George Jonas: The Spielberg massacre. My book was all about avenging evil...

georgejonas.ca ^ | January 7, 2006 | George Jonas

[Tolik]

Thank you.

I am somewhat uncomfortable discussing a movie I have not seen. But all people I respect and who did see it (Medved, Prager, Krauthammer and many others) are united in raving against its message of moral equivalency. I was curios what author of the book is saying about the movie (especially with his well deserved reputation of one of the best Canadian conservative writers), and also, how he responds to charges that the book was not accurate in the first place.

I am satisfied with his answers.

[Tolik]

One of my favorite authors Orson Scott Card has his famous Ender's Game in the works in Hollywood. From what he wrote about the process, I understand that he was able to retain some kind of critical control and has a right to pull a plug if the movie is not going to be to his liking.

It is in a striking contrast with Clancy, for example, who has his name in the producer (or executive producer) line, but allowed the movies that shift meanings far too much (I am talking first of all about The Sum Of All Fears with mushy Ben Affleck, but other movies while being not as bad did change some principal accents as well - I read all his books made into the movies)

[dennisw]

Never doubt Krauth-hammer
What doesn't kill you makes you stronger
\
Thanks Charles Krauthammer

[dervish]

Thank you for your comments.

[dennisw]

Islam doesn't need friends. It needs enemies

[kenavi]

all dramatizations based on historical events do this. If you want the unadorned truth then read a history book and/or watch a documentary.

And all generalizations are false, including this one. But some get us closer to the truth than others.

[kenavi]

I never read that book, but I did see the movie

Maybe you should before you pontificate on whether I lost money on it or not.

Maybe you should read the article that I helpfully quoted or look into the book it cited, so you can compare it to your movie-going experience.

[dfwgator]

Spielberg loves the noble Jewish victim, like in Schindler's List. But heaven forbid if Jews actually fight back against their oppressors.

[L,TOWM]

If you want to see a decent dramatic account of the events Mossad initiated in response to the Munich atrocity, look for the title "Gideon's Army" on Netflix.

Caught it on the Encore network a couple of years ago on a rainy saturday afternoon. A fine return on a two hour investment...

[firebrand]

Good comment, df.

Someone gave this shred of evidence that the thrust of the film was against the terrorists:

Someone makes a remark that the terrorists should be treated as criminals and tried in criminal courts. This is followed by a shot of the World Trade Center. Just how many people are going to get this point, that the first WTC bombers, in 1993, were treated as criminals and look what happened? People on this forum might get it, but the average moviegoier, no.

This is a tiny bone that is thrown to the antiterrorist crowd, so the filmmakers can claim that their film is antiterrorist. Typical Ho-llywood slime tactic.

[cricket]

If you want to see a decent dramatic account of the events Mossad initiated in response to the Munich atrocity, look for the title "Gideon's Army" on Netflix. Caught it on the Encore network a couple of years ago on a rainy saturday afternoon. A fine return on a two hour investment...

Thanks. ..will remember that. . .

[L,TOWM]

I must correct myself...
As noted on this thread -
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1560450/posts?page=1
The movie was titled "Sword of Gideon".

My apologies.

[Blind Eye Jones]

"That's exactly the problem. Spielberg should stick to pure entertainment and stay away from historical cases."

He can't do that! He has been praised inside out, up side down by Hollywood and he believes he can do... anything! The flattery is his downfall. He is on the latest TIME magazine cover and strikes the mild mannered Birkenstock ego manic ("I'm just like everybody else") King of Hollywood pose... the questioner asks him something about his inner child, drips sweet praises and fawns and falls all over him... so, yes, he can do anything!

What was truly appalling was Spieberg's self reference to the Woody Allen movie Manhattan. But he got the wrong movie. His real role is like the Jew in Woody Allen's Zelig who blends into everything and ends up a Hitler rally. Spieberg seems to embrace the great liberal believe that life is about 'equality' 'relative values' and 'conflict resolution' while ignoring his own Jewish traditions and the fundamental reality of good and evil. Good and evil is intractable and doesn't end up leading to a nice neat resolutions but rather war. In other words, there is no truce with terrorism. But the liberal camp continue to flatter him and make him wealthly... and, now, he's just a shill.

[flaglady47]

But the liberal camp continue to flatter him and make him wealthly... and, now, he's just a shill.

Very well put, Blind Eye.

[Victoria Delsoul]

His real role is like the Jew in Woody Allen's Zelig who blends into everything and ends up a Hitler rally.

LOL, actually, that was a funny movie - I saw it a few years ago.