Escape to the Movies: Lone Survivor

redknightalex

Elusive Paragon
Aug 31, 2012
266
0
0
So, back to the review, I found the whole reason why this movie is bad to be down to one specific reason: war porn.

Did I miss something else in this review, which not just seemed rushed (Bob is going to some such event), because it felt like Bob didn't want to review it but still tried to put on a face that looked as if he did. It doesn't have the contempt Man of Steel does, or even Star Trek, but it's still just "bad." Alright, it's bad, you didn't like it, and still the real criticism was it focuses on the dead shots and can be classified as war porn? I'm rather confused.

I still would like to see this movie however, if only because I read the book and found it to be quiet something. It wasn't sensational literature by any means, and perhaps for a time it was inspirational, yet it did feel shockingly human. The author of the book, Luttrell as many have pointed out, went to great lengths to show off the feats of his friends and other SEAL brothers, not really himself. His stay in the Afghanistan village felt more like a section wedged in than a full feature, so having that be a small tidbit of the movie makes sense. All the points Bob didn't like were, iirc, the main points in the book. I didn't expect great writing from the book, I don't expect great cinematography from the movie, but I do expect a good tale.

I still hope to see it, and I do hope it does well as the main point of this was to get the story spread, but who knows. Still, you can do better at reviewing a movie. Even your tirades at Man of Steel and Star Trek last year had at least some substance we could all argue over.
 

kenah

New member
Jan 26, 2010
1
0
0
I came up with this solution for their moral dilemma:
They should have just taken the prisoners to the extraction point with them (or at least lead them further away from the camp). If they don't cooperate shoot (or threaten to shoot/stab) someone in the foot/leg so he can walk but CAN'T RUN back to the camp and leave him behind, the other two will probably walk much faster after that, if not repeat.
Also it's worth noting they weren't just some innocent peasants, they had radio to communicate with the bad guys...
 

DjinnFor

New member
Nov 20, 2009
281
0
0
Markunator said:
They're not soldiers, they're sailors. Only a small fraction of US servicemen have ever committed a war crime.

Once again: they're in the Navy, not the Army. They have absolutely nothing to do with the Army.
Someone's clearly mad, since he's resorted to meaningless, pointless nitpicking.

The reality is, you're a solider if you're in the payroll of your military, and have a gun, a uniform, and are on land. I don't give a flying fuck what your nation calls you or what you normally do, you're a soldier if you're in those circumstances whether you like it or not. The United States does not set the standards for which the English language may be used, as much as it tries to impress it's doublespeak onto it's citizens.

The US Navy is a branch of the US Military just like the Army is. A country's "army" is also used to refer to it's military, because not all nations have contrived distinctions like the U.S. does. Ergo, a member of the U.S. Navy is a member of the U.S. Military, or "army", even though it is not a member of the "U.S. Army". I don't give a flying fuck what U.S. calls them, nor does anyone else. The Navy and the Army don't have "nothing to do" with each other, either, so you can stop that.

You don't get to avoid reality by using different labels for things, as much as you would like to.

Ihateregistering1 said:
As a Combat Veteran myself, I can tell you there are plenty of folks in Iraq and Afghanistan who, while not technically combatants, are doing whatever they can to get you killed
Well of course they are. You invaded their country on a flimsy pretext and killed a ton of them in the process. Of course they want you out. Since you don't seem to be leaving of your own volition or leaving when they ask you to, they fight violent occupation with violent resistance. A little empathy goes a long way. I wouldn't be surprised the number of so-called "Taliban" increased a thousand-fold since the beginning of the occupation of Iraq and Afganistan.

Ihateregistering1 said:
so you'll excuse me if I don't think the people trying to kill me and my fellow Soldiers should be treated with "dignity and respect".
You are a soldier of another nation occupying their country armed with a gun, by definition you are not treating them with dignity and respect. Guess you're both equally justified in your intolerance and lack of respect for each other, eh?
 

leviadragon99

New member
Jun 17, 2010
1,055
0
0
Bittersteel said:
leviadragon99 said:
Oh boy, more chest-beating, alpha-male, military-worshipping tripe, just what the western world's media needs...
It seems like that you have not don your research on the subject. The film is based on Operation Red Wings, which was a big fuck up when it happend. Look it up.
Oh I'm aware, but it seems you forgot to watch the damn review, presentation of events can frame them in a new light, and this movie was apparently all about hailing the heroism of the American military in their talent for taking a punch.
 

Markunator

New member
Nov 10, 2011
89
0
0
jaded zombie said:
I can't tell if you're being deliberately obtuse, or if you're just that dense.
So you see nothing wrong with a "U.S. servicemen", with the full endorsement of his superiors, firing at was clearly civilians, including 2 journalists and 2 children?
maybe you're also ok with "U.S. servicemen" breaking into peoples houses, shooting men, women and children and then setting fire to them:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-17334643

there are countless stories just like that, but who am I asking, of course you are ok with it, you know the people killed had a different skin tone and probably a different religion than yours.
Don't you dare. Don't even try to paint me as some kind of racist Islamophobe. That means you've already lost the argument as far as I am concerned. Again, those two videos I posted earlier - what are those men doing wrong?

jaded zombie said:
the victims are the people from afghanistan and pakistan who had this war thrusted upon them, a war betwen two "hostile, foreign and imperialistic" (as put in a good, although shortsighted way) factions that, coincidentally, claim to have only the interest and well-being of those people in mind.

Also I'm sure that in betwen having their rights violated and being shot at for no good reason, they must really look foward to the prospect of voting for a corrupt puppet goverment that doesn't represent their identities and values, but has good enough screen presence to appease the western countries.
No, you're wrong. They voted for him because they wanted him as their president. What, do you think the Taliban represent their values?
 

Markunator

New member
Nov 10, 2011
89
0
0
jaded zombie said:
Markunator said:
Don't you dare. Don't even try to paint me as some kind of racist islamophobe. That means you've already lost the argument as far as I am concerned.
touched a nerve there?
Well, I can tell you this much: if you are calling me a racist islamophobe, you and I have absolutely nothing more to say to one another.

jaded zombie said:
Markunator said:
Again, those two videos I posted earlier - what are those men doing wrong?
what about the links I posted, what are those men doing right?
You're dodging my question. Yes, the men in that video committed a war crime, I'm not denying that - HOW DOES THAT MEAN THAT THE MEN IN THE VIDEOS THAT I LINKED TO ARE DOING ANYTHING WRONG?! Could you answer that, please?!

jaded zombie said:
Markunator said:
No, you're wrong. They voted for him because they wanted him as their president.
yes, they "voted" for him alright:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/05/peter-galbraith-ousted-un_n_309427.html
Still better than the Taliban, sorry.
 

geier

New member
Oct 15, 2010
250
0
0
It's fascinating how americans bend the reality to fit their twisted minds. A similar situation (special forces get discovered by native) occurred in the operation anaconda. A german KSK team was found by a shepherd and instead killing him, just changed position. After the operation US forces scolded the germans and said:
"Use your silenced gun, then move on."
But nobody wants to see the reality. So a movie, like this, is made to show the special forces as the super good guys, who will rather die then kill an innocent person.
This my friends is why less and less people like america.