Reply to Topic
Ok, as expected everyone took my post entirely out of context. First, I wasn't accusing tramp of extremism in any way, shape, or form. I was simply trying to clarify Yoda's position, because I do not believe that he was explicitly defending Bush. I was trying to clarify the kind of attitude that he was advocating. Personally, as I believe I already stated, I am completely against the B.A. and all of its actions. I shouldn't have had to say that twice.
W.
Erasmus, that was a wonderful post. Better than anything I tried to say.
Yes, and here we have a President where impeachment proceedings were hardly threatened. He has been accused of being worse than Nixon by those that were in the Nixon White House. That he has not paid any price for his corruption worries me. Further, we did impeach a President over a sexual indiscretion. For shame, America. And I'm sorry that we're not marching in the streets as we did then; unfortunately, I think it comes back to the draft -- people only get involved when they think it impacts them directly. I also think we've become too cynical. That is terrible. I'm sorry the American people don't feel the need to fight for our ideals.
Add to that the signing statements, an arrogant action of a President who believes he is above the law and in effect, has created an emperical Presidency. Further, the actions by his party in Congress can only be described as bully tactics in an effort to have one party rule. His disregard for those that have died (has he been to one funeral?), his refusal to change his mind when new facts appear make him a reckless individual. And that is merely a few additional things he has done....
And the excuse of "9/11 changed everything" is appalling. Benjamin Franklin said, "those who give up liberty for security deserve neither."
I hadn't really thought of that, but I would agree. I was pretty shocked when I first heard about this film, and as much as like Oliver Stone (I do), this does seem strange. I'm going to theorize the box office will be very poor. I get the feeling people are burned out on Bush.
Sawman -- I know you were clarifying Yoda's position and I appreciated your post. I just wanted to respond to some of what you said in an effort to clarify my position. All good?
I would like to support what tramp has posted here. It is well thought out, reasoned, rational. It is not a strident or a knee-jerk response nor do I find anything in it that is intended to insult anyone. If there are any insults it has been from this President to the people of our nation and to the Constitution of this great country.
I am a child of the sixties and a Vietnam veteran who served there in 1970. This country was nearly torn apart by that war and by the actions of President Nixon in the aftermath of Watergate. Thousands of Americans marched in the streets of American cities and Washington D.C. to protest that war. Today you would hardly know that our troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US House of Representatives voted to impeach Nixon for his actions in the cover up of the Watergate burglary and the illegal wiretapping of 6 citizens.
I am a child of the sixties and a Vietnam veteran who served there in 1970. This country was nearly torn apart by that war and by the actions of President Nixon in the aftermath of Watergate. Thousands of Americans marched in the streets of American cities and Washington D.C. to protest that war. Today you would hardly know that our troops are in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US House of Representatives voted to impeach Nixon for his actions in the cover up of the Watergate burglary and the illegal wiretapping of 6 citizens.
This President has authorized the illegal wiretappings of thousands of US citizens.
This President has launched a pre-emptive war against another country that was not a direct threat to this country, an action unprecedented in American history.
This President and this administration have sought to justify the use of torture, calling it by the Orwellian phrase ‘enhanced interrogation’.
This President and this administration arrested an American citizen (Jose Padilla), held him in a military prison without charges and without the right to consul for more than five years.
This President has permitted CIA interrogators to torture, in foreign countries, captured Al-Qaeda suspects who were directly responsible for the attacks of 9/11, thus insuring that they can never be brought to trial in our justice system.
These actions are utterly indefensible and should anger all Americans. They stand against our very core beliefs.
This President has launched a pre-emptive war against another country that was not a direct threat to this country, an action unprecedented in American history.
This President and this administration have sought to justify the use of torture, calling it by the Orwellian phrase ‘enhanced interrogation’.
This President and this administration arrested an American citizen (Jose Padilla), held him in a military prison without charges and without the right to consul for more than five years.
This President has permitted CIA interrogators to torture, in foreign countries, captured Al-Qaeda suspects who were directly responsible for the attacks of 9/11, thus insuring that they can never be brought to trial in our justice system.
These actions are utterly indefensible and should anger all Americans. They stand against our very core beliefs.
And the excuse of "9/11 changed everything" is appalling. Benjamin Franklin said, "those who give up liberty for security deserve neither."
There is abroad in this land a notion that everybody has an opinion and that all opinions are of equal import. I am sorry but there some things that have a moral certainty to them. The condemnation of torture and the unwavering belief in equal justice for all under the law are among them.
The idea that Hollywood can make a movie about Bush, be it satire, drama, comedy, or merely Oliver Stone venting his rage against a President he dislikes and sell it as an entertainment to generate a buck is reprehensible to me. It cheapens and degrades the cost that has been paid by those who have suffered from these crimes.
The idea that Hollywood can make a movie about Bush, be it satire, drama, comedy, or merely Oliver Stone venting his rage against a President he dislikes and sell it as an entertainment to generate a buck is reprehensible to me. It cheapens and degrades the cost that has been paid by those who have suffered from these crimes.
Sawman -- I know you were clarifying Yoda's position and I appreciated your post. I just wanted to respond to some of what you said in an effort to clarify my position. All good?
