Cool News
Stone Heads Back To Nam, This Time With Bruce In Tow!!
Merrick here...
Oliver Stone is ramping up to direct his fourth Viet Nam themed movie.
This time it's PINKVILLE starring Bruce Willis and Channing Tatum. It's about the My Lai Massacre, in which hundreds of unarmed Vietnamese civilians (many elderly and children) were savaged and slaughtered by American forces.
As details of the event slowly filtered out, global outrage ensued and court martials (courts martial?) were undertaken. There are many horrifying images on-line if you've interest in further research.
Willis will play Army Gen. William R. Peers, who supervised the investigation into the massacre by U.S. soldiers of as many as 500 My Lai villagers, most of them unarmed women, children and elderly.
Tatum will play Hugh Thompson, a helicopter pilot who, upon realizing what was happening below, put a stop to the killing by placing his craft between gunmen and the few villagers who were left, and telling his two shipmates to fire on the soldiers if they shot any more people. They airlifted the survivors and reported the carnage to superiors.
..says THIS ARTICLE in Variety.
I'm not always a huge fan of Stone's work, but I think movies like this are critically important.
There's a great deal of simplification and glorification in how we view war; it's imperative to remember things like this happened...might happen...and perhaps still do. Such realities aren't comfortable, but it's the truth.
Tatum will play Hugh Thompson, a helicopter pilot who, upon realizing what was happening below, put a stop to the killing by placing his craft between gunmen and the few villagers who were left, and telling his two shipmates to fire on the soldiers if they shot any more people. They airlifted the survivors and reported the carnage to superiors.
-
+ Expand All
-
Sounds like a good movie. Did I mention that I'm first?
-
What about it? What about exploring the atrocities the Japanese committed during WWII?
-
My thunder was officially stolen.
-
Ugh.
-
Maybe. why does the narrator talk like that?
-
before actually. I'm not a huge fan of Stone's work either. Maybe this movie will actually make sense.
-
Has it come to this? Are we that dumb? Well obviously soma you don't care. That the iraqs and the south africans and the asian countries. Soma them don't have maps either and if the iraqs and asian countires give soma attention to the maps. Then soma the Ameri-Kins can locate the maps. Wait slater! let me finish!
-
in vietnam. This story should be told.
-
Stone doing another movie on Vietnam? Like Born on the 4th of July and Platoon wasn't enough? What more can he possible bring to the table, outside of a pointless action film?
-
There's no good guys or bad guys in War. Just ugly people
-
would make a great movie
...but it would be unwatchable. -
Natural Born Killers and he hasn't done anything that interested me since.
-
After 2o seconds of death metal I turned it off. Looked like a fan film. Not worth my time watching it if it has been put together so poorly. Gonna talk about US attrocities in Vietnam? Start with death metal. That sets the tone! You know its going to be sooo even handed. Thank god UK doc makers are so much better than that. As for the movie? Cool! Great cast, great director, obscure titbit of history = Oscar and BO failure. There isnt one country out there who hasnt got a few of these skeletons in the closet. Us Brits killed 900 Indians in a massacre in Amritsa(sp). Should always shine a light in dark places. That wank doc still has me pissed. How the fuck is anyone going to take anything you say seriously in a documentary when you start like that!
-
Oh wait, I'm sure it'll be at Cannes...
-
Never read Brave New World? The population is controlled by a drug called "Soma". That was more like an obscure Dennis Miller reference.
-
It scares the hell out of me that there are people around who have never heard of My Lai.
-
If this story ain't appropriate, given the current zeitgeist in this country, I don't know what is.
-
Terrible things were done in Vietnam, to be sure...but could you go piss on ANOTHER country just this once?
-
of mine wrote a book on it and made us all read it. otherwise, i never would have known about it. US history never gets past WWII, mainly so teachers dont have to tell little kids about awful stuff like this. we are supposed to be the good guys. i can't wait for the Bush slamming movies to come out in a decade or so.
-
Of course they do. Don't be stupid.
-
with Internet culture that is, that or he just doesn't visit Youtube. I was being sarcastic Mr. Valentine. Mocking the Miss South Carolina clip the entire world, except you, is talking about - http://tinyurl.com/2vbl8d
-
Let's make a movie about America kicking some bad guy ass. Oh yeah... Team America!
-
A future CNN anchor on the market.
-
That would have been awesome.
-
this film probably won't villify the US as much as it sounds. Now if Stone had cast Clooney, Penn and Robbins, it would be different! Also, there would be zero chance of me watching that. :)
-
Miss Teen South Carolina Special Edition - http://tinyurl.com/2eam2s
-
When can see that one? Heard the HOSTEL crowd would love it.
-
A story about two American heroes, and all anchorite can do is shit on them.
-
Let's hope so!
-
except to do a proper conspiratoral 9/11 movie.
-
People who bitch about Stone being anti-American are just the absolute worst kind of idiot. So he focuses on American abuses of power instead of Vietnamese, or Japanese, or Russian, or Turkish, etc. He's American. Pointing out the mistakes of others is easy, and often nothing more than offensively simplistic (sometimes vaguely racist) bitching. That's alot of what American cinema did at it's beginning. Staring your own country's mistakes in the face takes courage and an honest interest in it's soul and character. He's not my favorite film maker, but he's often been a lonely voice for authentic American reflection in mainstream cinema. So you ridiculously defensive "patriotic" duck farts should take a breath and realize that taking a good hard look at America's mistakes in the past could very well save her soul in the long run.
-
Don't worry, Jess Franco is currently shooting a film covering that very topic. He's described his new movie as "an unflinching, unforgiving and extremely detailed examination of this historically important subject." I understand furthermore that as a political statement about how the suffering of women has not been sufficiently paid attention to, Franco is using an all-female cast.
-
No one seems willing to call him on his past.
-
With Oliver Stone at the helm, I'll bet Colin Powell's whitewashing of the whole affair will probably be a big part of it. Especially since it was Colin Powell's utter horseshit presentation at the U.N. that got the U.S. its civillian support for the Iraq invasion. If Stone doesn't cover Powell's involvement, it'd be a shame.
-
detailing the atrocities Americans committed in Vietnam, and in America and in other counties. Why, beause there are people who have never heard of things like this and the Trail of Tears. I'm not saying we cast a bad light on America, but you know what there are assholes in our American army just like there are in every army and there are good guys in the American army just like there are in every army. The world is not diveded up into Bad guys and Americans or good guys and Americans. Our world is divded up into people who make good choices, who follow their moral compass and people who make bad choices and follow their moral compass whichever way it turns.oh and btw I am a conservetive and a registered Republican (however that might change to Independent)
-
You are "shitting on" a film maker for high-lighting the heroism of two American servicemen who stood up in the midst of a massacre because the perpetrators were also American? Everyone who serves in the military has a degree of heroism within them (including my brother who was medically retired after serving in Afganistan and my brother-in-law who just returned from a year in Iraq), but they can also be swept up in a machine of war that lacks, from time to time, a strong enough structure to stop it's soldiers from commiting overwhelming brutality. It takes uncommon heroism to stand up in the face of that momentum, and that is the story Stone is choosing to tell. A real patriot should at least appreciate Stone's willingness not to shy away from stories like this because some of our less-reflective, less intellectually nimble, more irrationally sensitive ticket-buyers will stay away. I just wish those who stay away might open up a book or a newspaper instead of letting Sean Hannity service them en route to the mall. It is NEVER wrong to think critically, especially when it is about a war fought in your name and in your children's name.
-
than most of the posters here, but to refer to My Lai as "an obscure tidbit of history" is woefully ignorant. To the question of Willis' involvement, sure he's had some box office stinkers of late, as well as some deserved hits ( LFDH, despite some noted hatred for the PG-13, Over The Hedge, one of the better 3D animal cartoons that we've been assaulted with lately, Sin City).And the guy's always working in bit parts (Fast Food Nation, Grindhouse, etc.), so it's not like he's lacking for roles. I think it may be an attempt to finally get some Oscar attention. I think he's been overlooked for work in The Sixth Sense ( damn, the entire movie centered on his performance and it was HIS story, not the kids ), and some really subtle work in Unbreakable. If this gets him an Oscar nod, its about time.
-
Also wanted to throw out that Oliver Stone did combat duty in Vietnam and was twice wounded in action. Why the fuck shouldn't he make movies about the war -- it obviously had a big affect on him and he has a perspective on it that a lot of you naysayers don't.
-
Aug 28, 2007 12:51:16 PM CDT
How left-wing could this really be with Bruce in it?
by excaliburffolkes
I doubt he'd sign on the star in a film that's going to trash the US. I'm betting this flick deals more with disillusionment over the Vietnam war, a la Born on the Fourth of July, than wallow in anti-Americanism.
-
Thank you Bloo and spoilerd. I'm really sick of uncritical gas bags crying foul everytime someone points out an American judgement lapse.
By the way, as far as "reflecting on America with pride" (which is what I think Stone is doing with this story - I'm VERY proud of the soldiers who were strong enough to stand up) he also made World Trade Center, which didn't even have a puff of conspiracy smoke in it.
And my worldview is tanned, not jaundiced. -
What will he wear on his head?
-
That's called education, Achorite. Although wikipedia may not be the best source. If we attempt to honestly tell the whole story, instances of American history in which to take pride and others in which to feel shame, perhaps we will learn from them and strengthen our country's character.
-
...just beating a dead horse...
-
Bring it on.
-
NOT A MASSACRE?!? What the HELL would be a massacre if that wasn't one?!?
-
It should be seen as a positive thing, that our country is held to a higher standard. American tragedies and mistakes should be explored honestly, in order for us to reflect. I think that filmmakers should explore America's worst times- not shy away from it- tell a story that needs to be told, regardless of if it is flattering to our sense of nationalism or not, if it has a sense of purpose and can bring clarity on current events.
I don't see why you should percieve films that are critical of America as something dangerous or offensive. -
That's the kind of thinking of irresponsible monsters and fools that never wanted to win the fight. They just wanted blood like a dirty animal.
-
... Saying they knew nothing of this incident, so don't tell ME this isn't a worthwhile project. Ignorance isn't bliss in the real world.
-
"Oliver Stone who can't seem to get past his Vietnam fetish" Yeah, it's almost like he fucking served in it and then went on to become successful making academy award winning movies on it or something! WHAT A CRAZY MAN.
-
That was a terribly simplistic reading of the "left" posts here, and I won't let you get away with it just because you're angry and a hopeless cynic. Gotta call bullshit, and if you care about the truth instead of jusy feeling dominant, try to pay attention.
I am an independent. Democrats make me sick. I would vote for Chuck Hagel in heartbeat if he ran.
OK, point by point. No one said "throw our soldiers in jail". It's not their fault they are put in situations, like in Iraq, where they are asked to do tasks they are untrained to do in the midst of terrorists who will do anything to draw American blood. War is Hell, people die by accident. It's the people who get the war machine moving that make me sick.
The Viet Cong did horrible things, like hide in the midst of peaceful villages, just as certain militias and terorist groups are doing in Iraq today. That is true; war is indeed hell.
You are NOT a true patriot if you denigrate your country. You ARE a true patrioy if you think critically about your country's behavior. It's amazing that somehow "criticism" has become equated with "denigration".
The left won the election in 2006, taking control of Congress.
I love America, whether you choose to believe it or not is of no consequence.
I DO hate that we live on stolen land and that our history is stained with the slavetrade. That makes me a patriot, true, but a decent human being even more so. Who doesn't hate that our European forbearers stole and killed for land, hurling small pox infected blankets into villages and ambushing Indians at treaty conferences? Who takes pride in the part of our heritage that said one person could own another person? And I DO like capitalism.
And Oliver Stone peaked in the late 80's, not the 90's, and this movie may, indeed, be terrible. -
Achorite, I didn't say Stone was "heroic". The climate in the country is indeed making it more possible for Hollywood to release challenging films that bask questions about how America uses its power. In the 80's, though, with Platoon and Wall Street, Stone was pretty lonely out there. He may not be a hero, but he certainly doesn't deserve the irrational jingoistic vitriol some conservatives throw at him. And I'm SURE you think the people who stood up against the massacre were heroic, only a soulless prick could think otherwise. And even though I'm sure I disagree with you on many things, I do not think you're a souless prick.
-
They don't sit on their hands and worry about the current political and social climate, that's for damn sure. Stone has courage, but I wouldn't call him a hero in general. A champion of free speech and real issues, sure, but I haven't heard anyone call him a hero.
-
The true point of making films like this is so that history might never repeat itself. While it would be nice to believe that our countrymen could never do something so horrible, to do so would be to live in a fantasy world. And if Stone truly wanted to make something anti-American, the heroic characters would be mere cameos. The main characters would be the terrorized Vietnamese villagers, and the American soldiers would only be seen as villains.
As to anyone like AnimalStructure who has the "it was war, and anyone was fair game" point of view, I hope to God they never see combat (or get assigned to guarding a military prison). Sociopaths have no place in the military. It's bad enough that they seem to populate our government. -
Kindly forgive my passionate typos.
-
How about World Trade Center and United 93?
-
...that project sounded so much more interesting than this. Stone needs to tackle the more contemporary wars that are going on... he's covered Vietnam enough.
-
There are plenty of films that make America look good, but they're all set in WW2 -- which was a war effort pretty much everyone rallied behind. There haven't been too many military endeavors since then that people have agreed on.
-
Behind Enemy Lines? It was kind of stupid, though...
-
By your thinking, if Wesley Clark was to blame for the massacres, then everyone from Nixon to GWB is even greater monsters. Wasn't this coming from the same person that said "War is hell. Nothing to see here. Move on."?!?
-
Achorite, what is a "good light"? Is it a film that contends that all American behavior is positive? Or is it something that shows how various Americans stand up in the midst of tyranny, either domestic or abroad, and fight for those foundational American values of truth, justice, equality, and freedom? There are many of these, thankfully, that show how individuals cope with huge bearaucratic power structures that lean toward the brutal and do their best to bring them down. Think The Insider, Syrianna, Traffic, even a film about a Brit made by a Mexican (Children of Men) or a study of Israeli retribution (Munich)can be viewed as a study of American pride. At least this American's pride.
-
to make movies detailing and cataloging America's failings and short-comings?" Becuase without doing so, you're whitewashing history. Films like Platoon and Born on the Fourth of July show bravery, madness, hate, love, and every last other emotion you'll find when fighting for your life.
-
In unrelated matters it is being reported on mania.com that Braniac will be the villain in the next Superman movie
-
To show American atrocities of war. Always.German Nazi atrocities. Sometimes important. Sometimes.Communist atrocities (i.e., Stalin, N. Vietnames, Che). Never important. Never.You see, it's American Imperialist Aggressor Propaganda to show ANYTHING, but American war atrocities. And we all know that ol' Ollie Stone is no American Imperialist Aggressor.No double standard here at all. Nothing to see. Move along, comrades. Move along.
-
I can't tell if you're serious or just attempting to get people angry, but you seem not to know anything about this particular incident. These soldiers weren't fearful that the villagers would attack them. Were that the case, they would not have taken the time to round them up in an orderly fashion before shooting them. They would not have beaten and raped them if they felt themselves to be in any immediate danger. They would not have mutilated the bodies if all they were concerned about was protecting themselves. (You can read about it here http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/64344.stm but I'm sure you'll just dismiss it as limey liberal propaganda.) While some people may want to go on and on about what sort of awful things the Viet Cong did, the point is that we as Americans are supposed to be above those sorts of things. We're the good guys and should be held to the highest standard. The second our countrymen stoop to brutality, it diminishes our standing in the world as the standard to which other nations should aspire.
-
Shut the fuck up and enlist already. Seriously. If we're all such pansies, go put your money where your mouth is and go show us what pansies we all are. There's a war on, so here's your chance. Then come back and tell us what idiots we are for opposing it, and how it was just business as usual when you "iced" some 14 year old because she might have been an enemy with a grenade. Or hey, maybe instead you could respect what our soldiers are going through like the rest of us and question why they have to be over there in the first place making such horrifying decisions that most of us thank God we never have to make.
-
What "positive American film" has been described as "filthy jingoist propoganda"? I can think od MANY more films about America that are labeled "filthy leftist propoganda" by conservatives. I'm stumped.
And just because war is hell and soldiers are put in extreme situations doesn't mean we can't call their actions a "massacre". What about victim's rights? I'm not saying we prosecute the enlisted guys in over their heads pulling triggers, but it's an insult to the dead to diminish the tragedy with words. -
tears of the sun, also starring our pal bwilly (that's how i call him).
-
I think you mean blind approval. I have pride in the USA, but I'm not going to blind myself to the horrors that fellow Americans are responsible for. What the fuck? That's exactly how racism starts. With closing your eyes about your own evil while demonizing other countries. Yeah, thank god we don't have a bunch of unabashed simple minded pride in the USA films. Freedom means first and formost that truth should reign. There is no freedom when we close our eyes to the truth just to feel good about ourselves.
-
" There's a great deal of simplification and glorification in how we view war; it's imperative to remember things like this happened...might happen...and perhaps still do. Such realities aren't comfortable, but it's the truth."
Since Vietnam, every journalists who wants to make a name for himself/herself reports only the bad news. Every filmmaker who wants to be considered "serious" makes a movie like this, in regards to war movies. Lets not uphold this movie as daring, innovated, or unique.
Daring would be to make a positive war movie in these days.
