Cool News
Capone With...Well...Robert Redford!!
Hey everyone. Capone in Chicago here.
When they tell you that you have an opportunity to sit down with Robert Redford, you just say yes. The man founded the Sundance Film Festival, and has starred in and directed some of the finest films ever made. You just say yes. You don't care if the roundtable numbers rival the size of a small European nation (they didn't, in this case, but it easily could have depending on how they divided the number the requests for interviews). He directs and co-stars in a thought-provoking little film called LIONS FOR LAMBS, and rather than me extolling the artistic and political merits of the film, I'll allow Mr. Redford to do that for me (or you can read my review on Friday). But the one thing I know for sure, no two interviews with Redford on this or any other subject will be the same. The man loves to talk, and he's clearly enjoying this press tour when, as a rule, he tends to loathe them. This is a film designed to provoke and instigate conversation, with Redford usually taking the lead.
Enjoy…
Question: Films and the film-going audience have both changed a lot since you first began producing and directing. Are you concerned that you might just be speaking to the choir here? How do you get around that or does that even concern you at all?
Robert Redford: Well, I imagined that I would be speaking to some kind of choir. How big it would be, I didn't know. The country has become so polarized, quite frankly, but in terms of that polarization, I don't know how great of a division there is in regards to how many people are here and how many are over there. I know who is extremely over there, and I think that it is so far gone over there that I don't concern myself with them. Where other people are is something that I really don't know. I certainly know who I am and the kind of films that I like to make and the way that I like to make them, which is to not to deliver propaganda with a ribbon tied around it and the answers all fixed. I prefer ending more with a question that can involve the audience and let them think about how they feel about the issues that are being brought up.
I don't know [how audiences will react], but I think I know what will be pretty predictable--pathetically predictable--and that would be the people in charge of the Swift Boat stories or Sinclair Oil or that institute that wealthy guy has in Pittsburgh. You know where they are going to go and it will be predictable because they will have decided already--in fact, that has already happened on their blogs. They have already decided without seeing it, and I expected that. On the other front, I would think, or I would hope, that there are a lot of people out there who, if they saw the film, would think that the film is speaking to how they feel. What is education going to do? What are young people in school going to do? What are they going to demand of their leaders who have sunk to such a low that there is no moral framework anymore. Whatever the film is doing on the front, I hope that people can relate or identify with it.
Then there is the other side--does it provoke enough thought to maybe activate you in some way? It doesn't have to be this or that but in some way, more than what you are doing now. I do believe that is what is needed in America right now…I think young people have to act and have to express a certain rage. They need to be raging against the machine because their future should be more in their hands than in the hands of the leaders we now have that are destroying them. That is what I hope but I don't know. In a way, that is the reason I'm here.
I don't like press junkets--I think they are boring and awful. They are no fun for you and no fun for me, and they spend a lot of money that I would rather them give to another filmmaker. I went to the studio and said "Look, I don't like going to a hotel in New York or L.A. and have a bunch of four-minute sound-bite interviews--I think that is just bullshit." I'd like to go out in a situation where I can have some interaction with people to hear their thoughts. I wanted to go to four major areas in the country with a lot of schools and have screenings for students [which Redford did the night before our interview] and submit ourselves to interactivity. That, to me, would be a lot more interesting because you aren't bulldozing the audience or hammering them over the head.
That is also good for the filmmaker because I am making the film in the dark on certain assumptions of my own and certain observations of my own. I don't know this country well enough to know how it will be perceived. Is it true that the younger generation today is more apathetic and cynical? I know that has been the held opinion for about 10 years, but I don't know how accurate it is. I'm not so sure that the pendulum that has been swinging one way isn't about to swing back into more activism even without a draft. I think that if there had been a draft, this administration would have been toast a long time ago.
That is why there hasn't been a draft, and that is why you have security contractors like Blackwater around. In fact, there are young people who are tired of these choices and want to have more involvement. There are a lot of things they can do, a whole lot of community activities, and the film even suggests one--do away with your junior year and use it to get out in the streets and find out who's who and what's what. The film attempts to throw some things out there to be thought about, but it doesn't say you have to do that. I guess that to answer your question, I don't really know what the climate is, but in a small way, this is my chance to find out.
Q: What have the reactions been at the Q&As?
RR: Good. I don't want to black cat myself here, but they have been electric. The University of Chicago is a very smart school, and so you expect a certain amount of intellectual jousting, but what has interested me are the similarities, the fact the people were interested enough to talk about it. There was a kid at Berkeley who said "You know, it's not like we apathetic. Apathy is out there and cynicism is out there" You couldn't be faulted for being cynical. He said "I'm ready and I'm energized. I want to do something but I just don't know where to go or where to put it." If I were a politician, I would be looking at that.
