# left wing movies



## billc (Dec 18, 2010)

I am posting this here because it is of a political nature.  John Nolte at Bighollywood.com is listing the top 25 left wing movies of all time.  It is an interesting list so far, he is reviewing one movie a day, and I think he is amazingly fair.  So far,  http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/17/top-25-left-wing-films-21-coming-home-1978/

25-Day after Tomorrow
24-The English Patient
23-Salvador
22-Sneakers
21-Coming Home

Also, Andrew Klavan at Bighollywood.com has an article about conservative values making a comeback in the movies.  His "Klavan on the Culture" clips on youtube and over at Pajamasmedia.com are pretty funny.  http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/255296/can-conservatives-win-back-arts-andrew-klavan









  In my opinion, this is one of his funniest clips.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 18, 2010)

Do you actually have views of your own to post because all we get is second/third hand reports from television, radio and the internet. 
'top left wing films' good grief it will be the top ten left wing dog food brands next.


----------



## billc (Dec 18, 2010)

Actually, I haven't found that dog food brands take a political position.  The companies that make them are probably much like any corporation, apolitical, and willing to support the best deal makers in congress.  If I have time I will try to find the politicial leanings of dog food brands.  Did you also want cat food brands found as well?

I point to the people who speak about my views in a much more articulate way than I would ever be able to.  It also lets people who might just accept the main stream view about who conservatives have access to real conservative thinkers, who can explain the conservative point of view.  John Nolte is a writer who is very good at the cultural issues, especially where hollywood is concerned.  Hollywood is one of the main exporters of American culture, and most of what it sends out to the world at this time is from the left.  So I like to give people a chance to see the other side.  If you don't like what I do, I believe in freedom of the individual, so please look elsewhere.  I won't be offended.  We can politely agree to disagree.

Have you read any of his reviews?  They are quite good and inciteful as well as being fair.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 18, 2010)

billcihak said:


> Actually, I haven't found that dog food brands take a political position. The companies that make them are probably much like any corporation, apolitical, and willing to support the best deal makers in congress. If I have time I will try to find the politicial leanings of dog food brands. Did you also want cat food brands found as well?
> 
> I point to the people who speak about my views in a much more articulate way than I would ever be able to. It also lets people who might just accept the main stream view about who conservatives have access to real conservative thinkers, who can explain the conservative point of view. John Nolte is a writer who is very good at the cultural issues, especially where hollywood is concerned. Hollywood is one of the main exporters of American culture, and most of what it sends out to the world at this time is from the left. So I like to give people a chance to see the other side. If you don't like what I do, I believe in freedom of the individual, so please look elsewhere. I won't be offended. We can politely agree to disagree.
> 
> Have you read any of his reviews? They are quite good and inciteful as well as being fair.


 
I don't even know who he is.

What I'd like is to know your views on things, however you feel you express yourself. Party political opinions I can read anywhere but I'd much prefer to read a personal view from you.


----------



## billc (Dec 19, 2010)

Okay, what would you like to know.  But, in fairness, you first.  Ask a question and answer it yourself, and then I will give you my answer.  I think it may not engender agreement, but it will make for clarity. (This idea clarity over agreement,  is borrowed from Dennis Prager, a very wise radio host I listen to quite often.)


----------



## granfire (Dec 19, 2010)

billcihak said:


> Okay, what would you like to know.  But, in fairness, you first.  Ask a question and answer it yourself, and then I will give you my answer.  I think it may not engender agreement, but it will make for clarity. (This idea clarity over agreement,  is *borrowed from Dennis Prager*, a very wise radio host I listen to quite often.)



HAHAHAHAHAHAHA, so much for originality! :lfao:


----------



## billc (Dec 20, 2010)

20-fahrenheit 911

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/20/top-25-left-wing-films-20-fahrenheit-911-2004/


----------



## billc (Dec 21, 2010)

19- Soylent Green

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/21/top-25-left-wing-films-19-soylent-green-1973/

Interesting insight into the way captialism makes life better.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 21, 2010)

billcihak said:


> Okay, what would you like to know. But, in fairness, you first. Ask a question and answer it yourself, and then I will give you my answer. I think it may not engender agreement, but it will make for clarity. (This idea clarity over agreement, is borrowed from Dennis Prager, a very wise radio host I listen to quite often.)


 
Okay but a question on what? I only watch violent films so probably not films, what subject do you suggest?

Films aren't real they rarely show reality because who would want to watch that? Hollywood gets a lot of flak here because of the way it portrays America in the last war, it has a habit of twisting the truth, understandable enough I suppose but it doesn't help international understanding so when you constantly quote television programmes etc it's frustrating because we know it's a commercial view designed to sell advertising. When an American posts up views we non Americans like to hear the genuine thing not something copied from a programme. We might not agree, chances are we could but it's interesting to read. I want to read what real people say about American politics, life etc.


----------



## granfire (Dec 21, 2010)

billcihak said:


> 20-fahrenheit 911
> 
> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/20/top-25-left-wing-films-20-fahrenheit-911-2004/





billcihak said:


> 19- Soylent Green
> 
> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/21/top-25-left-wing-films-19-soylent-green-1973/
> 
> Interesting insight into the way captialism makes life better.



You got the power of link, but do you have the strength of thought?


----------



## elder999 (Dec 21, 2010)

billcihak said:


> 19- Soylent Green
> 
> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/21/top-25-left-wing-films-19-soylent-green-1973/
> 
> Interesting insight into the way captialism makes life better.


 
Kind of have to question these assertions:



> Of course this is all a left-wing fantasy come true, a cautionary tale that validates the environmental, socialist, and abortion movements.


 

I can see how one could say that it validates the environmental movement, but I have to question how it validates abortion or socialism. In fact,I question that it's a "left-wing fantasy."

It's based on the nove, Make Room, Make Room!" by author  Harry Harrison, who, while he does write from a fairly liberal point of view, says the inspiration from the story came from an Indian he spoke with in 1946, who brought up overpopulation as a problem.






> This is especially maddening because the complete opposite is true. As we advance as a free society, life only gets better *and its been proven once and for all that the cure for poverty is a free and capitalistic society.*


 
Proven where, and by whom, exactly?



> Furthermore, not only do people live better under a free market system than under oppressive governments, the environment is far cleaner.


 
People live under a free market system *and* under oppressive governments. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive.



> But our current environmental movement (which is nothing more than socialism in disguise) would lead us to the kind of totalitarian government that always leads to environmental degradation and a world that looks very much like Soylent Green, where the masses suffer under a very few elites who think they know best.


 
How, exactly, is our current environmental movement "nothing more than socialism in disguise?"

Was Richard Nixon a socialist? :lfao:


----------



## Blade96 (Dec 22, 2010)

How about the movie "Its a wonderful life?" Quite considered quite a left wing commie movie for obvious reasons when it first came out in 1946 when the cold war was just beginning.


----------



## billc (Dec 22, 2010)

John Nolte points out that this movie could be about Barak and Michelles BFF's Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn( violent domestic terrorists of the weather underground, who by the way introduced the young couple, Barak and Michelle to each other).
18-Running on Empty
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...g-films-18-running-on-empty-1988/#more-429052


----------



## granfire (Dec 22, 2010)

billcihak said:


> John Nolte points out that this movie could be about Barak and Michelles BFF's Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn( violent domestic terrorists of the weather underground, who by the way introduced the young couple, Barak and Michelle to each other).
> 18-Running on Empty
> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...g-films-18-running-on-empty-1988/#more-429052




But what does billcihak think about it - if he has seen the movie? 

What is your idea of a 'socialist' film?


----------



## Empty Hands (Dec 22, 2010)

granfire said:


> What is your idea of a 'socialist' film?



Anything not directed by Michael Bay and without huge explosions.

Or: any movie The Movement happens not to like for any reason.  Justifiable, reasonable, or truthful explanations are strictly unnecessary.


----------



## billc (Dec 22, 2010)

I'll take a shot.  I saw this movie, "Running on Empty" on television, years ago.  I was a lot younger and I have to say I felt sorry for the kid, and for the plight of the family.  Now, I am not doing this as an attack, this is just an opinion coming up.  As an adult and as I have become more conservative, I think that conservatism is a more difficult view to believe in.  
   For example, my thoughts on the death penalty would also apply to this movie family.  
It is much easier to be against the death penalty than for it for these reasons.  The criminal who has committed the murder that landed him on death row is still alive and in jail.  People are very visual in relating to the world.  They see an individual in jail, alone, among really bad people, isolated  and facing death.  When you see the profiles of these killers on the news it is easy to feel sympathy for their plight.  I think as people, we put ourselves in their situation and we empathize with them.  No one wants to be locked up, isolated, in danger from other inmates and so on.  You can listen to the inmate showing regret and asking for forgiveness, and it reaches out to your human instinct to forgive when someone is sorry.  You also have people telling you, forgive him because he/she is sorry, or killing them doesn't bring back the victim. Their lawyers argue for them, they seem like nice people now, and the thought of killing them is horrible.

  This is where it is difficult to be a conservative.  The victim is nowhere to be seen and cannot speak for themselves.  Sure, you have relatives to describe them, and how much they miss them, but as I mentioned above, we are more visually oriented.  We can actually see the prisoner and hear him say he is sorry.  We will never be able to be at the actual scene of the crime.  We will never be able to know  what the victim experienced as well as we know what the still living prisoner is currently experiencing.  The victim is almost non-existent.  The human that committed the murder is not the human we are seeing now.  The joy, or the emptyness of the killer as he committed his crimes is lost, especially over time.  So it takes a real effort to stand up for the victim, to stand up for what you believe is justice.  The person you are representing essentially no longer exists, so you need to work harder to follow through on your beliefs.  

   That is what this movie is like.  This seems like a nice family.  They seem to love their kids, and they are forced to live in hiding.  It is easy to sympathize with them.  It takes an act of conscious thought to remember their crime and how they are fleeing punishment.  It is easy to like this family, it is harder to want to see them punished for what they did.  Even at the end of the movie they are still running from taking responsibility for the person whose life they destroyed.


----------



## granfire (Dec 22, 2010)

Empty Hands said:


> Anything not directed by Michael Bay and without huge explosions.
> 
> Or: any movie The Movement happens not to like for any reason.  Justifiable, reasonable, or truthful explanations are strictly unnecessary.



Sooo.....