-
We Were Soliders (a Vietnamflick that was positive and military), Gods and Generals, Blackhawk Down, the aformentioned Behind Enemy Lines (the one with Gene Hackman and Owen Wilson) was a positive American pro military flick, Hunt for Red October, Patriot Games, Clear and Present Danger, The Sum of all Fears. Hell Red Dawn was a pro American flick. What about Tears of the Sun, or even Welcome to Sarajavo. Even Casino Royle with Jeffy Wright's char didn't make the CIA look stupid.the problem with any movie is that it is a story, so therefore you have to have good guys and bad guys, and sometimes Americans are protrayed as bad guys as well as good guys in the same movie.
-
Oliver Stone has explored this terrible war three times already, and I thought each of the films were pretty good. I have problems with Born on the Fourth of July how it suggests that all American marines and soldiers were baby killers, but overrall I liked it. Sometimes though I think people get the impression (especially non-Americans) that ALL soldiers/marines/sailers/airmen involved in the Vietnam conflict were war criminals. That's just not the case. As a son of a Vietnam War ex-marine combat vet, I know that's not the case. But I do agree this story should be told, but hopefully he'll bring some sort of balance to it, perhaps even discussing some of the numerous My Lai-esque massacres committed regularly by VC and NVA forces. Or, perhaps, the US ally South Korea, whom my father witnessed them murdering Vietnamese civilians in 1968 as retaliation for several VC hiding there and ambushing a Korean Marine convoy. My Dad was assigned as a Marine Corps liason officer to them after serving in the DMZ since the Tet Offensive. My Dad tried to stop them but they didn't listen and he reported it to his commanders who raised the issue with SK, but it died there. The SK government was under a dictatorship at the time and didn't care. No one knows of this or other brutal tactics of the South Korean Marines, who would wipe out entire villages if VC attacked from one.
-
Who said we shouldn't stare foreign corruption/brutality/tyranny in the face? We absolutely should. But why does everyone think Oliver Stone should do it? Does he have to sacrifice another story that he's more compelled by and do something mandated by some agency? That sound sort of communist to me...
And there are many more films that stare Hitler and the Nazis in the face and judge them than films that challenge America's use of power. Come on now.
Anti-soviet films? What the hell are you taliking about? Almost every film made in the 60's and 70's was anti-commy. There is no soviet union anymore. And mark my words, films critical of the Chinese system (already ubiquitous, albethey thinly veiled, in the foreign film industry will come stateside as China gets more powerful. -
That all soldiers would have to be sociopaths to do the job of killing. Sociopaths would kill indiscriminately, not caring who they were killing or why. Soldiers must have enough compassion to do what is right. AnimalStructure, you surely must understand that there is a difference between war and genocide. I sincerely hope that you're not actually advocating the latter. Seriously, if murdering unarmed women and children is just "business as usual" in war, then the Allied soldiers who liberated the Nazi concentration camps were just getting in the way of that.
-
and his unbelievable statements that we should have stayed in Vietnam and we would have won. are there no depths of insanity this asswipe won't go.
-
like I said, good list
-
Just didn't have the political will to do so.
-
is unreliable full of partisan BullShit, you know, just like CNN, the BBC, and the AP.....
-
Then why don't you go back and reread your idiotic first post: "Most Americans actually LIKE their country, I know, I know, that offends the Left's anti-American sensibilities, but hey, what can you do? They hate America. They hate that they live on stolen land, in a country founded by slaveowners, that operates on the capitalist system. They hate everything about America since its inception. They'll argue, and say their negativity and anti-Americanism is the only real patriotism, but they're wrong, as they always are. The Left, always on the wrong side of history."
You haven't "pointed out the hypocrisy of the Left", you've just pointed out your own hypocrisy. All you've done is expose the fact that you're incapable of any sort of intelligent discourse.
Stay in school. -
I can't honestly belive anchorite and AnimalStructure really belive what they are sying. To me, as a conservetive, a GWB voting, Republican conservetive from the midwest (Kansas) that any conservetive, outside of Pat Buchanan, actually talks and believes what you guys say. It almost sounds like what someone THINKS a hardcore Republican would say. But I have a hard time believing anyone is that set in their ways. Politically noone agrees with everything that those in power do or say. I think that these Republicans that are getting caught in sex scandels are hypocrites and should be tossed out, just as I would say the same thing toward any Democrat. I think Mitt Romney waffles like crazy and would vote for the Law and Order dude that may or may not be running for President. I think our immgation policy needs to be changed but not by building more and higher fences but by trying to help the less fortunate countries. I'm planning on going to Afghanstian next summer to (possibly earlier) not as a military person but as a civilan and film what I hope to be a documentary on some positive work that Americans are doing over there with education and medical work, etc. What is being said (from both sides of the fence not just anchorite and Animal Structure, but from a couple of extrem left wingers on here too) sound too much like rehotric and not true belief. In fact it sounds like something I would have spouted out when I was a naive 17, 18 y/o Republican who had never expireneced in anything in life. As I got older, I reliezed hey Unions aren't ALL bad, is there corruption yes, but is there also protection, yes. America is not a righteous nation that does everything perfectly. I've visted 3rd World countries, have filmmed in these countries, I have seen what people there live like and how lucky we are to have what we have, but I'm not so nationalistic that I can't see our problems as well. No one nation is perfect, like I said above, we are going to have good guys and bad guys if you will on every side of the fence, we have to learn past what the rehtoric says and follow our own beliefs and our own moral compass, but also be open to listen to what others have to say and learn from them.
-
Animal, who said you supported the Iraq War?
Mav, Wikipedia is mainly just unreliable, sometimes in a partisan way. All media outlets have human-created journalism, which certainly includes perspective/bias on some level. As a teacher, I try to choose pieces from various sources when I ask my students to explore a topic, especially a controversial one such as the Vietnam War. Question, in your list of biased news outlets, why did you not list some accused of leaning right, such as Fox News and the Washington Times? I would hope you'd be aware of both liberal AND conservative bias. -
with a little thought i could surly come up with some more...all 3 Rambo movies, Shooter, are just some more off the top of my head.
-
It's not simply a matter that Oliver Stone should "stare FOREIGN corruption/brutality/tyranny in the face." It's simply that, when viewing HIS body of work, the only corruption/brutality/tyranny he seems to see is AMERICAN.Certainly NO ONE is arguing for a state agency that mandates he look at another side of the issue, i.e. FOREIGN corruption/brutality/tyranny. He has a perfect right to do stories that "compel" him, but it's his point of view, his "compulsions," as exemplified in the plots and themes of his movies that many here are noting.Stone seems to delight in pointing out the flaws of the U.S.Look at it this way, take the plots and themes of some Oliver Stone flicks (Platoon, Talk Radio, Born on the Fourth of July, JFK, Natural Born Killers, Any Given Sunday and Nixon), remove the U.S. and its "brutality" and "thuggishness" and insert instead Islam or Iran. Would he seem decidedly anti-Islam or anti-Iran in that case? One wonders if he'd still be drawing breath what with the fatwas that would be issued.I certainly don't think that the perils and pitfalls of war should ever be overlooked. A balanced picture and a proper point-of-view DEMAND that all sides of the story be presented by artists and politicians. But when one artist seems to present only ONE POINT-OF-VIEW AD NAUSEUM, an agenda seems to be present.Has America made mistakes? Undoubtedly. Am I always proud of the route my country has taken? Of course not. But again, ask yourself: if Islam or France or any other country or ideal were inserted into Stone's movies would he seem biased?
-
Animal Structure's thought for the day. Regarding your position that war is hell, and no conduct would be considered unbecoming. I was waiting for your response to Matt Martinez and his reply to the real circumstances surrounding My Lai.
-
I think there have been some movies about the atrocites that other nations commit, Blood Diamond, Welcome to eSarajavo, and there si one I can't think of the title but it has Stellen Starrsgard and deals with the Yugoslavic conflict. But this is America, and Americans are the largest consumers of movies in the world, and we want to see movies about America, in good light or in bad light, we want to see movies about the USA, so therefore we get both good movies and bad movies about America because that's what people want to see. I live in the midwest and people get bored out here watching any movie that doesn't deal with America, that's why we don't see movies like that. Look how FEW people went and saw Amazing Grace in this country because it didn't involve their country directlyAnother pro-America movie would be the end of Life is Beautiful when the US Tanks roll in to the concentration camp, a WW2 movie but still pro American...also Flyboys, a WW1 movie
-
but their are far too many people who abandon reason in favor of safety, and if Animal and anchorite are blowing smoke, there are at least a dozen viewers of these posts that need to hear the counter arguments. Not arguments rooted in liberal passion, but rooted in reason. Too many of us are passion-drunk fury mongers too intoxicated to discover what we're really mad at.
-
What are you talking about? I never said that there weren't movies about the atrocities of other nations OR that weren't pro-American. Of course there are. You're arguing against a statement that I never made.Again, Stone has a decidedly ONE-SIDED VIEW of the U.S. as exemplified in his movies. Look at them all. Examine the plots and themes. Substitute either France, Cuba, or Islam for the words "America" or "U.S." in order to see the bias/point-of-view. Nobody (certainly not ME) said that pro-American movies didn't exist. I just think that Oliver Stone doesn't know how to make them.
-
like I said it sounds like the arguments I would have used when I was 17, 18 y/o and hadn't really lived any where or seen anything outside of my comfort zone. I had seen a little but it had never really made an impact on my entire world view. The problem with passion drunkness is that it usually happens to people who are living in a safe isolated world.
-
"It's simply that, when viewing HIS body of work, the only corruption/brutality/tyranny he seems to see is AMERICAN."
Well, he is an American filmmaker. -
Let me just say that I was mainly reacting to your caricature of The Left. Dumb statements like yours get us nowhere. I may be a Lefty pinko, but I have close friends and family who are Republicans and conservatives and war supporters, and I treat them with respect. No matter how vehemently I oppose their position, they hold those positions because they believe they are for the common good. Making sweeping generalizations of a group of people is just idiotic and it's something you should have learned by now. Have some respect for your fellow man.
-
I read your statement about Oliver Stone not making any films about any other nation as saying that there wer eno films out there about what was going on in other nations. As someone else pointed out above me, Stone is an American filmmaker, and is backed by American film companies, attempting to make money off an American audience, therefore any movies he makes are going to American in nature, dealing with Americans, ecause that is what the American movie going populace wants to see
-
I would argue that there are market, historic, patriotic, and artistic forces at work in Stone's decision making that create what you call his "agenda".
Americans, as bloo said, long to see movies about America. They won't pay to see others (usually). America is THE power of the moment. Artists challenge the current power structures. If China overtakes us, stay tuned for pictures challenging Chinese power (hopefully). I believe Oliver Stone has certain gifts that he employs in order to challenge his country to face our judgement lapses. I consider that patriotism. Why is it about Oliver Stone's "agenda" rather than the veracity of the stories he tells? Michael Moore has the same problem. BOTH should have their films criticized, but often times we get caught up in a personality cult trap. -
what happened to stone's 911 movie (not the cage one(
-
Aug 28, 2007 2:23:33 PM CDT
Ah, fish tacos, just the answer that I thought I'd see
by elvis cole lives
So, since Oliver Stone's an American filmmaker he can/should see only corruption/brutality/tyranny in America? Can't see anything else?Conversely, would your argument fly if he only made "jingoistic," flag-waving American propaganda? One doubts it highly. (In fact, I recall some recent talkbacks where John Wayne was criticized for his "jingoistic, flag-waving" movies and not one person excused him because he was American.)Americans can and should be able to see their own STRENGTHS and FLAWS as well as the STRENGTHS and FLAWS of others.
-
There is a quote by Al Franken that I think truly describes the differences between how the left and right love their country: "Liberals like me love America. We just love America in a different way. [Conservatives] love America like a 4-year-old loves his mommy. Liberals love America like grown-ups. To a 4-year-old, everything Mommy does is wonderful and anyone who criticizes Mommy is bad. Grown-up love means actually understanding what you love, taking the good with the bad and helping your loved one grow. Love takes attention and work and is the best thing in the world. That's why we liberals want America to do the right thing. We know America is the hope of the world, and we love it and want it to do well. We also want it to do good."
-
Artists confront and challenge dominant power, they shouldn't focus on fluffing their pillows. What good is that?
-
You know I used to critize Micheal Moore left and right, without ever really seeing any of his movies. When I saw roger and Me I was blown away by his talent as a filmmaker. I may not agree with him but I loved his style. Then I saw his movie that came out before Bowling...the one based on his book tour of Downsize This, where he talks to the head of Nike about the sweatshop polices and I found myself agreeing with im. Dang I wish I could remember that movie, because it seems like the last movie he did where he was actually looking out for people and not having an agenda against Bush.
-
But it won't be as good as Hearts and Minds. That movie kicked my head in; definitely worth a watch.
-
That's the movie you're thinking of, Bloo. It's named after what Moore facetiously says would be a better name for our country than The United States of America.
-
I know a liberal or two who love the Democratic party like a four-year old. Idiocy knows no party bounds.
-
I'm a conservetive and I love my country but I know that it is not perfect and that everything it does and has done in the past isn't right. I hear stories like this or even going back deeper in History like the Sand Creek Massacare. And I don't see anyone poning up to take responsiblity and that saddens me. To me, a true conservetive should be one who takes responsibilty when the do wrong, who strive to make right what has been done wrong by themselves and others, they personally extend a helping hand when someone is down, but at the same time encourage them to take responsibilty for themselves once they are on their feet. I don't think true conservetism or librelism can be so simply defined as Franken did there.
-
for reminding me of that movie, great documentary, like I said, I think Micheals best one since Roger and Me
-
We don't have to massacre peasants anymore. All we have to do is neglect to rebuild a country, condone looting, disband their army so there are thousands of yahoos with guns running loose, stage an election where one religious group is certain to win, and then just stand back, pump oil, and watch them massacre each other. People think Bush and Chaney are dumb? These guys are geniuses.
-
I've heard the massacre mentioned often. I mean, it's not constantly discussed, but most in depth looks at 'Nam bring it up. I don't mind a movie about this, but it does get somewhat annoying that Stone has to fixate on bad things in politics and war in the 1960s. I'd like to see him branch out at this point. Aside from the Vietnam movies, lets not forget JFK and Nixon. For me Nixon went much too far into portraying Nixon as some complete lunatic that any unbiased view was thrown out the window. The interesting thing about Platoon was that it didn't really touch much on the politics of the war or who the villains were. It simply showed that the war became such a confused mess, that the soldiers main focus was on keeping themselves and their friends alive. But, this movie could be done well if it focuses on everything that happened, and not be an obvious message being conveyed by the filmmaker. Though, that may be more personal preference. I prefer historical films to not have much of an opinion and just show what happened.
-
Not even Revisited? I thought that was an awesome epic.
But I also liked SM3 and World's End this summer, so what the fuck do I know lol. Hey, I enjoy the movies -
about loving movies, I love a quote Micheal Moore said, "i will see every movie that comes except Ninjas and Neil Simon"
-
Yipee!!!
-
Why are all the examples military in nature? How about movies that celebrate daily life and the freedoms ( religion, press, etc. ) that our nation enjoys. Ironically, one of the most pro-American movies may be "All The Presidents Men", because it illustrated that the press was beholden to no man or government. And that the most important byproduct of freedom is truth.
-
Why is it about Oliver Stone's "agenda" rather than the veracity of the stories he tells, you ask. Firstly, I deny your false dichotomy. Stone is OFTEN attacked for his veracity (see JFK, for example) when the veracity of the story may be attacked. However, FICTION is simulated truth and facts. It's not real. Can't really attack the "truthfulness" (whether or not something ACTUALLY happened) with FICTION, only its "truthfulness" in that it simulates REALITY.Secondly, what many are criticizing here (for the third time) is Stone's perceived anti-American bias. Is Stone anti-American? I don't know; I never met the man. I can only speak to his views based upon the movies he makes and most of them seem to focus on the ills of America as some super-militaristic, super-materialistic super-power of rubes controlled by a shadowy cabal of brutal thugs and sinister power brokers.Look, Stone is an ultra-accomplished filmmaker. His movies are practically flawless. He is good. But his body of work suggests to many a bias.Don't buy the "insert France, Cuba, or Islam" analogy earlier? Try this:Stone professes to be a patriot, to love America. Imagine each of his movies as a love letter that starts with him telling his beloved how very much he loves her. Then spend the next three hours pointing out that she's overweight, not too bright, easily manipulated, greedy, selfish, uncharitable, and unkind. Tell her she's wrinkled, one ear is bigger than the other, and that she STILL hasn't lost the baby weight. Tell her how she was wrong in every conflict that YOU want to discuss. And don't mention her successes, don't mention her good points. Just spend three hours berating your "loved one." End your letter by, once again, telling the disgusting beast how much you love her and that this was for her own good. Finally, make that 2/3 of the letters that you've ever written and you'll see why some perceive a wee bit of slant to Mr. Stone's pictures.That's not to say that some or all of what Stone has written or directed is not "true." It's just that the only "truth" he often seems to see is American flaws.
