Why more and more cinemagoers are hating America

I have to ask, though: how do you know Black Hawk Down is meant as anything that goes against that? Perhaps they're showing you an example of poor U.S. foreign policy, but they're doing so while also showing you how brave those men were.

Sure, we've made mistakes. I dunno what you learned in school, but in my education (both public school, and homeschool), I've never been taught that America was flawless. I was taught (and still believe) that America is an amazing, revolutionary country, and quite an example to follow in most areas, though, despite some of our recent problems.

As for it not being our business...I'm not looking to spark another political debate, but sometimes we have to make it our business. Would it be okay to let suffering go on if we had the means to stop it on the grounds that it wasn't our business?

Now, despite my disagreement overall, I DO agree that historical accuracy is important. If you're not gonna get that part right, you need to make it clear. Don't put "based on a true story" up there if you've embellished things heavily. It's just not honest. The spread of ignorance is never a good thing...and that's what movies like U-571 and Titanic do -- spread ignorance. And not through the fault of some stupid moviegoer who may or may not think Middle-Earth is a real place...but through fault of their own.

It's a shame, too, because I think U-571 is an amazing movie. Intense and emotional. I loved it. But, I'll be the first to admit that they had no business changing the nationality of the characters. My philoshopy is this: America's got LOTS of heroes throughout history. We Americans pride ourselves on it. So if we want to make a film about American heroism, we've got lots to choose from, I think, and we don't need to go using anyone else's story.

After reading some of the posts I would like to add my personal opinion.
Who cares! I think the US can't spend so much time worrying about what everyone else thinks. Its an American film made in America with the focus of entertaining an American audience. If you think other countries dont portray the US in a dim-light than you're greatly mistaken. Movies should be taken with a grain of salt. It's entertainment....a story, nothing more than that. With all that has been happening I dont think there is anything wrong with showing material that can inject some patriotism into our country ... we need it. If other people don't like it leave the thetaer or turn off the tube.

Clark Kent - I agree, the problem is, it's very true, according to some posts here, that outside countries JUDGE the US based on our media output. It's like a girl who goes to school dressed like a slut or puts pics of herself up naked on the net. Everyone from Timbuktu to Greenland is going to BELIEVE she's a whore. Someone could say, "take it with a grain of salt, she's just a kid, let her express herself, so long as she doesn't DO anything wicked" but ... it's true, how she paints herself will affect how others treat her, in the long term.

that said, the US can choose to NOT release certain films internationally. maybe we need a board or panel that determines what can go out - something comes across their desk, a US patriotic film, and they say no, this should be released nationwide ONLY. if some copies sneak over the border, fine, no big loss, but no, there's n oneed to deliberately release movies that studios know d@mn well could offend other nations.

For example, Collateral Damage is currently featuring something EXTREMELY close to Sept 11 and that is just TOTAL TOTAL capitalization on someone else's suffering. That sh|te is just NOT necessary. It just isn't. We don't need to see the elusive middle eastern terrorist get chased by Arnold S. We just don't. And I just bet that flick is released internationally. And if so, THAT is just plain stupid.

Something should change; something should get done. I don't believe in censorship but I do believe in rules. and it honestly seems like Hollywood stopped having to abide by any years ago. they just keep on going and until the day the Federal system or the President say STOP - they won't. Because there is ALWAYS someone who's going to buy the movie, the ticket, the popcorn. And that DOES piss me off. We're all so sick of seeing trash and the reason we ARE is because of the system. When FEWER films were made the films were better! Now so many are made that most of them are CRAP and the good ones don't even come out of the system, they come from independents!

This is not to say BHD is trash, I haven't even seen it. But like i said, rules. Americans and American products DO have an impact on the outside world not just politically, but socially. We represent our values. They see us through movies, music, films. They see our Britney Spears with boobs hanging out and our Destiny's Child with slits in the skirt up to the navel and they see Madonna. When the world first fell in love with film, they saw glamor, values, chivalry, depth, pushing the envelope, yes, experiments. At first there was naivete, but it was making beautiful work. Then there was maturity, and deep AND beautiful work. And somewhere in there trying to find some new story, some new slant, make some new money, it started becoming jaded. It forgot itself. It became willing to pretend something was worthwhile knowing it's using audiences, using stars, rather than working WITH them, making art. It stopped being about telling a beautiful story with depth and more about making a slick package with all the right people in it so they KNOW people will see it even if it sucks. and that's sad.

whew. anyway ...

film freak - you missed my point entirely.

