Brokeback Mountain, I am going to talk about last because I will probably put my foot into my mouth. I will piss people off. So I will put it way at the bottom. Nobody reads that far down.
The other two movies are based on actual events that are "slanted" to some degree. I realize that there are always two sides to every issue. So I had to think back to movies I have liked that other people said were slanted and not actual history.
"Patton".. Staring George C. Scott. I love this movie and have often wished we had someone like Patton in command today. Whenever this movie is on TV, I try and watch it. I believe the combination of Ike and Patton, plus all the brave men who fought, made America heroes in WWII.
I had a great Uncle who served in one division Patton was in command of. This uncle didn't care for Patton. Patton was called: "Old blood and guts." My uncle use to say: "Yea, our blood and his guts." He hated the movie Patton. He said that the strategy that America was using, anyone could have lead Patton's divisions. (Any other general) He said Patton made it MORE dangerous because he didn't want to stop and regroup. Many times, Patton ran himself out of supplies.
I respect my uncle. "He was there, I wasn't." And while he was alive, I would listen to him. But I still love the movie Patton. I think he was a great American General.
The second movie is "JFK" by Oliver Stone. I am predisposed to believing in a conspiracy on JFK's assassination because I just don't think Oswald could have done it by himself. People have said that District Attorney Jim Garrison didn't play that big a role in the investigation of JFK's murder. They say the movie JFK is based mostly on fiction. I do not care.. I like this movie. (For more on the topic of JFK- Click Here.)
So I do understand that there will always be two sides to every movie made about history.
Now.. I move onto today's movies…
First… I have not seen these movies. I will not see them until they land in the "bargain bin" at Billy Bob's movie house. I know it sounds silly.. But it is my way of "sticking it to the man." Since I haven't seen the movies, I cannot debate the content. But I can debate the premise.
George Clooney's- "Good Night, and Good Luck."
I respect Edward R. Murrow as a broadcaster. I have some records of his. A series of 78 speed records from a show he did called "Hear it now." These are collector's items.The premise: That Senator Joseph McCarthy's hearings on communistic activity in America was un-American. Murrow fought against the brass at CBS to report that these hearings were a witch-hunt.
Here is the problem I have. We knew that the Soviets had spies. (The Soviet rocket program is similar to the US Saturn rockets, just bigger. The "Mig" is similar to some US fighters, just bigger. The Soviet plans for a space shuttle were similar to the US space shuttle, just bigger.)
How do we find spies? Do we lay down and do nothing? Do we wiretap Americans? No.. we can't do that. That is un-American.
So we have open hearings on the subject. The one thing people who do not believe in these hearings have said is that; "It destroyed the career's of people." Let's take Lucille Ball. She popped on the list because she joined the communist party and she married a man whose family fled Cuba. "I can understand why she was on the list." This never destroyed her career. Lucille Ball had no idea why she joined the communist party. In an interview, she said: "We were young and stupid. Many young people in Hollywood joined the communist party. I never went to any meetings or donated any money to them."
Mark my words.. Twenty years from today you will hear that same thing. "I don't know why. Many of us in Hollywood were sympathetic to terrorists. We were young and stupid."
Lucille Ball was not charged with anything. She went on and had a great career. These hearings went on to find some interesting Soviet ties that needed to be investigated. Plus, it shut down some communistic activity in America. Did the McCarthy hearings go to far? Yes. But they were necessary.
(You will hear this twice in this post.) There is a danger in always second guessing what our fathers and grandfathers did. These people lived through the fear of communism in the 1950's. They felt these hearings were necessary. So do I. When you condemn the actions of a past generation, without regard for why they did it, you begin to look weak.. Spineless. Where is your backbone? It is easy for us to say communism never spread that far, so they didn't need to have hearings. But back then, who knew how far communism would go. It was spreading into different countries.
Now..
"Munich"
I realize that Steven Spielberg is trying to say that violence will get you more violence. Terrorist's have families and lives. Maybe we just do not understand these people?
(Here we go again..) Our fathers and grandfathers felt it was important to give the Jewish people their own state. People of the world picked the Holy Land. Why? I am not afraid to say it.. "Because the people in that region might someday blow up the Holy Land because they are mad about something." The state of Israel would be the perfect guardians of The Holy Land. "That land belonged to the Jewish people, long ago." So a group of nations pushed out the residents, (Palestinians) and created The State of Israel. It was a British commander who taught Israel to fight. "He did a great job!" America supplied some weapons.
We cannot continue second-guessing what our past generations did. Sure we can analyze it. Learn from it. But to say it was wrong? What gives us the wisdom to even make that statement?
Taking this land, (America) from Native Americans was not a good thing to do. "Do you want to give your land back to them?" Will you give up your house and move back to where ever your family came from?
So.. In my opinion.. We should respect and back the State of Israel. Therefore, I have no sympathy for Palestinian terrorists. In my opinion Israel has tried to work with them, and the Palestinians turn everything down. Sharon gave the Palestinians the Gaza Strip and it is now a hellhole. "Will Steven Spielberg take his vacation in The Gaza Strip?" I don't think so..
And finally..
"Brokeback Mountain." Featuring Gay cowboys..
I will probably never see this movie. No offence.. (If you're gay, there maybe things you do not want to see..) For me.. Seeing two cowboys kissing in a pup tent is not something I want to see.First off, (from what I hear) they are not cowboys. They herd sheep. Second, they have women. So they are not gay. They are bi-sexual. Or to use a more progressive term.. "They are experimenting.."
So the movie should be.. "Brokeback Mountain" Featuring Experimenting Sheepherders.
So.. either way you put it.. I do not want to see this movie. But I do not care that Hollywood has made it. It is progression. From Marilyn Monroe's skirt flying up from a street vent, to Sharon Stones beaver shot in Basic Instinct, to lesbian scenes in " Mulholland Drive." So the next step would be Experimenting Sheepherders.
Do I agree with this progression that Hollywood is on? No.. But I know I cannot stop it. As long as people line up to see this, Hollywood will make it.
The only thing I can do, is what my great uncle did to me, many years ago. When I commented on how much I like "Patton." He reminded me that there are two sides to every story.
Link to the original post: angryrepublican
