(LAMP)Political/Hollywood Gripe

[The Poojer]

I was watching "The Terminal" on HBO saturday and it pissed me off. Why did Steven Speilberg have to (A)Make this happen in an American Airport, and (B)Feel the need to make the American Official's so heartless, cruel and mean! Why not tell the story the way it happened....In France?????? At the end when the bald American guy went chasing after tom hank's character after he was freed...Damn! Why are we so hell bent on not offending others and all the while making us look like the bad guys? I don't usually get riled up over these knee jerk hollywood types, but this one got to me! OK now back to pre-season analysis!

[SouthernMan]

I was watching "The Terminal" on HBO saturday and it pissed me off.  Why did Steven Speilberg have to (A)Make this happen in an American Airport, and (B)Feel the need to make the American Official's so heartless, cruel and mean!  Why not tell the story the way it happened....In France??????  At the end when the bald American guy went chasing after tom hank's character after he was freed...Damn!  Why are we so hell bent on not offending others and all the while making us look like the bad guys?  I don't usually get riled up over these knee jerk hollywood types, but this one got to me!  OK now back to pre-season analysis!

414122[/snapback]

 

 

Sadly, Hollywood has become more about pushing their left wing agenda than making entertaining movies. They have little regard or respect for middle America.

[KRC]

I was watching "The Terminal" on HBO saturday and it pissed me off.  Why did Steven Speilberg have to (A)Make this happen in an American Airport, and (B)Feel the need to make the American Official's so heartless, cruel and mean!  Why not tell the story the way it happened....In France??????  At the end when the bald American guy went chasing after tom hank's character after he was freed...Damn!  Why are we so hell bent on not offending others and all the while making us look like the bad guys?  I don't usually get riled up over these knee jerk hollywood types, but this one got to me!  OK now back to pre-season analysis!

414122[/snapback]

 

If it was set in France, would you have watched it? The American public will connect better with the movie shot in an American airport. I do not see it as a political statement, but just marketing.

[The Poojer]

stop making sense!!!!!!!!

 

If it was set in France, would you have watched it? The American public will connect better with the movie shot in an American airport. I do not see it as a political statement, but just marketing.

414155[/snapback]

[KRC]

stop making sense!!!!!!!!

414159[/snapback]

 

Sorry. I forgot where I was at.

[Kelly the Dog]

Sadly, Hollywood has become more about pushing their left wing agenda than making entertaining movies. They have little regard or respect for middle America.

414149[/snapback]

That's just crap, especially if you're talking about that particular film. If anything, Hollywood is just as much led by right-wing values (as in making as much money as you can and pushing large corporations and corporate politics). That film was set in America because (as KRC correctly said) it was an American film made by American filmakers and film companies who thought more Americans would watch Americans in an American city, specifically for your so-called "Middle America", who cares much less about foreign countries than coastal or big city America.

[Kelly the Dog]

I was watching "The Terminal" on HBO saturday and it pissed me off.  Why did Steven Speilberg have to (A)Make this happen in an American Airport, and (B)Feel the need to make the American Official's so heartless, cruel and mean!  Why not tell the story the way it happened....In France??????  At the end when the bald American guy went chasing after tom hank's character after he was freed...Damn!  Why are we so hell bent on not offending others and all the while making us look like the bad guys?  I don't usually get riled up over these knee jerk hollywood types, but this one got to me!  OK now back to pre-season analysis!

414122[/snapback]

When I was watching that film, which IMO sucked in every way (excluding, perhaps, a good performance by Hanks in a thankless role), I was thinking what were Speilberg and Hanks thinking when they decided to make this movie? It was a terribly stagnant story for a film, and much better suited to a two page magazine article than a two hour film.

[BB27]

1. I am a conservative.

 

2. I hate France, anything french, even french toast.

 

3. I didn't see this movie as a slap at US politics.

 

4. I liked this movie.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

I think the main difference between the filmmakers, Hollywood in general (as though there is one Hollywood which moves in lockstep), most of the rest of Amwerica and in contrast the views expressed here and by most of the doctrinaire political types (as often seen on TV which is mostly controlled in Hollywood or that hotbed of conservatism NYC) is that:

 

1. The right (or left for that matter) wing view seems to assume most people are motivated soley or at least primarily by doctrine and ideology.

