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.
Reviews12
CoolClones's rating
There are many negative comments about the facts of this film. I watched it and I decided that what has transpired in Sierra Leone is almost typical the every wealthy former Colony.
The price of Independence for many countries in what we mockingly call "The Third World" has been corruption and tyranny. These nations may have their Independence, but the Colonial power's organisations have retained all of the rights to the most valuable property which they initially stole from the people.
Ahmad Tejan Kabbah's position of power reminds me somewhat of General Pinoche in Chile, The Shah in Iran, Marcos in the Phillipines and Saddam Hussein as leaders kept in power to serve foreign business interests.
The History of the last 200 years has told us that when poverty reaches a certain level, worker's Revolutions occur using Marxist ideologies to fuel the uprising. In the 80's these movements, such as the Sardinistas, where labelled as Communists and systematically reviled and suppressed by the Free Market Economies. Tyrants where kept in power to protect foreign businesses from Nationalisation.
Now in the face of uprising, all that can be agreed on is to hold Elections. If the Revolutionary party wins the election, the International Community will simply not recognise the government and label them a "Terrorist Organisation" (eg Hamas).
Free elections are pointless exercises.
I point to the 1953 Iranian coup d'état to illustrate my point. Here, a Democratically Elected government was removed from power by a US/UK backed coup when they revealed plans to nationalise the Iranian Oil Company (Better known as BP). The International Community then endorsed a Dictatorship which was in turn crushed in 1979 by a Shia Muslim Revolution.
This is a very familiar old story told in Africa instead of South America or The Middle East.
The price of Independence for many countries in what we mockingly call "The Third World" has been corruption and tyranny. These nations may have their Independence, but the Colonial power's organisations have retained all of the rights to the most valuable property which they initially stole from the people.
Ahmad Tejan Kabbah's position of power reminds me somewhat of General Pinoche in Chile, The Shah in Iran, Marcos in the Phillipines and Saddam Hussein as leaders kept in power to serve foreign business interests.
The History of the last 200 years has told us that when poverty reaches a certain level, worker's Revolutions occur using Marxist ideologies to fuel the uprising. In the 80's these movements, such as the Sardinistas, where labelled as Communists and systematically reviled and suppressed by the Free Market Economies. Tyrants where kept in power to protect foreign businesses from Nationalisation.
Now in the face of uprising, all that can be agreed on is to hold Elections. If the Revolutionary party wins the election, the International Community will simply not recognise the government and label them a "Terrorist Organisation" (eg Hamas).
Free elections are pointless exercises.
I point to the 1953 Iranian coup d'état to illustrate my point. Here, a Democratically Elected government was removed from power by a US/UK backed coup when they revealed plans to nationalise the Iranian Oil Company (Better known as BP). The International Community then endorsed a Dictatorship which was in turn crushed in 1979 by a Shia Muslim Revolution.
This is a very familiar old story told in Africa instead of South America or The Middle East.
Just watched the first screening of this TV Film since 1985 on Digital Channel BBC4.
My parents would not let me watch "Threads" when it was first aired in 1984 as I was only nine years old. At the time, I was resigned to the fact that Nuclear War was innevitable. This was a fear passed on by my parents and many other adults I knew. People lived in fear of The Bomb, even kids in the school playground where aware of it and afraid of it.
Nearly 20 years later, my opinion has reversed. I see Nuclear arms as mankind's greatest scientific achievement and the single reason that we have never seen a Third World War. No-one would ever risk the "Worst case scenario" as featured in "Threads".
Basically, we witness the strife of two families and one administration in the great city of Sheffield attempt to survive and bounce back from a massive Nuclear Strike that has completely destroyed all of Great Britain's transport and amenity (gas, electricity, water and food) infastructure. All contingency plans fail, all relief efforts fail to appear as it appears that the entire civilised world has been effected and the Earth's ecology is irreversibly damaged.
"Threads" does more than outline the effects of a Nuclear attack and the consequential ecological disaster. It looks at possible effects on society as the human race descends into anarchy and life becomes a living hell of survival of the fittest. The only method of control is in the hands of a provisional government who are forced to use deadly force to control food supply for the good of all. Starving masses are summarily executed for looting food caches and forredging for food by the well fed militia.
