By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Hurt Locker = war propaganda film or fair & balanced?

 

Hurt Locker = war propaganda film or fair & balanced?

War propaganda film! 22 38.60%
 
Fair & balanced just like most war films. 14 24.56%
 
Never seen it, not my cup of tea! 9 15.79%
 
Candy!! 12 21.05%
 
Total:57
Wiintendo on 05 October 2010

It'd be nice, but perhaps asking too much, to get people to debate, either for or against, from the source material:

 

But what should we think about a German war film dealing with the Warsaw rising and the slaughter of Stalingrad, or a Japanese film about Nanking or the death march, that focused only on the heroism of their bomb-disposal  troopers, without any reference to the aggressive wars that situated them in Poland, Russia, China and the Philippines? Most people would characterize such films as "enemy propaganda," particularly while the wars were still going on, as are the U.S. wars  in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen (as well as Iraq, despite Washington's claim that "combat operations" are now over).
 
Suppose you were an Iraqi, who lived through 12 years of U.S.-UK-UN killer sanctions that took another million Iraqi lives, followed by seven years of invasion and occupation. What would you think of a U.S. war film where nearly all the Iraqi characters were villains or crooks, and the occupying GIs were depicted as heroes and at least well-meaning? 
 
What would you think when you read from the producers that "The Hurt locker" is "a riveting, suspenseful portrait of the courage under fire of the military's unrecognized heroes: the technicians of a bomb squad who volunteer to challenge the odds and save lives doing one of the world's most dangerous jobs.... Their mission is clear — protect and save." 
 
You'd probably think this film, which won six Academy Awards while the war was still going on, was enemy propaganda.

 

 

The articles only a few more paragraphs...

 

"The Militarization of Hollywood": Unlocking "The Hurt Locker"
War Propaganda wins the Academy Award
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20910
 
   I think that fairly soon, a movie so prominent as this will get official public recognition (besides advertising via military websites) of this film via the Pentagon, sanctioning it as Saving Private Ryan did shortly after it's award wins.

Of note a man that works in military to propagandize through hollywood has said that many films of the past which weren't financially back by the military would be today because they've been deemed to be on message, or in other words, movies like A Few Brave Men tote the military message effectively as to promote recruitment. (info from Hollywood and The Pentagon: A Dangerous Liaison - http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8125002310328201175#)


I would very strongly like a thorough truth out on video games and the military, in particular juggernaut Call Of Duty. I'd like a conscious public, well aware of the cooperation they have by helping to propagate the military's message and agenda, including 5 million displaced Iraqis and Afghanis, not limited to current atrocities only, but far extended into the murderous military history that exists.

God bless people with the bravery to expose Call of Duty, Medal Of Honor, Battlefield, and other works of darkness manipulating the hearts and minds of men towards spiritual destruction.
May God save people out of these explicitly evil games, and other related forms of media.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifixion_of_Jesus#Accounts                                                                                             'almost all modern scholars agree Jesus existed, and His baptism and crucifixion are historical facts.'
^Islam is a lie[.]  The Koran denies He died on the cross.

BIGGEST NEWS OF OUR LIFETIME: India Passes $20 Billion Dollar Law To Guarantee Food As A Civil Right

http://www.tabforacause.org/

movies: Bible Lessons, Weapons Of Mass Deception: Why You Shouldn't Trust The Mainstream Media, Hollywood's War On God: The Gnostic Influence, Operation Hollywood: How The Pentagon Censors And Shapes The Movies,

VGCThread: They Sold Their Souls For Rock And Roll - Rebuking The Satanic World Of Music

Thread: Returing Fire: Hacking Video Game Cutlure

Around the Network
sad.man.loves.vgc on 05 October 2010
sapphi_snake said:
sad.man.loves.vgc said:

The main charecter is an asshole who doesn't care about his team members and he is tooooooooooooo into it that it sounds so unreal. Bombs got harder to disintegrate as the movie neared the end it felt like a video game lol. I didn't like the movie and I thought it was too long with not so much happening or probably because I hate everything happened in Iraq and the soldiers in the movie were tooooo "good and nice" that also felt unreal and it is unreal.

FTR I think that that was exactly what Bigelow tried to achieve (maybe it was a reference to all the violent video games depicting war nowadays).

It was funny and I don't really mind it much. I just felt like mentioning it.

My main point is that the movie isn't believable AT ALL.



rocketpig on 05 October 2010
sapphi_snake said:
rocketpig said:
sapphi_snake said:
rocketpig said:

I felt the exact opposite way when I finished watching the film. I felt for the soldiers and the predicament they were put in the film. It all seemed rather pointless.