X
Favorite Movies
Oliver is unpredictable. Simple as that. But seriously, you have to understand, even if Oliver Stone chooses to make an honest and unbiased portrayal of our President, he's going to attack him inadvertently. Bush has made some rather large mistakes in his 8 years, that even Pro-Bushies will acknowledge. And of course, if Oliver is going to make an honest film, he's going to have to show the good and bad of Bush's career, which means the mistakes. Unfortunately for Stone, people are going to accuse him of being biased and people are going to support him for being honest. In order to be unbiased, you have to show the bad too. And I think everyone will agree that there has been alot of that in the last 8 years. And that has to be shown in the film. Simple as that.
__________________
"All the confusion of my life... has been a reflection of myself! Myself as I am, not as I'd like to be." - Guido, 8 1/2
"All the confusion of my life... has been a reflection of myself! Myself as I am, not as I'd like to be." - Guido, 8 1/2
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Based on this clip alone, I'm going to go out on a limb and say this movie is gonna be the funniest movie in the history of movies. I do not like Oliver Stone, but I have to give the guy some credit on this one. And Josh Brolin's my hero now. "Well, looks like we're hittin it off like grease hits a skillet, huh?"
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
This movie looks hilarious - can't believe they would actually be making a comedy about George W. Bush.
I wonder what his take on it is...
I wonder what his take on it is...
I was mildly interested when I first heard about the project. But after seeing the trailer just before the screening of RockandRolla, I feel this is a must see - and this is coming off somebody who doesn't like Oliver Stone..
I'm in the process of writing a little something on Josh Brolin anyways. It'll be posted shortly.
I'm in the process of writing a little something on Josh Brolin anyways. It'll be posted shortly.
You Mofo's still excited about seeing this? I'm really anticipating it. I don't know if it's because of Brolin or Newton, but this is definitely must see material. I've read two offcial reviews on it already. One postive, the other one mostly negative, though it did get 2 stars out of 5. I'm trusting the positive one for now, because the negative one had very vague reasons for not liking the picture.
Heres the postive: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.../09/bfw109.xml
Negative: http://entertainment.timesonline.co....cle4903206.ece
I'm pretty sure the Telegraph is more reliable than the Times Online.
Heres the postive: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.../09/bfw109.xml
Negative: http://entertainment.timesonline.co....cle4903206.ece
I'm pretty sure the Telegraph is more reliable than the Times Online.
Prestige, I actually thought the negative review was less vague than the positive one. And I wasn't thrilled with either review.
I didn't see anything about the tone of the film. One of the trailers had a comedic tone, but from reading the reviews and the article I link to below, it seems Stone made a straight story of the man. Stone calls it a "Shakespearean" story.
BTW, some interesting quotes about the film over at The Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/1..._n_133284.html
I really think the whole thing is rather wierd. The man hasn't even left the White House yet. What is the point of making a film like this now? Why the hurry to be there before election day? And from what I'm reading, there is nothing new in the story. So why?
I didn't see anything about the tone of the film. One of the trailers had a comedic tone, but from reading the reviews and the article I link to below, it seems Stone made a straight story of the man. Stone calls it a "Shakespearean" story.
BTW, some interesting quotes about the film over at The Huffington Post:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/1..._n_133284.html
I really think the whole thing is rather wierd. The man hasn't even left the White House yet. What is the point of making a film like this now? Why the hurry to be there before election day? And from what I'm reading, there is nothing new in the story. So why?
X
Favorite Movies
I'm sorry I have to disagree tramp mate. The negative review just didn't make sense. At least to me. First it says that Josh Brolin does a very good impression of George W, but then it says that it's just that - an impression. Well, er, yeah!
If an actor is playing a real life figure, of course it's an impersonation. So that remark was very obscure.
Your right though, neither review says anything about the tone. I too am having trouble deciding if it's meant to be a comedy, satire or straight forward drama. But hey, maybe it will encompass all of it and be a revolutionary drama. The negative reviewer did admit that he hadn't seen anything like W. before, so maybe he was a bit overwhelmed by the uniqueness of it, who knows. Some trailers are very deceptive, and until we see the finished product, we don't really know all that much about the film.
If an actor is playing a real life figure, of course it's an impersonation. So that remark was very obscure. Your right though, neither review says anything about the tone. I too am having trouble deciding if it's meant to be a comedy, satire or straight forward drama. But hey, maybe it will encompass all of it and be a revolutionary drama. The negative reviewer did admit that he hadn't seen anything like W. before, so maybe he was a bit overwhelmed by the uniqueness of it, who knows. Some trailers are very deceptive, and until we see the finished product, we don't really know all that much about the film.
Let's be honest, just like the worst books about the man, by ex-employees with an axe to grind. Good or bad, the the real "truth" of this Presidency will always be of speculation, or at least a good portion of it. The "truth" is most likely worse and more shocking to some degree, considering what information they are willing to release.
__________________
...uh the post is up there...
...uh the post is up there...
I can - he will probably look at it blankly and wonder who they are about.
A comedy on the president? Wow, I want to see this already.