I didn't say it mattered. I have no problem with any mixing up nationality, unless, just like you said, someone botches a film with their horrible accent. My point was that an American story MOVED someone who wasn't American. Stories are universal, life is universal, and film is an engine that allows - as my point was trying to cover, vs. bigval's comment regarding America distancing itself - that mix that I encourage and enjoy and believe is a strong suit of film. So, mixing is a GOOD thing and happens to disprove (to me) bigval's earlier point.

I disagree -- with the first part, that is. It was made before all this nonsense, and I really can't say whether it's getting more or less attention because of it. My gut instinct says more -- but not much...plenty of people just don't want to see something like that right now. So it could hurt it. I don't think it can be called capitalization, though, if they were working on it (and were basically done with it) before the attacks even happened.

As for some kind of screening process: well, people still WANT to see American films, even if they expect to disagree with some of them, I'm sure. People over there no doubt want to see a lot of these flicks, so, we oblige. We have a movie, they want to see it, it makes sense. I don't think we should have to screen anything -- people can screen themselves. No one needs their hand held, I don't think. If I'm watching a Chinese movie I have no grounds for complaint if it ignores the goodness of America and focuses on the virtues of Chinese people and heroes, etc.

Yes, Hollywood, to some extent, reflects American society - but if that's the case, what do you think of all the teenage gross-out comedies? Do a lot of Americans f--k pies? Do we condone wagging horse penises? Is that a new American pastime?

There's Hollywood movies that are deplorable for how they handle their subjects, it's true (I point to Zoolander most recently). But others handle them admirably (Beloved.) There are no easy answers - you're making generalizations that aren't fair. Why can't movies be judged on their own individual terms?

I refuse to address the issue of politics. I'm talking about the cinema - I think at the beginning of this thread you were too.

But I will say this: a movie is not obligated in any way to address issues that hold no weight in the full context of its story. For example, A Beautiful Mind glosses over John Nash's bisexuality. But is it any less of a cinematic achievement? It's still a remarkably affecting and compelling film. Even if a man named John Nash never existed, the movie would still be fantastic. Movies exist on their own individual planes - a movie can borrow from real life, but it doesn't become real life.

What does this have to do with movies? Is America's conservatism why more and more moviegoers hate them? Bullsh!t. I point you in the direction of the films being made in Afghanistan, and how positive their critical responses have been

These are political questions, not questions about the movie. Black Hawk Down doesn't say American lives are more valuable, nor does it say it was right to murder 1000 people. But here we go:

1. No, the life of an American is no more or less valuable than a Somali life. But in the context of the movie, the Americans are underdeveloped as well, and the Somalis are shown as smart enemies.

The Somalis are seen only as enemies. Imagine for the sake of your argument that they were white. Would you be saying the same thing? I don't think you would. And if that's the case, then what does that say about you?

I think Behind Enemy Lines is much more appalling in its treatment of the enemy - Bosnians are basically seen as total dumb@sses, that can't hit jack ***** even if they fire millions of rounds of machine gun bullets. From its American point of view, Black Hawk Down is even-handed enough not to be offensive, and not middle-ground enough to still allow the audience to identify.

2. The movie doesn't address this, so that's an irrelevant criticism of it. But, in a more political context, I think you're not looking at the situation in full - the U.S. was there to give aid to starving peoples, the warlords began firing on these innocents, so the U.S. decided to put a stop to it. When poor planning and execution, coupled with thousands upon thousands of hostile civilians with weapons began attacking the 50 or so soldiers, most of whom had never seen combat, lives were lost.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with the U.S.'s foreign policies. (I've also read that America had larger strategic interests in that area.) But I'm saying for the sake of the movie, it provides enough information to illustrate its point and achieve its purpose.

