StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Elfdart wrote:

Kanastrous wrote:Starship Troopers, for another reprehensibility-nod. Making jingoism and totalitarianism look cool, right down to black leather trenchcoats and peaked black-and-silver caps for the psi guys.

You do realize that Paul Verhoeven was playing it for laughs, right?

You do realize that Paul Verhoeven has publically proclaimed he's never read the book, right?

Beowulf wrote:

Elfdart wrote:

Kanastrous wrote:Starship Troopers, for another reprehensibility-nod. Making jingoism and totalitarianism look cool, right down to black leather trenchcoats and peaked black-and-silver caps for the psi guys.

You do realize that Paul Verhoeven was playing it for laughs, right?

You do realize that Paul Verhoeven has publically proclaimed he's never read the book, right?

So?

Beowulf wrote:

Elfdart wrote:

Kanastrous wrote:Starship Troopers, for another reprehensibility-nod. Making jingoism and totalitarianism look cool, right down to black leather trenchcoats and peaked black-and-silver caps for the psi guys.

You do realize that Paul Verhoeven was playing it for laughs, right?

You do realize that Paul Verhoeven has publically proclaimed he's never read the book, right?

Too bad for you that he didn't write the screenplay.

Simple IMDB Search That Makes You Retarded

Xon wrote:The Harry Potter series has some truely nasty aspects to it if you look. Widespread use of memory editing and love potions put a whole new perspective on where the "muggle-born" actually come from.

I realize this is a somewhat old post, but I have to ask: what's your point? Its sounds like you're suggesting that wizards go out and drug, rape, then mind wipe Muggles to create Muggle-born children, but I'd hate to subscribe such an utterly unsupported piece of fanon nonsense to you unfairly.

The casual use of mind-wiping is rather disturbing though.

Oni Koneko Damien wrote:There's also been a few parts of the Harry Potter series that have bothered me. Pretty much the implied assumption that it's a-okay to consistently put children in very dangerous situations,

This I agree with, though to be fair some characters (in the books at least) object to it, and its mainly Dumbledore who's guilty. Though as I've said before, I want to see Dumbledore hauled before a court on war crimes charges for the use of child soldiers.

and for the 'bad' teachers to display blatant favouritism and the 'good' teachers to play fair, which inevitably results in a pointless net loss for the students who aren't complete douches. In the end, neither issue is addressed, so I can only assume that the movie is trying to tell us these sorts of things are perfectly fine.

Or maybe the point is more that the 'bad' teachers engage in favoritism because they're bad teachers.

Flagg wrote:

Beowulf wrote:

Elfdart wrote:You do realize that Paul Verhoeven was playing it for laughs, right?

You do realize that Paul Verhoeven has publically proclaimed he's never read the book, right?

Too bad for you that he didn't write the screenplay.

Simple IMDB Search That Makes You Retarded

Did I claim that? Anyways, the film reached pre-production under the working title of: "Bug Hunt at Outpost Nine". It wasn't until they manage to get the option for book that it got changed. That's when they retrofitted the names of characters into the movie. A $100 million movie, that's missing the signature element of the book: the powered armor.

Those elements that are included from the book are twisted 180 degrees. Lt Rasczak shoots his own troop in the film. In the book, the MI will do nearly anything to rescue their wounded. First chapter even shows this (the character that's wounded is not seen anywhere else, and dies in that chapter, in the film, he's a girl, and a main character). The knife throwing scene appears in both, with radically different motivations behind learning to throw them. In the book, it's because there's room for a graduated response between turning a world into baked cinder and doing nothing. In the film, it's essentially there to show the cruelty of the drill instructor.

I've said before, I'd think it's an excellent movie, if it wasn't named Starship Troopers. Instead it's about as faithful to the book as "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" is to "The Hunt for Red October".

Why is it a reprehensible movie, anyway? It's a friggin sci-fi action komedy. It's depiction of Space American jingoism is no different from Robocop's satirical dystopia! I think it's wonderful. It's like me putting on a Patton helmet, standing in front of the American flag, and doing my best George W. Bush impersonation. Starship Troopers is a wonderful representation of American society and American family values! All American, baby!

