, and the all-American life of the pre-Marine Kovic seems a little too perfect to be believable. Obviously a story such as this requires adequate screen time, but the 145 minutes is slightly drawn out, particularly toward the end. And although one of its central themes is the opposition to the war that greeted returning vets, the genesis and rationale of that opposition are not adequately explored.
As a whole, however, "Born of the Fourth of July" is recommended. Kovic's biography and Stone's masterful storytelling are a perfect match. It's not your typical war movie. In fact, it's not your typical movie, period.
Now for the bad news. The picture is overly political, with Stone once again (and unnecessarily) casting Republicans as the bad guys and Democrats as the good guys (seemingly ignoring that the Dems initially sent the troops to 'Nam). The film also takes a while to build up steam, and the all-American life of the pre-Marine Kovic seems a little too perfect to be believable. Obviously a story such as this requires adequate screen time, but the 145 minutes is slightly drawn out, particularly toward the end. And although one of its central themes is the opposition to the war that greeted returning vets, the genesis and rationale of that opposition are not adequately explored.
As a whole, however, "Born of the Fourth of July" is recommended. Kovic's biography and Stone's masterful storytelling are a perfect match. It's not your typical war movie. In fact, it's not your typical movie, period.
Strange Watching This In The Summer Of 2004
Theo Robertson8 August 2004
On the first of August 2004 BBC 2 showed two movies featuring characters from the US Marine Corp , the first one being THE SANDS OF IWO JIMA and the second being BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY - Talk about contrasts ! Unlike the John Wayne flag waver BORN ON THE FORTH OF JULY is an entirely different type of movie , it's pro soldier but very anti-war , it's graphic , disturbing , foul mouthed , unsubtle but ever so slightly uplifting at the end
Despite being made in 1989 and despite first seeing it in 1993 I can't help notice that this movie is more relevant today than it was in the 1990s . Whatever the rights and wrongs of the American led invasion of Iraq it saddens me to see coalition troops coming home in body bags , worse it saddens me more to see young servicemen return from the Middle East missing limbs , maimed for life with psychological and physical wounds that will never heal . Better to fall quickly in battle than suffer a handicap that will last 40 or 50 years is my meaningless abstract opinion on the matter , and Ron Kovic's and thousands like him injuries will never heal , a point made very well .
I also couldn't help noticing there's an election going on for US president with the democrat candidate making a big song and dance number about his service in Vietnam . Is it just me or does anyone else think the democrats should have gone for Ron Kovic ? No one can question Kovic's patriotism unlike Kerry , no one can question Kovic's courage unlike Kerry's and no one can question Kovic's supposed injuries unlike Kerry's . Okay Kerry has three purple hearts against Kovic's one but Kerry can still run for the White House while Kovic will never be able to walk which shows that the purple heart is the most unfair military decoration ever invented and should be scrapped
As for the rest of the movie Tom Cruise is an absolute revelation as Kovic , I've criticised him before notably in VANILLA SKY as an actor unable to put enough anger in to a performance but as a sometimes bitter man Cruise is superb here . Stone's direction is also good though it's by no means his best work ( That would be PLATOON ) and the story isn't always as focused as it should be but with the exception of JFK it's better than any of the over directed nonsense he's made since
Seven out of ten
Despite being made in 1989 and despite first seeing it in 1993 I can't help notice that this movie is more relevant today than it was in the 1990s . Whatever the rights and wrongs of the American led invasion of Iraq it saddens me to see coalition troops coming home in body bags , worse it saddens me more to see young servicemen return from the Middle East missing limbs , maimed for life with psychological and physical wounds that will never heal . Better to fall quickly in battle than suffer a handicap that will last 40 or 50 years is my meaningless abstract opinion on the matter , and Ron Kovic's and thousands like him injuries will never heal , a point made very well .
I also couldn't help noticing there's an election going on for US president with the democrat candidate making a big song and dance number about his service in Vietnam . Is it just me or does anyone else think the democrats should have gone for Ron Kovic ? No one can question Kovic's patriotism unlike Kerry , no one can question Kovic's courage unlike Kerry's and no one can question Kovic's supposed injuries unlike Kerry's . Okay Kerry has three purple hearts against Kovic's one but Kerry can still run for the White House while Kovic will never be able to walk which shows that the purple heart is the most unfair military decoration ever invented and should be scrapped
As for the rest of the movie Tom Cruise is an absolute revelation as Kovic , I've criticised him before notably in VANILLA SKY as an actor unable to put enough anger in to a performance but as a sometimes bitter man Cruise is superb here . Stone's direction is also good though it's by no means his best work ( That would be PLATOON ) and the story isn't always as focused as it should be but with the exception of JFK it's better than any of the over directed nonsense he's made since
Seven out of ten
The Oliver Stone and Tom Cruise Show
tfrizzell26 July 2000
"Born on the Fourth of July" is a film based on the real-life experiences of Vietnam veteran Ron Kovic (Tom Cruise in an Oscar-nominated role). As a young man he feels that Vietnam is just another battleground for the United States. Even after he returns home paralyzed from the waist down, he still feels that Vietnam is important and that if you do not support the fighting then you should leave America. However, he has a change of heart and becomes an anti-war activist who realizes that one gets nothing out of combat but heartache and sorrow. Oliver Stone's screenplay is pretty strong, but it is his unrelenting direction that makes the material work throughout. Tom Cruise established himself as a high-class actor and the film stays above water because of that fact. The lack of character support does impede the progress of the film though. Willem Dafoe, Tom Berenger, and Kyra Sedgwick make somewhat token appearances and the impact of their screen-time is all minimal. Cruise's character dominates the film. This is both the film's strong point and weak point. All in all a strong film, but could have been so much more. 4 out of 5 stars.
