4/5 Odd, but memorable...
  by Mark Savary (Seattle, WA)
As others have mentioned, this is perhaps the only pro-war film ever made about our involvement in Vietnam, either at the time of the war or since.

Pretty much these days, nobody espouses a pro-war stance on the Vietnam conflict. It was not a "good" war, after all, and the war will always be part and parcel with the agony of America's social chaos in the late 60's and early 70's. However, at the time, the social battle lines were well defined between the peaceniks and the hawks; those against the war, and those all in favor of it. Without the thirty-plus years of hindsight to help them put this conflict in perspective, the hawks were pretty gung-ho. Likewise, the the peaceniks, who thought that if we just "love each other" everything would be alright, looks pretty naive and childish. If only the world were so simple.

Like the war, this film engenders strong feelings in those who see it. The DUKE was a known hawk, and you can see it shine through in every line, and in every scene. Like most hawks at the time, I suspect that The DUKE simply thought Vietnam was just like any other war (most likely, World War II), and it was incomprehensible to them that anyone would be against it. The film, in turn, reflects the hawk viewpoint.

In other words, you could substitute the Vietnamese with the Japanese in WWII, and the film would be more or less the same (good, upstanding Americans vs. big bad empire). The capture of the enemy general is pure WWII melodrama. The character of Petersen, the "scrounger", is also a stock character from a WWII movie. The staging of the action, the commando raid, blowing up a bridge, etc., all scream WWII.

DUKE co-directs, and despite being filmed in Georgia (which looks nothing like Southeast Asia!), the results are really pretty good. The raid to capture the enemy general is laughable, but tense and exciting nevertheless. The characterizations are solid. The film flows nicely, and isn't too long or too short. The cinematography is workable, and at times, even impressive. There's plenty of action, too!

When you see DUKE react to the child running from helicopter to helicopter looking for Petersen, you cannot help but have respect for this film. Certainly one of the best endings in American film history follows. Politics and anti-war sentiment of today's PC society aside, this is a great war film that honors the best of the best; the Green Berets.

Let me take a moment and say a word or two about David Janssen's role as George Beckworth, the reporter for a left-wing and anti-war newspaper. The character is a little too obvious, and at first, a little too strong on the anti-war sentiment. His conversion was a little too predictable, but the handling of his conversion to pro-war is very well-handled. Ultimately, I think it was a believable transformation, and this is due entirely to Janssen's talent. In the hands of another, less skilled actor, the Beckworth character could have been a big sore point, but Janssen makes Beckworth a quiet force, a wall of anti-war sentiment needing to be erroded away by the reality of the situation he finds himself in. In many ways, I think Janssen's underplayed approach for Beckworth makes him seem more real, and ultimately sells the character. It helps sell the movie too, despite our modern perspective on the war.

Appearing in supporting roles are Jack Soo (Nick Yemana on "Barney Miller"), George Takei (Sulu on "Star Trek"), and Bruce Cabot. Cabot had starred in a great many films, and "The Green Beret" is one of his last. He was a favorite DUKE co-star, appearing with DUKE in "Hellfighters", "Big Jake", "Chisum", "The War Wagon", "In Harm's Way", "McLintock!", "Hatari!", and others. Cabot is probably most famous for rescuing Fay Wray from King Kong. Also on hand is The DUKE's son, Patrick Wayne. Patrick appears as the commander of a Seabee team, following in his father's footsteps (DUKE starred in the famous homage to the outfit, "The Fighting Seabees").

DUKE fans should try to locate a copy of the video "No Substitute For Victory" (available on this site), in which DUKE hosts a right-wing documentary look at our reasons for fighting in Southeast Asia. Watching this documentary after the film will give the viewer new insights into the thinking of the hawks at the time, and their position during the Vietnam conflict.