Double Impact = Good movie
You've got mail = Socialist crap


----------



## elder999 (Dec 22, 2010)

billcihak said:


> John Nolte points out that this movie could be about Barak and Michelles BFF's Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn( violent domestic terrorists of the weather underground, who by the way introduced the young couple, Barak and Michelle to each other).
> 18-Running on Empty
> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...g-films-18-running-on-empty-1988/#more-429052


 

It could be based on any number of people from that period of time, from any number of "underground" domestic terroitst groups. Naomi Gylenhaal ,the writer, has never claimed to have based it on anyone, though one of the details does mirror a college bombing. Bill Ayers, though, never actually bombed _anyone_, and all charges against him were dropped while he was a fugitive-a fact conveniently forgotten by some.

Of course, that hardly makes him "innocent." :lfao:

Michelle Obama was assigned as Barack's mentor at Sidley&Austin, the law firm in Chicago where he was a summer intern from Harvard Law. There was no introduction from Bill Ayers or hs wife......

Back to the movie, neither of the parents is a completely sympathetic character, and both come across (*deliberately*) as quite narcissistic.


----------



## billc (Dec 23, 2010)

17-The American President

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...ft-wing-films-17-the-american-president-1995/


----------



## girlbug2 (Dec 23, 2010)

"It's a Wonderful Life" is considered a commie, left wing movie? I don't see that at all.


----------



## Empty Hands (Dec 23, 2010)

Any movie with a hint of conscience or empathy or in the slightest way fails to uphold the terrified egos of movement conservatives magically becomes "left wing".

It's sort of like "you're with us or you're against us" except for Hollywood instead of the world.


----------



## billc (Dec 23, 2010)

Actually, I think that It's a Wonderful life is a very conservative movie.  You have George Bailey doing the right thing at great cost to his own life choices.  You have people watching out for each other, not expecting the government to do it, and you have a belief in God portrayed in the film.  George's good deeds are eventually rewarded and the other people come in to help him out. 

At the same time, the villain is a greedy, mean banker.  That might be where the left wing tilt comes in.

If you have time check out the Saturday Night Live take on the movie.  I haven't looked for it on youtube but it reveals a lost ending to the movie that is really funny.

Batman, The Dark Knight is another movie that is very rightwing, but the left tries to claim it.  

http://www.christiancinema.com/catalog/newsdesk_info.php?newsdesk_id=688


----------



## billc (Dec 27, 2010)

16-Missing

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/27/top-25-left-wing-films-16-missing-1982/


----------



## Ken Morgan (Dec 27, 2010)

billcihak said:


> and you have a belief in God portrayed in the film.


 
Believing in a deity does not automatically mean you are right wing. I know plenty of "right-wing" atheists. 

Traditionally the left has been the more religious of the extremes.


----------



## elder999 (Dec 27, 2010)

billcihak said:


> 16-Missing
> 
> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/27/top-25-left-wing-films-16-missing-1982/


 

Uhhh....



			
				the usually ill informed review said:
			
		

> While in reality, the United States did back the new Chilean government after the coup, *our government had nothing to do with the coup itself*, though naturally the position of the film is the exact opposite


 
Actually, one of th efirst things Richard Nixon did upon Allende's election in1970 was order the CIA to begin working to depose him, starting with Project Fubelt. THis was meant to worsen the economc crisis in Chile and hasten a right-wing coup. Additionally, papers released duriong the Clinton adminstration show that CIA operatives were inserted into Chile, and that the CIA supported propaganda efforts to hasten a coup. While there haven't there haven't been any papers released showing direct involvement, it's safe to say that the coup was what our government agencies wanted and strove for to the extent that they were capable.

For some of what passes for the real skinny on U.S. involvement in Chile, you should take a look at the Hinchey Report, a CIA generated paper on the U.S. State Department webpage, entitled, simply, _CIA Activities in Chile_


----------



## billc (Dec 28, 2010)

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...ing-films-15-born-on-the-fourth-of-july-1989/

15-Born on the fourth of july.

Using a true story or not, this is something Hollywood loves to do; haul out the template I call the *He Who Believes In The Goodness Of America Template*.
And it goes a little something like this&#8230;
When a character arrives on screen and makes clear that he believes in the goodness of America, Hollywood&#8217;s intolerant politics will only allow the arc of that character to rise in one of three ways:

He Who Believes In the Goodness of America will be revealed as the villain.
He Who Believes In the Goodness of America will be a liberal fighting evil conservatives.
He Who Believes In the Goodness of America will have that illusion shattered forever.
I&#8217;m not sure how effective this formula is in the real world, but anti-American filmmakers use it all the time. In this case, Oliver Stone cherry-picked a true story that already fit the template, Michael Moore frequently introduces us to those &#8220;who once believed in America,&#8221; and more recently there have been these kinds of characters peppered throughout the long string of box office flops released to undermine our troops: &#8220;Lions for Lambs,&#8221; &#8220;Green Zone,&#8221; and &#8220;In the Valley of Elah,&#8221; to name a few.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Dec 29, 2010)

billcihak said:


> ]Im not sure how effective this fo...sides of the argument presented in the movie.


----------



## Blade96 (Dec 29, 2010)

girlbug2 said:


> "It's a Wonderful Life" is considered a commie, left wing movie? I don't see that at all.





billcihak said:


> Actually, I think that It's a Wonderful life is a very conservative movie.  You have George Bailey doing the right thing at great cost to his own life choices.  You have people watching out for each other, not expecting the government to do it, and you have a belief in God portrayed in the film.  George's good deeds are eventually rewarded and the other people come in to help him out.
> 
> At the same time, the villain is a greedy, mean banker.  That might be where the left wing tilt comes in.
> 
> ...



You might both be right in ways. But this came out during the cold war.  when they could take anything and call it a commie movie because george bailey was not completely conservative. all for helping the oppressed and such.


----------



## billc (Dec 29, 2010)

That whole, conservatives do not care for the oppressed is an old myth.  The left is always saying they want to help the oppressed and then the oppressed really, really suffer.


----------



## billc (Dec 29, 2010)

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/12/29/top-25-left-wing-films-14-a-civil-action-1998/

14-a civil action

"Again, &#8220;A Civil Action&#8221; is based on a true story and by all accounts, unlike the bogus &#8220;Erin Brockovich&#8221; suit, the facts of this case stand true. So my argument is not with the movie itself or this specific case. By all accounts this was a real tragedy, where due to toxic poisoning in the groundwater, a lot of people got sick and died, including children.
My argument _is,_ however, with Hollywood&#8217;s relentlessly out-of-context, choosing of only these kinds of stories to build up the drip-drip-drip effect necessary to craft an unfair and dishonest narrative that always portrays corporate America as homicidal maniacs. As an example of how out of whack Hollywood&#8217;s lack of context is, I know of no American corporation responsible for as many deaths as the EPA&#8217;s politically motivated decision to ban DDT in 1972."


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Dec 30, 2010)

I find the fact that people consider "It's a Wonderful Life" communist or left-wing interesting.  I, for one, find the story especially conservative.  I actually only watched the entire movie for the first time this year and the behest of my wife.

Think about it.  You have a man who is living in an era where one rises based upon ones merit.  Harry Bailey is a case in point.  He went to college, joined the military, and won the Congressional Medal of Honor for his actual actions.  

In this era, one makes sacrifices to obtain what one wants.  In the case of Sam Bailey, he sacrificed his aspirations in order to keep open a bank so that the citizens of his community would continue to be helped.  Not by the government, mind you, but a private entity.  He complained to himself, but he didn't whine that the government didn't step in and help.  

When their was a run on the banks, he asked his community members to help keep the bank open, which based upon their enlightened self-interest and morality, they did, ultimately to the betterment of the community.  At the end of the movie, they came and assisted him due to his past kindness, sacrifice, and generosity.

At no point did the government step in to help.  

As we have seen in reality, those who define themselves as conservatives give more to charity then those who define themselves as liberals.  This movie is an example of that, while at the same time, mind you, of making a profit.

To me, this movie epitomizes conservative values, not liberal ones.


----------



## billc (Dec 30, 2010)

5-0 Kenpo,  Thanks for the above post, I see you get it.  You might find this funny.  At Bighollywood.com there was an article on the real villain in "It's a Wonderful Life,'  George Bailey's brother Harry.  It was a funny take on the movie.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/b...-is-the-real-villain-in-its-a-wonderful-life/

"For years I watched this movie and like many Americans would come away with that warm fuzzy feeling.  But one character in this film always bothered me. In fact, I believe that the more appropriate title of Capras project should have been Its A Wonderful Life  If Youre Harry Bailey."


----------



## billc (Dec 30, 2010)

13-Three days of the Condor

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...-wing-films-13-three-days-of-the-condor-1975/

"Why it&#8217;s a great film
In this time of war, with most of Hollywood sympathetic to the other side, every God-fearing American patriot should thump down on their knees and thank the Almighty that for over a decade now, present-day Hollywood has been completely incapable of making a decent left-wing film, much less something as entertaining, well-crafted, and blazingly intelligent as &#8220;Three Days of the Condor."

On the funny side, Max Von Sydow is like Abe Vigoda from the god father, he looks the same age in just about every film he is in.


----------



## billc (Jan 3, 2011)

12-American Beauty

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...p-25-left-wing-films-12-american-beauty-1999/

"Furthermore, the only sin in this story is hypocrisy and we know this because it&#8217;s only hypocrites who suffer and who are unhappy; those fools who bought into the lie that hard work, sexual restraint, military duty, love of country, status, money, and manicured lawns mean something. On the other hand, it&#8217;s those who openly flaunt the norms of society who have been granted the reward of inner peace"

&#8220;American Beauty&#8221; is a fascinating and revealing exploration through the empty, dark soul of the left, those who confuse the pursuit of pleasure with happiness and the releasing of your inner-narcissist with fulfillment. Though they remain the most conformist, lock-steppers of all, because Leftists are so unhappy and too arrogant to wake up to the fact that they&#8217;re the source of their own unhappiness, the left refuses to believe that those of us who disagree with them, those of us who try to live our lives morally and embrace the American dream, aren&#8217;t suffering from that hoary cliché known as &#8220;quiet desperation.&#8221;


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2011)

billcihak said:


> 12-American Beauty
> 
> http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...p-25-left-wing-films-12-american-beauty-1999/
> 
> ...


 

I'm sorry but that is the funniest thing you've posted yet! Right = happiness, left = misery, c'mon even you can't believe that. :rofl:


----------



## granfire (Jan 4, 2011)

What does it say about 'Universal Soldier'?


