Anti-war movies hurt America - and debase the art of film
Joe Gillis
If Tokyo Rose were alive today, she wouldn't get jail time - she'd get
a three-picture deal.
Throwing all caution and fiscal sanity to the winds, the Hollywood
establishment is releasing a slate of anti-war films that do violence
to the cause of American victory - and to the art form of film.
Art is best served by an open competition of ideas. When only the anti-
war left is allowed to make films in Hollywood and pro-American voices
are excluded, the result is movies that are ideologically rigid,
morally shallow and creatively sterile. Is it any wonder that recent
anti-war films like "Rendition" and "In the Valley of Elah" have
bombed at the box office?
Hollywood's enforced ideological conformity is obvious: "Elah," the
Tommy Lee Jones vehicle now in theaters, and "Redacted," directed by
Brian DePalma and set for release later this month, both depict
American troops in Iraq as murderers and psychopaths. "Rendition,"
released last month, asserts that the American government allows
innocent Muslim civilians to be tortured. "Lions for Lambs," featuring
Robert Redford and Tom Cruise, depicts a venal Republican senator
risking the lives of American troops in order to advance his political
career. "Stop Loss," starring Ryan Phillippe, posits that the only
noble American soldier is the one who refuses to serve.
Even the relatively tame "The Kingdom" concludes with a coda that
draws a moral equivalency between American CIA agents and Saudi
terrorists.
These films and others are the crescendo of three years' worth of anti-
war films. Even our sacred memories of World War II have been
tarnished in recent years by films like "The Good German" (a ghastly,
morally confused remake of "Casablanca").
This proliferation of anti-war cinema in the midst of a war is
unprecedented. In World Wars I and II, Hollywood filmmakers - both
conservative and liberal - rushed to support the war effort regardless
of which administration was leading it.
During the Great War, conservative stars like Mary Pickford and
Douglas Fairbanks worked with liberals like Charlie Chaplin to raise
millions of dollars through Liberty Loan drives.
During the Second World War, Hollywood's Republican studio heads -
patriots like Louis B. Mayer, Jack Warner and Darryl F. Zanuck - did
not hesitate to make films supporting the war effort when Democrat
Franklin Roosevelt asked for their help. Great pro-war films like
"Casablanca," "To Have and Have Not," "Sergeant York" and the "Why We
Fight" series were the result.
Hollywood's support for American military efforts continued during the
Korean War and into the early Vietnam era. Despite growing anti-war
sentiment, the studios made not a single major anti-Vietnam War movie
while our troops were still on the ground fighting. The only notable
Vietnam movie made during the war, John Wayne's "The Green Berets,"
was ardently pro-American.
That all changed when the Baby Boomers took over Hollywood in the
1970s and weaved a new cinematic narrative of anti-American self-
loathing. This narrative is now being applied to the post-9/11 world -
and dissenting conservative voices are being systematically excluded.
Talented filmmakers like Cyrus Nowrasteh (ABC's "The Path to 9/11"),
Emmy Award-winning screenwriter Robert Avrech ("Body Double"),
novelist and screenwriter Andrew Klavan (Clint Eastwood's "True
Crime") and actor Robert Davi ("Profiler") have all tried to get pro-
war projects made these past three years, and have all been turned
down by the Hollywood system.
Even superstar Bruce Willis has tried to get a film made about the
famed "Deuce Four" battalion serving in Iraq - but has gotten nowhere
with the studios.
The resulting ideological conformity is a disaster both for America
and for the art form of film. Art must serve truth if it is to be
compelling. When Hollywood systematically muddies distinctions between
freedom-loving Americans and terrorists, it's no wonder the resulting
films resemble the tedious "Rendition" - instead of enthralling
classics like "Casablanca."
It's hard to tell good stories when you equivocate about tyranny - and
even harder to get the public to go along with it.
George Peatty
wrote:
>That all changed when the Baby Boomers took over Hollywood in the
>1970s and weaved a new cinematic narrative of anti-American self-
>loathing. This narrative is now being applied to the post-9/11 world -
>and dissenting conservative voices are being systematically excluded.
