Posted on 06/07/2023 11:53:34 AM PDT by DallasBiff
Silly controversy. Hollywood wants its liberal or progressive pictures to be judged as pictures, not as propaganda. If they happened to make a “conservative” picture why deny it?
It wasn’t that great a movie, but most of what Hollywood puts out isn’t that great either.
It has been a thing in other publications such as "Where's Waldo?" and Chauncey Gardner in Being There.
Correct 91 vs 94 but they both were similar in that men like I know were nowhere to be found in either film. Ordinary guys with competence and good intentions are scarce.
Peter Sellers in “Being There”. Played a mute, got an award.
Forrest Gump was slow but was a serious fella when asking Jenny to marry him.
Never go full retard.
How about a great-uncle of mine: Smyrna bordello, 1812; battle of New Orleans, 1814; Burning of Canton, 1820;
Chilean Navy, war with Peru, 1830s; New Orleans transporter of German immigrants to Texas, 1835; Arakan, Burma teak developer, 1840s. California Gold Rush, Fremont property, 1850s; Fremont bodyguard, 1860s; Malay investor, 1860s; Gun for hire, Chinatown, San Francisco 1870s; guano investor, Pacific Coast, 1880s. Died in bed 1895.
Being There is a satirical novel.
So, not real.
And “Flashman” is made up stories. Again, not real.
Forrest Gump was also fictional. What’s your point? Having a fictional character appear in many historical situations is not that uncommon a literary device.
Memories - our local high school had a running back named Forest - it was worth going to the games, just to hear everyone yell, “Run Forest Run”
It’s just a stupid literary device.
But, to each their own.
Of course. You just stay on that high intellectual level, and I’ll read what I like.
Oh, I’m not high-brow, but Forrest Gump was one of the stupidest movies I’ve ever seen - up there with Super Troopers.
Not Tugg Speedman… he went full retard.
oh well that’s what impressed them them :)
Not disagreeing there (never saw Super Troopers), but I don’t have anything against the literary device of placing a character into historic events. Some, like G. M. Fraser, do it better than others, like whoever wrote Forrest Gump.
What I didn’t like about Forrest Gump was the sheer foolishness of most of the situations, like him running nonstop for however long. And then at the end, when the lefty bimbo goes off to die and leaves him with some other guy’s bastard to raise, all I could say was, “Yup, he’s a retard, all right.”
What I didn’t like about Forrest Gump was the sheer foolishness of most of the situations, like him running nonstop for however long. And then at the end, when the lefty bimbo goes off to die and leaves him with some other guy’s bastard to raise, all I could say was, “Yup, he’s a retard, all right.”
I think that’s what got it for me... just the sheer stupidity of the “situations’ he was in. I can suspend my disbelief (huge Star Wars and Star Trek fan, so of course), but man... this was just too much.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.