Full Metal Jacket (film)

[Nonverbis]

Full Metal Jacket - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As far as I know, in the army they don't divide ammos into full metall jackets, soft-point bullets etc. It is hunters who do that. On the other hand, in the army they use zinc-lined coffin to transport home those killed in action.
But this methaphor seems to be far fetched.

But anyway, in the arr my all bullets have full metal jackets. That's why I suppose we can't ready the name of the film literally. It must be methaphoric. But I can't catch it. Could you help me understand what sense is implied in the name of the film.

 

[probus]

I may be wrong about this, but here is my best guess. Some bullets are called soft-nosed or hollow point. These are designed and intended to fragment on impact with a human body, thus causing maximum damage to internal organs. They were formerly known as dumdum bullets, after the suburb of Calcutta (Kolkata) where they were first made. A bullet with a full metal jacket, on the other hand, is designed to remain intact for maximum penetration. They are used to pierce body armour and similar defensive combat gear.

 

[Skrej]

Hollow points or similar "soft" points which are designed to mushroom out and cause a larger wound cavity are actually banned under the Geneva Convention. The use of such would be considered a war crime. It's not the fragments that do so much damage, but the expanding mushroom head which creates not only a much larger wound cavity, but corresponding shock wave that further damages internal organs. It's okay to kill the enemy, but you're not supposed to kill them too effectively, for the all the sense that doesn't make.

However, the military uses the term 'full metal jacket' (aka ball ammo) to distinguish it from other types such as armor piercing, incendiary, or tracers (or even other types of non-lethal practice rounds or blanks).

 

[Amigos4]

They are used to pierce body armour and similar defeneive combat gear.

@probus - Typo Alert!

 

[probus]

Typo repaired. Thanks @Amigos4.

 

[Amigos4]

 

[emsr2d2]

As far as I know, in the army they don't divide ammos ammo/ammunition into full metall metal jackets, soft-point bullets etc. It is hunters who do that. On the other hand, in the army they use zinc-lined coffins to transport home those killed in action.
But However, this methaphor metaphor seems to be far fetched.

But Anyway, in the arr my army, all bullets have full metal jackets. That's why I suppose we can't ready read/take the name of the film literally. It must be methaphoric metaphoric no full stop here but I can't catch understand it. Could you help me understand what sense is implied in by the name of the film?

Note my corrections above. We don't pluralise "ammo". Note the correct spelling of "metaphor". As you're a learner, I suggest that you don't try to start sentences with "but".

 

[Nonverbis]

Ok. Why the film is called FMJ? In other words, how the name of the film reflects its content?

 

[probus]

Is a title is even intended to reflect the movie's content? I suggest that titles are chosen with nothing more than marketing in mind.

By the way FMJ reveived critical acclaim and was praised for realism. But in my opinion a far more realistic treatment of the same subject was provided by a little-known film released around the same time: 84 C MoPic or 84 Charlie MiPic.

 

[emsr2d2]

Ok OK/Okay. Why is the film is called FMJ "Full Metal Jacket"? In other words, how does the name of the film reflects reflect its content?

Note my corrections above. At the start of a sentence, you can write "OK" or "Okay". Anywhere else in a sentence, write "OK" or "okay". Never write "Ok". Note the correct word order used in questions.

If Probus's and Skrej's responses didn't help you to understand it, I certainly can't add anything useful! I've never seen the film and I know nothing about guns or ammunition.

 

[Skrej]

It's taken from the scene where "Pvt. Pyle" has his mental breakdown and shoots the drill instructor before shooting himself. You can watch here. Graphic violence warning, although the suicide isn't included in the linked clip.

Pyle (a nickname) was both physically and mentally unfit to be a soldier to begin with, but the stress and abuse of basic training drove him over to the edge. Ironically, prior to his complete breakdown, he was showing signs of becoming an more ideal recruit. Learning how to identify and expressing familiarity with the weapon and its ammunition is part of their training, but with his mental breakdown, he takes it too far. Notice he also performs several drill rifle maneuvers quite crisply and adroitly. He assembles, loads, and charges the rifle with precision. It shows the contrast of him being molded into an unthinking robot; one which then malfunctions.