-
Aug 28, 2007 2:48:31 PM CDT
"Reagan? The man! He ended the Cold War singlehandedly"
by thunderbolt ross
Okay, that takes the cake. Anyway, listen, criticising something doesn't equal bashing it. Oh, and if you're spinning your wheels trying to think of movies that show the US (including US military) in a positive light, you are a moron, or you haven't actually ever seen a motion picture. IMHO Stone is a shit filmamaker who has had his moments but doesn't anymore. He's also apparently nuts, a dickhead and Natural Born Killers is a terrible, terrible film. But ... the guy does not "hate" America. He's troubled by some things his country has been involved with. Guess what, Kool-Aid drinkers? The US has been involved in some fucked up shit! NOT everyone knows about it. It's healthy and productive to revisit your nation's fuck-ups, and how they were (hopefully) fixed - PARTICULARLY WHEN YOUR NATION IS IN THE MIDST OF A COLOSSAL FUCK-UP. Stop whining about it, because people are going to keep doing it, and frequently, because we are in the middle of a ridiculous war.
-
You've GOT to be kidding me. Michelangelo, cave painters, and Dali, all confronters and challengers of the dominant powers of the Catholic church, wooly mammoths, and reality. Amazing how your definition today only includes as an "artist" those who criticize who YOU perceive to be the dominant power in the world, the U.S.. How very convenient for your political views. Does your "definition" of the artist as challenger to dominant power allow for gradations of power? For instance, any anti-Castro artists in Cuba or anti-homosexual artists in San Francisco or anti-Islam artists in Saudi Arabia? Or is it all top-heavy in that the ONLY TRUE ARTIST is one who confronts and challenges who YOU perceive to be the DOMINANT GLOBAL (not local) POWER?
-
you know what I had some friends not so subtly tell me that I needed to lose weight. Not in the AICN Talkback way, you know "hey ya fat faggot why don't you go on an effen diet" but you know tell me that I was overweight. I hurt at first and I didn't want to, I liked eating greasy hamburgers and french fires, I loved fried chicken, give me a slab of steak just warme dover the fire and I'm happy. but I knew they were right so I've been dieting, you know salads, and vegtables and drinking water, and running and excercising. sometimes when someone we love is making mistakes it's more harmful not to point them out then to point them out. I really do think Stone loves this country and is doing what he thinks is best to point it back in what he feels is the right direction. Do I agree with him on everything, no of course not, that would just be silly, but I can understand why he says what he says in his movies.
-
the Elvis Cole Lives post above.
-
anchorite challenged us to name recent movies that were pro american espically those dealing iwth the military and politics, that is why there are so many military ones on there. But I agree All The Presidents Men is a great American movie. there are several slice of life movies out there that are just as pro american, but that was the challenge, specifically military or policitcal
-
If a batshit jerk-off like Stone making his umpteenth movie about his flawed USA really puts a bee in your bonnet, you probably need to examine your feelings for your country. It shouldn't bother you if you really believe Stone and others like him are barking up the wrong tree.
-
That was funny! And certainly injects some much needed levity in the tb.I guess the bottom line is that one side sees a bias in Ollie Stone's work and the other doesn't.Oh, wait, it does see the bias, but the bias needs to be there for "ARTISTIC INTEGRITY." No, no wait, no bias. Just honesty. Errr...Neither side is going to convince the other here. I don't know why we bother. This ALWAYS deteriorates into a "you're a fascist pig-you're a communist asshole" sort of argument.
-
basically he is saying that we think a person is only an artist if they critize America. However he is wrong, I agree that artists can and should critize any dominant power weather or not we agree with them. Doltozky(sp is butchered, I know) was an artist, Alexander Slozenstien was an artist who was crapped on by people in the American left when he routinly pointed out the flaws in the Russian system. What about Pope John Paul II, he was a playwright in Poland, as was the leader of Solidarity
-
I KNOW why people see an anti-American bias in Stone's films. He asks Americans to pay attention to their screw ups. He asks them to do that frequently (though not always). I just fundamentally disagree that that impulse should be labeled "anti-American".
To address your amusing love-letter metaphor: Stone isn't criticizing love-handles or cleft palates; he writing a letter criticizing a loved one for MORAL choices (murder, corruption, indecency, cowardice, etc). If your child cut the head of a swan at the duck pond, I'd expect you to reprimand him. If he's chubby you just stop buying cupcakes.
When I indicated "veracity", I did so fully informed by the JFK reaction. There was indeed areas ripe for arguing. More often than nnot, though, the arguing is polemic, rather than honest. It seems to always start with an anti-Stone sentiment, rather than a posture of reflection both of the film and the part of American history it explores. -
...is how we're bound, for about a year, to hear "Oliver Stone" and "Anti-American" in about eighteen billion blog posts, Fox News broadcasts, AICN talkbacks, and every other media venue imaginable.
-
But can you be an artist WITHOUT criticizing the "dominant power?" For instance, can you paint a pretty picture of a rural countryside without it being "an indictment of the capitalistic attack on the integrity of nature?" Can you write a story about, say, an old man trying to land a fish without it being a diatribe "against the modern excesses of unrestrained humanism" or some such rot?I was not saying that you thought "a person is only an artist if they critize America." I was asking if you thought that.Now I'm asking if some sort of anti- (or pro- ) dominant power (or non-dominant power) message is necessary in every artistic work or can the picture (or story) merely be "pretty?" ;)
-
Stone doesn't need to try to make America look bad.... Americans do a great job already.
-
Americans do a great job of making America look bad already.
-
i got the double post blues - lordy lordy mama
-
Art does challenge the dominant power, be they political, religious, existential, etc. Any thing that fails to do so is not art but marketing. Much classic religious art both challenges pervading existential paradigms and subtly challenges the religious establishment. If it doesn't do either it's technically proficient advertizing.
As far as work that "challenges" dominant cultural assumptions (ie gay rights {which isn't quite an assumption} anti-Castro), if it's not rooted in some systemic logic that can be conversed with, than it is, sorry to say, BAD art at BEST, polemical illustrations at worst. -
Sorry if I didn't spell his name right, but please don't quote that man. He has been proven to be lying many many times over even the last few years, after he wrote a damn book about other people who lie. Quote any liberal you want to us, but keep Franken (and Moore) out of it.
There's comes a time when so much bs has come out of someones mouth, not even a valid truth can be believed from said person. This is true of Franken and Moore. They could give me hard proof that being a conservative is somewho bad for the country, but they've had they're chances, and they blew them over and over again. Just tell someone else their point, and have this new person deliver it to me, and I'll listen. But to repeat, Franken and Moore had they're chance, and they prooved time and time again what horrible human beings they are. -
Landscape painting is not art until it inspires the viewer to engage in rational discourse with another about the powerful questions of meaning in human life, whether it be focused inward or at the structure and character of civilization or its components.
-
Until it does that, why bother looking at it. Because it's pretty? Fine, but that doesn't make it art; it makes it a pretty picture.
-
Al Franken a liar? Back it up. Wesley Clark a murderer of women and children? Back it up. With honest sources. Otherwise your spitting into the wind. Franken's quote hold's true in this very talkback. If you actually consider the success of stopping genocide in Kosovo to be blood on Clark's hands, then may the blood of thousand other wars wash over you.
-
I think an artist can paint a picture or write a story or take a photograph without an agenda and do a faboulous job. Not every piece of art has to be politically motivated, however art can sometimes be the only method as to which someone can critize those in power.
-
is he a liar according to the comedian Rush Limbaugh or O'Lielly? Franken is not a liar. Prove it if he is!
-
Which brings us to the fundamental question: Should films about America be artistic, ie challenging to it's varying components, or pretty pictures, ie not exciting a deeper conversation about its implications for meaning? Stone wants to make art. It could very well be bad art, but his compulsion is artistic rather than profiteering or jingoistic. Other's don't. And I enjoy those films, too, I just wouldn't call themm art. And art is essential to the survival of civilization.
-
They think of ways to fuck people.
-
You should try one sometime. Oh, wait, you do. ;) I made an analogy between the "moral" flaws that Stone sees in America and the MORAL AND PHYSICAL flaws in a lover. But assuming that you don't get that, let me omit the physical descriptions:Stone professes to be a patriot, to love America. Imagine each of his movies as a love letter that starts with him telling his beloved how very much he loves her. Then spend the next three hours pointing out that she's not too bright, easily manipulated, greedy, selfish, uncharitable, and unkind. Tell her how she was wrong in every conflict that YOU want to discuss. And don't mention her successes, don't mention her good points. Just spend three hours berating your "loved one." End your letter by, once again, telling the MORALLY disgusting beast how much you love her and that this was for her own good. Finally, make that 2/3 of the letters that you've ever written and you'll see why some perceive a wee bit of slant to Mr. Stone's pictures.Is that better for you? Everything left in that "letter" is a non-physical, correctable moral or intellectual flaw.Stone "asks Americans to pay attention to their screw ups...frequently (though not always)." I can't think of ONE Oliver Stone movie that paints America in a positive light since the mid-1980s.To use your very own analogy (the swan-head cutting child), make that Stone's first mid-1980s love letter/movie - a "loving" criticism of the child for cutting the head off a swan. Make the next love letter/movie a berating of the child for being greedy and materialistic. Make the next love letter/movie an indictment of child for being ignorant and easily manipulated. Make the next love letter/movie a rant against how the child was wrong in that one argument. Don't discuss any OTHER arguments that the child may have been right in because you're only "compelled" to discuss THAT ONE ARGUMENT in which the child was wrong. Don't include any love letter/movies extolling the child's virtues or things he did right.Get it? That's how many see Stone. That's pretty much (okay, maybe a little exaggerated) how I see Stone. Do I think he is (or was) a great filmmaker? Sure. Definitely. He makes a VERY watchable movie. Do I think that he HATES America and wants to see it destroyed? Well, no simple answer there.I think that the Kennedy assassinations have colored Stone's world-view and, specifically, his view of America, to the extent that he's become neurotic, borderline psychotic, in his perception of paranoid conspiracies swaying the course of American history. Of course, for that to occur, America must be a country of ignorant rubes over which these shadowy cabals hold sway.I disagree. Won't stop me from watching a good Stone movie (and there are many), but I can certainly see the paranoid delusions peeking through at times.
-
seriously.
-
Well, I have to disagree with you about, strangely, how good a film maker Stone is. I don't really like his work. I do respect the artistic impulse behind them.
Your analogy failed despite your revisions. The relationship between an artist and America can't sustain a comparison with lovers for long. Why use an analogy at all? Why not call it what it is, a letter from an artist to AmericaNS? That letter, in the form of a film, criticizes the failings of the state and asks the recipient viewers not to love Stone, but to love America, and to take responsibility for the mistakes. Stone doesn't want you to love him, he wants you to love America in a way that challenges its shortcomings. -
didn't catch that earlier. It's funny, remember last year when World Trade Center came out, the media was almost saddened that Stone took a straightforward approach to the story and did not add any political angle. It was like reviewers and the press were, "Geez, Oliver, wheres the nutty conspiracy theories..."
-
Alexander was an enormous bomb. Domestically, internationally, a BOMB.Stone's reaction? Blame America first when the movie bombs domestically.From Guardian Unlimited (UK): "At the UK premiere of his epic film of Alexander, Oliver Stone last night blamed "raging fundamentalism in morality" for the film's US box office failure."Sexuality is a large issue in America right now, but it isn't so much in other countries," the Oscar-winning director explained yesterday. "There's a raging fundamentalism in morality in the United States. From day one audiences didn't show up. They didn't even read the reviews in the [American] south because the media was using the words: 'Alex is Gay'."ANDFrom Softpedia:Director Oliver Stone blames Americans for being too homophobic and sustains they were the cause for the box office disaster of "Alexander". Stone confessed that after his historic movie was called 'Alexander the Gay', the negative critics filled up the media.The director also said he was very disappointed by the British public too, because they were as harsh as the US spectators.He says: "Once 'Alexander The Gay' came out - that was the headline - that killed it. You don't combine homosexuality or bisexuality with military men in America.Finally, when Alexander bombed in Britain, Greece (where lawyers tried to sue to prevent the movie from showing due to its portrayal of Alexander's bisexuality), and the rest of the world, who does Stone blame? That's right; you guessed it -- America! Stone proceeds to blame America's homophobic reactions (also ignorance of history, I might add) for coloring the rest of the world's reaction. See, even when OTHER COUNTRIES reject his films, it's America's fault! America MADE them do it! He was, of course, "disappointed" in British and Greek reception to the flick, but he saved invectives like "HOMOPHOBIC" for America, his "loved one."Notice that "disappointment" in the world, but that "[y]ou don't combine homosexuality or bisexuality with military men in AMERICA." [Emphasis added.]One is left to wonder if you CAN "combine homosexuality or bisexuality with military men" in OTHER COUNTRIES in Stone's view. We'll probably never know because Stone's only compelled to point out the short-comings of America. ;)
-
Stone is a bit paranoid, for sure, but I got to tell you he has a little bit of a point. America's attitudes toward sexuality are conservative, and certain media outlets, with a conservative bias, probably hurt the box office with homophobic headlines. Which is what it is, Stone probably shouldn't have expected big returns from the south with that sort of subtext going on. But lackluster showings in countries where films debut DO tend to diminish profits as they roll out world wide. Although, if I remember correctly, the film got pretty poor reviews in most liberal outlets as well. Stone's paranoia and pride probably did prevent him from taking responsibility for a bad movie, but there are shreds of a point in there, too.
-
That's all I can say about your definition of "art" versus "pretty pictures!" Holy Hell! Good luck with that.Why bother looking at "pretty pictures" as opposed to dominant power-challenging/conversation inspiring "art?" Gee, dude, I can't think of a reason to look at a PRETTY picture. Not one.Who wants to see a PRETTY PICTURE when there's so much debate and thoughtful intellectual attacking of the dominant power we can do?"Blech! Look at that PRETTY PICTURE! Yuck! It doesn't even make me think of one pseudo-intellectual attack on the dominant power structure! The nerve!"BTW, you define art pretty narrowly, implicitly stating that there is no art in marketing, explicitly stating that there is no ART in PRETTY PICTURES.PUH-LEEZE!
-
You want to know the real problem with America? Not a single bulletin board, talkback, or comment board anywhere on the internet can avoid America's Liberal/Conservative name calling war. Does EVERY topic have to eventually lead to Bush or the "Liberal media?"
There's a talkback off of the Drudgereport today with people yelling at the Chef from Hell's Kitchen, saying get out of America if you don't like it. These were posted on a London newspaper article that Stated Ramsey was in England.
Get off it! The internet would be great if every asshole with a keyboard and an opinion didn't think he were William Randolf Hearst. -
It's a horrible title for the movie, but the moment involving Thompson described above does sound pretty amazing.
-
is that only one person was court martialled, William Calley. That mean's he's going to have to fill it with all kinds of conspiracy shit. I don't see any good coming from this movie. At least JFK was entertaining even if it was wacky.
-
how dare stone make up this shit...oh thats right. it actually happened. so shut the fuck up.
-
There is no art in marketing, there is only manipulation. You should know that. The only thing they want to do is sell you something.
I enjoy pretty pictures just fine. Family photos bring back memories; What About Bob makes me laugh. But those artifacts are not important philosophically for America or humanity. Not everything has to be, but work that challenges structures of power are much more important than pretty pictures. Which is why movies that throw a critical lense at American policy/behavior should be appreciated for not just painting a rosy picture. They should be appreciated as ART, as something fundamentally deeper and smarter than pop confections (such as Behind Enemy Lines). In my world, intelligence is a higher value than comfort or pride. Isn't it in yours? -
You mean the son of that fucking cocksucker George Hearst?
-
The same!
-
re you fucking kidding?
The world is the middle of war war 2, we have just been bombed in Pearl Harbor (talk about your preemptive war, liberals), 6 million people were be exterminate just because of their religion, and Japan, hell they made there prisonors work in slave labor camps, and did medical experiments on their Chinese prisoners. Any one ever hear of anything like this happening at those "Japanese american concentration camps"? "Concentration camps", give me a fucking break with that term. You do know the "Japanese-americans " (don't get how you can be both) were given financial compensation from the US government? What did the Japanese give their prisoners, beside a club in the back of the head?PS: the small pox blanket story is -
While there was a smallpox epidemic on the Plains in 1837—historians agree, and all evidence points to the fact—that it was accidental, and the Army wasn’t involved.
-
Holy crap, where are you people farmed and what's the fertilizer? Are you postulating that anyone who comes out against Japanese-American internment during WW2 and feels disgust at that American policy must be FOR nazi and Japanese atrocities of the same era? If you are then you are terribly, horribly, stupid, and I'm stunned you figured out how to operate a personal computer. Please stop surfing film-geek websites and get an education, read a newspaper, or try your hand at second grade logic puzzles. I am so sick of ignorant boneheads, of which you, dear classy, are the absolute nadir.
-
Sometimes some of you make me ashamed to be part of the human race.
-
By the way, in case you think I'm some tweeded-out head-case who only likes artistic films, I'm going to see Superbad tonight and assume it'll be a good time. Loved Knocked-Up and the other Apatow flicks. Also love bad ass action movies ala Bourne Ultimatum, Casino Royale, etc. I just felt Stone-smacking needed to be mellowed with a little perspective on what his approach is all about. I don't think it's shitting on America cause it feels good; I think it's an artistic decision to constantly challenge American authority, and we HAVE to respect that impulse, even if we don't like the films.
-
internment vs concentration camps. If you don't know the difference between the too words, and why you shouldn't confuse them, then you are indeed the dumb fucktard of the day. Put that in your dick sucking mouth and suck it, toad.