In Chicago, there were questions about working with Tom and Scientology. I said that I didn't care about that unless he tried to recruit me right in the middle of a scene. That has no meaning for me whatsoever. I was happy to work with Tom because he wanted to step into some new territory and because he had these wonderful characteristics to play this very dangerous guy. His character just addressed a version of what we now have, but he has the all-American look and intensity and energy--all the things that Tom actually has as a performer and I thought they would work very well for charming an older woman reporter. Last night, that question got shot down by other students. There were some other deep, heavy questions. There was one that went on for so long that I had to ask if it was a question or a statement because it was so intense and had so many parts to it. That is what is so interesting about this school.
Years ago, I was asked to come here for some kind of award and I felt somewhat uncomfortable. I said "Look, I'd like to bring something." I wanted to bring the film I was almost finished with, which was QUIZ SHOW, and they thought that was a great idea. In the film, which is about a quiz show and a scandal involving the Van Doren family and these sleazy producers that represent the merchant mentality of show business who are trying to convince him to go on the show. He is presented with the apple from the Garden of Eden and he is tempted but they are just leaning on him. They are hardly letting him breathe and finally, he starts to shake his head and says "I'm just trying to imagine what Kant would make of this" and the answer to that is when the producer says, "I don't think he'd have any problem with it." That was the punch line, that was the joke. We screened that and the minute he said "I'm trying to imagine what Kant would make of this," the place broke into a roar of laughter and they never heard the punchline.
Last night, I didn't know what to expect of younger people and what they are feeling and what I guess I was excited about was how active their minds really are and how I sensed that they really want to become involved and do something. Their egos want it--to do something that makes a difference. I think the thing that brought the strongest response and made me feel good was when someone asked if I thought that teachers really made a difference, and I said that I do and that I didn't think it takes 10 or 12 of them--you just need one or two to make a difference in your life if they come at the right time. With me, that happened in the third grade and again in college. I wasn't doing well and I wasn't interested in the rituals and the way they were being presented.
My mind was always wandering because I always wanted to be out in the world and getting my education through experience. A teacher saw this--at that time, I wanted to be an artist--and recognized it and said "Look, you are wasting your time here. Why make yourself miserable and have the school kick you out for not being able to make it?" That was the kick. I was feeling guilty because I worked hard to earn the tuition to go, and I was feeling guilty about squandering it.
I was saying to the students that the thing that is really important is for teachers to really recognize students instead of treating them as a faceless bunch, to really engage with students and say that this person is this person and that person is that person and let that person feel it. If a teacher can communicate that and support that, even if they drive you up against the wall, you are still being recognized, and I think that makes a big difference and that is what I think a lot of the students last night felt. The section of the film where I am with the student is very much about that. I'm feeling, "What good am I and what good am I accomplishing?" and yet, to recognize potential. . . I'm saying to this kid that I see you and do you really want to go this way? If you do, that's fine, and it is your choice, but the idea of that teacher recognizing that kid is what affects the kid. The kid is trying to defend himself but he is still beginning to feel that this teacher cares.
CAPONE: I wanted to go back to something you said before about the student who said that they had the motivation but didn't know what to do with it. A lot of us here saw the film CHICAGO 10 a couple days before we saw your film, and now you are here in Chicago, where students were willing to get their heads busted in 1968 as part of a protest. They had something resembling leadership at that time. Is that the problem? I've certainly thought about young people and their response or non-response to the war that there is no one to rally or organize them like that group had in Chicago in 1968 today, and there hasn't even been a singular event where they could all gather like that.
RR: That is because of a number of factors. By the way, we opened CHICAGO 10 at our festival this year. I felt it was the kind of film that should open Sundance because it was the kind of film that we support and also because I thought he was doing something new and might be a signal of what is coming in the future. He had live footage that he drew from about 200 different pieces of film, including actual stuff with Abbie Hoffman and Tom Hayden. Then when they went into court, where the real drama for their particular characters was, there were no cameras allowed, and so they took the transcripts and animated them. I thought that was really inventive and interesting--the blending of animation and documentary was new territory and that was why we showed it at the festival.