"You can take your Vietnam and shove it up your ass" Stone's 2nd best film to date
Quinoa198420 November 2001
Oliver Stone's Born on the Fourth of July to me is better than Platoon, or at least more psychologically moving and cinematically compelling. While Platoon, Stone's totally personal account of the Vietnam war is quite accurate and superb in many ways, this film is better if only because it's not Stone's story. He takes the tale of Ron Kovic (who wrote the book with the same name as the film and scripted by him and Stone) and turns it into a blisteringly awesome and ultimately harrowing picture that has performances, scenes and direction that top Platoon (maybe it's a sign that practice makes perfect)
Anyway, the tale centers on Ron Kovic (played to a utter T by Tom Cruise) good old-boy-type of American kid who decides he wants to fight for his country in the Vietnam war even if he has to die for his country. He fights, witnesses horror and makes a tragic mistake and comes back home a crippled from the waist down veteran, who has to endure the emotional and physical pain of just being a veteran of Vietnam in a country where they are put down more than revered. All this, and more (including one of the most volcanic scenes I have ever seen between Cruise and Dafoe on a Mexico road) lead him to become a anti-war activist.
In making the big theme of the picture Kovic and his feeling on the war, Stone depicts his journey excellently by showing his desire to be in it, his confusion afterwards, his eventual hatred and then placement in being against the war all the while still being a patriot. Not only does it work as a saga/war movie, but also as a 180 degree change tale. Must, must see for all Stone fans and for anybody who wants to see what Cruise can actually do with proper direction and script.
Anyway, the tale centers on Ron Kovic (played to a utter T by Tom Cruise) good old-boy-type of American kid who decides he wants to fight for his country in the Vietnam war even if he has to die for his country. He fights, witnesses horror and makes a tragic mistake and comes back home a crippled from the waist down veteran, who has to endure the emotional and physical pain of just being a veteran of Vietnam in a country where they are put down more than revered. All this, and more (including one of the most volcanic scenes I have ever seen between Cruise and Dafoe on a Mexico road) lead him to become a anti-war activist.
In making the big theme of the picture Kovic and his feeling on the war, Stone depicts his journey excellently by showing his desire to be in it, his confusion afterwards, his eventual hatred and then placement in being against the war all the while still being a patriot. Not only does it work as a saga/war movie, but also as a 180 degree change tale. Must, must see for all Stone fans and for anybody who wants to see what Cruise can actually do with proper direction and script.
A Patriot's Fall From Grace
comix-man23 June 2002
What defines a great film? I believe that for a movie to be great, it should move you. It should make you think. It should make you reconsider your views and outlooks. It should make you take a closer look at its subject matter. It should draw attention to itself. Above all, you should gain some amount of enjoyment from a great film. I believe that BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY was a great film. I say this because, whether or not you agree with Ron Kovic's message, and although Oliver Stone almost ruined it with his attempts to personalize reality, the movie still made people stop and look. It literally defined the Vietnam War for a generation of Tom Cruise fans, and made many more aware of what the vets went through. The cinematography, score and fabulous acting made it a pleasure for many people to watch, if only to see how Cruise would deliver his next line.
The film grossed $70,001,698 nationwide. In 1989, when BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY was released, movie tickets cost five dollars. Therefore, over fourteen million American people went to the theater to see this movie. The number of viewers increases when you take into consideration the people who rented it on video or watched a television broadcast. It had that special something that made people think about issues that they might not have thought about before. It is lamentable that by 1989, many of the members of Generation X had paid little or no attention to the Vietnam War, even though only sixteen years had passed since the war's end. The younger generation was reminded that the war did, indeed, happen, and that the country was still being lambasted with the side effects.
The camera work was extremely effective in relaying the messages in the film. Different moods within the film were indicated by different tints in the color. Combats were filmed in red, while blue indicated sadness, and white tints where used in the dream sequences. Whether intended or not, the colors of choice also coincide with that of the American flag, which is very appropriate for the film. The film also employed a wide variety of interesting angles without becoming confusing to the viewer.
