The Big Picture: American Sniper Sucks (And It's Okay To Admit That)

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
American Sniper Sucks (And It's Okay To Admit That)

Folks are imprinting importance on American Sniper.

Watch Video
 

Verlander

New member
Apr 22, 2010
2,449
0
0
...aaand enter the people on here, saying that you're blinded by your opinions, or that your political slant skews your opinion on this. Not here yet? They will be.

I massively agree with what you're saying, although I have a different perspective on it. Living in the UK, the details of Chris Kyle's life never made it to the news, and so all of the details on him have to be pieced together from the internet. Most people can't be arsed to do that, and so go to the film largely ignorant of it. The people I spoke to who'd seen the film were largely unaware that it was based on a real thing, and the significance of who it's filmed on. When pressed about how they found the film, they shrug and go "It was alright I guess". I think we largely believe that it's an oscar contender because it's got a flag on the poster.
 

Hindkjaer

New member
Sep 15, 2010
30
0
0
A movie about domination and submissiveness (fifty shades of gray)is forcing MovieBob to watch and work with it for months.. I find that to be irony on a entire different level!
 

varmintx

New member
Oct 6, 2011
149
0
0
I'm looking forward to watching this movie many, many months from now when, hopefully, all this nonsense has died down and I can actually judge it on its own terms.

Oh, and I hope the mods are ready for what I assume will be an incoming onslaught of ideologues.
 

Jake the Snake

New member
Mar 25, 2009
1,141
0
0
I sort of figured this is the kind of direction this movie would have to take, seeing as Chris Kyle, in real life, was a pathological liar and actually posthumously lost a huge defamation lawsuit against one of my home state's former governors. The dude wasn't a good man, and while I respect his service and contribution to the US Navy seals, he doesn't deserve the amount of attention, admiration, and fame being thrown at him because of this film. Whole thing just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
 

Izanagi009_v1legacy

Anime Nerds Unite
Apr 25, 2013
1,460
0
0
Well, time to brace for blowout because this is a doozy

As for my view on this, if it's a bad movie, fine so be it. Lots of people watch bad movies, hell Transformers still makes me scratch my head in terms of popularity.

However, this whole culture war thing really did kind of spark up from rather minimal controversy. I can understand wanting a comforting narrative: guy gets girl, guy saves people, guy is patriot to nation, selfless causes and simple truths. I can also understand some people taking a stand with it and supporting it. I can't comprehend how this became a political thing. Isn't it possible to say "this movie presents a comfortable narrative about the war on terror that is detached from reality" while being able to still know and understand the more complicated issues of the war?

How on earth did we get a small demographic of people apparently supporting this movie out of nationalism with some rather nasty and ignorant comments about the middle east?
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,258
0
0
This video is a beautiful "fuck that noise" to this thread: http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.869780-Lets-prove-movie-bob-wrong-derive-a-moral-from-American-Sniper?page=1, and it's awesome.

But yes, I agree on American Sniper just having nothing to say. I don't even think that it's broad enough to warrant people putting meaning in to it. There is either a slight hint at an argument or a slight hint that is contradicted later on. His brother has the typical "I hate war, fuck this shit!" attitude yet he's still fighting in the war years later. As far as I know, the US doesn't force people to stay in for more than one tour (though feel free to correct me if I'm wrong).

It's also really bad at talking about the man's life. To audiences outside of the US it may as well be just a typical good guy versus bad guy story about an American well... sniper. I had to tell the person sitting next to me that the camera quality had changed so drastically because it was a real person who died. The film doesn't even seem to acknowledge Chris Kyle as somebody who was real until the end, though in all fairness neither did Dallas Buyer's Club and that film managed to work pretty well as a story of a man's life after a traumatic event.

I think I liked the action because I've a soft spot for snipers, come to think of it. There really wasn't much to say about it beyond Bradley Cooper's cheek extending a good foot in front of his face every five or so minutes.
 

deathbydeath

New member
Jun 28, 2010
1,363
0
0
Hey Bob, are you still pretending The Winter Soldier was at all relevant to American politics? Because while I don't doubt Sniper isn't too relevant either, at least it doesn't drop its plot halfway through and say "Post-911 Right = Nazis lol" in one of the most jarring and stupid plot holes this side of ME3's ending.

Also, I sincerely doubt 50SoG is going to be successful. Shooting it cost $40 million and while the book sold like hotcakes, very few people bothered to finish it; they just picked it up to see what the fuss was about and put it down soon after.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
I feel this will turn into an American politics war soon.
Despite not being an American, I am versed in that... but I wont be the one starting it.

Instead I will say that I havent watched the movie yet. And I have no idea who Chris Kyle is.
!HOWEVER!

I do not understand how in the f*$king hell, you Bob can basically take SUCH a certain and concrete position about something as subjective as the quality and messages in a work of art?
That was just PLAIN UGLY as all hell.


*Obvious things that sadly must be hammered in again*
We CAN NOT ALL like or dislike the same damned things.

You thought Avengers was good? I almost FELL asleep through that movie. I dont consider it a good movie for me. In fact, it was probably the worst movie I watched in 2012. A waste of money.
You disliked Interstellar, yet I loved it.

You love yer Nintendo games, I love my STALKERs and Grand Strategies.
Some people love Bioshock Infinite... I don't get them, but big deal :(

Neither of us, or anyone else on this damned planet can REALLY claim a high ground on quality of a work of art. As that is NOT quantifiable. Never has been. Never will be. No matter how much we try. That cant be calculated. And never will be.

You went down in my eyes... again :(

*Note*
Someone may quote me and explain how Bob is actually thinking about WHY the movie is this successful. I know that. It is as obvious as it can be. These discussions are GOOD for movies and gaming. Some of those parts of the review make a lot of sense.
But taking a concrete position EVEN before you started your analysis or research on the success of something, is not the way to do it. It is the opposite. This aint how science of any kind or a fair critical analysis is done.
Conclusions are drawn at the end. Not at the beginning.
 

Tanklover

New member
Nov 10, 2013
10
0
0
This is a movie I could never stomach, simply because is nothing but simple dick waving american army/patriotism bullshit, basically 'Murica Fuck Yeah: The movie. And yeah I really couldn't bother with something like this. Not that I dislike the US or its culture, but some parts of it are pretty damn stupid and or hypocritical.
 

seiler88

New member
Feb 22, 2011
54
0
0
Um, hate to say this Bob, but the whole point of the debate is not that the movie is poorly done but that all to many Hollywood types use it to take a dump on the soldiers and the general conservative/libertarian position.

Now I personally think that some of this is backlash form being insulted every five minutes by most film makers. (see also: all the faith films that came out last year) I mean can you at least admit that we are mot all the same and do your homework on theology? I don't care if you reject the message all I want is accuracy.

At least Bob didn't mistakenly stick that really awful Palin rant on Fox News. (Seriously the Escapist had a bad habit of misattributing things to that network)
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
 

Sigmund Av Volsung

Hella noided
Dec 11, 2009
2,999
0
0
Charcharo said:
I feel this will turn into an American politics war soon.
Despite not being an American, I am versed in that... but I wont be the one starting it.

Instead I will say that I havent watched the movie yet. And I have no idea who Chris Kyle is.
!HOWEVER!

I do not understand how in the f*$king hell, you Bob can basically take SUCH a certain and concrete position about something as subjective as the quality and messages in a work of art?
That was just PLAIN UGLY as all hell.


*Obvious things that sadly must be hammered in again*
We CAN NOT ALL like or dislike the same damned things.

You though Avengers was good? I almost FELL asleep through that. I dont consider it a good movie for me. In fact, it was probably the worst movie I watched in 2012. A waste of money.
You disliked Interstellar, yet I loved it.

You love yer Nintendo games, I love my STALKERs and Grand Strategies.
Some people love Bioshock Infinite... I don't get them, but big deal :(

Neither of us, or anyone else on this damned planet can REALLY claim a high ground on quality of a work of art. As that is NOT quantifiable. Never has been. Never will be. No matter how much we try. That cant be calculated. And never will be.

You went down in my eyes... again :(

*Note*
Someone may quote me and explain how Bob is actually thinking about WHY the movie is this successful. I know that. These discussions are GOOD. Some of those parts of the review make a lot of sense.
But taking a concrete position EVEN before you started your analysis or research is not the way to do it. It is the opposite. This aint how science of any kind or a fair critical analysis is done.
Conclusions are drawn at the end. Not at the beginning.
I think it's less so "American Sniper is just bad, stfu" and more so "please stop using American Sniper as a political weapon".

I'd say it's bad titling at fault here, since the video revolves around how American Sniper is a hit in America because it feeds into the insecurity spurred on by their recent wars by giving them a certain, moral righteousness on the "War on Terror".
 

Izanagi009_v1legacy

Anime Nerds Unite
Apr 25, 2013
1,460
0
0
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
 

SlothfulCobra

New member
Nov 18, 2009
41
0
0
It might just be that not that many movies have come out directly about the Iraq war, and this is just an empty niche that needed filling.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
ctlee93 said:
jacobbanks said:
Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
Why is this still a thing?
It will always be a thing... Unless you think that you would be safe in a world without people willing to defend you and your loved ones.
 

Westonbirt

New member
Nov 7, 2013
35
0
0
I liked the reference to the Golgotha Chainsaw Massacre because it's basically the same situation ; it's another piece of culture being used as ammunition by ideologues who don't care about cinema as much as how they can sharpen it to stab their socio-political opponents.

And that's sad because when you make media into a political vessel it's not media anymore. I can't really say "this movie was successful" if the reason people went to see it is because they wanted to make a point.
 

Micalas

New member
Mar 5, 2011
793
0
0
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
 

Enosh_

New member
Aug 27, 2008
55
0
0
the best thing about American Sniper is the butthurt it caused first by it's sheer existence and then the even bigger one by it's record breaking success
 

Living Contradiction

Clearly obfusticated
Nov 8, 2009
337
0
0
Verlander said:
...aaand enter the people on here, saying that you're blinded by your opinions, or that your political slant skews your opinion on this. Not here yet? They will be.
Heh. People who are blinded by their own opinions claiming that someone else is blinded by their own opinions?

The irony, it screams.

I don't blame Bob for kicking the anthill, largely because it's growing and spraying righteous indignation all over everything. "Nobody understands us except for these fine, outstanding people who give our lonely voice a clarion call in this dark and terrible age where we must stand strong and fight against those who see us as monsters", said every side of every argument ever when a piece of fiction came along to show a bit of empathy for their perspective.

Everyone has opinions. Some of those opinions are backed by factual examination ("This is an awful movie/game/book/TV show, and this is how it fails.") and some use the fact that an opposing opinion exists ("This is a wonderful movie/game/book/TV show because this figure of authority doesn't share my opinion and this figure of authority hates it.")

This has always been. This will always be. We are on a form of media that exists for the endless debate to carry on. I'm not saying embrace the flames but I am saying there's a reason we have fire extinguishers.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
 

ctlee93

New member
Apr 17, 2009
8
0
0
jacobbanks said:
ctlee93 said:
jacobbanks said:
Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
Why is this still a thing?
It will always be a thing... Unless you think that you would be safe in a world without people willing to defend you and your loved ones.
You sound like a farce.
 

Westonbirt

New member
Nov 7, 2013
35
0
0
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
What a fucking wonderful sentiment. One of the reason why societies who see the army as something other than a tool in the broader array of government institutions bother me is because when you enshrine something, you make respect to it mandatory, meaning it's going to devolve into a corrupted mess, and you make of its members a clergy whose undue respect makes them lose the sense of their actual mission. The military becomes less the defence of the nation and more a class that it outwardly respected but silently shunned because nobody deals with it as it is, rather as they wish it was. And that's how we get people like you.
 

Scorpid

New member
Jul 24, 2011
814
0
0
SlothfulCobra said:
It might just be that not that many movies have come out directly about the Iraq war, and this is just an empty niche that needed filling.
Well more like not that many movies have come out about the Iraq war and haven't been ham fisted Bush bashing.
OT: Bob is getting better at this. His video made me see american sniper in a different light.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Sigmund Av Volsung said:
Charcharo said:
I feel this will turn into an American politics war soon.
lysis is done.
Conclusions are drawn at the end. Not at the beginning.
I think it's less so "American Sniper is just bad, stfu" and more so "please stop using American Sniper as a political weapon".

I'd say it's bad titling at fault here, since the video revolves around how American Sniper is a hit in America because it feeds into the insecurity spurred on by their recent wars by giving them a certain, moral righteousness on the "War on Terror".
I honestly think it is both. That it is just a bad movie, nothing more and what you said.

BTW, my father liked it. We arent American. He was in the military though. Then again he likes such movies :p
 

Ickabod

New member
May 29, 2008
389
0
0
For some reason I just think it's kind of funny that this is turning into a propaganda movie, where you either love it or you're unmerican. Wasn't the propaganda movie in Inglorious Bastards about a sniper too.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Westonbirt said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
What a fucking wonderful sentiment. One of the reason why societies who see the army as something other than a tool in the broader array of government institutions bother me is because when you enshrine something, you make respect to it mandatory, meaning it's going to devolve into a corrupted mess, and you make of its members a clergy whose undue respect makes them lose the sense of their actual mission. The military becomes less the defence of the nation and more a class that it outwardly respected but silently shunned because nobody deals with it as it is, rather as they wish it was. And that's how we get people like you.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
 

mjharper

Can
Apr 28, 2013
172
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
 

Tortilla the Hun

Decidedly on the Fence
May 7, 2011
2,244
0
0
Tanklover said:
This is a movie I could never stomach, simply because is nothing but simple dick waving american army/patriotism bullshit, basically 'Murica Fuck Yeah: The movie. And yeah I really couldn't bother with something like this. Not that I dislike the US or its culture, but some parts of it are pretty damn stupid and or hypocritical.
I don't see how it could be turned into "Murica Fuck Yeah" sensibly considering, from what I gather, the movie is about how it changes people and often not for the better. He pushes his family away time and time again because he's become addicted to war and it tears him apart, only to end in him being killed back home in a shooting range by another man whose mind has been lost to war. That doesn't paint war in a pretty picture for me. That doesn't seem like something that people would strive to re-create for themselves, personally.
 

Sigmund Av Volsung

Hella noided
Dec 11, 2009
2,999
0
0
Charcharo said:
Sigmund Av Volsung said:
Charcharo said:
I feel this will turn into an American politics war soon.
lysis is done.
Conclusions are drawn at the end. Not at the beginning.
I think it's less so "American Sniper is just bad, stfu" and more so "please stop using American Sniper as a political weapon".

I'd say it's bad titling at fault here, since the video revolves around how American Sniper is a hit in America because it feeds into the insecurity spurred on by their recent wars by giving them a certain, moral righteousness on the "War on Terror".
I honestly think it is both. That it is just a bad movie, nothing more and what you said.

BTW, my father liked it. We arent American. He was in the military though. Then again he likes such movies :p
I'll admit that MovieBob isn't the best in articulating his points correctly. That said, I'm pretty sure you can still enjoy the movie so long as after watching it you don't un-ironically go "FUCK YEAH AMERICA KILL THEM MUSLIMS THIS MOVIE IS AWESOME!!11!".

That would be a real problem since you're using your own enjoyment of the movie and your patriotism to cannonise it as some sort of symbol of the "war on terror".
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
 

Scorpid

New member
Jul 24, 2011
814
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
Its so bizzare to me comments like this. I mean what does freedom of speech and being punched in the face have to do with one another? Or why does the poster seem to think that freedom of speech is an ineffectial passage of the bill of rights thats protects nothing? OR how does the poster believe that violence against a speaker proves that the speakers point is invalid?
 

Halla Burrica

New member
May 18, 2014
151
0
0
Very humble of you, Chipman. Veeeery humble stance you took on this issue, o Great and Mighty Emperor of Movie Critique. I shall look forward to your next "I'm right and anyone else is wrong" piece, I'm sure the peasants will be thrilled to hear your judgement.
 

Jacked Assassin

Nothing On TV
Jun 4, 2010
732
0
0
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
While I'm also annoyed that Bob decided to rant about a movie he doesn't like that he recently reviewed. Well it just seems more like a rehashed rant he could've had about The Expendables.

I find myself more annoyed with your concept of earned. Freedom Of Speech is not something you earn. But it is something you have unless its taken away from you by someone threatening you.

I imagine (jokingly) in some alternate universe Bob posted a rant on how he hated a documentary on trees. And someone told him he didn't earn the right to breathe the air that was thanks to the trees.

....

In either case there are people who would've still found the acting in those movies wooden.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Scorpid said:
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
Its so bizzare to me comments like this. I mean what does freedom of speech and being punched in the face have to do with one another? Or why does the poster seem to think that freedom of speech is an ineffectial passage of the bill of rights thats protects nothing? OR how does the poster believe that violence against a speaker proves that the speakers point is invalid?
You're free to do what ever you like, just not free from reprisal of your actions. The Bill of Rights is documented protection from said reprisal, but is only ensured by those willing to fight for others. And it doesn't you could speak nothing but the truth, but if someone doesn't like that true there is nothing that a piece of paper can do to protect you, its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
Actually, several hundred MILLION have seen the face of war.
Maybe even a billion.
So it is more like 6/7s of the planet. But not 99%.
 