-
Soooo not Bruce Campbell then?
-
Ward Churchill, who has about as much honesty and integrity in him as the New York Times reporting staff
-
Fuck stains who think Howard Dean, Harry Reid and Nancy Facelift walk on air. Pol Pot, who only massacred 5 million people because they didn't want to be communists.
Look at North Korea vs South Korea for a good comparison, you loose stools -
Always a class act.
-
and I probalby won't be back on tonight, so any closing remarks before I see you fiends back here tomorrow?
-
LOVE that insult, no sarcasm included. I actually laughed out loud at that.
You're still dumb. "Concentration" means "collecting many articles in a small container". They were concentration camps. They were also internment camp. So were the Jews in eastern Europe. The Jews were treated worse than the Japanese Americans. Duh. You are still an idjit; please swallow a fistful of cuttlery.
I am independent, no love for Dean, thinly veiled loathing for Pelosi, would vote for republican Chuck Hagel if he'd run.
You are stupid, too. -
See you, bloo. I'm going to assume that you're a year or two older than me because you haven't sunk to the childish name-calling parade I've jumped into, but thanks for your even-handedness.
-
classy...assy, what about the Sand Creek Massacare? Do you know what that is, oh and I don't get this information from Ward Churchhill, I heard about it from *gasp* a native American whose family just managed to survive. A group of American soliders in leave Kansas (the area I'm from incidently) go up into Colorado, a group of Native Americans is camping at Sand Creek, the man in charge orders his soilders to attack, not all do but a large portion do, killing almost everyone in the camp. Problem, there were no warriors in the camp, it was all women and children and elderly, all the men were out, not massacering white people or anything like that, they were out hunting. Only one person in the US Goverment has apologized to the leaders of that tribe (which barely survived but did) and it was a REPUBLICAN (just out of curioosity did any librels or anyone for that matter know about this) it was KS GOP Senator, Sam Brownback in Nov. of 2003, 2 days after Thanksgiving. He wasn't running for president, and like I said this wasn't reported in the media, he did it because he felt the US Goverment needed to apologize for this atrocity with no fanfare. I'm not trying to start a flame war here, if you read my previous posts you'll see that. Our goverment has commited crimes against humanity, for centuries, we are not perfect. Yes the Japenese internement camps were not concentration camps, they were treated very well there, but they were still denying rights to American citizens that are guarentted by our Constitution and the Declartion of Independence.anchorite, about Shooter, it still protrayed our hero, as a decent man, who was an American solider. And it was not some sweeping conspiracy across all goverment branches. Like I've said time and again, institutions have good and bad people in them and people who do stupid stuff, hypocritical stuff, and people who make mistakes. Do movies exagerette these truthes, yes, the movies tend to paint things in big strokes, very good and very bad, because for the most part people want to think of themselves as very good, not with shades of grey, like most of us have within us.
-
The number of neo-conservative brainwashed little blue puppies on here is really alarming.
From a European perspective, it looks suspiciously like yer gun-totin' ma and pa have drilled the US constitution into some of you idiots from day one.
It makes me laugh to see the word 'liberal' being used as though it's a derogatory term.
Do some reading, take a holiday out of your polarised dictatorship that is America, and try to look at current and recent historical events from a world perspective for a few minutes. If you consider yourself to be an ethical human being, then wake the fuck up. -
I never implied that Stone's film would be some sort of non-profit humanitarian effort. I suppose it's a worthy discussion as to whether or not it's morally wrong to profit from making a film that deals with a historical tragedy. Stone and company do stand to make money from this project, although probably not boatloads. After all, this certainly doesn't sound like the most commercial venture, and that is why I still stand by what I said. If all he was interested in was getting more cash, he'd still be doing stuff like The Hand and Conan the Barbarian. (Actually, I'd kind of like to see him work on a new Conan. I don't know if it'd be good, but it'd be interesting.) Plus, I doubt this will be exploitative in the vein of, say, Ilsa, She Wolf of the S.S.
-
I'll be turning 31 in Feb. so i don't know where that places me and belive me, I've sunk to my fair share of name calling and troll baiting in LOST and Hero's talkbacks LOL, I love a good rational political discussion.BTW I too would vote for Hagel if he ran, can't stand dean or Pelosi, although I do like that she is trying to take China to task for human rights violations, but most of the time she makes me shudder. I'm currenlty registered republican, but I'm seriously thinking about going Indepedent, simply because I don't like being saddled with a "title" and frankly I'm a little ashamed as to what is going on with Republican leaders and hyprocisy, saying one one thing to get them elected but doing stuff totally against it.
-
oh my god that is hilarious and at the same time disturbing, Rove, Foley and Craig sandwhich ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwanyways while I thought bill Clinton seemed like a nice person just couldn't agree with his politics and don't trust hillary as far as I could throw her, so I've been scanning the politics looking for someone to vote for. Right now I'd even vote for Sen. Law and Order Fred Thompson.
-
Did the native americans get a raw deal? You bet. I know the tax exempt status and free college tuition doesn't make up for it, but hey, its better than what China gave the fine folks in Tibet.
Aside from Richard "rodent in my ass" Gere, you never hear about it, because it doesn't fit any one's agenda. Hell, countries like Turkey won't even acknowledge the fact they murdeded millions of Armenians in cold blood. All the San Fran hippies that think socialism and communism are so great never mention the fact Stalin massacred upwards of 100 million, that's right, 100 million of his own people. Any why isn't no one ever talks about the mess England and France left in places like the middle east and africa. Don't get me started on what radical islam has brought to the world the best 50 years. America's record isn't spotless, but l would like to see countries like China, Russia, and Iran give money and apologies to people they have done wrong in the past. -
In about 5-10 years, all you Euro-weenies will be praying to Mecca each day, or paying your infidel protection tax the clerics.
-
And a complete wackjob to boot. JFK? lol complete rubbish! Now he's just not satisfied until him and his liberal communist friends can get the U.S. to leave Iraq in defeat and disgrace. I'm getting quite sick of these America haters in Hollywood, but it's ok, their day is coming, mark my words.
-
that there are countries out there with a much worse track record then ours. I personally know a man in Nepal that was dragged behind a car because he was a Christian. This isn't an American but a native of Nepal, and he has many other stories similar to that. I know that the caste system in India is horriable too, and that's a result of Hindiuism. These are things that need to be talked about and aren't, but in the same way there are many things that America doesn't know about. this incident that Stone is looking to do, Sand Creek Massacare, are just two examples. It's like I've said before and again on this talkback, no country is perfect and no person in any country is perfect, we all have issues that we need to apologize for.
-
The village-burning scene in Platoon had echoes of My-Lai.
Still, if there is one thing Stone does well it's the 'Nam. -
wondering where your "p" went.
-
Here's a quick run down: "Some were herded into cowering groups and blown apart piece by piece with rounds from grenade launchers. Others were mowed down at point-blank range by machine gun and automatic weapons fire, with Calley personally involved in two such mass executions. Numerous women were raped and forced to perform oral sex. Then they were killed at close range and their bodies mutilated. One was beheaded. One was killed by rounds fired from an M-16 rifle after the barrel had been rammed up her vagina. A child, similar to the one described above, barely old enough to walk, tried to crawl out of a ditch where its mother had just been executed. Calley personally pushed it back down into the pile of bodies, shot it, and then returned to beating an old man he had been in the process of interrogating." The photos of the massacre have dead blown apart babies lying next to their blown apart mothers. I'm not sure I could sit through a movie about this, this is as evil as people are in the world. If there was a scale from 1 to 10, there's a lot of people in history who rate a 10 for different reasons. These guys were a 10. Making a film about it doesn't make the horror resonate any more.
-
p go down the holeebolamonkey...man I couldn't agree more about the evil these men did, reading what you posted makes my stomach turn, but I guess the question is, does America at large know about this, if I asked my 18 y/o rother about this would he know? I don't think he would and I don't think most of America knows about this. Do I want to see something this horrific, no, I don't. I'm guessing based on who Bruce is playing it'll be more about the investigation and the reprucssions of this event.
-
Tools, like Ray Gamma.
-
Question isn't will anyone want to watch this ,it's will anyone care?
-
From an American perspective (liberal OR conservative, Republican or Democrat), you win yourself few American friends (including, I'd bet, Mr. Oliver Stone) by denigrating an intimate and lifelong familiarization with the ultimate legal source and founding document of this nation - the U.S. Constitution.Why, what an incredible horrendous idea, that our "gun-totin' maws and paws" might have instilled within us an abiding respect for and knowledge of our countries constitution, that document from which ALL law and legal precedent in this country spring! Egad!It may make you "laugh to see the word 'liberal' being used as though it's a derogatory term," but certainly even an IDIOT knows that certain words and terms in the English language gain different meanings over time and depending upon the CONTEXT in which they're used.For instance, I'm sure that, GENIUS that you are, you know that most Western nations spring from a CLASSICALLY LIBERAL BASE, that is, "a doctrine stressing the importance of human rationality, individual property rights, natural rights, the protection of civil liberties, constitutional limitations of government, free markets, and individual freedom from restraint."All these (shock!), are included as items within THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, a knowledge of which you seem deride. So, love classical "liberalism," but criticize a document that enshrines it?!?!? THAT'S REAL GENIUS!Aware of the traditional definition of liberalism (our Western forms of government), I'm sure, that "well-read" non-American that you seem to be, you also know that MODERN LIBERALISM has given rise to varying schools, including (but not limited to) cultural liberalism, social liberalism, economic liberalism, conservative (SHOCK!!!) liberalism, ordoliberalism, libertarianism, and paleoliberalism.American CONSERVATISM is a political philosophy (and branch of classical liberalism, Einstein!) that advocates slow change in society and, often, less government intrusion into the economic lives of its citizens. Still, it's a BRANCH of CLASSICAL LIBERALISM. Just like MODERN AMERICAN LIBERALISM is a branch of CLASSICAL LIBERAL THOUGHT. That being said, it's far easier to say conservative vs. liberal when the context of debate is OBVIOUSLY the current poltical climate (CLASSICAL LIBERALISM) and not the RIGHTS OF KINGS! But if you'll REALLY need us to, perhaps you can convince everyone to forthwith identify themselves in arguments as either, CONSERVATIVE OF THE CLASSICAL LIBERAL SCHOOL OF POLTICAL THEORY AND SOCIALLY/ECONOMICALLY/CULTURALLY LIBERAL OF THE CLASSICAL LIBERAL SCHOOL OF POLTICAL THEORY.'Cause THAT won't be unwieldy at all!You see, moron, just because you once picked up a history book and learned that ALL MODERN WESTERN POLITICAL THEORY is "liberal," which is GOOD in the historical context of LIBERAL VS. THE DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS, doesn't mean that we're all so stupid that we're ALL SO STUPID that we can't differentiate between the a "liberal" in the context of AGE OF ENLIGHTENMENT POLITICAL DEBATE and the MODERN CONTEXT (which is, essentially, capitalism vs. socialism or, duh, conservative vs. liberal).So when you spit "neo-conservative" WE KNOW that you mean that in the context of the current political debate, but apparently you're not bright enough to know that when others spit "liberal" that they mean it within the context of the same debate, not the Enlightenment debate of liberalism vs. divine right of kings?!?!?!? Who's the idiot again?The debate between liberal and conservative schools of CLASSICAL LIBERALISM rages in even France, Great Britain, and Germany today, rocket boy, and, yes, the terms are abbreviated (for instance, the Tories are the conservatives in England)!Maybe YOU ought to "do some reading.
-
Vampire Ninja Robots from Mars who spy on hot Earthly lesbians and then kidnap them to use their sexual energy to power a machine that opens the gateways between dimensions? Seriously!Why can't Oliver Stone EVER be compelled to tell THAT story?
-
"Holy fuck!""Are those vampire ninja robots!""I was told there'd be no vampire ninja robots!""Shit, they look pissed!"
-
It just needed to said.
-
Full Metal Jacket, bitches! Yuh-ayuh! The movie Stone WISHES he could've made!
-
...nothing like an Oliver Stone talkback to bring out the nutjobs. With WTC it was the left-wing conspiratards. With this movie it's the right-wing jagoffs like anchorite and AnimalStructure (formally known as Thunderballs).
The point that assholes of their ilk refuse to consider seriously is that there actually WERE soldiers who DIDN'T go along with the murders and were ready to turn their weapons on their own comrades in order to uphold the values of the United States even in the inhuman face of war, which is about as patriotic as you can get.
The reason for their voluntary blinders is very simple. You will find that the very same braying asshats are the ones defending or rationalizing atrocities committed by U.S. troops in the current war. Any reminder that American soldiers actually CAN and are OBLIGED to uphold certain codes is anathema to them because then their rationalizations and excuses become empty and useless. And these asstools call everyone else "unpatriotic" or "haters of America". -
I feel there are a lot better directors out there to be doing movies on these important moments of history. His 'World Trade Centre' was a piece of sensationalized garbage that was premature and terribly orchestrated. It almost feels like he just does these movies to get a rise out of people; so he can cash in on humanities' atrocities and horrible crimes. He knows its easy money. He doesn't have to even fucking try making a good film about the 'my lai massacres' and make it relevent to today or put any thought behind it. It disgusts me to think that Oliver Stone need just paint a poster in blood 'my lai massacre movie' or 'world trade centre' and people will go fucking watch it for the namesake. I'm mostly disappointed because I feel a movie about this most horrible moment in history shouldn't be made by an amateur like him but rather someone I trust can show a true version that's not sensationalized of the historical accuracy of what happened in my lai. He hasn't made anything half decent since 'Wall Street'. His excesses and hollywood corruption have depressingly destroyed a once great filmmaker. This is most depressing they would let him make a sensationalized big budget film about this horrible even in human history. The people of 'mai lai are turning in their graves.
-
...google his former username "Thunderballs" along with "aintitcool" and marvel at some of the truly hideous shit he's vomited forth in these boards, such as how genocide of certain people is acceptable if they are enemies of the United States and how Milosevic was actually a good guy just trying to repel Muslim invaders in his country.
AnimalStructure/Thunderballs is an absolutely amoral monster worthy of nothing but utter contempt and hatred from decent human beings. -
spielberg, or coppola maybe... but not fucking spielberg
-
booo stone booo
-
Isn't it funny how the people saying "hey Stone, make a movie about atrocities committed by other countries!" are the same people who, when confronted with people complaining that Hollywood doesn't make enough movies about the heroism of other countries' soldiers fighting the good fight of WWII, say "fuck you, we're Americans - make your own goddamn movies about your soldiers!"
-
Did you READ the whole talkback? Or did you just blindly insert what you think the opinion of SOME is.Most of this talkback centered on a perceived anti-American bias exemplified by Oliver Stone in which he ALWAYS, CONSTANTLY, AND FOREVER seems to remind of the AMERICAN atrocities and shortcomings in both war and peace, economic as well as social and cultural. In fact, I went to some lengths to point out that even when a movie of his like Alexander fails both domestically and internationally it's "disappointing" of the Greeks and British and "homophobic" of Americans who, apparently, FORCED the world to not like his movie.While SOME may find it "anathema" to be reminded that American soldiers actually CAN and are OBLIGED to uphold certain codes, I find it interesting that most instances that Stone seems "compelled" to explore are the AMERICAN shortcomings, not the North Vietnamese, not the Chinese, not the British.Additionally, rare is the scene in an Ollie Stone picture in which Americans (and the American military especially) are seen as heroes and helpers. Oh, sure, one or two Americans may heroically stand against brutality and thuggishness, but it's always perpetrated by other Americans (except WTC, of course). And they're the few against the VAST MACHINE.I'm no cheerleader for American atrocity, but I find Stone's paranoid fantasies and preoccupations biased, at best.
-
I swear to god if he messes up one fucking quote or spreads his conspiracy bullshit, or makes it out to be something it wasn't he's going to burn in hell.
-
Oh, I most certainly read the whole talkback.
-
Please show me the idiots who when 'confronted with people complaining that Hollywood doesn't make enough movies about the heroism of other countries' soldiers fighting the good fight of WWII, say "fuck you, we're Americans - make your own goddamn movies about your soldiers!"'I doubt you VERY FUCKING MUCH. I'll apologize when you show me those examples.And even if you do, so what? One cannot be of the opinion that American filmmakers should sometimes show American soldiers as heroic and the soldiers of other countries' atrocities? Why is that? I mean, in a debate, you insist that the other side give you your argument? You call "shenanigans" if they tell you you're wrong and they're right?
-
I'm looking grimly forward to seeing it. Also, all I can say to people here is read the following books: Prisoners Of The Japanese by Gavan Daws, and The Rape Of Nanking by Iris Chang. Real eye openers. Don't know how the sick Nanking story could ever be told realistically on film, but horrendous Prisoners of the Japanese story could be told somehow, and it is damn disgusting neglectful bullshit that the issues covered in Daws book has never be properly treated in film.
