MovieChat Forums > State of Play (2009) Discussion > Anyone who denies the liberal slant is e...

Anyone who denies the liberal slant is either stupid or dishonest.


Those who say there isn't a political slant to the film are either stupid or dishonest about the film.

"It's just a movie, it's to entertain, that's it" Right. That wouldn't ring as false if there wasn't a ratio of about 60 liberal films to everyone with conservative perspective. If it's even that.

What films that have anything about the Iraq war have been ones that supported the policies or showed the bravery of the troops? A couple maybe?

No, Hollywood is littered with limo liberals, who don't mind making a flop for some reason if they can be applauded by other liberals in Hollywood or Caan.

And were I a liberal, I would want to deny the liberal bias as well, because almost always these movies suck because they are intellectually dishonest, obvious, cliche ridden, and don't do all that well.

Maybe after DVD rentals, they will show a profit, but amazingly these days, even a total of $100,000,000 doesn't mean that much if there are big time stars drawing down 20 million salaries and you invest $50 million at least into advertising.


There are two types of people in the world, those who divide people into two types and ........

reply

and yet again the right wing terrorist GOP is trying to cover up all their wrong doings. U CANT HIDE!

reply

The problem with liberals is that they equate their position with normalcy to the point that when they see a pro-liberal film (like this one) they can't even recognize it as liberal. They think it is fair and balanced. And when people call these films out on their liberal bias, the liberals respond with the same old, tired, and previously refuted defenses.

Hollywood is overwelming liberal. Leftists can name all the "conservative" actors they want. The proof is in the films that are actually released every year. Can anyone even name a "pro-conservative" film that has come out in the last two years?

Road to Freedom: jbs.org and thenewamerican.com and lewrockwell.com and mises.org

reply

An American Carol
Anything by Michael Bay

reply

Funny how conservatives always equate "liberal" with "ethical." Come to think of it, for once the conservatives are correct.

Of course this movie has a liberal slant. Because it espouses ethical behavior.

reply

2012 with its tie in to biblical prophesy about the end time revelations (and noah's ark) and its quite a distraction from the real crises facing the world (e.g., polution). Yah yah, you disagree, because religion doesn't help save the world, but then those that believe are surely off to heaven anyway so they're happy; its the disbelievers that are fighting to cling to civilization. Just to show you that there are different perspectives one can give to a movie :-) but more to the point there are no movies that are consistent with all conservative or all liberal views because both of those American value systems have a lot of internal contradictions.

--------------------------
RIGOLETTO: I'm denied that common human right, to weep.

reply

I am so very tired of these whiny, bitch-ass conservatives going on and on and on about how anything and everything has a "liberal slant." You psychos have been screaming about this from the very moment George W. Bush first took office to the moment he made his first speech and mandated that there be "Free Speech Zones" for those who disagreed with his policies. You don't "like" the "liberal slant" in the entertainment you choose to watch out of your own volition? Then, either don't watch it or make your own damn movies instead! It really is that simple.

reply

"Funny how conservatives always equate "liberal" with "ethical.""

Actually, yes. It's amazing how the most basic shred of morality can be jettisoned if you simply call it "liberal."

Heard a story from an embedded journalist a while back who accompanied U.S. forces on a house raid in Iraq. As it turned out, the house had no military-age males; the people in it were rounded up outside and restrained anyway with bonds that were tied hard enough to draw blood. After everyone in the house had been accounted for, the journalists pointed out to one of the soldiers that the restraints were, in fact, drawing blood and could be loosened a little without causing trouble. The soldier just looked at her and went "You're one of those liberals, aren't you?"

Actually, she was an Israeli Defense Forces veteran (doubly to her credit since she was born American, not Israeli, and didn't have to serve) and as far as I know, politically apathetic to neutral. But hey. She has a basic shred of humanity in her, which makes her a goddamn liberal and means you can't listen to anything she says.

Same thing all across the board. Vietnam veterans like John Kerry, John McCain and Max Cleland who served their country at huge personal cost while most of today's neocons were dodging the draft via college classrooms with all these New Left elitists? Well, they disagreed with the neocons, so they're goddamn liberals, and you can't listen to anything they say. That policy of treating terrorism as a law enforcement issue and treating terrorists as common criminals, because if you acknowledge the political dimension of their crimes, you're giving them an honor they don't deserve? That was REAGAN's policy, back when international terrorism was first getting off the ground; now, it's the very definition of liberalism, which sucks, just in case you didn't hear us the first and second times.

