Why Vietnam?

Why Vietnam? with 2nd feature: The Battle of Khe Sanh

United States – 196?

Director – United States Department of Defense

United American Video Corporation, 1989, VHS

Run Time – 1 hour

It doesn’t bother me that this tape is just old government propaganda about the war, I’ve seen a lot of that and I understand the historical context. I recognize that for those willing to do a little looking, the ideological context of Vietnam is obvious and well documented and out there for the taking.



What bothers me is that the box proposes the title, “Why Vietnam?” as a socio-cultural question and suggests that some analysis will occur within its frames. It is the use of the past tense in the synopsis; “Why did the U.S. send our young men…?” clearly suggesting that there is to be some reflection on a past event, the causes and meanings of that conflict, what we learned from it. What it actually consists of is a government propaganda film bookended by a speech given by Lyndon Johnson in the mid-1960’s in which he proposed to answer a mother’s question: “Why is my son fighting in Vietnam?” It’s a legitimate question, for at the time it was still unclear to the American public just what was really at stake and what warranted such a precious investment of blood and riches. Up until that point Americans really didn’t know what Vietnam was all about and so, Johnson’s administration made a concerted effort to sell the war, to legitimize undeniably bellicose behavior with the rhetoric of freedom, justice and honor. I may not agree, but I’m okay with the past, I’m aware that these things happened and certain people took part. What I can’t abide is just redistributing a grainy government propaganda film under the guise of some serious reflective analysis. Don’t ask me one of the heaviest questions of the 20th Century American experience, and drop decrepit saber-rattling rhetoric in my lap for an answer. The least you can do is call it out for what it is, a government PR film, and let me buy it on my interest in history rather than some false pretense.

The second feature is a Department of Defense film about the 1968 Battle of Khe Sanh. Though lighter in tone, this too is merely a government film produced only slightly after the events. I saw this film some 6 years ago albeit in a higher quality print, but that’s not what’s disappointing. It too is misrepresented as an “objective” analysis. But at this point I’m complacent, I can only shake my head and pay attention to other things. Ultimately, the lies told are the same as they’ve always been, self deceptive and incomparably pitiful. That’s why this tape is useless, it is the very thing it purports to dissect. It offers nothing new, just the same sad rhetoric and circular justifications that got us into that mess, in a grainy washed out print no less.

From Hell to Victory

From Hell to Victory

Italy – 1979

Director – Umberto Lenzi (as Hank Milestone)

United American Video Corporation, 1990, VHS

Run Time – 1 hour, 42 minutes

In history classrooms and textbooks around the world, you’ll likely find a standard narrative regarding the Second World War. Typically the stories would have you believe that there was a concerted effort by a few evil imperialists to take over the world. Against these were arrayed a fragile alliance of freedom loving peoples who, with a great deal of cautious strategy and careful planning bought a narrow victory for the cause of freedom. A very grandiose and inspiring tale to be sure, but sadly inaccurate.

Through Umberto Lenzi the true saga of World War Two can at last be told. But his is not the standard tale of triumph snatched from the jaws of global fascist conspiracy. Lenzi employs a unique documentary style, utilizing randomly selected archival footage to lend his picture a blurry realism, and jumping deftly between his own dramatized material and footage never before seen outside the context of its original movie. Rather, he loosely describes a series of boring and unconnected local skirmishes which might have coincidentally happened around the same time. Eisenhower, Stalin and Hitler were only shuffling about with little direction, but Lenzi admirably captures that confusing mess and transfers it to the screen with such accuracy it astounds.

"Where's that angry fellow with the mohawk?"           "Vietnam isn't over until 1983 sir."

The loose group of friends around which the narrative quickly skirts, is caught up in the totally unexpected arrival of war in 1939 Paris. All are cast into diverse and dubious roles; French Partisan, Wermacht Panzer Colonel, Elderly American Paratrooper, and each is given an enigmatic and ambiguous motivation, their intense personal struggles revealed through vague dialogue and inspiringly minimal use of continuity. Unbelievably, though each is fighting for a separate cause the friends come face to face in the final climactic battle as if scripted in some low budget melodrama and not by cruel ironic accident of history. It is only through such carefully crafted efforts as Lenzi’s that we can truly come to terms with the pointless chaos of war.

By definition the job description “director” suggests giving a point or a purpose or goal to some series of events or behaviors. Direction implies some kind of plan under the authority of a leader. Much like a general issuing orders to his army; “Move there, attack that ridge and capture and hold the summit there.” It makes for interesting college courses, for it makes history sound like it happened in a sort of linear narrative progression type of thing. But at last, thanks to our beloved Umberto, it has become clear that what sounds good for the headlines and history majors, is really just fluff, propaganda, an elaborate delusion to make us feel like we’re actually taking part in some sort of shared temporal experience. Lenzi’s most lofty triumph in From Hell to Victory is to give the lie to that self-important ivory tower conspiracy called history.

A nice French poster from Moviegoods.