What do you think?
Rate this book
Full Metal Jacket Diary
Despite the infamous reputation of the enigmatic Stanley Kubrick, Matthew Modine couldn't refuse his offer. Faced with the prospects of a career-defining role and mentorship by a cinematic great, the 24-year-old Hollywood actor arrived in London armed with a large-format Roliflex camera-inspired by Kubrick's early career as a "Look "photographer-and a notebook to record his own on-set reportage; preparation for his starring role as a Marine Corps journalist.
But expectations eroded as a strange, creeping sickness pervaded the set, a horrific accident sidelined a principal, and an unexpected rivalry arose with a co-star. And as the months dragged on, take-by-take, Modine realized he was falling victim to a manipulative mind-game of the Grand Master himself.
By the time his tour of duty ended a year and a half later, Modine had shot hundreds of photos and written countless entries. Only now-after two decades and the death of Kubrick-can Modine look back on his images and words. The result-a coming-of-age drama set against the backdrop of a seminal Vietnam saga.
A book like no other, Stanley Kubrick would have been the first in line to buy "Full Metal Jacket Diary."
But expectations eroded as a strange, creeping sickness pervaded the set, a horrific accident sidelined a principal, and an unexpected rivalry arose with a co-star. And as the months dragged on, take-by-take, Modine realized he was falling victim to a manipulative mind-game of the Grand Master himself.
By the time his tour of duty ended a year and a half later, Modine had shot hundreds of photos and written countless entries. Only now-after two decades and the death of Kubrick-can Modine look back on his images and words. The result-a coming-of-age drama set against the backdrop of a seminal Vietnam saga.
A book like no other, Stanley Kubrick would have been the first in line to buy "Full Metal Jacket Diary."
224 pages, Hardcover
First published October 1, 2005
8 people are currently reading
315 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews
June 9, 2007
The cover's made of metal. Was else do you want?
January 1, 2011
What is your major malfuction Private Pyle!?
June 6, 2008
Sigh, I was going through this amazing Modine thing about a year ago and damnit, I bought this book. The pictures (most if not all were taken by Modine) are wonderful. The diary itself isn't very interesting. he doesn't seem know how to edit it to give the audience what they want: 1)what it was like to work with Kubrick and 2) what was Kubrick like. You get bits and pieces but it feels a little light.
EDITED TO ADD: now that my Mode thing has waned, I decided to go back to review this book. I am surprised how much more satisfying it was without the weight of a staggering crush to get in the way. Still, I wish there was more meat! I need meat. I need sirloin. I need Kubrickian words of wisdom.
I need a gin & tonic.
EDITED TO ADD: now that my Mode thing has waned, I decided to go back to review this book. I am surprised how much more satisfying it was without the weight of a staggering crush to get in the way. Still, I wish there was more meat! I need meat. I need sirloin. I need Kubrickian words of wisdom.
I need a gin & tonic.
July 20, 2025
finally got to read this!! only one library around here had it but its still like an hour away so luckily they could ship it to my local library. i want to keep it so bad 👺 i will probably never get to own a copy of this since there were only 20k made (the copy i read was 3230/20000) and it is very hard to find, then when i do find one it's over a hundred dollars. just like 'the short-timers,' the book that full metal jacket was based on. what is with full metal jacket related books being so rare and expensive 💔
April 1, 2014
This is a limited edition book containing actor Matthew Modine's diary entries for the period 1984 to 1987, during which he was hired to play the role of Joker in Stanley Kubrick's motion picture Full Metal Jacket. In an attempt to impress Kubrick, Modine's agent gives Modine an old Arriflex camera. Modine falls in love with the camera, and begins taking pictures during his time making the film. Every page of this oversize (8" x 12") book contains full-page copies of these photos (most, but not all, taken by Modine). The book itself is cased in aluminum -- a full metal jack.
This is not a production diary, per se. Yes, Modine talks a lot about the making of the film, but his real purpose in keeping the diary is to reflect on personal issues. This means Modine's personal reactions to things, but also other things that happen in his life -- like the death of his manager, or the premature birth of his first child.
