I think it was a great and highly underrated movie.
I've read most of the Negative reports about them and find them to be suspect at best.

This message has been deleted.

Come on people!
#1. Its a movie.
#2. Basic story, bent, alcoholic, drug abuser, goes inside, then gets out and sees up close how different his wife is, and after a really bad night, decides he can't go on, status quo.
#3. He changes and good stuff starts to happen.
#4. Few more twists and turns and hes in Africa. There, he realizes, or discovers a need for (as it was pu"t in Taken") his peculiar set of skills.
OK, you like it, or you don't. But why the vitriol? Wheres the depth of anger/dislike coming from? Might be worth asking.

it was boring
An alcoholic is someone you don't like who drinks as much as you do.

This message has been deleted.

What good has Mandela did to south Africa? Look how bad aids is there.

Sure, all film making is a form of manipulation in the same way that all journalism is as well: there's no such thing as pure objectivity; choices are made re the how and what is presented. But intent is a gradable quality.
Clearly, you've been manipulated into believing something that's not true and you're happy with that 'cause it suits your worldview, and so you're angry with the minorities who don't appreciate the white hero sold on screen and anyone who discusses this aspect. How pretentious can one get!? Seems to me you're even more easily offended if you can't even accept others voicing their valid opinions on a public board.
Do some research and you'll quickly learn that Childers is an arse who's doing more harm than good in Africa, and that much of what he says, and what served as the basis for the film, is self-aggrandizing lies. There's subjective interference and flat-out manipulation/propaganda. For you it's all the same? I think you may have gotten the wrong memo in film class?!
And you can't just play the "it's fiction" card on this one.
More to say about 'colour' and ethnocentricity, colonialism and the concept of third world and such, and why it matters to many, especially your so-called "minorities", but I wouldn't want to draw attention to anything past your own navel.
Close-minded, name-calling, easily-brainwashed bullies should probably also stay off the internet, strong wristed or not.

I honestly don't get why people hate on it. I would understand 'white man comes, saves all' kind of comments if it was not based on a true story.
Who cares if he's white or not?! The people clearly needed help and he helped them. I'll never understand why minorities get all hot and bothered when a "white" person tries to help. And to the BOZO "filmmaker" who called the movie "manipulating"hey moron, did you not get the memo in film school: ALL filmmaking is manipulation.
You limp-wristed, easily-offended tripe need to stay off the internet.

Yep same here. I loved the film, but after digging in, doing some research it made me sad to realize he is a cheat with hidden motivations..

I just watched the DVD yesterday, my first time viewing the movie. On the plus side, Gerard Butler did an excellent job in portraying Sam. That being said, I had a hard time liking Sam. He is a person who loves violence, wasn't there for his daughter, and seems to have an obsessive personality. Who builds a church and decides he is a preacher without any training? I started to look for information on the Internet, and doubt his motivation as pure. I understand now why the distribution was limited.

http://videosift.com/video/Tropic-Thunder-What-you-mean-YOU-PEOPLE
Based on a true story is a convenient figleaf, a deflection, but it changes nothing. The questions are still one of selection and amplification, i.e. why that subject and how is it treated? In this case once again, the product being sold to white consumers is white narcissism.
http://www.imdb.com/board/11586752/board/thread/204058106

oh look another film student who learned a few things and is now an expert. EVERY AD on TV manipulates people, I'm assuming you have either your apple computer or your ipod close by which you purchased because you were manipulated into buying it. Don't act like an authority figure about manipulation in movies. The movie did what it had to do, it showed what happens in Africa, go read south african news paper and you'll find the "manipulations" you're so keen to point out.

I loved it

Joyer, it is nice to hear from someone who knows Sam first hand. I appreciate your input. Do you feel like his intentions are sincere?

Made clickable:
http://www.bdkeller.com/2011/08/who-is-sam-childers/
The author concludes: "We can choose to believe that Childers claims are true, in which case he is dangerous, or that theyre false and hes untrustworthy. The reality is probably that hes a bit of both."

http://www.bdkeller.com/2011/08/who-is-sam-childers/
Because once you dig even slightly beyond the surface of his claims, it is as fake as any other campaign relating to Kony. About the only thing the film seemingly got right was a violent unhinged nature.

Why do you say he's a scum? I go to his church, im at his bike shop a lot and know a lot of his family. And he's one of the funniest, nicest But very real.. people I've ever met. Not judging at all like most pastors and Christians.

This message has been deleted.

What do you mean by "you people"?