I think that it was the draft that galvanized and motivated people then. I think it was the time and I think history is this pendulum swing. The Fifties, which is when I grew up during my teenage years, was this dead zone, and it made me crazy. I was rebelling against was this too-perfect situation, which was dead to me by being so perfect. Nobody was worried about anything. We had just come out of the war and we were rebuilding our infrastructure, and it felt like there was no air. Then the pendulum moved and it was a new time and a new era and the draft is what galvanized it. There was also the music and a lot of drugs, freedoms were being exercised. This time is just as bad. In fact, I think it is worse in terms of what the leadership is doing to this country even though there is no draft.
Secondly, the climate has so changed--even the film business has completely changed since the time that I started. The studios aren't studios anymore, they are just clearinghouses that distribute films that other people finance. These other people are tricky because they are people who don't know films--they made their money with dot.com companies or hedge funds, and they want to rub up against the movie business because they have $25 million they can throw away. It is very complicated and the studios are only interested in distributing and making their money from that. They aren't invested in the way that they were. The same thing goes across the country in terms of young people. There are so many options out there but there is so much noise because the Information Age has so completely taken over.
I think those are the factors, but if something came up, it would be just like global warming. I've been involved with the environment since 1969, when I first became politically active, and I would just get hammered for years as being a nutcase or a tree-hugger or what have you. You are out there pretty much alone for a number of years and as time went on, you would struggle and fight and get knocked back by the oil and gas companies. We had a global warming conference at Sundance in 1989, and no one heard about it because it just wasn't the right time. Now, suddenly Wall Street realizes that there is money to be made by going green, and people can see the evidence in their own backyards and are saying "Oh, we'd better do something."
The tipping point has been reached, and it has moved fast in the last couple of years. I have a hunch, and you guys might know better than I do, but there is a feeling that I get that young people are ready to go, and it is just a matter of time before they find that thing and the film tries to encourage that.
Q: The thing that stuck me most immediately about LIONS FOR LAMBS when I watched it was the immediacy of its style. The majority of your previous directorial efforts have moved at a slow and measured pace, while this one is short and right to the point. Obviously, part of that is born out of the material because of the various short time frames and the fact that most of the scenes involve only a couple of people within the confines of a limited space.
RR: There is only one other film that I have done that had a pace similar to this and that was QUIZ SHOW. It has to do with the nature of the subject. A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT, for example, was a whole other kind of film--it took place in 1910, when life was more leisurely, in rural America with a river and water.
In THE HORSE WHISPERER, you are out west in the wide open spaces where life is slowed down. Here, what I did with the script was realize that it needed a velocity added to this and that it should all take place during an hour in which all three stories are occurring at the same time--just that alone will speed things up. I was very concerned when I first got involved and read the script that it was just talking heads in a room.
Where show business is, with a high pace and a lot of visceral and muscular action, this has words, which the studios usually consider to be death to a film. My objective for this film was that I didn't want to give up those words because they were important, but they were only fodder for the patterns of behavior that we can recognize.
I felt that this thing had to travel at a very fast pace because our time is running out. Look at what we have lost in six years and think how bad things can deteriorate in such a short time that is only getting shorter as time goes on. The idea of suggesting symbolically that time is running out for everybody--the professor, the students making choices, the reporter trying to get a story when she realizes just how dangerous what it is that this guy is planning to do and realizing that she can't write it because her editor just wants the scoop. This creates a tension and urgency.
This was the toughest film that I have ever had to edit because we had to put three stories together in such a way that none of them would flag or drop. I felt that the film had to travel so fast and provoke audiences into spending some time thinking about it because it is packed with ideas and packed with issues.
Everyone's point of view on the issues is represented, whether you like it or not. Tom Cruise's character does have a couple of points where the reporter says "Don't you think it is important to figure out how we got here?" and he says no, we don't have time. He says, "Okay, let's play it your way and bring the soldiers home: The Taliban metastasizes and becomes worse." Well, when we shot that scene, they hadn't but now they have. These issues are rolling around out there, but what sits underneath them? What is the condition that creates them? If that had been presented slowly and in a calmer way, I don't know if it would have the same impact.
Capone
-
+ Expand All
-
I give Redford mad props.
-
Though a little short. Still, I'll take a short but thoughtful interview over a long one of little to no substance.
-
About 15 years ago Redford would have been the perfect choice for Watchmen. You know its true!
-
Admittedly I haven't seen this yet, but it looks like another "America BAD!"-type film. Gotta love how Bush-hatred generates such golden quotes like, "They need to be raging against the machine because their future should be more in their hands than in the hands of the leaders we now have that are destroying them." LOL. Oh, Bobby...the 60's are over, man. In your mind, Bushco McCheneyburton is more evil than fanatics who blow themselves up to kill as many as possible (including WOMEN AND CHILDREN, Bobby!) and think they're getting 72 virgins for it. LOL Hollywood.