"Threads" succeeds in delivering it's stark tale by telling a very human story. It follows the fate of two families linked together by a young couple who are expecting a baby at the time of the attack. The central character, Ruth, carries and delivers her baby (who is mentally handicapped, as many younger children are in "Threads" due to radiation poisoning). The images of Ruth's daughter some 17 years after the attack with Britain "bombed back to the stone-age" are harrowing as the unfortunate youth gives birth to a still-born child.
This movie is harrowing and caused a major storm back in the mid-eighties. It really brings home the fear that was generated by insurgence of Communism and the subsequent "Cold War".
Remeniscent in subject matter to such films as "Soylent Green" in it's de-humanising of society induced by desperate times demanding desperate measures.
My parents would not let me watch "Threads" when it was first aired in 1984 as I was only nine years old. At the time, I was resigned to the fact that Nuclear War was innevitable. This was a fear passed on by my parents and many other adults I knew. People lived in fear of The Bomb, even kids in the school playground where aware of it and afraid of it.
Nearly 20 years later, my opinion has reversed. I see Nuclear arms as mankind's greatest scientific achievement and the single reason that we have never seen a Third World War. No-one would ever risk the "Worst case scenario" as featured in "Threads".
Basically, we witness the strife of two families and one administration in the great city of Sheffield attempt to survive and bounce back from a massive Nuclear Strike that has completely destroyed all of Great Britain's transport and amenity (gas, electricity, water and food) infastructure. All contingency plans fail, all relief efforts fail to appear as it appears that the entire civilised world has been effected and the Earth's ecology is irreversibly damaged.
"Threads" does more than outline the effects of a Nuclear attack and the consequential ecological disaster. It looks at possible effects on society as the human race descends into anarchy and life becomes a living hell of survival of the fittest. The only method of control is in the hands of a provisional government who are forced to use deadly force to control food supply for the good of all. Starving masses are summarily executed for looting food caches and forredging for food by the well fed militia.
"Threads" succeeds in delivering it's stark tale by telling a very human story. It follows the fate of two families linked together by a young couple who are expecting a baby at the time of the attack. The central character, Ruth, carries and delivers her baby (who is mentally handicapped, as many younger children are in "Threads" due to radiation poisoning). The images of Ruth's daughter some 17 years after the attack with Britain "bombed back to the stone-age" are harrowing as the unfortunate youth gives birth to a still-born child.
This movie is harrowing and caused a major storm back in the mid-eighties. It really brings home the fear that was generated by insurgence of Communism and the subsequent "Cold War".
Remeniscent in subject matter to such films as "Soylent Green" in it's de-humanising of society induced by desperate times demanding desperate measures.
Quentin's newest is a joy to behold.
I have to say that this is one of the most enjoyable movies I have ever seen. Tarantino has produced a great, great movie and his fingerprints are all over it.
I was sold on this movie as soon as I read the "Old Klingon Proverb" in the first frame "Revenge is a dish that is best served cold". Never has a truer thing been said when in relation to this movie.
This is the definately the bloodiest film ever, including the blood geysers in The Evil Dead movies. Truly, I have never seen so much blood on the screen. Parents are going to have a field day with this.
The comedy is SO dark it's positively bleak. The hospital scene with Buck is one of the most shocking scenes I have ever witnessed. I mean, the dialogue between Buck and his customer was the crudest thing I have ever heard from a human being's mouth and the whole Vaseline thing killed me let alone Bill.
After seeing this, I think QT made the right decision in cutting this movie in half as the movie is so rich it needs to be appreciated in smaller slices.
Thank you Quentin. Thank you for Kill Bill!
I have to say that this is one of the most enjoyable movies I have ever seen. Tarantino has produced a great, great movie and his fingerprints are all over it.
I was sold on this movie as soon as I read the "Old Klingon Proverb" in the first frame "Revenge is a dish that is best served cold". Never has a truer thing been said when in relation to this movie.
This is the definately the bloodiest film ever, including the blood geysers in The Evil Dead movies. Truly, I have never seen so much blood on the screen. Parents are going to have a field day with this.
The comedy is SO dark it's positively bleak. The hospital scene with Buck is one of the most shocking scenes I have ever witnessed. I mean, the dialogue between Buck and his customer was the crudest thing I have ever heard from a human being's mouth and the whole Vaseline thing killed me let alone Bill.
After seeing this, I think QT made the right decision in cutting this movie in half as the movie is so rich it needs to be appreciated in smaller slices.
Thank you Quentin. Thank you for Kill Bill!