Americans don't support anti-war films - DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate

**meencegic** · 11-12-2007, 07:30 AM

IMO,

Many Americans (self included) have an incredible capacity to ignore the fact that their nation is involved in a war. They go to the movies to be entertained and don't find entertainment in a reminder that the human, financial and material resources of their nation are being needlessly wasted.

**TheReallyBest** · 11-12-2007, 07:42 AM

Originally posted by DanS
But it's interesting to see a far left Hollywood ... McCarthy used to call everyone he didn't agree with a Communist.
Bill O'Reilly calls these people "far left."
It seems to have caught on.

The last truly far-left movie Hollywood made was Grapes of Wrath.

**JoesBro** · 11-12-2007, 07:50 AM

Quacks like a duck...

**attractiveweb** · 11-12-2007, 07:57 AM

A mindless nation requires mindless entertainment.

The trick Hollywood needs to learn, besides being able to make decent films, is to be more subtle. Maybe even employ subliminal messages.

**ycMC0PLg** · 11-12-2007, 08:25 AM

Pro war movies would bomb as well.

Currently most Americans would prefer to ignore the war in all its aspects.

Besides, a lot of hard dramas are not doing very well anyways, and there is a glut of them as well.

**mincbiori** · 11-12-2007, 08:32 AM

Originally posted by OzzyKP
You forget how popular Fahrenheit 9/11 was at the time. Compare the take of an average motion picture and compare the take for F 9/11.

**BorBitExatini** · 11-12-2007, 08:49 AM

The trick Hollywood needs to learn, besides being able to make decent films, is to be more subtle. Maybe even employ subliminal messages. Like all those 50s monster movies involving radioactive poisoning

**Kneeniasy** · 11-12-2007, 09:06 AM

Independence Day was the highest grossing film when it premiered in the US. What is this thread about?

**itititit** · 11-12-2007, 09:15 AM

To be fair, Rendition looked like it was nothing more than a blatant political piece where the actors are mere mouthpieces for the writer to give long, not-quite-eloquent (almost Randian in their snore factor) speeches about the horrors of the eponymous practice.

Maybe people didn't want to see it not because it was anti-war, but because it looked like it was going to suck, even with the star power it had available?

As far as Lions for Lambs, I don't think it got the marketing muscle needed to make it a hit.

I have no hypothesis on In the Valley of Elah, though.

**BiseCreesia** · 11-12-2007, 09:20 AM

Originally posted by DanS
Rendition... bombed i dont know about the other films, but Rendition sucked badly. it was... torture watching (pun intended)

i believe you can easily find many anti-war films with box-office success...

**refdhbgtd** · 11-12-2007, 01:22 PM

**valensds** · 11-12-2007, 02:12 PM

I disagree.

Wasn't Platoon an anti-war movie as well? It just depends what people regard as anti-war movies. IMO all movies with at least bits of realism are anti-war movies.

Then again, we might not understand that they are actually anti-war movies.

**Pedsshuth** · 11-12-2007, 02:21 PM

Originally posted by DanS
Platoon was made ages ago, Pekka. Think this millennium.

I thought he said Patton...

**uC4F0NVL** · 11-12-2007, 04:39 PM

Perhaps Hollywood isn't willing to risk any more 'Alamo' style disasters.

**replicajoy** · 11-12-2007, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly
Translation: Americans don't like depressing films.

Any more startling revelations, guys? Maybe something about the religious practices of the Pope, or the defecatory habits of bears? QFT

**BlackBird** · 11-12-2007, 06:00 PM

I'm not sure if Gladiator

was pro- or anti-war, but it pwnd teh box office.

**expomeHattePe** · 11-12-2007, 06:00 PM

No one is dumb enought to make a blatantly "pro-war" film, which belies DanS's implication that those movies failed for being Anti-war.

There are a lot of dramas out there doing poorly, like "Things we lost in the fire." I don't think this will be qa very happy movie season for the studios.

**Qeiafib** · 11-12-2007, 06:16 PM

Why has nobody mentioned that Lions for Lambs features Tom Cruise? There might still be some residual flop factor attached to his name after all the couch-jumping and Scientology-promoting.

**thushioli** · 11-12-2007, 06:39 PM

Is it possible that the reson the movies listed are failing is that they just suck and in the case of at least some of the trailers seem kinda preachy?

**Aswdwdfg** · 11-12-2007, 07:52 PM

Nor is Rendition really anti-war, as opposed to just ... anti-sending innocent people overseas to be tortured by oppressive regimes.

Surely teh fact that it bombed doesn't mean that "middle America" approves of this practice?