-
Aug 28, 2007 8:14:19 PM CDT
Read it all, but chose to use a ridiculous straw man...
by elvis cole lives
Argument anyway? That certainly was genius.How about this? Since you read the WHOLE TALKBACK, where was the point raised that some "soldiers DIDN'T go along with the murders and were ready to turn their weapons on their own comrades in order to uphold the values of the United States even in the inhuman face of war?"Where was that argument raised and then ignored ("voluntary blinders") 'cause I missed that. I only saw YOU bring it up then answer your own point with a straw man argument that the otherside is ignoring your JUST MADE argument because they're "defending or rationalizing atrocities committed by U.S. troops in the current war."Again, where the fuck was that EVEN BROUGHT UP?Additionally, you say that "American soldiers actually CAN and are OBLIGED to uphold certain codes" is pretty much the first time THAT was brought up. Again, we were discussing Stone's bias in that the only atrocities and injustices he often explores are American.Finally, you say that these arguments are "anathema to them because then their rationalizations and excuses become empty and useless," but you're the first essentially to raise these points (and the straw man arguments against)!Wow! That's a helluva debate you've had with that scarecrow! You win! You win!
-
Nice way to make irrelevant any examples I might have dragged up.
Please show me where I said that a filmmaker is obliged to show only one or the other. Plenty of films are made showing Americans in a good light and the atrocites of others. How is this somehow invalidated because some filmmakers see it as their job or mission to remind a country of when it falls short of its ideals? You are taking it upon yourself to infer intent on their part rather than see the effect that films like that may have on the collective American conscience in the long run.
Anyway, my primary argument is with people like anchorite (who will go into amazing "intellectual" contortions to defend anything wrong that America does) and AnimalStructure/Thunderballs (who is simply an evil, miserable piece of shit). -
Contortions to defend anything wrong that America does is REPREHENSIBLE! I love my country, but it HAS made some mistakes. It's a government of the people, by the people, and for the people and, last I checked, people are fallible and imperfect. A balanced and proper view DEMANDS that we look at both the GOOD and EVIL done in the name of the U.S., that we look to where we've lived up to our country's greatest ideals and where we've failed. To many, Stone seems to revel in the CONSTANTLY pulling the scab off the wounds to look at them again and again and again and again...
-
Let it go, Oliver. Just let it go. Then go make THE HAND II and enter your golden years gracefully.
-
You know, I could debate the way you do in this case and completely ignore the history of talkback and the documented opinions and habits of certain talkbackers. Or I could actually spend time sifting through the past five years or so of talkbacks looking for throwaway comments and assembling dossiers for your perusal. However, I'm very confident and comfortable in just trusting in the collective knowledge of fellow longtime talkbackers when describing tendencies in certain individuals.
-
The thing is, nobody tells/told people like John Wayne to act in more movies critical of the U.S., so why should Stone have the pressure of having to do the opposite?
-
Alot of people are missing the point of this film. The phrase "Evil has won when good men do nothing" comes to mind. You basically have a situation where members of a country begin to go against what said country is supposed to stand for. Some men realize this is morally wrong and they bravely take a stand against this, against their own people to save their "enemy". The underlying story is that "Ya, fucked up shit happens, but many of us realize this is wrong and we must do our part to stop it". And the fact the men who performed the killings, and not those whom got in the way to stop them, were punished also goes a long way to show how, at it's spiritual core, this country wants to make sure it does the "right thing".
-
John Wayne is OFTEN criticized in LIBERAL MEDIA OUTLETS for his "jingoist, flag-waving" movies. From the Encyclopaedia Britannica Online: "Wayne himself was also the subject of controversy: his outspoken right-wing politics (and, by extension, his movies) were admired by conservatives but derided by liberals as being naively jingoistic." If that's not saying that he should "act in more movies critical of the U.S.," what is?
-
Sometimes you just have to say that out loud to remind others that it's still ok. Our media and our democrats are doing their best to make you think otherwise. When I served in the armed forces I was in other countries and witnessed first hand our troops rebuilding schools, bridges, and roads. This still takes place today, all over the world. Yet you never hear about it. This is just one tiny example of what our country does on a daily basis.
-
Its May Lai. One of the most famous incidents of war atrocities ever commited. How the fuck was this NOT going to be turned into a movie eventually. It's been referenced in some way in just about every other Vietnam flick anyway. Sure, the timing coincides with similar incidents in Iraq leaking out, and Stones career sort of fallling off the tracks. A quick mainstream court room drama vietnam flick could help his bank account out. As others have brought up, The Rape Of Nanking would make for a pretty interesting film. Especially with the Schindler like Nazi attempting to shield the chinese from the Japanese. I have no idea what it has to do with Oliver Stone however. Is it a suggestion for a film he may wish to tackle, since he has an asian fetish?
-
Cause with your "post" at 08:41:38 PM, you just hurdled Memories-Of-Murder for 1st Place as the current biggest windbag, asshole on AICN.Jesus Fucking Christ. I can't even begin to dissect the Talkback ignorance you've chosen to put on display here.
-
This will no doubt become another film the O'Reilys and Savages will condemn without bothering to see. Let's look at their logic vs. reality so far. Movie 1: Brokeback Mountain. neo-con beef: promotes, glamorizes gay lifestyle. Reality- Gay characters persecuted, abused, one killed, nothing very glamorous. Movie 2: Letters From Iwo Jima. Neo-cons: Humanizing Japanese soldiers who committed atrocities on Allied POWs. Reality- They were just as scared and human as us, that's the point. Savage especially railed against these films as anti-american in LFIJ or gay agenda vehicle in Brokeback but never saw either film. Hopefully we never reach the point where they or some of the resident aicn neo-cons decide what movies are made.
-
what the fuck is the video supposed to be for? Half the clips in that opening montage are WW2, korea, gulf war, etc. NOT VIETNAM. Ill-informed morons just need to die. PS - no camera-guided bombs in vietnam, shithead
-
denigrating the memory of the people died there.
-
"If I am a soldier, am I gonnna wait for that little 14 year old girl to blow me up with some grenade, or I am gonna ice her?"
Or maybe you could just sneak into her house in the middle of the night, pack rape her, then kill her and her family? Retarded people like you are why I don't see any problem with Stone making another film about American atrocities. Just doing your "job" doesn't have to involve raping and murdering children and the elderly. The weak, pathetic mentallity of a soldier who was just "following orders" is something to be ashamed of. Yes, the higher ups who put the wheels in motion and enforce these actions are guilty. But so is every single one of the soldiers who perpetrates the crimes. As for why people like Stone seem to make "anti-American" movies, and so few pro U.S flicks, the answer should be self evident. Nationalism is a refuge for the weak and stupid. People confuse the great actions of individuals with it being the result of some magical collective. The closest most Americans (just so you bitches don't cry, this holds true for any nation) got to doing anything commendable was inadvertantly paying for insitutions like NASA and so on through taxes. Which they probally moaned about anyway. America isn't great. It's a chunk of land with a flag. Some Americans are great however, and there has been no shortage of movies about them. But a hell of alot of them are assholes, and this film just happens to be about them. -
Anchorite in the house? Check. Pazuzu, Gaius? Check. Looks like I've got some good reading tonight.
-
History repeats itself, but at least we get oil for our efforts.
-
THIS ISN'T ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT HOLLYWOOD SHOULD SENSATIONALIZE AND PORTRAY ANOTHER U.S. ATROCITY ON FILM. THIS ISN'T ABOUT LEFTIES VIEWS VS. RIGHTIES VIEWS. THIS IS ABOUT OLIVER STONE BEING A SHITTY DIRECTOR. NO ONE HERE (UNLESS THEY'RE FUCKING BRAINDEAD) WOULD ARGUE THAT THIS SHOULDN'T BE PUT TO FILM. WHAT YOU SHOULD ALL BE ARGUING ABOUT IS; WHY IS OLIVER STONE BEING THE ONE TO DIRECT ANOTHER FILM LIKE THIS? HE IS A TERRIBLE DIRECTOR NOW AND WILL JUST COMPLETELY RUIN ANOTHER HISTORIC EVENT IN HISTORY. STOP THE FIGHTING!!! THIS IS ABOUT OLIVER STONE BEING A TRASHY FILM DIRECTOR! HE HASN'T BEEN GOOD SINCE 'WALL STREET'
-
Anyone for a game of Rock, Paper, Gunships?
-
...if the folks above don't think the Japanese internment camps were all that bad, how about the death camps America set up in the phillipines as a substitution?
-
Oliver Stone is a great director. His recent works are wretched, but Born on the Fourth of July, *JFK*, The Doors ... classics.
-
I too am proud to be an American. I love that I live in a land of freedom where people like Oliver Stone, Michael Moore, Glenn beck and Anne Coulter have the right speak. I am proud of the fact that there are heroes, who have served this country. These heroes like Oliver Stone (yes he served) have the right and obligation to speak up whenever and wherever they choose. Stone has made strong movies "Platoon, World Trade Center, Talk radio..." he, like other veterans serve so that the rights of others are not infringed upon. Yes, I too am proud to be an American and will see this movie.
-
Greatest. American. Ever.
-
Aug 28, 2007 9:39:04 PM CDT
Oliver Stone does Viet Nam movies because it was a big
by bringingsexyback
part of his life's experience. The war was one of America's greatest catastrophes, and he was a part of it. How can anyone fault him for doing this movie?
-
For those also arguing about why we can't have movies that show heroic American actions, I would volunteer the fact that the film is focusing on the lead investigator and one of the few soldiers there who had the balls to stand between his fellow soldiers and innocent civilians as evidence that someone is making a movie focusing on positive American actions.
-
Shut up. The movie hasn't even been made yet and you know NOTHING about what Stone's approach is going to be towards the subject matter. As for Stone's "conspiracy bullshit", funny how he came under fire by the so-called "9-11 Truth movement" who claimed that his WTC film didn't contain enough "truth" and that he basically was now a neocon sell-out.So, between you and those delusional nutjobs, it looks like Stone can't get a break.
-
Worst. American. Ever.
-
Lets see Oliver Stone make a film about Auschwitz, or what it was like to be on the Bataan Death March, Or how our pulling out of Vietnam because of DNC backlash caused genocide in South Vietnam and Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge. Let's see him make a film about how Jimmy Carter was the major western influence that gave a green light to the rise of radical Islam in 1979 with his pathetic response to the Iranian Hostage Crisis.
To quote one of his own characters:
"Love it or leave it, you bastard." -
This IS a movie about American heroicism. It's about Willis and Tatum's characters upholding the greatest ideals we can aspire to. Someone should strap Alberto Gonzales, Larry Craig, Karl Rove and every fucking dick-slurping Republican cockstroker in a chair and watch this movie. Then again, all they'll think about is PENISES.
-
"Easy...ya just don't lead 'em so much. Ain't war hell?"
"Anyone who runs...is a VC. Anyone who stands still...is a WELL DISCIPLINED VC."
-
Aug 28, 2007 9:45:48 PM CDT
Cygnus shut the fuck up. You ought to be charged for
by bringingsexyback
your freedom to speak. Go suck a dick, you know you want to. Yeah .. penis
-
The Righter they are, the more love of the cock they have. Ain't that right, Cygnus?
-
And I cant believe you thought "The Doors" was any good. Fucking ray manzarik himself the lead keyboardist has stated that Stone's version of Jim Morrison was fucking bullshit. What Oliver Stone likes to do is create propaganda, start conspiracies, lie, manipulate, evoke false emotion in people, and make crappy movies. With 'World Trade Centre' he finally got around to telling a story but his talent showed through when he had no propaganda to spin out...IE he can't direct actors, he can't weave a story, and he doesn't do enough research
-
Ron Kovic reminds me of Cygnus. A brash flag-waving tard with the "love it or leave it" line, until he got his legs blown off. Then he saw the truth - he was nothing but cannon fodder. And he went on to become a great American hero truly worthy of waving that flag. But for some reason I don't envision Cygnus' future as a hero, just some wingnut sucking a random penis in an airport bathroom.
-
performance. When he lost the Oscar to Daniel Day-Lewis that year, he basically gave up on acting and focused on being a movie star. And sucking penises.
-
If you need your dick sucked in a hurry, find a Republican.
-
...Born on the 4th of July garbage? Well acted, moving, interesting, beautifully shot and cut...I mean, it's a pretty solid film. The narrative arc is kind of stunted, since it's a true story and it's not like Kovic grew his legs back after coming to his personal epiphany or anything, but it's hardly I Now Pronounce You Chuck And Larry.
-
despite having a penis in the mouth ...
-
Great film. One of Stone's best. That Kovic's own family shunned him speaks volumes about how terribly corrosive partisan politics are to our families and culture.
-
lameeeeeeee propaganda
-
AKA: REPUBLICAN WITH A PEARL NECKLACE
-
How bout: 1. Self-expression 2. craft 3. innovation/imagination I figure it comes down to some combination of those elements. I don't think art needs to aggresively challenge things. I mean, it's all just opinion, what constitutes "art" ... but that challenging thing does seem to be too narrow to be accurate in a general sense. And whoever brought Pol Pot into this, please - don't.
-
Was there not enough penis sucking to suit the right-wing audience?
-
That guy has a fucking rocket of a penis. Nothing but the best for Karl Rove.
-
You can cum on his face, piss on him, and still get into heaven. Nice.
-
The prettier you are, the stupider you can be. God Bless America.
-
It's the state that looks like a penis.
-
because I am Liberal and I like vaginas.
-
Just a quick question: are you gonna spam this thread to a grinding halt?
-
I think I just did. Wingnuts don't like to be reminded of their love of PENIS.
-
covering up for the massacre as best he could?
-
I predict a ratings disaster.
-
for the atrocities in Iraq. That and too much cockstroking in the White House.
-
ought to share blame too. They're all fucking insane. Massacres are not limited to the U.S. Others do it, and do a better job of it.
-
Why don't YOU go make a fucking movie about Nagasaki and the Native Americans? Stone was IN the Vietnam War, and most of his great movies were set in that era. That's what he does best. Just because he didn't make the movie you want, don't let that stop you from making it.
-
You Stone-haters are fucking tards. Penis-loving tards.
-
Well, when you do that, you drive everyone out and deprive us all the opportunity to further bitchslap ignorant fucks like AnimalStructure & Co.I'd hate for Merrick to have to change to title of this TB to "The Not-So Deep Thoughts of BSB".
-
And it did a great job of showing how soldiers grasped desperately for their individualism and humanity in the face of violence and death. Cygnus should watch it even though there's no penis-sucking in it.
-
Been gone for a week. You must've missed me a lot.
-
Aug 28, 2007 10:37:57 PM CDT
And BTW, Animalstructure basically bitchslaps himself
by bringingsexyback
everytime he posts a thought.
-
Aug 28, 2007 10:40:40 PM CDT
Although if I was Bud Fox, I would've taken the golden
by bringingsexyback
parachute off Blue Star. Break it and sell it.
-
anymore? I miss those.
-
Have you read the script? And it's not "justifiable". At most, it's understandable.
-
Oh, wait...
-
The only thing stopping us from dropping another atomic bomb is Ninja Warrior. Great show.
-
...that Stone had gotten Vietnam out of his system, he decides to do this of all films. It will be called cutting edge, but really it will not be. This is the sort of thing Hollywood does these days. Mores the pity.
-
This is relevant, stick with me here. (Disclaimer: the TF movie sucked ass, and Bay is a hack)
I recall the criticism Michael Bay received because of his inclusion of the U.S. military in TF, and even sharper criticism because he was portraying them in a positive light. I also recall personally being criticized because I felt that Optimus Prime should be portrayed as the iconic John Wayne-like personality (heroic American leader) that he was in the cartoon. There were even several shitty responses to people wishing Prime had the more familiar, decidely American coloring he had in the cartoon.
This is the shit that pisses me off. Stone is praised for his slanty movies while not even something like Transformers gets a pass for being pro-American in any way. Not only does it not get a pass, the idea of pro-American is openly ridiculed.
Fuck that, America has no excuses for the bad things it has done, but we've done far, far more good in the world than we've done bad, and we continue to do so. Start with how much money we give away in foreign aid and charity and work your way up from there. No other country even comes close. America is full of good, charitable people who want to do right, and expect our soldiers to do right. We don't need Oliver Stone to explain to us why what happened in My Lai was wrong, we already know, and we don't condone it.
Here's another thing I know, if My Lai was about Palestinian fighters massacuring a Jewish kibbutz then fucksticks like Stone would stand in line to pin medals on the Palestinians' chests along with all the rest of the hyper-left hippie dipshits. Oh and fuck both the Left and Right!
Okay, meandering crazy rant over.
-
Wow, this looks like it could be a great film. I've studied a good portion of the Vietnam War, but unfortunately never read much about My Lai except that it was a US-led masscacre.
Olver Stone hasn't impressed me in recent years, but this story is so raw and intensely dramatic I can't see how he could fuck it up. The YouTube clip Merrick posted was actually really well-made if anyone's interested. The first minute is blusterous but then it settles into a propulsive rhythm. Some of the footage and testimony is pretty moving, actually, so I'll definitely be interested to see how Stone handles it. -
Just look at the TV news reports or read the newspapers, terrorists kill Iraqis, men women and children, every day with car bombs or death squads (aka Al Qaeda), with Iranian support.
-
How do you make a boring movie about the 9/11 attacks? Only Stone could do that.
-
Well, that actually proves my point. When I said "nobody" I was referring to the same people who think they have some say in what directors like Stone "should" be doing. One can criticize both John Wayne and Oliver Stone of being myopic in their work, but actually pontificating about what they "should" be doing instead is absurd. I find it healthy that both people can/could have their say.
