Posted on 08/05/2007 3:59:25 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
Perhaps we should have expected this but apparently The Bourne Ultimatum which opened this weekend is chock full of liberal proganda. So who is making this charge? Some vicious rightwinger with an axe to grind against liberal Hollywood producers? Nope. This is the claim of a liberal movie reviewer, Anthony Kaufman, who wrote the following in his Huffington Post blog, Jason Bourne: An Anti-Cheney American Hero?
A stinging rebuke against Cheney-esque black ops and torture tactics, Universal Pictures' The Bourne Ultimatum is more than just a heart-stopping international espionage thriller: It is Hollywood's most direct attack against the Bush Regime since George Clooney's one-two punch of Good Night and Good Luck and Syriana. If those more "sophisticated" dramas preached to the choir about our deteriorating civil liberties and oil-fueled overseas obsessions, the third film in the mega-successful Bourne action franchise offers up a picture of corrupt clandestine leadership for all to see -- where every Matt Damon fan can also enjoy high-powered American government officials as arch-villains committing treasonous and reckless activities without oversight.
In case we have any doubts that The Bourne Ultimatum is a liberal fantasy, Kaufman "reassures" us that it is:
But is the film really a liberal fantasy, where the bad CIA leaders get punished for their penchant for waterboarding, "experimental interrogations," "rendition" and the manipulation of American soldiers' minds with intimidation and humiliation? It sure seems so, as bullish Rumsfeld-like strategies are depicted as inept, while the sensitive, sympathetic touch of Joan Allen's CIA head Pamela Landy is shown as the most effective way to combat renegade forces. If conservatives like to label Tinseltown as leftwing, The Bourne Ultimatum should do little to assuage their concerns.
Thank you for that admission of Hollywood being leftwing, Anthony. At least that is something that most in the media won't admit. Kaufman finishes his review with an admiring look at a scene involving "moral complexity" chock full of nuances that a John Kerry would love:
Then again, perhaps the film allows us to have our blood-soaked cake and eat it, too. Matt Damon's Jason Bourne is a guilt-ridden CIA assassin, who glowers and suffers every time he swiftly strikes a rival down. But as audiences, we still bask in his every murder. Even though Bourne hates being a killing machine, I suspect audiences like it very much. After all, that's the chief source of the movie's thrills. I'd bet director Paul Greengrass (who showed some sensitivity towards depicting the 9/11 terrorists as human beings in United 93) intentionally tried to offer some moral complexity to a scene where Bourne strangles to death an obviously Arab enemy assassin. But how many people will pick up on that? Or will they just whoop and holler with the rising body count?
Most likely, no matter how hard Hollywood tries, most of the audience will overlook the obvious liberal propaganda of The Bourne Ultimatum and "whoop and holler" over the "rising body count" action. Something similar happened with another recent movie, Shooter, starring Mark Wahlberg. It also featured the standard leftwing proganda including a portrayal by Ned Beatty as an absurdly charicatured EVIL rightwing senator who practically drooled bile all over himself. So ridiculous in the propaganda department was Shooter that one of the few good guys in the FBI wore a Che Guevara T-shirt when he was off duty. Therefore be prepared for another leftwing proganda onslaught if you see The Bourne Ultimatum. The physical action, as in Shooter, is good but you will have to put on your political proganda filters in order to keep from groaning out loud.
I saw it the same way you did.
Seems to me that the plot indicated that the Administration was unaware of the assassination (by Bourne) of US citizens and the rogue, high level CIA officers bragged that they ordered the killings themselves.
Obviously a section of CIA engaging in insurrection. There is not a HINT that the White house is involved with the bad guys.
And, yeah it is good. I enjoyed the Quran , your windpipe scene.
Team America: World Police.
Although, I thought he was motionless in the water too long to have regained consciousness and swim away.
I’m going to go see it this week. I loved all of the Bourne books, and the movies have been OK. I haven’t noticed liberal propaganda in the first two so far. Instead, my complaints are:
1. Matt Damon just does not fit my mental image of Jason Bourne. He looks more like a baby-faced kid trying to be tough. Bourne, in the books, was smooth and ruthless. He was also a chameleon, able to shift into different personas instantly, and altering his looks frequently. Damon pretty much stays Damon throughout.