The musical score is one of the best of all time. John Williams is a genius in the music industry. His fabulous music can make a film feel the way it was intended to. He seems to simply know what sequence of notes will produce what emotions. Along with Williams' music, the score also includes some of the popular music from the time of the film's setting. For instance, AMERICAN PIE by Don McLean, MY GIRL by the Temptations, and MOONRIVER by Henry Mancini, all give the viewer who remembers the music a sense of nostalgia, taking them back to those years.
Two words sum up why the movie got the attention it did: Tom Cruise. Many critics were skeptical whether or not the pretty boy of RISKY BUSINESS and TOP GUN fame had what it took to portray a real life Vietnam veteran and make the audience believe he was that person. Fans crowded into the theaters to watch Cruise's handsome face (which was not so attractive through most of the film). Critics went to watch him blow the role. But he proved himself and went above and beyond what was expected of him in one of the most moving performances I have ever seen. He literally became Ron Kovic.
Many people were affected by BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY. It had great cinematography. Its soundtrack was inspiring and beautiful, pulling out of the viewer all possible emotions. Tom Cruise's performance as Ron Kovic blew almost everyone away. In short, BORN ON THE FORTH OF JULY has what it takes to be a great film. It overcomes Stone's blatant manipulation of facts, such as the violent conflict that in the movie occurs during a republican convention, but in reality occurred during a democratic convention. Powerful and touching, it drives its point home and back again, never missing a beat.
8 out of 10 stars
The film grossed $70,001,698 nationwide. In 1989, when BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY was released, movie tickets cost five dollars. Therefore, over fourteen million American people went to the theater to see this movie. The number of viewers increases when you take into consideration the people who rented it on video or watched a television broadcast. It had that special something that made people think about issues that they might not have thought about before. It is lamentable that by 1989, many of the members of Generation X had paid little or no attention to the Vietnam War, even though only sixteen years had passed since the war's end. The younger generation was reminded that the war did, indeed, happen, and that the country was still being lambasted with the side effects.
The camera work was extremely effective in relaying the messages in the film. Different moods within the film were indicated by different tints in the color. Combats were filmed in red, while blue indicated sadness, and white tints where used in the dream sequences. Whether intended or not, the colors of choice also coincide with that of the American flag, which is very appropriate for the film. The film also employed a wide variety of interesting angles without becoming confusing to the viewer.
The musical score is one of the best of all time. John Williams is a genius in the music industry. His fabulous music can make a film feel the way it was intended to. He seems to simply know what sequence of notes will produce what emotions. Along with Williams' music, the score also includes some of the popular music from the time of the film's setting. For instance, AMERICAN PIE by Don McLean, MY GIRL by the Temptations, and MOONRIVER by Henry Mancini, all give the viewer who remembers the music a sense of nostalgia, taking them back to those years.
Two words sum up why the movie got the attention it did: Tom Cruise. Many critics were skeptical whether or not the pretty boy of RISKY BUSINESS and TOP GUN fame had what it took to portray a real life Vietnam veteran and make the audience believe he was that person. Fans crowded into the theaters to watch Cruise's handsome face (which was not so attractive through most of the film). Critics went to watch him blow the role. But he proved himself and went above and beyond what was expected of him in one of the most moving performances I have ever seen. He literally became Ron Kovic.
Many people were affected by BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY. It had great cinematography. Its soundtrack was inspiring and beautiful, pulling out of the viewer all possible emotions. Tom Cruise's performance as Ron Kovic blew almost everyone away. In short, BORN ON THE FORTH OF JULY has what it takes to be a great film. It overcomes Stone's blatant manipulation of facts, such as the violent conflict that in the movie occurs during a republican convention, but in reality occurred during a democratic convention. Powerful and touching, it drives its point home and back again, never missing a beat.
8 out of 10 stars
Insightful, but could've been better
~AleXa~12 June 2005
Born On The Fourth Of July (1989) is more or less the biography of Ron Kovic, a Vietnam vet who eventually becomes anti-war after feeling abandoned and forgotten by the country he fought for.
The film moves along well enough, and despite the wonderful portrayal of Kovic by Tom Cruise, I did not find myself entirely drawn into the story. I understood and sympathized what he was going through, but did not feel it, and I can't help but think it's simply the result of an inadequate screenplay. Oliver Stone certainly knows how to direct the material, but I found nothing particularly spectacular. The scene with Ron and Charlie (Willem Dafoe) on the highway was pleasantly amusing. I was however moved by Ron's speech to his mother and later outraged by the abuse he took at the rally, but these moments did not arrive till near the end of the film.
