|
Post by Jorji Costava on Aug 30, 2015 14:32:52 GMT -6
The Fog of War (2003): This Errol Morris documentary profiles, through an extended interview and archival footage, the life of Robert S. McNamara, US Secretary of Defense from 1961-1968. The film discusses his work in the US Air Force as a member of the Office of Statistical Control, where he prepared reports on the efficiency of bombing campaigns in Japan. These reports played a role in Gen. Curtis LeMay's relentless fire bombing campaign against numerous Japanese cities (including Tokyo, which in the end suffered more casualties from fire bombing than Hiroshima did from the atom bomb). The film also deals with his involvement in the Cuban Missile Crisis and his role as one of the major architects of the Vietnam War. The Fog of War uses some arresting cinematic techniques: Morris' 'interrotron' allows his interview subject to simultaneously look directly at him and at the camera. As a result, McNamara is looking right at the audience for most of this film. He is also frequently filmed using dutch angles and jump cuts, perhaps hinting at the disjointed and uncertain nature of memory itself, and the questionable reliability of McNamara's testimony in particular. He is a fascinating figure as an interview subject: He seems far more introspective and forthright than would be suggested by his reputation for arrogance, yet he is undeniably elusive at key moments. As he puts it: "Don't answer the question that was asked of you. Answer the question you wish had been asked of you. That's a good rule. I like that rule." After the film was released, there was considerable controversy regarding the trustworthiness of McNamara's representation of his role in the Cuban Missile Crisis and in the escalation of the Vietnam War. I don't think these controversies undermine the film's power, however. The Fog of War remains an effective lesson in history, collective memory, and the ethics of warfare (McNamara indicates that he was pretty interested in philosophy as a college student, confirming what I sadly already knew: Studying ethics does not make you more ethical). The ending, in particular, is a hard-hitting encapsulation of McNamara's career.
|
|