The most frightening symptom of American decline in my lifetime. This self
loathing will undermine our values and institutions to where someday they
will be repudiated and repealed. I am grateful that at my age, I am not
likely to live to see it .. But, sadly, I have lived to see the start of it
..
wantthis
> On 1 Nov 2007 12:30:35 -0700, Joe Gillis <FloatingInTheP...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >That all changed when the Baby Boomers took over Hollywood in the
> >1970s and weaved a new cinematic narrative of anti-American self-
> >loathing. This narrative is now being applied to the post-9/11 world -
> >and dissenting conservative voices are being systematically excluded.
maybe just maybe these movies wouldnt be popular. HoWEVER THEY ARE
POPULAR BECAUSE truth hurts....
Frank Arthur
"George Peatty" <peattyg...@copper.net> wrote in message
news:1nbki35ih2uuen8e0...@4ax.com...
A decline in the USA if free people are not free to express their
point of view
whether it supports the government in power or not. An American
decline took
place during the Bush administration where protections and guarantees
under
the Bill of Rights are taken away from us by secret government
snooping and
imprisoning people indefinately without lawful recourse.
Bert Hyman
news:1193948363.5...@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
Popular?
So, the post's statement "Is it any wonder that recent anti-war films
like "Rendition" and "In the Valley of Elah" have bombed at the box
office?" isn't true?
--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | be...@iphouse.com
Jerry Kraus
Bert, some films make money, others don't. How long can Hollywood
Studios stay in business if their films don't make money? How likely
are they to make films if they don't think they will make money? What
possibility is there that they are not simply trying to accomodate
popular preferences in film? And popular political views?
Look, these guys in Hollywood are rich and part of the status quo.
They themselves may not particularly support the views presented in
these films. But, obviously, this is what they think will sell. Why
else would they make them?
Jim Beaver
"Joe Gillis" <Floating...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193931069.9...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/11/01/2007-11-01_antiwar_movies_hurt_america__and_debase_.html
>
> If Tokyo Rose were alive today, she wouldn't get jail time - she'd get
> a three-picture deal.
>
> Throwing all caution and fiscal sanity to the winds, the Hollywood
> establishment is releasing a slate of anti-war films that do violence
> to the cause of American victory - and to the art form of film.
Who wrote this bilge? Medved? Sounds like him.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
> "Joe Gillis" <FloatingInTheP...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1193931069.9...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
> >http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/11/01/2007-11-01_antiwar_mov...
>
> > If Tokyo Rose were alive today, she wouldn't get jail time - she'd get
> > a three-picture deal.
>
> > Throwing all caution and fiscal sanity to the winds, the Hollywood
> > establishment is releasing a slate of anti-war films that do violence
> > to the cause of American victory - and to the art form of film.
>
> Who wrote this bilge? Medved? Sounds like him.
Not Medved, it was written by GOVINDINI MURTY <shrugging>. At least
that's the byline.
neoconis_ignoramus
wrote:
Medved, failed critic turned whiny right-wing hack? That's the Medved
I assume you're referring to.
Kingo Gondo
"Joe Gillis" <Floating...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1193931069.9...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
> http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/11/01/2007-11-01_antiwar_movies_hurt_america__and_debase_.html
>
> If Tokyo Rose were alive today, she wouldn't get jail time - she'd get
> a three-picture deal.
>
> Throwing all caution and fiscal sanity to the winds, the Hollywood
> establishment is releasing a slate of anti-war films that do violence
> to the cause of American victory - and to the art form of film.
>
> Art is best served by an open competition of ideas. When only the anti-
> war left is allowed to make films in Hollywood and pro-American voices
> are excluded, the result is movies that are ideologically rigid,
> morally shallow and creatively sterile. Is it any wonder that recent
> anti-war films like "Rendition" and "In the Valley of Elah" have
> bombed at the box office?
>
> Hollywood's enforced ideological conformity is obvious: "Elah," the
> Tommy Lee Jones vehicle now in theaters, and "Redacted," directed by
> Brian DePalma and set for release later this month, both depict
> American troops in Iraq as murderers and psychopaths.
Wow, here's a bulletin--there are a lot of murderers and psychopaths in any
armed forces, especially a volunteer force. And since the US armed forces
have been required to lower standards (since most sane people do not want to
commit their fates, or those of their children, to the sociopaths in the
White House), we probably have more than ever--shocking! Despite ample
training and clear rules to the contrary, there have been enough disclosed
atrocities to make the point beyond dispute.
