Posted on 05/16/2005 4:09:24 AM PDT by Jon Alvarez
"It is just one of those re-occuring things. I hope this doesn't come true in our country. Maybe the film will awaken people to the situation of how dangerous it is . . . The parallels between what we did in Vietnam and what we are doing now in Iraq are unbelievable." --George "Michael Moore" Lucas
sorry folks...we know this one hurts, but this idiot does not deserve our money. We are at war and to fan the flames of anti-Americanism around the globe is irresponsible and dangerous. George Lucas will never see a dime of my money again.
I've been looking forward to this one since they described the fall of the Jedi in the first movie, no way am I punishing myself because Lucas is an idiot.
I look at it this way, if I didn't own any music made by liberals or people leaning left, my music collection (which is vast) would be dwindled down to a few country & western artists.
Goodbye Beatles, Byrds, Dylan, Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, Stooges, Clash, REM, Radiohead..etc..etc..etc. No thank you, I'll stick with just enjoying it.
In the words of Newt Gingrich, even Karl Marx was a compelling writer, he was just wrong.
Lucas wrote this story almost 3 decades ago. Only the Bush haters see hate Bush in this movie.
I don't agree with your stance on boycotts but good luck out there. Stay safe.
Clint Eastwood put it well on Oreilly a little while back. He said that in the 1960s and 70s it was the Left who would whine about movies like Dirty Harry and every little thing. Now the pendulum has swung the other way. It's just another version of PC. IMHO.
Marx was a terrible writer! Even those who find some merit in his critique of Capitalism think so. I don't think anyone has ever gotten through Das Kapital.
Ahh.. I was just quoting Newt 'cuz it served a purpose. I hope my overall point is taken though.
This war is not against terrorist murderers. At least not the ones who committed 911. They were Saudis, not Iraqis. And their mastermind is still on the loose.
As far as ridding the world of Saddam. Great, he is gone. Now we have Zarqawi. Not much of an improvement, especially in light of the growing need for body bags in Iraq. Not just for American soldiers, but for an increasing amount of civilian casualties as a result of the insurgency. I suppose that they are just part of the cost of freedom.
Saddam Hussein was not threat to this country. He had no WMDs nor a program to put them into place. Iraq was not actively involved in terrorist activities against this country at the time, nor had they been in years. Did you really go to sleep at night worrying about Iraq?
Iran on the other hand has been involved actively in terrorist activities and is in the process of developing a nuclear program. They may or may not be planning on developing weapons from this program. But they are a hell of a lot closer to a weapon than Iraq ever was.
Consider then, North Korea who many say has a much more developed nuclear weapon program than either Iran or Iraq. And they have the missles to deploy them.
Why was Iraq more of a threat than either of these two countries who are much more capable of becoming a threat to this country?
So, why are we fighting this war in Iraq again? Are we fighting for Iraqi freedom since the whole WMD thing did not pan out? Is that what it is about now? Is this the cause that we can now use to justify 1600+ American deaths? I am sorry but I take war very seriously. I want to be damned sure that if American blood is going to be spilled in some far away land that it is for a very good reason. Not to mention the hundreds of billions of dollars that we have poured into this cause.
Through BRAC we are supposed to save $50billion over 20 years. Imagine the cost savings if we had chosen to handle Iraq a bit differently. And there might be about 1600 moms that would have had a much better Mother's Day a few weeks ago.
I pray that some day, something worthwhile will spring forth from this war. Right now, I am not sure.
As far as your going to boot camp. If that is what is you want to do, good on you. I did my time in service. And if this country were truly in need of my service, I would serve again. I just choose to wait until such time as there is a real threat to our freedom. Iraq is not that threat.
Oh I understand!
Eh, I'm going to see it. :-)
Not everyone in the entertainment industry falls into this category. Clint Eastwood does not, nor does George Lucas. Eastwood is a libertarian, whose overall worldview is close to that of Robert Heinlein, the science fiction writer or Ludwig von Mises, the economist. I did not go see "Million Dollar Baby" because I disagreed with the pro-euthanasia slant of the movie. However, if Eastwood produced a movie that I would be interested in seeing, I would see it or perhaps buy the DVD.