4/5 Take that, Uncle Ho!
  by M. G Watson (Los Angeles)
If you ever read Gustav Hasford's "The Short-Timers" (which "Full Metal Jacket" was based on) you know how he felt about this movie: "Let's watch the Duke and Mr. Sulu karate-chop Victor Charlie in a Kodicolor fantasy about Vietnam." In other words, he thought it was bunk. So does everyone else on the left, who have bought into the myth that Vietnam was a purely guerilla war and that the human-wave assaults employed by the NVA/VC on Col. Kirby's camp in the film would never have happened in real life. In point of fact almost 90% of the fighting in Vietnam was of the conventional type in the Central Highlands or the valleys ("We Were Soldiers") while only 10% of the troops were employed in the rice paddies you see in movies like "Platoon." Whenever the NVA fought out in the open, a la the Tet Offensive, they were well and truly beaten, but their leadership was ruthless and understood that by trading 5 Vietnamese lives for one American, the U.S. will to fight would eventually break. They knew the American public had only tepid support for Vietnam and would not accept the losses. The result, of course, we all know. Hanoi Jane what she wanted and so did Uncle Ho. Too bad Jane didn't go back in say, 1975 and spend some time in a re-education camp. They could have taken pics of her in a tiger cage, eating bugs and rotting from typhus.

If you are reading this you probably know the story of the movie.
John Wayne's Col. Kirby and his elite Special Forces "A" Team (no, not the one with Hannibal and Face and B.A. Barracus)is sent to Vietnam to establish base camps which offer protection to the local farmers from the murderous Viet Cong (whose crimes against their own people are well documented here). The soldiers teach the locals how to fight while providing basic medical care and 20th century improvements to their primeval way of life. There is the usual big John Wayne type battle as the VC try to overrun the camp, followed by a commando raid deep into enemy territory, and a tragic-heroic ending. But the movie is more than the sum of its parts. It is not mere entertainment, it is personal propiganda, designed to present the Duke's argument for why America was fighting in Vietnam at all. The only failing is its sappiness and jingoism, which make it easy for opponents to ridicule. But making fun of it doesn't take away the fact that the Duke's argument was based on something he is rarely credited for -- human decency. What "right" did we have in Vietnam? I guess the same "right" we had to land on the beaches of Normandy. We had no "right" at all -- it was just the "right thing to do", to support a bad government (South Vietnam) against a much worse government (North Vietnam) that used methods like mass killings of teachers, civil servants, nuns, missionaries, and village chiefs to destabilze the South and forcibly unite the country. You can argue about the legitimacy of taking sides in a civil war all day, but any country that uses methods like burying people alive and raping women to death as a matter of military policy probably deserves to be opposed, yes?

Anyway, let me take a moment to say I LOVE THIS FREAKIN' MOVIE. Growing up, good old Washington D.C. Channel 20 (remember when you only had ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS and your one local channel? Channel 20 was ours) played this movie, (along with "The Battle of the Bulge" and "The Bridge at Remagen" and some other classics) about once every other day. Even the thought of it brings a smile to my face. Here was a guy, John Wayne, who had the guts to make a film this flag-shakingly right wing at a time when patriotism was growing unfashionable and millions of people were abandoning and spitting on the ideals that he embodied -- which, by the way, a few of us still hold true. As a movie, "The Green Berets" has a hard ideology of anti-communism and shows the newfangled Special Forces as a sort of elite brotherhood consecrated to fight against it. I think a lot of the hate directed against this movie comes from the surity of Kirby's (meaning John Wayne's) beliefs. They are rock-solid and not up for debate or negotiation. He understands what will (and did) happen to Vietnam if the North wins the war, and fights bitterly to prevent this from happening, while simultaneously trying to win over a stubborn journalist who has legitimate doubts about our involvement. No question, this movie is jingoistic and predictable, a Vietnam war movie packed in WWII casing, but who cares?