You could probably read into the title some symbolism of how the military training which is designed to mold regular civilians into soldiers is akin to the purpose of a metal jacket casing - designed to mold something soft into a more cohesive and uniform shape. Without that casing, the soft bullet expands and deforms, which is another sort of metaphor for Lawrence having his mental breakdown.

Keep in mind that it's an anti-war film intended to show how war dehumanizes people.

 

[Tarheel]

Why is the film called Full Metal Jacket?

It's a military movie, and that term is a military term. That's enough for me.

(You had the verb in the wrong place.)

 

[jutfrank]

I'm on board with Skrej's interpretation (post #11). Military training turns soft men into fully hardened killing machines.

Gustav Hasford's original novel was titled The Short-Timers, which Kubrick, who co-wrote the screenplay, didn't like. Apparently, he came across the term 'full metal jacket' in a gun catalogue.

 

[yiirtoola]

The scene you're describing is a powerful representation of the impact of intense military training and the toll it can take on individuals who may not be mentally or emotionally prepared for such an experience. Pvt. Pyle's breakdown is a culmination of the harsh training methods and psychological stress he has undergone, highlighting the mental fragility of individuals subjected to such rigorous conditions.

The contrast you mentioned, where Pvt. Pyle displays moments of precision and skill before his breakdown, serves to underscore the conflict between his potential to excel and the overwhelming pressure that leads to his eventual collapse. This further emphasizes the dehumanizing nature of the military training process, which attempts to mold individuals into a uniform, unthinking unit, often at the cost of their emotional well-being.

 

[jutfrank]

The scene you're describing is a powerful representation of the impact of intense military training and the toll it can take on individuals who may not be mentally or emotionally prepared for such an experience. Pvt. Pyle's breakdown is a culmination of the harsh training methods and psychological stress he has undergone, highlighting the mental fragility of individuals subjected to such rigorous conditions.

The contrast you mentioned, where Pvt. Pyle displays moments of precision and skill before his breakdown, serves to underscore the conflict between his potential to excel and the overwhelming pressure that leads to his eventual collapse. This further emphasizes the dehumanizing nature of the military training process, which attempts to mold individuals into a uniform, unthinking unit, often at the cost of their emotional well-being.

I don't know what the moderators think, but I think that if you're going to post an answer written by AI software, you should make that clear in the post.

 

[emsr2d2]

I don't know what the moderators think, but I think that if you're going to post an answer written by AI software, you should make that clear in the post.

Absolutely correct. Presenting AI-generated content as your own is tantamount to cheating. We take a very dim view of AI-generated content in general (on the forum) but at the very least, users must state that that's what it is.

 

[kttlt]

I don't know what the moderators think, but I think that if you're going to post an answer written by AI software, you should make that clear in the post.

How are you able to tell that that post was written by an AI? I feel embarrassed, because upon reading it I thought "Damn, that's a well-written English, I wish I could write that well". Are there any specific giveaways?

 

[probus]

I too have the same question as @kttlt. Are there telltale signs in the text? If so, what are they @jutfrank?

 

[jutfrank]

How are you able to tell that that post was written by an AI? Are there any specific giveaways?

I too have the same question as @kttlt. Are there telltale signs in the text? If so, what are they @jutfrank?

It's very obvious to me that the text in question was written by AI from its perfect semi-formal, impersonal style and tone. It's hard to say anything more specific than that. I think the only real practical tip I can offer is that if you see any mistakes, however tiny, or any inconsistencies, then it's very likely not AI since the texts are always perfect. Even if you ask it to deliberately make mistakes, it doesn't do it very convincingly.

I should add that I have a lot of experience with AI-generated texts. The more familiar you become with them, the easier it gets to spot them when you see them. As you can imagine, it's a good skill for a teacher to have!