>"Rendition,"
> released last month, asserts that the American government allows
> innocent Muslim civilians to be tortured.
I hate to dsiturb this rant with something called "facts", but that has
happened, exactly.
>"Lions for Lambs," featuring
> Robert Redford and Tom Cruise, depicts a venal Republican senator
> risking the lives of American troops in order to advance his political
> career.
And that is not credible how? Most politicians would set their mother on
fire to get an extra vote. It has always been thus.
>"Stop Loss," starring Ryan Phillippe, posits that the only
> noble American soldier is the one who refuses to serve.
>
> Even the relatively tame "The Kingdom" concludes with a coda that
> draws a moral equivalency between American CIA agents and Saudi
> terrorists.
>
> These films and others are the crescendo of three years' worth of anti-
> war films. Even our sacred memories of World War II have been
> tarnished in recent years by films like "The Good German" (a ghastly,
> morally confused remake of "Casablanca").
When somebody starts talking about "sacred memories" generally, I know they
are an idiot. When invoke address this moronic phrase to reference a
conflict that resulted in 50 million dead, I know they are nuts, too.
> This proliferation of anti-war cinema in the midst of a war is
> unprecedented. In World Wars I and II, Hollywood filmmakers - both
> conservative and liberal - rushed to support the war effort regardless
> of which administration was leading it.
>
> During the Great War, conservative stars like Mary Pickford and
> Douglas Fairbanks worked with liberals like Charlie Chaplin to raise
> millions of dollars through Liberty Loan drives.
And they were fucking morons. WWI was the stupidest conflict in history, and
the US had no business getting involved in it.
> During the Second World War, Hollywood's Republican studio heads -
> patriots like Louis B. Mayer, Jack Warner and Darryl F. Zanuck - did
> not hesitate to make films supporting the war effort when Democrat
> Franklin Roosevelt asked for their help. Great pro-war films like
> "Casablanca," "To Have and Have Not," "Sergeant York" and the "Why We
> Fight" series were the result.
The problem with WW2 it is the exceptional war, although everyone tries to
make it the rulebook--the need was clearcut (Japs bomb Pearl Harbor, Nazis
declare war on the US in the same week) and the adversaries were completely
hideous (of course so was the main ally, but that is another story). This
moral clarity, such as it was (let's forget the mass murdering ally for a
minute), is comforting to little minds. But most wars lack just such
clarity, which is something this idiotic commentator seems to be immune to
understanding.
> Hollywood's support for American military efforts continued during the
> Korean War and into the early Vietnam era. Despite growing anti-war
> sentiment, the studios made not a single major anti-Vietnam War movie
> while our troops were still on the ground fighting. The only notable
> Vietnam movie made during the war, John Wayne's "The Green Berets,"
> was ardently pro-American.
It was also pro-awful.
> That all changed when the Baby Boomers took over Hollywood in the
> 1970s and weaved a new cinematic narrative of anti-American self-
> loathing. This narrative is now being applied to the post-9/11 world -
> and dissenting conservative voices are being systematically excluded.
>
> Talented filmmakers like Cyrus Nowrasteh (ABC's "The Path to 9/11"),
> Emmy Award-winning screenwriter Robert Avrech ("Body Double"),
> novelist and screenwriter Andrew Klavan (Clint Eastwood's "True
> Crime") and actor Robert Davi ("Profiler") have all tried to get pro-
> war projects made these past three years, and have all been turned
> down by the Hollywood system.
>
> Even superstar Bruce Willis has tried to get a film made about the
> famed "Deuce Four" battalion serving in Iraq - but has gotten nowhere
> with the studios.
Hmmm...forgive me for pointing out the obvious, but Rupert Murdoch owns News
Corp., which means he owns Fox as well--like in 20th Century Fox, the film
studio. He's a noted "conservative" isn't he? Yet Fox apparently doesn't
want these projects either. This leads me to believe they are either (a)
shit artistically or (b) viewed as likely dogs at the box office (my guess
is that the latter is the overwhelming consideration). So much for grand
conspiracies....
