Posted on 10/14/2013 6:27:25 AM PDT by the scotsman
Ha! Ha! Ha!
As usual, everything with the Left(including Tom Hanks) is one big lie!
There is money at stake. The man carping is not a credible source. His lawyer is an especially unbelievable source.
They are attempting to take Maersk for a ride down the golden plaintiff path
And the crew might make a better point if they weren't looking for a payday from their former employer.
... snip
11 crew members have sued Maersk Line and the Waterman Steamship Corp. for almost $50 million, alleging “willful, wanton and conscious disregard for their safety.” Phillips is a witness for the defense.
Lawyered up to sue and the hero of the film is a witness against their lawsuit. Yeah, totally unbiased commentary here.
There’s nothing in the article that explicitly says so, but the subtext of the article is that Phillips was bribed to take the ship into waters where the Alabama could be boarded, and made everything as easy as possible for them.
Another Hollywood lie.
I wouldn't expect anything actually factual in a Hollywood movie these days.
“It’s called a movie, not a documentary!!”
Yup. In the TV ads it is stated that the story is “based” on real events, I.E., creative license is at work. It’s entertainment. It’s like suing the makers of “Titanic” because your great Aunt was aboard.
I don’t go to Tom Hanks movies.
Does the plot include the CiC’s dithering during the opportunity to stop the pirates?
Not this again. Movies aren’t claiming to tell the truth...therefore there is no lie. Even if its ‘based on a true story’.
“aren’t claiming to tell the truth”
Yes, they are. They are claiming to tell you that by the mere fact they mention “based on a true story”. Hell, EVERYTHING in ANY movie is based on something some human experienced, so when they make that claim they are attempting to tell people the “the story you are about to see is what happened”.
P.S. If movies weren’t attempting to persuade people the movie is the real story they would say that, such as, “This movie is based on a true story but this isn’t what really happened.”
I saw this movie under protest Friday night and picked several inconsistencies just from my limited knowledge of the case.
1) It was ‘under protest’ because I had vowed to never again see anything with Tom Hanks because of Hanks’ announcement last week that he hoped that Obama would have a “third term”. What an idiot!
2) I don’t remember that this ‘rescue’ was at night. In fact, I think that I’ve seen video of the take down (it was all over the news) on TV and it appeared to be in the afternoon. There was plenty of light when they shot the pirates.
3) Does anyone else remember that Obama refused to give the Seals the order to shoot? I seem to remember that he had to be asked 2, or 3, times.
I saw this movie under protest Friday night and picked several inconsistencies just from my limited knowledge of the case.
1) It was ‘under protest’ because I had vowed to never again see anything with Tom Hanks because of Hanks’ announcement last week that he hoped that Obama would have a “third term”. What an idiot!
2) I don’t remember that this ‘rescue’ was at night. In fact, I think that I’ve seen video of the take down (it was all over the news) on TV and it appeared to be in the afternoon. There was plenty of light when they shot the pirates.
3) Does anyone else remember that Obama refused to give the Seals the order to shoot? I seem to remember that he had to be asked 2, or 3, times.
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.