-
reviews have been awful. It's a talk fest yawner. Redford should have done Sneakers II.
-
Legend in his own time, perhaps. I'll give ya that.
-
And you know it.
-
Why does everybody think that your garden variety left-leaning Hollywood type must also be a closet Jihadist with a soft spot for "poor, disenfranchised freedom fighters"? Isn't it conceivable that someone might want to win the War on Terror (whatever that might mean) and also be critical of the government at the same time? The trailer certainly seems to suggest that Redford's beef is with yes/no, black/white debates rather than any particular policies.
-
point of view but have you been to Venezuela lately? How's socialism(dictatorship) working out down there? I hear the rich left(talent,job creating entrepreneurs)are leaving in droves(brain drain) for Brazil and Miami.America has a shitload of problems and the current regime is a total disaster but turning commie isn't my idea of an improvement.
-
You think your country can win the "War on Terror"? I hate these bastards too but you can not be that stupid. You can never destroy terrorism. Kill one, get 100 new one.
-
I give credit where credit is due.
-
Well, Robbie, just wait to see the box office on your little opus... That will let ya know.
-
I agree with him. We should give up now and either chop off our own heads or adopt sharia law.
-
Nov 06, 2007 1:37:34 PM CST
Q: Why did Robert Redford jerk off in a jar of Paul Newman's Spa
by rev_skarekroe
A: He's known Paul Newman for 40 years, he's not going to jerk off into the competitor's brand!
-
Just let us make the headlines as long as we want again, dammit.
-
ASS FUCKABLE!
-
let us hear these interviews instead of reading them.... saves all of us time. (unless you love transcribing)
-
The rest we can work out over beer and Jennifer Connelly pictures.
-
For starters, this isn't a reaction to the movie but to the interview. Redford has no answers and I don't think he wants to. He complains about how bad things are now, then complains how boring everything was when things were good in the fifties. I'm no fan of the Iraq war, but no political party is completely innocent. Bush and the Republicans started it and the Democrats let it happen. If the right-wing Republicans are war mongerers, then the left-wing Democrats are cowards, equally dangerous and by Redford's own indirect admission since he seems to think that apathy and inaction is bad. Why didn't anyone have the guts to ask Redford if he would have preferred there to be a draft? He talked so much about it -- mentioned it would have meant the end of the administration he hates so much -- so why not ask him if he wishes there had been one? If he said no, it would call into question just how badly he wants this administration gone. If he said yes, then it would have signaled that, to him, the ends justify the means and I would hardly call that the perfect American-left-wing philosophy. Given the means was always to end terrorism and take out a violent dictator -- which, by the way, is what Democrats and liberals have wanted to do in Africa for decades - it would be a justification for what's going on now. As for action, the kind of action Redford seems to be promoting has been going on since before the war began, and what's come of it? Protest after protest, in Washington, on Bush's ranch in Crawford, anywhere there's a liberal or left-leaning moderate, and... what? That's the sort of hippie bullshit that actually contributed to Bush's re-election in 2004. I think people looked at the ballot and asked themselves whether a war overseas and at least a steady economy was worse than being ruled by a Democratic party whose biggest mouthpieces were people like Michael Moore leading his slacker uprising. Do you really think that anyone that actually works for a living and pays their bills wants to be represented by a party whose highest ideals are preached by self-proclaimed slackers -- not just in movies but at candidate conventions? As for rights being stripped away -- what rights? Privacy? Like hell... any American with a credit card and an Internet connection gave up their privacy the minute they applied. People post all sorts of disgusting, private information online, on MySpace and blogs, all the time, but when it seems like the government is going to take a concerted interest in the name of national security, then uh-oh, here come the Nazis. Bottom line, at least the right-wing is consistent. It doesn't mean their leadership is always the best or even halfway decent, but if there's hypocrisy there, they at least know how to manage it and keep it from completely destroying their credibility and threatening the votes in their own party. The left has a guy like Redford referencing drugs as if they were a positive, galvanizing force for the ACTION taken in the sixties, but then has groups like the ones making the TRUTH ads villifying corporations for making cigarettes -- but, interestingly, never do the ads say, "Don't smoke." No, if you smoke, it's not YOUR responsibility, it's the corporations.' I guarantee that most conservatives that even know about this are sitting back and thinking, well, if the left want to go back out there with gaudy signs and foul language to "protest," more power to them -- they'll desroy the credibility of their own party and we'll have another Republican administration in 2008. 'Not like a Democratic majority in the House has changed anything, and if the "galvanized" left doesn't vote Democrat, they don't have a candidate with a chance of winning.