I can't imagine these haven't been posted, which means they probably eluded my quick search. But I'll take a shot anyway.

• Pearl Harbour - How do you best exploit a military catastrophe? By pissing off anyone with military experience, trivializing the tragedy and dehumanizing the Japanese, of course.
• U-571 - Also, Enigma was cracked by the Americans. Not as reprehensible as the one above, but still really fucking bad.
• Enemy at the Gates - I think it was Stas who clouted this one for its historical inaccuracy and outright fabrication. Again, not quite as bad as Pearl Harbour, but still unforgivable.
• Pretty Woman - "The film that taught impressionable girls the world over that sucking dicks on the street for money will bring you happiness," as one web page put it. And it's not hyperbole; this is the iconic let's-glamorise-prostitution chick flick. Lest people think I'm mocking sex workers here, I'm not. Those familiar with prostitution will, however, also be familiar with all those screwed-up preteens who began fucking for money and/or drugs as a necessary step toward ultimate fairy-tale paradise. Hey, it worked for Julia Roberts, right?
• Boondock Saints - Hey, I liked the movie, but let's not kid ourselves. It's plenty messed up, and not in a harmless "it's all for laughs" way either, considering the director's attempts to be relevent and/or subversive.

I liked Enemy at the Gates, for all its wrongness. But U-571 pisses me off. Fucking Americans, NONE OF YOU did that shit! The British did! Fuck you. Hey, why don't we write a story with Stalin invading Normandy, eh?

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Hey, why don't we write a story with Stalin invading Normandy, eh?

We can call it, the S-Day! The Stalin Day! Greatest day in history! It can also be continued with "Vladivostok Harbor" where Stalin retaliates on the imperialist Japanese for sinking Russian ships in Vladivstok.

But yeah, American war history movies simply suck balls. They are even more inaccurate and bullshit than their popular history books. Which is saying a lot. Enemy at the Gates, Pearl Harbor, U-571 and most if not all modern U.S. war movies are... well, whatever Travolta said about Hollywood in Swordfish. IP has that quote in his sig.

I agree that American history movies are largely bullshit and The Patriot (the Gibson one, not the Seagal one) can be seen as morally reprehensible was a huge crock of shit historically, even in comparison to books like Uniforms From 1775-1783: The American Revolutionary War.

Spike Lee famously blew a gasgate over it, since The Patriot airbrushed over/played down black slave ownership, edited out the Native Americans, and played up British brutality against their fellow white colonists of British/German extraction. The Patriot was written by an US writer, but had a German director (also responsible for silly fun like Stargate and Independence Day, and pure crap like Godzilla).

Hopefully productions like Band of Brothers don't suffer from this bullshit in your judgment, Stas?

(But man, I loved Enemy at the Gates - and the videogame too!)

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Hopefully productions like Band of Brothers don't suffer from this bullshit in your judgment, Stas?

Band of Brothers is quite good, however it does have its wank moments. For example, I remember the scene where an american soldier, in broad daylight, without cover, manages to hit a 2-man area on a roof over 20 meters away with a rifle-mounted grenade. While being under MG42 fire.

Right.

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Hopefully productions like Band of Brothers don't suffer from this bullshit in your judgment, Stas?

(But man, I loved Enemy at the Gates - and the videogame too!)

I forgot to include the preposterous "The Patriot" in that list (thanks Big Orange, I forgot about that stinker), but most of the time, American movies which deal solely with their own part of a war aren't shit. Band of Brothers and Saving Private Ryan aren't too bad. However, just a little step anywhere outside the US of A, and the movies become utter crap.

Enemy of the Gates is actually so bad it's good. Kinda like Red Dawn or the Tom Clancy movies - a certain special kind of stupid.

You'll find a lot of criticism for Saving Private Ryan here in Canada. You know, the whole Juno Beach thing. SPR would have you believe that every single man storming the beaches that day was an American.