----------



## billc (Jan 4, 2011)

11-The insider

Yes tez, I do.  I believe I have seen some studies that talk about this difference in dispositions.

http://lifetwo.com/production/node/...conservatives-vs-liberals-are-parents-happier

Conservatives are happier than liberals. Self-described conservatives have been found to classify themselves as "very happy" nearly twice as often as those who call themselves "liberal" or "very liberal". This is not a new trend and has been true for at least the past 35 years. Interestingly this is not because of income differences between the groups (which have been isolated in the study), instead Brooks believes it is because: a) Conservatives are twice as likely to be married; b) Twice as likely to attend church; and c) More likely to have children. Brooks believes that, putting merits aside, the conservative viewpoint is more conducive to happiness than a liberal viewpoint. "Conservatives tend to believe that if you work hard and play by the rules, you can succeed. this makes them more optimistic than liberal, more likely to feel in control of their lives and therefore happier. American liberals, at their most pessimistic, stress the injustice of the economic system, the crushing impersonal forces that keep the little guy down."


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2011)

billcihak said:


> 11-The insider
> 
> Yes tez, I do. I believe I have seen some studies that talk about this difference in dispositions.
> 
> ...


 

Strewth mate they've really got you brainwashed.


----------



## billc (Jan 4, 2011)

From the Brooks guy where he discusses conservative vs. liberal hapiness. An article from the New York times:

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/04/23/conservatives-are-happier-than-liberals-discuss/

What the actual data on self-assessed happiness show, however, is that conservatives have a substantial happiness edge, at least by the time they grow up. 
For three decades, the General Social Survey has asked a nationwide sample of adults, &#8220;Taken all together, how happy would you say you are these days? Would you say that you are very happy, pretty happy, or not too happy?&#8221; Here is a representative sample of the results:
&#8226; In 2004, 44 percent of respondents who said they were &#8220;conservative&#8221; or &#8220;very conservative&#8221; said they were &#8220;very happy,&#8221; versus just 25 percent of people who called themselves &#8220;liberal&#8221; or &#8220;very liberal.&#8221; (Note that this comparison uses unweighted data &#8212; when the data are weighted, the gap is 46 percent to 28 percent.) 

You can see the rest of the article at the link, so yes, I think liberals are less happy and tend more toward lashing out.
If you are conservative, you tend, although not absolutely, to be religous, believing in a god with an afterlife.  There is some expectation that if you do right, and help people, even if the people around you do not notice, God knows.  From this you will in the least, not be punished in the here after for hurting other people.  That is a somewhat comforting thought.  Liberals, tend, although not absolutely, are less devout leaning toward non-religous.  What happens on earth stays on earth.  If you get a raw deal, you are stuck.  Nothing in the here after, so you get nothing in the here after.  It might make you a little grouchy.  Also, if God isn't important, the fact that he may be watching how you treat other people won't mean anything to you.  That is why petty to great acts of violence are more likely coming from the left, especially the atheist left, socialists of the nazi, fascist or communist leanings are perfect examples of this.


----------



## billc (Jan 5, 2011)

10-Dead man walking

A movie that gives scant attention to the murder of two innocent teenagers by two brutal killers, and then wants us to feel sorry for the killer.(my comment, now to Mr. Nolte's)

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...-25-left-wing-films-10-dead-man-walking-1995/

"By approaching the issue through a Christian point of view and not in any way giving those who disagree the excuse that the film isn&#8217;t objective, in my opinion, Robbins more than earns the right to ask whether or not it&#8217;s moral for the State to take a man&#8217;s life. And the message he respectfully sends to we Christians goes well beyond the simplistic bumper stickerism of What Would Jesus Do? The film simply asks a complicated question that lingers long after the film ends: Is it Christian to intervene and cut short the life of a man who, if given the time and ministry, might someday repent and save his own soul?"

"Personally, I believe in the death penalty but I&#8217;d be lying if I said that, as a Christian, Robbins&#8217; film didn&#8217;t create an ongoing conflict with that belief. Part of me wants to oppose cutting short a man&#8217;s opportunity to repent and save his soul. But a bigger part reads about these crimes and wants to pull the switch myself. And quite frankly, despite the other side&#8217;s insistence to the contrary, I find the idea that execution is not a deterrent absurd"


----------



## granfire (Jan 5, 2011)

billcihak said:


> 10-Dead man walking
> 
> A movie that gives scant attention to the murder of two innocent teenagers by two brutal killers, and then wants us to feel sorry for the killer.(my comment, now to Mr. Nolte's)
> 
> ...




Well, it wasn't a feel good movie... that's for sure.
So if it gave somebody pointers to think, I think it is not a bad thing, in ever which way the train of thought meanders.


----------



## billc (Jan 5, 2011)

That above statement by John Nolte is why he is my favorite movie critic.  He, more than others is a fair critic, and shows that even if a movie is a wacky lib fest, he can still appreciate it as a great work of art.


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Jan 6, 2011)

It would follow that conservatives are happier than liberals. The definition of conservative means satisfied with and supportive of the status quo. If you'r not, you have more reasons to be unhappy. It's almost a tautology.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 6, 2011)

I only watch films with loads of fighting in, no life lessons, chick flicks, soppy romances or real life stories, just fights. :ultracool


----------



## billc (Jan 6, 2011)

Did you like, "My dinner with Andre 2: The Reckoning."


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 6, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Did you like, "My dinner with Andre 2: The Reckoning."


 
Can't say I've ever heard of it, I should have added I also love anything by Studio Ghibli.


----------



## billc (Jan 6, 2011)

The first "My dinner with Andre," was a dynamic kung fu movie with state of the art wire work and awsome special effects.  You should look it up before you rent it though.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 6, 2011)

I tend to classify my movies not so much left/right but worth the money/not worth the money.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 6, 2011)

billcihak said:


> The first "My dinner with Andre," was a dynamic kung fu movie with state of the art wire work and awsome special effects. You should look it up before you rent it though.


 
I like proper fights lol. Wire is fun but not real. Someone I know made a film a couple of years ago it's called Sucker Punch, my instructor is in it as well. Ian is a UFC veteran. I've seen him fight legit and not so much legit lol.

http://www.suckerpunchthemovie.com/suckerpunch_cast/ian_freeman_interview.htm

 Rise of the Foot soldier is good, there's another guy I know in it, Dave Legano MMA fighter.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rise_of_the_Footsoldier

These are proper films btw.


----------



## granfire (Jan 6, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> I tend to classify my movies not so much left/right but worth the money/not worth the money.



Now _where ever_ is the fun in _THAT?!!_


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 6, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> I like proper fights lol. Wire is fun but not real.



What I hate in action/fighting movies that is so common now is the shaky cam style combined with really up close quick cuts.  Makes it impossible to see a damn thing or appreciate the fighting.  Which probably sucks anyway, explaining the style. 

Look Hollywood, shaky cam was pretty damn awesome in Saving Private Ryan, and really added something.  It doesn't have to be in Every. Single. Damned. Movie. since then however.  Let us see what is going on!

The last couple Bourne movies were unwatchable for this reason, which is too bad because Matt Damon's fighting work looked damn impressive (from what I saw).

I really like some of the old martial arts movies because they use continuous takes from a distance you can appreciate.  That takes real skill!


----------



## billc (Jan 6, 2011)

9-silkwood

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/01/06/top-25-left-wing-films-9-silkwood-1983/

For my money, nothing exposes the left for the anti-capitalist, anti-progress socialists they really are more than their opposition to nuclear power. Here&#8217;s an energy source that overcomes all their objections regarding safe, clean, and renewable and still they vehemently oppose it with the worst kind of hysterical scare tactics. In this respect you can&#8217;t even label them &#8220;European Socialists&#8221; because there are nearly 200 nuclear power plants currently powering Europe, over 50 in France alone, and yet here in America &#8212; thanks mainly to environmental fear-mongering &#8212; we only have a little over a hundred.

the dumbest way I know of to try and kill someone is by running them off a rural road where chances are more likely than not they will survive. But of course these are the same conspirators supposedly reckless and stupid enough to try and kill Silkwood by poisoning her with plutonium &#8212; as though death by radiation of one of their own employees wouldn&#8217;t bring all kinds of unwanted attention and scrutiny down on the company.


----------



## bushidomartialarts (Jan 6, 2011)

You do understand that the original anti-nuke movement was funded by big oil?


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 6, 2011)

You do realize that nuclear fuel is not a renewable energy source, right?

And it is far from clean, what do you do with the waste?

It is not entirely safe either. Accidents happen.

And before you rant, I'm a proponent of nuclear energy, just be aware that it too has consequences.


----------



## billc (Jan 7, 2011)

8--Norma Rae

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/01/07/top-25-left-wing-films-8-norma-rae-1979/

*Why it&#8217;s a left-wing film*
Set in the Deep South, director Martin Ritt&#8217;s &#8220;Norma Rae&#8221; is yet another Hollywood entry that gushes over the selfless virtues of Big Labor and demonizes both the corporation and the individuals who would prefer not to be forced into the Borg Collective. White collar management is naturally made up of bullies who tap phones and work an old man literally to death and the &#8220;exploited workers&#8221; themselves who oppose being community-organized are motivated primarily by racial bigotry and the ignorant belief that unions are nothing more than a New York, communist conspiracy run by the Jooooozzzz&#8230;


----------



## billc (Jan 7, 2011)

Canuck, I understand everything you pointed out.  It is just funny that the most efficient, and safe source of energy is blocked by the environmental movement.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Canuck, I understand everything you pointed out. It is just funny that the most efficient, and safe source of energy is blocked by the environmental movement.


 
The people of Chernobyl sit and think that every day.


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

The russian socialists built Chernobyl, that is why is melted down.


----------



## Ramirez (Jan 8, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> 'top left wing films' good grief it will be the top ten left wing dog food brands next.



LOL....good one Tez!


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> The russian socialists built Chernobyl, that is why is melted down.


 #
The *Soviet Communists* built it and it's not like America and the UK has never had problems with nuclear reactors. Funnily enought eh Soviets were quite good at some things, one's political beliefs don't always inpinge on every aspect of life.

Ramirez, cheers for that. I don't think you can spend every waking minute of your life categorising everything into what's left and what's right wing especially when you can't do it correctly anyway. 

I'm waiting, as this is a martial arts site, for the posts that designate what martial art you do by political belief.....and Bill I'm joking here.!


----------



## Ramirez (Jan 8, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> #
> Ramirez, cheers for that. I don't think you can spend every waking minute of your life categorising everything into what's left and what's right wing especially when you can't do it correctly anyway.



