MBT
Joined Oct 1999
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews11
MBT's rating
The makers of this film have assembled a collection of statements made by members of the Bush Administration in the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq. The power of the film is in its simplicity. It is dispassionate. No moralizing, no condemnation -- the guilty just hang themselves.
The principal tactic the Bush people used to engineer the invasion of Iraq was to weave together: 1) truths (Saddam Hussein is a bad guy); 2) half-truths (he wants nuclear weapons); and, 3) outright falsehoods (he is a year away from having nuclear weapons). The truths get people nodding in agreement, the half truths sound plausible enough, and the listeners end up buying the falsehoods.
The second tactic was to revert to emotionally laden symbolism. Count the times Bush said he was fighting for "freedom"; Saddam Hussein is "evil"; we are "defending America." There are many people for whom these words and terms resonate. Who can disagree that "freedom" is good and "evil" is bad?
This is a film that should be shown in History classes and Public Relations classes: the first, to show how the disaster happened, the second to teach how to get people to buy into something every fiber in their being should be telling them is wrong.
The principal tactic the Bush people used to engineer the invasion of Iraq was to weave together: 1) truths (Saddam Hussein is a bad guy); 2) half-truths (he wants nuclear weapons); and, 3) outright falsehoods (he is a year away from having nuclear weapons). The truths get people nodding in agreement, the half truths sound plausible enough, and the listeners end up buying the falsehoods.
The second tactic was to revert to emotionally laden symbolism. Count the times Bush said he was fighting for "freedom"; Saddam Hussein is "evil"; we are "defending America." There are many people for whom these words and terms resonate. Who can disagree that "freedom" is good and "evil" is bad?
This is a film that should be shown in History classes and Public Relations classes: the first, to show how the disaster happened, the second to teach how to get people to buy into something every fiber in their being should be telling them is wrong.
Toward the end of the movie, one of the main characters says, "Nudity is so boring." That's easy for him to say. He's on that side of the screen.
Anything -- nudity, aliens, raindrops against a windowpane -- anything to relieve the boredom and tedious dialog that so many French film makers think is deep and meaningful but which is just annoying. It isn't deep. It isn't meaningful. It's just silly nonsense to endure.
What a waste of talent from actors to whom art is everything and yet nothing. Wait. Now they've got me doing it.
I'm going to go watch a gangster film.
Anything -- nudity, aliens, raindrops against a windowpane -- anything to relieve the boredom and tedious dialog that so many French film makers think is deep and meaningful but which is just annoying. It isn't deep. It isn't meaningful. It's just silly nonsense to endure.
What a waste of talent from actors to whom art is everything and yet nothing. Wait. Now they've got me doing it.
I'm going to go watch a gangster film.
This movie begs comparisons with the original. It overcomes the slow pace of the 1957 version, but if you value any realism in this genre, you'll be disappointed. The gun violence is way, way over the top. Much too Hollywood, as they say. The acting is excellent and there is thoughtful devotion to those things that make great westerns -- scenery, dialog, music, and plenty of livestock and authentic weaponry -- but the spent cartridges (even excluding a Gatling gun) and body count strain belief. Anyone who merely likes westerns should see it and will probably enjoy it, but if you love westerns, keep your expectations in check.