But it's definitely not reprehensible.

Phantasee wrote:You'll find a lot of criticism for Saving Private Ryan here in Canada. You know, the whole Juno Beach thing. SPR would have you believe that every single man storming the beaches that day was an American.

But it's definitely not reprehensible.

When did they ever show Juno beach?

The didn't. They were showing a fictionalized version of Omaha beach, but Phant is referring to all the Normandy beaches by obliquely pointing out that Juno beach was stormed by Canadians. Something many Americans don't know, nor that the Free French went ashore that day, they might know the British did. And while they probably know of the French Resistance they also probably don't know that General Eisenhower valued their contribution to such an extent that he compared them to having more than a dozen (I think he said 18) division. You could probably write a book on all the things Americans take for granted about the invasion and the contribution of other nations.

Anyhow, the point of my rambling that while it's not reprehensible per se that SPR focused on Americans given the plotline, it unintentionally helps to spread a belief that is reprehensible.

I've said it before and I'll say it again - SPR is a very pale shadow compared to The Longest Day. That one is a truly epic war movie.

Thanas wrote: Band of Brothers is quite good, however it does have its wank moments. For example, I remember the scene where an american soldier, in broad daylight, without cover, manages to hit a 2-man area on a roof over 20 meters away with a rifle-mounted grenade. While being under MG42 fire.

Right.

You actually remember the scene wrongly: the guy was concealed, nobody was firing directly at him. Besides, even if it was like that, it's merely very improbable: things like these did happen sometimes. There were guys running about landing beaches with aircraft machine guns blowing up bunkers and manhandling wounded who never managed to get hit, people losing their wedding bands but not fingers to shrapnel, accidental bomb drops hitting correct targets, people falling out of airplanes and surviving, etc.

Enemy At The Gates, though, goes beyond that into outright propaganda territorry with idiocy like one rifle per two men and political officers thinking creation of heroes for propaganda purposes is a new and radical idea.

As for U-571, Americans actually did capture a u-boat, the U-505, and the boat's cryptographic material was crucial for the Enigma decryption effort at the time (remember, it was a continuous operation to keep decrypting German messages, not just a one-time breakthrough), though of course the movie completely distorts the action (well, okay, invents one out of thin air) and naturally shows Americans as the only people capable of pulling it off.

Which is a shame, because it had really great effects and good acting, ruined by a shitty and generic plot (Yeah, a German destroyer in the Atlantic ). What's even better is the freakin' disclaimer put in at the end when people raised a stink over its treatment of history. It's like saying "Yeah, we know we pissed all over everybody not American who fought German U-Boats. Sorry. We're still releasing the film."

I wonder why it is that Americans couldn't be satisfied with the fact they designed and mass produced the best electromechanical decryption computers of the war, thus allowing for almost real-time decryption of Enigma messages? What, providing most of the equipment and manpower necessary to read the damned messages isn't good enough to prove American superiority?

The Spartan wrote:Anyhow, the point of my rambling that while it's not reprehensible per se that SPR focused on Americans given the plotline, it unintentionally helps to spread a belief that is reprehensible.

Unfortunately, a movie can't always show the whole extent of a very large and complicated operation in all its nuance, so all war movies can be accused of this attitude. For example, if a movie about Stalingrad fighting doesn't show that women fought in that battle in all-women fighter regiments, does it help unitentionally spread the belief that the VVS was sexist? Not really - only if the audience is already ignorant.

PeZook wrote:Unfortunately, a movie can't always show the whole extent of a very large and complicated operation in all its nuance, so all war movies can be accused of this attitude. For example, if a movie about Stalingrad fighting doesn't show that women fought in that battle in all-women fighter regiments, does it help unitentionally spread the belief that the VVS was sexist? Not really - only if the audience is already ignorant.

Oh, I know. And I'm not blaming them for it. Spielberg made an excellent film, after all or I think he did*. The problem and, I think, the blame, lies squarely upon the often willfully ignorant jackasses out there. Like my idiot, asshole brother, who admits, at least, that there were more than just Americans in the war, but very much downplays everyone else's contributions. His stance is, more or less, something like, "We didn't need them, they maybe just sped things up a bit by freeing our forces up."

