Posted on 05/21/2005 4:53:48 PM PDT by Natty Bumppo@frontier.net
I have a tough decision to make, very soon. In the face of a powerful lobby that has clearly gained credibility with a critical constituency, I must choose a potentially counter strategy. In something other than Washington-ese, that means that I have to tell my 9-year-old son that the latest Star Wars movie is too violent for him to see, even if every fast-food franchise and every other television commercial is urging him not to miss it. Given my personal affection for the previous five Star Wars movies (even the eye-crossingly dull “Episode II”), I am sorry to find myself in this position. Oh, to be sure, my wife and I will see the movie ourselves before making that call, if for no other reason than the desperate hope that the previews have been either alarmist or wrong.
In college, my friends and I used to delight in the mindless stalk-and-slash movies, an admission that I know is not very politically or socially enlightened these days. We would summarize them for others by “body count” and “splatter” factors, both of which are self-explanatory. “Splatter”, of course, always trumped “body count” – an imaginative dispatch for a stock character could easily overcome a lack of plot, lack of dialog, or even a shortage of dispatchable characters.
Most of us outgrew that sort of rubbish, and my wife and I are even more certain that we don’t want my son taking that cinematic detour. This summer’s slashers are already started, with the remake of House of Wax. Twinkie-of-the-year Paris Hilton joins the ranks of scantily-clad airheads experiencing uninvited ventilation, and the splatter movies don’t seem to be fading from popularity. Even the splatter content of network television is getting alarmingly high. Sigh – so why do I have to draw the line at Star Wars, one of the most popular movie franchises ever? Because sometimes you just have to say “enough!”
Many people have reached that point already with the latest spate of political rumors masquerading as news. With Democrats and Republicans alike hinting darkly at filibuster strategies vs. nuclear options, Bolton’s personality vs Bolton’s politics, and any manner of showdowns on Social Security, the rhetoric has definitely taken a turn for the lowest common denominator – so much so, that the usual label of “smear” seems so pedestrian in the face of the kind of splatter that is taking place.
We may have thought the recent wave had crested with the Bolton nomination committee hearings, which ended with Senator Voinovich’s non-approving approval of the nomination. Bolton, for weeks pelted with mud about his temper and people skills, found out that there are apparently some manifestations of id that are less acceptable than others – pitching a tantrum is bad, for example, while chasing skirts in the White House is not. Yet in the face of all the vilification, it is significant to note that the most unexcited participant in those hearings was Bolton himself. If that’s not a demonstration of diplomatic skill, I don’t know what is. After all, Bolton will have to sit in the General Assembly and listen to such paragons as Libya, Zimbabwe, and Cuba lecture the U. S. on Human Rights.
Having failed to sufficiently splatter Bolton, the Democrats looked for another target. Howard Dean, the one-man refutation of the notion of Yankee taciturnity, ranted that Senator Tom DeLay should “go back to [Texas]” to serve his jail time. Considering that DeLay has neither been indicted or tried, Dean’s prescription was a bit over the top (shocking development, that), and resulted in criticism from, of all people, a Democrat from Massachusetts – Barney Frank. That Dean is already becoming an unguided mud missile is plain, especially when it takes someone in his own Party to holler “bad dog!”
In yet another case, Minority Leader and Senator, Harry Reid, hinted that he would continue to oppose one of the President’s judicial nominees, because of something supposedly in a “confidential FBI report.” No details, of course, just an oblique reference to a report no one else can or will see. Artful, that – in a stroke delivered as deftly as Inspector Clouseau, Reid has replayed the old “have you quit beating your wife yet?” bit with far less panache. Left with no access to confidential FBI reports, the town is left to buzz about what might be in such a theoretical report. Score one for Reid? Hardly. The good Senator needs to be reminded that when slinging mud, it’s hard to keep your own hands clean.
Nonetheless, that’s exactly the strategy that NEWSWEEK is attempting after erroneously reporting last week that U. S. interrogators had flushed copies of the Qur’an down Guantanamo toilets. It was a story that spread rapidly (like most mudslides do), and ignited protests in Afghanistan that have claimed over a dozen lives thus far, and are destabilizing an area that was on a path towards stability. In a somewhat glib and surreal semi-retraction this week, editor Whitaker and reporter Isikoff claimed to have been suckered by an unnamed Pentagon source, the same basic defense that failed Dan Rather six months ago. Why is it that when the Right gets it wrong, everyone says they’re lying, but when the Left gets it wrong, they just claim someone on the Right lied to them?
To compound matters, Isikoff has dismissed his culpability in setting off the riots by assuring everyone that “it is important to remember that no journalistic standards were violated.” (This, from the same magazine that had a no-dirty-laundry deal with the Kerry campaign last fall.) I have friends serving in Afghanistan and Iraq. I’m not sure they will find that rather quaint explanation deeply satisfying – the rough equivalent giving Rodney King a bandaid. NEWSWEEK is saying, in effect, that they may have yelled “Fire!” in a crowded theater, but they should be forgiven because they only did so with the best of intent. Those who get trampled in the exits, I am sure, will keep that in mind.
So will I, when I go to see Star Wars “Episode III.” With all the laser fire, flashing lightsabers, explosions and epic battles, the pyrotechnics on the screen could prompt a panicky viewer to scream “Fire!”. But what I will be really watching for is the splatter – not as an aficionado as I may have been in college, but as a parent, concerned that my son is not needlessly exposed to something uglier than he should really see. When it comes to your kids, sometimes you just have to say “enough!”
Don’t you wish there were someone here in Washington doing the same thing for the rest of us?
David J. Aland is a retired Naval Officer with a graduate degree in National Security Affairs from the U. S. Naval War College.
Watch it yourself, without him knowing you are going.
The critic's statements are/were ALL wrong. Yes, I've seen it. It compares (favorably!) against almost ALL of the "regular" violence he sees in three hundred murders a week on regular TV. And the moral "Lessons" of good and evil combatting each otehr through lies and deceit - although less than in previous Star Wars episodes, are still present.
I abhore violence in movies...but I think the talk about this one being excessively violent is overblown. I went in prepared to watch between my fingers, but it wasn't that bad. Er...correction. The ending when Anakin is maimed is pretty bad. That's what I wouldn't let a kid see. The most painful thing about the movie for me, though, was that it wasn't one of the (un-Lucas-revised) originals! Now that hurt.
Saying that, my 3 nephews are old enough for it, but not my nieces (9 and 10)
My husband's entire IT dept saw it Thursday. He came home and told our boys they could go (ages 13,10 and 7). They went with their grown sister who covered the seven year olds eyes when Anakin gets maimed. She said he had his hands up first. They all enjoyed it. We have no TV in the house so we are especially concerned with excessive violence with our boys. The other posters are correct, however, you should see it first.
FOFLOLPIMP!!!! I may just steal that line later as a new tagline, LOL.
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.