2. Carlos (The Jackal) was one of the greatest villains ever created. The whole conundrum swirling around in Bourne’s head in the first book — “Am I Carlos? Am I the Jackal?” — was gone, as were Carlos’ ingenious moves, always seemingly a few steps ahead of his adversary. Carlos took up at least the number of pages in the first and third books as Bourne himself, if not more. Totally frustrating for the movies not to include this crucial character.
3. The herky-jerky camera work in Supremacy was annoying.
As much as I think Matt Damon is NOT my idea of Jason Bourne, though, Ben Affleck was an even more egregious assault on my idea of Jack Ryan!! Harrison Ford did an admirable job, but Affleck? Geeze. Sum Of All Fears was ruined, in my opinion.
I liked Clancy’s Debt Of Honor and Executive Orders, too, but I’m sure Hollywood won’t make those — especially the viscerally satisfying ending in Executive Orders. The Bear And The Dragon is one that Hollywood can rightfully skip — The Bore And The Draggin’ was more like it. Yeesh. Bad novel.
"Madness? This is FREE REPUBLIC!"
*kick*
Having enjoyed the first two, I expect I will like this one too.....the reviews are great.
I saw the movie but I didn’t see the propaganda. Somebody had to be the bad guy or guys. It is the third movie in the series. The CIA warriors, off the reservation has been known all along.
It was an exciting movie that was well written, directed and acted.
But I like him in this character...
..The newest version of James Bond he's not...but Bourne, yeah.
Rented it yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it.
The great thing about the books (at least the first one) was that you didn’t know who Jason Bourne was. It wasn’t until late in the book that you realize that he isn’t even Jason Bourne! Damon would never be able to pull off a character with intelligence and an education; Good Will Hunting lost to Titanic after all...
Carlos the Jackal was not a fictional character. He was and remains a real terrorist. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_the_Jackal. Mixing suspense fiction with the real life tribulations of the day (the 1970s) made the first book a great read.
Hollywood can’t seem to get these movies right. I suspect it is because they can’t read.
That's when I knew I would enjoy it.
I watched Shooter the other day, too. I give it a B+ for technical accuracy (although why does Hollywood insist that the view through binoculars is a figure-eight on its side?), D- for plausibility, and A for entertainment value. The movie had a lot of product placement for Remington, Leupold, and Barrett.
Since when does two dozen of the world's best mercenaries, with air support, get their collective asses kicked by one Marine and a Junior G-Man? And with privately-owned guns, too.
I dare say this is just some liberal jackass trying to hijack a popular movie to try to advance his cause. Evil out-of-control spymasters and rogue black ops have been a Hollywood staple, year in and year out, for the last fifty years, regardless who is President (or Vice President).
99.5% of the population looks at this sort of thing and just laughs at how the lefty idiots try to politicize everything. Kaufman is not winning any converts, here.
Speaking of Ben Affleck, isn't he about due for an infomercial?
Well, pleaseeeees, go see it for yourself. Mrs. Submareener and I saw it this afternoon. It is one, if not the best, of the bunch. The good guys win, and the bad guys loose. Out of control “civil servants” who put themselves above the law, constitution, and common decency take the biggest hits, some of them fatal.
“Although, I thought he was motionless in the water too long to have regained consciousness and swim away.”
Hey, we’re talking Jason Bourne here.
Freepers are going to see right through the anti-American garbage in these films, and enjoy them for the action and suspense.
However, all of the major Hollywood releases are marketed worldwide, and young people in Europe and elsewhere absorb all of this anti-Americanism out of Hollywood which just reinforces all of the prejudices peddled to them by their left-wing media. This really does hurt us in the real world.
If ONLY the CIA had people as effective as Jason Bourne going after our real enemies, instead of being packed with liberals undermining the elected president, running their own liberal foreign policy and leaking everything they can to Sy Hersh and Walter Pincus.
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.