There's very little text in the book. It might take, maybe, an hour to read. The entries vary in length from a few sentences to several pages, and tend to focus on the early part of the production. In part, this is because Modine -- a working actor -- has more time to write. But it also, I think, reflects the ennui and punishing work that Kubrick put his cast through in making the film.
The is a myth that Stanley Kubrick was a monomaniacal detail-freak who brutally manipulated his actors for minimal gains in cinematic achievement. Modine reveals that although Kubrick is very detail-oriented, he's not as psychotic as the myth makes out. Moreover, Kubrick's inability to give voice to what he wants from actors and technical crew is readily apparent, and proves to be a major problem in Kubrick's working style.
Full Metal Jacket Diary is, in the end, a very revealing look at the mind of 27-year-old actor whose career in Hollywood is really taking off. It's two-thirds of the story of how a young, committed actor tries hard to stick to his values despite a film production that brutalizes him and deeply challenges his attempt to put those values into practice.
If I have a critique of the book, it is that the ending is rather abrupt. It's not clear if this is because Modine himself simply stopped writing -- exhausted by the production, too brain-dead to continue writing -- or whether this is a choice. The production merely ends, and Modine provides little insight or reflections on his feelings about the production, his return to New York City (and his new home) with his family, the post-production process, or the promotional process and subsequent fame the picture brought him.
The reader can make all sorts of assumptions about why Modine let the book "just end", but it is unfulfilling.
This is not a production diary, per se. Yes, Modine talks a lot about the making of the film, but his real purpose in keeping the diary is to reflect on personal issues. This means Modine's personal reactions to things, but also other things that happen in his life -- like the death of his manager, or the premature birth of his first child.
There's very little text in the book. It might take, maybe, an hour to read. The entries vary in length from a few sentences to several pages, and tend to focus on the early part of the production. In part, this is because Modine -- a working actor -- has more time to write. But it also, I think, reflects the ennui and punishing work that Kubrick put his cast through in making the film.
The is a myth that Stanley Kubrick was a monomaniacal detail-freak who brutally manipulated his actors for minimal gains in cinematic achievement. Modine reveals that although Kubrick is very detail-oriented, he's not as psychotic as the myth makes out. Moreover, Kubrick's inability to give voice to what he wants from actors and technical crew is readily apparent, and proves to be a major problem in Kubrick's working style.
Full Metal Jacket Diary is, in the end, a very revealing look at the mind of 27-year-old actor whose career in Hollywood is really taking off. It's two-thirds of the story of how a young, committed actor tries hard to stick to his values despite a film production that brutalizes him and deeply challenges his attempt to put those values into practice.
If I have a critique of the book, it is that the ending is rather abrupt. It's not clear if this is because Modine himself simply stopped writing -- exhausted by the production, too brain-dead to continue writing -- or whether this is a choice. The production merely ends, and Modine provides little insight or reflections on his feelings about the production, his return to New York City (and his new home) with his family, the post-production process, or the promotional process and subsequent fame the picture brought him.
The reader can make all sorts of assumptions about why Modine let the book "just end", but it is unfulfilling.
July 18, 2012
Another perspective on the mind games Stanley Kubrick played with his actors to create his masterpieces. Modine starts out so optimistic and eager to be on this film and by the end of production he just seems a bit broken. Overall, a depressing read, because I really like the film and was disheartened to learn how painful it was to be a part of creating it.
May 7, 2020
Fascinating insight in to the life of a lead actor working under Kubrick, a notorious perfectionist. I may have enjoyed Modine’s book more than Kubrick’s film. I listened to the audiobook, which is narrated by Modine, and aided by sound effects that build a compelling atmosphere.
December 31, 2022
That Stanley Kubrick, pretty level-headed guy, I'd say.
There's that line that Kubrick says about why he does so many takes: "Actors don't know their lines." It may sound pretentious at first, but when Matthew Modine adds on to it with, "When Stanley said that actors don't know their lines, he didn't mean the words." He... earns getting to say that.
