Patriotic movies get snubbed by Hollywood

a reply to: Tangerine

i can agree that many can not comprehend my post often.
I totally dis agree that i ever hit and run and have post history to prove otherwise
i already admitted i was bias on this thread and found an article to support my bias.
The final say will come when we all see the films.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: HUMBLEONE

If Mossad is a secret organization, how do you know Hollywood is full of Mossad agents?

I would think that would be obvious, I view the world through a paranoid filter.

Argo

A movie that misrepresented and altered the facts in order to portray the US in a more positive and proactive light so that US audiences found the story more palatable and pro-US.

Argo has been criticized for its portrayal of events; especially for minimizing the role of the Canadian embassy in the rescue, for falsely showing that the Americans were turned away by the British and New Zealand embassies, and for exaggerating the danger that the group faced during events preceding their escape from the country.

en.wikipedia.org...(2012_film)

Seven Oscar nominations and won three including Best Picture.

U-571

A film whose whole premise is based on outright lies again in order to portray a patriotic message to US audiences and thus improve box office performance.

The film was financially successful and generally well-received by critics in the USA[1] and won an Academy Award for sound editing.[2] The fictitious plot attracted substantial criticism since, in reality, it was British personnel from HMS Bulldog who first captured a naval Enigma machine (from U-110 in the North Atlantic in May 1941), months before the United States had even entered the war.

In 2006, screenwriter David Ayer admitted that U-571 distorted history and stated that he would not do it again.[10] Ayer told BBC Radio 4's The Film Programme that he "did not feel good" about suggesting Americans, rather than the British, captured the naval Enigma cipher:[10]

“ It was a distortion...a mercenary decision...to create this parallel history in order to drive the film for an American audience. Both my grandparents [sic] were officers in World War II, and I would be personally offended if somebody distorted their achievements.

en.wikipedia.org...(film)

Two Oscar nominations, won one.

a reply to: Freeborn

Exactly American "patriotic" films are normaly bull # and based on outright lies!


Double so if mel gibbson is involved.

originally posted by: HUMBLEONE

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: HUMBLEONE

If Mossad is a secret organization, how do you know Hollywood is full of Mossad agents?

I would think that would be obvious, I view the world through a paranoid filter.

They must not be very good secret agents if it's obvious that they're secret agents

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: HUMBLEONE

originally posted by: Shamrock6

a reply to: HUMBLEONE



If Mossad is a secret organization, how do you know Hollywood is full of Mossad agents?

I would think that would be obvious, I view the world through a paranoid filter.

They must not be very good secret agents if it's obvious that they're secret agents

That would be a very great cover. a secret agent wanna be so over the top they get wrote off
The whole bit would become so in your faces that they would make movies about it and many would still not see their inside joke

a reply to: deadeyedick

So what you're saying is...james bond is real?!?

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Tangerine

i can agree that many can not comprehend my post often.
I totally dis agree that i ever hit and run and have post history to prove otherwise
i already admitted i was bias on this thread and found an article to support my bias.
The final say will come when we all see the films.

You're right. And we can agree to disagree about some things and still remain friendly.

a reply to: Freeborn

There's no doubt that history gets altered and in this case, it's purely for profit. Come to think of it that's probably almost always the reason for altering history.

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: Freeborn

Exactly American "patriotic" films are normaly bull # and based on outright lies!


Double so if mel gibbson is involved.

That's true, too.

Well American Sniper was nominated 6 times at the oscars ans it seems to be getting much press lately. I am not sure about the other film.

a reply to: Tangerine

Lone survivor got 2 oscar noms but in thoraway categories.

It has nothing to do with sensibilities. Hollywood targets an worldwide audience. Patriotic movies with a theme that generate attention on a global scale, like saving private Ryan for example, do well and are interesting for Hollywood. Movies that likely only Americans are going to care about are less interesting for Hollywood.

Another highly patriotic movie that got passed up was Selma,sure the battles that took place was on American soil against anti-American bigots trying to deny Americans born and bred in this land the right to participate in their own land,sure the body count was smaller than what took place over seas ,but the courage and raw patriotism along with the spilling of Blood of those patriots were not one wit less than those heroes and heroines overseas.

a reply to: Spider879

Well to be honest this thread was made prior to the oscars and was based on the golden globe awards. Selma did get many nominations for oscars while the two in the op did not. Now fast foward to the oscars and you will find that all three got some nominations for oscars but i think the nomination for selmas oscar was not in a good enough catagory for al sharpton.

All in all i think we are talking about 3 really great films if we can look past the bs.

Rewind and investigate America's and Hollywood's definition of 'patriotic'.

pa·tri·ot·ic - having or expressing devotion to and vigorous support for one's country.

In the US, this is confused with support and love of the military and it's actions around the world, for what ever reason.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
On a personal note, I'm still waiting for Hollywood to make a movie about REAL military life: sitting on a FOB, with the stony faced lead cleaning his weapon for the fourth time that day, complaining about how the chow hall got hit by a mortar so he's eating MREs again, and then he goes and stands in line to use a crapper, TP in hand....

That's a horror film. "Clinkers: The Taste of MREs"

Mostly it's filmed outside a crapper, using a handheld. Inside, there's groans and a few shrieks, followed by a clanking sound like a lead weight falling on concrete. A few minutes later, a white-faced guy comes staggering out, covered in sweat, leaning on things and occasionally holding his butt as he staggers off...

originally posted by: roadgravel
pa·tri·ot·ic - having or expressing devotion to and vigorous support for one's country.



In the US, this is confused with support and love of the military and it's actions around the world, for what ever reason.

I do not see how that is confusion.

One film celebrates the action taken to protect the country and another shows the actions taken to change the country. Both have meaning but the one changing the country does not exist without the acts of protecting and defending. Both have merit and should not be pinned against eachother.

a reply to: deadeyedick

Name a film considered patriotic by Americans that isn't about war.