 Categorizing films like that looks to be a silly and pointless exercise,  I don't recall going into the video store and seeing the left and right wing sections....what I want to know is if the movie is action, drama, comedy etc. and if it's worth spending money on.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 8, 2011)

Ramirez said:


> Categorizing films like that looks to be a silly and pointless exercise, I don't recall going into the video store and seeing the left and right wing sections....what I want to know is if the movie is action, drama, comedy etc. and if it's worth spending money on.


 

I doubt the film makers care about what's left or right either, what is fixed in their minds is 'will this make money'. The film industry is after all a business where the idea is to make the film makers rich. All this 'leftie' stuff is getting suspiciously like a witch hunt, it used to be the Jews that were accused of runnng everything, now it seems it's the 'socialists'.


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

Sorry tez, money is not the primary directive for making movies.  If it was you would have a lot more family movies and cartoons.  An example, at bighollywood they did a story about the director who made "independence day" a big blockbuster.  He refused to make a sequel because he said he didn't want to make a movie that would be helpful to george bush while he was in the white house.  Also look at the war against Islamic terrorism.  Can you name one, just one, movie, that portrays the fight against these cold blooded killers in any light other than 1) America is really the bad guy 2) our soldiers are either mentally damaged, drug users, rapists, or victims of a corrupt america?  I can dig up about 10 without really trying.  

Check out the articles at big hollywood.  They discuss the politics over art and money phenomenon all the time.  Also, it is not just politics over money, it is often appealing to their art house friends over money.  If you look at the movies with the biggest box office reciepts, and you look at the movies with the oscar nominations, you will see that the biggest reciepts and the oscars do not match up.  Check it out.  It is pretty interesting.


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

One column from Bighollywood.com to show that hollywood does not always put money first.

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...it-13987-proving-hollywoods-not-money-driven/

*Director Roland Emmerich at his London home.*
&#8220;Independence Day&#8221; is one of the most profitable films in history &#8212; and after the original &#8220;Poseidon Adventure,&#8221; one of the greatest bad films_ ever_ &#8212; but there was no sure-fire, money-making blockbuster sequel because President Bush &#8212; The Abraham Lincoln of the Middle East &#8212; won the presidency:
&#8220;In Independence Day, it was about a king who leads his country into a fight against an outside invader. I didn&#8217;t want to make that movie during the Bush years. It was not thought that George W. Bush would have made a great king. Now with Obama, it&#8217;s another story.&#8221;​


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> The russian socialists built Chernobyl, that is why is melted down.


 

Three Mile Island was buily by...


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

THree mile island was built by us, and you can see the difference.  Chernobyl, built by socialists and it was a disaster, 3 mile island, built by capitalists, and it was a small accident, no deaths, no major problems.  Big difference between the two accidents.

wikipedia:3 mile
The nuclear power industry claims that there were no deaths, injuries or adverse health effects from the accident,[13] and a report by Columbia University epidemiologist Maureen Hatch agrees with this finding.[14] Another study by Steven Wing of the University of North Carolina found that lung cancer and leukemia rates were 2 to 10 times higher downwind of TMI than upwind.[15] The Radiation and Public Health Project reported a spike in infant mortality in the downwind communities two years after the accident.[16][17]

chernobyl:On April 26, 1986, Reactor #4 at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant near the town of Pripyat, Ukraine, exploded. The explosion took place at around one in the morning while the neighboring town of Pripyat slept. Two workers were killed instantly. Forty hours later, the residents of Pripyat were ordered to evacuate, and most never returned; By that time, many of the residents had suffered varying degrees of radiation poisoning.

Big difference between socialism and capitalism.


----------



## Ramirez (Jan 8, 2011)

So Bill I take it you are a big fan of the People's Republic of China, because right now they have mastered capitalism so completely that the US is a debtor nation to them.


----------



## Archangel M (Jan 8, 2011)

Look at the movies Hollywood was making around WWII and tell me that media then and now is not influential in the political realm. Most actors and directors have been more than clear about their political leanings. If you don't think that the use their films to convey their personal message you are kidding yourself.


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

Capitalism is one leg of a truly free country, you also need democracy and the rule of law.  One out of three is a good start, and they are getting really good at it, but it doesn't make them a truly free country.


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

Remember, it is the politicians more sympathetic to a socialist vision of the world that are putting us into debt to China.


----------



## granfire (Jan 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Remember, it is the politicians more sympathetic to a socialist vision of the world that are putting us into debt to China.



That's it....


----------



## Ramirez (Jan 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Remember, it is the politicians more sympathetic to a socialist vision of the world that are putting us into debt to China.



  Socialists politicians?  And the uber capitalists running the Fed and the Treasury recruited from Wall Street and the ones on Wall Street themselves have nothing to do with it?  Goldman et al,  make a deals with the Chinese in a second if there was profit in it.  The capitalist oil companies can't move fast enough to sell off oil resources fast enough to them. 

  Check out who has been running the financial system in the US for the last 30 years,  ultra right wing , Ayn Rand worshipping Greenspan and ex Goldman CEO Henry Paulson.  They look like socialists to you?


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

More like corrupt politicians to me.  Barney frank, Chris dodd, pelosi, Obama, they are the ones piling up the debt, and they love big government.


----------



## Ramirez (Jan 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> More like corrupt politicians to me.  Barney frank, Chris dodd, pelosi, Obama, they are the ones piling up the debt, and they love big government.




  so Bush jr. didn't pile up debt?  The chinese didn't buy up US debt under Bush?


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

yeah, he is hardly a conservative on economic issues, even if he did lower taxes.  He was good fighting the terrorists though.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 8, 2011)

Where's Bin Laden?


----------



## billc (Jan 8, 2011)

I don't know, but finding him is one of Obama's biggest priorities.  Wait, let me get the kleenex, the tears of laughter need to be wiped away.


----------



## Blade96 (Jan 8, 2011)

billcihak said:


> The russian socialists built Chernobyl, that is why is melted down.



That is not why chernobyl exploded, because it was built 'by socialists' 

anyone effed up with their nuclear crap, check this out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daigo_Fukuryū_Maru


----------



## granfire (Jan 8, 2011)

Blade96 said:


> That is not why chernobyl exploded, because it was built 'by socialists'
> 
> anyone effed up with their nuclear crap, check this out.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daigo_Fukuryū_Maru


Bless you for trying!


----------



## billc (Jan 9, 2011)

another column on liberal vs. conservatives and hapiness, going back to the movie American beauty

http://www.dennisprager.com/columns...l=why_conservatives_are_happier_than_liberals

I was looking over Prager's past columns and this one sprang out because of the movie list.

The unhappy gravitate toward the left for a second reason. Life is hard for liberals, and life is hard for conservatives. But conservatives assume that life will always be hard. Liberals, on the other hand, have utopian dreams. At his brother Robert's funeral, the late Sen. Edward M. Kennedy recalled his brother saying: "Some men see things as they are and say 'why?' I dream things that never were and say 'why not?'"
Utopians will always be less happy than those who know that suffering is inherent to human existence. The utopian compares America to utopia and finds it terribly wanting. The conservative compares America to the every other civilization that has ever existed and walks around wondering how he got so lucky to be born or naturalized an American.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 9, 2011)

So if I follow your logic, the conservative scientist looks at ancient Rome and says "We're live longer than they did. We're OK", while the liberal scientist looks at now and says "Why can't we do better than this?"


----------



## Ramirez (Jan 9, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> So if I follow your logic, the conservative scientist looks at ancient Rome and says "We're live longer than they did. We're OK", while the liberal scientist looks at now and says "Why can't we do better than this?"



 sounds like it to me, the conservative scientist looks at cancer and says we'll survival rates are better than 50 years ago, no point looking for a cure,  the liberal says there is a cure,  the conservative scientist at diabetes and says it is treatable , give up looking for a cure, the utopian liberal one says he can find a cure.....etc.

  Actually seems to me every scientist would be liberal by that logic because they never stop striving to do better, advance knowledge, find cures etc.


----------



## billc (Jan 9, 2011)

Not quite. A conservative might look at that and say, wow, we have come along way and with hard work we can go a lot farther, look how far America has come in just over 200 years. A liberal might look at the same situation you mention and say, after all this time, people are still being mistreated, and there are still people who are in poverty. that might be a little closer to what he is saying.

I remember hearing the star fish story from Dr. Laura. the story goes something like this. A guy is walking on the beach after the tide goes out. There are thousands of star fish stranded on the sand and rocks and they are dying. there is a guy a little farther on tossing star fish back into the water. The original guy walks up and says "Buddy, You can't save all of these star fish." The other guys says "no, but I can save this one, and this one...."

I know, it is a simple story, and you might think it is dumb, however it can show the difference between a liberal and conservative thinker. I know, you just groaned, but give me a few clicks on my keyboard.

On the O'reilly show, he interviewed Sam Donaldson, formerly of the Sunday morning news show. He is a liberal, o'reilly more conservative. O'reilly asked Sam about school vouchers saying " i Support school vouchers because the public schools are broken." Or something like that. Sam Donaldson, the liberal said, "I would support school vouchers if you could show me that you could help all the children, if you can't then I am against vouchers." I couldn't believe it when I heard it. it helped me come up with this corollary to the starfish story.

The guy walks up and says, " you can't save all these starfish" the other guy says, "I can save this one, and this one..." At which point the other guy says, "If you can't save them all, I won't let you save any of them," and beats up the other guy.


----------



## billc (Jan 9, 2011)

Remember, conservatives are the people against rationing healthcare, thinking that there are ways to improve healthcare that do not demand limiting access to cures and better medicine.  the liberals are the ones who point to abortion and "end of life counseling' and in the "death penalty on t.v." thread, the liberal side are the ones who believe it may be better to abort a healthy baby if it might end up in a bad foster home or a bad adoptive situation. There is a big difference here and I think that is what Prager is getting at.  More positive outlook by conservatives, less so among liberals.  It is truly a  Yin and yang thing.


----------



## billc (Jan 9, 2011)

Ramirez, did you read Pragers column, it would explain more and in a clearer way the  point he is trying to make.

Also, this idea of not advancing, the liberal side wants the developing world to stop developing, because of the effects of development on the environment.  They also believe in 
"family planning" for the developing world because they believe there are already too many people on the planet and that people are too destructive.  conservatives believe that the advances of science and civillization need to be spread to the 3rd world.  Why should they be stuck in everlasting poverty and have their children die of easily cured illnesses when we can help them.  they have as much right to seek a better life as anyone on the coasts of the united states do.  Another view on the rome situation.


