|
Films/DVD Asylum Movies from comedy to drama to your favorite Hollyweird Star. |
For Sale Ads |
Use this form to submit comments directly to the Asylum moderators for this forum. We're particularly interested in truly outstanding posts that might be added to our FAQs.You may also use this form to provide feedback or to call attention to messages that may be in violation of our content rules.
Original Message
Well, Mark, after Nuremberg (or My Lai) it is expected that soldiers
Posted by tinear on January 18, 2015 at 08:51:53:
will be held accountable.
But you've put up a red herring.
I know that to go to war is to sign up to kill. A soldiers job, quite obviously, is to defeat the enemy, killing him if necessary.
Fine with that, assuming it's a justifiable war.
But this was a film about an individual. A guy who killed (unlike the examples by Road Warrior, a sniper SEES his adversary, sees him die) several hundred human beings. Who volunteered for FOUR tours of duty. Of course he was being glorified: we were told a story about how he saved his brother from bullying, under a philosophy from his Dad (that goes beyond trite, doesn't it?). His brother, a Marine, is later shown as an overwrought basket case; why was that depiction included?
I don't like being manipulated and that's exactly what this film was doing. It is propaganda, pure and simple. Kind of like "Dirty Harry" glorifying a cop that did a lot of killing, too.