 

2. Most Americans have more complex motivations than simple ideology and if there is one doctrine it is actually to do what makes a lot of money.

 

If it would made the maximum amount of money to set the film in France it would be done. Political correctness has so little to do with this as motivation or some desire to slam the right it isn't even funny.

[Typical TBD Guy]

specifically for your so-called "Middle America", who cares much less about foreign countries than coastal or big city America.

414166[/snapback]

 

Well since we appear to be in the business of making broad stereotypes...

 

I'd say that Coastal America and Big City America care more about themselves and their own selfish/materialistic desires than any country - foreign or their own. While the Blue States do a lot of general talking and criticizing about foreign policy, the obvious majority of the US military is comprised of Red Staters actually willing to sacrifice their time, security, social life, family, and jobs to help free other countries and peoples who these soldiers have never previously met in their lives.

[SouthernMan]

 

1. The right (or left for that matter) wing view seems to assume most people are motivated soley or at least primarily by doctrine and ideology.

 

 

I don't don't think they"are motivated soley or at least primarily by doctrine and ideology", but I do think that they use their movies and other forums where they have a captive audience as a convenient place to insert left wing views. I don't know that it's necessarily a conscious effort. It may be a simple case of their art reflecting their personal values.

 

John Gibson did a special recently talking about this very subject.

The movie "The Runaway Jury" was cited as a prime example. In the Grisolm novel, the court case involved a case against the tabacco industry. Hollywood changed it from tabacco to guns. Typical.

 

It also pointed out that there has not been a mainstream movie where a right wing conservative type was portrayed in a positive light or made out to be the hero.

[smokinandjokin]

to help free other countries and peoples

414189[/snapback]

 

The problem is we simply assume that every country wants to be like the U.S. I understand it is the job of the rich and powerful to help the poor and weak, but many countries think America's economy/values/way of life is far from ideal for them. Regime change means so much more when the citizens rise up and do it on their own for their own reasons.

[Reuben Gant]

Most American made movies now make more money in the international market than in the US. With this in mind, the values and other things portrayed, reflect not strictly an American POV, but the sensibilities of the international market.

 

More than a liberal POV, mass market films tend to reflect a market appreciation for the lowest common denominator.

[gantrules]

I thought the movie was very entertaining. But, then again I liked You Got Served too.

 

I probably wouldn't have bothered with the movie if the setting was in France.

[Typical TBD Guy]

The problem is we simply assume that every country wants to be like the U.S.  I understand it is the job of the rich and powerful to help the poor and weak, but many countries think America's economy/values/way of life is far from ideal for them.  Regime change means so much more when the citizens rise up and do it on their own for their own reasons.

414198[/snapback]

 

Point well taken (I mostly agree with you on this one), but you missed the spirit of my post. I was merely presenting the biased counterargument that could be made by the right to match KTFABD's biased statement on the left. I'm well aware that most political issues are far more complicated than Red State/Blue State, right/left, Reps/Dems, conservative/liberal - especially foreign policy.

[Kelly the Dog]

Well since we appear to be in the business of making broad stereotypes...

 

I'd say that Coastal America and Big City America care more about themselves and their own selfish/materialistic desires than any country - foreign or their own. While the Blue States do a lot of general talking and criticizing about foreign policy, the obvious majority of the US military is comprised of Red Staters actually willing to sacrifice their time, security, social life, family, and jobs to help free other countries and peoples who these soldiers have never previously met in their lives.

414189[/snapback]

Well, I agree with the first part and disagree with the second part. I am not an army guy but ask them (I may or may not be right about this), I don't think the main reason that kids join the army is really to "sacrifice their time, security, social life, family and jobs to help free other countries and peoples who these soldiers have never previously met in their lives." I think the vast majority of the kids who join the army (be they red or blue staters, conservative or liberal) join the army because they don't know what else they are going to do, get a great training, get a lot of benefits to go to college, learn all kinds of terrific and valuable experience in technology, think it's cool to be able to fire weapons, look at it as a career possibility where they have no others, get a thrill out of the flying and other technologies the army life offers, have a family history in the armed forces, or want to protect America and Americans. I would think that a scant few if any join the army as a 19 or 20 year old strictly because they want to save other countries citizens.

[Reuben Gant]

the obvious majority of the US military is comprised of Red Staters actually willing to sacrifice their time, security, social life, family, and jobs to help free other countries and peoples who these soldiers have never previously met in their lives.