----------



## billc (Jan 9, 2011)

From an article in "front page" magazine about left and right:

The biggest mistake that has been made by psychologists (e.g. Altemeyer 1981 & 1988) and others, however, is to identify conservative motivation with opposition to change. Obviously, from Cromwell to Reagan and Thatcher, change has never bothered "conservatives" one bit  but preservation of their rights and liberties from governments that would take those rights and liberties away always has. THAT is what has always made a "conservative"  and it still does.


----------



## Blade96 (Jan 9, 2011)

billcihak said:


> another column on liberal vs. conservatives and hapiness, going back to the movie American beauty
> 
> http://www.dennisprager.com/columns...l=why_conservatives_are_happier_than_liberals
> 
> ...



Which makes liberal good, everything we have in the 21 century is due to someone's "utopian dreams" you should thank your lucky stars there are people who dare to dream of a why can't we do better.



billcihak said:


> Ramirez, did you read Pragers column, it would explain more and in a clearer way the  point he is trying to make.
> 
> Also, this idea of not advancing, the liberal side wants the developing world to stop developing, because of the effects of development on the environment.



Not true, people leftists are always fighting for better living conditions for everyone and the third world. I myself worked for a leftist group that promotes fair trade because of third world people being exploited for easy profits.



			
				bill said:
			
		

> They also believe in
> "family planning" for the developing world because they believe there are already too many people on the planet and that people are too destructive.  conservatives believe that the advances of science and civillization need to be spread to the 3rd world.  Why should they be stuck in everlasting poverty and have their children die of easily cured illnesses when we can help them.  they have as much right to seek a better life as anyone on the coasts of the united states do.  Another view on the rome situation.



We believe that too, bringing out sciences and a better life to the third world and yes, we do believe in family planning. Nothing wrong with that.


----------



## billc (Jan 9, 2011)

Let me clarify family planning.  The left, as in people like ted turner and like minded liberals, Al Gore and others, believe in "planning the families" of third world people which means they should not have children and if they do they should not have more than one.  Kind of like the one child policy in China.  I mean, historically, Planned Parenthood as an organization was created to keep down the population of African Americans in the inner cities.  If you listen to the liberals back then, Teddy Roosevelt and George Bernard shaw, they believed that breeding programs for the poor should be initiated.  that is what they mean by family planning.  Is that what you mean?


----------



## billc (Jan 9, 2011)

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif]And again, eugenics attracted the support of prominent Americans. Progressive Theodore Roosevelt summed up eugenicist theory: "Society has no business to permit degenerates to reproduce." Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the famous opinion upholding Virginias decision to sterilize a woman named Carrie Buck: "Three generations of imbeciles," he averred, "are enough."[/FONT]​


----------



## Blade96 (Jan 9, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Let me clarify family planning.  The left, as in people like ted turner and like minded liberals, Al Gore and others, believe in "planning the families" of third world people which means they should not have children and if they do they should not have more than one.  Kind of like the one child policy in China.  I mean, historically, Planned Parenthood as an organization was created to keep down the population of African Americans in the inner cities.  If you listen to the liberals back then, Teddy Roosevelt and George Bernard shaw, they believed that breeding programs for the poor should be initiated.  that is what they mean by family planning.  Is that what you mean?



No, I dont agree with that. Ted Turner said people should have the one child policy that china has, but chin'as is oppressive because it forces abortions on women who might not want them.  I dont agree with that kind of stuff.  Family planning to me means that family can decide when or if to have children and have the opportunities to limit the size of their families ( in africa for example many women are not allowed to say no to sex or get their partners to wear condoms and because they are poor may feel they have to have many children to help support the family) But that does cause a population growth that can be harmful to environment so family planning to me means Helping them rise up from poverty, making more BC methods availiable, emancipating women and the like.


----------



## billc (Jan 10, 2011)

7--Platoon

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/01/10/top-25-left-wing-films-7-platoon-1986/

In what&#8217;s obviously a very personal film (like his main character, in 1967, Stone served in the Infantry in Vietnam), the director doesn&#8217;t use a single soda straw to dishonestly portray the war, he uses about a half-dozen of them in order to focus only on America&#8217;s Worst Hits and spin them into a patch-quilt of propaganda that makes our military look as though it was highly populated with monsters. According to Stone, these were men who participated in or stood by as civilians were executed and beaten to death, whole villages were burned, Vietnamese children were raped, and ears were taken as souvenirs. Furthermore, drug abuse, fratricide, and in-fighting was the norm.

Yes, the left truly does love our men and women serving in the military.


----------



## billc (Jan 11, 2011)

6-Mash

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/01/11/top-25-left-wing-films-6-mash-1970/

Remember when liberals could be funny? If nothing else, &#8220;MASH&#8221; is a reminder that politics haven&#8217;t destroyed the Left&#8217;s ability to entertain or be creative or even charismatic, self-seriousness, bitterness, political correctness and multiculturalism have. What you have in &#8220;MASH&#8221; is an over-arching anti-military, anti-war, anti-religious theme, but within this leftist message you also have a ribald and truly irreverent comedy that refuses to recognize sacred cows. There&#8217;s also nothing preachy or even close to heavy-handed. To the contrary, there&#8217;s a contagious spirit of joy, playfulness and, at times, humanity.

Today, &#8220;MASH&#8221; and especially the characters of Hawkeye, Trapper John (the great Elliott Gould), and Duke (a very funny and charming Tom Skerritt)  would be denounced as sexists and likely redrawn completely in 1984-ish production meetings. And you can bet the subplot involving all the comedic machinations that go on to cure &#8220;Painless&#8221; the dentist of his homosexuality would never survive in this tender and totalitarian day and age. The entire storyline would either be removed altogether or Painless would have to learn to embrace the awesomeness of his gayness.(He&#8217;s not really gay, he just fears he is and decides to commit suicide.)


----------



## billc (Jan 12, 2011)

5-Planet of the Apes

An interesting choice.

Director Franklin J. Schaffner&#8217;s &#8220;Planet of the Apes&#8221; might be the most cynical, anti-human and anti-religious film ever made. What&#8217;s most telling about the film&#8217;s political point of view is the arc of the main character, played by The Mighty Charlton Heston. When we first meet Colonel Taylor aboard an in-flight American spacecraft, he makes no secret of his revulsion towards mankind as he records in his duty log&#8230; _Does man, that marvel of the universe, that glorious paradox who sent me to the stars, still make war against his brother? Keep his neighbor&#8217;s children starving?_

&#8220;Planet of the Apes&#8221; never gets old. Not a single frame has aged a day. And in this era of lazy CGI, the organic quality of the production is a feast for the eyes; from the crash of the spacecraft to the stunning aerial shots of the barren landscape that immediately follow to show how small the survivors are in their new world to a compelling and completely convincing society ruled by apes. And thanks to a superbly crafted screenplay, this society isn&#8217;t just visually realistic. This all comes to life because the necessary details have been thought out when it comes to how a society is structured, ruled, and governed.


----------



## billc (Jan 14, 2011)

4-the china syndrome

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/j...25-left-wing-films-4-the-china-syndrome-1979/

With the enormous powers of persuasion found in the magic of the motion picture, for a time, Hollywood was truly a force of tremendous good, a force for liberty and the ennobling of the human spirit. Best of all, Hollywood showed us idealized versions of ourselves through heroes and heroines who had codes of honor and integrity, who were selfless and if at first they didn&#8217;t comprehend that there was a bigger moral world beyond their own self-interest, they usually did before the final fade. This wasn&#8217;t the world as it was, this was the world as it should be. And the critics are wrong. Hollywood wasn&#8217;t lying or being hypocritical during their Golden Age, Hollywood was asking us to aspire to something better.


----------



## billc (Jan 18, 2011)

3--Dances with Wolves

_I had never been in a battle like this one. This had not been a fight for territory or riches or to make men free. This battle had no ego. It had been fought to preserve the food stores that would see us through winter, to protect the lives of women and children and loved ones only a few feet away. I felt a pride I had never felt before._
*Why it&#8217;s a left-wing film*
The quote above pretty much sums up the theme found in director Kevin Costner&#8217;s epic, Academy-Award winning Western. Whether it&#8217;s the Civil War, the men of the North who fought their own countrymen to end the abomination of African slavery, or the very idea of property ownership and commerce; our protagonist, Lt. John Dunbar (Costner), finds none of that, or even the promise of his young country, worthwhile after falling in with a tribe of benevolent and harmonious Sioux Indians.

If you&#8217;re looking for something resembling a defense of what happened to the American Indian in this country, you&#8217;re going to be disappointed. Reading any evenhanded history of the settling of the American West means having your heart broken for the people who paid the price. Yes, it was a different and more brutal era, but that excuse for the appalling only goes so far.
So my argument is not so much with the side Costner takes in that matter, it&#8217;s that even without any kind of American presence in North America, the quote above and the overall theme of the film is still factually incorrect. The battle Dunbar&#8217;s reflecting on in the quote is one between his friends the Sioux and the Pawnee (who, in real life, were also victims of brutal Sioux attacks) who are portrayed as no less murderous than the Americans. And yet, we&#8217;re still told this nonsense:
_This had not been a fight for territory or riches or to make men free. This battle had no ego._​Long before the evil European set foot on this continent, Indian tribes warred over &#8220;territory&#8221; (hunting lands), &#8220;riches&#8221; (food stores, slaves), and to not become slaves should they lose the battle. And this was likely true of the long historical war between the Sioux and Pawnee that was also something of a blood feud, which seems even less noble than our war &#8220;to make men free.&#8221; Furthermore, Costner&#8217;s quote contradicts itself in the next sentence when he admits this was a fight to protect &#8220;food stores.&#8221; That doesn&#8217;t qualify as riches? And to say &#8220;no ego&#8221; was involved in a famously prideful people is borderline foolish. The Indians themselves would likely argue both points. Finally, some of our noble Indian friends were just as guilty of owning slaves and butchering women and children as any racist American, because&#8230;

That, however, doesn&#8217;t change the fact that the film&#8217;s final words are tragically true. 13 years after the year in which the film is set, the last of the free Sioux were forced into a humiliating surrender and the several thousand year era of the Plains Indian ended forever.  Nor does it change the fact that Costner&#8217;s masterpiece is not only one of the greatest Westerns ever made, but also one of the greatest films of all time.


