This movie is anti-russian propaganda.
-
casemon — 17 years ago(October 19, 2008 04:43 PM)
You must feel so good to hate as you do, to willfully ignore the truth because the lies coincide with your own prejudices. And of course, no one should question America's global forced-hegemony right? Despite the fact that is the leading cause of terrorism in the world today (and has been for the past 60 years).
I feel sorry for you (too bad my pity doesn't help you). -
casemon — 17 years ago(October 19, 2008 05:11 PM)
Thanks for showing your true colors here, I can tell I got a rise out of you (wink).
Of course you don't know about American 'black' programs (later revealed). Operation Paperclip (like Nazis much?), or Iran-Contra, or MKULTRA (one of many against America's own citizens?) or American support of countless brutal regimes to combat democratically elected leaders (let's see Nicaragua, Panama, Guatemala, El Salvador, Cuba, Haiti the list continues.)
But of course, instead you remember only an out-of-context shoe-banging incident; a response to wrongful accusation of Russia as colonial / nation building, despite the fact Americans have had FAR more success in this regard, due to increased effort & dedication on America's part.
No, instead of a solid rebuttal, all you can do is point and laugh at the shoe, because any serious attempt to respond would reveal the truth (face it). Your ignorance makes you very predictable (sorry, it's true).
For the record, America has sold and continues to sell more weapons to hostile countries than any other in the history of the world. This is fact (look it up?).
"The United States last year (2005) provided nearly half of the weapons sold to militaries in the developing world, as major arms sales to the most unstable regions many already engaged in conflict grew to the highest level in eight years, new US government figures show." from a non-partisan study performed in 2006 (Congressional Research Service).
Maybe in the future you'll grow enough as a human being to see the truth for what it is, and not just carry forth the lies you are told (then again, maybe not?) -
casemon — 17 years ago(December 25, 2008 08:44 AM)
You obviously know nothing of South Ossetia, claiming they are Georgian; they declared independence from Georgia over 17 years ago. You should try getting your news from non-US sources, say from actual South Ossetians.
Here's a nice mix for ya:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DTorXbca6v0
I'd think a smart person like you would want to know when they are being lied to
Then again, maybe you prefer it this way? The lies make reality go down easier, like baby needs milk for sleepy! -
zap644 — 17 years ago(December 27, 2008 10:33 PM)
I'll admit I'm no expert, but South Ossetia IS a part of Georgia and is not recognized as an independent country. You should not assume I get all my news from US sources (especially since I don't), but if you believe the Russian version without question then you're being more than a bit naive.
I'm not going to click on a youtube link for information on this issue. If you get your news from youtube, well, there's not much more to say to you.
I know quite a bit more than you think. -
casemon — 17 years ago(December 27, 2008 11:27 PM)
So dismissive & yet so many assumptions! Clearly you're not interested in learning new things.
For one, youtube is convenient means of sharing some content, not a source of news. It is obviously used in this tradition (did you even watch the link?)
For two, ask a South Ossetian whether their independence is recognized. You have a very Georgian view (and much of the west supports this view, because Georgia wants to sell natural gas).
Do some research and you'll find the majority of South Ossetians do not want Georgian rule (which was taken by force).
There is no "russian version" in this you have South Ossetia signing an official treaty with Russia for protection by Russia from Georgia; an official treaty that has been in effect for over 15 years!
Georgia invades South Ossetia and Russia follows the treaty then in Western news sources, they revive "the sleeping bear" / communist propaganda and say Russia is the invader; meanwhile Israeli forces are inside South Ossetia and crossing into Georgia to "secure" the building a conduit for energy. Wake up man!
Really to see this any other way, you have to work hard to ignore facts. -
zap644 — 17 years ago(January 04, 2009 01:45 PM)
Did I stutter? I'm not going to view a YouTube link to get information - for one thing, I'd rather read facts than watch propaganda or RickRolls.
And now it's Israeli forces inside SO - silly me - I thought they were busy dodging rockets fired from Gaza by Hamas.
What's next? Are you going to claim Bush's daughters are committing "genocide" against South Ossetians?