-
http://www.superherohype.com/news/topnews.php?id=6496 TAKE OUT THE SPACES! IM NOT READING IT EITHER! LALALALALA!
-
that was cool. Well said.
-
Redford, you're a Grade-A liberal douchebag and the American people aren't buying your drivel. Movie receipts are in the dumper as no one wants to go the movies and see your movie or any of the other Hollywood anti-American hit jobs that have been rolled out so far.
There are meds available for your Bush derangement syndrome (BDS). -
What a tool.
-
He's one of them. Even if he wasn't in some of the greatest movies of all time he would still be the man who started Sundance.
-
Without seeing it.
Boring.
Yawn. -
So why would I need to pay to go see the movie?
-
They are so fucking bad. Kids do not care that tobacco companies lied in the 50's. Big business has more money and smarter people to cover up their lies, and the only lies we know about are the ones they let us know about. The only commercials that work are people coming on TV and saying, "I'm 26 and I have cancer cause I smoke, here is an X-RAY of my lungs". That scares the shit out of kids, but instead that goofy black guy is going around doing dumbass PUNK'd pranks in front of buildings. fucking waste.
-
Nov 06, 2007 4:28:09 PM CST
Wow, if talkbackers are in any way representative of public opin
by bob x
then America is fucked. True Democrats these days are cowards, like farmers on Tatooine, when they should be more like the rebellion. But they're not the ones FUCKING EVERYTHING UP and destroying America from the inside while making it the most hated country in the world and doing more damage than terrorists could ever hope to. Shouldn't people be attacking the fucking Empire instead??!! It's a sad state of affairs when the only guy I agree with in this thread is a huge dick who should have been banned ages ago.
-
Right after 9/11. That would have given warmongering right-wingers pause about initiating ill-equipped missions to nowhere, lazy hippie liberals some sense of duty and patriotism, and terrorists second thoughts about attacking a militarily-trained citizenship with freakin' box cutters.
-
Redford's right that there should have been a draft.
-
enjoying getting crispy in hell.
-
Even your liberal friends in the media are panning your movie. This moveon.org tripe is currently sitting at certified rotten at 33-percent favorable right now at Rotten Tomatoes.
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lions_for_lambs/ -
Morons.
-
Thanks for the laugh, Bob, assuming I'm actually the one you refer to since you did practically quote what I said about Democrats. Side with the ones that slam the right for, among other things, supposedly taking away freedoms and then declare one of the first allegedly conservative talkbackers on the board (or at least the most verbose) to be someone that should have already been banned. Personally, I think we Americans have it so good on a day to day basis regardless of the war or even an economic slump (which doesn't exist right now) -- compared to a lot of other nations -- that we don't really know what bad is -- any more than we know what real Fascism or Communism is because if we did we woudn't see as much difference between the two. Don't take my word for it -- read the heroic humanitarian George Orwell: http://orwell.ru/library/articles/As_I_Please/english/efasc. We die of cancer because WE smoke. We feel repressed because we try to ban each other and blame it on the government. We get in a hopeless and useless war in Iraq because we vote not only for the people that start it, but the people that didn't have the guts to stand against it when it would have actually done some good and why? Because the right-wing has enough money to just about do whatever they want with impunity and the left, when it's not taking that money or the power that comes with being associated with it in exchange for complicity, it cares more about opinion polls, just like it cares more about how America is viewed by other countries than it does about taking a real stand or about our right to defend ourselves -- a reference to your suggestion that somebody should be attaking the "EMPIRE," presumably the U.S. 'Fact is, I don't fault Bush for involving us in a war. Frankly, I agree with Machiavelli in that war can be postponed but never avoided indefinitely. I fault Bush for getting us into the wrong war and for having faulty reasoning and almost non-exisent forsight on how to actually win it. In any case, God forbid we as a nation ever come into any REAL danger, or America ever becomes a REAL Empire run by Bush's ilk (or anyone with characteristics which you apply to Bush and the right-wing), because if that were the case, we wouldn't even be having this discussion - PERIOD. Communication wouldn't just be monitored, we'd be dragged off in massive numbers just for launching sites like this which flaunt its opposition to the current government. So why do I bother? Frankly, I get a kick out of it all, and I'd wager to say that most of the people on here do, too, whether it's admitted or not. That's not saying I don't really believe what I write or that I don't care as much as I profess, but it is saying that I've learned not to be as polarized and unfoundedly biased for or against one political party or the other in my discussions. Then again, as vitriolic as I've been, you're welcome to call me out on the part about bias.
