Mickey Z
Cool Observer
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
The Forgiven: Clint Eastwood's Good War
Don’t forget Prescott Bush, Dubya’s grandfather, who helped finance Hitler through Brown Brothers Harriman.
Posted by Jeremy on from Taipei 11/01 at 06:21 AMGreat article Mickey, and the last lines by Muste are keepers....’more lies’ are flowing freely, perhaps more than ever before and more insidiously so.
Captcha “pattern”, and an ugly one at that.
Posted by Amelopsis on from Canada 11/01 at 10:20 AMHello Expendables. It’s yet another gorgeous fall day in NYC.
So, is anyone going to write a novel in November? Where the hell is Mudge?
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 11/01 at 11:39 AMHey folks. I’m not going to start another novel in November. I’m just going through the last stages of editing the one I started in Nov ‘04 and am trying to finalise that one! Whoever thought that one month was plenty of time to write a novel in needs to explain how that’s possible to me!
Restate your WWII case all you like, MZ. When I was reading “Saving Private Power” earlier this year, I cited plenty of your info to people round me, and most hadn’t the faintest idea what had gone on. Cite away is my advice, mate!
Posted by Chris Wood on from Manchester, here there be dragons 11/01 at 02:12 PMGreat post and great article, Mickey!
And ‘hi’ to Jeremy, Amelopsis and Chris Wood from a wet Daylesford - at long last, we are having some rain but it won’t break the drought, I’m afraid to say.
I’m off to Wellington, New Zealand, early tomorrow (Friday 3 November) and our computer will go to the repair shop for some tender loving care later today, so you won’t hear from me before 10 November or so. Have a great weekend, all of you, and I hope the next week is good for you.
Bye for now ..
Posted by Helga Fremlin on from Daylesford, Australia 11/01 at 02:18 PMGlad to hear your novel is nearing completion, Chris.
Helga: Have a good trip. You will be missed.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 11/01 at 02:25 PMI’m not the novel writing sort, or at least it’s not something I’ve ever felt compelled to want to do, so no na-novel from me, but I do look forward to reading other Expendables’ efforts.
Gute Reise, Helga!
Posted by Amelopsis on from Canada 11/01 at 04:03 PMEmpress: The NaNo thing caused quite a stir here last year with Mudge, Cat Lady, JOS, Michael, Owen, myself and others giving it a try. So perhaps the idea has simply run its course.
I plan to write a novel this month but my ever-changing schedule could put a damper on that.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 11/01 at 04:19 PMI just received an email from Mudge...looks like he is into it again this year. I didn’t even come close last year...I am still thinking about it for this year...better think fast.
Posted by JOS on from Chicago 11/01 at 04:37 PMYeah, JOS, Mudge is ready to rock. I hope you’ll join in, too.
Btw, today’s WWII article garnered this response on another site:
WWII was fought exclusively in the interests of big business, the jews, and the putative NWO, in other words the Rothschilds. History will one day exonerate Germany; they were merely
fighting a war of survival, and if the Axis powers had won, the world would be a better place today. Any country that has someone like Clint Eastwood as a cultural icon is not to be taken seriouslyAh, me…
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 11/01 at 05:29 PMI think you’re underestimating “Flags of Our Fathers”. It had a conservative side to it but it was also pretty subversive in its own way.
1.) The professional propagandists in this movie all assholes.
2.) The senior officers despise the men under them. One of them is about to send Ira Hayes (obviously suffering from post traumatic stress disorder) back to the front because he sees him drunk.
3.) Racism is dealt with head on. True Eastwood didn’t deal with the concentration camps and Japanese or segregation but Ira Hayes is the subject of racial slurs in this movie every five minutes. Narrative economy really doesn’t let you deal with everything. But you get the point when that Senator says “did you use a Tomahawk on them Japs”.
4.) It has one of the most vivid state vs. indiviudal images I’ve ever seen. Do you remember when that soldier falls overboard in the middle of that fleet steaming in perfect formation? And his friends make no protest at all when it looks as if they’re just going to let him die?
All in all a confused movie but not really pro war propaganda.
Posted by Stanley W. Rogouski on from New Jersey 11/01 at 06:21 PMI agree to a point, Stanley. The depiction of anti-Indian racism did surprise me but damn, why so little of the horrifying hatred of the Japanese?
Also, let’s not discount the reality that many Americans line up to see a war movie directed by Clint with jingoistic fervor. Eastwood’s subtle jabs are hardly enough to jolt such “patriots.”In the end, I felt both Eastwood and Spielberg did sneak in ideas unique to Hollywood war films but I stand by my opinion:
Films like (these) teach us that even if war is hell and the good guys sometimes lose their way, there is still no reason to question either the morality of the mission or the stature of that particular generation.
Has anyone else seen this movie? If so, please join in.
Posted by Mickey Z. on from Astoria 11/01 at 06:51 PMI tried to write a review of this movie and simply coudn’t get a handle on it. Eastwood seemed to change his opinions every 5 minutes in the narrative.
But one thing I did notice were the not so subtle comparisons to the war in Iraq.
Remember when Ira Hayes is looking at a stack of photos and his “friends” are teasing him about it being his girlfriend?
Then he shows the photo of the Japanese soldier beheading an American prisoner? “Don’t waive any white flags”.
Well, when he gets home, some of the racists tease him about whether or not he scalped any of the Japanese (did you use a Tomahawk?).
What’s more, all of the official propagandists, from Joe Rosenthal to their handlers are constantly going on about how the war is being funded on a deficit, that that American people won’t have the stomach for it, that “we” have to “stay the course”.
A lot of that could have come right off of Powerline or Little Green Footballs or Instapundit.
So was Eastwood validating the war in Iraq by comparing it to the Second World War or was he criticizing the Second World War by comparing it to the war in Iraq?
In the end, I do think Eastwood’s pro war. He does support the war in Iraq but he also seems to be saying that the United States is a rotten society, that it’s somehow betrayed its ideal of individualism (and Eastwood describes himself as a “libertarian") and that it really didn’t deserve to triumph in 1945.
All in all it wasn’t a bad movie, a very intelligent one in fact, better in its own way than Saving Private Ryan. But of course nobody went to see it. They were all watching “Saw III”.
Posted by Stanley W. Rogouski on from 11/01 at 09:20 PMI haven’t seen Clint’s latest opus, but yesterday, by chance, I came across this disturbing video. Be warned, this isn’t watered down.
John Dower’s ‘War Without Mercy’ remains an amazing piece of scholarship twenty years after publication.
Posted by sk on from 11/01 at 09:28 PMbut yesterday, by chance, I came across this disturbing video
Interesting video but the guy who posted it seems to be an Irish Protest/British National Front fascist of some kind.
Posted by Stanley W. Rogouski on from 11/01 at 09:51 PMCould be a nutter (I hadn’t checked up on his other offerings), but montage of the buildup to July 1, 1916 (first day of Battle of Somme when 20,000 British soldiers were killed) is still something…
Posted by sk on from 11/01 at 10:40 PMRight on! The perpeuation of the war propaganda films constantly released by Spielberg and his coterie, has always made me sick !
Posted by pawl redburn on from San Francisco, Ca 11/02 at 09:35 AM
Next entry: The Battle in Seattle (Looking back seven years)
Previous entry: Only 54 shopping days till Xmas (plus: a caption contest)
Copyright © 2005-2007 Mickey Z.