Westonbirt

New member
Nov 7, 2013
35
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Westonbirt said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
What a fucking wonderful sentiment. One of the reason why societies who see the army as something other than a tool in the broader array of government institutions bother me is because when you enshrine something, you make respect to it mandatory, meaning it's going to devolve into a corrupted mess, and you make of its members a clergy whose undue respect makes them lose the sense of their actual mission. The military becomes less the defence of the nation and more a class that it outwardly respected but silently shunned because nobody deals with it as it is, rather as they wish it was. And that's how we get people like you.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
Well isn't that just making my point. Considering your previous record, this is quite an accurate contrast between our answers.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
RatGouf said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
While I'm also annoyed that Bob decided to rant about a movie he doesn't like that he recently reviewed. Well it just seems more like a rehashed rant he could've had about The Expendables.

I find myself more annoyed with your concept of earned. Freedom Of Speech is not something you earn. But it is something you have unless its taken away from you by someone threatening you.

I imagine (jokingly) in some alternate universe Bob posted a rant on how he hated a documentary on trees. And someone told him he didn't earn the right to breathe the air that was thanks to the trees.

....

In either case there are people who would've still found the acting in those movies wooden.
Ahh, let me elaborate... Freedom to speak without fear of reprisal... That good enough? We all have free will in the sense that we can do what our bodies are capable of... doesn't mean you could do it without ramming into someone else's free will.
 

mjharper

Can
Apr 28, 2013
172
0
0
jacobbanks said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Even if that is true (which I am not convinced of, since there things like logic should be universally applicable, and anyway such an argument leads to a slippery slope where only artists can have an opinion on art, and so on)... even if it is true, isn't the argument undermined in this case by the fact that Eastwood is not a veteran?

If only veterans can have an opinion on veterans, doesn't that only apply to the book, and not to the movie, which is an adaptation by a non-veteran?
 

Zontar

Mad Max 2019
Feb 18, 2013
4,931
0
0
Ickabod said:
For some reason I just think it's kind of funny that this is turning into a propaganda movie, where you either love it or you're unmerican. Wasn't the propaganda movie in Inglorious Bastards about a sniper too.
There's a second layer to the irony when you also take into account that the movie has a pretty strong anti-war message, which for years has typically been something that, no matter the actual quality of the movie, typically gave it an automatic pass by the left and rejection by the right, which is the exact opposite of what happened with American Sniper.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Sigmund Av Volsung said:
Charcharo said:
Sigmund Av Volsung said:
Charcharo said:
I feel this will turn into an American politics war soon.
lysis is done.
Conclusions are drawn at the end. Not at the beginning.
I think it's less so "American Sniper is just bad, stfu" and more so "please stop using American Sniper as a political weapon".

I'd say it's bad titling at fault here, since the video revolves around how American Sniper is a hit in America because it feeds into the insecurity spurred on by their recent wars by giving them a certain, moral righteousness on the "War on Terror".
I honestly think it is both. That it is just a bad movie, nothing more and what you said.

BTW, my father liked it. We arent American. He was in the military though. Then again he likes such movies :p
I'll admit that MovieBob isn't the best in articulating his points correctly. That said, I'm pretty sure you can still enjoy the movie so long as after watching it you don't un-ironically go "FUCK YEAH AMERICA KILL THEM MUSLIMS THIS MOVIE IS AWESOME!!11!".

That would be a real problem since you're using your own enjoyment of the movie and your patriotism to cannonise it as some sort of symbol of the "war on terror".
*Looks at Movie Bob's opinion of FPS games, his opinion on that which must not be named, his opinion on PC Gaming...

I see what you mean. He really is bad at articulating. So bad that I am unsure whether it is not you and I that are giving his thoughts reasoning ...
 

Westonbirt

New member
Nov 7, 2013
35
0
0
Charcharo said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
Actually, several hundred MILLION have seen the face of war.
Maybe even a billion.
So it is more like 6/7s of the planet. But not 99%.
Depends - what qualifies as a veteran ? The western form of it is more military members in arms way, such that logistics personnel is not counted. If you count only people who have fought in a professional capacity, shed civilians and administrative work, it's quite a small minority.

I mean, all my heart to people being shelled, but they're not really "veterans".
 

mjharper

Can
Apr 28, 2013
172
0
0
Charcharo said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
Actually, several hundred MILLION have seen the face of war.
Maybe even a billion.
So it is more like 6/7s of the planet. But not 99%.
I was referring to those who had fought to 'protect that piece of paper'. Only the US military is being referred to, not all those touched by war. You're right, that number would be much higher.
 

Westonbirt

New member
Nov 7, 2013
35
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Scorpid said:
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
Its so bizzare to me comments like this. I mean what does freedom of speech and being punched in the face have to do with one another? Or why does the poster seem to think that freedom of speech is an ineffectial passage of the bill of rights thats protects nothing? OR how does the poster believe that violence against a speaker proves that the speakers point is invalid?
You're free to do what ever you like, just not free from reprisal of your actions. The Bill of Rights is documented protection from said reprisal, but is only ensured by those willing to fight for others. And it doesn't you could speak nothing but the truth, but if someone doesn't like that true there is nothing that a piece of paper can do to protect you, its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
As it turns out, physical violence as an answer to criticism... not legal.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Even if that is true (which I am not convinced of, since there things like logic should be universally applicable, and anyway such an argument leads to a slippery slope where only artists can have an opinion on art, and so on)... even if it is true, isn't the argument undermined in this case by the fact that Eastwood is not a veteran?

If only veterans can have an opinion on veterans, doesn't that only apply to the book, and not to the movie, which is an adaptation by a non-veteran?
Now that is a good question... I could find that agreeable... Clint Eastwood's interpretation of the book is lack luster... Yeah, there you go, common ground.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Westonbirt said:
jacobbanks said:
Scorpid said:
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
Its so bizzare to me comments like this. I mean what does freedom of speech and being punched in the face have to do with one another? Or why does the poster seem to think that freedom of speech is an ineffectial passage of the bill of rights thats protects nothing? OR how does the poster believe that violence against a speaker proves that the speakers point is invalid?
You're free to do what ever you like, just not free from reprisal of your actions. The Bill of Rights is documented protection from said reprisal, but is only ensured by those willing to fight for others. And it doesn't you could speak nothing but the truth, but if someone doesn't like that true there is nothing that a piece of paper can do to protect you, its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
As it turns out, physical violence as an answer to criticism... not legal.
LEGAL? WHAT IS LEGAL? Does committing an action that is illegal prevent one from preforming such action? No? Thought not...
 

Westonbirt

New member
Nov 7, 2013
35
0
0
Mortis Nuncius said:
Tanklover said:
This is a movie I could never stomach, simply because is nothing but simple dick waving american army/patriotism bullshit, basically 'Murica Fuck Yeah: The movie. And yeah I really couldn't bother with something like this. Not that I dislike the US or its culture, but some parts of it are pretty damn stupid and or hypocritical.
I don't see how it could be turned into "Murica Fuck Yeah" sensibly considering, from what I gather, the movie is about how it changes people and often not for the better. He pushes his family away time and time again because he's become addicted to war and it tears him apart, only to end in him being killed back home in a shooting range by another man whose mind has been lost to war. That doesn't paint war in a pretty picture for me. That doesn't seem like something that people would strive to re-create for themselves, personally.
Making icons is rarely ever about what things actually are, it's more about the zeitgeist and the way people chose to remember it. If a whole wing of the American society chooses to canonize AS as a celebration of military bravery, you can't do anything to stop them. Chris Kyle is an icon, and icons are like statues, they don't say anything, they embody what people want them to.
 

daxterx2005

New member
Dec 19, 2009
1,615
0
0
oh wow, that Sarah Palin clip was ridiculous. At first I thought it was a parody and someone mocking her....but it was actually her.
 

Micalas

New member
Mar 5, 2011
793
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
So you're saying that because of the US Military, I don't have to worry about people punching me in the face when I talk. Oh thank god. That's so much easier than filing a police report and having to take someone to court for battery.

So how does this protection from face punching manifest? If someone throws a punch at me, will a service member materialize in front of me to catch the punch or will they kill me would-be assailant?
 

PetiteMoogle

New member
Dec 3, 2014
7
0
0
jacobbanks said:
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Fine. Then as the FOURTH in my line to have served the military, do I get a vote? This movie wasn't the greatest. I didn't think it sucked, but it could have spent more time on what it's really like there, and instead of focusing on "difficult choices made for good reasons" they drudged up a super villain. That trivializes the actual events, to me. Not liking this movie doesn't make you unpatriotic, liking the movie isn't the height of "fight the power", it just happens to entertain some people who enjoy war movies period. Or action.

Your idea that these people aren't allowed to speak their opinion because they're not vets is so dumb that it actually hurt my brain. Then why did our forefathers allow ALL to vote instead of simply military minded people? To get the full picture, to be free from exactly those who said if you're not one of these people your opinion doesn't matter. If you want to get up in someone's face about not being 'MURICAN enough to matter, then you've missed the point entirely of what it is WE fight for.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
PetiteMoogle said:
jacobbanks said:
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Fine. Then as the FOURTH in my line to have served the military, do I get a vote? This movie wasn't the greatest. I didn't think it sucked, but it could have spent more time on what it's really like there, and instead of focusing on "difficult choices made for good reasons" they drudged up a super villain. That trivializes the actual events, to me. Not liking this movie doesn't make you unpatriotic, liking the movie isn't the height of "fight the power", it just happens to entertain some people who enjoy war movies period. Or action.

Your idea that these people aren't allowed to speak their opinion because they're not vets is so dumb that it actually hurt my brain. Then why did our forefathers allow ALL to vote instead of simply military minded people? To get the full picture, to be free from exactly those who said if you're not one of these people your opinion doesn't matter. If you want to get up in someone's face about not being 'MURICAN enough to matter, then you've missed the point entirely of what it is WE fight for.
As a veteran, your opinion on veteran related things counts :)

however, our forefathers allowed all land owning white men to vote... That said, you can have an opinion on any number of things... Just things your are not familiar with or have no knowledge are things in which your opinion hold no weight.
 

JarinArenos

New member
Jan 31, 2012
556
0
0
Why do people insist on feeding obvious sockpuppets? I've never understood that.

Clint Eastwood hasn't put out a good movie in 20 years, whether directing or acting. I didn't expect this to change anything. It's about as rambling as his empty chair speech was.
 

PetiteMoogle

New member
Dec 3, 2014
7
0
0
Westonbirt said:
Making icons is rarely ever about what things actually are, it's more about the zeitgeist and the way people chose to remember it. If a whole wing of the American society chooses to canonize AS as a celebration of military bravery, you can't do anything to stop them. Chris Kyle is an icon, and icons are like statues, they don't say anything, they embody what people want them to.
Wonderfully expressed, my friend. I agree.
 

varmintx

New member
Oct 6, 2011
149
0
0
daxterx2005 said:
oh wow, that Sarah Palin clip was ridiculous. At first I thought it was a parody and someone mocking her....but it was actually her.
Eh, for Palin, that really wasn't that bad. Try this one. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrzD-zqWwWc]
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Micalas said:
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)


So you're saying that because of the US Military, I don't have to worry about people punching me in the face when I talk. Oh thank god. That's so much easier than filing a police report and having to take someone to court for battery.

So how does this protection from face punching manifest? If someone throws a punch at me, will a service member materialize in front of me to catch the punch or will they kill me would-be assailant?
oh no, because of people willing to defend others, not exclusively the military... if you're capable of defending yourself, why worry about people who disagree with you.
 

Hebby

New member
Dec 8, 2013
42
0
0
Christopher Scott "Chris" Kyle was a racist prick and a terrible human being. That ignorant Americans jizz in their pants over this drivel of a movie which was never in the same vicinity as the real story make the entire circus even more offensive.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Hebby said:
Christopher Scott "Chris" Kyle was a racist prick and a terrible human being. That ignorant Americans jizz in their pants over this drivel of a move which was never in the same vicinity as the real story make the entire circus even more offensive.
It's not illegal to be racist. Good thing too, everyone is racist.
 

ctlee93

New member
Apr 17, 2009
8
0
0
jacobbanks said:
That said, you can have an opinion on any number of things... Just things your are not familiar with or have no knowledge are things in which your opinion hold no weight.
Oh how I wish this was true..
 

vid87

New member
May 17, 2010
737
0
0
On the subject of superheroes as modern allegory of current events:

I'd actually really appreciate it if many of them took more of a stand on these kinds of things or at least had more of a point and I find it ironic that Bob points out the Avengers (together and individually) as having nothing to do with reality when:

-Iron Man 3 deals with war veterans and the Iron Patriot as a symbol of global policing and failed foreign policy.

-Winter Soldier inherently urges audiences to question the government and at least begins talking about "the world as it should be versus the world as it is" (before the Nazis take over the 3rd act).

-The Avengers spitting in the face of dour, dreary action trends by focusing not on Loki's destruction of New York but on the stand-up group of people who, amid chaos and war, went out of their way to rescue civilians because that's the main and now seemingly forgotten point of superheroes.
 

SirAroun

New member
Apr 27, 2011
84
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Westonbirt said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
What a fucking wonderful sentiment. One of the reason why societies who see the army as something other than a tool in the broader array of government institutions bother me is because when you enshrine something, you make respect to it mandatory, meaning it's going to devolve into a corrupted mess, and you make of its members a clergy whose undue respect makes them lose the sense of their actual mission. The military becomes less the defence of the nation and more a class that it outwardly respected but silently shunned because nobody deals with it as it is, rather as they wish it was. And that's how we get people like you.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
You don't have to EARN Freedom of speech. The idea that people have to earn their rights and freedom, blindly glorifying the military, and disrespecting people's civil liberty are the philosophises of a fascist state.
More over in resent years the military and the institutions around it has be a greater TREAT to the freedoms U.S. Freedoms and Rights then any terrorist.
 

PunkRex

New member
Feb 19, 2010
2,533
0
0
Being English I can say with some assurance that this film isn't a thing over here, although I havn't seen any actual numbers on what the movie's grossed so I might be wrong.

We do have these sorts of debates here in England but a lot of it is so isolated that no one really gives it any attention, is this a big thing in America?
 

Scorpid

New member
Jul 24, 2011
814
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Scorpid said:
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
Its so bizzare to me comments like this. I mean what does freedom of speech and being punched in the face have to do with one another? Or why does the poster seem to think that freedom of speech is an ineffectial passage of the bill of rights thats protects nothing? OR how does the poster believe that violence against a speaker proves that the speakers point is invalid?
You're free to do what ever you like, just not free from reprisal of your actions. The Bill of Rights is documented protection from said reprisal, but is only ensured by those willing to fight for others. And it doesn't you could speak nothing but the truth, but if someone doesn't like that true there is nothing that a piece of paper can do to protect you, its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
Hmm so you just don't know. Alright. The 1st amendment is not freedom from reprisals for speech, it is not protected by soldiers. Its a contract between the government and the governed on the limits of the government, that limit being that the government cannot prosecute you if you safely voice your opinion no matter what that opinion is. It has since been adopted by other world organizations as a basic human right. The British government (which has no constitution) even holds it as that. It doesn't protect you from repercussions from other citizens which includes being punched in the face, which other other laws do protect you from that. What protects the 1st amendment is lawyers and organizations like the ACLU as well lawmakers themselves. The 1st amendment and the bill of rights does need to be protected but its not from terrorists on the otherside of the world. Soldiers do not protect people from the fear of violence that repeatedly allows the government violate the first amendment, and they do not prosecute the government when it does over step its constitutional limits. Soldiers do perform a service but protection of the bill of rights isn't it and there is no scenario that isn't simply fantasy in which they do.
 

RJ 17

The Sound of Silence
Nov 27, 2011
8,687
0
0
Hmmmm...I wonder if it's because of the fact that this movie is "based on a true story" that Bob doesn't like the fact that people are attaching their ideologies to this film. That's the only thing I can think of considering he sung the praises of movies such as Elysium and White House Down almost specifically for the political commentary contained there-in. Or perhaps it's because American Sniper has people "imprinting" their views on the movie while the other two I mentioned are stuffing their views down the audience's throat (specifically "The Man" wants to keep health care from the poor masses for Elysium and anyone claiming to be a conservative is a racist nazi terrorist for White House Down).

It's reasons like this that I hate all movies that have a political tilt, even if that tilt is in my favor. I don't watch movies because I want people to tell me how they think the world is, I watch them to be entertained...and I find absolutely nothing entertaining about political propaganda. I can get enough of that by turning on the news if I so desire.

This is also why I don't watch very many movies these days. :p
 

shirkbot

New member
Apr 15, 2013
433
0
0
jacobbanks said:
You're free to do what ever you like, just not free from reprisal of your actions. The Bill of Rights is documented protection from said reprisal, but is only ensured by those willing to fight for others. And it doesn't you could speak nothing but the truth, but if someone doesn't like that true there is nothing that a piece of paper can do to protect you, its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
That's not true at all. The Bill of Rights only protects the right to free speech insofar as it prohibits the federal government from passing laws restricting it. Originally that didn't even apply to state level governments, but there have been subsequent additions to the governing body of laws and rulings that enforce it from the top down. Nothing, at any point, prevents reprisal by private citizens as long as they don't violate other laws which prohibit things like assault, hacking etc. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequence, and there are some restrictions on freedom of speech like when it endanger public safety (shouting fire in a theater) or the applicable slander and libel laws. I've not seen the movie, and I've mostly avoided the fuss, but to say that there is a protection from the consequences of your actions or speech is ignorant at best. Not to mention the idea that the only valid opinion is that of veterans. It's like saying that only the opinions of hardcore gamers matter in these forums.

EDIT
Scorpid said:
Aww man, you beat me to it, but good to see someone else with a firm grasp of US law, and I'll stick to my point on the validity of opinions.
 