11-12-2007, 07:30 AM	#1
meencegic Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 375 Senior Member	Americans don't support anti-war films IMO, Many Americans (self included) have an incredible capacity to ignore the fact that their nation is involved in a war. They go to the movies to be entertained and don't find entertainment in a reminder that the human, financial and material resources of their nation are being needlessly wasted. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 07:42 AM	#2
TheReallyBest Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 385 Senior Member	Originally posted by DanS But it's interesting to see a far left Hollywood ... McCarthy used to call everyone he didn't agree with a Communist. Bill O'Reilly calls these people "far left." It seems to have caught on. The last truly far-left movie Hollywood made was Grapes of Wrath. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 07:50 AM	#3
JoesBro Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 368 Senior Member	Quacks like a duck... Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 07:57 AM	#4
attractiveweb Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 372 Senior Member	A mindless nation requires mindless entertainment. The trick Hollywood needs to learn, besides being able to make decent films, is to be more subtle. Maybe even employ subliminal messages. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 08:25 AM	#5
ycMC0PLg Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 444 Senior Member	Pro war movies would bomb as well. Currently most Americans would prefer to ignore the war in all its aspects. Besides, a lot of hard dramas are not doing very well anyways, and there is a glut of them as well. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 08:32 AM	#6
mincbiori Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 507 Senior Member	Originally posted by OzzyKP You forget how popular Fahrenheit 9/11 was at the time. Compare the take of an average motion picture and compare the take for F 9/11. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 08:49 AM	#7
BorBitExatini Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 356 Senior Member	The trick Hollywood needs to learn, besides being able to make decent films, is to be more subtle. Maybe even employ subliminal messages. Like all those 50s monster movies involving radioactive poisoning Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 09:06 AM	#8
Kneeniasy Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 435 Senior Member	Independence Day was the highest grossing film when it premiered in the US. What is this thread about? Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 09:15 AM	#9
itititit Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 519 Senior Member	To be fair, Rendition looked like it was nothing more than a blatant political piece where the actors are mere mouthpieces for the writer to give long, not-quite-eloquent (almost Randian in their snore factor) speeches about the horrors of the eponymous practice. Maybe people didn't want to see it not because it was anti-war, but because it looked like it was going to suck, even with the star power it had available? As far as Lions for Lambs, I don't think it got the marketing muscle needed to make it a hit. I have no hypothesis on In the Valley of Elah, though. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 09:20 AM	#10
BiseCreesia Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 467 Senior Member	Originally posted by DanS Rendition... bombed i dont know about the other films, but Rendition sucked badly. it was... torture watching (pun intended) i believe you can easily find many anti-war films with box-office success... Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 01:22 PM	#11
refdhbgtd Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 398 Senior Member	Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 02:12 PM	#12
valensds Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 387 Senior Member	I disagree. Wasn't Platoon an anti-war movie as well? It just depends what people regard as anti-war movies. IMO all movies with at least bits of realism are anti-war movies. Then again, we might not understand that they are actually anti-war movies. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 02:21 PM	#13
Pedsshuth Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 457 Senior Member	Originally posted by DanS Platoon was made ages ago, Pekka. Think this millennium. I thought he said Patton... Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 04:39 PM	#14
uC4F0NVL Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 454 Senior Member	Perhaps Hollywood isn't willing to risk any more 'Alamo' style disasters. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 05:03 PM	#15
replicajoy Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 334 Senior Member	Originally posted by Rufus T. Firefly Translation: Americans don't like depressing films. Any more startling revelations, guys? Maybe something about the religious practices of the Pope, or the defecatory habits of bears? QFT Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

11-12-2007, 06:00 PM	#16
BlackBird Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 463 Senior Member	I'm not sure if Gladiator was pro- or anti-war, but it pwnd teh box office. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 06:00 PM	#17
expomeHattePe Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 428 Senior Member	No one is dumb enought to make a blatantly "pro-war" film, which belies DanS's implication that those movies failed for being Anti-war. There are a lot of dramas out there doing poorly, like "Things we lost in the fire." I don't think this will be qa very happy movie season for the studios. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 06:16 PM	#18
Qeiafib Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 526 Senior Member	Why has nobody mentioned that Lions for Lambs features Tom Cruise? There might still be some residual flop factor attached to his name after all the couch-jumping and Scientology-promoting. Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 06:39 PM	#19
thushioli Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 351 Senior Member	Is it possible that the reson the movies listed are failing is that they just suck and in the case of at least some of the trailers seem kinda preachy? Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote

11-12-2007, 07:52 PM	#20
Aswdwdfg Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 520 Senior Member	Nor is Rendition really anti-war, as opposed to just ... anti-sending innocent people overseas to be tortured by oppressive regimes. Surely teh fact that it bombed doesn't mean that "middle America" approves of this practice? Share Share this post on Digg Del.icio.us Technorati Twitter
	Quote