414189[/snapback]

 

Not sure about that, but I have wondered. My own inclination is that it is economic.

Rust Belt is getting plenty of recruits.

Recruiting by State

 

There are some tables if you scroll down the link.

[KRC]

I am not an army guy but ask them (I may or may not be right about this), I don't think the main reason that kids join the army is really to "sacrifice their time, security, social life, family and jobs to help free other countries and peoples who these soldiers have never previously met in their lives."

414240[/snapback]

 

I do not think that is the main reason either, but they are aware of the fact that they will be deployed and may need to fight in a war. Signing up for military service means you are involved in military actions, regardless of where the action is located and how intense that action may be. Granted, there are some who just expected free travel and education and did not actually expect that being in the military actually means doing military-type stuff, but there is no way to avoid that.

[Kelly the Dog]

I do not think that is the main reason either, but they are aware of the fact that they will be deployed and may need to fight in a war. Signing up for military service means you are involved in military actions, regardless of where the action is located and how intense that action may be. Granted, there are some who just expected free travel and education and did not actually expect that being in the military actually means doing military-type stuff, but there is no way to avoid that.

414263[/snapback]

True, but how many that actually do do it knowing that they might have to fight in a war are doing it because they want to save foreign countries' citizens as the prime motivator as Kelso's Helmut suggested, as opposed to just protecting America.

[KRC]

True, but how many that actually do do it knowing that they might have to fight in a war are doing it because they want to save foreign countries' citizens as the prime motivator as Kelso's Helmut suggested, as opposed to just protecting America.

414274[/snapback]

 

Just my opinion, but I think it is to protect America first. Protecting America might involve saving foreign citizens, removing murderous dictators, etc, but the main motiviation is to do those things in an effort to protect America and her interests. Again, this is just my opinion and not based on first-hand knowledge.

[Fake-Fat Sunny]

Well since we appear to be in the business of making broad stereotypes...

 

I'd say that Coastal America and Big City America care more about themselves and their own selfish/materialistic desires than any country - foreign or their own. While the Blue States do a lot of general talking and criticizing about foreign policy, the obvious majority of the US military is comprised of Red Staters actually willing to sacrifice their time, security, social life, family, and jobs to help free other countries and peoples who these soldiers have never previously met in their lives.

414189[/snapback]

 

A look at the actual demographics strikes me that the whole Red State/Blue State thing is an accurate way to categorize whether states tend to vote GOP or Dem in tems of the winner take all electoral votes (many states Mass. or IN for example are historically in one column all the time).

 

However, it really is more a convenient way for the media to lazily use the broad stereotypes you mention without doing real analysis because that takes work, time to report and does not allow them to make a much money as they can as easily as possible.

 

I saw once (I wish I had kept the link) a map which assigned reds and blue not simply based on the state assignment of electoral votes but based on their actual votes by county, Most states (even the reddest of reds) has pockets of blue in urban areas or pockets of red in rural areas. In NYS for example (a blue state if there ever was one, a strong majority of counties (I think it was 2-1) actually voted GOP. However, even though Buffalo is the second largest city in NYS by a good chunk over smaller burgs like Rochacha and Syracuse because the largest city NYC is so much larger than Buffalo the red/blue dichotomy is just not a good description at all of life and most communities in NYS.

 

For that matter, simply categorizing things as red or blue does not accurately describe the fact that NYS has a GOP mayor now, has generally had one for much of the past 2-3 decades (Bloomberg, Giuliani and hard to categorize Koch who no one would describe as a doctrinaire lefto) and has had a GOP governor finishing his thrid term.

 

Even your description of the motivations of military recruits does not necessarily scan with the red/blue description that one would say it is accurate as a description of motivation.

 

1. A Red ideology does not seem to be the primary motivator for service as is described in the CSN article linkes above. it is economics which can be termed as the selfish/materialistic motivation you describe.

2. Even among folks motivated by ideology it seems to be a desire to fight for people to be free to make their own choices red or blue rather than to promote a red outcome.

 

In general I think folks should simply drop the whole red/blue shorthand if instead they want to be accurate about the point they are making.

[\GoBillsInDallas/]

Why are we so hell bent on not offending others and all the while making us look like the bad guys?

414122[/snapback]

 

 

Women who work in the military or as police officers but look like Playboy centerfolds.

