So far, this movie is really one of my favorites. I really loved how the director, Stanley Kubrick, used nightmare comedy and the ideology of the liberal consensus to present in a satirized format: the the atomic bomb scare, the paranoia, and anti-communist feelings (which were present in the 1960's).
Before I read the article, I couldn't understand why Kubrick made the President sound like such a little girl yet the most sensible out of all the other characters. As the article states, Kubrick was "suggesting that man's warlike tendencies and his sexual urges stem from similar aggressive instincts." I could see where his was getting at with the characters names being sexual, the penis-like refueling plane (which made me feel like a pervert), and the low camera angle shots rooting from Rippers pants. I'm not sure however, if Kubrick was suggesting that all men or just men in the military are sexually and aggressively charged human beings. Personally, I feel that it is all men but on different testosterone levels.
I also liked that Kubrick did not make all of the male characters trigger happy, especially Turgidson who couldn't wait for the annihilation to begin in Russia. I liked how a peer said, in class discussion, that the President appeared to have "no balls" at times, especially in his ridiculous telephone conversations. While I agree, I do feel however, that he did have some balls when deciding not to intensify the attack on Russia. When everyone else around him was suggesting to blow them up before they could retaliate against the U.S, the President was not willing to be known as a mass murderer. While the President tried to avoid being compared to Hitler, it was funny how Dr. Strangelove was such an ex-supporter always having outbursts. I felt that Dr. Strangelove's presence and his craziness symbolized how the U.S was soon to follow in the footsteps of Hitler. While Hitler annihilated almost the whole Jewish population, the President of the United States would be known for annihilating the whole human race. Not intentionally like Hitler, but it would go down in his name as the initiator of the nuclear war that ended all life.
I have been thinking about what Professor McRae asked us to think about and try to blog about:"Satire of the Iraq War." I just can't wrap my head around it. Probably because I feel as though I do not possess all the information necessary to begin to satire it's situation. I am however, extremely curious on what other peers might formulate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I thought that was funny that the President was so concerned with being compared to Hitler: The entire human race would be, as you said, annihilated so what does it matter? It’s not like there would be anyone around to remember. It really shows the complete lack of consciousness with the officials not understanding the effects of nuclear warfare not only on the United States but on the whole world.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the president's actions. Sometimes it takes just as much guts to stop doing something than to just let them go on as they are. It kinda makes you see how hard it can be as a leader sometimes when he could go down in history as a mass murderer even though he was the most against the attack.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this was one of my favorites so far! I thought it was funny how you mentioned the president having "no balls" which is very funny but I agree with you that he had to have at least some because it took a lot for him to try and stop what had already been started. I also thought it was funny how he was so worried about being compared to Hitler. It also didn't help that he sounded like a little girl through half the movie and the phone conversations were ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteThe President was supposed to be a decent person, and more to the point, a decent liberal person. But in the long run, how effective were his actions and policies, in the context of the movie?
ReplyDeleteAlso, what do you take 'liberal consensus' to mean?
Do you think we have less of a sense of humor now about the craziness of war than people did 50 years ago? Or do you think the actuality of 9/11 made a difference in our outlook and fear levels?