-
There are probably two reasons I've not been banned. First, I rarely use vulgarity. I do sometimes, but not to the extent that a lot of other talkbackers do. I also don't use hate speech or condone or recommend direct, harmful action against any group or individual. That leaves only my viewpoints as criteria for banning, so on that note, while I don't agree with Harry's politics, he at least doesn't seem to be a hypocrite when it comes to everyone having the right to express their viewpoints. I'm fairly confident about that because he even responded directly to a complaint I had about the site a couple of years back by e-mail -- a lot more graciously than most of us (including myself at times).
-
I read recently that George Clooney, ever the political activist, is involved in another film adaptation of "Nineteen Eighty-Four." If he thinks it's going to be a direct rebuff to any current conservatism or form of Fascism, he obviously doesn't know the history of the book. Per Orwell's own essay about why he writes and, particularly, his influences for the totalitarian society depicted in his book: "Much of Oceanic society is based upon Stalin's Soviet Union. The "Two Minutes' Hate" was the ritual demonisation of State enemies and rivals; Big Brother resembles Joseph Stalin; the Party's archenemy, Emmanuel Goldstein, resembles Leon Trotsky, (both are Jewish, both have the same physiognomy, and Trotsky's real surname was 'Bronstein'); doctored photography is a propaganda technique and the creation of unpersons in the story, analogous to Stalin's enemies being made nonpersons and being erased from official photographic records; the police treatment of several characters recalls the Moscow Trials of the Great Purge." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four
Granted, much of the analogies could apply to Fascist, so-called "conservative" regimes, but that's the point -- that it goes both ways. And for the record I have no intention of defending Fascism over Communism let alone defend either one Now, who wants to call anyone against the Democratic party a Fascist and who wants to call anyone against the Republicans a Communist? -
Daryl Hannah gotta eat.
-
Anchorite here pushing his Muslim-hating Zionist agenda? Check.
AnimalStructure here dripping usual verbal diarrhea? Check.
Think I'll read the interview now. -
That's the stamp of death right there. Kos tried to get what, 16 people elected a few years ago and was 0-16. Awesome!
-
Terrific posts, loved the "1984" history as well. Divisive talkbacks like this CAN be reasonable as you've demonstrated. Redford made it too easy in this case, a perfect example of elitist, narrow-minded Hollywood denizens. I love his older works, it's unfortunate he's completely lost it like Joe Dante and Brian De Palma have.
-
Suddenly, the solutions are all right there in front of you.
-
and since neither left wingers nor right wingers are capable of doing what's right for America, I choose to not see this movie. I'll tell ya one thing, the problem with America today is the radicals seem to have the most power (liberals in the media and right wingers in the big business). I weep for my sons who will group up in this shit pool.
-
I appreciate your letting Redford explain the film. I'm certainly going to give it a look; it addresses many critical issues of the day, as well as the future.
I'm also glad I missed out on the right-wing foaming-at-the-mouth-fest, which gave me a chance to contemplate Redford's points. Clearly the film is aimed at those whose futures will be greatly impacted - young people who, should the war continue on indefinitely, will likely have to serve. They are right to question the issues and judge for themselves if war is indeed the answer. Many would have people believe that it is the ONLY answer. They turn a blind eye towards diplomacy, strategic alliances, negotiations and responsible foreign policy. In gamesman terms, they regard the world more as a football field than a chess board.
In your previous political Talkback, there were 3 Talkbackers who spoke quietly and eloquently about their previous and upcoming military service. Having faced, or about to face deployment in the Mideast, none of them remotely resembled the rabid arm-chair warmongers in this TB. Where they earn and are due respect, the others deserve derision. To play bloodlusting cheerleader for others to fight, or to kill, or to suffer or die, on their behalf is the most cowardly act imaginable.
Which leads me to Anchorite.
There are a few outspoken right-wingers here. I may disagree with their opinions, and they mine, and that's fine. Having discourse is absolutely critical even when two or more sides get into heated debate.
But Anchorite is in a league all by himself. There are war-mongers, and then there are lunatic warmongers. His crazed call for America to escalate its brutality adheres to the vilest of agendas on the planet. He demonizes an entire race of people to draw America into war with the world. When an opportunity to incite hatred comes along - and a Robert Redford talkback qualifies - he types more than in the previous 90 talkbacks combined.
Anchorite is consistent in that he never carries out the conviction of his own words. He wants America to change, to become inhumane and brutal, yet he himself is a coward behind a keyboard. He wants the young high school and college students to take up arms against Muslims, to leave their families and become brutal and inhumane for him. He wants them to throw their educations and futures away, for him. He wants them to kill or be killed, to sacrifice their bodies and families, for him.