 

People who are punched, kicked, hit, blown up or knocked out but magically do not suffer any aftereffects.

 

Parents that are incredibly dimwitted while the kids are the smartest people who have ever lived.

 

Hookers who have “hearts of gold” and are candidates for Mensa, who live in a mythical place without pimps, drug/alcohol use or STD's.

 

Obligatory black character (OBC)

 

Obligatory female character (OFC)

 

Obligatory latino character (OLC)

 

Assembling a “team” that includes OBC, OFC, OLC.

 

Obligatory white male authority character who is “insensitive” to everyone who works with him or acts around him.

 

15-year-old boys who apparently spend their days lusting after 40-something women instead of teen girls or supermodels.

 

20-somethings who owns $5000 TV's and $75,000 cars.

 

White Supremacists who apparently control all aspects of life in America, and it is up to “one man” to stop them.

 

People who drugs and/or alcohol every day, but have personal-trainer-toned bodies and apparently can wake up the next morning without any ill aftereffects.

 

Police officers who are incredibly dimwitted while the crooks are PhD’s.

 

People who can kill people with one shot from a half-mile away while avoiding every bullet fired by 20 people towards them.

 

A world inhabited by thin people who wear $2000 clothes with never a hair out of place.

 

People who have computers that don’t crash and cell phones that work without interference.

 

Supporting characters who go to church every week but beat their wife/children and cheat on their spouses with regularity.

 

People who live in New York City but apparently never take the subway and never encounter any traffic jams when they drive.

 

People who struggling trying to make a living in New York City but live in 1500 sf apartments to die for.

[dib]

I guess for the same reason that Hollywood exchanged Arab terrorists for neo-Nazis in "The Sum of All Fears".

[Mr Info]

2. I hate France, anything french, even french toast.

 

414169[/snapback]

 

Hate is a strong word. Have you had the opportunity to know any people from France? Have you spent any time there? Have you purchased Michelin tires? Do you own any RCA or GE consumer electronics (under Tompson SA of France). I could list many more.

I am in Corsica right now staying with some of my extended family on vacation. Fortunately, I have the opportunity to meet and speak with quite a number of very personable, engaging, and thoughtful citizens of the island and mainland.

Certainly there are jerks in any nation but it might be short-sighted to make a gross generalization such as you have. Certainly, I disagree with some of the French political views but that is also true for my homeland, the USA.

However, applying deductive reasoning that hate equates to a disagreement with someone or some political view seems a bit unusual.

[Johnny Coli]

2. I hate France, anything french, even french toast.

414169[/snapback]

 

"Freedom" fries cause breast cancer.

 

Fries bad

[Typical TBD Guy]

True, but how many that actually do do it knowing that they might have to fight in a war are doing it because they want to save foreign countries' citizens as the prime motivator as Kelso's Helmut suggested, as opposed to just protecting America.

414274[/snapback]

 

No, it's probably not the main motivator for most military recruits. But it IS a factor for many of them, one that often becomes interwoven with the whole "finding a greater purpose in life" reason for joining.

 

Care to still defend your blanket statement that Middle America doesn't care nearly as much about foreign countries as Coastal America and Big City America do???

[Kelly the Dog]

I guess for the same reason that Hollywood exchanged Arab terrorists for neo-Nazis in "The Sum of All Fears".

414316[/snapback]

Perhaps that had something to do with the fact that the film was co-produced by "MFP Munich Film Partners GmbH & Company I. Produktions KG" and not a leftist Hollywood.

[Kelly the Dog]

No, it's probably not the main motivator for most military recruits. But it IS a factor for many of them, one that often becomes interwoven with the whole "finding a greater purpose in life" reason for joining.

 

Care to still defend your blanket statement that Middle America doesn't care nearly as much about foreign countries as Coastal America and Big City America do???

414356[/snapback]

That is not what I meant or implied. I meant that Middle America is more likely to buy tickets to a story about Americans than their big city or coastal America counterparts, who are more likely to actually be foreigners or immigrants or see foreign films.

[Typical TBD Guy]

That is not what I meant or implied. I meant that Middle America is more likely to buy tickets to a story about Americans than their big city or coastal America counterparts, who are more likely to actually be foreigners or immigrants or see foreign films.

414361[/snapback]

 

Ah, OK. I re-read your post and now I see what you meant. My bad. Sorry. Continue on...