> The resulting ideological conformity is a disaster both for America
> and for the art form of film. Art must serve truth if it is to be
> compelling. When Hollywood systematically muddies distinctions between
> freedom-loving Americans and terrorists, it's no wonder the resulting
> films resemble the tedious "Rendition" - instead of enthralling
> classics like "Casablanca."
>
> It's hard to tell good stories when you equivocate about tyranny - and
> even harder to get the public to go along with it.
Nice non sequitur to end on--exactly who is "equivocating about tyranny"
lately? The people junking 200+ years of habeas corpus doctrine? Those using
fear to build a surveillance state? Nah, it's the filmmakers of course! What
a threat to liberty they constitute! Just ignore the man behind the curtain.
What a fucking joke.
Kingo Gondo
Feel free to put yourself out of our misery any time.
Oh wait, your still hoping Jeezbus is going to hoist your fat ass out of
here with that goddamned Rapture.
Oh well.
Smokie Darling (Annie)
>
> - Show quoted text -
Considering I wasn't referring to anyone, only answering a question
about who wrote the article, you may assume anything you like.
chatnoir
> On 1 Nov 2007 12:30:35 -0700, Joe Gillis <FloatingInTheP...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >That all changed when the Baby Boomers took over Hollywood in the
> >1970s and weaved a new cinematic narrative of anti-American self-
> >loathing. This narrative is now being applied to the post-9/11 world -
> >and dissenting conservative voices are being systematically excluded.
>
> The most frightening symptom of American decline in my lifetime. This self
> loathing will undermine our values and institutions to where someday they
> will be repudiated and repealed.
And then the people will Elect Bush the Younger!
Jim Beaver
> "Joe Gillis" <Floating...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1193931069.9...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>> http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/11/01/2007-11-01_antiwar_movies_hurt_america__and_debase_.html
>>
>
>> During the Second World War, Hollywood's Republican studio heads -
>> patriots like Louis B. Mayer, Jack Warner and Darryl F. Zanuck - did
>> not hesitate to make films supporting the war effort when Democrat
>> Franklin Roosevelt asked for their help. Great pro-war films like
>> "Casablanca," "To Have and Have Not," "Sergeant York" and the "Why We
>> Fight" series were the result.
Those were not "pro-war" films, they were "pro-cause" films. In the words
of John Huston (after being accused of making an anti-war film), "If I ever
make a pro-war film I hope they take me out and shoot me."
Jim Beaver
chatnoir
> http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/11/01/2007-11-01_antiwar_mov...
>
> If Tokyo Rose were alive today, she wouldn't get jail time - she'd get
> a three-picture deal.
>
She was railroaded!
Christopher Helms
> On Nov 1, 12:55 pm, George Peatty <peattyg47-1...@copper.net> wrote:> On 1 Nov 2007 12:30:35 -0700, Joe Gillis <FloatingInTheP...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > >That all changed when the Baby Boomers took over Hollywood in the
> > >1970s and weaved a new cinematic narrative of anti-American self-
> > >loathing. This narrative is now being applied to the post-9/11 world -
> > >and dissenting conservative voices are being systematically excluded.
Yeah, that's why Top Gun, Red Dawn, All those films made from Tom
Clancy books, the Rambo films and all those Chuck Norris and Dolf
Lungren films never got made. That's why Flight 93 never got made.
Your voice is being heard. You guys have been pulling this shit since
the 1970s with every medium there is. You've done it with almost all
of talk radio, you've done it with the entire mainstream US media,
most of cable television and now you're trying to do it with
Hollywood. You act like you're politely opposing "bias" when you're
actually trying to corner the market on it. At its most liberal,
Hollywood has never been as far to the left of the 50 yard line as it
will be to the right of it if you assholes ever get your way.
Spark...@gmail.com
Some people have decided that Jesus was right and that large scale
killing of one another is a bad thing. And they present these views in
a movie. And this is a frightening symptom? (I don't see where "self-
loathing" fits into any of this, but whatever...)
Martin Koolhoven
> The most frightening symptom of American decline in my lifetime. This self
> loathing will undermine our values and institutions to where someday they
> will be repudiated and repealed. I am grateful that at my age, I am not
> likely to live to see it .. But, sadly, I have lived to see the start of it
> ..