VERDICT: Certainly a moving story worth seeing, but I can't help but feel it could've been better. Recommended to all, 17 and up of course.
7.0 out of 10.0
The film moves along well enough, and despite the wonderful portrayal of Kovic by Tom Cruise, I did not find myself entirely drawn into the story. I understood and sympathized what he was going through, but did not feel it, and I can't help but think it's simply the result of an inadequate screenplay. Oliver Stone certainly knows how to direct the material, but I found nothing particularly spectacular. The scene with Ron and Charlie (Willem Dafoe) on the highway was pleasantly amusing. I was however moved by Ron's speech to his mother and later outraged by the abuse he took at the rally, but these moments did not arrive till near the end of the film.
VERDICT: Certainly a moving story worth seeing, but I can't help but feel it could've been better. Recommended to all, 17 and up of course.
7.0 out of 10.0
Not your average Vietnam film
singles0029 December 2005
"Born on the Fourth of July" had a certain impact of me. I first watched it at the cinema when I was 13. I didn't understand much about politics or war at the time. But it certainly struck some chord within myself. And then I watched that film a couple of times more in my "adult" life and, to me, it's one of Oliver Stone's very best. As well as Tom Cruise's induction into serious Hollywood stardom, forget "Cocktail" and "Top Gun". The way patriotism is depicted, it's veil of ignorance, god-family-and-the-flag...the way Vietnam 'vets' were betrayed, used...cannon-fodder for US politicians is fantastic. The beauty is that "Born on the Fourth of July" is not agonisingly political or in any way patronising.
Who ended the war?
flyinghorseart-0158714 April 2023
Nixon ended the war. Kennedy started it, LBJ escalated it and Nixon took too long to end it. They skipped over that but it was still a stunning movie and Tom Cruise deserves all the praise. Oliver Stone's maudlin soundtrack was heavy-handed but the moviemaking nearly flawless. Not surprised by Stone's omissions. They left out one of the most memorable chants of the 60s peaceniks: "Hey, hey, LBJ! How many boys did you kill today?" That would be 16,899 casualties by 1968.
The vets' experience at the VA hospital was nightmarish, the confusion of war hellish and the contradiction of a "peace movement" illuminating.
The vets' experience at the VA hospital was nightmarish, the confusion of war hellish and the contradiction of a "peace movement" illuminating.
Masterpiece-Stone, Cruise and Cast Deliver
elect_michael1 September 2021
8.5 of 10 stars. Oliver Stone delivers a Masterpiece. Stone has Directed several Masterpieces thus far during his career, and this film is on that list, a truly great piece of film cinema.
Tom Cruise stars alongside Willem Defoe and Kyra Sedgwick. Tom Cruise puts on an amazing performance that delves multiple layers into the craft that not many Actors are capable of delivering. The 'coming home drunk after the bar' scene is incredible, a truly amazing performance by Cruise that College Drama teachers have shown students on how to act with subtleties and dynamics at the same time; a scene that is a centerpiece, if I had to pick of the many great scenes in this film; and incredibly performed scene, and Stone captures it brilliantly.
Willem Defoe is a truly great Actor and he simply performs great in this film with Cruise; I'm simply seeing 2 great performers together in scenes that allow them to get wings and take off.
Kyra Sedgwick does an extremely good job and puts on a performance that simply works and is unquestionably believable, as she so often does.
The supporting cast is good throughout the film, and in a smaller but important part, Frank Whaley knocks it out of the park with an 'A+' performance.
Tom Cruise stars alongside Willem Defoe and Kyra Sedgwick. Tom Cruise puts on an amazing performance that delves multiple layers into the craft that not many Actors are capable of delivering. The 'coming home drunk after the bar' scene is incredible, a truly amazing performance by Cruise that College Drama teachers have shown students on how to act with subtleties and dynamics at the same time; a scene that is a centerpiece, if I had to pick of the many great scenes in this film; and incredibly performed scene, and Stone captures it brilliantly.
Willem Defoe is a truly great Actor and he simply performs great in this film with Cruise; I'm simply seeing 2 great performers together in scenes that allow them to get wings and take off.
Kyra Sedgwick does an extremely good job and puts on a performance that simply works and is unquestionably believable, as she so often does.
The supporting cast is good throughout the film, and in a smaller but important part, Frank Whaley knocks it out of the park with an 'A+' performance.