People like you are not as amusing or convincing as you'd like to believe. -
cthulhulurks — 16 years ago(December 10, 2009 07:45 AM)
Casemon told you the truth - South Ossetia is a small nation that faced oppression from Georgia They speak a different language, they have a culture of their own, they've always been looked down on by Georgians, etc. They're also lazy bastards not willing to work and create, so now they want to come back to the warm embrace of Russia so that they can do nothing and get multi-billion transfers like Chechnya does.
my vote history:
http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=27424531 -
CorumJI — 17 years ago(October 19, 2008 03:48 PM)
I felt a thousand times safer than in Philly, where I live.
Oh, pshaw. It's the city of
Brotherly Love
. What are you a homophobe? You got something against getting a shot in the *** while walking down the street?
:^P -
zap644 — 17 years ago(December 24, 2008 10:47 PM)
I feel about a thousand times safer in 99% of the US than I do when I have visited Philly - and I had the misfortune of racking up 50,000 frequent flyer miles in one year going to Philly on business.
And I don't know what movies you've been watching, but I've never seen one where modern-day Germans were portrayed as Nazis. There may be a few that focus on a few select characters like that, but never broad generalizations as you suggest.
Is everyone in LA a gangster? Is everyone in NYC a thug? Get over yourself - and make something of your city besides having the best cheese-steaks and being the home to the Liberty Bell - oh and also have Yuengling very available. Those are really the only redeeming qualities I can think of that Philly has - but of course you have to go to a socialist state-run store if you want to buy a bottle of wine or a fifth of vodka. In that respect, Philly (all of PA for that matter) is probably more socialistic than most of Eastern Europe is in this day and age.
No wonder you're so sensitive. -
medicatedsoup — 17 years ago(August 22, 2008 01:29 AM)
I agree with OP,a reasonably entertaining film,but it also left me wondering if it was more american political stereotyping BS.
To me,the message in this film could of been:
Russians = bad people,not to be trusted,communists,spies blah blah
Spanish+Mediteranians = liars and crooks,forceful with women
Americans = the good guys
World War 2 is a classic example of american misinformation in their films and media,its amazing how according to them,they always saved the day,coming to rescue the weaker Europeans and Russians and win the war for us,never(not that im aware of?) even a mention of how Russia lost many more lives than anyone else did,and contributed much more effort into fighting the nazi's than the americans ever did.
I think what makes this subject such an issue for some,is that it seems almost everyone on earth knows and agrees on who the worst of todays bad guys are,except for a large percentage of americans. -
psuedoK — 17 years ago(August 23, 2008 11:22 PM)
"Russians = bad people,not to be trusted,communists,spies blah blah
Spanish+Mediteranians = liars and crooks,forceful with women
Americans = the good guys"
No, it is your simple-headed mind that is reading these stereotypes into the movie. -
andreasaysyes — 17 years ago(September 20, 2008 08:13 AM)
SPOILERS AHEAD!: I couldn't tell, from the beginning, if the Americans were going to be portrayed as the "good guys" or as churchy goody two-shoes. I was happy when the director made the decision, right before Jessie kills Carlos, to have him say "i wouldn't hurt you" again, right before she killed him. But then the film turned and went into Americans-as-the-World's Saviours territory when she was vindicated at the end by learning that Carlos was, indeed, a sexual predator. That really really annoyed me. So what, we're supposed to feel that she did a good job by taking out the bad guy? This film shouldn't have ended as it did. As soon as they decided to bust out of the prison it all got completely ridiculous.
-
roell29 — 17 years ago(November 21, 2008 09:07 PM)
I thought it was more complex than that. Jessie tried to put her past behind her by becoming the antithesis of her former self. In the end, she realises that she can't cancel out her past without falling (like the detached train), and she eventually transforms into a more realistic synthesis. I didn't see it as pro-American propaganda either, though I am very sensitive to it's prevalence generally. Remember that Abby did turn out to be the cold-blooded killer that Ben Kingsley's character had described earlier. I more or less assumed the kind of corruption depicted in the film is understood to exist everywhere, unfortunately, and the last scene showing Abby retrieving the money supports that notion.