So yes, there really is no inconvenient ethical objection that you can't overrule at once simply by calling it "liberal." But, of course, we're the ones with the bias.


Keep flying, son. And watch that potty mouth!

reply

You're onto something. Not all conservatives fall into this classification, but there's a good amount who feel like they're being persecuted by what they perceive as the "liberal media". These people also tend to be straight, white males. (You know... the demographic that has historically been persecuted the least over the course of history. For the record, I am also a straight, white male.) They also seem to be completely oblivious that they themselves persecute the very people they claim to be persecuted by. It's super awkward. There are liberals who act similarly to this as well, but they tend to be minorities, and as such, it makes their perpetual wallowing in societal-inflicited victimhood exponentially less ridiculous. All in all, the constant whining is a plague on society and it should *beep* off.

reply

You have fox news which over powers any and every liberal piece of media there is since they will distort, confuse and down right LIE to people on a daily basis on that channel just to get a hit on Dems so stop crying and go watch glen beck do it.

Oh and conservative heroes like beck, the hero of the everyman, he made 32 MILLION dollars least year fooling idiots into thinking he's just the man who knows the truth and isn't afraid to say it no matter what those liberals think.

Bull****, keep fooling yourself into thinking Limbaugh is the same, just looking out for YOU, with his 400 MILLION dollar contract to rant and rave about all the evil Obama does trying to give kids health care and stop banks from ripping us off.

The darling Palin, she quit her job SERVING the state of Alaska and guess what, she made 9 million dollars going around singing DRILL BABY DRILL ask Louisiana how that's working out for them, cause she's too much of a coward to do so.

oh and anyone who denies that these are the people who run the conservatives and the GOP are either stupid or dishonest.

reply

Amen MedoSaber!! Someone who calls it like they see it. These 3 can say what they want with no repercussions because they are not in the political circle. They can sit back and rake in the dollars while their words stir this country into a tizzy. The world is crumbling around them and they're feeding off of it. It's disgusting!

"What the *beep* have you done lately?"

reply

This movie is about military contractors and political corruption. So what you're saying is that conservatives are in favor of war crimes and corruption?


"Unless Alpert's covered in bacon grease, I don't think Hugo can track anything."

reply

Honestly, I thought this movie was anti-liberal and didn't even know it. Just look at the "twist" ending. It was the liberal politian that was the real "bad guy" and not the military contractor.
There ya go.

reply

Ha ha ha....I love it how, whenever there's a movie set in modern times that involves corruption it's the right that gets all defensive about it.No parties were mentioned in this movie, and it's adapted from a BBC miniseries. Guilty conscience?

Aaah, buckle this.

reply

OK, tell us how you would have changed the movie?

Hank Tuff - when the going gets rough!

reply

The great point in the movie is that the gov't trains them, and the private military corps kill them for a profit. The scariest things about private military is that they are not bound by the US constitution. At least the american militiary and those controling them, have restrictions set for in the constitution. These private militiary groups can do whatever they want, and are not answerable to anyone.

reply

[deleted]

Reality has a well known liberal bias.

reply

That's why they say reality bites.

reply

That's why they say reality bites.


So you prefer the fantasy land of "fair and balanced" (LOL) Fox News. Got it.

This movie is not liberal. As another poster pointed out, the Senator who was trying to blow the whistle on Blackwater (can't remember the fictional company name, but it was clearly Blackwater) was engaged in a scandal. In the end, both the Senator and the criminal running Blackwater went down in flames.



Dude means nice guy. Dude means a regular sort of person.

reply

I think it fair to say both that the film raises some questions concerning the military industrial complex, which right wingers now slavishly support (unless the government wants to enforce gun laws, of course) but also showed the guy who was attacking them was corrupt.

To call that approach an example of liberal bias seems to be based either on ignorance of what happens in the film, particularly toward the end, or perhaps is suggesting that questions should not even be raised about privatizing homeland security and national defense. Or both.

reply

[deleted]

Honestly, I thought this movie was anti-liberal and didn't even know it. Just look at the "twist" ending. It was the liberal politian that was the real "bad guy" and not the military contractor.


^THIS^

reply