Disney Hits The Fan; Upcoming movie depicts US Army as druggies and thieves

Drudge Report ^ | 7/13/03 | Matt Drudge

[Ciexyz]

Joaquin Phoenix is in this turkey? I'm gonna barf. (Gladiator is my favorite movie. I'll never be able to look at Joaquin again in the same way.)

This movie sounds like it's a step way beyond "Stripes" in that it's a serious attack on our military.

[joesnuffy]

Whorlywood has been trashing Vietnam vets for thirty years or better
guess we are just getting too old be believable villians anymore..

[SkyPilot]

I never said the Republic would fall because of a movie, or alluded to such. I also am cognizant that there are anti-military and anti-war films out there.

I simply made a distinction between your drawing parallels with certain films and this one.

Further, your argument regarding "there are no sacred cows" sounds like same one we hear Hollywood and Democrats. Yes, people can say what they like, but free speech is a two-way street. We have the right (and even the obligation to) rightly criticize movies that are nothing more than hit pieces on institutions that certain left-leaning companies and individuals target.

I have heard enough from Hollywood and Liberals who cry CENSORSHIP! if the criticism of what they spew is turned back on them (or even remotely questioned). It is utterly cowardly and childish.

Moreover, there is a distinction between "comedies" and movies such as this one, that seek to depict military individuals in the worst possible light in a very realistic fashion.

Do you still not see this?

[pabianice]

Hey! What happened to our belief in the free market? Let this bomb cost Disney a lot, cause its stock value to drop, and suffer for it. That's the American way.

[gdani]

Moreover, there is a distinction between "comedies" and movies such as this one, that seek to depict military individuals in the worst possible light in a very realistic fashion.

Do you still not see this?

Yeah -- I think I see it. You -- for some reason -- feel that (serious) movies should portray the military in only a favorable way.

I couldn't care less. It's a movie. But then, I've never been accused of being thin-skinned.

[Ol' Sox]

Yipes! What's with that picture? He looks like a goa'uld.

[hattend]

Actor Phoenix explains, "I don't know why anyone would be offended. It wasn't a movie that was intended to offend. And if we don't show things as they really happen, then what's that about? Censorship!"

Put it in or don't...your choice. It's not censorship if you leave it out. Only the government can censor.

[af_vet_rr]

So this is just Sgt. Bilko with drugs? Good to see they have original screenwriters *snort*.

There was a serious drug problem in all branches back in the 70s/80s, but things have gotten much much better (drug testing, standards, etc.).

The best thing that will happen to this movie is it will flop, and lose Miramax a lot of money, teaching them a valuable lesson.

[dts32041]

So did you turn him in for customs violations, or just look the other way?

[SJSAMPLE]

I didn't even KNOW about it. I was there for about a month in late 1988 when they took him away. After that, though, we watched the soldiers' ration cards like hawks. At payroll inspections, that was one of the things we reviewed. If a soldier had already max'd out his card on booze, cigarettes and coffee, we knew something was up.

[SkyPilot]

You -- for some reason -- feel that (serious) movies should portray the military in only a favorable way.

Answer me this: do you think any studio (Mirmax, Icon Productions, Universal, etc) would put out a picture today that depicted gays and lesbians in an unfavorable way?

Secondly, do you know the history of the real Buffalo Soldiers?