George Lucas is a New Ager who has been strongly influenced by Joseph Campbell, the student of comparative religions and mythology. The Star Wars movies can be best described as "Campbell Made Easy." In this respect, he differs from the agnostic/atheist Hollywood mainstream. He may view himself as a liberal but he is not the obnoxious activist type like Sean Penn, Susan Sarandon, Carl Reiner, etc. Joseph Campbell is far from my religious and philosophical ideal, but neither is he Karl Marx or Herbert Marcuse. If the latest Star Wars episode is of good quality, I will probably see it.
The boycott is an effective weapon, but it should be used like a rifle, not a shotgun.
If I boycotted everything that pissed me off politically, I'd be living in a cardboard box in Idaho.
I think you meant Rob Reiner not his father Carl. I don't really have to agree with the politics of an artist to appreciate their work (Dante, Milton). If someone wants to actively support a political candidate I don't care anymore then they would care about my political activities. If you take the boycott argument to its logical extreme it's an argument for secession isn't it? (Tying to split from undesirables and financially ruin them). If you or I were running a shop of some sort and it came to be public knowledge that we supported Bush in the last election...if a bunch of people started encouraging boycotts of our shop we would rightfully think they were boorish. And MDB was not slanted towards any particular position but that's a different argument. :-)
I am a die-hard Star Wars fan (although I HATE the first two prequels), and I've already seen Episode 3 at a Charity premiere in Washington last week. I thought the film was a lot better than the previous prequels, but nowhere near as good as the The Empire Strikes Back or Star Wars. I didn't see an anti-American tone to the film, but wishful thinking from journalists and then stupid comments from George Lucas.
I don't get how Lucas could believe that Bush is like the Emperor. Has he been paying attention to his own movies? The prequels are about how an evil ruler takes on two identities who are on opposite sides in his fictional war (Senator/Supreme Chancelor Palpatine and Darth Sidious). For this to parallel today's society, that would mean Bush was secretly behind 9/11 and was supplying the insurgents in Iraq to kill our troops, so he could take over the world. This of course, is baloney. If one wants to make a more realistic parallel, then Bush is leading the Rebel Alliance against terrorism.
This film is NOT anti-Bush or anti-American, but it appears that George was trying to please his liberal buddies and the French media at Cannes. The theme of the Star Wars films represents how good can overcome evil.
People like to say that Anakin's "You're with me or you're the enemy" is just like what Bush said, but they forget that in the previous Star Wars films, Vader and Palpatine were saying the same thing. "He will join us or die, Master" or "If you will not be turned, then you will be destroyed" are two lines from the original trilogy. Therefore, it's stupid that Lucas is going along with the press in agreeing that the line could reflect the Bush administration.
I'm annoyed at George Lucas, but it's not going to stop me from seeing the movies a few times. He just comes across as clueless sometimes. He doesn't seem to get that although he is the creator of that galaxy far, far away, there were many people who contributed to the original films being so good. Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford and Carrie Fisher were so good together in those movies. John Williams' score, Ben Burt's sound effects, the visual effects crew, the creature and art designers and the editing team (which ironically included Lucas' ex-wife) were what made the films as good as they were. Since much of this was not as good in the prequels and since it featured an inferior set of cast and characters, the movies were no good.
And is it any coincidence that the greatest Star Wars film ever (Empire) was the Star Wars movie he worked on the least?!
Hmmmm....
No.
I'm gonna go see it no matter HOW much of an @$$ George Lucas.
Amen. I already have my tickets in hand for the first showing.
You're wrong. He did not write this story until recently. The backstory was very vague until now.
And he certainly didn't write his cheap shots 3 decades ago.
Anyone who DOESN'T see Bush hating in this is blind.
And anyone who gives their money to this jack@ss should be ashamed!
Anyone can boycott what is easy. True protest is when you have to give up something you want. And believe me, I want to see this.
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.