PetiteMoogle

New member
Dec 3, 2014
7
0
0
jacobbanks said:
As a veteran, your opinion on veteran related things counts :)

however, our forefathers allowed all land owning white men to vote... That said, you can have an opinion on any number of things... Just things your are not familiar with or have no knowledge are things in which your opinion hold no weight.
I'm not saying everything they laid down was perfect, simply pointing out that your idea doesn't make sense. Look, I could drudge up innovations where someone from an entirely different specialty gave their opinion and it improved the field which they didn't belong to. (How about the use of drones vastly improving sports filming?) When you only depend on one viewpoint, you focus on what you know and miss the answer to a problem that someone with an entirely different way of thinking solves. Ah! How about in WW1, where a movie guy had an idea to put multiple high grade movie cameras on the wings/underside of the plane and then use the film to create a 3D effect that accurately gave raised surfaces? How about how no one could believe a missile could be so large or launch vertically? But they investigated on these non-military ideas which turned out to be true.

You seem reasonably intelligent, don't get so bogged down by those thoughts.

I also find it kind of perfect that "fancy pants" is my captcha. Thank you for reminding me of the ridiculous of arguing on the internet. That's the last I'll say about all this mess. As Varric says, "opinions are like balls, you kick them hard enough and it doesn't matter how many of them you have."
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Scorpid said:
jacobbanks said:
Scorpid said:
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
Its so bizzare to me comments like this. I mean what does freedom of speech and being punched in the face have to do with one another? Or why does the poster seem to think that freedom of speech is an ineffectial passage of the bill of rights thats protects nothing? OR how does the poster believe that violence against a speaker proves that the speakers point is invalid?
You're free to do what ever you like, just not free from reprisal of your actions. The Bill of Rights is documented protection from said reprisal, but is only ensured by those willing to fight for others. And it doesn't you could speak nothing but the truth, but if someone doesn't like that true there is nothing that a piece of paper can do to protect you, its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
Hmm so you just don't know. Alright. The 1st amendment is not freedom from reprisals for speech, it is not protected by soldiers. Its a contract between the government and the governed on the limits of the government, that limit being that the government cannot prosecute you if you safely voice your opinion no matter what that opinion is. It has since been adopted by other world organizations as a basic human right. The British government (which has no constitution) even holds it as that. It doesn't protect you from repercussions from other citizens which includes being punched in the face, which other other laws do protect you from that. What protects the 1st amendment is lawyers and organizations like the ACLU as well lawmakers themselves. The 1st amendment and the bill of rights does need to be protected but its not from terrorists on the otherside of the world. Soldiers do not protect people from the fear of violence that repeatedly allows the government violate the first amendment, and they do not prosecute the government when it does over step its constitutional limits. Soldiers do perform a service but protection of the bill of rights isn't it and there is no scenario that isn't simply fantasy in which they do.
I said fighters, not specifically soldiers... and I have a lot to respond to. I can only convey a general idea with the given time. Laws are nothing without those willing to put themselves in harm's way to enforce them.
 

Ironbat92

New member
Nov 19, 2009
762
0
0
Couldn't it just be that People just liked the movie? Is it really that hard to admit that the reason it's a big success is because people just liked it. I think the problem with the video, and how Movie Bob comes of when making any of his video's, is that he says his thoughts on something, it is fact, not an opinion.
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
jacobbanks said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Your point is a fallacy for the same reason your other examples are fallacies. It is the same as saying only someone with experience with developing games can have an opinion on games, or only a movie director can have an opinion on movies and/or directing.

But let me put it this way, since I can find testimonials and opinions of veterans that disagree with the narrative you built on the movie, I guess your opinion is just as unimportant...
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
hermes200 said:
jacobbanks said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Your point is a fallacy for the same reason your other examples are fallacies. It is the same as saying only someone with experience with developing games can have an opinion on games, or only a movie director can have an opinion on movies and/or directing.

But let me put it this way, since I can find testimonials and opinions of veterans that disagree with the narrative you built on the movie, I guess your opinion is just as unimportant...
I would love to discuss this with other veterans... So with that... I guess I will have to get out of this forum hahaha.
 

Sigmund Av Volsung

Hella noided
Dec 11, 2009
2,999
0
0
Charcharo said:
Sigmund Av Volsung said:
Charcharo said:
Sigmund Av Volsung said:
Charcharo said:
I feel this will turn into an American politics war soon.
lysis is done.
Conclusions are drawn at the end. Not at the beginning.
I think it's less so "American Sniper is just bad, stfu" and more so "please stop using American Sniper as a political weapon".

I'd say it's bad titling at fault here, since the video revolves around how American Sniper is a hit in America because it feeds into the insecurity spurred on by their recent wars by giving them a certain, moral righteousness on the "War on Terror".
I honestly think it is both. That it is just a bad movie, nothing more and what you said.

BTW, my father liked it. We arent American. He was in the military though. Then again he likes such movies :p
I'll admit that MovieBob isn't the best in articulating his points correctly. That said, I'm pretty sure you can still enjoy the movie so long as after watching it you don't un-ironically go "FUCK YEAH AMERICA KILL THEM MUSLIMS THIS MOVIE IS AWESOME!!11!".

That would be a real problem since you're using your own enjoyment of the movie and your patriotism to cannonise it as some sort of symbol of the "war on terror".
*Looks at Movie Bob's opinion of FPS games, his opinion on that which must not be named, his opinion on PC Gaming...

I see what you mean. He really is bad at articulating. So bad that I am unsure whether it is not you and I that are giving his thoughts reasoning ...
Yup, that it is.

I still chuckle at his "PC Gaming is Dead" video everytime I go on Rock Paper Shotgun.

Ironically enough, PC Gaming saw a resurgence shortly after that video aired :p
 

JPArbiter

New member
Oct 14, 2010
337
0
0
I almost reflexively closed the video when Sarah Palin showed up, but fought that urge to hear the point.

I was not disappointed.
 

Teoes

Poof, poof, sparkles!
Jun 1, 2010
5,174
0
0
jacobbanks said:
I would love to discuss this with other veterans... So with that... I guess I will have to get out of this forum hahaha.
That you would automatically assume those disagreeing with you are not veterans - and by extension veterans would automatically agree with you and that everyone here is American to be covered by U.S. Freedom of Speech - speaks volumes.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
Teoes said:
jacobbanks said:
I would love to discuss this with other veterans... So with that... I guess I will have to get out of this forum hahaha.
That you would automatically assume those disagreeing with you are not veterans - and by extension veterans would automatically agree with you and that everyone here is American to be covered by U.S. Freedom of Speech - speaks volumes.
Nah, there were more than a few veterans on here who disagreed with me, that's fine. About speaking to Americans... yes, I would rather speak to an American, I only like people who enjoy over-eating and shooting guns and other stereotypical American stuff, just like me :).... 'MURICA!!!
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
jacobbanks said:
its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
So when will they be shooting The US and UK governments then? Because the Iraq War has done nothing but put you, me and the whole region in greater danger than ever.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Just a question but I don't understand the "Iraq was a mistake" opinion, I mean, Saddam Hussein wasn't known as a really nice person with things like Halabja chemical attack or financing terrorists. It might not be the big bad monster thought originally but people paint it as an utopia invaded by americans for profit.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
So when will they be shooting The US and UK governments then? Because the Iraq War has done nothing but put you, me and the whole region in greater danger than ever.
How so? how are we put in danger from the invasion of Iraq?
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Bob, buddy, I just feel the need to chime in here and tell you that you are horribly horribly WRONG about something in this video. . . . . . . I don't think Greg Tito is your editor in chief anymore. Could be wrong though . . . .
 

remnant_phoenix

New member
Apr 4, 2011
1,439
0
0
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This position is predicated on one buying into the philosophy of "freedom isn't free." This is the idea that freedoms are earned/won by service men and women and then granted to civilians out of the goodness of the hearts of said service people.

I myself believe that freedom of speech is a natural right. It's something exists in and of itself. That freedom is suppressed by tyrants. Righteous governments create laws and policy to preserve and protect natural rights. From this perspective, freedom isn't earned and then granted by those who serve in the armed forces. On the contrary, servicemen and women have the honor of preserving and protecting something that exists on its own.

Which of these two perspectives do you think is more "American"?

Well, the founders of the U.S.A. overwhelmingly subscribed to the latter one. The American experiment was based on the philosophies of John Locke, who argued for natural rights; he argued that governments (and by extension, the military that they create) don't create and distribute freedom. On the contrary, he argued that freedom is the natural state of humanity and that governments (and military) are created to keep tyranny at bay.

The whole "freedom isn't free" mentality wasn't a normal thing in American culture until the Cold War, and then spurred back into the popular psyche in a post-9/11 world.

To top it all off, no matter which view one subscribe's to, the freedom of speech includes the right to criticize one's government, and all military actions are government actions, so that includes criticism of military actions. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." (Thomas Jefferson)
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
So when will they be shooting The US and UK governments then? Because the Iraq War has done nothing but put you, me and the whole region in greater danger than ever.
How so? how are we put in danger from the invasion of Iraq?
Not all that up on current events I take it, the region has become the largest breeding ground for terrorists in the world. Far worse than Afghanistan ever was, people have been already been there, radicalised and then taught how to fight by groups that operate in Iraq (amongst other places) and set loose on the streets of Europe where they amassed a tragic body count.

The United States won't be immune from this.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
remnant_phoenix said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This position is predicated on one buying into the philosophy of "freedom isn't free." This is the idea that freedoms are earned/won by service men and women and then granted to civilians out of the goodness of the hearts of said service people.

I myself believe that freedom of speech is a natural right. It's something exists in and of itself. That freedom is suppressed by tyrants. Righteous governments create laws and policy to preserve and protect natural rights. From this perspective, freedom isn't earned and then granted by those who serve in the armed forces. On the contrary, servicemen and women have the honor of preserving and protecting something that exists on its own.

Which of these two perspectives do you think is more "American"?

Well, the founders of the U.S.A. overwhelmingly subscribed to the latter one. The American experiment was based on the philosophies of John Locke, who argued for natural rights; he argued that governments (and by extension, the military that they create) don't create and distribute freedom. On the contrary, he argued that freedom is the natural state of humanity and that governments (and military) are created to keep tyranny at bay.

The whole "freedom isn't free" mentality wasn't a normal thing in American culture until the Cold War, and then spurred back into the popular psyche in a post-9/11 world.

To top it all off, no matter which view one subscribe's to, the freedom of speech includes the right to criticize one's government, and all military actions are government actions, so that includes criticism of military actions. "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." (Thomas Jefferson)
Right, I didn't say he shouldn't exercise his free will and speak his mind. Only that I thought his opinion was invalid. Also, I feel that people do earn the freedom they enjoy. Does that mean that I think those who do not contribute should be imprisoned until they do? No, not really... I just have no respect for them and I feel they often take their freedom for granted.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
So when will they be shooting The US and UK governments then? Because the Iraq War has done nothing but put you, me and the whole region in greater danger than ever.
How so? how are we put in danger from the invasion of Iraq?
Not all that up on current events I take it, the region has become the largest breeding ground for terrorists in the world. Far worse than Afghanistan ever was, people have been already been there, radicalised and then taught how to fight by groups that operate in Iraq (amongst other places) and set loose on the streets of Europe where they amassed a tragic body count.

The United States won't be immune from this.
Immune to what? Radicalized Muslims? I see your Charlie guy and raise you one Boston bombing.
 

remnant_phoenix

New member
Apr 4, 2011
1,439
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Right, I didn't say he shouldn't exercise his free will and speak his mind. Only that I thought his opinion was invalid. Also, I feel that people do earn the freedom they enjoy. Does that mean that I think those who do not contribute should be imprisoned until they do? No, not really... I just have no respect for them and I feel they often take their freedom for granted.
You said that his opinion doesn't matter. While that isn't a direct suppression of his freedom, that is saying that his opinion should be disregarded in public forum, which is, in the end, the same result. If his opinion, according to you, should not be a part of the conversation, then the underlying purpose of the freedom of speech, to have one's opinion be accounted for in the public voice, is lost.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
remnant_phoenix said:
jacobbanks said:
Right, I didn't say he shouldn't exercise his free will and speak his mind. Only that I thought his opinion was invalid. Also, I feel that people do earn the freedom they enjoy. Does that mean that I think those who do not contribute should be imprisoned until they do? No, not really... I just have no respect for them and I feel they often take their freedom for granted.
You said that his opinion doesn't matter. While that isn't a direct suppression of his freedom, that is saying that his opinion should be disregarded in public forum, which is, in the end, the same result. If his opinion, according to you, should not be a part of the conversation, then the underlying purpose of the freedom of speech, to have one's opinion be accounted for in the public voice, is lost.
Right, whats so bad about that? If you were at a NAACP meeting, discussing ways to improve schools and community outreach to a black neighborhood, you wouldn't be taking suggestions from the grand dragon would you? He would likely be asked to leave, even though he is exercising his free speech, regardless of how offensive it is.

Now, I am in no way saying Bob (or anyone who dislikes the movies) is anywhere close to that bad, in fact I like most of Bob's videos. However, certain forums should disregard certain voices.
 

remnant_phoenix

New member
Apr 4, 2011
1,439
0
0
jacobbanks said:
remnant_phoenix said:
jacobbanks said:
Right, I didn't say he shouldn't exercise his free will and speak his mind. Only that I thought his opinion was invalid. Also, I feel that people do earn the freedom they enjoy. Does that mean that I think those who do not contribute should be imprisoned until they do? No, not really... I just have no respect for them and I feel they often take their freedom for granted.
You said that his opinion doesn't matter. While that isn't a direct suppression of his freedom, that is saying that his opinion should be disregarded in public forum, which is, in the end, the same result. If his opinion, according to you, should not be a part of the conversation, then the underlying purpose of the freedom of speech, to have one's opinion be accounted for in the public voice, is lost.
Right, whats so bad about that? If you were at a NAACP meeting, discussing ways to improve schools and community outreach to a black neighborhood, you wouldn't be taking suggestions from the grand dragon would you? He would likely be asked to leave, even though he is exercising his free speech, regardless of how offensive it is.

Now, I am in no way saying Bob (or anyone who dislikes the movies) is anywhere close to that bad, in fact I like most of Bob's videos. However, certain forums should disregard certain voices.
And what about this forum says that certain voices should be discarded? And if so, who are you to say who should be discarded and who shouldn't?
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
So when will they be shooting The US and UK governments then? Because the Iraq War has done nothing but put you, me and the whole region in greater danger than ever.
How so? how are we put in danger from the invasion of Iraq?
Not all that up on current events I take it, the region has become the largest breeding ground for terrorists in the world. Far worse than Afghanistan ever was, people have been already been there, radicalised and then taught how to fight by groups that operate in Iraq (amongst other places) and set loose on the streets of Europe where they amassed a tragic body count.

The United States won't be immune from this.
Immune to what? Radicalized Muslims? I see your Charlie guy and raise you one Boston bombing.
Yes, so I'm sure how you can see creating the worst training and creation ground for nutters like this is a very bad thing. There is also the argument the Boston bombers might not have did what they did without the "war on terror" in the first place, hard to say but it seems likely.
 

JennAnge

New member
May 15, 2012
86
0
0
From comment at 2:20 re 50 shades of eyerolls...you and me both, Bob. We just got past that period in time contaminated by Twilight; even if you buried yourself under a rock and ignored all movies, books, posters, anything, it seemed to creep into your world via osmosis. And now this next year is going to be dominated by this...fungus that grew off of Twilight like a bad case of woodrot.

I'm going back under my rock. If anyone wants to join me, I'll be playing Starship Troopers on the DVD later. I suddenly wanted to watch it again after reading posts in this forum, and I can't figure out why...
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
remnant_phoenix said:
jacobbanks said:
remnant_phoenix said:
jacobbanks said:
Right, I didn't say he shouldn't exercise his free will and speak his mind. Only that I thought his opinion was invalid. Also, I feel that people do earn the freedom they enjoy. Does that mean that I think those who do not contribute should be imprisoned until they do? No, not really... I just have no respect for them and I feel they often take their freedom for granted.
You said that his opinion doesn't matter. While that isn't a direct suppression of his freedom, that is saying that his opinion should be disregarded in public forum, which is, in the end, the same result. If his opinion, according to you, should not be a part of the conversation, then the underlying purpose of the freedom of speech, to have one's opinion be accounted for in the public voice, is lost.
Right, whats so bad about that? If you were at a NAACP meeting, discussing ways to improve schools and community outreach to a black neighborhood, you wouldn't be taking suggestions from the grand dragon would you? He would likely be asked to leave, even though he is exercising his free speech, regardless of how offensive it is.

Now, I am in no way saying Bob (or anyone who dislikes the movies) is anywhere close to that bad, in fact I like most of Bob's videos. However, certain forums should disregard certain voices.
And what about this forum says that certain voices should be discarded? And if so, who are you to say who should be discarded and who shouldn't?
Well, Escapists user agreement... Escapist can remove comments for any number of reasons. Me saying Bob should more or less shut up about a movie that wasn't really made for him isn't one of those reasons.
 

jacobbanks

New member
Feb 3, 2015
22
0
0
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
So when will they be shooting The US and UK governments then? Because the Iraq War has done nothing but put you, me and the whole region in greater danger than ever.
How so? how are we put in danger from the invasion of Iraq?
Not all that up on current events I take it, the region has become the largest breeding ground for terrorists in the world. Far worse than Afghanistan ever was, people have been already been there, radicalised and then taught how to fight by groups that operate in Iraq (amongst other places) and set loose on the streets of Europe where they amassed a tragic body count.