----------



## billc (Jan 20, 2011)

2--Apocalypse Now

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/01/19/top-25-left-wing-films-2-apocalypse-now-1979/

*Why it&#8217;s a left-wing film*
 With a script loosely based on Joseph Conrad&#8217;s novella &#8220;Heart of Darkness,&#8221; co-writer/director Francis Ford Coppola moves Conrad&#8217;s existential tale from the 19th Century African Congo to the 20th Century Vietnam War and portrays America&#8217;s involvement there, and our military men in particular,  in the harshest and most disturbing ways imaginable. At best, we are forever indifferent to everything and everyone, most especially human suffering. At worst we are murderers of women and children and our government is involved in the kind of secret Black Ops the Left was sure Wikileaks would finally reveal when the just the opposite turned out to be true.



​ We also epitomize the term Ugly American, treating our South Vietnamese allies like children or as though they don&#8217;t exist, and there is no amount of brutality we won&#8217;t rain down on our enemies in the North.  We are borderline terrorists willing to indiscriminately lay down intense air-strikes on villages where children scramble for cover just so we can surf. We use the dead in ways to strike fear into the hearts of the enemy and casually toss around racial slurs to describe anyone who doesn&#8217;t look like us.


----------



## granfire (Jan 20, 2011)

doesn't that regurgitates stuff leave a bad taste in your mouth?

Anyhow, you never answered my question:

How leftish is Universal Soldiers?


----------



## billc (Jan 20, 2011)

Just to be clear, the one with Van Damme, the first one right?  I haven't seen it in a  while, but from what I remember, it was a good film for both Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren.  To comment on how left wing it was I would need to see it again.  I know they were in Vietnam and Dolph was committing some sort of war crimes wasn't he?  So right there, if I remember correctly, it is starting to tilt.  If I can find some time I will watch it and give you a determination.  Also, I thought the leading lady could have been prettier.


----------



## Steve (Jan 20, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Just to be clear, the one with Van Damme, the first one right?  I haven't seen it in a  while, but from what I remember, it was a good film for both Van Damme and Dolph Lundgren.  To comment on how left wing it was I would need to see it again.  I know they were in Vietnam and Dolph was committing some sort of war crimes wasn't he?  So right there, if I remember correctly, it is starting to tilt.  If I can find some time I will watch it and give you a determination.  Also, I thought the leading lady could have been prettier.



Any film that depicts troops committing war crimes is left wing?


----------



## granfire (Jan 20, 2011)

stevebjj said:


> Any film that depicts troops committing war crimes is left wing?



According to bill it's a hallmark of the leftwing movie.

Anyhow, the Lundgren character loses it in Nam, they all die and are recycled as Special Ops and go out of control under Lundgren

I think it's probably the best van Damme movie (which of course is relative)


----------



## billc (Jan 20, 2011)

I would have to say yes, movies about the military today are majority left wing.  Can you name a recent, say last 20 years, movie focusing on the military that didn't show them as rapists, nutjobs, and murderers?  I can think of Black Hawk Down and going back The Green Berets.  Vietnam is the special case, even in the Lundgren and Van Damme movie, Lundgren plays a psycho before he is returned from the dead.  Are there any movies about fighting islamic terrorists that show american soldiers in a positive light?  I can think of one, Dear John.  I saw this movie base on the review at Bighollywood that it actually showed a soldier, a special forces soldier no less, in a positive light, who loved his country and fought for the country because of a sense of duty and commitment.


----------



## billc (Jan 21, 2011)

1--JFK

http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2011/01/21/top-25-left-wing-films-1-jfk-1991/


----------



## billc (Jan 23, 2011)

I have to say on further thought about the portrayal of the military in movies, Jerry Bruckheimer does a pretty good job in his movies.  From the "Rock" to "Pirates of the Carribean" and even in "The Transformers," the military is portrayed as noble, self-sacrificing and decent.  Bruckheimer also Produced "Black Hawk Down."  At least I think he did.  Even in the Rock, where the bad guys were ex-military special forces, they were in a way portrayed as noble, especially in the Ed Harris character and his aide.  Even Sean Connery played a member of the S.A.S. and portrayed nobility, and decency.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jan 23, 2011)

Bill, you can take this idea too far.

Sometimes a movie is just a movie.  Entertainment.

I mean, come on.  Universal Soldiers being left-wing or right wing.


----------



## billc (Jan 23, 2011)

It is more how the average artist views the military.  Look at the recent movie Avatar and how it portrayed the military.  Look at any of the films showing our troops vs. islamic terrorism.  Outside of Jerry Bruckheimer can you name a hollywood movie that shows the american military in a positive light or our soldiers as anything other than victims, drug users, crazies, or rapists or murderers in uniform?  Lions for lambs, redacted, in the valley of elah, any number of films about the current war effort are all negative in how they show our people.  Sure, there are bad guys in the service, there are people with problems, but just about every movie?  5-0, can you name a positive movie about our soldiers.  Even forrest gump had the lead character Gump and then Captain Dan, a wounded and disgruntled vet.  Universal Soldiers, in the character of Lundgren follows the stereotype of the crazy vietnam vet.  Have you seen that before?  How about every movie since the green berets.  a lot of conservatives will point to the movie "taking Chance" as a positive movie about our soldiers, however, when Kevin bacon is on the plane, he is reading a magazine critical of the war effort, and the movie is more about Chance's death and how sad it is, which is accurate, but on top of every other hollywood movie not much of a change.

Matt Damons green zone.

Most people watch movies without worrying about an overall effect.  But once you see the pattern, you start to realize not a plot or a plan, but a general attitude coming from the hollywood artistic community.  That's all.


----------



## granfire (Jan 23, 2011)

5-0 Kenpo said:


> Bill, you can take this idea too far.
> 
> Sometimes a movie is just a movie.  Entertainment.
> 
> I mean, come on.  Universal Soldiers being left-wing or right wing.



Sadly, he does not get sarcasm much


----------



## elder999 (Jan 23, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I would have to say yes, movies about the military today are majority left wing. Can you name a recent, say last 20 years, movie focusing on the military that didn't show them as rapists, nutjobs, and murderers?.


 
_Saving Private Ryan(1998),Band of Brothers(2001), Flags of Our Fathers(2006), Letters From Iwo(2006), Three Kings (1999), Jarhead(2005), Crimson Tide(1995), Gunner Palace(2005), Restrepo(2010), We Were Soldiers(2002), The Thin Red Line(1998), The Great Raid (2005), The Siege of Firebase Gloria (1989), Windtalkers (2002), Ears Open, Eyeballs Click, (2004), Generation Kill (2008), Taking CHance (2009),....._

Some of those are documentaries (_Restrepo_ was shot with phones in Afghanistan, and is a must see!) but most are not-I didn't include comedies like _Major Payne_, avoided the legal procedurals like _A Few Good Men_, and _Rules of Engagement_,  and, frankly, just got tired of looking...I mean, nearly 20 over the last 20 years, and all...


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 23, 2011)

Now now Elder. Don't you go trying to destroy his fantasy that the evil left, those kitten-eaing socialists, is taking over the world.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 23, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> Now now Elder. Don't you go trying to destroy his fantasy that the evil left, *those kitten-eaing* socialists, is taking over the world.


 
Kittens......mmmmm. Little four legged fuzzballs of deliciousness.

If kitten eating is a sign of socialism, color me RED. :lfao:


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, were about the war everyone likes, for now, WW2 and remember the scene where our guys were about to kill the german prisoner and were only stopped by Tom Hanks.  Band of Brothers, a good pick, again, WW2 the last good war, for now, But Tom Hanks went on to do the Pacific where he then went on to say to the world press that we fought the Japanese simply because they were different and implied that it was like what  we are doing now.  

We Were Soldiers, good pick.  It did portray our guys in a good light.  Mel Gibson was involved in that one so that was the reason for that.

Crimson tide, a racist sub commander is all set to launch missles because he is too stubborn to listen to reason.  A miss.
Letters from Iwo Jima, and Flags of our fathers, didn't see, although humanizing the Japanese at Iwo Jima, was one criticism I read about pertaining to the film.  Also, Both films were by Clint East wood,  a libertarian if not conservative guy, much like mel gibson.

Great Raid, another film made by a conservative.  A good film that portrayed our guys in a good way.

A few good men, portrays marines as brutal, ignorant, and religous zealots?  Not a good pick for your point.
Rules of engagement, another one that shows a moral equivalence between our guys and the killers in vietnam, but at least it did show the people with guns in the crowd at the end.

Three Kings, a boring, bad movie that once again showed america in a bad light, as well as showing our guys in a less than flattering way.

Wind Talkers, showed a policy of shooting the wind talkers that military historians claim did not exist.  Only saw parts of this movie.

Taking Chance, a nice movie, but as I pointed out on the plane, anti-war cover, and the story is about the death of a soldier in the war.  Soldier as victim, as I have pointed out in the past.

Jar head, didn't see it, got bad reviews, some reviews pointed out a poor portrayel of our guys in the first gulf wa

Fire Base Gloria, I think R. Lee Ermie may have been in it, haven't seen it.  About vietnam isn't it.  If I see it I'll let you know.

Gunner Palace, Eyeballs, did not see them.

Thin Red Line, also portrayal of the commamder by Nick Nolte was less than flattering, overall a boring movie.  Not a good example for your side.  I see it as an Artists interpretation of the battle for Guadlacanal.  
More later.

How about all those uplifting movies about the war against islamic terrorism.


----------



## granfire (Jan 24, 2011)

> although humanizing the Japanese at Iwo Jima, was one criticism I read about pertaining to the film.



holy ****, recognizing that 'we' fought against other _human beings_, what utter disgrace, right.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2011)

Bill doesn't want films, he wants right wing propaganda. I imagine he wants an American Leni Riefenstahl to make a film about the troops.


----------



## granfire (Jan 24, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Bill doesn't want films, he wants right wing propaganda. I imagine he wants an American Leni Riefenstahl to make a film about the troops.



But she was a communist Nazi wench...


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2011)

granfire said:


> But she was a communist Nazi wench...


 

Yep, a right wing nut in other words!

People don't want to see films about perfect people, in dramatic terms they are boring, authors, playwrights then screenwriters have also been drawn to writing about the flawed personalities, so much more interesting than the 'normal'. Check all the great literature and you will find the subject is the flawed characters.

I haven't seen Crimson Tide but taking it from Bill's description, the film he would have wanted would have been the good commander commanding his crew, end of film, there's no drama there! 