Will you please explain where exactly you're coming from? It seems right now that you're just using Black Hawk Down as a vessel to voice all these problems you have with the United States' foreign policies. What do you say to the points I've brought up about the movie? You're countering my statements with more political questions, and since I thought this discussion was supposed to be about movies, I don't think we're going anywhere.

I see movies and politics/history as separate entities. I guess that's all the situation boils down to. I'm not going to argue politics with you, but I'll defend Black Hawk Down all day.

About Collateral Damage:

It doesn't interest me personally. I wouldn't have seen it, even if it was released before the events of Sept. 11.

Excellent point T.

__________________
**** the Lakers!

I think people complain about America because they either have nothing to complain about or they're just biased because America is doing so well for itself (bar the wars and such of course).

And this coming from an Aussie!

__________________
www.esotericrabbit.com

Humm... I'm not nearly as adept at putting this as is our faithful host, T... but I'll give it my best shot. (By the way, that's why I like T so much... he says exactly what I want to say, just in a more concise fasion).

I personally enjoyed Black Hawk Down. I don't feel it was a racist movie primarily b/c the term 'skinnies' that you seem so offended by was coined by a group of outnumbered soldiers in a hostile nation. This is a pretty basic way for people to deal with fear, particularly when they aren't supposed to show it. I thought it was an appropriate phrase in the film and wouldn't doubt if it was said in the war.

As for the country of America... I feel with all my heart that we are the greatest nation the world has ever seen (a little biased of course, lol). Sure we have our problem, but any time you have more than two people in a room there are going to be disagreements and problems. Something I was thinking about the other day... Why is it that we have such a knack for turning out solid leaders full of integrity and leadership during times like this (Reagan and Bush are great examples). I do feel that our society has problems and that our moral values as a whole have declined over the past 50 years... but I don't us as being quite the cesspool some people make us out to be.

As for historical accuracy... I feel that for the most part it is very important, though in some films it's not important to the story and can thus be changed. T was right though... U-571 is a great example of an idiotic change that should never have been made... Of course anyone with half a brain is capable of going elsewhere to learn the real history behind the event.

I'll tell ya what, not to p*ss anyone off, but I think something Higher must be at work...we've had great men step in just when they are needed more than once. I'm biased, too...but I honestly believe that. We're starting to stray (too many federal regulations -- let the states govern themselves primarily!)...but I still wouldn't want to live anywhere else.

Thanks for the kind words, mightymose.

Great leaders at times of crisis? Ronald "I'm from Hollywood" Reagan and George "Trigger Happy" Bush are not great leaders. But that's just my opinion. I'm a fan of Clinton but it was his administration who messed up big time in Somalia, in the fight that was featured in Black Hawk Down.

Propoganda is a politic's must useful tool. And movies are the best source of it. Black Hawk Down, to me, was pro-America propoganda. It's the sort of food Terrorists will feed on to satisfy their American hatred. American can go ahead and make these sorts of films all they like. I'm just trying to show you the impression that it's giving to the world outside. It's a dangerous movie.

Where are the voices who are criticising America in the world of cinema? Where is Oliver Stone or Robert Altman? It's frightening to think that the American government has little criticism, though they are breaking international rules left, right and centre. I'd like to see Hollywood show a different side of the coin, show that America is critical of itself. Is Hollywood afraid? Films like MASH, Platoon, Three Kings had a voice that was critical of American policies and they were better films because of it.

If you can't see the political propoganda that was fed to you in BlackHawk Down then you've been blinded by your own patriotism and that can't be a good thing.

__________________
I couldn't believe that she knew my name. Some of my best friends didn't know my name.

Why would Germans have a problem. U.S. hardly even fought Germany in WWII. And it is certain that they did not win the war.

If any country should be given credit for winning WWII it should of course be Russia. (The U.S. were only concerned with beating Japan)


Why is it that people around the other side of the world hate your guts?

Going back to the movies topic i actually don't mind patriotic Amricana movies. I can understand what they represent and can enjoy them (usually) for what they are.