The United States won't be immune from this.
Immune to what? Radicalized Muslims? I see your Charlie guy and raise you one Boston bombing.
Yes, so I'm sure how you can see creating the worst training and creation ground for nutters like this is a very bad thing. There is also the argument the Boston bombers might not have did what they did without the "war on terror" in the first place, hard to say but it seems likely.
You're right, lets go back in time and leave Saddam in power... sounds perfect. He was a shinning beacon of humanity and fair governance. There's always going to be bad guys.
 

jabrwock

New member
Sep 5, 2007
204
0
0
Mortis Nuncius said:
I don't see how it could be turned into "Murica Fuck Yeah" sensibly considering, from what I gather, the movie is about how it changes people and often not for the better. He pushes his family away time and time again because he's become addicted to war and it tears him apart, only to end in him being killed back home in a shooting range by another man whose mind has been lost to war. That doesn't paint war in a pretty picture for me. That doesn't seem like something that people would strive to re-create for themselves, personally.
Because like Passion of the Christ, people are treating it based on the IDEA(tm) rather than the substance. As he said, it's no Rambo, it's an ok movie that doesn't say much, but the "right" are talking about it like it is THE army recruiting poster for this generation.

Wouldn't be the first time (nor will it be the last) a movie's cultural significance is blown WAY out of proportion based on what people have decided it means based on their political agenda.

It's the right's equivalent of Oscar Bait. Clint Eastwood or other Reagan-era folk hero? Check. Military service? Check. Kicking the ass of "them"? Check. Totally non-ambiguously evil bad guy (almost super-villain level)? Check. Perseverance in the face of hardship (generally family trouble)? Check. Minor note about how war is hell on the participants, but don't delve too deep or it might be seen as criticism of the whole point of the war? Check.

It'll get added to the "must see" list of "Murica Fuck Yeah" crowd, and the rest of the movie-going world will barely remember it in a year. Because the cultural phenomenon will far outlast the the actual "meh, it was ok" movie itself.
 

XDravond

Something something....
Mar 30, 2011
356
0
0
movie was meh maybe not as bad as Bob makes it out to be, but not that big of a deal around here in not-murica.... So I don't get all what Bob is on about but I can guess but glorifying all soldiers because they been soldiers yea that's dumb...


And all gibberish about "freedom" in this thread is quite funny actually.
And I'm free to speak my mind and are not "protected" by an old paper that should had a overhaul, written by people that has no clue about modern civilization...
And by free I mean peace for a loooong time (not "protected" by amercians ever) reasonably wealthy state with only danger is policies that USA wants to force on to our dumb politicians to protect their local businesses (PIPA/SOPA/etc)
And not afraid of getting shot by someone who got a badge because they think I might kill them with my bag from 100m away...
Nor am I afraid of loosing my job every day because a manger have a bad day we got laws against that
or go hungry we have social and economical support for that
or not have any ability to get roof over my head we can get help
or get sick and not be able to afford medical attention it's close to free,
or even for that matter not get education because I don't have enough money...

Oh and I love huge piece of meat with an ocean of cola and more fries than there's potatoes in a field... Plus I really enjoy shooting with guns, bigger is usually more fun and I've served in the military, infantry machine gunner to be precise...


Heh spent way to much time on this post oh well good troll I guess :)
oh and still: yea not great movie...
 

WindKnight

Quiet, Odd Sort.
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
1,823
6
13
Cephiro
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Female
jacobbanks said:
Westonbirt said:
jacobbanks said:
Scorpid said:
jacobbanks said:
Micalas said:
Haven't seen the movie, don't care to.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
This is ridiclous. I'm a huge supporter of the military and even work for the DoD, but I'm tired of this line. The last vets that fought for our freedoms were from WW2. And the freedoms "protected" in that war for the US was tenuous at best. We only got involved after Pearl Harbor was bombed, which wasn't much worse than a modern terrorist attack.

You're out of your mind if you think any of the people in the middle east are threatening our freedoms. You can definitely say that troops right now are working to ensure that we don't get attacked in a large scale way again. But what you can't say that our "freedoms" are being defended.

Until we get invaded, there are very few things that will be classified as protecting our freedoms when it comes to armed response.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
Its so bizzare to me comments like this. I mean what does freedom of speech and being punched in the face have to do with one another? Or why does the poster seem to think that freedom of speech is an ineffectial passage of the bill of rights thats protects nothing? OR how does the poster believe that violence against a speaker proves that the speakers point is invalid?
You're free to do what ever you like, just not free from reprisal of your actions. The Bill of Rights is documented protection from said reprisal, but is only ensured by those willing to fight for others. And it doesn't you could speak nothing but the truth, but if someone doesn't like that true there is nothing that a piece of paper can do to protect you, its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
As it turns out, physical violence as an answer to criticism... not legal.
LEGAL? WHAT IS LEGAL? Does committing an action that is illegal prevent one from preforming such action? No? Thought not...
Well, then I guess you slam into arrest, prosecution and some jail time. I mean, hey, break laws, face consequences, or do you have some magic fairy bunny to get you out of those?
 

Izanagi009_v1legacy

Anime Nerds Unite
Apr 25, 2013
1,460
0
0
inu-kun said:
Just a question but I don't understand the "Iraq was a mistake" opinion, I mean, Saddam Hussein wasn't known as a really nice person with things like Halabja chemical attack or financing terrorists. It might not be the big bad monster thought originally but people paint it as an utopia invaded by americans for profit.
The issue is not the fact that he is gone but the fact that we are entrenched with helping the people set up government and security while protecting them from violent elements from within. Concerns are raised that if we leave, the system could collapse but the amount of time, money. and manpower being put in is a drain on the states.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Izanagi009 said:
inu-kun said:
Just a question but I don't understand the "Iraq was a mistake" opinion, I mean, Saddam Hussein wasn't known as a really nice person with things like Halabja chemical attack or financing terrorists. It might not be the big bad monster thought originally but people paint it as an utopia invaded by americans for profit.
The issue is not the fact that he is gone but the fact that we are entrenched with helping the people set up government and security while protecting them from violent elements from within. Concerns are raised that if we leave, the system could collapse but the amount of time, money. and manpower being put in is a drain on the states.
Yes, but the matter is that the US attempts to fix it rather than letting the remaining forces there tear the place apart, people try to force the mentality that americans are invading bad guys despite them having decency to remain afterwards to try the repair the damage.
 

josh4president

New member
Mar 24, 2010
207
0
0
Hey guys, how about this:

If you want to see the movie, go see it.

If you don't want to see the movie, don't go see it.

Is that acceptable for everyone? Are we good here?
 

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
2,868
0
0
Hoo-boy, this got ugly. Maybe Bob just isn't the audience for a war movie, especially one that doesn't portray American soldiers as anything other than blood thirsty psychopaths (let's see you call out a movie for doing that, Bob!)* and it's a REAL stretch of the imagination to find any political subtext for what should be a biopic of a guy who's senseless and tragic death colors the rest of his life.
Mezmer said:
I sort of figured this is the kind of direction this movie would have to take, seeing as Chris Kyle, in real life, was a pathological liar and actually posthumously lost a huge defamation lawsuit against one of my home state's former governors. The dude wasn't a good man, and while I respect his service and contribution to the US Navy seals, he doesn't deserve the amount of attention, admiration, and fame being thrown at him because of this film. Whole thing just leaves a bad taste in my mouth.
You mean Jesse Ventura? That Nutball?! Yeah, take a man's widow to court over something her dead husband did. That's sure to not win ya any douchebag points. If Ventura told me what time of day it was, and he had a clock on him, I still wouldn't believe him.


*Or maybe he did, and I just can't be arsed to dig through the Escape to the Movies archives for what he thought of Zero Dark Thirty and The Hurt Locker right now.
 
Aug 12, 2013
81
0
0
jacobbanks said:
ctlee93 said:
jacobbanks said:
Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
Why is this still a thing?
It will always be a thing... Unless you think that you would be safe in a world without people willing to defend you and your loved ones.
And here go. Patriotism is not just defending your country with a gun, it's also having the balls to say that something is seriously wrong with your country especially when your fellow country people won't like what you say. While that might not be as life-threating as being shot at, it's just as brave.
 

Windcaler

New member
Nov 7, 2010
1,332
0
0
Did I watch a different movie from everyone else? What I saw was a movie with a clear anti-war sentiment buried inside the narrative. Seriously if you put yourself in the shoes of this admitadly romanticized soldier does this honestly make you say "America, fuck yeah!"? Would you want to leave your wife and kid alone over and over and over again to see humanity at its very worst and do some question stuff in the process? Do you feel the desire to slowly have your sanity slip away as you deal with the horrors of war that dont stay on the battlefield and chase you home to invade your dreams and your very soul, putting yourself and your loved ones in danger during what seems like an endless struggle in your own mind?

These are serious anti-war messages guys. Why does it seem like nobody realizes that?

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
I am a veteran. I spent 6 years with 10th mountain division and was deployed twice. Once to bosnia with SFOR6 and once to afganistan. When I see comments like these I see the height of arrogance. We all swore the oath of service, to defend our country from foriegn and domestic enemies, but that oath doesnt make us any better then a civilian. Our experiences and expertise is different but that never makes us better then anyone else

If you still serve then you need to get off that high horse before you get yourself or someone in your squad killed. Ive seen that happen before and theres no doubt in my mind that it'll happen again
 

EssThree

New member
Oct 6, 2013
21
0
0
I never understood the US's obsession with the military and creating heroes out of murderers. It's just baffling to me.
 

Callate

New member
Dec 5, 2008
5,118
0
0
I haven't seen American Sniper. I have no particular interest in seeing American Sniper. I might watch it if I had two hours to kill and it showed up on Netflix; otherwise, I have slightly less interest in seeing American Sniper than I do in Fifty Shades of Grey, which will probably be painfully stupid but may at least have the benefit of featuring some attractive naked people. (And no, that doesn't mean I'm itching to see FSOG.)

...All that said?

American Sniper is at 73% on Rotten Tomatoes. The blurbs that favor it say things like "a damn good film", "a smart, complex portrait of a man", and "Eastwood is good at making it seem raw and personal".

I think it is well and good to consider if audiences are picking it up for the curious reasons, if it's become a kind of banner for some perplexing sentiments, if that was the intent of the director or the marketing. I think there are certainly reasonable discussions to be had on such matters, preferably without unnecessarily painting people as jingoistic rednecks or emasculated communist sympathizers.

...But I think Bob needs to consider the possibility that his personal circle of critic friends and associates isn't necessarily indicative of the opinions of either the greater viewing audience or the greater critical audience.

This is not to say that he, or his associates, is wrong. The torch-bearing mob may be the majority, but that doesn't inherently make them noble. But it does mean one has to look askance at presuming to speak for a majority. Sometimes you just have to bite the bullet and argue on the basis of being right for reasons you're willing to defend, not for having people who agree with you willing to retweet your awesomeness.
 

Parasondox

New member
Jun 15, 2013
3,229
0
0
jacobbanks said:
You're right, lets go back in time and leave Saddam in power... sounds perfect. He was a shinning beacon of humanity and fair governance. There's always going to be bad guys.
As I walk into this thread and see all of your comments,


Why so serious? To the dear veteran who has somehow put himself on to some high platform and look down upon everyone who has not served their country and say their opinions on military matters don't matter at all... enough already. What game are you wishing to play with people here? Superiority? The know it all that has to have the higher ground over the internet? Do you enjoying getting people frustrated and angry? Does it get you off in some way? Or are you just offended that people are challenging and criticizing their government on the international decisions they make than can affect everyone? I could easily call you the "T" word but that is what you want isn't it? To play a card that you know oh so well and make it look like everyone is attacking you cause YOU have the right to do what you feel and others should listen. "FREEDOM OF SPEECH", right? Right.

I could have addressed your quote on Saddam but I just remembered that my views just don't matter to you. Oh heck, anything I say right now means... nothing.
 

Fsyco

New member
Feb 18, 2014
313
0
0
Windcaler said:
Did I watch a different movie from everyone else? What I saw was a movie with a clear anti-war sentiment buried inside the narrative. Seriously if you put yourself in the shoes of this admitadly romanticized soldier does this honestly make you say "America, fuck yeah!"? Would you want to leave your wife and kid alone over and over and over again to see humanity at its very worst and do some question stuff in the process? Do you feel the desire to slowly have your sanity slip away as you deal with the horrors of war that dont stay on the battlefield and chase you home to invade your dreams and your very soul, putting yourself and your loved ones in danger during what seems like an endless struggle in your own mind?

These are serious anti-war messages guys. Why does it seem like nobody realizes that?
People tend to read messages into movies based on what they want to hear, regardless of the filmmaker's actual intent. Scarface and The Godfather were both intended to be movies about how crime is awful and being a gangster sucks, but most people who saw those movies focused on the positives of the lifestyle (the money, the women, the power, etc) and not the negatives (people's lives being ruined by that lifestyle), which is why you see a distressing number of people trying to emulate people like Vito Corleone and Tony Montana. (See also: Fight Club).

So, nobody realizes it because they don't want to see an anti-war message, or because you do want to see an anti-war message. Not having seen the film myself, I can't really offer much more than that.
 

ryukage_sama

New member
Mar 12, 2009
508
0
0
deathbydeath said:
Hey Bob, are you still pretending The Winter Soldier was at all relevant to American politics? Because while I don't doubt Sniper isn't too relevant either, at least it doesn't drop its plot halfway through and say "Post-911 Right = Nazis lol" in one of the most jarring and stupid plot holes this side of ME3's ending.

Also, I sincerely doubt 50SoG is going to be successful. Shooting it cost $40 million and while the book sold like hotcakes, very few people bothered to finish it; they just picked it up to see what the fuss was about and put it down soon after.
Winter Soldier is CULTURALLY relevant to contemporary Americans. Politicians and public policy in general are (and ought to be) indifferent to it, but the idea of a shadowy militaristic police organization that doesn't answer to any sort of democratically appointed oversight having too much power, that is relevant to the those people with anxieties about domestic spying, which is much of the country across many political demographics.

Also, enough people read and enjoyed 50SoG that both of its (similarly bad) sequels were extremely successful. And given people's preference for film over literature, plenty of those who didn't bother finishing the book would still be willing watch the movie version. The film is going to be successful, the question is simply by what margin. And the low budget (of course how expensive could such a movie be to film; it looks like an episode of White Collar) only further lowers the bar for its success.
 

J Tyran

New member
Dec 15, 2011
2,407
0
0
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
So when will they be shooting The US and UK governments then? Because the Iraq War has done nothing but put you, me and the whole region in greater danger than ever.
How so? how are we put in danger from the invasion of Iraq?
Not all that up on current events I take it, the region has become the largest breeding ground for terrorists in the world. Far worse than Afghanistan ever was, people have been already been there, radicalised and then taught how to fight by groups that operate in Iraq (amongst other places) and set loose on the streets of Europe where they amassed a tragic body count.

The United States won't be immune from this.
Immune to what? Radicalized Muslims? I see your Charlie guy and raise you one Boston bombing.
Yes, so I'm sure how you can see creating the worst training and creation ground for nutters like this is a very bad thing. There is also the argument the Boston bombers might not have did what they did without the "war on terror" in the first place, hard to say but it seems likely.

You're right, lets go back in time and leave Saddam in power... sounds perfect. He was a shinning beacon of humanity and fair governance. There's always going to be bad guys.
Saddam was a menace but a limited one, he was almost spent after Western nations stopped supporting his efforts against Iran and the first Gulf War completely ended any ambition to cause trouble beyond his own borders the man had. Worse dictators around the world are left alone, there are always going to be dictators and deliberately toppling a bad but stabilising influence and eventually creating a far greater global threat has made the world far less safe.

Saddam would never have been a threat as great as that, even at the height of the Iran-Iraq war and his massacre of the Kurds didn't cause as many casualties as the US-UK campaign in Iraq and the subsequent explosion of Jihadist activity.
 

Nixou

New member
Jan 20, 2014
196
0
0
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter

Spoken like a true nobility of the sword wanabe

***

Just a question but I don't understand the "Iraq was a mistake" opinion, I mean, Saddam Hussein wasn't known as a really nice person with things like Halabja chemical attack or financing terrorists. It might not be the big bad monster thought originally but people paint it as an utopia invaded by americans for profit.

Iraq was a "mistake" insofar that all the reasons invoked to justify the invasion were lies:
Saddam had no WMD
Saddam was never allied with Al Quaeda
The Bush administration never intended to replace his dictatorship with a democracy: any malleable authoritarian regime would do.

And because the aftermath was catastrophic
Al Quaeda gained a foothold in Iraq
The Iran-backed revanchist Shiite regime which followed Saddam's dictatorship allowed the iraqi shiite to bloodily retaliate against the sunni population, causing among other things ethnic cleansing in Bagdad.
The Sunnis in turn radicalized and many eventually started supporting Daesh: an organization ruled by a guy who had been excommunicated by Al Quaeda: that's as close as voting for Red Skull as you can get in real life.
Daesh's expansion eventually drove the US back into the region: the good news is that western involvement is slowly but surely destroying the organization, the bad news is that its erstwhile victims are themselves starting to indulge in bloody revanchism [http://www.niqash.org/articles/?id=3613]
 

K12

New member
Dec 28, 2012
943
0
0
Whenever I see Sarah Palin giving a speech it always gives me the impression that she's recovering from a stroke and hasn't fully re-learned how to construct sentences yet.
 