Wat exactly are you affraid of?
Martin
I Know Why the Caged Ice Sings
news:1193948363.5...@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> actually if we didnt do so much stuff that makes ME LOATH OURSELVES
> maybe just maybe these movies wouldnt be popular. HoWEVER THEY ARE
> POPULAR BECAUSE truth hurts....
They're NOT popular; that was one of the points of the article. Home of the
Brave, In the Valley of Elah, The Kingdom, Rendition....none of them were
hits, and most of them were cinematic bombs (look for Redacted and Lions for
Lambs to disintegrate upon impact). The last anti-war film that made any
money at the box office was Fahrenheit 9/11.
We get it, Hollywood. You dont' like this war, you dont' like this
President. At this point there's nothing left to say. He's not pulling out
the troops, and neither will President Clinton or Vice President Obama.
-------------------------------------
Icebreaker
Tobias: "Well, Michael, you really are quite the Cupid, aren't you? I tell
you, you can zing your arrow into my buttocks any time."
Michael: "Okay, you know what you do? You buy yourself a tape recorder, you
just record yourself for a whole day. I think you're going to be surprised
at some of your phrasing."
Neolibertarian
Joe Gillis <Floating...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/11/01/2007-11-01_antiwar_movies_hurt_
Pro war movies do the same thing, silly.
Honest films about contemporary events haven't been invented yet.
It really doesn't matter. It's not even art, it's just movies.
--
NeoLibertarian
"Politics, when I am in it, it makes me sick."
---William Howard Taft
K Swynford
On 1-Nov-2007, "Kingo Gondo" <kingo_nos...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Feel free to put yourself out of our misery any time.
>
> Oh wait, your still hoping Jeezbus is going to hoist your fat ass out of
> here with that goddamned Rapture.
>
> Oh well.
Er...Umm, most of the conservative "Jeezus freaks" support the chimp and his
war!
--
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." Benjamin Franklin
Kingo Gondo
"K Swynford" <kswy...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:472b24b9$0$25135$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> On 1-Nov-2007, "Kingo Gondo" <kingo_nos...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Feel free to put yourself out of our misery any time.
>>
>> Oh wait, your still hoping Jeezbus is going to hoist your fat ass out of
>> here with that goddamned Rapture.
>>
>> Oh well.
>
> Er...Umm, most of the conservative "Jeezus freaks" support the chimp and
> his
> war!
True, but "Kill a Muslim for Christ" just isn't as alliterative as "Kill a
Commie for Christ".
sirb...@hotmail.com
why is joe gillis such a fascist troll? oh yeah, because 'democrats'
respond.
wby...@ireland.com
George Clooney makes the big budget movies - Ocean's 11 (and the
others) so he can make movies that mean something - Michael Clayton,
Good Night and Good Luck. That's why he makes some movies and puts his
money up to back them.
WB Yeats
Steven L.
I'll bet those movies won't bomb overseas.
Much of Hollywood's revenue comes from overseas sales. The
anti-Christian, pro-Muslim movie "Kingdom of Heaven" bombed in the U.S.
but played to packed houses in the Middle East.
Hollywood is increasingly producing movies for a global audience. And
let's face it, the global audience often cheers when they see Uncle Sam
getting poked in the eye.
In a way, we should be proud of ourselves. It's America that has done
so much to help create a peaceful, prosperous world that can now afford
to purchase anti-American entertainment.
--
Steven L.
Email: sdli...@earthlinkNOSPAM.net
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
steve
On 2-Nov-2007, "Steven L." <sdli...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Hollywood is increasingly producing movies for a global audience. And
> let's face it, the global audience often cheers when they see Uncle Sam
> getting poked in the eye.
Who was it that said (approximately) "Capitalists will sell you the rope you
hang them with." ?
--
"False face must hide what the false heart doth know."
Macbeth
snide sneering Leftwing Jew Soderbergh is making a Che Guevara movie to turn hispanics against USA and white folks
> "Joe Gillis" <FloatingInTheP...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1193931069.9...@z24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> >http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/11/01/2007-11-01_antiwar_mov...
>
> > If Tokyo Rose were alive today, she wouldn't get jail time - she'd get
> > a three-picture deal.