So, in your OPINION, it's a pro-war piece. In my opinion, it's neutral to anti-war but mainly, it's a character piece.

Isn't that the point of good art? To challenge perception and let the audience take from it what they will? Maybe both of us are right, maybe neither of us are right.

But to definitively say that the film is pro-war is, frankly, bullshit.

Why are the Americans over there? Should they be there? Is there any point to the war?

That's all that matters. The personal tragedy of the soldiers doesn't.

In your opinion. You DO realize that people are allowed to have dissenting opinions on subjects, right? And that your OPINION is not gospel... right?

Of couse they are. That doesn't change the fact that they're blind to what really matters (in MY OPINION, I gotta mention this;  you sure remind me of an annoying judge on The Good Wife).

But why don't you explain to me why you have the opinion that you do?

Soldiers join the military for many reasons; some good, some bad. Some join because of a bloodlust or because they have a screw loose (the lead character in the film), some out of obligation for their country. They don't choose where they are assigned, they don't choose what wars they do fight or don't fight. Some may disagree with the Iraq War but have faith in leadership and want to serve their nation so they join anyway. Some join in peacetime and are sent into an impromptu war they didn't choose.

Soldiers, like the rest of humanity, are a varied mix of people who join for different reasons. The same way I despise the terrorist bomber who destroys a public market, I may feel sympathy for his family who shelters him because he's family and are injured or killed because of it. Why should soldiers be any different? Your vilifying of them and talking about them as if they're all mindless robots is no different than any other kind of broad, sweeping demonization.

I feel sympathy for humans who are put in a shitty situation, even if it was "of their choosing" in a second-hand sort of way. And there's nothing wrong with that. Do I like all soldiers? Hell no, just like I don't like every member of any group of society. On the other hand, I'm not going to classify them all as evil or idiotic, either.

The Hurt Locker did a good job of displaying various people in the military; some crazy, some sane, some good, some bad, some fucked up, some just keeping their heads down and waiting for it to be over. Bigelow didn't burden the film with political posturing (which would have been INCREDIBLY easy given the subject) and opted to tell the story of a soldier. That's why I like it. It was about as far from propaganda as I've seen from a war film. Some of it was ugly and some of it wasn't... and it was up to the viewer to do with that what they pleased. That's about as far from propaganda as it gets, in my opinion.

PS. I didn't start this argument over opinion versus fact. You were the one busting other posters for stating opinion as fact while you were guilty of it yourself.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

pizzahut451 on 05 October 2010
sapphi_snake said:

@pizzahut451:

1. No its not. Why should you care if someone is a US soldier or Iraqi soldier? They are both humans whos life can be ended every second.

The movie was made by Americans, that's why it matters. Would Americans ever make a movie that puts American solidiers in a bad light?

2.  Because they are human beings? Putting their life on the line for their country and their people, willing to give a life for what they think is rightful.

Most soldiers don't seem to think very much (I'm pretty sure that's a bad quality to have if you're a soldier), so I doubt they're doing what THEY think is right. And how exactly are American soldiers "putting their life on the line for their country and their people" by invading Iraq? And as for the human being thing, after all the atrocities that solidiers (regardless of the side they're on FTR), can they still be called human beings?


1. The movie didnt put anyone in bad or good light. Its about soldiers who happend to be US soldiers and their experience and emotions in the war.Is it hard for you to believe that Americans didnt try to promote anything here? The movie didnt choose any sides at all. And yes, Amercans make movies that makes American soldiers look bad. I watched the movie about some squad in Iraq who raped teenage iraqi girl and killed her borther, and later one of the soldiers got kidnapped by Iraqi fundamentalists and got his head chopped off. In case you didnt notice in todays news, lots of amercans are VERY critical about their army in Iraq.

 

2.Well, they think they are defending their freedom and democracy by whiping out terrorist group in Middle East. Im not here to argue on weather their views are right or wrong. They are there because they feel thats the right thing to do.And of course you'll find some sick people that will rape and kill civilains, but that doesnt put an entire army and people who serve in the bad light.



rocketpig on 05 October 2010

If Bigelow was trying to make a pro-war piece, would she REALLY have used that guy as a lead character? Other than battle-induced trauma that could lead to audience sympathy, the guy was pretty much an asshole.

If that is pro-war propaganda, it's just about the worst damned attempt at war propaganda I've ever seen.




