Dr. Strangelove: The Evilness Of War

Even though Stanley Kubrick’s Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb screened in the midst of the sobering Cold War, critics were keen on praising the film for its mastery of humor applied to such a sensitive matter. The film is exceedingly loaded with metaphors, innuendos, and allusions that nothing can be left undissected or taken for face value; the resulting effect is understood to be part of Kubrick’s multifarious theme. Kubrick has stated that what began as a “the basis for a serious film about accidental war ” eventually birthed an absurd and farcical classic comedy. The director fuses together irony, satire, and black humor to create a waggish piece but most of all the situation of the times and its

Slaughterhouse-Five, by Kurt Vonnegut Jr., is the tale of a gawky World War II veteran/soldier, Billy Pilgrim. His wartime experiences and their effects lead him to the ultimate conclusion that war is unexplainable. To portray this effectively, Vonnegut presents the story in two dimensions: historical and science-fiction. The irrationality of war is emphasized in each dimension by contrasts in its comic and tragic elements. The historical seriousness of the Battle of the Bulge and the bombing of Dresden are contrasted by many ironies and dark humor; the fantastical, science-fiction-type place of Tralfamadore is, in truth, an outlet for Vonnegut to show his incredibly serious fatalistic views. The surprising variations of the seriousness

In this essay I will analyze two Cold War American Films, War Games and Dr.Strangelove. Both of these films portray the cold war era, where it was uncertain when and if nuclear fallout would happen. I will start off by giving a brief summary of both films. Then talk about some cold war culture such as posters, TV shows, and historical events discussed in class, as well as some aspects of plot in the films, such as the leaders in power in each film and finally compare both films to the culture shown and argue that they both accurately portrayed it.

Dr. Strangelove is a comedy about the Cold War intended for a young adult or adult audience due to the topic of the Cold War not being understood easily by children. The reason for creating this film is for the comedic spin on a very serious historical event, making it truly a one of a kind movie.

This puts a picture into the reader’s head and forces them to think deeper about how much worse the World War would have been if it occurred during the times of technology that could produce more violence. The idea of fear comes into place because the picture of a more modern war is supposed to promote a very frightening sight and how much more negatively the War would have impacted the society, that is if mankind were even able to survive the war. Additionally, the author uses logic to prove their argument to the reader. The author looks at the how the World War was the event that made humans have more realization as to what is going on around

Charles Maland’s argument for the 1964 film Dr. Strangelove is that it was one of the most “fascinating and important American films of the 1960s.” He backs up his argument with evidence of the films rejection of the Ideology of Liberal Consensus, its attack on “crackpot realism” and critique of life in the 1960s Cold War era, and finally its paradoxical revolution that sets an example for other films to come after.

In his 1964 film Dr. Stangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb, Stanley Kubrick by no means chose the title unintentionally or without plenty of deliberation. While it may seem odd that the title’s namesake character, Dr. Strangelove, is only in a few scenes and could even be written off by some as a minor character, his importance to the film is nothing short of crucial and presents a much deeper meaning when considering his significance. In only his second speaking appearance, the first of which doesn’t occur until over halfway through the film at the 51:07 mark, Dr. Strangelove at 1:27:41 begins to discuss with the President the idea of preserving a “nucleus of human specimens.” On the surface this may seems like something any sort of ‘doomsday prepper’ would consider, but the character of Dr. Strangelove makes the meaning much deeper and darker.

“War is hell” goes the commonly used phrase. While conducted with a purpose in mind, many believe war to bring nothing but violence and death. In the history of mankind and combat, men have committed many abominable acts against one another as a means to an end. The bombing of Dresden, Germany, one of these loathsome deeds, while seldom mentioned and not widely known, remains one of the deadliest air raids in history. Just as in all largely fatal events, the survivors reflect upon the unbearable guilt and emotions they have experienced. Billy Pilgrim, the main protagonist In Kurt Vonnegut’s novel Slaughterhouse-Five, serves as Vonnegut’s vehicle to communicate his feelings and contemplations as a survivor. Throughout the story, Pilgrim, or the reader encounters an animal that Vonnegut uses to convey the range of emotions and incidents that humans are subject to as a result of war.

Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964) is a dark comedy film by Stanley Kubrick. The film deals with nuclear war which was a hot topic during the 50 's and 60 's. Americans were very paranoid about communists and nuclear war at this time. This film shows how ridiculous the paranoia about nuclear war through a sexual relationship allegory. The allegory deals with the masculine and the feminine. The masculine is an important part of the nuclear war efforts while the feminine takes a backseat. The feminine is displayed in men as a negative. The sexual allegory becomes funny through

War may seem like a heroic ideal, but the mountain is very steep. George Washington had us settle at Valley Forge in December 1777. Washington had mostly six and nine-month men that are debating to not reenlist. Reenlisting means to stay at Valley Forge and fight in the war, but I am considering to not reenlist. I will not reenlist due to the amount of deaths, lack of money, and the amount of exposure to the harsh elements.

The film Dr. Strangelove is very critical of the American government during the Cold War. The film features a commander named “Jack D. Ripper,” who orders an attack on Communist Russia because he thinks they are secretly trying to add fluoride to the American water supply. Later in the movie, the President calls upon a former Nazi to help him figure out how to deal with the repercussions of Ripper’s actions. Several times during the film, the former Nazi refers to the President as “Mein Fuher.” It was no accident on Stanley Kubrick’s part to have the President referred to as such. Kubrick successfully showed the similarities between dropping an atomic bomb and committing genocide.

Its unrelenting portrayal of irrational death and annihilation goes well beyond other German war films of the 1950s. Its vigilant proposition that at least some of the boys might be accountable for not only their own deaths but the others deaths as well, implying that the older German soldiers indubitably should have known better.

Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse-Five is a satire on the behaviors of man. Often characterized as an anti-war novel, Slaughterhouse-Five tries to show that war and destruction are a part of the human life cycle. Humanity is highly conflict prone; conflict resolution often manifests itself in the terms of war. Vonnegut attempts to show that war results in widespread death and destruction; therefore, war and death are inevitable. In Slaughterhouse-Five, Kurt Vonnegut explores the inevitability of war, shown through the examination of color usage - such as blue and ivory - in order to symbolize the interminable presence of war.

People are known to be very curious and intelligent individuals. With the new developments every year, people are becoming more involved with new research and discoveries. The thirst for knowledge has become very strong for scientists especially. Although having knowledge can be a good thing it is also a very powerful weapon. It could be used for good or for evil, but most of the time people go too far and without intending to, uses their knowledge for evil. People are not known to be perfect and they make mistakes, but they learn from their mistakes so that they do not make the same fault they did the last time. But can people make the same mistake twice, after seeing the results of their first mistake? Are people really just Einstein’s monsters – not fully human and always bringing destruction among their own kind? A good example would be the film “War Games”. The film “War games” serves as a metaphor that the United States have not learned anything from their mistake, despite having dropped the atomic bomb and knowing its effects on Japan and its people.

Benedict and his chums were rejoicing. They hadn't served, of course, they were just bloody pleased that rationing was over. The feasts could start again! The Balls! The gambling and excess that their city was known for!