-
If your going to invade a country, and the residents have the nerve to attempt to protect themselves against your buddies, your pals, the best way to beat them back down is to rape some babies and machine gun crowds of elderly folk. I do understand how these young men could have been pushed by circumstance to commit such actions. I also understand that it would be good if these same young men all died. Even one of these young men, Varnado Simpson, realised what a useless piece of shit he was and topped himself. Too bad the rest didn't. Again, it has to be asked, what do Iranian backed terroirsts attacks in 2007 have to do with Oliver Stone directing a film about an incident that occured in South East Asia in 1968?
As for Stone Vs. Bay being used an example of praise for anti-americanism and ridicule for pro-American film making...Well, duh. Just look at the fuckin' results. Bay makes millitary friendly flicks, as does Bruckhiemer. They suck. As films, and idealogically. Stones films, on the other hand, have been fairly monumental. Yes, like most directors, hes been on a slow decline over the years, but early on he was making great flicks. Which, oddly enough, don't really seem all that anti-American at all. It seems to be an accusation levelled at him by people who just dislike his stance. Sort of like yelling witch. -
You people really don't like it when somebody holds a mirror up in front of yourselves, do you?! Even though it is one of your own.
-
Talk-backers never stop, huh? There's some big time discipline here.
The question is not "Do you hate Oliver Stone?", The question is "WHY do you hate Oliver Stone?" Elvis is rolling his eyes because he thinks he's answered this question about 3 dozen times, but it's still not terribly clear. I think it's for one of these two reasons:
1) Stone frequently, almost always, does films about moments of American weakness. Anyone who does that is un-American and does damage to the country.
2) Stone LIES about American history to make us look bad because he's a tranny comrade.
3) The way Stone goes about exploring American weakness is unproductive.
If your answer is "A", you're a hopeles jingoist with a very small soul. If your answer is "B", well, elevate the conversations with examples of untruths. If your answer is C, well, that's fine with me. I almost agree with you. It would elevate the conversation to describe what he does that isn't useful, from a storytelling approach.
This post began from standard, pretty moronic statements about Stone being anti-American or possibly wanting to do America harm. I think that's a statement that needs the help of reasoned premises, combined with evidence, to pass the sniff test. Otherwise its last week's gym shorts that needs a good soaking. -
Nuff said. Do the math.
-
When you say "NOBODY tells/told people like John Wayne to act in more movies critical of the U.S.," I must have INCORRECTLY assumed you meant the classical definition of NOBODY, that is N-O-B-O-D-Y, instead of your recent definition of NOBODY as "the same people who think they have some say in what directors like Stone 'should' be doing."Just for clarity's sake though, in the future, when I say NOBODY, I'll actually mean "no person; not anyone" as opposed to "people who think they have some say in what directors like Stone 'should' be doing."See, even if I disagree with "people who think they have some say in what directors like Stone 'should' be doing," I still consider "people" somebody as opposed to "nobody" ("no person; not anyone").Still not QUITE sure though, how my providing evidence that SOMEBODY was critical of John Wayne's "flag-waving, jingoistic movies" and that, therefore, he should have been in more movies critical of the U.S, PROVES your point that "NOBODY tells/told people like John Wayne to act in more movies critical of the U.S.," but that's probably just my not understanding what you mean by "N-O-B-O-D-Y"Or "tells/told"...Or "people"...Or "John"...Or "Wayne"...Or "to act"...Or "more"...Or movies"...Or "critical"...Or "U.S.",...Right?Silly me with my standard universal definitions and all.
-
Good morning and wazz up! Can't believe this shit is still on-going, but for the most part it's going to be going-on without me - I've some writin' to do. ;-) It's absolutely stunning the vitriolic differences here and the stubborn refusal by either side to give an inch of understanding EITHER WAY, present company excluded, of course. Anyway, have a good one, Hell. Later.
-
I love that I have to write Hairy Nutsack as a subject line. Anyway, I think getting a pass and being openly ridiculed are kind of diametrically opposed. In other words, if you're being ridiculed, you're not "getting a pass". That being said, Transformers was ridiculed for it's fetishistic portrayal of the military (what? In Michael Bay movie???) more than just being pro-American or pro-military. You can be those things in a less heavy-handed way.
-
I'm no "right wingnut," but, yes, I do love MY penis. You don't love yours? No penis love AT ALL?!?!?!Well, hate to be a Bible-thumper, but...Matthew 18:8-9 - "If thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out; If thy right hand offend thee, cut it off,..."You see where I'm going with this?You seem to have "right wingnuts" yet you use veiled homosexual implications and slurs to attacks those you despise. Hmmm. Psychologically, we call that "projection." Politically and ethically, we call that "hypocrisy."
-
"You seem to HATE "right wingnuts"...
-
...*sigh*... It would be more productive for this debate if you were willing to overlook my at 3 am poorly chosen word (especially after I admitted it) and addressed the content of the statement put forth. Instead you have bogged the discussion down in nitpicking.
My point is, as if you didn't know, that you don't see right-wingers telling people like John Wayne (living, political equivalents - just to head that future nitpick off) to make more left-leaning films, in the same way that you don't see left-wingers telling Oliver Stone to make more right-leaning movies. The reasoning behind an argument like that is specious to say the least. -
Starring 50 cent and Sen. Larry Craig?
-
Aug 29, 2007 9:25:33 AM CDT
Elvis Cole can't seem to process a lot of points, Doc
by bringingsexyback
Like the fact that he's calling me hypocritical when I'm pointing out how all the ultra-right anti-homosexual wingnuts are the ones who love sucking cocks of congressional pages, male prostitutes and random air travelers. Elvis likes to have things spelled out for him because he's the intellectual equivalent of Miss Teen South Carolina.
-
I have GOT to write, but, Hell, I'll bite...I guess, in regards to your A), B), and C) post earlier that the crux of the matter is Stone's motivation and, as you said, whether it's productive. I don't think that it's really even possible to deny that Stone is quite frequently critical of the U.S., especially as it relates to Vietnam and war and "big business." Agreed, right?Once the facts of his frequent criticism are established, the issue becomes one of motivation. Why is he being critical and is his criticism productive? As to his motivation, the issue seems to divide into two camps (although there are probably at least FOUR possibilities):1) He criticizes because he HATES America (the virulent MY COUNTRY RIGHT OR WRONG crowd) and...2) He criticizes because he LOVES America (the rabid scab-pickers who seem to believe that if you KEEP picking at the wound, it will ensure that you'll never again be wounded).I don't fall into either of those camps. I think, as I said, that Stone has an idea/ideal of America that was crushed with the Kennedy assassinations and the Vietnam War. As such, he's constantly comparing his idealized America (whether you agree with HIS ideal or not) with the America that exists, the one in THIS TIMELINE where the Kennedys died and the Vietnam War was fought.Stone seems compelled, like some out-of-sync time traveler, like Hawkmoon in Michael Moorcock'sCount Brass, to revisit the pivotal events that altered history, that altered HIS-STORY.To some, he does this because he LOVES America. To others, he does it because he HATES the country.His actual MOTIVATION though, we'll never know as we'll never get inside his head. We can know this, I think: whether his "revisitings" are productive or constructive.At this point, *I* think we've got a law of diminishing returns here. Stone's incessant navel-gazing seems to be reaching the SAME AUDIENCE, over and over. The very SAME AUDIENCE, I might add, that ALREADY agrees with his message regarding American missteps in history. He's preaching to the choir.He doesn't seem to be winning any converts. America doesn't seem to be building any time machines to alter history or cloning devices to bring back Jack.So what's he accomplishing with his seemingly (to some) incessant scab-picking besides self-catharsis? I mean, catharsis is good and all, but when's he gonna get over it?The Vietnam war is over. Kennedys both are dead. Jack ain't comin' back. Even his son is dead.If Iraq IS Vietnam (as some claim) and Stone's message and movies about Vietnam and the 1960s were to help us learn from history (or be doomed to repeat it), then he's failed miserably.Revisiting My Lai for its "informative" value? Please. War is hell. Bad things happen to good people. Good things happen to bad people. Atrocities occur during war on both sides and, much like Abu Ghraib, we should examine them when they occur, punish the wrong-doers, and move on.Yet another scab-picking Vietnam movie from Stone will please two audiences:1)Oliver Stone and...2)Those who already agree with Oliver Stone.But seriously whose minds is he going to change and what history is he going to alter? The past is done and those who will send us to war already know that shitty things happen in war.What Don Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and George Bush are gonna wake up upon seeing this and SUDDENLY change course? Right.
-
"Stone's incessant navel-gazing seems to be reaching the SAME AUDIENCE, over and over. The very SAME AUDIENCE, I might add, that ALREADY agrees with his message regarding American missteps in history. He's preaching to the choir."
What, exactly, do you base that theory on?
-
You said "NOBODY." When I showed you SOMEBODY, you said that my showing you SOMEBODY "PROVED YOUR POINT?!?!?!" You did NOT "address the content of the statement put forth." You fucking said "NOBODY said John Wayne should make pictures more critical of the U.S.," then obfuscated.If your point was that "you don't see right-wingers telling people like John Wayne... to make more left-leaning films, in the same way that you don't see left-wingers telling Oliver Stone to make more right-leaning movies" then YOU SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT.But just to NITPICK EVEN THAT, so what? That's the most sophistry I've heard from you in a while. What's the fucking point of THAT statement?Yes, those who are right-wing don't tell right-wingers to make more left-wing movies. True. Additionally, those who are left-wing don't tell left-wingers to make more right-wing movies. True again! How very fucking insightful of you?The debate wasn't whether right-wingers should tell right-wingers to make more left-wing movies!The debate wasn't whether left-wingers should tell left-wingers to make more right-wing movies! Nobody told anybody else to tell Oliver Stone ANYTHING so far as I could read.The debate was whether Oliver Stone was overly critical of the U.S. and chose to focus solely on its missteps and shortcomings, what his motivation was in doing so, whether other countries had similar shortcomings, whether Stone should focus on THEIR shortcomings, too, and why he couldn't ever seem to do a pro-American movie that didn't include some atrocity or American shortcoming in the process.Nobody said that he should make more right-wing movies, if he's left-wing. Many said that he should perhaps choose a point-of-view in which America isn't always to blame or forever committing atrocities that a brave few must stand against or forever falling short of its ideals or populated by violent ignorant rubes who are being manipulated by shadowy cabals. Is it your contention that this is the left-wing position - that America IS always to blame AND forever committing atrocities that a brave few must stand against AND forever falling short of its ideals AND populated by violent ignorant rubes who are being manipulated by shadowy cabals and that, therefore, no one should ask him to make any other kind of movie?!?!?'Cause see, I thought that left-wingers (like apparently you admit Stone *IS*) could see the good in America, too. Its successes. Its achievements. The good that the U.S. has done. Where it's gone right.Because IF THEY CAN, Oliver Stone should ALSO make a picture that shows the good in America, its successes and achievements, and where it's gone right." Is that not clear?That's not asking him to make a "right wing" picture. It's asking Stone to make a picture that shows what he sees as the good in America, a picture that doesn't show the few good standing up to the many, ignorant violent, easily-manipulated rubes.Is that really too much to ask? Is that asking for a "right wing movie," one that shows America as heroic?If so, oh, my God, what does that say about the "left wing?"
-
Only a single US soldier was wounded. Here's a description of how that happened "One U.S. soldier was wounded, taken out by medical evacuation helicopter in the midst of the killing, after accidentally shooting himself in the foot while trying to clear a jammed .45 caliber pistol. The pistol had been borrowed by a squadmate to finish off a small boy he saw moving in a pile of wounded. He shot the boy in the neck. Bleeding heavily, the the child crawled to his feet and stumbled forward two or three steps trying to escape. As he fell, the G.I. with the .45 tried to shoot him again, jamming the weapon. He returned it disgustedly to the owner, who then managed to shoot himself while attending to the malfunction." So for all the assassins you speak of, none of them had a gun, grenade, bomb, or sharp stick that they fought back with. Between 400 and 500 Vietnamese murdered, and nobody fought back - not a single US serviceman wounded. Truly this was an incredibly dangerous village of assassins. Piltdown has changed my mind, maybe this movie does need to be made.
-
Instead of whining about a My Lai movie, USAns should rise up against the war criminal regimes.
-
Well, some facts and some other theory.Stone's 'message' movies: Platoon ($138,000,000), Wall Street ($43,000,000), Talk Radio ($3,000,000), Born on the Fourth ($70,000,000), JFK ($70,000,000), NBK ($50,000,000), and Nixon ($13,000,000). That's a flat to declining box office for the "message" flicks.Seems to indicate, in theory, anyway, fewer people "getting the message" and certainly his audience for "message" flicks ISN'T INCREASING.WTC barely made its budget back domestically, but no Oliver Stone "message" here, just an overwrought tearjerker (I liked it though).Any Given Sunday DID make its budget back, but, come on, not even CLOSE to one of his "message" flicks.U-Turn? Again, not even close to making its budget back domestically.So it doesn't seem like more and more people are "getting the message" unless it's your contention that his declining asses-in-seats are all "new converts?" No "new converts" = "preaching to the choir."Also, if the intent of Platoon, Wall Street, Born on the Fourth, JFK, NBK, and Nixon (his "message" movies) was to prevent manipulation of ignorant violent rubes in "right wing" takeovers, foreign quagmires, and war-time atrocities, one could say he's failed MISERABLY, if one were left-wing.So, for a message to NOT be succeeding, in theory anyway, he must not be reaching enough people or convincing enough, ergo, he must be preaching to the choir.Finally, I can't remember EVER hearing someone say "dude, I used to think that Vietnam War was a real high water mark for U.S. foreign policy and military intervention until Oliver Stone showed me the truth."And THAT's what I base the theory that Ollie Stone is preaching to the choir on.I'll say it again. I like most Oliver Stone movies. Technically speaking, I think he's an excellent filmmaker. Thematically speaking, I think he's usually a little sad, kind of like a violin virtuoso who becomes a paranoid schizophrenic.
-
...you really are shoveling it thick and fast now aren't you? Fair enough, I'll play along. Your initial response to the offending "everybody" post consisted of basically nothing other than saying that left-wingers criticized John Wayne's movies all the time, which is about as "insightful" as you sarcastically accused me of being.
The fact remains that even if Stone made nothing other than movies pointing out America's weaknesses for the rest of his life, it wouldn't make him any less of a patriot. It doesn't prove that he IS one either. Your suppositions are nothing but you inferring purpose and intent for the sake of argument. Talk about your ultimate straw man. -
the fighting usans of South Dakota Technical Community College State?
-
Instead of whining that "USAns should rise up against the war criminal regimes," you should shoot yourself in the head.
-
No freedom of speech for you! Shut the fuck up!
-
In fact, I explicitly stated Stone's "actual MOTIVATION though, we'll never know as we'll never get inside his head."MY "initial response to the offending 'everybody' post [and actually, genius, it was NOBODY, not EVERYBODY] consisted of basically nothing other than saying that left-wingers criticized John Wayne's movies all the time." Is that insightful? No. Never claimed it was. In fact, it was a response for the EIGHTH FUCKING TIME to your saying that "NOBODY criticizes John Wayne for not making left-wing movies." So, insightful? No. A necessary response to an OBVIOUS misstatement, whether you did it on purpose or not? Abso-fucking-lutely.It may not have been INSIGHTFUL, but it was certainly necessary to correct YOUR misstatement. I'm not the moron who said "NOBODY criticizes John Wayne for not making movies more critical of the U.S."You're right though about Stone's patriotism and love of country as reflected in his movies -- it's NEITHER confirmed NOR denied because "his actual MOTIVATION though, we'll never know as we'll never get inside his head."INFERRING his views is pointless. I don't care whether he's a patriot or virulently anti-American and it doesn't matter.I'm free to posit psychological estimations of Stone's mental health or preoccupations are paranoia, but I don't really give a rat's hairy fucking ass whether he's what I view as a "patriot" or not. I just care whether he's going to make a good movie or not. I know what kind of movie he's going to make, technically and usually thematically. It's quite simple to draw a conclusion about what type of flick he'll make (not about his patriotism) given his track record.I never questioned his patriotism or CAN'T YOU READ? I posited a theory on his world-view based upon the messages of his movies, but really I can only say that you know what you're going to get with an Oliver Stone flick. His view of America, what it is and what it stands for, is probably different from mine, yours, and 299,999,999 other Americans. Therefore, his "patriotism" will be different. That is immaterial, to me and I never said otherwise.
-
I don't post political comments on any board until someone else has.
If the US wants to be regarded better, even by its own filmmakers, then it needs to purge itself of the violent, greedy, depraved thugs who rule it. -
The funny thing is, ebolamonkey being called a "typical slave of authoritarians." That's just some silly, funny shit.Secondly, kabong-head assumes "the US wants to be regarded better." I personally don't give a greasy green fart how the US is regarded by anyone but me. So go blow it out your ass, kabong.
-
Hold on, let me get that "purge" started right now. Wait. No. Oh, shit! Is the "purge" cycle after "rinse" or "hot wash?" Oh, no. Here it is. Right beside the "blow me" cycle.
-
I mean really.Oh, wait, the same people that say "violent, greedy, depraved thugs who rule it" -- jackasses!What are you, 1930s Nazi, 1950s Communist, 1980s Baathist? What?'Cause over here in America , we have elections (and then recounts ad infinitum) not "purges."
-
I typed "everybody" instead of "nobody"! Now Elvis Cole has fuel for at least a dozen new anally retentive posts.