This witch hunt of 'leftist' films smacks of there wanting to be censorship and propaganda baised towards the right. The talk of having 'sides' is likewise worrying, it harks back to the type of totalitarian country that so many of our soldiers died to get rid of. American is a country that believes in freedom of thought, of action and of political belief, people like Bill would have you abandon this creed and have the country tied up like a right wing South American dictatorship, complain and he will brand you anti American, if his ilk get their way you will not only be branded but locked up. Since it's birth America has stood for freedom, here you see the insidious wearing away of personal freedoms, ie these films should be banned because they don't show the troops in a good light, what comes next? You can figure it out.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Well, for one thing, I don't believe in censorship, or keeping anyone from making any kind of movie they want.   I personally have liked quite a few of the above movies, but I am pointing out that in hollywood, if the director is from the left, the military is going to be portrayed poorly.   

Communists and Nazis are different and competing types of socialist.

Jerry Bruckheimer, Mel Gibson and Clint eastwood tend to portray soldiers, from foriegn countries as well in a more positive light.  The film makers on the left show them in a less positive light.

It doesn't even have to be a movie about soldiers, they manage to fit in the bad stereotype of soldiers in non-military films.  In American Beauty, the killer is a homophobic, brutally abusive marine.  In the HBO series, True Blood, the cook, a character not actually in the books, is a psychologically damaged Iraq war vet.  Since it is no longer popular to target vietnam vets as the deranged nut, they have started moving into the area of Iraq war vets.  Toby Macguires recent movie with Natalie Portman and Jake Gyllenhall is along those lines.  

The Japanese were brutal and treated P.O.W.'s as well as civillians in occupied countries as bad if not worse than the Germans and the Russians.  The Rape of Nanking, their special medical units, the beheading contests, the torture and murder of captured soldiers and civillians is what I refer to with Clint eastwood trying to humanize the japanese soldiers.  The things they did were policy, not rare events.   I remember one text that talked about Japanese soldiers forcing marines to bury their comrades alive.  So please, I know that their is a revision of the Pacific war about to take place, but until then, let's realize that the Japanese atrocities have yet to be fully addressed.  In fact a couple of movies are coming out about Nanking or the other cities occupied by the japanese.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Actually, they could have made Crimson Tide a better movie if they hadn't thrown in the nuttiness of Gene Hackman and then at the moment of greatest tension, they throw out that he is a racist as well.  The plot concerns the need to launch or not launch their nuclear missles.  During an engagement with another attack sub, they loose communication with their chain of command, the last order being to launch.  Denzel Washington wants to get closer to the surface to use another antanae to try to confirm the launch order.  Gene Hackman wants to follow procedure, and since they are cut off, they are required to follow their last order.  

That is the plot of a good movie.  And then they make Gene Hackman a nut, and then they throw in that he is also a racist.  Unecassary for the overall plot, and it diminished the quality of the movie.

Here are some others, Sean Penn, and Michael J. Fox, Casualties of War, their squad, on the way out on a patrol, kidnaps a vietnemese girl so that while they are hanging out in the jungle, waiting to ambush the enemy, they can rape her and then kill her.

Redacted, same idea.

Once again, for those just joining us, I am 100 percent against any kind of censorship.  I am a conservative who believes in the bill of rights and the constitution.  I believe in the first ammendment protecting freedom of speech.  I also believe that, as a movie goer, I have a right to complain about the movie experience.  I am a paying customer, so I have a say in what I pay to see.  That's all.  I have simply pointed out that American soldiers get a bad deal from the left wing in this country, especially in movies, in particular in recent movies.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Well, for one thing, I don't believe in censorship, or keeping anyone from making any kind of movie they want. I personally have liked quite a few of the above movies, but I am pointing out that in hollywood, if the director is from the left, the military is going to be portrayed poorly.
> 
> Communists and Nazis are different and competing types of socialist.
> 
> ...


 

Well actually it's a matter of well recorded history, haven't you caught up with it yet? There are a great many television documentaries, books and articles by historians as well as articles, books etc by the victims. Do you know what the connection between the schoolgirls of St.Trinians and the Japanese is? The Japanese way of making war is a very well documented subject.
Incidentally the lower ranked Japanese soldiers weren't treated any better than their prisoners. 
Do you honestly think you are instructing us, that we are ignorant of world history? That we aren't taught these things in schools?


----------



## Blade96 (Jan 24, 2011)

and bill some soldiers dont help matters since they act like douchenozzles themselves 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Ghraib_torture_and_prisoner_abuse

Thats just one american example. Soldiers from many different countries act like this at times. It doesnt help.

Some movies over the decades have attempted to humanize the military. The Enemy Below is such a movie. showing that the americans and the germans were really just scared people many of whom didnt even like their job their governments gave em in WW2.

I think if some soldiers didnt act like douchenozzles , maybe people will see the military in a better light.

I wouldnt mind in the least movies showing the good side of the military, as many movies show as well.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

I know Blade96, there are all types of people in the military, and war gives the bad ones opportunities to do really bad things. My point is, we have a current war on our hands and almost all of the films set in this war show the american soldiers as crazy, criminal or victims. I extended the search out and asked for some ideas about movies that may show the U.S. in a positive light and some have shown up, while some are a little dubious.
I don't think that all movies about the military have to be positive, but movie after movie showing the American soldier as crazy, criminal or a victim is something I noticed.

Another one The General's Daughter, The plot: a generals daughter is found dead, naked and staked to the ground at a military fort. The general is up for a big promotion and John Travolta is tasked with finding the killer. The plot point meant to throw off the viewer to who the real killer is, is that when she was at the Premier American Military academy, West Point, ( Go Army) she is raped by 4 or 5 senior cadets, left naked and staked to the ground. Her father tells her to deal with it because he doesn't want to embarass the military and he doesn't want it to effect his career. Not another example of good soldiering.

Granfires sarcastic point about Universal soldiers unwittingly helped to show my point.  Dolph Lundgren is committing war crimes in vietnam in the movie.  This is a B-level science fiction movie and they still throw in the crazy, criminal vietnam war vet.  

Another one, Cadillac man, now this one I would have to check on.  The Tim Robbins character I believe is some sort of vet.  He goes into a car dealership with an assault rifle and explosives to kill the guy he thinks is sleeping with his wife.  Remember, this is a comedy about a shady car salesman, and Tim Robbins is a vet. Once again, I would have to check to be sure.


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 24, 2011)

The cook in True Blood??? You have got to be ******** me!!!!

What is so wrong about seeing a character that served his country and came back mentally scarred from the horrors of war? Because that never happens right?

Crimson Tide, I don't want to watch 2 hours of a sub commander and his XO debating the finer points of whether they should try to confirm or not. The characters were written to have tension, motivation.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

The cook could have been anyone, they specifically made him an Iraq war vet.  Is that a coincidence.  They didn't make him an iraq vet. who came home and lived a regular life.  He isn't even in the original book.  He is completely made up and put in to the story.


----------



## granfire (Jan 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> I know Blade96, there are all types of people in the military, and war gives the bad ones opportunities to do really bad things. My point is, we have a current war on our hands and almost all of the films set in this war show the american soldiers as crazy, criminal or victims. I extended the search out and asked for some ideas about movies that may show the U.S. in a positive light and some have shown up, while some are a little dubious.
> I don't think that all movies about the military have to be positive, but movie after movie showing the American soldier as crazy, criminal or a victim is something I noticed.
> 
> Another one The General's Daughter, The plot: a generals daughter is found dead, naked and staked to the ground at a military fort. The general is up for a big promotion and John Travolta is tasked with finding the killer. The plot point meant to throw off the viewer to who the real killer is, is that when she was at the Premier American Military academy, West Point, ( Go Army) she is raped by 4 or 5 senior cadets, left naked and staked to the ground. Her father tells her to deal with it because he doesn't want to embarass the military and he doesn't want it to effect his career. Not another example of good soldiering.
> ...




You forgot 'Deer Hunter'


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Thanks Granfire, that is another one.  

First Blood with Stallone.  That was a movie based on a book.  The actual character in the book is less innocent and the sherrif is less bad.


----------



## granfire (Jan 24, 2011)

The point about these leftist movies as you like to call them is that war is not a gallant adventure.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

I have tried to see wether the Tim Robbins character in cadillac man is a vet. but it doesn't say in any of the info. on the movie.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

No, its not a gallant adventure Granfire, but with the bad examples of soldiers there are far more examples of good men and women doing the right things in the middle of that chaos.  Like I have said, I am not looking for every movie to be a glowing portrayal of soldiers.  I have noticed that too often, the worst stereotypes of the military are shown, often gratuitously, as in American Beauty and True blood.   

Coming Home, a left wing movie mentioned on the list, Bruce Dern comes home not quite right after leaving for the war as a gung ho soldier.

Not to leave our reserve forces out, "Southern Comfort", the national guardsmen on a weekend drill, blow up a cajuns home, and commit random indignities on the locals, until the locals start to hunt them down.  Fred Ward goes in to kill a prisoner, and one of the soldiers goes crazy.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

And for our peacetime forces, "the great Santini" a film about an obnoxiuos, mean Marine Corps. pilot who mistreats his entire family and is generally obnoxious.  A famous scene:  At a basketball game for his son, the son is fouled by another player.  Robert Duvall, the great Santini, tells his son that if he doesn't punch out that player, he will have to walk home.  Also, when the son beats the great santini in a basketball game at home, the great santini bounces the basketball off his son's head saying, " 1,2,3, Cry." bounce the ball off the head.  "1,2,3, cry..."


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

danother two films, Doom, and Zorro.

Doom, yeah, just a bad movie in general but the special forces soldiers accept an order to murder all the civillians on Mars to cover up the problem.

Zorro, I know, it is about California under Mexican control, but, in a movie with all Spaniards and Mexicans, who is Antonio Bandera's primary villian?  An American, former union army officer, who we know is a former union army officer because he wears the uniform throughout the entire movie.  He kills Bandera's brother, and is about to murder hundreds of mexican mine workers before he is killed.  (Catherine Zeta Jones was really great looking in this movie by the way.)


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 24, 2011)

I saw First Blood, and read the book. The overwhelming message I got from both was the crappy treatment the 'Nam vets got coming home. 

Doom was based on a video game dude.


----------



## Empty Hands (Jan 24, 2011)

CanuckMA said:


> I saw First Blood, and read the book. The overwhelming message I got from both was the crappy treatment the 'Nam vets got coming home.



The clear message of every single movie I can think of that portrays vets or soldiers as crazy or criminal is that it was the horror of war that did that to them.  Next to them, there are usually plenty of sane, normal soldiers for contrast.

