All a-twitter to release a series of “gritty” and “hard hitting” anti-war movies while American forces are still engaged in combat overseas, Hollywood’s Film Actors Guild once again goes boldly where angels would disdain to tread:
“Antiwar movies are coming out now because public opinion has crystallized against the war,” (Brown University policy and media expert Darrell) West says.
“It’s safe for Hollywood to make these kind of movies without risking much of a backlash. There’s always a risk when you make an antiwar movie in the middle of the war that people are going to be ticked off,” he says. “But now, with two-thirds of Americans thinking that the war in Iraq was a mistake, it’s the perfect time to release these kinds of movies.
“There’s been a tremendous change in American public opinion over the last two years. In 2004, Bush was re-elected based on the war on terrorism, but now the administration is seen as having mangled foreign policy and put the country into a mess. So it’s safe to take on the administration in a way that it would not have been two or three years ago.”
Not safe like “before we would have been bundled off to Gitmo,” nor safe like “we’d have been blacklisted and never worked again,” but safe like, “we can make a ton of money playing on the fears of the mall-going set while 160,000 American volunteer soldiers risk their lives in hellish conditions to preserve our freedoms.” That kind of safe.
Oh, noble.
You jest by saying “oh, noble,” but if you listen to people like Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon, they really do think that their vocal protestation of all things Iraq War-related is the right thing to be doing. It’s as if some of these people (all of them financially “stable” by the way) believe that they are living in some kind of third world oppressive regime against which they must rebel. It’s startling, really…
They are ’safe’ to sneer at better men and women than they’ll ever be, who make them look bad just by breathing.
The Penns and Sarandons of the world mistake “safety” for being ignored with silent contempt. Same outward appearing result, but very different cause. No matter, because the visible result suits their insatible vanity.
The truth, Sean and Susan, is that you’re both just getting old and silly.
And Hollywood, we’re just not that into you.
My guess (and hope and prayer) is that ALL of these movies will bomb at the box office. Although Hollywood types have a hard time understanding it, most Americans just aren’t into demonizing our military. Or losing wars.
The most icky part will be when these films bomb (because they won’t be very good, at least not all of them), they’ll scream they were censored or their First Amendment rights were infringed.
They don’t understand that they may be free to make such dreck and we are likewise free to *not* see the same. Free people, free choice. Just not a happy choice for them, that’s all.
I can hear the screams of “It’s not fair….” now.
I watched the movie Syrianna again last weekend. I found myself yelling at the TV. The next day I saw We Were Soldiers Once, and Young and had to grab the tissues a few times.
One of the things I pointed out to my TV during Syrianna was that a truthful movie could be made about the Chinese or French oil company involvement in African nations rather than the fantasy that Syrianna is. However, there would be no “self flagellation” factor to the thing so it wouldn’t do well at the U.S. box office.
How many of you recall that the movie Syrianna was “based on Bob Baer’s book See No Evil?” Well, I read that book quite carefully and can tell you that the movie has almost nothing to do with the book. During the credits, at the VERY end of the movie a disclaimer pops up that says that the movie was “inspired” by the book but is a work of fiction. How many movie goers that want to believe the tripe put forth do you think actually read that disclaimer and processed what it ment?
So, here we go again; evil oil company America backed up by psychopath soldiers…
This is going to be interesting. Hollywood is out of step, as usual. The publishing house that published Marcus Luttrell’s Lone Survivor, the story of the SEAL attack which went tragically wrong, originally printed only 1500 copies, thinking that would be enough for us hard-core military boosters. Much to the publishers’ surprise, readers were clamoring for copies. I believe that they’re up to 275,000 by now, with maybe more to come. And elsewhere on the internet I read a story last week that there is a bidding war going on in Hollywood to do the movie.
Strange how the moonbats in Hollywood consistently misread America’s Heartland, isn’t it? Didn’t use to be that way. Back in WWII, Hollywood actors like Jimmy Stewart and other A-list thespians actually served [with honor] in our Armed Forces.
Very few grown-ups in the room right now, whether in Congress or in the entertainment world.
Marianne Matthews
Hollywood hasn’t done anything “couragious” in years, if ever. A movie like “Crash” would have been couragious in 1954. In 2004, not so much.
Which reminds me of another theme coming from Holywood these days. Why is it that they would have us believe that the only way for dis-advantaged urban youth to rise from thier surroundings is through the help of a young idealistic, white teacher?
#7/Jeopardy -
Perhaps it’s an inversion of the “Magic Negro” meme: Magic Caucasian.
Once again I am forced by these nutjobs to use language I don’t normally use – assholes. Every single one of them who participates in these “safe” movies – completely perfect definitions of the word – ass…hole.
What a shame that Hollywood doesn’t realize that if it weren’t for the very Military who they take such delight in denigrating and slandering, yes, slandering, none of them would be enjoying anything but goose-stepping to the tune of a dictator. Then again, they’d probably figure out a way to blame Pres. Bush.
Veritas et Fidelis Semper
I got a copy Marianne. I saw the trailer for this movie this weekend and it pis$@D me off.
Even the 3rd Bourne movie was a huge disappointment to me, as it took a promising plot line and wasted it. I thoroughly enjoyed the first two movies for their twists and turns, but the third was just about setting up the intelligence community and, not so subtley, the current admin, as an evil bureacracy. Yawn.
I’m a huge fan of Bourne, both the books and the movies and I was serioiusly looking forward to Ultimatum. I couldn’t believe how disappointed I was in it. I hope they don’t even consider making any more (although I’m sure they will given the money its already made) unless they go way back to the basics and this time, get it right.
“Get it right” means what to you Michelle? As the movies portray a secret U.S. gov’t program that turns people into assasins…
BTW I’ve read the books…
Well, actually, even though I was a fan of the first two movies, I would have much prefered life without Treadstone; if Jason hadn’t been a government assasin but only thought he was like in the books.
My biggest problem with Ultimatum (I had many, including a camera technique which made me feel as if my head took every punch in one of the fight scenes) however was that they dropped most of the story line and took the easy way out. It was pure action without any of the plot twists and turns, as Flatlander put it, of the previous movies. No thinking involved, no need or reason to care about the main character (unless you had already *connected* with him from the previous movies), just an evil government plot which appeared to be run by an exceedingly evil man.
The End.
Emphasis should be place on the Film Actors Guild portion of your post.
That usually explains everything.