Seriously though, is there anything else in my posts besides an unfortunate choice of a word which is causing your apoplectic fit, Elvis? -
Now THAT is what I was hoping to read about. Ho rises up out of that glass case and leads an army of Deadite Viet Cong against mankind.
Even "Bubba Ho Chi Minh" would have been okay. Fat Elvis versus skinny Ho Chi Minh would have been worthwhile. -
Just nitpicking, right? Because you OBVIOUSLY can't fucking read. Is there anything else in your posts causing my "apoplectic fit." Well, let's see. I corrected your "NOBODY" assertion, then...I corrected your assertion that I "proved your point"...Then I corrected your delightfully inane/"insightful" notion that right-wiingers don't tell right-wingers to make left-wing movies and that, therefore, left-wingers don't tell left-wingers to make right-wing movies (a sophomoric truism) apropos of NOTHING (certainly not what was being discussed)...Then I educated your ass on where my theory on "preaching to the choir" comes from with FACTS and EVIDENCE...Then I corrected YOUR INFERENCE that I thought Oliver Stone was unpatriotic and...Finally, I stated as a matter of fact, Stone's personal patriotism is relative and beside the point. I furthermore clarified that one KNOWS what is going to get with an Oliver Stone picture, technically good, but thematically skewed.But, no, I'm just a nitpicker of NOBODY vs. EVERYBODY. You've responded to NONE of those point above, just constantly gone back to your crying little bitch - "I mistyped/you misunderstood/you're nitpicking." You sound like a bitchy little broken record. But *I'M* the nitipicker.Have you had a fucking stroke down in Kiwi land or what?You're a fucking fool who got schooled.
-
I hope the 'ugly people' you're talking about aren't the soldiers, but the politicians who start the wars. The soldiers are there often because they have no career prospects back home, or because they thought that they would be defending their nation, and don't realize until the shit hits the fan that war is pointless.
-
Dude...HATE to rain on YOUR selective CAPITALIZATION parade but your last several POSTS are nothing MORE than the equivalent OF doing donuts on someone's LAWN. I think IT'S time to park the CAR and ShUt tHE FUCK uP.
-
and going and going with some crzy trolling going on as well. Right now I really don't have anything to add that I haven't already said, but I'll keep checking in
-
"Then I educated your ass on where my theory on "preaching to the choir" comes from with FACTS and EVIDENCE..."
Really? When did you do this? Are you referring to that cringeworthy and sad little box office post? Or is there a post I missed where you can show exactly how the moviegoers felt going in to Stone's movies as well as coming out of them?
Yes, you are a nitpicker, actually. And intellectually cowardly in a debate as well, since you (apart from nitpicking) employ wilful ignorance as to your opponents' meanings (the "insightful" notion, for example) in order to score cheap, shoddy points. Furthermore, I just watched your performance of trying to tear a talkbacker a new asshole for using the perfectly acceptable word "purge", which was embarrassing in the extreme (for you, that is).
You've got nothing, chief. -
Puh-fuckin'-leeze! Go suck a kiwi and have another fuckin' stroke, DorkPazuzu.When did I educate you on "preaching to the choir?" Yes, in that cringeworthy post which provided evidence for a theoretical inference since even a giant fucking idiot like you knows that there exists nowhere to show "exactly how the moviegoers felt going in to Stone's movies as well as coming out of them." No polls done. No surveys conducted. Evidence, dear fuckhead, can also be circumstantial as well as statistical, or do they not teach that in New Zealand?Circumstantial evidence in this case is indicated in that Stone's cannot be reaching and convincing MORE and MORE people because events with which he apparently disagrees (Republican presidents and Iraq wars and Guantanamo Bays) keep occurring. Circumstantially speaking, as I pointed out, idiot, if he were speaking to more than the select audience of "the choir" current events would be turning in his direction (impeaching presidents, withdrawing from Iraq, closing Guantanamo).Statistically spoeaking, declining box office business indicates FEWER ASSES IN SEATS so, if he's not preaching to the choir," as I asked before, is it your contention that those fewer and fewer and fewer and fewer people seeing his movies are ALL new people, the unconverted?Yes, *I'M* the "intellectual coward." You mistype and are unclear. Since I don't read minds and your muddled thoughts are unclear, I correct you. You say that you meant something else, but that my correcting you proves your point (!?!?!?), a point that, I might add for the ninth time, is pure sophistry.THE FACT THAT RIGHT-WINGERS DON'T TELL RIGHT-WINGERS TO MAKE LEFT-WING MOVIES IS APROPOS OF NOTHING!!! So FUCKING what! That WASN'T BEING DISCUSSED!!!NO ONE said that left-wingers should tell Oliver Stone to make a RIGHT WING MOVIE, you idiot! Therefore, stating that proves nothing and says nothing.A movie that doesn't always show Americans as greedy, ignorant, violent rubes manipulated into committing atrocities can be LEFT-WING! Not all left wing philosophies stipulate that Americans are greedy, ignorant, violent rubes manipulated into committing atrocities. Hell, go look at a lot of 1930s, 1040s, and 1970s Hollywood flicks. LEFT-WING, but not all of them show Americans as greedy, ignorant, violent rubes manipulated into committing atrocities. Therefore, Oliver Stone CAN be true to "LEFT WING VALUES" and make a LEFT WING MOVIE without resorting to denigrating and scab-picking.I've made this point SEVERAL TIMES, you fucking stroke victim.Purge may be a "perfectly acceptable word," but even an imbecile like you knows that, historically speaking, "purging" is used by totalitarian regimes to rid themselves of undesirables. Democracies and democratic parties win elections; they don't "purge" the opposing party. At least in America. Maybe you guys do something different in the Land Not Good Enough To Be Called Down Under, New Zealand.Oh, wait, you don't know the difference between NOBODY, EVERYBODY, and ONE-SIDE. Never mind.
-
Of course, if YOU think I should "park the CAR and ShUt tHE FUCK uP," well, I really must, mustn't I?I mean, where would we all be if we didn't defer to YOU?Golly, gee whiz, thanks, dude. I will so totally "ShUt tHE FUCK uP" now that YOU've said to.Nobody I want to please more than you, buddy.Yes, sir, Mr. Gay-Ass! Shutting up now.That's me.Nothing more to say.Not a thing.Nope.Nada.That's it.Thanks, Gay-Ass, you're the best!
-
New Zealand?!?! HA, HA! You have no idea do you, Elvis Cole?Wait for it...
-
Mr. Nice Gay-Ass...
-
Waiting (HA, HA!)!
-
(HA, HA!)
-
(HA, HA!)
-
It's a virtue.
-
DocPazuzu is from New Zealand. Follow me so far?Australia is the "land down under." It's a nickname, you see? Still with me?I implied that New Zealand, where Doc's from, is subservient to Australia ("not good enough to be called the land down under").
-
I'm still waiting. Wha?!Or not.Later.
-
Rambo? Braddock? Gump?
-
I thought I told you to ShUt tHE FUCK uP. Hmmm. Oh well.Anyway, my point about you ECL is that you have no point. I've seen some TBers dance around the ol' Semantics Tree in my time, but your display here is starting to take the cake. I mean, if you want to continue making a complete jackass out of yourself with these petulant and overwrought posts, then by all means do carry on. It's obvious I can't stop you.Regarding New Zealand and Australia: yes, I'm quite aware of them, thank you very much. I've never been but I'd love to visit!As for DocPazuzu's "origins", I'll let him address that...should he feel the need to do so. Like I said, wait for it.
-
Non-semantically speaking, you're a fucking idiot. I've made POINT after POINT after POINT after POINT. And I'll make another one - I wouldn't fucking shut up for an asshole like you if it cost me my life. You are a donkey-raping, gangrenous, turd fucker, non-semantically speaking, of course.As for DocPadoodoo's "origins," I won't hold my breath.Padoodoo's "from" New Zealand; that's where he lives and where he calls home. He's said so in TBs on several occasions.So what I'm waiting for is beyond me and certainly beyond you.
-
Shut the fuck up!
-
Keep dancing!
-
I thought I told you to shut the fuck up!
-
1) With the circumstantial "evidence" you produced, I could draw the conclusion that America would have ten times the number of Gitmos and atrocities committed if it weren't for the restraining effect of Stone's movies.
2) The fact that you've "deduced" that I'm from New Zealand from this talkback is really an impressive feat and truly cements your credentials as a master of logic and common sense. Especially since I currently live in a spot which is about as far away from New Zealand as you can get on the planet. -
Don't you just love it when the little fuckers start to self-destruct?
-
I FUCKING LOVE IT!!!
-
The RNC calls a session with the Black Caucus - but it ain't for debatin'!
-
"As far away from New Zealand as you can get," but that doesn't change the fact that you are from New Zealand. Where you are NOW doesn't change where you're from.In fact, I didn't "deduce from this talkback" that you're from New Zealand. You have unequivocally stated in prior talkbacks that you are from New Zealand. In fact, you've explicitly stated that while your fellow New Zealanders for the most part take a dim view of America and Americans that you're a little more understanding, having traveled to or lived in the U.S.Who's "the master of logic and common sense" and who's the employer of "willful ignorance?" You do not now state that you're not from New Zealand. You merely state that you don't currently reside there and try to imply that I've pulled the fact out of my ass by sarcastically impugning my logic and limiting my "deductive" skills to this talkback. As I stated before and as you well know (and choose to willfully ignore), you ARE from NEW ZEALAND and you HAVE said so. No? Please then, for the record, Doc Pazuzu, are you from New Zealand? Have you ever lived in New Zealand and called yourself a New Zealander?As for your "conclusions," my conclusions are drawn on what exists - box office, attendance records, and the fact of a world that EXISTS (Republicans, Iraq, and Guantanamo). Your "conclusions" are drawn from a world that doesn't ("Oh, it could've been ten times as bad without Stone!"). Right!
-
Really? NOT from New Zealand. I didn't say where you currently lived I said "FROM NEW ZEALAND." So I'm waiting...Not self-destructing, you little fucker. Just waiting.
-
Be careful, the guy in the next stall might be a republican
-
Aug 29, 2007 2:17:13 PM CDT
AnimalStructure - How do you talk with a mouthful of
by bringingsexyback
cock?
-
Aug 29, 2007 2:30:05 PM CDT
Piltdown ... like I said, it's understandable but still
by bringingsexyback
not 'justifiable'. Some of you seem keen on equating war with total anarchic chaos. Ever heard of Rule of Engagement? Just because the enemy used women and children as fighters or cover, does NOT justify the killing of ALL women and children. I really don't know how you can put that together and call yourself a civilized human being. Soldiers are - or at least should be - trained to engage the enemy within the rules of engagement. They were violated in the My Lai massacre, and continue to be violated by not only Americans, but soldiers worldwide. However, nothing has made their actions justifiable or legal in any way.
-
Wow, you took that bait about a hundred times more eagerly than I thought you would and delivered another massive treatise on absolutely nothing of weight as a bonus.
I'm not from New Zealand. I have never lived in New Zealand. In fact, I have never even set my foot in New Zealand. Furthermore, I have never claimed to be from or live in New Zealand in any talkback ever in the history of AICN.
So much for your logic and skills of deduction. -
I just finished reading all the postings, and I literally forgot what the movie was about until I went to the previous page. All you guys should just vote Libertarian and be done with it - it's got conservatism AND weed! Best of both worlds!
-
The best thing about you is that you do all the work for me. All I have to do is wind you up and you present all the evidence damning you for the hideous, amoral, human-impersonating homunculus that you are.
What's especially funny is your assertion that I've never engaged left-wingers in debate. Show me one single political talkback in which GingerTwit, Wanananra7, MinasTirithII, Ringwearer9, BladeRunnerUnit and zfisk/homewrecker have taken part where I haven't clashed with them. I also frequently butt heads with BrokeBackCowboy/BringingSexyBack on issues where he clearly represents the leftist view of things, as he no doubt will attest to. -
I get the impression Stone movies are actively communicating to you, but ppl are too busy making up their forum posts or their slamming reviews to listen and engage.
-
Aug 29, 2007 3:14:56 PM CDT
BringingStupidBack, homophobia, and party affiliations
by elvis cole lives
You know, it's funny. The only openly gay member of Congress is a Democrat.I sure as shit didn't see BringingStupidBack calling all Democrats "penis lovers" or "suggesting that if you want your dick sucked to go find a Democrat in a bathroom."As a matter of fact, despite BSB's protestations that it's "ultra-right wingnuts" that are "anti-homosexual," HE seems to be the only one using the acts of male homosexuality (oral sex, etc.) as derogatory and as invectives.None of the "ultra-right" posters here seem to be deriding Larry Craig as a "penis lover" or "faggot." Just seems to be ol' liberally tolerant BSB.Liberally tolerant, by the way, means pseudo-tolerant or just tolerant enough to get your votes, but not actually tolerant enough to not use your sexual proclivities as vile invectives.Now, personally, I'd don't give a shit about personal sex lives of consenting adults unless you get into some illegal shit (like public restroom solicitations and running homosexual prostitution rings from one's house), but the utter GLEE with which BSB tackles the sad and seamy subject of a Senator's travails by flinging BSB's thinly veiled homophobia around is truly disturbing.Listen, BSB, it's okay. Most of us eventually reach an understanding about our sexual natures and, even you, will one day cease your self-loathing and fling that closet door wide open.Until then, try to be a little more tolerant, a little more understanding of how using "penis lover" as invective can hurt the very ones you love. ;-)
-
because they're cliched and boring, for the most part.
The best WWII film was Schindlers List and that didn't even involve Americans.
If people wanted to watch rah-rah go-America movies, then Hollywood would be making them.
Conservatives outnumber liberals by a ration of 3:2 in this country. You'd think if their numbers, combined with the number of people in the middle who don't consider themselves liberal or conservative, could pursuade Hollywood to pump out some non "anti-American" films, they would have done so.
But money doesn't lie, and the money just isn't there for those types of films.
Plus, it's the heel theory of pro wrestling at work. Bad guys are just more interesting than good guys. And a movie where Americans play the bad guys is bound to be more interesting, and thus more entertaining, than the opposite. -
Magic Rat - You mean like those little known movies, Saving Private Ryan and Apollo 13?
-
apparently a pro-american movie is one where americans are getting shot at and anti-american movies are ones where americans are doing the shooting.
-
SPR was a WWII movie, which as has been talked about earlier in this thread, is defacto pro-America since I don't believe there's anybody who disagrees with our involvement in WWII.
Apollo 13 wasn't about war. That's like saying JAWS is a pro-America movie because some Americans conquered a shark. -
Because, you imbecile, BSB is not anti-gay. He's just baiting idiots and irony-deficient tools like you.
-
...aren't you also the guy who once said that there is "no such thing" as a right-wing dictatorship?
Cunt. -
Hey Elvis Cole - remember when I said, "Wait for it."? Maybe you should have had Pike and Sgt. Lou on the case, huh?What a fucking loser.
-
I guess that I'm wrong. I guess that in another talkback (Flight 93? United 93?) under another screen name, you and I never had a lengthy discussion about Bush, the Iraq War, American imperialism, whether the war was about oil, what your fellow countrymen (at the time) thought about the U.S. and why you're not of a similar bent. My mistake.I take back every derogatory thing I said about NZ and the Kiwis. DocPazuzu DOESN'T live there, never has, and, therefore, they've not been tainted. My utmost apologies to any Kiwis I might have offended. Truly, I am sorry.It must have been that OTHER DOCPAZUZU.Nonetheless, DocPazuzu (this one) is a foolish tool. Or a toolish fool. Whatever.
-
I thought I told you to shut the fuck up! HA HA HA HA!Fucking gangrenous ass-wart!
-
How wonderful for him to be able to use derogatory descriptions of homsexuality as invectives since he's "just baiting."Isn't he special?The IRONY is that someone who professes liberal tolerance (there's a fucking oxyMORON for you), uses descriptions of homosexual activity as derision.I guess that's ironic like...Someone from the NAACP calling someone a "nigger" or...Someone from LULAC calling someone a "spic" or...Someone from the Special Olympics calling someone a "retard" or "cripple" or...Someone from the Anti-Defamation League calling someone a "kike."Yes, that IRONY sure is something when you get do EXACTLY what you CLAIM the other side does and get away with it.Woo hoo, you're a fag! You're a fag! Woo hoo, you're a fag! You're a fag!Don't criticize me though. I was being ironic, fag. I love all you cocksuckers!Give me a break!
-
Are non-homosexual house-run prostitution rings legal? If so, got any maps?
-
Pfffftttt.Poor Elvis Cole. Sucks when you've got nothing, eh?
-
I've got actual WORK to do.Shouldn't you be freelance researching or writing?Oh, and shut the fuck up, you absolute half-wit!
-
Fair warning: BSB is not "anti-gay". He just wants to fuck you and your sisters in the ass.
-
Really it's amazing.And, yes, skimn, prostitution is legal in Storey County, Nevada, including
"non-homosexual house-run prostitution rings." Several are run from former houses. Simply search for Storey County on the internet...Or call DocPazuzu's mom at 1-900-DOCPAZU. She'll be glad you did. ;-) -
You are making this so very, very sweet.
-
Good thing that using homosexuality as derisive invective ain't "anti-gay," you cocksucking, assfucking, jizzdrinking, lil' faggot! Or I'd be worried about saying that.