He is a coward.
I have the answer to his question to America:
"Who is willing to commit to such brutal and inhumane acts?"
The answer is: Not him. -
Due to my incarceration for what was actually an act of rebellion, I cannot vote so therefore I don’t bitch. Truth be told while Robert Redford holds a torch for George Plimpton, I hold one for George Pérez. That man can draw something wicked.
-
How does Robert Redford feel about the imminent flop of this $42 million picture?
-
Is there anything worse than someone just ranting and raving? Oh, wait, I wasn't talking just about Redford right now (although he sure sounds like a looney), but BringingSexyBack - wow, you just have everything all in a little nutshell, huh? I wonder what kind of advice you would've given Abraham Lincoln - probably something like "forget about the slaves, they'll be okay!" You act like the soldiers in the war don't have a choice. Well, guess what BSB, they do! It's called "volunteering". In fact, many soldiers go back again a second time or even a third time. But you wouldn't understand that, because to someone like you, nothing is worth fighting for. Sad, indeed.
-
I'm comparing: not calling people warmongers if they believe in going to war for something. There.
-
Sure, no worries! Glad I made myself understood.
-
They've infected this talk-back!
***Alert***
***Alert***
***Alert***
***Alert***
***Alert*** -
"It's a sad state of affairs when the only guy I agree with in this thread is a huge dick who should have been banned ages ago." You're going to have to be more specific...haha!
-
Learn to read. Better yet, learn to read and comprehend what you read.
It's not about going to war for the sake of it. A civilized world goes to war as a last resort, after all other measures have been exhausted. Personally I don't regard Iraq as a war. Do you? It was an invasion and occupation of a country that did not attack us, had nothing to do with those who did. So far, it's resulted in hundreds of thousands innocent dead, and tens of thousands of American casualties. What exactly is the war rationale for that?
I pointed out the soldiers who participated in Capone's last Talkback. One completed his service in Iraq, and the other two are active duty. Although they support the military and honor their service, not one of them supported the reasoning for the occupation of Iraq nor called for an escalation in the violence. Therein lies the distinction you missed.
I can understand why you brought up Lincoln, because linking the Civil War to Iraq is a convenient smokescreen. And in the fog of war, a smokescreen is ever the necessity. In a Talkback, it's fairly harmless. But in the real world, people die from such deception. This isn't Rambo. This is the real world. -
I totally agree with you. They're like the guys on the side during a fight screaming "fight! fight! fight!". It's not them getting bloodied.
-
Now I remember which talkback it was that a few soldiers participated - it about Stop-Loss. Soldiers volunteered for duty, and National Guardsmen for stateside service - both groups were sent into battle without a way to get out, even after the requisite duty fulfillment. It's bullshit, and anyone saying they "volunteered" for war should have themselves forcibly volunteered in their place.
-
A yawn fest (close-up, dialogue, close-up, dialogue, close-up, dialogue, cue Redford diatribe #104). It's the most shamelessy narcisstic film since TRIUMPH OF THE WILL. Bob, get a job in an Adam Sandler movie.
-
the guy is a living legend. nothing more to say about that. just for the natural alone would put him in that category.
-
Is an inexcusable practice, in no small part caused by the anti-Reagan peace-dividend slash-and-burn of the military perpetrated on the American military post-Ronald Reagan, by Bush, Sr., Bill Clinton, and then Dubya-Rumsfeld continue the philsophy of a "lean, modern" military. And I don't see a huge drumbeat to open up closed military bases.Also, the film looks a little more interesting than this obvious snooze-fest. Before you go, BSB, remember to "Revive with Vivarin!"
-
Whether or not you fight in it, just as you are allowed to not support the war, whether or not you fight in it. I support the military, myself. I don't care for pre-emptive wars. I certainly don't see the point here. I think the idea was really (liberals may groan now) to liberate Iraq, but I think that's an insanely uphill battle--given that most of the Western media and all of the eastern media and conservative isolationists and liberal anti-war types are all going to be opposed. Still, I support the military and their current mission and think Robert Redford has almost certainly made the Sleepy-Time Herbal Tea of anti-war movies.