What's engrossing about this process of Kubrick's - in this case the year long shoot (albeit with some delays not all on the filmmaker) for Full Metal Jacket - is all about this idea of knowing and not knowing what he wants... and that question if he always knew is practically besided the point. By 1985-86 he had far reached a stage of freedom (albeit in a commercial medium and a genre film) that the making of a film for him was more about exploration, experimentation, and trying to get an actor to be natural as possible... which is a lot harder to do for some than others. Sometimes for this case it meant jettisoning one cast actor (the guy who was originally Sgt. Hartman who, as many actors do, held back his full force of delivery in rehearsals) and bringing on the guy who was whipping the extras into to shape (R Lee Ermy, who I didn't know due to a car crash extended the shooting schedule more than *just* Kubrick's experimentation).
Sometimes it meant Modine having to walk around by himself on the set and Kubrick coming up to ask what's wrong, the actor in exasperation saying he didn't know who this guy Joker is or how to play him, and Kubrick giving an almost savant-Yoda response to *not* act and be himself. Whoa. And sometimes it meant being on a stage so very very long. I don't even think after listening to this Kubrick comes off as a perfectionist; the entire running mishegas around the ending seems proof of that, which was changed and multiple ideas were considered and reconsidered (to the point when, once Modine lands on it with SK and the director's response, he wonders if he was fucked with all along and this was the ending the director and writers planned anyway as a test).
But there's a part of me that when I hear about the making of this, or 2001 or Dr Strangelove or Eyes Wide Shut (and to an extent the Shining, his abuse et al), I have an admiration for his artistic spirit. I think the general impression that's been fostered by cinephiles (though I'm sure Kubrick's reputation didn't help) was that his Perfectionism meant that he would drive his actors to be drained of any 'acting' until they were robots. But seeing his films that's not true to me, and listening to Modine recount how Kubrick would respond to Modine's choices with "what was that?" Reaponses is kind of amusing... until one realizes that in a sense his tuning in to actors was far less theoretical and more organic and/or instinctual. And to Modines credit as a writer, he gets to a certain kind of empathy: it's not what he is doing wrong as an actor, he realizes, it's what this filmmaker can't see in his own conscious state of the material.
In other words, this diary, though with (understandably) many personal tangents, is a sort of act of reckoning and empathy for his one time director. Other actors and directors asked him "so... what's *he* like?!" And the underlying impression of their question may be closer to "what's this freak up to" more than a genuine interest in process. What one comes away with in Modine's diary is that Kubrick was and wasn't a tyrant, and he was and wasn't a sweet-hearted older artistic soul. It might seem like he was fucking with people (the bit about Modines baby name would almost be funny, if maybe this shows like... did SK have a touch of aspergers on top of everything else?) but he also got fucked with too.
It seems like Modine was equally humbled and pissed off, frustrated and in awe, of what Kubrick could accomplish and what almost could be called OCD on the director's end. It cost him work, it cost him time with his infant child, it even cost him (arguably) hearing loss. And on occasion, Modine could screw up, badly, and it's to his credit that he's candid about his mistakes. It's a powerful, complex portrait of what sounded like one of the most difficult shoots in modern movies... except for the other Kubrick shoots.
*fyi the audiobook version, which I listened to in one sitting, is worth indulging in even as it almost is presented more like a podcast with audio effects and certain filters for some of the voices and beats.
There's that line that Kubrick says about why he does so many takes: "Actors don't know their lines." It may sound pretentious at first, but when Matthew Modine adds on to it with, "When Stanley said that actors don't know their lines, he didn't mean the words." He... earns getting to say that.
What's engrossing about this process of Kubrick's - in this case the year long shoot (albeit with some delays not all on the filmmaker) for Full Metal Jacket - is all about this idea of knowing and not knowing what he wants... and that question if he always knew is practically besided the point. By 1985-86 he had far reached a stage of freedom (albeit in a commercial medium and a genre film) that the making of a film for him was more about exploration, experimentation, and trying to get an actor to be natural as possible... which is a lot harder to do for some than others. Sometimes for this case it meant jettisoning one cast actor (the guy who was originally Sgt. Hartman who, as many actors do, held back his full force of delivery in rehearsals) and bringing on the guy who was whipping the extras into to shape (R Lee Ermy, who I didn't know due to a car crash extended the shooting schedule more than *just* Kubrick's experimentation).
