Pop Culture w/o Vietnam

So with the glory of WWII movies waning and no Vietnam war to make movies about, would Korea somehow have become popular as a war movie theme? Or did war movies in general reach their expiration date?
 
So with the glory of WWII movies waning and no Vietnam war to make movies about, would Korea somehow have become popular as a war movie theme? Or did war movies in general reach their expiration date?

It was Vietnam that killed for some time the glory of old WW2 films, once the deep unpopularity sunk in, however they rebounded in the 90s. The big difference is the depiction of war as an ugly, but honorable affair has gone out the window.
 
It was Vietnam that killed for some time the glory of old WW2 films, once the deep unpopularity sunk in, however they rebounded in the 90s. The big difference is the depiction of war as an ugly, but honorable affair has gone out the window.

You were already seeing that in movies like Stalag 17 (1953), The Caine Mutiny (1954), and The Bridge on the River Kwai (1957) Movies like Battle of the Bulge (1965) were just going along the path laid before about a decade earlier. The rose colored glasses regarding WWII were already slipping well before Vietnam.
 
I'd say "Magnum" is closer to "Rockford" (or "77 Sunset Strip") than OTL, given no 'nam.

I'd also say both Bolan & Punisher (& maybe even Vigilante) never happen. Which seems to mean Ashton Ford, psychic detective, gets an earlier airing. It also seems to mean, if that fails (as OTL), Joe Copp comes along around 1975, in a series of successful hardboiled PI novels.:cool:
 
What would American pop culture look like, particularly in the 60's and 70's, without a full scale Vietnam War? (Assume, for the sake of this thread, that JFK surviving is our PoD.) If we still see familiar things (like the Counterculture, New Wave, etc), what changes?

Alan Moore wouldn´t write Watchmen.

And all the 80es´s TV action shows with Vietnam Veteran main characters (MacGyver, A-Team,Magnum, Knight Rider, Miami Vice,etc.)

No Marvel Comics Frank Castle a.k.a the Punisher, Tony Stark´s origin story would be altered , too.
 
Last edited:
yeah, without 'Nam i can see films with the kinda-sorta message of "war is glorious" persisting; it was the realities of war exposed in Vietnam which kinda killed them IOTL iirc

I never got the impression that even 50s WWII movies had the message that "war is glorious". It seemed to me more like the WWII movie message was "war is horrible, but sometimes necessary and just".
 
I'm surprised how many answers here look for butterflies in the 1980's, rather than short term effects in the 60's or 70's.

One easy example of the latter -- Muhammad Ali is not drafted.

I thought that initially too, though his debut was in early 1963, so maybe not.

Hello John Fredrick Parker,

I researched, in the origin story it was indeed the Vietnam war. The US involvement began with first military advisors in the late 1950es. So it could have been entirely possible that Tony Stark is intended to be buisinessman selling weapons to aid the South Vietnam regime against the Vietmihn. Even if this predate the "official year" 1965 when the war was supposed to start.
 
mudhead said:
How much responsibility did the US involvement in the Vietnam War have for the much wider use of recreational drugs in US society? I've read/seen stuff about conscripts (and it was a conscript war, mainly) going out there, never having used drugs, and coming back as regular users.
I've heard it said (tho I can't credit the source with reliability) that two things created the U.S. drug problem: KMT losing the Civil War, leading to ex-ROC Army leaders becoming drug warlords; & AUS vets doing dope in the 'Nam & bringing the habit home. Take out the war, you've more/less made the Drug War unnecessary.:cool:

You've butterflied away an entire genre of films, of which "Rambo" is only the best known; there were half a dozen of them, easy. You've also dealt a severe blow to Oliver Stone's career.:cool:

You've also butterflied away Bolan.:eek::eek::eek::(:( (Tho if Pendleton moves to *Joe Copp sooner as a result....:cool:) And you've wiped out Riggs from "Lethal Weapon".:eek::( (Unless you have him ex-Delta antiterrorist operator, or former Recon...:cool::cool:)
 
Corrupt poverty stricken third world countries with a communist insurgency on one side and an American supported President who is not actually in controll of much would still have been there without Vietnam. Therefore the opportunity for an American military besoted by Counter Insurgency theory to get into a similar mess, with similar cultural results is there. The mindset that led to the early war statement 'Vietnam is the right war in the right place at the right time' will not go away because the location shifts to Lebanon or Columbia or wherever.