-
Did you see that little Give-n-Go I just passed you? Run with it, lad!!!
-
Tell your mom I'll be bringing some friends over to see her this weekend, including the decidedly NOT ANTI-GAY BSB.And, don't worry, they all know to bring the usual chicken in payment.
-
Are you splooging on your lil' assfucking friend there?Does he like to drink all your man-goo when you "pass" it to the lad?Does he run around like a little girl and squeal with delight?Speaking of which, if any of you want DocPazuzu's mom to run around and squeal with delight, she charges extra.You gots to brings her some additional poultry.
-
Quote: "gangrenous ass-wart"Yeah. 'Nuff said, loser.
-
Aug 29, 2007 4:27:52 PM CDT
Can't believe I've blown off an entire day to do this
by elvis cole lives
Which, coincidentally, is how Mr. Nice Gay-Ass spends every day - BLOWING OFF!The countdown to smackdown from AICN is well underway!The countdown to Doc's mom is "mediocre under lay."
-
Talkbacker Meltdown has commenced.Elvis Cole - your idiocy has guaranteed that this TB will be bronzed, time-capsuled, and archived. Thanks!
-
And, by the way, if anybody would know when "it sucks when you've got nothing," it would be you.BSB was regaling us recently with tales of your...Well, whatever, what really counts is that he DOES love when you're "givin' the goo!" Really your size shouldn't matter. It's true love that counts.
-
out of his ass, then maybe we can understand his logic.
-
Of course, despite what you may see between your legs, don't sell yourself short.You've certainly played no SMALL PART in the festivities.As BSB gleefully giggles while gobbling goo, thank you, Gay-Ass! Thank you!
-
...have nothing to learn from war and mistakes. I mean come on war is for killing people who cares if it is innocent people.
In fact I don't give a fuck about anyone who died on 911, it was just the beginning of a war so oops oh well thats the way it goes.
Isn't my logic great? -
Checking out a book to some sad sack or lining up some more clients for your mom?And though we miss your repartee,We'll screw your mom all though the day.This has GOT to be ending soon.
-
Thanks for the tip if I'm ever in Nevada. I just thought it was very specific for you to state "running homosexual prostitution rings from one's house", in your non anti-gay defense,
-
Barney Frank (Democrat and the only openly homosexual member of Congress) had a "relationship" with a male prostitute (Steve Gobie) who ran, wait for it (as Gay-Ass, might say) --- a homosexual prostitution ring out of the congressman's Washington flat.Supposedly, Frank knew NOTHING about the prostitution ring, though he DID know that Gobie was a prostitute and DID pay him for sex and DID subsequently have a relationship with him and DID hire him as a "personal assistant" and DID fix parking tickets for him.Somehow, though, he had NO IDEA that a male prostitution ring was being run out of his own apartment. I mean, really, who would've suspected that anything like that was going on?So, as I said, I got no problem with the private sexual proclivities of individuals, but when those proclivities cross into illegal (those two examples where Congressional homosexuality and illegality crossed came to mind) then I must protest.
-
I think Elvis Cole's meltdown is the most exquisite talkbacker self-destruction I have ever witnessed here on AICN. Reading the first posts where his tightly wound stabs at logic and amateurish rhetoric are on hardcore mode and then enjoying his subsequent descent and unraveling to the point of mom insults after a few pokes with a stick is fucking hilarious.
I'm so very glad I was here for this one. -
Who tries to take the high road after devolving to "cunt" and "tool" and "hideous, amoral, human-impersonating homunculus."But no, no, I'm sure that Doc just mistyped those slurs...What he really meant was something else entirely.Or we're being purposefully obtuse...Or....oh, I know, maybe I'm being "nitpicky" when I point out the de-evolution of his rhetoric.Yes, I'm melting down. You answer nothing. Respond to nothing. Throw out "nitpick" and "willfully obtuse." Ignore most. Feign aloofness (when it's really ignorant "doof-ness") and I'm melting down. Whatever you say there, you sad, silly, little excuse for a human.Amateurish rhetoric? Oh, you sound so very smart for a librarian! Go actually read a book. Your ability to sway with words, at least in this talkback, is very fucking silly and sad.No?
-
BSB's not anti-gay; he's just baiting you with homosexual slurs! You're the very height of intellectual prowess, Doc.Gather round all! Gather close! Look behind the curtain and gaze...Gaze...Gaze...At the marvelous mystery of the man with half-a-brain - DOCPAZUZU!
-
No.
See, I used "cunt" and "tool" and "hideous, amoral, human-impersonating homunculus" in a way which was in keeping with my normal talkback persona. There was no devolving from a pretentious position to begin with, unlike in your case. Besides, I'm still miles above you on that particular scale since I have yet to berate someone for using perfectly good English words or trying (poorly) to insult them by saying that I'm going to meet their mothers this weekend for sex. Also, I have yet to employ fecal or sexual terminology while distorting their online handles for a "comedic" effect.
See how that works? -
Allow me to call you to class once more, Elvis. As much as I dislike BSB, if there's anything he's not, it's anti-gay. This knowledge comes from extensive reading and participation in these boards. This is what makes my take on his remarks more relevant than yours. Again, this is where your wilful ignorance comes into play. His remarks gall you so much that you'd rather accuse him of being anti-gay than taking them for the right-wing nutjob bait they are, or, indeed, simply ignoring them. The more you call him anti-gay, the more ignorant and pathetic you make yourself sound.
Hope this helps. -
...AnimalStructure/Thunderballs once insisted that he knew George Clooney was gay.
Uh-huh. -
Imagine what images Kubrick could've created if he lived to delve into the digital magicbox. And not to remove genitalia from orgy scenes either.
-
"Cunt" and "tool" and "hideous, amoral, human-impersonating homunculus" are "miles above" "berating someone for using perfectly good English words or trying (poorly) to insult them by saying that I'm going to meet their mothers this weekend for sex."(Of course, WE know that you meet FATHERS for weekend sex. Don't criticize me for saying that, though - I'm PRO-GAY.)Anything YOU say or do, including when you mistype and are unclear is perfectly all right and normal and "miles above" anyone else.Also, "cunt" and "tool" and "hideous, amoral, human-impersonating homunculus" are "miles above" fecal or sexual terminology while distorting their online handles for a "comedic" effect (because "cunt" or "tool" is, of course, NOT sexual terminology because of some ridiculous arcane shit that you're going to make up).Yes, yes, we KNOW, DickFordoodoo, that you're "miles above."Shit, we even know that whether your intimate personal knowledge of BSB pro-gay stances makes it perfectly acceptable, not hypocritical in the least for you or him (being the staunch pro-gay that you are).BSB's remarks do not gall me.They ARE anti-gay. HE IS USING HOMOSEXUAL TERMINOLOGY AS INVECTIVE. THAT IS ANTI-GAY.Go ask ANY GAY PERSON, you fucktard.He may NOT "BE" "anti-gay" -- but he sures throws homosexual invectives around with the best of the "anti-gays."
-
It is not "okay" to call people "niggers" even if you're "pro-African-American." It denigrates African-Americans.It is not "okay" to call people "spics" even if you're "pro-Mexican-American." It denigrates Hispanic-Americans.It is not "okay" to call people "kikes" even if you're "pro-Jew." It denigrates Jewish-Americans.It is not "okay" to call people "fags" or "penis lovers" even if you're "pro-gay." It denigrates homosexuals.But I guess DickFordoodoo will rhetorically twist some shit around where we're all beneath him and BSB.
-
What I hope you have learned from today's lesson is that having a passing knowledge of the terms "sophistry" and "straw man" isn't quite enough to dominate a debate, despite what they told you in that remedial course in fundamental rhetoric - nor is saying things to the effect of "Ha! You are now employing (insert relevant rhetorical term here), but without sufficient (insert relevant rhetorical term here) in order to back it up, thus your argument is nothing but (insert relevant rhetorical term here)!" All this does is simply expose you for the amateur you are, as well as present a number of juicy opportunities for the intellectual equivalent of a swift kick to the nuts.
Love,
Doc
-
Go fuck yourself and take your "love" and shove it up BSB's ass, where you and he can call each other "faggot" while being "pro-gay!"Yes, I'm the amateur.I criticize others for using "sexual terminology" while using "cunt" and "tool" myself. I then ignore my own rampant idiocy and pretend I've won the argument!Yay, I'm DocPazuzu, mastur-(de)-bater!Hate,Elvis Cole LivesP.S. You couldn't "school" a group of fish, you ignorant twat!
-
That shit was excellent! And weird as shit. I'm grinning from ear to ear. Who is Ringy? Must say, that was original as hell!
-
Progress of sorts, I suppose.
-
For him.
-
I haven't seen a combo TBer Meltdown/ass-kicking since the not-so-distant days of Tegujai Batir. You gotta love it.
-
My God, you people have to stop. Conversations that lengthn as they deepen are one thing; "conversations" that mutate their probably somewhat well-adjusted and of at least average intelligence into twelve-hour long spite-fests of no consequence are stunningly pathetic. You'll be dead, in all likelihood, within 60 years. Try to elevate the minutes of your life into something useful, or, at the very least, non-vitriolic. Or bite the head off a fork and swallow- that works, too. Liberal fury-fetishists and smarmy conservative ego-maniacs alike. I'm bored; bye.
-
What's up you crazy bastard?I don't know that it's such a good idea invoking the zfisk/homewrecker conspiracy in this TB. It might destroy what's left of someone's already fragile mind.As for Ringy...yeah. Heh.
-
If the headline read "Stallone Heads Back to Nam with Bruce in Tow", THAT would have had me interested.
-
Aug 29, 2007 10:45:05 PM CDT
SO ELVIS COLE AND ANIMALSTRUCTURE ARE GAY ACTIVISTS NOW
by bringingsexyback
I'm sure the GLBT contingent is celebrating your induction to the Left. If only Larry Craig, Marc Foley, Karl Rove and Jeff Gannon would just admit their homosexuality, and not hypocritically bash others who are at least honest about it, you wouldn't have to sacrifice so much for the cause.
Elvis, I do want to point out one particular lie you've been repeating. If you scroll up and read my posts, you won't find me ever saying "fag" or "faggot". Those are slurs that are best left unsaid. But your defense of homosexuality is honorable, not to mention heart-warming. Welcome to the Left.
DocPaz, I dislike you too. Thanks for the backup. And thanks to MNG as well, my new BFF.
-
'Cause I wanted to write it! :P
-
Okay enough already. Elvis, Doc, and Gaius, having watched most of this from the sidelines I can safely say that no one NO ONE owned anyone else during any of this. You guys keep going over the same crap, all three of you, over and over again in some new and not so inventive ways.
Bottomline, you three will never agree about any of this and it's gone way past debate and deeply into the realm of useless flame war from both sides.
The Nutsack says STFU all three of you, and the Nutsack expects to be obeyed or he will teabag the lot of you, even if you're way down in New Zealand...or not. -
The Nutsack demands you also STFU or you will get a mouthful of his Hairy goodness.
-
...fuck you all, I'm off to Dragon Con early tomorrow morning, which makes me 50% more manly than all of you and at least 150% cooler.
Or was that 50% less manly and 150% more nerdy? I always get those confused. -
Not if your a rational, socially functioning human being. One, no young boys walked into that village. Men did. You know, post pubescent. Two, I completely fail to see a situation in which raping a baby can be construed as self defense. They didn't fear for their lives from bomb strapped elderly people. They may have been angered that the civilian populace opposed their invasion, as any right thinking populace would, but they raped and murdered for the fucking fun of it. Thats all. The same way kids put cats in microwaves or bored rednecks drag homeless blacks behind pick ups. The reason Stone may take the Congs POV, is because they were in the right. Sure, they were mostly backwards dickheads, but they were defending their homes from violent thugs sent to colonise them, just as they had time and again before that.
-
I don't think anyone other than Elvis Cole claimed to "own" (or "schooled" as he put it). The glory of this Talkback was watching him have a complete breakdown for practically no reason whatsoever. (There is definitely a distinction there.) And if you scroll back up, you'll find that I said exactly the same thing you did in my first post.Anyway, how have you been you Hairy? Have fun at the Dragon-Con you hairy bastard! Oh, and whatever happened to your TRANSFORMERS video?!
-
He did it in PLatoon. Now he's just repeating himself. Probably because his Alexander the great film flopped. Of all the stories and events to tell in Vietnam, why one that he already told in allegory? And other films did as well such as Casualties of War. How many times is Hollywood going to flog My Lai? I guess Stone wants to win a prize at Cannes again, that's the only reason for him to make this.
-
Did you lose part of your brain when you switched your name over from "Thunderballs"? DocPazuzu never outright claimed that he "won" or "owned" anybody. However, "above the fray" and "morally superior", you say? Sure. Cause he certainly stayed more relevant than Elvis Cole who couldn't help but continue his downward spiral into depravity.Wow. Your abortion comments are REALLY a class act, too. Seriously. It's right up there with Elvis's "your mom is a prostitute" jokes. Way to go, buddy. These ridiculous attacks of your's on Doc's character couldn't be more desperate or incorrect.As a matter of fact, it appears that the only thing you got right was the notion that Elvis Cole was "spinning his wheels" yesterday. I couldn't agree more, as my first post will attest.Now, I know you were trying to get one more jab in before this TB falls off the top-list. But is there anymore hackery you want to put on display for us?
-
First of all (and correct me if I'm wrong) have we EVER discussed politics on AICN? Directly? You and me? Nevermind, I'll answer that for you:NO.You don't know jack-shit about my politics as evidenced by your complete ignorance of my indifference towards BringingSexyBack. BSB and I have had more than our fair share of Flame Wars. They've ranged from global politics to 9-11 conspiracy theories. The fact that I didn't address his remarks has nothing to do with politics or with any alleged homophobia (no matter how you and ECL try to nuance it). It has everything to do with realizing that he was using a rhetorical insult aimed simply at the heart of your Right-wing nutjob sensibilities. (Or in layman's terms: all of your hero Republican Senators love touching cock.) Knowing that you're a Right-wing war-monger, I have no problem with him stoking your pathetic little fire. Besides, my issue wasn't with him, it was with you and ECL. So, I hope you will excuse me while I issue forth a tremendous gut-laugh at your unbelievable idiocy in all these matters.And now we come to it, the place where you start scraping the bottom of the barrel = your insistance that Liberals somehow "hate America" is perhaps the most insidious thing you've said in a series of offense remarks in this and other TBs. AnimalStructure, in all seriousness, you should be ashamed of yourself.
-
...calling someone a "cunt" is one thing. Resorting to "abortion jokes" or "your momma's a prostitute jokes" shows that...YOU'VE. GOT. NOTHING.
-
"The Left" does not demonize gay and black republicans. I have no serious qualms with, say, the Log Cabin Republicans (gay group) other than some basic ideological right vs. left issues. Mostly though, I lean towards the center on most issues. I and other "Lefties" have a problem with hypocrites like Larry Craig, Teg Haggard, and Marc Foley, who actively and publicly denounce homosexuality while secretly indulging in homosexual behavior. They openly denigrate homosexuals while taking cock up their asses. You don't think that's something to mock? Well, I do. It's as mock-worthy as almost anything the Right-Wing does. As much as I appreciate MNG's defense, he shouldn't even have to waste time doing it. The intent in my posts are self-evident. Too bad you and Elvis col are too dense to see it.
-
He was treated like shit and ostracized by other officers. The Army pissed all over him, just like they did to the whistleblower from Abu Ghraib. I find it funny how American neo-Nazis still cry in their beer because Jane Fonda got her picture taken in N. Vietnam, but they whine like little bitches if someone brings up My Lai. For right-wing war whores, William Calley is OK but "OMFG Jane Fonda is teh E\/ul!"
-
...the only difference between your statements about what I've said in the past and your statements about me is that my claims are actually true and easy to verify since you were never banned as Thunderballs. However, since I've never been banned either, perhaps you could tell us how to find proof that you and I have ever discussed the civil rights movement and Chuck Heston?
No?
Oh, well maybe it's because it never took place?
The fact remains that you think:
1) Genocide is acceptable.
2) That George Bush is a liberal.
3) That there is "no such thing" as a right-wing dictatorship.
4) That Milosevic was "just trying to save his country from Muslim invaders".
You are, in short, the absolute scum of of the Earth, keeping good company with Nazis, Fascists, Communists, religious zealots, child molesters and racists of any stripe.
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 419 total posts 209 posts
- WTF HOLLYWOOD: SOLARBABIES -- 131 total posts 129 posts
- Herc’s Seen Tonight’s Return Of THE WALKING DEAD!! Discuss Also DOWNTON ABBEY, FEAR FACTOR, PAN AM, ONCE, SIMPSONS, DYNAMITE, LUCK, SHAMELESS, BAIT CAR, THE GRAMMYS And More!! Sunday Is Sweeps Day 11!! -- 123 total posts 122 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 124 total posts 58 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 191 total posts 47 posts
- Avid Comic Reader Hercules Does Battle With Tedium During Kevin Smith’s COMIC BOOK MEN! -- 43 total posts 43 posts
- If the Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day drops her pen, pick it up, but don’t look at her legs or else it will be on your record. -- 60 total posts 42 posts
- I am The Behind the Scenes Pics of the Day! No, I’m the Behind the Scenes Pic of the Day! -- 27 total posts 27 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 506 total posts 26 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 77 total posts 24 posts