Watching Black Hawk Down, I don't know about you, but I was feeling all sorts of angry and hostile feelings, most of them directed towards the American government. The great achievement is that the movie gave me these feelings without ever even addressing them - I was spoken to entirely in terms of action.

The situation is shown as ill-concieved and poorly planned, as it was. Americans were ambushed, yes, but they were invading hostile territory. We were feeding starving people, but we had larger goals for the area. And so on. There are no easy answers to that situation, bigval. You're taking the easy way out.

I agree with you about MASH, Platoon (even though I think it's overrated), and Three Kings. They are all better films because of their political angles. But this is not a requirement in a war film. The Thin Red Line, for example, has nothing to do with politics. (Or war for that matter. But that's an argument for another day.)

Again, I ask you to imagine, for the sake of argument - what if Black Hawk Down was about soldiers from a made up country? Would it be any less of a cinematic achievement? I don't think so, but what do you think?

If you can't see the entire situation that is covered in Black Hawk Down, then you're blinded by your own guilty-liberal sentiment.

My honest opinion, b/c they are jealous of the freedoms we are fortunate to have and the success we have been blessed with. You don't see a whole lot of people immigrating to Russia, Afghanistan, China, etc...

One thing I have never understood in this crazy world of ours is why we encourage people to succeed, but once someone does we try to knock them down... Look at Bill Gates for a great example... I see the U.S. as being kind of that like. We've become so successful that others now resent us b/c of it.

Cute little fabricated nicknames aside, yes, Reagan and Bush are examples. You should listen to some of these speeches. Read about what Reagan did...both economically, and diplomatically. Yeah, it's your opinion. I can't say I'm surprised. Anyway, even if you don't like Reagan, people like Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, and George Washington have shown their appearances to be rather timely.

Is this a joke? You go on and on about how much everyone hates this crap all over the world, and then you ask where the criticism is? Maybe you don't realize this, but America is usually VERY hard on itself. There are tons of liberals (and even conservatives) in the media who are ALWAYS trying to push the government down. Why do you think Clinton got into the trouble he did? Because we jump ALL OVER our own damn government. Try doing that in Cuba or China. See how well it works. Starting to see the difference here?

It's this simple: it paints no political picture, specifically. It's just about guys being brave when thrust into some situation they DON'T want to be in, most likely. If anything, the brutality involved shows a leaning AGAINST the government's decision to send them there. What part of this don't you understand, or agree with?

Steve makes an excellent point here: what if the soldiers were from a fabricated country? Or how about a country other than the U.S.? Let's face it, your only gripe is that this film shows U.S. soldiers being brave. It's not the bravery that bothers you, and it's not the non-existent political angle (which you perceive to be pro-government, it seems), it's the fact that it portrays a group of Americans in a positive light.

That's not true...you're expressing personal distaste for it, too...you can't try to tell me you're only doing this to "warn us" in some way...because it's plain as day that you, personally, highly dislike it.

You shouldn't watch an American film and expect a story about Australians anymore than you should watch American football and get p*ssed off that it's not Rugby. Indian films contain almost entirely Indian actors. I'll bet I'd be hard-pressed to find an Indian film revolving around the story of a heroic American.

Maybe you don't realize this (do you live in the U.S., by the way?), but the American public is, historically, distrustful of government. Exceptions are made for things like federal funding in times of war or perceived crisis, but those are usually made as short-lived as possible. Poll after poll has shown that people want a smaller, less powerful government. Damn man, our entire system is setup to try and prevent the government from having too much power.

Anyway, you go one criticizing Reagan and Bush...see if I care. Many did the same with Lincoln, Roosevelt, etc. I imagine their accomplishments will be undeniable to anyone with an open mind not long from now.

Why, where did all these jewels of the Crown come from?

I thought this was a movie forum.

Why the negative political rants being initiated by the Marmite eaters?

Stick to movies, not politics. Royal subjects have nothing on us.

Have you not heard of globalization?

Who really cares?

TO EACH HIS OWN
Or her own.

Who cares? I for one am sick of posts upon post of arguing about politics or evolution!!

written and authorised by matt clayfield (c) 2001 all right reserved. for matt.