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

Around the Network
raptors11 on 05 October 2010

It was one of the most boring movies I've ever seen. I didn't finish it. I was promised action and didn't get any.



nightsurge on 05 October 2010
sapphi_snake said:
09tarheel said:

I don't ususally like "war" movies but thought The Hurt Locker was great, mainly because it didn't really seem like a war movie. It just used the setting to create tense situations and show how three characters responsded to the situation on a scale (1 was constantly terrified, with the main guy seeming to get thrills from it), but the film never promotes that enjoying fighting or being an adrenaline junkie is a good thing. Overall the movie had great directing, acting, pacing, cinematography, score etc.  It deserved the oscar based on being high quality and lack of competition for the year (its not like Avatar was actually deserving of winning an Oscar).

 

Although I will add that I think part of the reason the movie got such high reviews was because it released during the summer. Critics seem to get tired of the mindless entertainment blockbusters during the summer, so I think they were happy to see something like The Hurt Locker during that time.

Yeah, because your opinion is a fact.

You seem to think yours is...



rocketpig on 05 October 2010
raptors11 said:

It was one of the most boring movies I've ever seen. I didn't finish it. I was promised action and didn't get any.


Who promised you action?




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/

sad.man.loves.vgc on 05 October 2010
rocketpig said:
sapphi_snake said:
rocketpig said:
sapphi_snake said:
rocketpig said:

I felt the exact opposite way when I finished watching the film. I felt for the soldiers and the predicament they were put in the film. It all seemed rather pointless.

So, in your OPINION, it's a pro-war piece. In my opinion, it's neutral to anti-war but mainly, it's a character piece.

Isn't that the point of good art? To challenge perception and let the audience take from it what they will? Maybe both of us are right, maybe neither of us are right.

But to definitively say that the film is pro-war is, frankly, bullshit.

Why are the Americans over there? Should they be there? Is there any point to the war?

That's all that matters. The personal tragedy of the soldiers doesn't.

In your opinion. You DO realize that people are allowed to have dissenting opinions on subjects, right? And that your OPINION is not gospel... right?

Of couse they are. That doesn't change the fact that they're blind to what really matters (in MY OPINION, I gotta mention this;  you sure remind me of an annoying judge on The Good Wife).

But why don't you explain to me why you have the opinion that you do?

The Hurt Locker did a good job of displaying various people in the military; some crazy, some sane, some good, some bad

I don't remember it contained any charecter that was "bad" in the American side, at least not the main charecters. Abu Ghraib was beyond "bad" and none of the scenes showed us how ugly some of American soldiers can get.



rocketpig on 05 October 2010
sad.man.loves.vgc said:
rocketpig said:
sapphi_snake said:
rocketpig said:
sapphi_snake said:
rocketpig said:

I felt the exact opposite way when I finished watching the film. I felt for the soldiers and the predicament they were put in the film. It all seemed rather pointless.

So, in your OPINION, it's a pro-war piece. In my opinion, it's neutral to anti-war but mainly, it's a character piece.

Isn't that the point of good art? To challenge perception and let the audience take from it what they will? Maybe both of us are right, maybe neither of us are right.

But to definitively say that the film is pro-war is, frankly, bullshit.

Why are the Americans over there? Should they be there? Is there any point to the war?

That's all that matters. The personal tragedy of the soldiers doesn't.

In your opinion. You DO realize that people are allowed to have dissenting opinions on subjects, right? And that your OPINION is not gospel... right?

Of couse they are. That doesn't change the fact that they're blind to what really matters (in MY OPINION, I gotta mention this;  you sure remind me of an annoying judge on The Good Wife).

But why don't you explain to me why you have the opinion that you do?

The Hurt Locker did a good job of displaying various people in the military; some crazy, some sane, some good, some bad

I don't remember it contained any charecter that was "bad" in the American side, at least not the main charecters. Abu Ghraib was beyond "bad" and none of the scenes showed us how ugly some of American soldiers can get.

Oh wait, I forgot how it's only okay for directors to show black and white. Shades of grey are obviously unacceptable. You know what The Hurt Locker needed to not be propaganda? A massive rape scene of Iraqi women and/or cattle. It's the only way Bigelow could have shown the "evil" of the war, even though that wasn't the point of the film AT ALL and would have turned the movie into a true propaganda piece but you guys would have been okay with it because it'd be propaganda YOU agreed with.

As I said earlier, the lead character was an asshole. He wasn't necessarily "bad" per se but he certainly wasn't a good guy. Neither was ANYONE ELSE in the film. The main character was a fucked up guy who continually did fucked up things to his fellow soldiers, family at home, and then constantly put them all at risk.

Whooooooo! My HERO!




Or check out my new webcomic: http://selfcentent.com/