4/5 The Truth Hurts Some People
  by Eric Howard (kansas city, mo. United States)
I saw this movie at the drive in when I was 7 and never forgot it. After a tour with the 82nd Airborne I joined the reserves and served with a Special Forces unit and met men who lived what this movie portrays. I've read reviews that said that this movie ignored politics and remade WW2 and westerns as a VN movie. What movie did they see? The opening scene alone endured this movie to SF veterans. Actor Aldo Ray (WW2 Frogman vet) tells why the US was in VN and dumps a case of ammo on David Jensen's newsman. This movie attacks politics head on. As far as being a remade western, that was the truth of the war, those camps called "fort Appache" or what ever, actually existed. The movie has been called a propoganda film, yet the Special Forces did, as the movie protrays, treat the local population with medical care and the Viet Cong did, as the movie portrays, murder villagers who denied them aid. The movie has cliches but in this case there is truth. One of the problems with this movie is that what made Special Forces in VN so special was still classified and much of the Robin Moore Book that it inspired was outdated for the time the movie portrays. The VC general driving around the jungle in a staff car comes to mind. I call this a great bad movie because there are some unexcuseable flubs in this movie, which one would not expect from a John Wayne major motion picture. Scenes that draw hoots, even from those that love it, are the scene where SGT Provos gets shot in the chest point blank from a 50 Cal and lives long enough to drink a shot with the duke before dying. What trooper wouldn't want to go out like that. The special effects are inferior such as the helicopter crash and some of the pyhrotechs, and let's not forget the poor point man with the plastic metal M16, turns out he didn't need it anyway, as he demonstrated some fine hand to hand moves. Some people complain about the many pine trees in the film, I've never been to VN but I've been to Okinawa and I saw a lot of pine trees there so I'll let that go.

This film shows strong Americans helping the weak and that was the truth. Many laugh that in the final scene the sun sets over the ocean which is on the east coast in VN. That's okay because THEIR BASE WAS ON A SMALL PENINSULIA.

5/5 I rather watch TGB and We Were Soldiers than Platoon
  by Antonio De La Cruz (Bayamon, PR USA)
I am more concerned with the identification of PLATOON as a accurate representation of the Vietnam experience than with TGB's.

To start with, people, I don't see how a movie that portrays US soldiers in the Vietnam War as war criminals, druggies and trash like PLATOON could be better than ANY other movie on the subject, THE GREEN BERETS included.Would you acclaim a movie negatively stereotyping Afro Americans,Latino or any other minority?No.In this aspect,John Wayne's movie has to be seen as an effort to somehow stem the wave of soldier in Vietnam/Vietnam veteran bashing that corroded this nation to its ever lasting shame at that time.

The experiences,type of missions,tactics,use of eqipment,etc shown in the movie corresponds to what is now considered historical fact.The uniforms and weapons are correct.The NVA VC represented were the NVA VC as armed and uniformed up to 1966/67 so they are either black pajamed or uniformed in khaki not with the NVA green and VC khaki of Main Force units of 67 onwards.

The odd thing to some people is that it was filmed in the US at North Carolina but as someone wrote both North and South Vietnam has many diferent types of vegetation and clime and there were pines and cold places. Not everything was jungle or swamps!

Another thing that results odd to some is the positive way and the negative way GIs are portrayed vs the negative way communists are portrayed. Well,if you happen to be prejudiced because of politics or just plain bigotry and believe Vietnam veterans were all Lt William Calley clones and every action a My Lai...you need to flash forward to the present and reality because it's a matter of historical fact that pop culture vision is not true.

THE GREEN BERETS has no special effects or natural settings or computer enhancing as we are accustomed today.The real value is that it portrays Special Warfare ops as accurately as it was possible and it was, until very recently, the only movie which did not echoed the foolishness,ignorance,vanality and malaise that so much hurted a generation of soldiers which sinned only by answering the call of duty.

4/5 Popular--no... Enjoyable--yes!
  by Jonathan M. Norberg (Grand Forks, ND)
Ok, this movie is not very popular in some circles, and it's not highly regarded in any film critic circles, BUT I like this movie. Why would I like a movie this unpopular? Because it portrays a part of the war that we don't often get to see. Hey, it's highly anti-communist, and it shows why our men were dedicated to fighting against it. The war was very cruel, and many things that happened were not good, but our men were fighting for the freedom of men--not just the Vietnamese, but the whole free world that was being threatened by Communism. I think that the way our soldiers were treated coming back was disgraceful, and I'm thankful for a movie like this that actually portrays them as the heroes they are. This allows me to overlook some of the weaknesses of the movie. If you are a film critic don't even bother with this, but if you like patriotism, hate communism, and like seeing the good guys beat up some bad guys you'll enjoy this movie!