http://today.reuters.com/news/artic...C_0_US-VENICE-IRAQ.xml&src=rss&rpc=22&sp=true I fail to see how one incident condemns an entire enterprise, but who am I to be logical?
It's interesting, because up to this point, Hollywood has restrained itself wonderfully from delving into the politics of ongoing conflict. But now, according to this story, I see there are eight films coming out that are war-related? Wonder what the tipping point was?
The furor over abu graib was finally dying down, ahd the surge was working pretty well. Democrats were starting to fear that we might win. So now's the time for some enemy proganda. You think US troops didn't commit a few atrocities during WW2? Of course they did, it's the nature of war. But you can bet your ass that no American made movies about it! General Patton himself told my grandfather that a bullet costs a few cents, while it costs $10 a day to keep POW's. He said, "I'm not telling you to shoot all the prisoners, but use your common sence." Imagine what today's media would have made of that! Making movies that highlight US atrocities serves only as propaganda for the enemy and inflames opposition to us. It is tantamont to treason to make a movie such as this while the war is still being fought.
Why do you Conservatives insist on saying we're starting to win the war? Excuse me but we've already won the friggin war. That barren Sand Dune of a country is nothing more then a parking lot. We've decimated their entire military, we've killed Saddam, and most of his cronies. The only thing we're fighting now are local militia's. And a few bands of Al-queda death squads. Who shake our Soldiers hands by day, then attack them come nightfall. That's why we Democrats want our Soliders home. They've completed thier mission. Staying in there is stupidity, not cutting and running.
You think the images of bombed out hospitals and children missing limbs from us bombing runs doesnt serve as enemy propaganda? You think the hundreds of thousands of innocent people killed is detering terrorists? You think those people killed dont have familes that arent going to be pretty effing pissed that their children died because of our occupation? You think that killing someone inoccent in the name of freedom justifies our cause? just wondering It works both ways bud, I think that we need to see the bad so that we can make a decision, instead of someone comming on fox and saying "the surge is working".....great but at what cost?
I wonder too about where he was during Saddams murdering and mahyem? Why don't we ever get to see the truth about how Saddam really ruled his country with his torturing and beheadings and chemicals used on the Kurds?:shrug:
quote madanthonywayne Making movies that highlight US atrocities serves only as propaganda for the enemy and inflames opposition to us. It is tantamont to treason to make a movie such as this while the war is still being fought. Treason ? If movie director thinks that hes country is waging illegal/pointless/needless war and want to public to know what is going on in there and specially if public opinion is against the war already I wouldnt speak about treason, specially in democratic country. If he twists the truth then it is a different story. Or are the issues why the war is going on and why it started in the first place already clear to everybody ? And is it better to debate about those things after the war ??? No debate is what war supporters want, that is logical. Both sides are entitled to their opinion (propaganda) and there has been a lot films with military money on in its budgets too.
I agree that this one criminal incident, shocking though it is (especially since this is the first I've heard about it) doesn't shed much light on Iraq as a whole (for the record, I'm told Our American Cousin was a very funny play). I do think Hollywood has intervened in conflicts before. M*A*S*H (1972) comes to mind, and in a much heavier handed way, I think sides were chosen in WWII. There are those who compare the propaganda from Hollywood during WWII to that of Berlin in the same era (albeit somewhat more subtle). Also being unsubtle, perhaps DePalma is just the Leni Riefenstahl of our age. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I don't think it's going to be anti-war at all. Who do you think is going to bring these crimminals to justice? The American Military. It's not only Heroic when you gun down an enemy fighter. It's also Heroic to report one of your fellow countrymen for breaking the moral code of the military.
Americans are a very desensitised people where other people's suffering is concerned. The film will make no difference.
Of course I agree that we easily and quickly won the war. I was simply using the standard terminology in referring to the present situation as the "Iraq War". But I wouldn't go so far as to say we're getting our asses kicked in the occupation. That would imply our losses are worse than theirs. We simply haven't been maintaining order to as great a degree as is necesary to achieve our goals.
Redacted is currently being shown at the Venice Film Festival. Typically, high-brow eyebrows will inject a certain mystique into a project deemed noteworthy, and that is more than enough to set a ball rolling—recall Michael Moore's 9/11 film at Cannes? It caused a scrupulous sensation, and when global sensations of any sort occur in the high-brow world of culture, America don't like being left out in the cold.
A sensation nonetheless, at the time. A harbinger, in my opinion, that contributed to draw the curtains open on the White House. Rove is out, man.