Grace_Omega

New member
Dec 7, 2013
120
0
0
I don't mind US soldiers and people who support US soldiers disagreeing with anti-war sentiment- I'm mean it's pretty expected- but I have never understood the "if they weren't out there fighting you wouldn't be free to say that/enjoy the free speech we got for you asshole" sentiment. None of the US's recent wars have had anything to do with freedom of speech. If the soldiers weren't in Iraq and Afghanistan, the ability of Americans to practice free speech wouldn't change in the slightest. In fact I'm having a lot of trouble coming up with *any* war that literally involved soldiers defending free speech, apart from parts of World War II in the sense that the allies were fighting a regime that was fond of squashing the free press and dissenting opinion in countries it conquered.

If you want to argue that America's recent military efforts have protected national security that's a more sensible (although still muddled) issue to talk about, but even then there is no realistic way any of the belligerents in those conflicts could have actually impacted the American right to free speech- not even more large-scale terrorist attacks would have done it. In case people didn't notice, 9/11 was not exactly followed by a time where people were afraid to express their opinions.

Basically, this is just intended as a way to shut down any conversation critical of the military.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
I think Bob is mostly correct but he is seeing things through his ideological lens. Michael Moore's criticisms were rather idiotic and probably incensed people into seeing the movie.
But ultimately I think it has more to do with people liking the Hero (whether Kyle earns that distinction or not is another matter) of the story and wanting to support a man who died too soon.

One thing though, those 4 kill da ay-rab tweets. Those are very cherrypicked. I went through the tags and most were generic support. I would venture to guess the article that displayed those tweets only had those 4 to work with, hence why I keep seeing them.
I also don't care because the 'opposing' faction has its own radicals that everyone loves to write off as just kooks. Referring to Islamists in this.
Like Anjem Choudary
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/01/07/islam-allah-muslims-shariah-anjem-choudary-editorials-debates/21417461/
http://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2015/01/14/radical-imam-anjem-choudary-calls-charlie-hebdo-front-page-act-of-war/

And others
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/08/world/british-principal-who-resigned-believes-he-was-seen-as-a-threat.html?_r=1
http://www.atheistrepublic.com/news/muslim-sex-groomers-uk-raping-girls-religious-requirement
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-14/danish-mosque-linked-to-islamic-state-is-targeted-by-lawmakers

Purely because they are designated as belonging to a persecuted minority is this given a pass.
The minority part puzzles me because there are 1.6 billion Muslims and 1.1 billion Whites. And Muslims have more kids. So I think minority can go, persecuted may stay but I would argue it is tenuous.
 

deathbydeath

New member
Jun 28, 2010
1,363
0
0
ryukage_sama said:
Winter Soldier is CULTURALLY relevant to contemporary Americans. Politicians and public policy in general are (and ought to be) indifferent to it, but the idea of a shadowy militaristic police organization that doesn't answer to any sort of democratically appointed oversight having too much power, that is relevant to the those people with anxieties about domestic spying, which is much of the country across many political demographics.
Except TWS isn't about that; TWS is about Nazis trying to kill a bunch of people so they can rule the world.

Sure, the first half sets up the question of "do the ends* justify the means" fairly well, but once Steve and Scarlet find Zola the entire conversation is dropped. The helicarrier triplets become an undeniably bad thing and it is impossible to argue the merits of a police state making the world better, because the world would no longer be better as it would be Nazi instead.

If you want a modern-day superhero story with legitimate cultural relevance, read Worm [parahumans.wordpress.com]. It's a fine critique of institutionalized morality (among other things), pointing out how it falls apart once you put some stress on it. Plus the main character actually undergoes a character arc unlike Cap, people have superpowers that aren't "punch hard", and the Ethically Dubious Anti-Antagonist doesn't immediately abandon their ideals when threatened.

*- Even though it's never actually specified what the endgame actually is. All they say is that they are making a better world, but that's so vague as to be useless. If they want to make a better world, they could have just as easily eliminated poverty in Africa for a lot less money and ethical qualms than building three micro-Death Stars under the Potomac.
 

castlewise

Lord Fancypants
Jul 18, 2010
620
0
0
ShadowRatchet92 said:
Couldn't it just be that People just liked the movie? Is it really that hard to admit that the reason it's a big success is because people just liked it. I think the problem with the video, and how Movie Bob comes of when making any of his video's, is that he says his thoughts on something, it is fact, not an opinion.
I suppose the movie's success could be some sort of statistical anomaly. Everybody likes a certain percentage of films they see. Maybe the dice fell so that this one is a hit, and there isn't any sort of underlying reason or pattern.
 

Phrozenflame500

New member
Dec 26, 2012
1,080
0
0
The movie really sent mixed messages to me.

While there were parts where the movie seemed to sincerely push the jingoistic "fuck yeah america" agenda, there we other parts which seemed to inch on self-awareness and acknowledged where the main character's black and white ideology breaks down. But then it oscillated back to pro-Muricanism for a few scenes before showing that doubt again.

I suppose the real success of the movie is that you can glean whatever message you want to see in the movie.
 

Kinokohatake

New member
Jul 11, 2010
577
0
0
deathbydeath said:
Hey Bob, are you still pretending The Winter Soldier was at all relevant to American politics? Because while I don't doubt Sniper isn't too relevant either, at least it doesn't drop its plot halfway through and say "Post-911 Right = Nazis lol" in one of the most jarring and stupid plot holes this side of ME3's ending.

Also, I sincerely doubt 50SoG is going to be successful. Shooting it cost $40 million and while the book sold like hotcakes, very few people bothered to finish it; they just picked it up to see what the fuss was about and put it down soon after.
You must not work in an office with many women. I can say, nay, I will bet you Scrooge McDucks vault, that 50 Shades of Abuse will make it's money back plus enough money to drown a small city.

OT- I agree. Saw the film, thought it was boring, and forgot about it. Until my Rush Limbaugh listening, Fox News watching dad saw it and declared it the best movie ever.
 

faefrost

New member
Jun 2, 2010
1,280
0
0
That's great Bob. Can we now openly admit that the rest of the seasons Oscar Bait movies are utter trash as well? That Selma is an abject failure because it tries to spin a narative rather than focusing on the actual world changing history, and as a result will be relegated to the dustbins and bargain tables alongside any number of Oliver Stone movies that took the same loose disrespectful approach to the historical record, while participants in said record were still alive. And let's not leave the gimmick filming project off the list. What was it? "Watching grass grow? No that would have been more interesting, oh yeah Boyhood. Can we hate that one as well? I would hate on the rest but honestly neither I, nor most consumers of the industry honestly know what they are or have any interest in watching them. Boring pretentious crap across the boards.
 

warfjm

New member
Nov 14, 2007
164
0
0
American Sniper was an OK 3 out of 5 stars movie.

That's it. It wasn't groundbreaking at all.

It wasn't terrible and it certainly doesn't deserve the Oscar nominations it got. I'll be surprised if it gets any Oscars at all.

That being said,

Movie Bob's assertion that is was a terrible movie irks me as I sense some anger about the movie and some political bias. Some of the claims from liberal left (Michael Moore as an example) that the movie "glorifies war" drives me even more crazy. Did they see the same movie I did? It doesn't glorify war at all!!!!

American Sniper is a movie about 1 guy's perspective of the war. Sadly, the story is not cohesive enough to get its' overall point across. The guys that went to Iraq were changed and were never the same again. Period. That is the entire movie right there in a nutshell! It doesn't glorify war or patriotism but gives a perspective of the true costs of war. Chris Kyle suffered from PTSD. Some of the guys he tried to help ALSO suffered from PTSD. Chris Kyle was KILLED by a man who suffered from PTSD.

Seriously, stop talking about how bad the movie is (which it is mediocre in my opinion) but talk about what the movie was trying to convey. Talk about how military service can cause personal problems. Join the military and this sort of thing might happen to you.

I'm also irked by the fact the conservative right is championing this movie as some sort of patriotic flick, standing for moral correctness. It fails completely on that front as well. I'm a conservative but I hate the talking heads over at FOX. They just look stupid every time I see them. Please stop putting Sarah Palin out in front. It's not helping us at all.
 

azriel2422

New member
Jul 19, 2010
57
0
0
I won't argue whether the movie was "good" or "bad", but I will vehemently argue with MovieBob that he has completely missed the point of the movie. Growing up in Texas on the largest army base in the nation, I had friends and family doing multiple tours in the Middle East after 9/11; many never returned. Those that did return were changed...and that was the point of the movie to me. It showed war to be what it is: ugly. Visceral and real. In your face and not apologizing for it. The stories that I've heard from guys in Vietnam and even WWII lend me to believe the depiction was as accurate if not more so than Saving Private Ryan. This movie was about how the war changes the soldiers, how families are dealing with their loved ones stricken with PTSD, and how they put the pieces back together again. Even in Texas Kyle wasn't a household name until well after he died. It may be okay for Bob to think this movie sucks, it's also okay to see the parts of the movie that absolutely do not.
 

Gizen

New member
Nov 17, 2009
279
0
0
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
Yeah, see, the thing about freedom of speech being a right guaranteed by the constitution is that you don't HAVE to do anything to earn it. You have it by default.

Also, the percentage of the population that is a veteran is actually fairly small compared to the broader population to whom movies generally need to appeal, and it also doesn't include the majority of the people who are actually praising the movie. So what you're saying is this movie is for a very small audience that alone probably wouldn't even turn out in the numbers required to make the movie a financial success, and even the majority of its proponents have no valid opinion on it.

Which is bullshit of course.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Ickabod said:
For some reason I just think it's kind of funny that this is turning into a propaganda movie, where you either love it or you're unmerican. Wasn't the propaganda movie in Inglorious Bastards about a sniper too.
Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaand Godwin's law at full force now. "Hurr, they're both vaguely nationalistic movies about snipers so that must mean that Murica is the Nazis!"
 

wswordsmen

New member
Mar 27, 2009
33
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Well, Escapists user agreement... Escapist can remove comments for any number of reasons. Me saying Bob should more or less shut up about a movie that wasn't really made for him isn't one of those reasons.
So this movie was made for veterans and not the general public. I didn't know that better tell my friends who have seen it that they shouldn't think about it at all what so ever because it was for the veterans and not them. If non-veterans can't have valid opinions on the film than why was it made by and marketed to non-veterans? While you might have a point that you shouldn't listen to non-veterans about certain things, this movie is not one of them. It isn't a film used by the military to adjust people back into civilian life, it is a movie made to make money from general audiences. It doesn't matter what veterans do, because it is a movie it is not real life. It might depict real life events, but that doesn't change the fact it is a fictional version of them.
 

hentropy

New member
Feb 25, 2012
737
0
0
I think one of the dynamics is that liberals and various other anti-war activists haven't yet had their "Platoon" or "Full Metal Jacket", let alone an "Apocalypse Now". Many of those same people feel vindicated due to how each war played out, and yet it seems even Hollywood seems rather unsure about blatantly waving that fact in front of people, many of who will only begrudgingly accept that the wars (my use of the plural is not a mistake) were a poorly-handled mistake.

This brings us to the sort of "compromise" of the servicemen. We can glorify the servicemen instead of saying anything definitive about the war, that way America can continue to feel proud that we have a competent and very professional military.

I haven't seen the movie and I refuse to make any judgements on a movie I haven't seen positive or negative, however it does seem like this movie is not being judged for what it is but rather what people want it to be based on their politics, and like Patton before it (repeat: I'm not directly comparing the quality of the two movies as I have not seen one), people are projecting whatever message they want it to be about. And in some ways, that could work to be a quality of the movie, more than a detriment. Or maybe not.
 

Truglington

New member
Nov 28, 2007
14
0
0
It's stupid shit like this that makes me come out of lurking...
As a veteran of the Iraq War (affording me infinite film criticism cred) I still think it's a bad film for some of its messages, but mostly because of the absurdly gung-ho reception it garnered. Clearly, something is wrong. On the other hand, I believe the bulk of other critics are correct in thinking it's a technically good movie.
I think Fury, aside from letting the wet blanket live at the end, did a better job.
 

The Rogue Wolf

Stealthy Carnivore
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
11,521
958
118
Stalking the Digital Tundra
Gender
✅
I was inordinately amused by Sarah Palin spouting off about the "Hollywood Left" not valuing veterans. I wonder what she had to say about Michele Bachmann's plan to freeze VA health care spending and cut veterans' benefits?

As for the movie's hot performance, I think there's some deep-seated need for some of my fellow Americans to believe that our people in uniform are pure, unsullied heroes- and sadly, they're not. They're human beings doing a difficult job in a harsh environment, and to romanticize them is to do them a serious disservice, because then we treat these soldiers, sailors, Marines and pilots like some kind of untouchable ascended beings rather than people like us, with pains and regrets of their own. And that only adds to the feelings of exclusion and alienation that too many of our servicemen and women suffer from already.
 

TotalerKrieger

New member
Nov 12, 2011
376
0
0
Nixou said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter

Spoken like a true nobility of the sword wanabe

***

Just a question but I don't understand the "Iraq was a mistake" opinion, I mean, Saddam Hussein wasn't known as a really nice person with things like Halabja chemical attack or financing terrorists. It might not be the big bad monster thought originally but people paint it as an utopia invaded by americans for profit.

Iraq was a "mistake" insofar that all the reasons invoked to justify the invasion were lies:
Saddam had no WMD
Saddam was never allied with Al Quaeda
The Bush administration never intended to replace his dictatorship with a democracy: any malleable authoritarian regime would do.

And because the aftermath was catastrophic
Al Quaeda gained a foothold in Iraq
The Iran-backed revanchist Shiite regime which followed Saddam's dictatorship allowed the iraqi shiite to bloodily retaliate against the sunni population, causing among other things ethnic cleansing in Bagdad.
The Sunnis in turn radicalized and many eventually started supporting Daesh: an organization ruled by a guy who had been excommunicated by Al Quaeda: that's as close as voting for Red Skull as you can get in real life.
Daesh's expansion eventually drove the US back into the region: the good news is that western involvement is slowly but surely destroying the organization, the bad news is that its erstwhile victims are themselves starting to indulge in bloody revanchism [http://www.niqash.org/articles/?id=3613]
If you ask me, one of the primary reasons the US gov't went after Saddam is because he started trading Iraqi oil for Euros in early 2000, thus challenging the almighty Petrodollar.

The national disaster resulting from the Iraq war sent a pretty clear message to other oil producing nations: trade in another currency and this is what will happen to you.
 

WarpedLord

New member
Mar 11, 2009
135
0
0
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
...or maybe just read the book, which is at least a (probably mostly) true account of Chris Kyle's life (seriously... the book is a good read!) and skip the movie (which is a fictionalized pile of drivel).

Veteran or not.
 

WarpedLord

New member
Mar 11, 2009
135
0
0
Windcaler said:
I am a veteran. I spent 6 years with 10th mountain division and was deployed twice. Once to bosnia with SFOR6 and once to afganistan. When I see comments like these I see the height of arrogance. We all swore the oath of service, to defend our country from foriegn and domestic enemies, but that oath doesnt make us any better then a civilian. Our experiences and expertise is different but that never makes us better then anyone else

If you still serve then you need to get off that high horse before you get yourself or someone in your squad killed. Ive seen that happen before and theres no doubt in my mind that it'll happen again
Thank you both for your service, and your clear head and respectfulness, sir.
 

A_Parked_Car

New member
Oct 30, 2009
627
0
0
I haven't seen American Sniper, and from what I have heard about it I never will. I'm always on the look out for good military history films, but they are really damn rare. I suppose Fury was half decent, as was Unbroken (not really military history though). I have heard that the Imitation Game is an excellent film, but it is also heavily fictionalized. That was something I picked up from watching the trailer, so I gave that one a miss as well. Oh well...I will hold out for the new Spielberg-Hanks miniseries on the 8th Air Force and Spielberg's new film about the Gary Powers U2 flight.
 

debtcollector

New member
Jan 31, 2012
197
0
0
jacobbanks said:
Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Oh damn it. See, I bought a car the other day, and I tried turning it on this morning, but it wouldn't start. I checked with my roommate--who is an English instructor--and he said that the battery had been removed. Now that sounded plausible to me, especially considering I definitely saw a gap under the hood where the battery could fit, but I guess I need to talk to an actual mechanic, huh?

Look, the idea that the only people who can comment on a field are the ones directly involved in said field is laughably moronic. It flies in the face of just about every form of expression, in fact. For example, why would Clint Eastwood make this movie if only soldiers and veterans are allowed to have opinions on it? Why do artists make art if only artists can comment on it? If my power goes out, do I need to be an electrician to say that the lights won't turn on? Hell, whole fields of marketing are devoted to finding out how other demographics feel about things to improve a product's reach--if anything, feedback from non-veterans is more valuable than feedback from veterans.

And yes, I do enjoy my freedom of speech. It allows me to say that you are not a particularly interesting person, whose worldview is laughably dated and predictable, and who depresses me by reminding me that there is a political majority of people like you across this country. Now, you could punch me in the mouth for saying that, but you won't because 1: you can't find me and 2: if you did, you would be arrested. You see, that's what legal/illegal means. It relies on the individual's restraint to deter crimes. Sure it can't prevent you from punching me in the mouth, but it does ensure that reactionary assholes who lash out with violence at anybody who disagrees with them spend more time in prison, which can only be a good thing.

P.S.--War is nothing to be glorified. Soldiers should be commended for surviving and helping their comrades, but in today's modern battlegrounds, they can hardly be called exemplars of patriotism for fighting politicians' wars.
 