>
> > Throwing all caution and fiscal sanity to the winds, the Hollywood
> > establishment is releasing a slate of anti-war films that do violence
> > to the cause of American victory - and to the art form of film.
>
> > Art is best served by an open competition of ideas. When only the anti-
> > war left is allowed to make films in Hollywood and pro-American voices
> > are excluded, the result is movies that are ideologically rigid,
> > morally shallow and creatively sterile. Is it any wonder that recent
> > anti-war films like "Rendition" and "In the Valley of Elah" have
> > bombed at the box office?
>
> > Hollywood's enforced ideological conformity is obvious: "Elah," the
> > Tommy Lee Jones vehicle now in theaters, and "Redacted," directed by
> > Brian DePalma and set for release later this month, both depict
> > American troops in Iraq as murderers and psychopaths.
>
> Wow, here's a bulletin--there are a lot of murderers and psychopaths in any
> armed forces, especially a volunteer force. And since the US armed forces
> have been required to lower standards (since most sane people do not want to
> commit their fates, or those of their children, to the sociopaths in the
> White House), we probably have more than ever--shocking! Despite ample
> training and clear rules to the contrary, there have been enough disclosed
> atrocities to make the point beyond dispute.
that is not true. there are NOT a lot of psychos in the military. but
there are some. and a few are all you need to end up with awful
atrocities. but, there are NOT a lot.
but, the pertinent question is why is hollywood making movies NOW
about this particular war?
why is hollywood so selective? why were there so many movies about
psychos and war crimes in relation to the vietnam war and almost no
such about WWII--when in fact, american soldiers far more atrocities
in WWII.
and read the recent article in NY Review of Books. american treatment
of german prisoners was 100x worse than its treatments of gooks or
ragheads. yet, why did'n't hollywood makes movies about the dark side
of WWII?
you know the reason. it's because iraq war is seen as bush's war. and
liberals are out to get bush.
do you really think hollywood will make a movie about how american
military personnel tortured 1000s of german prisoners? or, a movie
about how israeli soldiers tortured and killed alot of innocent arab
civlians?
when will hollywood make a movie about what israel did to lebanon a
few yrs back?
of course, all armies have psychos. all wars have war crimes. but,
hollywood selectively sheds negative light on certain wars while
romanticizing other wars for POLITICAL purposes.
and how come hollywood isn't making movies about what hussein did to
kurds? or how iraqi soldiers raped and slaughtered many kuwaitis and
other folks? such things would justify the current war.
now, there is much to be criticized and even condemned about the war.
but, hollywood is not being truthful here.
they are trying to undermine the war because they wanna totally
disgrace bush and discredit republicans. now, that's good political
strategy, and republicans like to play dirty too. but, the media is
mostly in the hands of jewish liberals and like to play dirty in favor
of dems.
> >"Rendition,"
> > released last month, asserts that the American government allows
> > innocent Muslim civilians to be tortured.
>
> I hate to dsiturb this rant with something called "facts", but that has
> happened, exactly.
they were not tortured. they were just harassed and brutalized to
squeeze some facts out of.
frat party hazing stuff.
>
> >"Lions for Lambs," featuring
> > Robert Redford and Tom Cruise, depicts a venal Republican senator
> > risking the lives of American troops in order to advance his political
> > career.
>
> And that is not credible how? Most politicians would set their mother on
> fire to get an extra vote. It has always been thus.
true. but, why not make movies about democratic creeps? why is it
always republican creeps? now, the answer is simple. it's DUH, cuz
hollywood is liberal and favor dems. and conservatives should stop
bitching and set up their own movie industry.
i don't understand why conservatives leave it up to liberals to run
the movie business and then complain that libs don't make conservative
movies. that would be like wondering why catholic church doesn't
support abortion.
>
> >"Stop Loss," starring Ryan Phillippe, posits that the only
> > noble American soldier is the one who refuses to serve.
>
> > Even the relatively tame "The Kingdom" concludes with a coda that
> > draws a moral equivalency between American CIA agents and Saudi
> > terrorists.