Aftermath of war :(
adam_traynor10 April 2021
a moving true story, put through the Oliver Stone wringer
mjneu598 November 2010
Just because Oliver Stone's heart is in the right place doesn't make this unofficial sequel to his Oscar winning 'Platoon' a good film, and in typical sledgehammer fashion he turns the moving true story of disabled, disillusioned Vietnam War veteran Ron Kovic into little more than a bad soap opera. Stone co-wrote the screenplay with Kovic himself, but judging from the presentation it's clearly an Oliver Stone project: the film is visually and verbally bombastic, overwrought with clichés, dripping with sentiment, and weighed down by the director's usual battery of cosmetic effects. The combat sequences and VA hospital scenes carry moments of genuine impact, but elsewhere the film is saturated with artificial music cues, fancy camera angles, portentous slow motion effects, and more tight close-ups than the average made-for-TV movie. A measure of redemption is supplied by the high caliber acting of (surprise) Tom Cruise, but there's a limit to what even he can do: when the life of an actual person is reduced to stereotype it's difficult to stretch him back to three credible dimensions again.
An ambitious film but it doesn't pull it off despite being worth a look for Cruise alone
bob the moo23 August 2004
Having had an all-American upbringing in Long Island, Ron Kovic leaves school and decides to sign up for the marines to represent his country in Vietnam and make a difference. Having seen all manner of horrors, Ron is shot and wounded in the field and finds himself in a veterans hospital where he hopes to regain the use of his legs despite the advice of doctors. When he realises he will never walk again, it starts his mental collapse and he becomes increasing disillusioned with the country and he lost his legs for.
There is nothing I dislike more than hearing uninformed people from other countries spouting about Northern Ireland so I'll be very careful about launching into any sort of preaching I'll leave that to Stone himself. It isn't that I don't want to know more it's just that I have so much to learn about my own culture and history that who has the time for wandering off to learn about America's! Anyway, there is no need for me to get on a soapbox because this film has a darn good go at doing it by itself. The basic plot is fine and very involving, mostly because it is a real person, not just a character but it weakens its impact by playing to the simplistic side of things. For example there is no question about Ron being a clean cut, shy boy, nor is there any complexity about how badly he is treated afterwards. In some regards this is fair enough but at times I wished that Stone had not been so strong in his sense of moral outrage because it doesn't give the subject the balance and subjectivity that it deserves to be presented with.
This alone does not make it a bad film however, and it isn't ever bad just a touch heavy handed at points but it is very difficult to watch impassively and uninvolved. The film shows Kovic's collapse and gradual disillusionment really well in a way that stands for the mental and/or physical suffering of many vets who must have come back to find that the sacrifice they had made was not even supported by the vocal section of the populace. In a way, focusing on this one man makes for a story that is intimate but also has wider significance but in another way it means the film has to go into very specific areas that don't work so well. In particular I didn't think that Ron's Mexican trip worked that well and some aspects of his life were simply forgotten about (Donna?) and I wondered why they had even bothered to include them at all. Anyway, despite these comments the film still worked for me and it is an impacting story even if Oliver Stone is not the person I would have chosen to tell the story a very good director but 'non-partisan' is not a term that could ever be laid at his feet and at points this film gets a little sermonising as a result.
A big factor in this film working is a superb performance by Cruise who was still, at this point, a clean cut poster boy and not the one I would have imagined taking this role! In the first of two performances that I believe he should have won an Oscar for (the other being SA for Magnolia), Cruise is very brave and very strong in the lead, convincingly taking us from a patriotic young boy to a injured soldier to a broken man to a man trying to put all the pieces together. Credit to both Cruise and the editor that this is done convincingly and without too many big jumps in character. Outside of Cruise though, nobody is really given a great deal of material to work with and all their characters are pretty two-dimensional and fleeting. If anything the support cast's main impact is to keep bringing well known faces to the screen; these include Barry, Sedgwick, Whaley, Baldwin (times two!), Dale Dye, Berenger, LeGros, Bob Gunton, Vivica Fox, Mike Starr (and brother), Dafoe, Sizemore, Eagle Eye Cherry, Wayne Knight and John C McGinley. Few of these have much to do but it is impressive how many faces there are that have since gone on to become well-known actors in their own right (I personally was surprised to see McGinley's only contribution being pushing a wheelchair or Fox being on screen (topless) for about 3 seconds with only one line) but this actually takes away from the film more than it gives now.
Overall this is an impacting film but not a great one. The story has a few bits that don't really work and aren't delivered very well, while Stone's direction occasionally gets all preachy on us but, although the now all-star cast are not great, Cruise is superb and deals with the difficult role well.
A very ambitious film and not one that manages to get it all right but still a film that is hard to ignore even if the same subject has been done better in other films.
There is nothing I dislike more than hearing uninformed people from other countries spouting about Northern Ireland so I'll be very careful about launching into any sort of preaching I'll leave that to Stone himself. It isn't that I don't want to know more it's just that I have so much to learn about my own culture and history that who has the time for wandering off to learn about America's! Anyway, there is no need for me to get on a soapbox because this film has a darn good go at doing it by itself. The basic plot is fine and very involving, mostly because it is a real person, not just a character but it weakens its impact by playing to the simplistic side of things. For example there is no question about Ron being a clean cut, shy boy, nor is there any complexity about how badly he is treated afterwards. In some regards this is fair enough but at times I wished that Stone had not been so strong in his sense of moral outrage because it doesn't give the subject the balance and subjectivity that it deserves to be presented with.