*As an aside, I actually can't watch it again. There's too much that gets to me.

You know, Grease has been mentioned, but if you consider both Grease movies together (yes, I've watched Grease 2), things get even worse.

Consider the message each seems to send, then combine them together
Girls (Grease); Turn into what the guy wants you to be.
Boys (Grease); Don't bother trynig to improve yourself, cause the girl will change for you in the end.
Boys (Grease 2); Mr. Nice Guy doesn't get the girl. Lie, Cheat, be violent, and you'll impress her into loving you.
Girls (Grease 2); Don't mind your guys actions. After all, you're his property (Pink Ladies Code, main female character couldn't date non T-Birds).

Put them all together:
Girls: Turn into what the guy wants you to be. After all, you're basically property. Put up with his shit, and you'll be happy in the end.

Boys: Don't be Mr. Nice Guy, and don't bother bettering yourself. She wants a lying violent punk anyways. Just make sure to look Cool.
Spoiler

The Romulan Republic wrote:I realize this is a somewhat old post, but I have to ask: what's your point? Its sounds like you're suggesting that wizards go out and drug, rape, then mind wipe Muggles to create Muggle-born children, but I'd hate to subscribe such an utterly unsupported piece of fanon nonsense to you unfairly.

It is the logical progression of unrestricted access to memory editing, teleportation and outright mind-domination which is almost trivially easy for even bumbling fools with a slight inclination for a disregard for others.

The casual use of mind-wiping is rather disturbing though.

The Memory Charm Obliviate is mind editing spell.

Xon wrote: It is the logical progression of unrestricted access to memory editing, teleportation and outright mind-domination which is almost trivially easy for even bumbling fools with a slight inclination for a disregard for others.

Granted, realistically there would be cases of it happening. There's just no canon indication that this is particularly widespread or, as you seemed to be suggesting, that its the sole or primary source of Muggle-born children. Granted, we do have one prominent canon example of a witch who probably used a love potion on a Muggle (Voldemort's mother) in the books, and Ron getting drugged up by a witch in Book/Film number six, so it does happen. But it seems to happen at least as much among Wizards as between Wizards and Muggles.

The Memory Charm Obliviate is mind editing spell.

Well, it can do a more complete wipe I think (Gildroy Lockhart's backfiring spell).

Samuel wrote: There is no reason to persume that there are no birth control spells or potions. Also muggles, unlike wizards, can't fight back.

Nor is there any proof that there are birth control spells or potions, not that this really has any bearing on the topic. After all, how many rapists specifically seek out victims without birth control? Really, what relevance does this have?

As for Muggles being more vulnerable, use of such methods on Muggles would violate the Statute of Secrecy and get whoever used them in deep shit with the Ministry. Unless of course there was a program of state-sanctioned rape, but there is zero canon indication of that. Absolutely fucking zero. And its not as if either the books or the films idealize the Ministry. Quite the opposite, really.

Sorry if this has been brought up (didn't read all 9 pages yet)

Law Abiding Citizen

So Gerard Butler's character is the villain and gets stopped at the end. But I still feel like the film was trying to get us to take his side throughout the beginning and middle. His character's stance is basically that the justice system is so screwed up and abused because cops "don't go far enough to take the law into their own hands" and criminals get all of those stupid protections to shield them from justice. (ie- the Constitution).

The Romulan Republic wrote:
Granted, realistically there would be cases of it happening.

Of course there would be cases of it happening. There are communities on the internet dedicated to rape and mind control fantasies. Even more "regular" people will have to resist the temptation to abuse those sorts of powers for personal gain. Infatuation and love make normal people go to crazy or unreasonable lengths already in the real world, if they could wave a literal magic wand and get their way do you think they wouldn't do it?

The only reason it would be very uncommon would be if the magical authorities were very good at detecting it and either preventing it or punishing the people who did it.