Sometimes it meant Modine having to walk around by himself on the set and Kubrick coming up to ask what's wrong, the actor in exasperation saying he didn't know who this guy Joker is or how to play him, and Kubrick giving an almost savant-Yoda response to *not* act and be himself. Whoa. And sometimes it meant being on a stage so very very long. I don't even think after listening to this Kubrick comes off as a perfectionist; the entire running mishegas around the ending seems proof of that, which was changed and multiple ideas were considered and reconsidered (to the point when, once Modine lands on it with SK and the director's response, he wonders if he was fucked with all along and this was the ending the director and writers planned anyway as a test).
But there's a part of me that when I hear about the making of this, or 2001 or Dr Strangelove or Eyes Wide Shut (and to an extent the Shining, his abuse et al), I have an admiration for his artistic spirit. I think the general impression that's been fostered by cinephiles (though I'm sure Kubrick's reputation didn't help) was that his Perfectionism meant that he would drive his actors to be drained of any 'acting' until they were robots. But seeing his films that's not true to me, and listening to Modine recount how Kubrick would respond to Modine's choices with "what was that?" Reaponses is kind of amusing... until one realizes that in a sense his tuning in to actors was far less theoretical and more organic and/or instinctual. And to Modines credit as a writer, he gets to a certain kind of empathy: it's not what he is doing wrong as an actor, he realizes, it's what this filmmaker can't see in his own conscious state of the material.
In other words, this diary, though with (understandably) many personal tangents, is a sort of act of reckoning and empathy for his one time director. Other actors and directors asked him "so... what's *he* like?!" And the underlying impression of their question may be closer to "what's this freak up to" more than a genuine interest in process. What one comes away with in Modine's diary is that Kubrick was and wasn't a tyrant, and he was and wasn't a sweet-hearted older artistic soul. It might seem like he was fucking with people (the bit about Modines baby name would almost be funny, if maybe this shows like... did SK have a touch of aspergers on top of everything else?) but he also got fucked with too.
It seems like Modine was equally humbled and pissed off, frustrated and in awe, of what Kubrick could accomplish and what almost could be called OCD on the director's end. It cost him work, it cost him time with his infant child, it even cost him (arguably) hearing loss. And on occasion, Modine could screw up, badly, and it's to his credit that he's candid about his mistakes. It's a powerful, complex portrait of what sounded like one of the most difficult shoots in modern movies... except for the other Kubrick shoots.
*fyi the audiobook version, which I listened to in one sitting, is worth indulging in even as it almost is presented more like a podcast with audio effects and certain filters for some of the voices and beats.
April 17, 2018
The first part of the film is AMAZING. An interesting view inside the film, the actor, and Kubrick. Was Stanley somewhat Aspergers? Seems like he couldn't put things in to words, but could see things. I'm glad the lost the original ending, it would have made FMJ, just another war film. At the time the film was released, I was a bit unsatisfied with the ending, but I was also a kid, a bit younger than Matthew. I appreciate the ending more now, and was gratified to see how it came to be, other than the, seemingly, typical Kubrick 100 to 1 film ratio. I listened to the audiobook was is narrated by Matthew, so it ads to verisimilitude. He repeats the story of how he helped Vincent D'Onofrio get the job as Pyle. If you like Kubrick, Full Metal Jacket, War films, or Matthew Modine, I think you'll like this one.
April 1, 2022
It was literally a good book but, it always talk about the author who make this diary and the director of the film or the author of this film.God i really wish if theres a Book Roman of "Full Metal Jacket"
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 12, 2024
I enjoyed the audiobook more than the movie itself.
February 1, 2025
good tidbits this would have driven me insane
January 15, 2016
Il diario della lavorazione di Full Metal Jacket dagli occhi del suo attore protagonista. Modine racconta la sua esperienza sul set in stile sceneggiatura, con dialoghi e stacchi di montaggio da un episodio all'altro. Bellissime le fotografie scattate a Beckton e durante le prove. Il libro è in edizione limitata di 20.000 copie e ha una copertina in metallo lucido, un "full metal jacket".
July 9, 2015
A nice peek into the making of the movie "Full Metal Jacket" as experienced by the lead actor Matthew Modine.
Displaying 1 - 14 of 14 reviews