This alone does not make it a bad film however, and it isn't ever bad just a touch heavy handed at points but it is very difficult to watch impassively and uninvolved. The film shows Kovic's collapse and gradual disillusionment really well in a way that stands for the mental and/or physical suffering of many vets who must have come back to find that the sacrifice they had made was not even supported by the vocal section of the populace. In a way, focusing on this one man makes for a story that is intimate but also has wider significance but in another way it means the film has to go into very specific areas that don't work so well. In particular I didn't think that Ron's Mexican trip worked that well and some aspects of his life were simply forgotten about (Donna?) and I wondered why they had even bothered to include them at all. Anyway, despite these comments the film still worked for me and it is an impacting story even if Oliver Stone is not the person I would have chosen to tell the story a very good director but 'non-partisan' is not a term that could ever be laid at his feet and at points this film gets a little sermonising as a result.
A big factor in this film working is a superb performance by Cruise who was still, at this point, a clean cut poster boy and not the one I would have imagined taking this role! In the first of two performances that I believe he should have won an Oscar for (the other being SA for Magnolia), Cruise is very brave and very strong in the lead, convincingly taking us from a patriotic young boy to a injured soldier to a broken man to a man trying to put all the pieces together. Credit to both Cruise and the editor that this is done convincingly and without too many big jumps in character. Outside of Cruise though, nobody is really given a great deal of material to work with and all their characters are pretty two-dimensional and fleeting. If anything the support cast's main impact is to keep bringing well known faces to the screen; these include Barry, Sedgwick, Whaley, Baldwin (times two!), Dale Dye, Berenger, LeGros, Bob Gunton, Vivica Fox, Mike Starr (and brother), Dafoe, Sizemore, Eagle Eye Cherry, Wayne Knight and John C McGinley. Few of these have much to do but it is impressive how many faces there are that have since gone on to become well-known actors in their own right (I personally was surprised to see McGinley's only contribution being pushing a wheelchair or Fox being on screen (topless) for about 3 seconds with only one line) but this actually takes away from the film more than it gives now.
Overall this is an impacting film but not a great one. The story has a few bits that don't really work and aren't delivered very well, while Stone's direction occasionally gets all preachy on us but, although the now all-star cast are not great, Cruise is superb and deals with the difficult role well.
A very ambitious film and not one that manages to get it all right but still a film that is hard to ignore even if the same subject has been done better in other films.
It's only Cruise that is good.
Chuck-14917 September 1999
I understand that Oliver Stnoe participated in the Vietnam war and hated the horrors he had to live and he demonstrated very well in "Platoon" but he didn't a very good job with "Born on the 4th of July". I think what Stone tried to do with this movie was take a few of the same general ideas he used in "Platoon" and put them in some different circumstances. Only he missed with this one. There are some scenes that could have been cut out and it wouldn't have made any difference.
Ron Kovic (Tom Cruise) is determined to become a marine and go to Vietnam. He even says that if he has to die there, well then so be it. But then, we see what he has to live and see in Vietnam. One afternoon, as the sun goes down, his platoon is attacked by the Vietnamese. Kovic takes cover behind a sand dune when all of a sudden, somebody pops up on the dune. Not hesitating for a second, Kovic fires his riffle. However, after the gunfight ceases a few minutes later, Kovic realizes that the man he has killed was one of the men in his platoon.
Kovic can't get over this and the next day, he is shot. When he wakes up, he finds himself in the hospital and later learns that he will never be able to walk again and that his hopes of being able to have children are nill. But Ron is determined to walk again. And so he tries and he tries until he falls down the bone of his leg pops out. All his hopes suddenly just go to pieces.
So Ron returns to his hometown and after having had a fit with his younger brother who claims the stupidity of the war, Ron starts to realize that his brother is probably right and that the war was useless and stupid and so he takes part in all the anti-war movements. But Ron changes a lot and finally he goes to Mexico where he finds ex-soldiers and prostitutes. The rest that follows his trip to Mexico is the reconstitution of the life he lost at war.
The movie drags a lot at many times and there a few scenes that I would even consider boring and pointless. Tom Cruise's performance is the best part of this movie and probably should have won an Oscar for it (although I haven't seen "My left foot" yet). Stone tries to show once again the image of young men losing their innocence at war but did a much better job at it in "Platoon". So as you might have guessed, I didn't like the movie that much. If you've got "Platoon" and "Born on the 4th of July" and you don't know which one to watch, you should definitely watch "Platoon".