-
BSB, what?? Learn to read? Dude, I was an English Lit major, so any time you want a discussion about dissecting essays and getting to the heart of the matter, just let me know. As for your moronic diatribe against those who support the war (and I believe it is a war, one which we will be fighting for a long, long time), you go on one rant after another, never fully thinking it out. The UN gave Sadaam around 16 warnings, within a couple of decades. It wasn't a spur of the moment thing, and all of congress agreed on going into the war. And why is it wrong to compare the soldiers (or any soldiers, for that matter) in one war (Civil) to another? Why is that a smokescreen? It appears you have many smokescreens, i.e. saying that National Guard soldiers and those that volunteered for service before the Iraq War should not have been sent to a war they didn't support. Excuse me - but it seems whenever you volunteer for military service, you have to allow that you might get into some kind of war down the line. To say they had no idea that this might happen is to patronize these soldiers and put them down as stupid.
Yes, I know it's the "real world" - especially after hearing the stories of the Battle of the Bulge and the landings in Normandy from WWII veterans in my family. They've seen things that would send you running, crying and hiding under your bed. -
You need a refund on your college tuition, because you got ripped off. If you need someone to vouch for your incompetent reading skills, let me know.
Firstly, define war. Invading and occupying another country that did not fight back may qualify as war in whatever institution of "higher learning" you attended, but not for the rest of us.
Secondly, the post you are responding to was not directed at war supporters in general. It was specifically directed at someone who was instigating an escalation of the conflict, to, and I quote, "be brutal and inhumane". To expand the conflict without regard for another country's sovereignty or borders. That's what I was talking about.
Thanks for your time in responding, misguided though you were.
Sincerely,
BSB -
Do you re-use your Sleepy Time teabags? I do. They're too expensive not to. Each bag is good for 2 to 3 cups, IMO.
-
Really doesn't require that you go fight in that war. Even a large percentage of the military isn't "in the war". There is an accounting corps, for example. There are all sorts of folks that are forever stateside, doing the stuff that needs to happen. Families have sons go to war, wives have military husbands--if they believe in what their husbands or sons are doing, do they have to, ergo, pick up a gun and go to the front lines?Additionally, I think people can really support a war or battle in the abstract, but feel their calling is elsewhere--on the homefront, teaching the children, doing drives to get air conditions to send over to the soldiers, etc. Or don't feel they would make a good soldier (even if fully supported the Iraq war, I wouldn't have enlisted, because I don't think I'd make a very good soldier).I tend to agree that the idea that you have to be or do a particular thing to be allowed to have an opinion or a position on an issue is a rhetorical device meant to stifle discussion and avoid debate. It certainly doesn't allow a general discussion addressing and issue or policy on its merits, or lack thereof.
-
After one use only. Now I am filled with regret.
-
go back to church or something
-
Nov 08, 2007 3:27:07 PM CST
BSB - You Need to Go Back to College - uh, make that Elementary
by dudeone
BSB - I was talking about you calling people "warmongers", which you obviously skipped over - so it seems if anyone needs a refund on their education, it's you. Obviously you don't bother to read people's posts correctly. And why should I define "war" do you? You just go on one tack after another, don't you? Besides, you'd just call me a "warmonger," no matter what I say, like you do everyone who doesn't agree with you. Talk about misguided!
Dramacidal, thanks - I think. Although I don't know what you can learn from BSB, except that he likes to takes people's statements and twist them around. -
I was quoting YOU. hahaha
Readers Talkback
User Login
Top Talkbacks
- Whitney Houston 1963 - 2012 -- 273 total posts 271 posts
- New JUDGE DREDD post production footage pops up -- 92 total posts 92 posts
- AVENGERS enemy revealed as pink boardgame pieces... You might suffer some form of elation... SPOILERS!!! -- 160 total posts 69 posts
- There's a STAR TREK video game that is going to lead into JJ's STAR TREK 2 apparently... -- 151 total posts 63 posts
- Does ‘SNL’ Rhyme With ‘Deschanel’?? Learn Which SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE Vet Hosts After Sexy Zooey!! -- 67 total posts 59 posts
- HANNA's Saoirse Ronan to boss around seven little people -- 60 total posts 57 posts
- To Commemorate The 3D Release Of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, George Lucas Wants You To Know...Greedo Shoots First!! -- 484 total posts 49 posts
- Here's The Red Band Trailer For Drafthouse Films' THE FP! -- 69 total posts 42 posts
- Friday Brings SWEEPS DAY NINE!! Gab Here About Tonight’s FRINGE!! Plus Einstein on TIM, Wiig On PORTLANDIA, MAHER, CLONE, GIFTED, GRIMM, SPARTACUS, SUPERNATURAL, GOLD RUSH And More!! -- 120 total posts 32 posts
- SPACE 2099!! -- 183 total posts 24 posts