>
> > These films and others are the crescendo of three years' worth of anti-
> > war films. Even our sacred memories of World War II have been
> > tarnished in recent years by films like "The Good German" (a ghastly,
> > morally confused remake of "Casablanca").
>
> When somebody starts talking about "sacred memories" generally, I know they
> are an idiot. When invoke address this moronic phrase to reference a
> conflict that resulted in 50 million dead, I know they are nuts, too.
it's sacred to people who were there and fought againt a great evil.
i was there, you weren't. for guys like me, it's sacred cuz we fought
for a great cause. it's something we would never bullshit about.
>
> > This proliferation of anti-war cinema in the midst of a war is
> > unprecedented. In World Wars I and II, Hollywood filmmakers - both
> > conservative and liberal - rushed to support the war effort regardless
> > of which administration was leading it.
>
> > During the Great War, conservative stars like Mary Pickford and
> > Douglas Fairbanks worked with liberals like Charlie Chaplin to raise
> > millions of dollars through Liberty Loan drives.
>
> And they were fucking morons. WWI was the stupidest conflict in history, and
> the US had no business getting involved in it.
i agree with you. and brits should have stayed out too. germans should
have won and become the dominant power in europe. war would have ended
much sooner. no communism, no nazism. just german dominated europe...
like we have US dominated north america.
>
> > During the Second World War, Hollywood's Republican studio heads -
> > patriots like Louis B. Mayer, Jack Warner and Darryl F. Zanuck - did
> > not hesitate to make films supporting the war effort when Democrat
> > Franklin Roosevelt asked for their help. Great pro-war films like
> > "Casablanca," "To Have and Have Not," "Sergeant York" and the "Why We
> > Fight" series were the result.
>
> The problem with WW2 it is the exceptional war, although everyone tries to
> make it the rulebook--the need was clearcut (Japs bomb Pearl Harbor, Nazis
> declare war on the US in the same week) and the adversaries were completely
> hideous (of course so was the main ally, but that is another story). This
> moral clarity, such as it was (let's forget the mass murdering ally for a
> minute), is comforting to little minds. But most wars lack just such
> clarity, which is something this idiotic commentator seems to be immune to
> understanding.\
but germans declared war on US cuz FDR had already declared defacto
war on germany on the high seas. US was already supplying war
material to UK.
also, moral clarity of WWII wasn't so clear. stalin wasn't much better
than hitler.
and UK and france were imperialist powers who did to most of the world
what germans did to most of europe.
and USA had been created thru conquest, genocide, and slavery.
Kingo Gondo
> i was there, you weren't. for guys like me, it's sacred cuz we fought
> for a great cause. it's something we would never bullshit about.
Gaza, this is some of your funniest shit yet.
tomcervo
> Much of Hollywood's revenue comes from overseas sales. The
> anti-Christian, pro-Muslim movie "Kingdom of Heaven" bombed in the U.S.
> but played to packed houses in the Middle East.
You never saw it, did you? Stop getting your impressions from Medved,
etal. It owed more to Kipling ("East is east", etc.) than the Koran.
wby...@ireland.com
Joe Gillis was Holden's part in Sunset Blvd. The Gillis is more like
the dead orang - or maybe Dobie.
WB Yeats
George Peatty
>A decline in the USA if free people are not free to express their
>point of view
>whether it supports the government in power or not. An American
>decline took
>place during the Bush administration where protections and guarantees
>under
>the Bill of Rights are taken away from us by secret government
>snooping and
>imprisoning people indefinately without lawful recourse.
Yeah, and saddest of all, we gave those rights away willignly, cheering as the
legislature enacted the law, in the name of security. Some famous quote to the
effect that people who do that deserve neither freedom nor security ..
Malik...@gmail.com
Although, I have to admit that I'm very much looking forward to seeing
Stop-Loss.
I'm not so sure that it actually "...posits that the only
noble American soldier is the one who refuses to serve." But rather
shows a side and situation from the perspective of one soldier and
their handling of the situation.
More so, that a noble soldier is not necessarily one that "refuses" to
serve, but one who actually puts some though into what they are being
asked to do.
Anyway, I stopped-by the official Stop Loss site, which has a pretty
cool forum for people to comment on how they feel about the issue and
film. The director Kim Peirce is also pretty involved in the
conversations, too...which is great.