I find this all too likely (and sad). The fact that the USA was willing to spend so much blood and treasure trying to 'secure' Vietnam, one of the most strategically and economically useless places on earth for us, showed that we were all too willing to get involved in anti-communism 'somewhere'. So, no war in Vietnam, we'd likely be fighting somewhere else. If that 'somewhere else' is here in the western hemisphere, we might do better. Otherwise, probably not...
 
Making an attempt to get back on track: as I recall the mid-60s (OK, I was in 8th grade), one of the major subplots was the mods-vs.-rockers debate in pop culture. Absent Vietnam, I suspect the mods might have prevailed. That might have a significant impact on social customs and fashion; e.g., skirts / heels for women might not have become as much of a rarity as they are today.
 
1940LaSalle said:
Absent Vietnam, I suspect the mods might have prevailed. That might have a significant impact on social customs and fashion; e.g., skirts / heels for women might not have become as much of a rarity as they are today.
I'm not seeing how the war impacts fashion so much. IMO, it's more about what is/isn't "okay" in a business environment, & that's going to be more about the number of women, & the number of professional women. A woman who wants to be taken seriously isn't going to dress like Ally McBeal (except on TV:rolleyes:).
 
I'm not seeing how the war impacts fashion so much. IMO, it's more about what is/isn't "okay" in a business environment, & that's going to be more about the number of women, & the number of professional women.
Well, might the war have affected that, by having a large number of men fighting overseas? Or did Vietnam not have that kind of impact on workplace gender ratios?
 
I've heard it said (tho I can't credit the source with reliability) that two things created the U.S. drug problem: KMT losing the Civil War, leading to ex-ROC Army leaders becoming drug warlords; & AUS vets doing dope in the 'Nam & bringing the habit home. Take out the war, you've more/less made the Drug War unnecessary.:cool:

Yes! Yes! Yes! to that!

Thank goodness someone brought this up!

Kuomintang officers, in order to support themselves did in fact do this!

Hooray!!! Somebody on AH.com actually knows some history!


As an aside to the OP, in my TL, we don't get involved in Vietnam but...instead we (our gov't) decides to aid the Portuguese in both Angola and Mozambique.

So... we still get to do some napalming in a tropical palm tree lined setting. Except...this time...it's in Africa:(.

Joho :)
 
John Fredrick Parker said:
Well, might the war have affected that, by having a large number of men fighting overseas? Or did Vietnam not have that kind of impact on workplace gender ratios?
I wouldn't think so. Suits have been standard for decades; even WW2 didn't alter it, AFAIK. (Yes, women's fashions then differed.) I don't think fashion really feels the effect of war so much; I could be wrong, tho.
joho6411 said:
Yes! Yes! Yes! to that!

Thank goodness someone brought this up!

Kuomintang officers, in order to support themselves did in fact do this!

Hooray!!! Somebody on AH.com actually knows some history!
Glad to oblige.;):p
joho6411 said:
As an aside to the OP, in my TL, we don't get involved in Vietnam but...instead we (our gov't) decides to aid the Portuguese in both Angola and Mozambique.

So... we still get to do some napalming in a tropical palm tree lined setting. Except...this time...it's in Africa:(.
That's disturbingly likely.:(
 
As an aside to the OP, in my TL, we don't get involved in Vietnam but...instead we (our gov't) decides to aid the Portuguese in both Angola and Mozambique.

So... we still get to do some napalming in a tropical palm tree lined setting. Except...this time...it's in Africa:(.
That's disturbingly likely.:(
Would it really be comparable to Vietnam, though? How wound the enemy supply lines work?
 
As an aside to the OP, in my TL, we don't get involved in Vietnam but...instead we (our gov't) decides to aid the Portuguese in both Angola and Mozambique.
I wonder if that changes the course of the Carnation Revolution somewhat, perhaps Portugal remains a slightly more centrist military dictatorship for longer with the eyes of the US focused on aiding Portugal.

In terms of culture, there's been at least one Nobel Prize for Literature winning author to come out of post-Fascist Portugal, Jose Saramago, who could have faced trouble for his affiliations with the communist party or for his books that he likely wouldn't even get the opportunity to publish.
 
Would it really be comparable to Vietnam, though? How wound the enemy supply lines work?

1) Soviet air supply to Egypt, then...

2) More air supply from Egypt through to the Congo,...

3) Foot traffic (foot convoys) into rebel areas from Congo.

My TL is different with regards to other things about Africa in this TL.

Too long and complicated to get into here though, sorry:eek:.

Joho :)
 
Top