MovieChat Forums > Billy Lynn's Long Halftime Walk (2016) Discussion > Is this another Pentagon supported propa...

Is this another Pentagon supported propaganda film?

posted 8 years ago by thebricks
14 replies | jump to latest

Like Hacksaw Ridge, Captain Phillips, Argo, Braveheart, Gladiator, Zero Dark Thirty...

Sorry, I can just smell this crap from a mile away.

[–] travise1986 8 years ago

Braveheart?

[–] MightyTiki 8 years ago

The U.S. Department of Defense pledged full support to the pre-production, production, and post-production of Breaveheart (1995) in keeping with the highest traditions of the United States Armed Forces.

"Toto, I've [got] a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore."

[–] thebricks 8 years ago

The villains were English, the good guys were Scottish and Irish, William Wallace mentions freedom a billion times, the message couldn't have been any more clear. Then he stars in a Revolutionary War movie that has the English burning his home, churches, murdering innocent people, the message couldn't have been any more clear. Then in Apocalypto, the Aztec/Incan(?) Empire sacrifices innocent people, basically for fun, but at the end, the lead is saved by the European ships, figuratively and literally, and presumably by Christianity.

If you're too thick to see Gibson for who he is, God help you.

[–] yeejunru 8 years ago

Didnt know pentagon got anything to do with the rome empire and scotland rebel

[–] CrzyCobb 8 years ago

No way, this movie is not only anti-war it's basically anti-America, but not in a "death to America" kind of way, more like a "Hey America, stop being so fat and dumb and maybe take advantage of the incredible luxury you're living in" kind of way.

But to me even that message is muddled and it seems like the whole movie is building up towards the main character being like "Yeah, why the hell am I risking my life for a bunch of old rich white guys?" and then he's suddenly like "hell yeah, war!" at the end. Not a great movie. Great war sequences.

[–] thebricks 8 years ago

Every single director of a war movie claims it's anti-war. Now I realize why, because they're ashamed they sold their soul to make propaganda.

Don't be an idiot, please.

[–] dannieboy20906 8 years ago

Hmm, you list three movies based on true events (I cannot speak for their accuracy) followed by three patently fictional movies loosely based on history (repeatedly explained as such by the people who made them).

If you smell crap all the time, maybe you should change your trousers.

The best diplomat I know is a fully charged phaser bank.

[–] thebricks 8 years ago

Go away.

[–] KurtOnyx 8 years ago

The truth hurts doesn't it. If you don't want to hear different opinions go sit in your safe space and don't post on a public forum.

[–] thebricks 8 years ago

Wow, you think this isn't happening? I feel sorry for you. I really do.

[–] KurtOnyx 8 years ago

Tin foil hat snug on your head?

[–] thebricks 8 years ago

How's your special ed classes going?

[–] ofumalow 8 years ago

The short answer to the OP's question is: That would be pretty freaking unlikely, since this movie is a critique of soldiers being used by the government for propaganda purposes.

[–] thebricks 8 years ago

You do know these people are really good at covering up propaganda, right?