Baresark

New member
Dec 19, 2010
3,908
0
0
The amount of emotional attachment this film has received is truly mind boggling. You can be attached to the guys story, you can feel that what he did was super important, that is fine, but the fact that this movie was about that man does not make it a good movie at all.

jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
I actually dare say that no one makes movies that are aimed specifically at Veterans. That is not the sole way people who are veterans identify themselves. Not all of them are from the same branch of the military or have even had similar jobs in the military or have even seen active duty. I know people from all branches and one thing they don't do is see eye to eye. Oh, and none of them are so self important as you.

As I said, a bad movie is a bad movie. You can love the guy, you can love the movie, you can love the book, you can love the service. No one is saying that you can't or even that you shouldn't. But to say that this movie was made for veterans actually does a disservice to veterans. You should expect better, not make excuses for the bad bits. When someone says it's not a good movie, they are not indicting the US military, not saying your service isn't respected, not saying that you don't matter, but they can still say it's a bad movie. It's not them taking for granted their freedom of speech or saying that what you did doesn't matter. It's just them giving their opinion, and while you may not like it, it carries as much weight as your own.
 

Evonisia

Your sinner, in secret
Jun 24, 2013
3,258
0
0
Truglington said:
I think Fury, aside from letting the wet blanket live at the end, did a better job.
I'm honestly surprised that Fury basically got ignored, especially when compared to the post-release buzz of American Sniper. I mean, ignore it having one of the most stupid deaths I've seen in a war film (second to last death, the turret one for the record) and it was pretty damn good.

On a barely related note: Fury actually humanises Nazis. American Sniper couldn't even do that to the terrorists (besides giving the secondary villain a wife we see for three frames). It gave me the thought that the director wanted to show that the world's greatest villains are, after all is said in done, just like us civil folk but in a different uniform. It's not original by any means, but it's something I honestly wished American Sniper would try to do rather than having the terrorists just be cartoonishly evil so the audience knows to hate them. They're terrorists, we don't need to see a child's skull get drilled off-screen.
 

happyninja42

Elite Member
Legacy
May 7, 2020
7,594
1,885
118
jacobbanks said:
When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter.
Then Clint Eastwood's "opinion" on war and the effects of it, presented in this movie don't matter either. Seeing as he never served in the military. So by your very stupid logic, stating that the opinion of anyone who didn't serve doesn't matter, this movie doesn't matter either. Congratulations, you've rendered the movie irrelevant in your patriotic mumbo jumbo.
 

Steve the Pocket

New member
Mar 30, 2009
1,649
0
0
The idea of patronizing a movie, or buying a game, or buying a book or whatever simply as a show of support seems to be a fairly recent one, and it seems to have stemmed from the pro-piracy culture that emerged in the early 2000s. People who had gotten used to cheating their way to free entertainment started feeling bad that certain people they liked and wanted to be successful were being potentially deprived of their livelihoods, and started advocating paying for some of their entertainment as a way of "voting with your wallets". It came to be applied to entertainment that was willfully provided for free, as well, from PayPal "tip jars" on creators' home pages to the recent emergence of crowdfunding sites and Patreon.

And there are problematic aspects to that mentality. For one thing, so far it only really applies to one type of product. You can't pirate food, or electronics. If you want to protest the way Altria or Apple do business by not buying their products, you don't have the option of doing that without also depriving yourself of those products. There's a certain degree of sacrifice involved. But on the other hand we're definitely starting to see more and more people at least consider the implications of buying from certain companies beyond whether or not they want what they're selling. And ultimately, that's a positive.

Where it can potentially go wrong is people using it as a way to support people whose opinions they already agree with and punish those they don't. I'm very much against this idea. People need to be more indiscriminate in what media they consume, in order to become more well-rounded people. The webcomic Unshelved has a slogan that I think fits well here: "Read irresponsibly." I'm not saying everyone has a responsibility to go out and buy a copy of Hatred just to show support for free speech, or something. But if you're not actually going to get anything out of watching a movie, or playing a game, besides a warm fuzzy feeling from having your own opinions "validated" by a single person who happens to know how to make a movie or a game, have they really earned your money? The mark of a good creator is the ability to make people think, to challenge people's ideas about the world. I never felt compelled to buy Spec Ops: The Line, for example, because by all accounts it sounded like it would be really unfun to play, even if I agreed with the ideas behind it and thought Yager were mighty brave for making it. Never bothered to get Gone Home either, since I gleaned everything I could have gotten out of playing it from reading about it.

Creators aren't charity cases. (Except when they are, in which case you're welcome to make a donation without actually buying their product, if they're not too proud to give you a way to do that.) Billion-dollar movie companies and the multi-millionaires who work for them are definitely not charity cases. Buy things because you want to have them. See movies because you want to see them. Not just as an excuse to throw your money at people you like. That's something that both sides of a certain current issue in the gaming community can stand to learn.
 

Ihateregistering1

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,034
0
0
?An MLK movie is in theaters for MLK weeknd, but U.S. audiences are turning out in droves for a (lousy) movie about headshotting brown people?
-Bob Chipman, on Twitter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3248210/posts

Got it Bob, so going to see a movie as a "show of support" and giving money to the people who helped make it is wrong and terrible...unless it's a movie you like and starring black people, in which case you should go see it and give them money and show your support.
 

Sniper Team 4

New member
Apr 28, 2010
5,433
0
0
I didn't see the movie. When I first heard about it I thought it sounded fun. I like snipers--as you can tell by my screen name. But when I heard that it was based on a real person, and one I was even aware of, I quickly lost interest. When I saw trailers for it, I lost even more. It just wasn't what I was expecting. I don't know...maybe it looked too serious? But then again, I bought Fury and I own Band of Brothers, so that kind of throws that reason out the window.

The movie just didn't look appealing to me once I realized what it was about. I'm not sure why.
 

tippy2k2

Beloved Tyrant
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
14,007
869
118
Ihateregistering1 said:
?An MLK movie is in theaters for MLK weeknd, but U.S. audiences are turning out in droves for a (lousy) movie about headshotting brown people?
-Bob Chipman, on Twitter.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/3248210/posts
Kind of unrelated but kind of related; I find that quote funny because Chris Kyle specifically tells a Marine in the film that the "legendary Syrian sniper" (although I don't think we knew he was Syrian then since it was just into the first tour in the movie but I'm not 100% sure) wouldn't be doing head shots because a true sniper aims for the center mass.

OT: I'm finding myself disagreeing with Bob more and more lately when he put this and "Interstellar" on his "worst movies of the year" list. American Sniper isn't good enough to win Best Picture (personally I think the only award that it is up for that it should have a chance at is Best Actor for Cooper) but it's not a bad movie. Movie Bob is entitled to his opinion obviously but I stopped watching his movie reviews after that "Worst Movie" episode with how off-the-mark I find him.
 

Haerthan

New member
Mar 16, 2014
434
0
0
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
J Tyran said:
jacobbanks said:
its fighters who protect against those who aim to do harm to others.
So when will they be shooting The US and UK governments then? Because the Iraq War has done nothing but put you, me and the whole region in greater danger than ever.
How so? how are we put in danger from the invasion of Iraq?
Not all that up on current events I take it, the region has become the largest breeding ground for terrorists in the world. Far worse than Afghanistan ever was, people have been already been there, radicalised and then taught how to fight by groups that operate in Iraq (amongst other places) and set loose on the streets of Europe where they amassed a tragic body count.

The United States won't be immune from this.
Immune to what? Radicalized Muslims? I see your Charlie guy and raise you one Boston bombing.
Yes, so I'm sure how you can see creating the worst training and creation ground for nutters like this is a very bad thing. There is also the argument the Boston bombers might not have did what they did without the "war on terror" in the first place, hard to say but it seems likely.
You're right, lets go back in time and leave Saddam in power... sounds perfect. He was a shinning beacon of humanity and fair governance. There's always going to be bad guys.
Dude Saddam was an angel compared to what the ISIS is right now. Also I would leave him in power cause he was a counter-balance to Iran. A majority of Iraqis want him back cause guess what: there was order, there was an economy, there was food. Funny how that works. Was he bad? Yea. But there will always be someone worse.

Also guess what: There were no WMDs in Iraq, with the exception of what the US sold him in the 80s. So guess what: The Iraq War was nothing more than a farce. And we are left with the crumbling remains of the place, the fact that we are going to deal with that fallout for a long time.

Also you seem to misunderstand how national security works. It is the NSA that does the protecting nowadays, with the FBI, Homeland Security and police departments that deal with home grown terrorists. Not the army. The army has only one use: Protect from external threats and put down insurrections (if such a thing rears its ugly head in the countries). They are not there to protect your rights. THey are not there to protect and serve. They are not there to spy on people. The army is a tool of the government, to be used by the government. Rarely is the army used against its own citizens.
 

Bizzaro Stormy

New member
Oct 19, 2011
829
0
0
So I've been reading the various posts back and forth and two thoughts occurred to me. The first was that left-wingers keep pitching hissy fits that result in me becoming interested in movies, books, and games that I would normally ignore. Thankfully I usually repress the urge to go get whatever they hate. I'm not made of money so impulse buying is a poor idea. The second is that multiple people have mentioned the movie Fury and I kept misreading it. I was wondering for several minutes why people were talking about a movie called Furry in a war movie discussion. Third thought I should go to bed now.
 

zinho73

New member
Feb 3, 2011
554
0
0
jacobbanks said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Without getting into too much into your general opinion, the insight of a third, non-related, party is often necessary to brake paradigms and bring positive change:

If science did not contested religion, we would still think the world is flat. If religion did not influenced politics, some social safeguards would never be implemented in some countries, if civilians dis not contested the military, a lot of countries would be living in a dictatorial regimen and so on.

You don't have to agree with the opinion of everyone, but simply dismissing them will only leave you with tunnel vision.

Bob is criticizing the movie, but he made clear he respects many ideas and ideals attached to it. He says that the movie is an empty template in which people are projecting their ideals. With each of your posts you are just proving him right.
 

zinho73

New member
Feb 3, 2011
554
0
0
Fsyco said:
Windcaler said:
Did I watch a different movie from everyone else? What I saw was a movie with a clear anti-war sentiment buried inside the narrative. Seriously if you put yourself in the shoes of this admitadly romanticized soldier does this honestly make you say "America, fuck yeah!"? Would you want to leave your wife and kid alone over and over and over again to see humanity at its very worst and do some question stuff in the process? Do you feel the desire to slowly have your sanity slip away as you deal with the horrors of war that dont stay on the battlefield and chase you home to invade your dreams and your very soul, putting yourself and your loved ones in danger during what seems like an endless struggle in your own mind?

These are serious anti-war messages guys. Why does it seem like nobody realizes that?
People tend to read messages into movies based on what they want to hear, regardless of the filmmaker's actual intent. Scarface and The Godfather were both intended to be movies about how crime is awful and being a gangster sucks, but most people who saw those movies focused on the positives of the lifestyle (the money, the women, the power, etc) and not the negatives (people's lives being ruined by that lifestyle), which is why you see a distressing number of people trying to emulate people like Vito Corleone and Tony Montana. (See also: Fight Club).

So, nobody realizes it because they don't want to see an anti-war message, or because you do want to see an anti-war message. Not having seen the film myself, I can't really offer much more than that.
Well said - And you cannot create a hero without tragedy, so the message behind the bad stuff happening are often seen as "challenges" and not as consequences.
 

Armadox

Mandatory Madness!
Aug 31, 2010
1,120
0
0
Armadox said:
I simply wanted to know what the OP gained from proving Movie Bob wrong.. or right, or how their opinion at all has an effect on the opinion of someone who, quite happily, moved on from that subject weeks ago.
Well, apparently this sentence was incorrect, as this video has completely undone me entirely. Well done, Bob, a stirring of hornets for the sake of embellishing on something you dislike entirely rather then perhaps placing enphasis on that which nurtures you. My hats off to you.

The problem here is this isn't actually anything. It really isn't, as at the end of the day, this rhetoric of "what does it mean?" that comes with this type of discussion never actually accomplishes anything, as there are by no means a point of mutual reference one can put on it. It's raw personal opinion without any reason to accept any other view in debate. Rare is it the post that places light on the why of it, and it's usually spirals into the "us vs. them" mentality that is as useful as beating one's head against the wall.

For those who like the movie. You are right.
For those who didn't. You are right, but you're money is already spent.

jacobbanks said:
Hahahhaha I got a warning for trolling but whats his fuck up there can say racial slurs without reprisal... Hahaha Awesome!!!
*squints a little* I'll be completely honest, I have read everything you've said in this thread. And by and large I have never seen somebody with a hard solid, black and white ideology on who or how people should be heard. Your very standpoint spits in the face of discussion itself, which is absolutely amazing. To hold one's opinion to only that which one knows is to deny innovation, as by opinion and discussion do we ever get anything new. If the old hand are the only ones who matter, then the knowledge that they hold is law, set in stone and dies with them. That no one can question it would simply create castes of elite in which every field would be beholden too.

Also, "redneck" is not a racial slur. There is, in fact, no island of Redneck where the Redneck people live. Who join together to make more native Redneckians. Redneck is at best a cultural slur (starting as a economical one against those of poverty in the South), and one that by and wide has been turned into it's own counter-culture. It can be used as an insult in the same way you can insult the Goth or Emo. A set of specific but diverse people, who happen to have the same stereotypical mentality on culture and society by which you do not agree with.
 

Storm Dragon

New member
Nov 29, 2011
477
0
0
I'd much rather see a movie about the deadliest sniper in all history: Simo Hayha. He was a Finnish farmer who enlisted during the Winter War and made at least 505 confirmed sniper kills over less than 100 days, all using an old bolt-action hunting rifle without a scope. The Soviet Union nicknamed him "The White Death" and launched entire missions just to kill this one man, up to and including artillery bombardments of areas where they thought he might be. Eventually, a Soviet sniper shot him in the lower jaw and took off half of his face. Simo responded by giving the Soviet sniper a first-hand demonstration of proper headshot technique. He then managed to return to base before succumbing to unconsciousness. Simo recovered and woke up a few days later, and the Soviets surrendered war ended on that same day.

Seriously, this already sounds more like an action movie than real life.

EDIT: Fact-checking turns out to be important.
 

Torque2100

New member
Nov 20, 2008
88
0
0
I can understand if someone does not understand what others see in something or someone. We all have that friend who's a diehard rightist or leftist and whose views leave us flabbergasted every time. I will never understand the fascination many people have with 50 Shades of Grey.

I can understand and respect that MovieBob doesn't understand what I see in films like The Interview, Interstellar or yes, American Sniper. I will never understand how MovieBob is able to keep his job while being such a transparent Hack.

That said, I think anyone saying that MovieBob's politics aren't clouding his judgement most of the time are being EXTREMELY disingenuous. Go back and watch the sumptuous, slobbering blowjobs that MovieBob has given to Leftist propaganda pieces like Elysium or Avatar then tell me politics don't play a role in MovieBob's opinion of a film.
 

cthulhuspawn82

New member
Oct 16, 2011
321
0
0
This is a movie with a heavy and politically biased narrative. People who agree with that narrative, like Sarah Palin, will automatically love it and people who disagree with that narrative, like Bob, will automatically hate it, and pretend its only about the acting/directing.

People who aren't "warriors" in the crazy right-bad left-good or vice verse crusade will probably just find it boring and empty, which is why I haven't watched it.
 

Qizx

Executor
Feb 21, 2011
458
0
0
jacobbanks said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Just like my opinion of Good Will Hunting didn't matter because I'm not a janitor/professor.
Just like my opinion of the Matrix didn't matter because I'm not "The One."
Just like my opinion of The Lord of the Rings didn't matter because I wasn't a ring bearer.

Yeah, I hope you see how silly your point is now.
 

Redd the Sock

New member
Apr 14, 2010
1,088
0
0
It's not difficult to understand the movie's popularity, if it's unpleasant to admit if you're a leftist ideologue: There's a very sizable portion of the country that live and vote right wing, and those people will line up for this they way we will for Age of Ultron. Much as I hate admitting Palin's right (hey, broken clocks and whatnot) come election time a large area of the map is bright red, the Democrats got trounced in the last couple of midterms, and most preidential elections don't have a wide margin between the two candidates at the popular vote level. There are a lot of right wingers that aren't dying out and were happy to have a movie not quite so overwrought in a "war is bad and people die" theme.
 

DerangedHobo

New member
Jan 11, 2012
231
0
0
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
Man this is some fucking *powerful* stupid. Since when was killing brown people in another backwater country thousands of miles away fighting for *your* freedom again? And let's say, for a moment, that soldiers weren't just doing a job: surely the voicing of that opinion and questioning the validity of the wars is more respective of that right that they 'fought and died for' instead of silencing it and saying it doesn't matter?

Pretty sure Bob pays his taxes, pretty sure he funds the wars whether he likes it or not and he funds their paychecks.
 

Ukomba

New member
Oct 14, 2010
1,528
0
0
The fact that this bother Bob enough to not only try to pillory it in his normal movie review, but feels it necessary to to do a big picture on it gives me no end of glee. I haven't seen the movie, but his reaction alone makes me hope it does hit #1 for 2014. ;)
 

Hawki

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
6,827
577
118
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Watches video...

...okay Bob, there's no way "The King's Speech" is a bad movie. Just sayin' ;)
 

IceForce

Is this memes?
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
2,384
16
13
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
Now this is some high class bullshit right here.