Ron Kovic (Tom Cruise) is determined to become a marine and go to Vietnam. He even says that if he has to die there, well then so be it. But then, we see what he has to live and see in Vietnam. One afternoon, as the sun goes down, his platoon is attacked by the Vietnamese. Kovic takes cover behind a sand dune when all of a sudden, somebody pops up on the dune. Not hesitating for a second, Kovic fires his riffle. However, after the gunfight ceases a few minutes later, Kovic realizes that the man he has killed was one of the men in his platoon.
Kovic can't get over this and the next day, he is shot. When he wakes up, he finds himself in the hospital and later learns that he will never be able to walk again and that his hopes of being able to have children are nill. But Ron is determined to walk again. And so he tries and he tries until he falls down the bone of his leg pops out. All his hopes suddenly just go to pieces.
So Ron returns to his hometown and after having had a fit with his younger brother who claims the stupidity of the war, Ron starts to realize that his brother is probably right and that the war was useless and stupid and so he takes part in all the anti-war movements. But Ron changes a lot and finally he goes to Mexico where he finds ex-soldiers and prostitutes. The rest that follows his trip to Mexico is the reconstitution of the life he lost at war.
The movie drags a lot at many times and there a few scenes that I would even consider boring and pointless. Tom Cruise's performance is the best part of this movie and probably should have won an Oscar for it (although I haven't seen "My left foot" yet). Stone tries to show once again the image of young men losing their innocence at war but did a much better job at it in "Platoon". So as you might have guessed, I didn't like the movie that much. If you've got "Platoon" and "Born on the 4th of July" and you don't know which one to watch, you should definitely watch "Platoon".
There shouldn't be wars.
kelvinselimor17 July 2022
Debunking a lot of dangerous myths
virek21331 July 2001
In PLATOON, director Oliver Stone gave us a look at the Vietnam war from ground zero. And in BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, he gives us another man's view of the war, like Stone a soldier who had become disenfranchised by the war.
The man at the center of this true-life story is Ron Kovic, a Marine who believed in the myths of American might, the honor of serving one's country, John Wayne, and the threat that communism posed. But in a firefight on a Vietnamese beach during Tet, Kovic was shot by a VC bullet and paralysed from the waist down. As a result, he would never be able to walk again and would be confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life. Even worse, when he returned from Vietnam, his rehabilitation was painful, and so was his coming to terms with the fact that many of his friends in his hometown of Massapequa, New York had grown either indifferent or hostile to him. Once a love-it-or-leave-it patriot, Kovic came to realize he could be a force for Good by protesting what the Vietnam war had done, not only to his fellow servicemen but to America.
This is what is at the heart of BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, and Stone (with help from Kovic, who collaborated with the director on the screenplay, which was based on his 1976 memoir) brings all the memories back of those traumatic years in American history. Tom Cruise gives a fine performance as Kovic.
Even more so, Stone does the right thing by debunking a lot of dangerous myths about America's anti-communist paranoia and our worshipping of John Wayne. Unlike a previous reviewer of this film, I am of the belief that America never fully understood communism as anything more than a threat to itself, and our inability to see beyond that surface to its inherent weaknesses is what led us to the utter tragedy of Vietnam. Furthermore, basing our patriotism on an actor like John Wayne, who NEVER served his country in reality, also turned out to be part of the recipe for disaster.
BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, in my opinion, is NOT an Anti-American film but a film fundamentally about the loss of human innocence. It does not make service to one's country dishonorable. But it does rightly destroy those myths that destroyed our innocence as a nation in the 1960s and 1970s. And on those counts alone, it is an American masterpiece.
The man at the center of this true-life story is Ron Kovic, a Marine who believed in the myths of American might, the honor of serving one's country, John Wayne, and the threat that communism posed. But in a firefight on a Vietnamese beach during Tet, Kovic was shot by a VC bullet and paralysed from the waist down. As a result, he would never be able to walk again and would be confined to a wheelchair for the rest of his life. Even worse, when he returned from Vietnam, his rehabilitation was painful, and so was his coming to terms with the fact that many of his friends in his hometown of Massapequa, New York had grown either indifferent or hostile to him. Once a love-it-or-leave-it patriot, Kovic came to realize he could be a force for Good by protesting what the Vietnam war had done, not only to his fellow servicemen but to America.
This is what is at the heart of BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, and Stone (with help from Kovic, who collaborated with the director on the screenplay, which was based on his 1976 memoir) brings all the memories back of those traumatic years in American history. Tom Cruise gives a fine performance as Kovic.
Even more so, Stone does the right thing by debunking a lot of dangerous myths about America's anti-communist paranoia and our worshipping of John Wayne. Unlike a previous reviewer of this film, I am of the belief that America never fully understood communism as anything more than a threat to itself, and our inability to see beyond that surface to its inherent weaknesses is what led us to the utter tragedy of Vietnam. Furthermore, basing our patriotism on an actor like John Wayne, who NEVER served his country in reality, also turned out to be part of the recipe for disaster.
BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY, in my opinion, is NOT an Anti-American film but a film fundamentally about the loss of human innocence. It does not make service to one's country dishonorable. But it does rightly destroy those myths that destroyed our innocence as a nation in the 1960s and 1970s. And on those counts alone, it is an American masterpiece.
Well structured but rather cheesy anti-war movie
JaydoDre17 July 2015
Born on the Fourth of July is one of the more cheesier movies out there. In the beginning there is a line a mother says to her boy with a crazy smile as they are watching TV: "I had a dream, Ronnie, the other night, that you were speaking to a large crowd just like him
just like him, and you were saying great things"! And in the background a wondrous orchestral theme is playing. Now that particular line does pay off eventually, but large parts of the movie are like that: artificial and full of pomp and cheese, all for the sake of the message.
That music keeps on coming back and it is always either the adventurous tune from every children's adventure movie ever or else the saddest tragedy tune. It really affects the mood of the movie and is one of the few movie scores that is persistently noticeable. This music on its own is good but in the film it is a major contributor to that cheesy feeling as it helps push the anti-war meaning.
It is as if a hippie tried to do an anti-war movie and tried to stay respectful and tasteful. He thinks he is but he still can't help but push his point through in every scene.
This brings me to another issue related to its pushy point: the issue with content variety. Of course a movie should have a point, but everything in this movie is about "war is bad". We see the young hero of the film being a promising young man and the rest of the film we spend watching the negative effects of war on him. Almost everything is related to that. Just pick a scene. Is war still bad? Yup, it is still bad. And how about this scene, what is the mood of this scene? War is bad. Even in the beginning, before the main character experiences war, the obvious music and themes remind you that war will be bad. It is only towards the end of the movie that something more positive and meaningful starts coming through but this is a long movie and you have to wait a while for that pay-off.
This movie makes me appreciate The Thin Red Line more. That is another movie with an anti-war message but it is much more subtle. Born on the Fourth of July, just like its title, is not.
Having said that, there is a point and a good structure to support it. Things seeded earlier in the story grow fruits later on. The progression in the main character and the change in his beliefs feels realistic and well-spread over the course of the film. There is also a good side to the movie being obvious, namely that it is clear and easy to grasp. Raw and dirty scenes may be forced in the viewer's face, but on the other hand the movie has interesting raw and dirty scenes that give the film texture.
On top of that, the movie has a good cast of many familiar faces appearing in different parts of the film. Tom Cruise in the main role gives it his best as he usually does. It would have been cooler if Willem Dafoe stayed for longer in the movie than he did but maybe then he would have chewed the scenery too much and outweigh the film.
Generally, the movie seems to get better as it progresses because the good structure starts becoming more and more apparent and the ideas start paying off, but I wish it was not so pushy.
That music keeps on coming back and it is always either the adventurous tune from every children's adventure movie ever or else the saddest tragedy tune. It really affects the mood of the movie and is one of the few movie scores that is persistently noticeable. This music on its own is good but in the film it is a major contributor to that cheesy feeling as it helps push the anti-war meaning.
It is as if a hippie tried to do an anti-war movie and tried to stay respectful and tasteful. He thinks he is but he still can't help but push his point through in every scene.
This brings me to another issue related to its pushy point: the issue with content variety. Of course a movie should have a point, but everything in this movie is about "war is bad". We see the young hero of the film being a promising young man and the rest of the film we spend watching the negative effects of war on him. Almost everything is related to that. Just pick a scene. Is war still bad? Yup, it is still bad. And how about this scene, what is the mood of this scene? War is bad. Even in the beginning, before the main character experiences war, the obvious music and themes remind you that war will be bad. It is only towards the end of the movie that something more positive and meaningful starts coming through but this is a long movie and you have to wait a while for that pay-off.
This movie makes me appreciate The Thin Red Line more. That is another movie with an anti-war message but it is much more subtle. Born on the Fourth of July, just like its title, is not.
Having said that, there is a point and a good structure to support it. Things seeded earlier in the story grow fruits later on. The progression in the main character and the change in his beliefs feels realistic and well-spread over the course of the film. There is also a good side to the movie being obvious, namely that it is clear and easy to grasp. Raw and dirty scenes may be forced in the viewer's face, but on the other hand the movie has interesting raw and dirty scenes that give the film texture.
On top of that, the movie has a good cast of many familiar faces appearing in different parts of the film. Tom Cruise in the main role gives it his best as he usually does. It would have been cooler if Willem Dafoe stayed for longer in the movie than he did but maybe then he would have chewed the scenery too much and outweigh the film.
Generally, the movie seems to get better as it progresses because the good structure starts becoming more and more apparent and the ideas start paying off, but I wish it was not so pushy.
Fantastic
Dragonborn649 August 2020
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
