Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Lone Survivor

i wont see it simply because i dont like war movies. i think ive seen a grand total of 2 (full metal jacket and platoon), and ive only seen them once each. i dont like glorifying war for entertainment.
 
i wont see it simply because i dont like war movies. i think ive seen a grand total of 2 (full metal jacket and platoon), and ive only seen them once each. i dont like glorifying war for entertainment.

there are a lot of "war movies" that are simply good movies, that don't glorify war for entertainment without showing the results of war.

though... there are always debates as to whether a movie glorifies war or not. when a great movie comes out, people with an agenda will often try to claim it as their own; I read the anti-war and pro-war advocates both did that with Patton, which came out during Vietnam. Supposedly, Nixon was so inspired by it that he ordered the bombing of Cambodia.

I wouldn't refuse to see a movie because some idiots take it as pro-war... but I do think that there are some movies that are objectively pro-war, and they're typically made with extensive Pentagon support (like Top Gun) or intelligence agency support (like the CIA with ZeroDarkTHirty). I read this article when it came out documenting that. It seems there are a couple directors (Kathryn Bigelow and Peter Berg) who's careers have basically become getting paid to direct pro-war movies on behalf of the US gov't. you could argue that this is basically against the law, since there are federal laws against the Pentagon spending money domestically to influence opinion... but I guess the Department of Justice has other things to worry about.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
jeez... it's not just war movies either:
"This is why (as I previously reported) the Pentagon sponsored the new ?X-Men? movie and then used it to produce recruitment ads that portray the soldier?s life as just as fun, exciting and safe as being an superhero. As the Journal notes, it is incredibly effective:
The spots played in cinemas, and exit polls of 17- to 24-year-olds leaving the movie theater found that those who saw the ad were 25% more likely to say they would consider joining the Army than those who didn?t, according to U.S. Army Accessions Command Chief Marketing Officer Bruce Jasurda.

?We get asked all the time, ?Why do you market??? said Jasurda. ?We?re a nation at war going on 11 years, which is ? the longest period of consistent conflict that the U.S. Army?s ever been involved in, that the nation?s ever been involved in, longer than any war we?ve been in?That?s why we market. We want to make sure people understand the full nature of this product. The Army is the ultimate considered purchase.?

 
there are a lot of "war movies" that are simply good movies, that don't glorify war for entertainment without showing the results of war.

though... there are always debates as to whether a movie glorifies war or not. when a great movie comes out, people with an agenda will often try to claim it as their own; I read the anti-war and pro-war advocates both did that with Patton, which came out during Vietnam. Supposedly, Nixon was so inspired by it that he ordered the bombing of Cambodia.

I wouldn't refuse to see a movie because some idiots take it as pro-war... but I do think that there are some movies that are objectively pro-war, and they're typically made with extensive Pentagon support (like Top Gun) or intelligence agency support (like the CIA with ZeroDarkTHirty). I read this article when it came out documenting that. It seems there are a couple directors (Kathryn Bigelow and Peter Berg) who's careers have basically become getting paid to direct pro-war movies on behalf of the US gov't. you could argue that this is basically against the law, since there are federal laws against the Pentagon spending money domestically to influence opinion... but I guess the Department of Justice has other things to worry about.

true, which is why the only 2 ive watched are those two. the bigger thing for me is that I just dont like watching that much violence period, regardless of what kind of film it is. im not one for many action movies at all, or horror, with a few exceptions (less graphic ones, as a rule).
 
I love war movies. Most go back to the 40's and 50's though. I wouldn't shut then all out there are some very good flicks..
 
What about movies like the
300
And it's sequel coming out soon?

How do those fall you your guys eyes?
 
i watched 300 once with a group of people cuz they all wanted to see it, but i wasnt a fan. not interested in the sequel at all. im just not a fan of tons of violence.
 
Back
Top