War veterans didn't fight for only their own freedoms, but for the freedoms of everyone, including future generations.
That was kinda the whole point.

Besides, if you really want to go down this route, then we can dismiss YOUR opinions on Bob's video, because you're not a creator of a web video series. And if you're not a creator of a web video series, then your opinions of web video series don't matter.
 

Nixou

New member
Jan 20, 2014
196
0
0
I was inordinately amused by Sarah Palin spouting off about the "Hollywood Left" not valuing veterans. I wonder what she had to say about Michele Bachmann's plan to freeze VA health care spending and cut veterans' benefits?

She doesn't give a shit: fetichizing the army as an abstraction is a way to hide one's callousness about the actual human beings who are part of it.
 

McElroy

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
3,992
102
68
Finland
Storm Dragon said:
I'd much rather see a movie about the deadliest sniper in all history: Simo Hayha. He was a Finnish farmer who enlisted during the Winter War and made at least 505 confirmed sniper kills over less than 100 days, all using an old bolt-action hunting rifle without a scope. The Soviet Union nicknamed him "The White Death" and launched entire missions just to kill this one man, up to and including artillery bombardments of areas where they thought he might be. Eventually, a Soviet sniper shot him in the lower jaw and took off half of his face. Simo responded by giving the Soviet sniper a first-hand demonstration of proper headshot technique. He then managed to return to base before succumbing to unconsciousness. Simo recovered and woke up a few days later, and the Soviets surrendered on that same day.

Seriously, this already sounds more like an action movie than real life.
While I agree with you and would like to see a movie about Häyhä (whether or not his kill count has been padded a bit), I must correct you on one thing: nobody surrendered at the end of Winter War. Häyhä woke up on the day the truce was declared.
 

Johnny Novgorod

Bebop Man
Legacy
Apr 10, 2020
16,680
727
118
Country
Argentina
It's about how war affects a particular soldier, and how he copes with it.
It's NOT about the justification of military presence here, there or anywhere.
 

Macsen Wledig

New member
Oct 4, 2013
58
0
0
American Sniper? More like Triumph of the Will.

IceForce said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
Now this is some high class bullshit right here.

War veterans didn't fight for only their own freedoms, but for the freedoms of everyone, including future generations.
That was kinda the whole point.
Let's not beat around the bush. Soldiers don't fight for freedom they fight to kill people.
 

XDSkyFreak

New member
Mar 2, 2013
154
0
0
Wow ... just wow. How in the seven hells did this end up happening? I mean ... I'm not american, but I just fail to see how people can take a movie (especially one that was so ... bland and poorly done as American Sniper) and turn it into some cultural icon. Go back and watch Inglorious Bastards, because the parts about that nazi propaganda flick with the sniper is exactly what te sheep worshiping this brain-dead movie remind me of.
 

Ihateregistering1

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,034
0
0
cthulhuspawn82 said:
This is a movie with a heavy and politically biased narrative....

...which is why I haven't watched it.
Uh, you should probably watch the movie before making an opinion about it. The movie actually aims to largely be politically neutral, the focus is on Kyle. His opinion(s) of Iraqis being "savages", or the war's justification, are just that: his opinions. It's never presented as being the gospel truth or not, it's just a story of a guy who was a really, really good Sniper, and what he went through and the effects his multiple deployments had on him and his family.

Bob's biggest anger towards the film seems to be that it DOESN'T try and have a political point. It just presents Kyle as a Soldier doing his job, but doesn't really delve into whether the job he's doing is part of a justified or unjustified action by the Government he serves.

This is, of course, completely disingenuous on Bob's part. What he's really saying is that he just wants it to have a point...so long as it's a point he agrees with, otherwise it's just jingoistic Military propaganda for Hillbillies and right-wing nutjobs and is terrible.
 

walsfeo

New member
Feb 17, 2010
314
0
0
Bob, good episode. Heck, just based on the number of comments you received I probably could have figured that out without even watching it. I'm glad you covered more than "it is just a bad movie" though, or I'd have gotten bored.

-

As for the folks who seem to think people doing job x, y, or z, are above reproach, or that people are only able to evaluate something if they've actually been subjected to it, then you obviously don't understand the benefits of civilization. part of civilization is learning from other peoples triumphs and mistakes. I get to know words, math, and history, not because I created them but because I've studied them. Have you ever complained about a politician or referee without actually doing those jobs? It's the same thing.

Holding anything above reproach, above inspection, is the kind of nonsense that at best stifles progress or more realistically allows corruption to settle in.

Sure we have a military class, I'm thankful we do and that they exist. I tend more towards the "hooray soldiery, yay cop" mentality than the bashing thereof but all institutions perform more consistently, and with fewer atrocities, when they aren't existing exclusively in an echo chamber.
 

Logience

New member
Jun 25, 2014
100
0
0
Sorry to interrupt, but I felt it necessary to say this:

FIFTY SHADES IS TWILIGHT FANFICTION.

TWILIGHT FANFICTION THAT'S GETTING ITS OWN MOVIE.

TWILIGHT FANFICTION WITH THE SAME NAME AS THE OLD HE-MAN MOVIE.

Next thing you know they'll end up turning the Draco Trilogy into movies.
 

Traun

New member
Jan 31, 2009
659
0
0
Enosh_ said:
the best thing about American Sniper is the butthurt it caused first by it's sheer existence and then the even bigger one by it's record breaking success
Seriously, it was extremely satisfying seeing Bob cram Palin in there, his sheer butthurt was the sole reason I watched this review.
 
Aug 12, 2013
81
0
0
Traun said:
Enosh_ said:
the best thing about American Sniper is the butthurt it caused first by it's sheer existence and then the even bigger one by it's record breaking success
Seriously, it was extremely satisfying seeing Bob cram Palin in there, his sheer butthurt was the sole reason I watched this review.
If turning a lying racist into a hero is your idea of good time.
 

Abyss

New member
Apr 21, 2012
22
0
0
There a few users here and there who complain about leftist-propaganda, but what difference does Bob's views make? Don't some of you dislike it when shows or movies you like are accused of being rightist-propaganda? This video barely even constitutes as propaganda: propaganda usually doesn't isn't concerned with painting the big picture of an issue.

Anyway, even though Bob is opposed to the wars and recent Republican-Conservative politics, that's not his complaint. From Bob's point of view, the film would have benefited by being more daring and insightful about the subject on which it is about. Personally, I think that after all these years, there hasn't been a definitive film or movie which stands as an effective commentary upon the post-9/11 period and the two wars. When are we going to see our modern equivalent of Paths of Glory or Dr. Strangelove?

I want to see a film which gets right into the heart of darkness of the period we live in, but not a strictly serious and idealized melodrama. I want to see everyone covered: the nationalists, the soldiers, the innocent bystanders, the not-so innocent bystanders, the demagogues, the fanatics, the practitioners of total warfare, the leaders, and the few people who try to make things better. I want to see Full Metal Jacket crossed with the morality fables of Arabian Nights and Kipling, and combined with the archetypes of Gilgamesh. An existentialist and naturalist response to Lawrence of Arabia whose goals or ethics or not clear.

I want to something based on the wars that unlike any other before, and it still has yet to be made

P.S. I'm rather confused why Bob thinks that the King's Speech is a bad movie. It came out of nowhere, but I guess this goes to show that I can get confused by some of Bob's opinions too.
 

medv4380

The Crazy One
Feb 26, 2010
669
0
0
Eat too many Sour Grapes?

By Bobs logic we should Idealize Norman Osborn and Lex Luther as American Presidents above and beyond Abraham Lincoln and George Washington.

Bobs critic would only be valid if American Sniper was a complete fiction. However, it is a non fiction, and a biography. By those two qualifiers it is limited in what it can do. But then because it contradicts Bobs world view, and he wants to lead a mob to burn it to the ground Bobs gotten a little offended that the Mob doesn't agree with him, and would rather defend it from his Witch Hunt.

Then this begs the question.
Why waste an entire episode sobbing about it, failing to add anything substantive beyond the first review, and adding a level of idiocy with Captain America that I can only equate it to Anti Vaxers, 911 Truthers, and Birther nonsense. Really, Bob wouldn't be happy unless every decent human being on the planet was painted as a depraved sociopath unless they're fictional and then it would be fine to paint them as a hero.
 

Kuredan

Hingle McCringleberry
Dec 4, 2012
166
0
0
I respect everyone's right to disagree, but I don't think it was a bad movie. As I have said in other posts, it resonates with me. I found something familiar in it and it was something I knew that many people wouldn't understand. I'm not saying you can't have an opinion on it, but you don't understand that life. I will never be a mother, so while I can appreciate art that depicts motherhood, I'll never understand that art in the way a mother would. I'm not at fault but if I wanted to truly understand, I'd have to ask a mother to explain it to me. I wonder how many of you talk to veterans or deal with them on a regular basis. God knows we need the attention and you might learn something you didn't know before. It's very easy put distance between yourself and a soldier, to "be glad that they exist" as though they were a disgusting, but necessary underclass and feel superior about it. Veterans are people: we've done amazing and terrible things, or done nothing of note at all, really. As long as we remain (conveniently) forgotten, as long as you keep us at arm's length, we're disposable and our stories, our experiences, are invalidated. So while I think it's fine to say "This wasn't a good movie because of [film reason]" I take issue at a criticism of the experience itself, especially from those who haven't lived that life and have no interest in trying to understand it.
 

Gorrath

New member
Feb 22, 2013
1,648
0
0
Kuredan said:
I respect everyone's right to disagree, but I don't think it was a bad movie. As I have said in other posts, it resonates with me. I found something familiar in it and it was something I knew that many people wouldn't understand. I'm not saying you can't have an opinion on it, but you don't understand that life. I will never be a mother, so while I can appreciate art that depicts motherhood, I'll never understand that art in the way a mother would. I'm not at fault but if I wanted to truly understand, I'd have to ask a mother to explain it to me. I wonder how many of you talk to veterans or deal with them on a regular basis. God knows we need the attention and you might learn something you didn't know before. It's very easy put distance between yourself and a soldier, to "be glad that they exist" as though they were a disgusting, but necessary underclass and feel superior about it. Veterans are people: we've done amazing and terrible things, or done nothing of note at all, really. As long as we remain (conveniently) forgotten, as long as you keep us at arm's length, we're disposable and our stories, our experiences, are invalidated. So while I think it's fine to say "This wasn't a good movie because of [film reason]" I take issue at a criticism of the experience itself, especially from those who haven't lived that life and have no interest in trying to understand it.
I think what irks me about Bob's expression on that point is that he understands this concept you're talking about perfectly. I know he does because he's made a point of talking about how his view of a movie has been altered in the past when seeing how people who are not like him, with different experiences than him, reacted to the movie. He said this about both "Friday" (a movie that resonates with me because I grew up in similar circumstances and despite the fact I'm not black) and "Maleficent" when he saw the reactions of some of the women who were watching the film when he went to see it a second time.

The thing is, he's happy to reconsider his opinion of those films, I would guess, because both tie into his own political beliefs. If women are empowered by a movie he thought was bad, there must be more to it than he thought, right? If people connected with "Friday" there must have been something redeeming in it that he couldn't see because he didn't grow up that way. But toss out a movie who's narrative connects with people who's politics he doesn't already have a vested interest in supporting and that consideration seems to vanish. This is one of the myriad reasons I take Bob less and less seriously; he seems far too wrapped up in his preferred ideology to even be fair in his own assessments.
 

Gorrath

New member
Feb 22, 2013
1,648
0
0
Cyberstrike said:
Traun said:
Enosh_ said:
the best thing about American Sniper is the butthurt it caused first by it's sheer existence and then the even bigger one by it's record breaking success
Seriously, it was extremely satisfying seeing Bob cram Palin in there, his sheer butthurt was the sole reason I watched this review.
If turning a lying racist into a hero is your idea of good time.
One can be a lying racist and a hero. Personally, I couldn't stand Chris Kyle but that doesn't mean he wasn't valorous.

Abyss said:
There a few users here and there who complain about leftist-propaganda, but what difference does Bob's views make? Don't some of you dislike it when shows or movies you like are accused of being rightist-propaganda? This video barely even constitutes as propaganda: propaganda usually doesn't isn't concerned with painting the big picture of an issue.

Anyway, even though Bob is opposed to the wars and recent Republican-Conservative politics, that's not his complaint. From Bob's point of view, the film would have benefited by being more daring and insightful about the subject on which it is about. Personally, I think that after all these years, there hasn't been a definitive film or movie which stands as an effective commentary upon the post-9/11 period and the two wars. When are we going to see our modern equivalent of Paths of Glory or Dr. Strangelove?

I want to see a film which gets right into the heart of darkness of the period we live in, but not a strictly serious and idealized melodrama. I want to see everyone covered: the nationalists, the soldiers, the innocent bystanders, the not-so innocent bystanders, the demagogues, the fanatics, the practitioners of total warfare, the leaders, and the few people who try to make things better. I want to see Full Metal Jacket crossed with the morality fables of Arabian Nights and Kipling, and combined with the archetypes of Gilgamesh. An existentialist and naturalist response to Lawrence of Arabia whose goals or ethics or not clear.

I want to something based on the wars that unlike any other before, and it still has yet to be made

P.S. I'm rather confused why Bob thinks that the King's Speech is a bad movie. It came out of nowhere, but I guess this goes to show that I can get confused by some of Bob's opinions too.
I'd watch the hell out of what you describe. Have a script on my desk by Friday and see if you can't get Scorsese to direct. If it's a hit I'll put you on the next Fast and Furious project.
 

DudeistBelieve

TellEmSteveDave.com
Sep 9, 2010
4,771
1
0
jacobbanks said:
Westonbirt said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
What a fucking wonderful sentiment. One of the reason why societies who see the army as something other than a tool in the broader array of government institutions bother me is because when you enshrine something, you make respect to it mandatory, meaning it's going to devolve into a corrupted mess, and you make of its members a clergy whose undue respect makes them lose the sense of their actual mission. The military becomes less the defence of the nation and more a class that it outwardly respected but silently shunned because nobody deals with it as it is, rather as they wish it was. And that's how we get people like you.
Enjoy your freedom of speech. Hopefully your piece of paper and its force field prevents anyone from punching you in the mouth for anything you say that may be offensive :)
It's always ironic that veterans that claim that they fight for our rights get hostile when we choose to exercise those rights.
 

Macsen Wledig

New member
Oct 4, 2013
58
0
0
Gorrath said:
Cyberstrike said:
Traun said:
Enosh_ said:
the best thing about American Sniper is the butthurt it caused first by it's sheer existence and then the even bigger one by it's record breaking success
Seriously, it was extremely satisfying seeing Bob cram Palin in there, his sheer butthurt was the sole reason I watched this review.
If turning a lying racist into a hero is your idea of good time.
One can be a lying racist and a hero. Personally, I couldn't stand Chris Kyle but that doesn't mean he wasn't valorous.
No, it's the hiding on roofs and shooting people in the back that would disqualify him from being valorous.
 

ryukage_sama

New member
Mar 12, 2009
508
0
0
Ihateregistering1 said:
Bob's biggest anger towards the film seems to be that it DOESN'T try and have a political point. It just presents Kyle as a Soldier doing his job, but doesn't really delve into whether the job he's doing is part of a justified or unjustified action by the Government he serves.

This is, of course, completely disingenuous on Bob's part. What he's really saying is that he just wants it to have a point...so long as it's a point he agrees with, otherwise it's just jingoistic Military propaganda for Hillbillies and right-wing nutjobs and is terrible.
The film is presented as being true, a recreation of actual events as recounted by Kyle. It IS being interpreted as such by the droves of people going to see it. The fact that the film has been the top movie at the box office for two weeks makes the film significant, and the reason for the film's success relevant.

The issue that Bob is addressing in this video is that the film is NOT an genuine representation of the war while being treated by its fans (and pundits) as such and that the interpretation that viewing this film is an act of patriotism is disingenuous. It's also relevant to Bob's discussion that his expressed distaste for the film has led to him being called (both directly and indirectly) unpatriotic and/or an oppenent of the ideals of freedom by proponents of the film. I've been accused of liking and not linking films for the wrong reasons, but nobody has ever accused me of hurting my country for doing/saying so.
 

ryukage_sama

New member
Mar 12, 2009
508
0
0
Macsen Wledig said:
Gorrath said:
Cyberstrike said:
Traun said:
Enosh_ said:
the best thing about American Sniper is the butthurt it caused first by it's sheer existence and then the even bigger one by it's record breaking success
Seriously, it was extremely satisfying seeing Bob cram Palin in there, his sheer butthurt was the sole reason I watched this review.
If turning a lying racist into a hero is your idea of good time.
One can be a lying racist and a hero. Personally, I couldn't stand Chris Kyle but that doesn't mean he wasn't valorous.
No, it's the hiding on roofs and shooting people in the back that would disqualify him from being valorous.
I don't have much appreciation for much of what Kyle had to say about the overall war upon his return, but I wouldn't discredit a sniper for being unsportsmanlike on a battlefield. Valorous isn't the best word to describe every person who volunteers to put themselves in a country where his/her uniform effectively puts a target on his/her back, but its not cowardly either.
 

