apeguia said:
The movie does present things as they are in terms of public opinion and the different positions within the US.
That's what made it so powerful - that it pretty accurately portrayed this.
apeguia said:
My problem is that without any context of reality and with very little contrasting with the crude facts on the ground (the few images of war are very sanitized and completely one-sided),
It's not a movie about the "crude facts on the ground" it is a movie about how the different people perceive things. The story about the two soldiers in Afghanistan is all the more poignant at the end when their reality is finally revealed as that which led to the total waste of their lives - that it was all basically for nothing even if they, individually, at least had the courage of their convictions.
It is entirely ironic to see that the far right can galvanize people, can move things, can suck people into such a reality that is entirely artificial, kill them, and care nothing about the people at all. It was a tragedy to see the gung-ho guys who were just tools, pawns, of the senator and his ilk, to learn their story, to discover how they were so misguided, yet, even misguided, they DID something.
apeguia said:
the resulting message seems to be that those are the only reasonable options available, and therefore, the whole truth must be somewhere in there, perhaps between the journalist and the professor. (Judging by Robert Redford's Colgate smile, I think he represents the real opinion of the director ;) ) But I don't think those views are even close to how bad things really are.
I think you are missing a whole lot of layers. You are emotionally invested in the horror of the war and your point of view and failing to see that this really was a powerful way to show how stupid the right wing version of reality is.
apeguia said:
Of course, someone who is well informed can learn a lot about human nature and how people are perceiving the war in the US, but how will the US public itself receive the movie? I'm afraid that most people will simply find confirmation of their views in any of the characters - which I find discouraging, because there is so much more to the war situation than what is presented in there.
Again, this is just my opinion and the way I read the intention of the director. Hopefully I'm wrong and it does help people wake up...
Like I said, you have a big emotional block here, I think.
The message of the film is to show that the right wing side activates people via lies, propaganda, power, etc and can even take in and manipulate good people who die uselessly, wasting their lives for lies, and that another way is possible, but that one has to rise out of apathy to do anything. The film is a plea for the American public to stop being so apathetic about our position in the global community and to get moving in ways OTHER than the stupidity of joining the army or believing in right wing lies.
The feeling that one is left with about the kids in the army is "what a waste of good kids who believed lies." The were, at least, committed to acting for change, but it is clear that their commitment was manipulated and followed lies. All that is made clear in the exchange between the journalist and the senator which is going on while those kids are out there dying because they believed lies while that slimy guy is ranting and raving and the journalist - a symbolic mother, even - is pointing out his lies and the faultiness in his reasoning. Then, she has to confront her own complicity by seeing how she supported the guy in the beginning. It's a horribly tragic moment. It hits you in the stomach.
In the end, the message about the journalist is: even if she was a decent person, as all Americans think they are, she didn't have the courage of her convictions, to stand up against the system that she had finally begun to understand as a lying, corrupt, death machine. The last time you see her is tearfully gazing out the window at Arlington National Cemetery and you know that she knows that more and more young kids are going to die. It makes you feel terrible to know that she couldn't do it - it hits you in the gut that there are so many like her and, because of that, more kids like the two shown in the movie, will die for nothing.
Regarding the kid in college: he is so typical of the average American that your heart just aches. You are left not knowing what he is going to do the same way we are left not knowing if the American people are going to wake up and DO anything or not.
You seem to want the movie to provide answers, to tell people what to do, to shove it in their faces. It isn't that easy. The movie does not give the answers, it just makes you FEEL and THINK if you are capable of either or both. The movie shows the realities of what Americans understand, and shows those realities in tragic, heart-breaking ways, and by this heartbreak, challenges people to ask themselves why they, individually, are remaining passive.
This movie is about a message that is illustrated by the juxtaposition of the three interwoven threads each of which produces powerful emotional reactions. If it is only your mind that engages, you won't get the message.
One reviewer on amazon put it very well:
...while Senator Irving and Reporter Roth are debating the pro and con of this War; while Professor Malloy tries to light a fire under his apathetic student; two idealistic young men, full of potential, fight with their last breaths because they believe it takes personal sacrifice to make the U.S.A. a better, safer place.
And in the end, it is that irony that hurts most of all.
Another reviewer also "got it":
I saw this film with my son, who is a senior in high school. He is a very cynical idealist, very smart, who wants to do something to improve the world, but is almost hopeless than anything can be done to fix the rampant incompetence and dysfunctionality in government and politics, the lack of principle and competence in almost every field of American endeavor, and the pervasive "anything for a buck" mentality. He is such a believer, but he is so angry and disillusioned as well. The only one out there who seems to understand what's going on and see through all the sheer idiocy that passes for public discourse is Jon Stewart, and he's essentially a comedian.
There was no one out there speaking to him until this movie. I was astonished, and very moved, that someone cared enough to sit down and talk to my son right where he lived, and tell him what he most needs to hear. Robert Redford wasn't speaking only to the kid in the movie; he was speaking to this new generation. To me, the words he spoke were holy and precious, not because of political content, but because they were meant to alight and encourage a sense of purpose and hope that is too easily snuffed out and stunted today, both by the many pretty, mind-numbing distractions available to our youth and the fact that almost no one seems to be acting out of sheer principle. I had to stop and sob a little at the end of the movie, I was so moved and grateful that someone cared enough to speak to my son and so many others like him to try to ignite the flame of hope again, to realize that if these problems are ever going to be solved, it will only come through a dedication of spirit, commitment of the body, rolling up of the sleeves, getting to work, becoming expert, and going out there to make things better. The movie was meant to demonstrate that the sacrifices of those who have given their lives in support of our ideals demand no less.
So thank you, Robert Redford and crew. There are some who are listening and heeding the call.