Of course, that isn't a message that the War Cheerleaders like, so it gets turned into "leftists hate soldiers!"


----------



## elder999 (Jan 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, were about the war everyone likes, for now, WW2 and remember the scene where our guys were about to kill the german prisoner and were only stopped by Tom Hanks. Band of Brothers, a good pick, again, WW2 the last good war, for now, But Tom Hanks went on to do the Pacific where he then went on to say to the world press that we fought the Japanese simply because they were different and implied that it was like what we are doing now.


 
Methinks you missed the point...._again_....:lol:....... Here's what *you* _said:_



billcihak said:


> I would have to say yes, movies about the military today are majority left wing. Can you name a recent, say last 20 years, movie focusing on the military that didn't show them as rapists, nutjobs, and murderers?


 
and those are *two*, regardless of what Tom Hanks had to say later, or which war they were about.





billcihak said:


> We Were Soldiers, good pick. It did portray our guys in a good light. Mel Gibson was involved in that one so that was the reason for that.


 
Actually, if there's a 'reason for that," it's that it's the true account, based upon the book by the same name, written by Lt. Gen Harold Moore-the Mel Gibson character (then Lt. Col)-about the first major engagement of the Viet Nam war. 





billcihak said:


> Crimson tide, a racist sub commander is all set to launch missles because he is too stubborn to listen to reason. A miss.


 
Actually, the racist angle was really nuanced-it was more about the conflict of following orders in those situations-unlike the people manning land based missiles, who are tested to be not particularly introspective or thoughtful, so that they're more likely to just launch after authentication, submariners are supposed to think-this was the conflict: what one officer thought vs. what the commanding officer saw as an authenticated order, and one which, when received, initiated a communications blackout. 

Simple human conflict-and not one that portrays the military "in a bad light" at all-it just demonstrates that the men making such decisions are..........well, *men*, and fallible.




billcihak said:


> Letters from Iwo Jima, and Flags of our fathers, didn't see, although humanizing the Japanese at Iwo Jima, was one criticism I read about pertaining to the film. Also, Both films were by Clint East wood, a libertarian if not conservative guy, much like mel gibson.


 
Again, movies based on factual material-you're right, it has a lot to do with the director's artistic vision-but way less to do with his politics.

Japanese aren't human? How ironic that you claim to do iaido, of all things......



billcihak said:


> Great Raid, another film made by a conservative. A good film that portrayed our guys in a good way.


 
What leads you to believe that John Dahl is "a conservative?" Certainly not the rest of his work.



billcihak said:


> A few good men, portrays marines as brutal, ignorant, and religous zealots? Not a good pick for your point.


 
That's part of why I left it out: crime procedurals by their very nature are going to portray military personnel acting like men-that is to say, brutal, ignorant and zealous.




billcihak said:


> Rules of engagement, another one that shows a moral equivalence between our guys and the killers in vietnam, but at least it did show the people with guns in the crowd at the end.


 
See above-and, weren't our guys "the killers in vietnam?" :lol:



billcihak said:


> Three Kings, a boring, bad movie that once again showed america in a bad light, as well as showing our guys in a less than flattering way.


 
None of those people were nutjobs-at least, no more than the rest of us-rapists or murderers. This was, essentially, a heist movie set in a war zone: an American tradition of sorts, since we are a nation of outlaws, bent on getting away with it. 

It also shows all the characters deciding to do the right thing.





billcihak said:


> Wind Talkers, showed a policy of shooting the wind talkers that military historians claim did not exist. Only saw parts of this movie.


 
The code talkers *did* have bodyguards-to keep American soldiers from mistaking them for Japanese and killing them. Otherwise, though, the movie fits the criteria: portrays the military in a positive light and made in the last 20 years-you know: _what you *said*_.:lol:



billcihak said:


> Taking Chance, a nice movie, but as I pointed out on the plane, anti-war cover, and the story is about the death of a soldier in the war. Soldier as victim, as I have pointed out in the past.


 
Water is wet. Women have secrets. *Soldiers die.*

Just the facts......



billcihak said:


> Jar head, didn't see it, got bad reviews, some reviews pointed out a poor portrayel of our guys in the first gulf war


 
Nope. Just guys portrayed as *guys.*




billcihak said:


> How about all those uplifting movies about the war against islamic terrorism.


 
Restrepo, Gunner Palace. You know-_documentaries_


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 24, 2011)

Bill does Iaido? He Pmd me that he does Kali.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Didn't see either Restrepo or Gunner palace, but I did hear the Restrepo film maker interviewed on the Dennis Miller show.   Yes, notice how restrepo, was made by someone living with the troops (don't know how Gunner palace was made or what it was about) and how they are portrayed in the film, at least according to the film maker.  It is the non-documentary films about the war that are lacking.

Also, three kings, when Walhberg is being tortured it was sort of showing some poor guy caught in the middle of something, bush and Hussein, and being blamed for what was going on.  the one guy wasn't very bright, and Clooney was a con man in uniform.

Another one, an oldie, Day Of the Dead, Soldiers are going nutty during a Zombie apocalypse, a really great movie, troops are shown in a bad light.

For our British friends, 28 Days Later, 28 days into the outbreak a small group of British soldiers has been broken to the point that they imprison a woman and an underage girl to be used as sex slaves, as the officer in charge apoligizes by saying that he had to do it because he had to give his men something to live for.  Or some such rubbish.  Oh, and they try to execute Cillian Murphy, the scarecrow from The Batman Begins, because he takes offense to the enslavement of his female friends.

American T.V. with a British twist,  On the show House, with Hugh Laurie, Dr. House's father is R. Lee Ermie, a mean, demanding marine whom House hates.  He hates him so much that house is happy to find out that his mother cheated on the father, and so the mean marine is not really houses's dad.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 24, 2011)

Tez3 said:


> Bill does Iaido? He Pmd me that he does Kali.


 

What his profile currently says:



> About billcihak Primary Art and Ranking *iaido *


 
could be he does both....I dunno....


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

I did Iaido 6 years before switching over to Kali.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

I know in the last version of Doom that I played, you were not charged with murdering civillians to cover up and contain the situation on Mars.

My iaido instructor's teacher was Dr. Gordon Warner, who lived in Japan before WW2, fought the Japanese in the U.S. Marines, losing his leg in the process, and then returned to Japan after the war and lived their till his death.  In fact, We were told he carried a Japanese sword with him during the war that was given to him by one of his teacher's in Japan.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

remember in Crimson tide at the moment where they are waiting to see if they can make contact and clairfy their orders, and Gene Hackman goes into the story that the Lipizaner Stallions are born white or some such thing.  I don't know if the movie was from a book, but that was unnecessary to the movies plot at that point, and was another shot at the Hackman character.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> American T.V. with a British twist, On the show House, with Hugh Laurie, Dr. House's father is R. Lee Ermie, a mean, demanding marine whom House hates. He hates him so much that house is happy to find out that his mother cheated on the father, and so the mean marine is not really houses's dad.


 
DNA testing in that episode proved that his father was, in fact, his father, and he mourns him.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

I stand corrected on House, it was on in the background and I remember him taking the Dna sample.  The description of his father still stands though.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Another positive movie, Independence Day, but the director refused to make a sequel because George bush was in office.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> My iaido instructor's teacher was Dr. Gordon Warner, who lived in Japan before WW2, fought the Japanese in the U.S. Marines, losing his leg in the process, and then returned to Japan after the war and lived their till his death. In fact, We were told he carried a Japanese sword with him during the war that was given to him by one of his teacher's in Japan.


 
Warner sensei was a legend-was your instructor Ken Pitchford?


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

If generation kill is a fair treatment, it would probably be because the writer actually lived with the troops.  this puts a different perspective on the men and women who actually fight in war.  I may try to watch this series, although when it first came out I thought it would just be another hit piece on the military.  It looks like it is on disc so maybe I'll give it a try.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Another positive movie, Independence Day, but the director refused to make a sequel because George bush was in office.


 
The reported reasons were far more complex than this-in fact, they had nothing to do with Bush, and more to do with Fox studios, Will Smith, and not having a good idea for a script. Rumor has it that it's a go, now.....


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Another documentary that i havn't seen but have heard good things about is "Brothers at War."  It is about one brother who is a civillian with two brothers who are soldiers and he goes and embeds with their units.  Something like that.  The brother explores why his brothers enlisted and what motivates their service.


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Roland Emmerich, director of Independence Day:

After _Independence Day_ brought us Bill Pullman as the inspirational President Whitmore, Emmerich didn't feel the spirit of the film was compatible with the times of the Bush administration:
"In Independence Day, it was about a king who leads his country into a fight against an outside invader. I didn't want to make that movie during the Bush years. It was not thought that George W. Bush would have made a great king. Now with Obama, it's another story."​


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

That would be him Elder 999.  From what Ken told us Dr. Warner was a really great guy.  Funny too.  Do you know the story of the Naginata match.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> Roland Emmerich, director of Independence Day:
> 
> After _Independence Day_ brought us Bill Pullman as the inspirational President Whitmore, Emmerich didn't feel the spirit of the film was compatible with the times of the Bush administration:
> "In Independence Day, it was about a king who leads his country into a fight against an outside invader. I didn't want to make that movie during the Bush years. It was not thought that George W. Bush would have made a great king. Now with Obama, it's another story."​


 
Yeah, that's what he says *now*-before Obama was elected, and while Bush was in office, it was all about money, Fox, Will Smith and a script......


----------



## elder999 (Jan 24, 2011)

billcihak said:


> . Do you know the story of the Naginata match.


 
No, but there are lots of stories about "the one-legged gaijin kenshi." :asian:


----------



## billc (Jan 24, 2011)

Well, the way it was told to me, Dr. Warner was visiting a school that taught Naginata.  While he was there he was asked to demonstrate with one of the women at the Naginata school.  The woman who was going to assist in the demonstration did not realize he only had one leg.  So, he squares off against the lady, and Ken said he noticed that Dr. Warner was leading with his artificial leg.  This was unusual because he never did that.  Well, the lady comes in and executes a hard strike at his lead leg, shouting a loud Kiai.  the leg comes completely off, and flies across the room.  The Naginata lady starts screaming in shock.  Apparently Dr. Warner thought it was pretty funny.  That is the Naginata story.


----------



## 5-0 Kenpo (Jan 26, 2011)

I agree that Hollywood does have a leftist bent.  

I would actually submit to you that these movies have less to do with the military, and more about the culture that spawned it, supposedly.


----------