Gorrath

New member
Feb 22, 2013
1,648
0
0
Macsen Wledig said:
Gorrath said:
Cyberstrike said:
Traun said:
Enosh_ said:
the best thing about American Sniper is the butthurt it caused first by it's sheer existence and then the even bigger one by it's record breaking success
Seriously, it was extremely satisfying seeing Bob cram Palin in there, his sheer butthurt was the sole reason I watched this review.
If turning a lying racist into a hero is your idea of good time.
One can be a lying racist and a hero. Personally, I couldn't stand Chris Kyle but that doesn't mean he wasn't valorous.
No, it's the hiding on roofs and shooting people in the back that would disqualify him from being valorous.
You and I will have to disagree on what constitutes valor then since your definition would disqualify people like Lyudmila Pavlichenko, Roza Shanina, Gary Gordon, Vasily Zaytsev, and Ben Roberts-Smith. I'm not sure what your definition would be but I've a feeling I would find it absurd.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
XDSkyFreak said:
Wow ... just wow. How in the seven hells did this end up happening? I mean ... I'm not american, but I just fail to see how people can take a movie (especially one that was so ... bland and poorly done as American Sniper) and turn it into some cultural icon. Go back and watch Inglorious Bastards, because the parts about that nazi propaganda flick with the sniper is exactly what te sheep worshiping this brain-dead movie remind me of.
Comparisons between the nazi film in Inglorious Basterds because they saw it on twitter and thought it was smart: 2
 

Storm Dragon

New member
Nov 29, 2011
477
0
0
McElroy said:
Storm Dragon said:
I'd much rather see a movie about the deadliest sniper in all history: Simo Hayha. He was a Finnish farmer who enlisted during the Winter War and made at least 505 confirmed sniper kills over less than 100 days, all using an old bolt-action hunting rifle without a scope. The Soviet Union nicknamed him "The White Death" and launched entire missions just to kill this one man, up to and including artillery bombardments of areas where they thought he might be. Eventually, a Soviet sniper shot him in the lower jaw and took off half of his face. Simo responded by giving the Soviet sniper a first-hand demonstration of proper headshot technique. He then managed to return to base before succumbing to unconsciousness. Simo recovered and woke up a few days later, and the Soviets surrendered on that same day.

Seriously, this already sounds more like an action movie than real life.
While I agree with you and would like to see a movie about Häyhä (whether or not his kill count has been padded a bit), I must correct you on one thing: nobody surrendered at the end of Winter War. Häyhä woke up on the day the truce was declared.
Oops, fixed the ending bit. As for his kill count, 505 was actually the lowest estimate I found. Other sources credit him with as many as 542 sniper kills; and that's still not counting his approximately 150-200 kills with a submachine gun. Simo Häyhä wasn't just the deadliest sniper ever, he was the deadliest single human being in recorded history.
 

TaboriHK

New member
Sep 15, 2008
811
0
0
Wasn't going to post because I felt my comment was asinine but it looks like this entire thread is asinine so my two cents: gotta rein in the accent, Bob. When it starts slipping in, you just sound like someone yelling about the Patriots and I completely tune out.
 

Ihateregistering1

New member
Mar 30, 2011
2,034
0
0
ryukage_sama said:
The issue that Bob is addressing in this video is that the film is NOT an genuine representation of the war while being treated by its fans (and pundits) as such and that the interpretation that viewing this film is an act of patriotism is disingenuous.
Several things here:
1: How would Bob know what was a "genuine representation" of the Iraq War? Was he there? Methinks that Bob will only accept something as a "genuine representation" if it satisfies his political beliefs, but maybe I'm just being cynical.

2: To call anything that follows one man (or even a small group) a "genuine representation" of a war is, in fact, disingenuous by itself. Wars have multiple battlefields, with lots of people doing lots of different things. No one's experience is exactly alike. I could make a war film in which we do nothing but follow the Battle Captain (google it if need be) for his/her entire deployment to Iraq. They never leave the wire, never get shot at, and never shoot at the enemy. Is that a "genuine representation"? For that individual, yes. But you show that to a group of Infantrymen who went on patrol every day and ask them if this is a "genuine representation" of the Iraq War, and they'd say hell no. If someone looks at the experience of one person and declares that it's supposed to represent the entirety of the conflict, that's their problem, not the film's.

3: I've yet to see anyone declare that watching (and liking) this movie instantly makes you a Patriot. Likewise, I've yet to see anyone declare you're un-American for disliking the film. Note that there's an important distinction between just saying "I didn't like the movie", and "I hate Chris Kyle the person", or "anyone who likes this movie is racist", which I have seen.
 

Arcane Azmadi

New member
Jan 23, 2009
1,232
0
0
Charcharo said:
I do not understand how in the f*$king hell, you Bob can basically take SUCH a certain and concrete position about something as subjective as the quality and messages in a work of art?
That was just PLAIN UGLY as all hell.
Are you... completely there...? He can take that kind of position because -get this- HE'S A FUCKING MOVIE CRITIC! Analysing a movie and then telling you whether it's good or bad (the "I think" part should be kind of obviously inferred automatically) is kind of HIS JOB. What kind of critic would he be if he said "I think this movie SUCKS... but that's just my opinion, you should go see it anyway and make up your own mind"? About as much use as a hessian condom.
 

tzimize

New member
Mar 1, 2010
2,391
0
0
Hindkjaer said:
A movie about domination and submissiveness (fifty shades of gray)is forcing MovieBob to watch and work with it for months.. I find that to be irony on a entire different level!
Haaaaaaaaaah! Now thats downright juicy.

OT: I dont think Clint will ever outdo Gran Torino. At least not for me.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Arcane Azmadi said:
Charcharo said:
I do not understand how in the f*$king hell, you Bob can basically take SUCH a certain and concrete position about something as subjective as the quality and messages in a work of art?
That was just PLAIN UGLY as all hell.
Are you... completely there...? He can take that kind of position because -get this- HE'S A FUCKING MOVIE CRITIC! Analyzing a movie and then telling you whether it's good or bad (the "I think" part should be kind of obviously inferred automatically) is kind of HIS JOB. What kind of critic would he be if he said "I think this movie SUCKS... but that's just my opinion, you should go see it anyway and make up your own mind"? About as much use as a hessian condom.

You do realize that there is more then one movie critic on this planet.
It has a metascore of 72. So saying it is MOSTLY taken negatively by critics... is a lie. Technically. 72 for movies is VERY high.

Not that all of that matters. His opinion is above no one elses. ANd it should not be presented as if it were.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Haerthan said:
Dude Saddam was an angel compared to what the ISIS is right now. Also I would leave him in power cause he was a counter-balance to Iran. A majority of Iraqis want him back cause guess what: there was order, there was an economy, there was food. Funny how that works. Was he bad? Yea. But there will always be someone worse.
The same way Stalin is an angel compared to hitler?

You know who likes getting rid of Saddam? the Kurds, for example. But if the majority enjoys the tyranny why should anyone stop them?
 

Haerthan

New member
Mar 16, 2014
434
0
0
inu-kun said:
Haerthan said:
Dude Saddam was an angel compared to what the ISIS is right now. Also I would leave him in power cause he was a counter-balance to Iran. A majority of Iraqis want him back cause guess what: there was order, there was an economy, there was food. Funny how that works. Was he bad? Yea. But there will always be someone worse.
The same way Stalin is an angel compared to hitler?

You know who likes getting rid of Saddam? the Kurds, for example. But if the majority enjoys the tyranny why should anyone stop them?
Sure for the Kurds Saddam was a tyrant. But guess what: ISIS is worse than Saddam for both the Kurds, the Shiites and the Sunnis. ISIS is actively engaged in a war with the Kurds of Iraq and Syria. And if they get the power in Iraq they will do worse than the Halabja chemical attack, just ask the Yazidis and Christians there. So yea Saddam was a tyrant, not doubt about it, a bad person through and through. But at least Iraq didn't have to deal with the shit under his regime that they deal with nowadays.

Stalin was worse than Hitler. Everybody with a knowledge of Eastern European history knows that. Saddam is nowhere near Stalin, so please stop bringing that analogy in the conversation because it doesn't work. A thief, a murderer, a genocidal maniac, manipulator and Christ knows what else.

Also funny how nobody asks the people of what they want, no matter where they are from. Nobody asked the Iraqis what they wanted when the US rolled into their country.
 

McElroy

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
3,992
102
68
Finland
Storm Dragon said:
McElroy said:
Storm Dragon said:
I'd much rather see a movie about the deadliest sniper in all history: Simo Hayha. He was a Finnish farmer who enlisted during the Winter War and made at least 505 confirmed sniper kills over less than 100 days, all using an old bolt-action hunting rifle without a scope. The Soviet Union nicknamed him "The White Death" and launched entire missions just to kill this one man, up to and including artillery bombardments of areas where they thought he might be. Eventually, a Soviet sniper shot him in the lower jaw and took off half of his face. Simo responded by giving the Soviet sniper a first-hand demonstration of proper headshot technique. He then managed to return to base before succumbing to unconsciousness. Simo recovered and woke up a few days later, and the Soviets surrendered on that same day.

Seriously, this already sounds more like an action movie than real life.
While I agree with you and would like to see a movie about Häyhä (whether or not his kill count has been padded a bit), I must correct you on one thing: nobody surrendered at the end of Winter War. Häyhä woke up on the day the truce was declared.
Oops, fixed the ending bit. As for his kill count, 505 was actually the lowest estimate I found. Other sources credit him with as many as 542 sniper kills; and that's still not counting his approximately 150-200 kills with a submachine gun. Simo Häyhä wasn't just the deadliest sniper ever, he was the deadliest single human being in recorded history.
Well, people who actually dug into the original sources (or at least the closest alternatives they could find) have calculated his sniper kills to about 250-300. As seen here (prepare to be able to read Finnish): http://agricola.utu.fi/keskustelu/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=4868 One of the main figures used is 219 + about the same with an smg, that got mentioned in an award ceremony for Häyhä's accomplishments some four weeks before he got shot. The figure got bloated with the legend as well as the Soviets' tactics being rushing with the numbers advantage, and during such rushes Häyhä's war buddies "confirmed" loads of kills which all fell behind the enemy line where they couldn't actually be counted.
 

MovieBob

New member
Dec 31, 2008
11,495
0
0
Truglington said:
It's stupid shit like this that makes me come out of lurking...
As a veteran of the Iraq War (affording me infinite film criticism cred) I still think it's a bad film for some of its messages, but mostly because of the absurdly gung-ho reception it garnered. Clearly, something is wrong. On the other hand, I believe the bulk of other critics are correct in thinking it's a technically good movie.
I think Fury, aside from letting the wet blanket live at the end, did a better job.
I cant agree.

Fury is a movie that claimed that American tanks are inferior and/or shit.

That... is a myth that must DIE.


inu-kun said:
Haerthan said:
Dude Saddam was an angel compared to what the ISIS is right now. Also I would leave him in power cause he was a counter-balance to Iran. A majority of Iraqis want him back cause guess what: there was order, there was an economy, there was food. Funny how that works. Was he bad? Yea. But there will always be someone worse.
The same way Stalin is an angel compared to hitler?

You know who likes getting rid of Saddam? the Kurds, for example. But if the majority enjoys the tyranny why should anyone stop them?
Stalin is not better then Hitler. In fact... he is probably WORSE.

Hitler is a monster. Stalin... is something even more... I honestly cant say.
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
JarinArenos said:
Why do people insist on feeding obvious sockpuppets? I've never understood that.

Clint Eastwood hasn't put out a good movie in 20 years, whether directing or acting. I didn't expect this to change anything. It's about as rambling as his empty chair speech was.
The Bridges of Madison County, Million Dollar Baby, Gran Torino, Mystic River, Invictus and Letters From Iwo Jima/Flags of Our Fathers would like a word with you.

As for American Sniper, it seems that almost everyone who reviews it is projecting their political views onto it, whether they're left or right wing. I'm going to wait until it comes out on DVD and make up my own mind.
 

The Choke

New member
Nov 5, 2014
52
0
0
I like how people keep trying to say this movie is such an accurate representation of a soldier's life when it's not even an accurate representation of Kyle's life. Others have brought up the "don't speak ill of the dead" reasoning behind leaving out some of the more controversial aspects of the man's life, but if Eastwood wanted to make a movie fully recounting a sniper's career without worrying about insulting his family, he could have gone for the less-polarizing figure of Nicholas Irving, still alive and able to respond to his own critics, and holder of the undeniably-awesome nickname "The Reaper" (also the title of his autobiography). I was disappointed to not hear more from him during his guest spot on The Nightly Show that discussed the movie.

Basically, given Kyle's career-kill-record and then sudden death, I can understand why Eastwood was enamored with telling his story, but I feel like in tip-toeing around the family's feelings, he may have done the story a disservice. It feels like it wants to say more but doesn't want to offend anyone, liberal or conservative, and so carefully avoids the main thrust of it's own argument- making its argument impossible to guess. Why is this movie, basically?

As someone who has never been to war, I went to see the movie with the hope that it would give me some insight into a man who did serve. However, Eastwood's hesitation made me feel like I was only getting half the story. I know some people say that I would hope the other half of the story would be something that spoke to my liberalism, but honestly I'd just like to see the other half of the story, period. Not "the other side" but just the parts that Eastwood felt would be too complicated to deal with while also being respectful of the recently dead. When I think about those things, it's impossible for the movie to not feel incomplete to me.
 

Gordon_4_v1legacy

New member
Aug 22, 2010
2,578
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
JarinArenos said:
Why do people insist on feeding obvious sockpuppets? I've never understood that.

Clint Eastwood hasn't put out a good movie in 20 years, whether directing or acting. I didn't expect this to change anything. It's about as rambling as his empty chair speech was.
The Bridges of Madison County, Million Dollar Baby, Gran Torino, Mystic River, Invictus and Letters From Iwo Jima/Flags of Our Fathers would like a word with you.

As for American Sniper, it seems that almost everyone who reviews it is projecting their political views onto it, whether they're left or right wing. I'm going to wait until it comes out on DVD and make up my own mind.
Huh, I had no idea Invictus was one of Eastwood's, didn't seem his speed. Well live and learn.


OT: I'm thinking of buying the guy's book; I hear a good chunk of the change goes to Veteran's Benefits/Charities so it won't be a total waste if I don't like it, and then watching the movie and see how they stack up. Can't offer a fairer chance than that to try and get my head around the guy.
 

Tojumaru

New member
Oct 17, 2014
25
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
JarinArenos said:
Why do people insist on feeding obvious sockpuppets? I've never understood that.

Clint Eastwood hasn't put out a good movie in 20 years, whether directing or acting. I didn't expect this to change anything. It's about as rambling as his empty chair speech was.
The Bridges of Madison County, Million Dollar Baby, Gran Torino, Mystic River, Invictus and Letters From Iwo Jima/Flags of Our Fathers would like a word with you.

As for American Sniper, it seems that almost everyone who reviews it is projecting their political views onto it, whether they're left or right wing. I'm going to wait until it comes out on DVD and make up my own mind.
Don't leave out Changeling which features Angelina Jolie's best performance(and a claustrophobic execution scene, I was hyperventilating through that whole thing), Space Cowboys(which kind of kickstarted the "old guys kick ass" trend) and Hereafter(which while not great was very interesting visually, and featured great acting from Matt Damon and Cecile de France). I might be the only guy who liked J. Edgar for that very last bit, where the shadow of doubt is cast on the whole affair by Armie Hammer's character calling Hoover a liar.

Also, is the tone of condescension really necessary Bob? "Hey, I told you not to pay to watch this film because I think it sucks, good for me, I am sooooo col, thank me!!!"
 

Souther Thorn

New member
Apr 5, 2013
105
0
0
jacobbanks said:
hermes200 said:
jacobbanks said:
mjharper said:
jacobbanks said:
Izanagi009 said:
jacobbanks said:
If you're not a veteran, then this movie wasn't for you and your opinion of it doesn't matter. Enjoy the freedom of speech for which you've done nothing to earn.
done nothing to earn it huh? so by that definition, anyone who does not want to or can't fight in a war have done nothing to earn a right that was granted to us by the Bill of Rights rectified in 1791, well before you and I were born.

Also, this movie was not given a limited release to VA organizations or military camps but to the public. As such, I would think that the public, having been the people who watch it, can have an opinion on it regardless of if it's about a veteran or not?
Oh you can have an opinion... it just doesn't matter... and yes... compared to the men and women who have died protecting that piece of paper that says you can say what ever you want, Yes! you've done nothing for it.
You signed up just to spark this debate? Well done.

Also, thanks for dismissing 99.9% of the current population of the Earth as having opinions which don't matter. That's cool too.
I actually did... And oh no, you misunderstand. When it comes to things that are about the effects of coming back from war and the effects of war. Non war veterans and their opinion of said portrayals don't matter. I'm sure if we we're talking about fixing a car or preforming lab research you wouldn't care about the opinion of a non mechanic or non scientist.
Your point is a fallacy for the same reason your other examples are fallacies. It is the same as saying only someone with experience with developing games can have an opinion on games, or only a movie director can have an opinion on movies and/or directing.

But let me put it this way, since I can find testimonials and opinions of veterans that disagree with the narrative you built on the movie, I guess your opinion is just as unimportant...
I would love to discuss this with other veterans... So with that... I guess I will have to get out of this forum hahaha.
Right here Chum. Former CTM/NO.IT, Chief USN. I can see you've got quite the opinion on you so I'll keep this as brief as I can.
You're comporting yourself like an idiot and you are shaming your service by belitteling the civilians that you served here. You do not ask for thanks, you do not say that they have no opinion or one that does not matter. They were your employer, your charge, your duty. They can kick us, beat us, scream and spit at us. The second you strike back or otherwise decide to throw that 'I'm a vet, bruh' demeanor around, you destroy the spirit of the service you did. Carry on with your civilian existence with some dignity man, instead of being another pup with more balls than brains.