Typical liberal fiction - Bridge of Spies (2015) Discussion

[–] Jack_LesCamela 9 years ago

Over zealous rightwing bigots threatening Donavan because he defended a communist spy.

The movie doesn't say what the politics of the people threatening his family are. What it does make clear is they don't understand when the law guarantees you legal representation in a court of law that lawyer representing you doesn't necessarily agree with you. He or she is there to makes sure you get a fair hearing in a court of law.

I don't know how much of the events of that part of the movie are accurate, but I suspect that things like that did happen to Donovan and his family. There is certainly no shortage of stupid people who would do such a thing for even less.

"I speak Spanish to God, French to women, English to men, and Japanese to my horse."

reply

[–] nyjack 9 years ago

There is probably some off-hand comparison being made to today's Patriot Act.

reply

[–] information_police 9 years ago

What it does make clear is they don't understand when the law guarantees you legal representation in a court of law that lawyer representing you doesn't necessarily agree with you. He or she is there to makes sure you get a fair hearing in a court of law.

I would have loved if Donovan brought up how John Adams defended the British soldiers on trial for the Boston Massacre. He took a lot of heat and put up with threats at the time but he firmly believed that everyone deserved competent legal representation in a court of law.

"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules. "
-Walter Sobchak

reply

[–] jd-276 9 years ago

What it does make clear is they don't understand when the law guarantees you legal representation in a court of law that lawyer representing you doesn't necessarily agree with you. He or she is there to makes sure you get a fair hearing in a court of law.

This is a major theme of Donovan's book.

reply

[–] ranb40 9 years ago

In Donovan's book he described various people who were saying "WTF are you defending Abel for?" Donovan's thought on the topic were that these people did not understand stand innocent until proven guilty and that everyone deserves a fair trial/good lawyer. He went on to say that if these people ever got in trouble they would be insisting on the best attorney they could afford.

Ranb

reply

[–] matkinson1775 9 years ago

Dead on review. The spy was a sensitive, learned man. The Americans were just maniacal red -baiters.

reply

[–] hafabee 9 years ago

But so were the Russians. When they captured the American spy, took him to a show trial and gave him his verdict the entire court room exploded with deafening applause, when ultimately the American spy was no less loyal, no less of a man than his Russian counterpart.

reply

[–] Terrapin2212 9 years ago

Why was there even such a big crowd in the Soviet courtroom? Wouldn't the USSR have used a military court martial or a secret trial? This movie glossed over the evil of the Soviet Union.

I don't know why Hollywood and the education system never depict the USSR, East Germany, Communist China, North Vietnam, etc as the evil they were/are? Stalin killed more people than Hitler did. Tens of millions were killed by Mao Zedong in China, yet so many people in America today have a rosy view of socialism. For them, socialism is a bunch of weed smoking hippies in the Vietnam era or these too serious looking Soviets in movies like this one. People seem to forget the USSR was an evil, despotic regime. I think if the true history of communism and socialism is taught in our schools, Bernie Sanders and Obama woudln't be so popular.

reply

[–] jd-276 9 years ago

This movie glossed over the evil of the Soviet Union.

So, every movie which has anything to do with the Soviet Union should have to doff its cap to your personal opinion, even if it only represents a cameo point? The whole point of this movie was not to show how evil the Soviet Union was but how much better America was. Don't you get that?

I don't know why Hollywood and the education system never depict the USSR, East Germany, Communist China, North Vietnam, etc as the evil they were/are?

You mean they don't teach your version of events? Actually, I'd be interested to see what proof you can provide of this, especially since it comes from the person with the biggest political panty bunch on IMDB.

People seem to forget the USSR was an evil, despotic regime.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

reply

[–] jef_imans 9 years ago

Why was there even such a big crowd in the Soviet courtroom? Wouldn't the USSR have used a military court martial or a secret trial?

The whole point of the USSR was exactly to make it a showcase... so you really wonder why there was such a big crowd...? Doh...

yet so many people in America today have a rosy view of socialism

You forget the even more people in the rest of the world like Europe, who realise that socialism is not a dirty word... but of course, you can't expect an American to know anything outside his little world and what his propaganda machine chews for him to swallow... by the way, what is that true history of communism you so easily refer to?

reply

[–] jd-276 9 years ago

Why was there even such a big crowd in the Soviet courtroom? Wouldn't the USSR have used a military court martial or a secret trial? This movie glossed over the evil of the Soviet Union.

Because, if you care to read the book, it was held in the same hall the 1930s show trials were held in. It could seat 2000 people. Apparently you missed it so your last sentence is a bit of a giveaway. You will only be satisfied with anti-Soviet piece which has nothing to do with the Abel story.

reply

[–] ranb40 8 years ago

There was a big crowd in the movie because that is the way it was described in the book that Powers wrote. It happens to be one of the few things that the producers got right.

reply

[–] cthulhulurks 9 years ago

I doubt the russians cared About the public opinion. The amercans did though.

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings

reply

[–] oceanlite06 9 years ago

Because this doesn't happen today with Muslims? Over-zealous bigots threatening Muslims and their families because they're perceived as terrorists just because of their religion? Wake up and read something, Tony. It happens frequently.

Television is a vice; film is an addiction.

reply

[–] Satan2016 9 years ago

Remember when Clock Boy took apart a clock with big red LEDs and took it to school. The police were called because hundreds of movies show bombs just like that?

Clock Boy played the victim, but all those "nasty conservatives" exposed his BS. He demanded the constitution be amended to ban "Islamophobia".

They family is off to democratic Qatar now. Good Riddance!

Check yer Privilege, White Boy! WOO WOO!

reply

[–] vampslayer33000 9 years ago

Actually, it doesn't happen frequently. In fact, it rarely happens ever, if at all.

Please join us in the real world.

reply

[–] fede_4488 9 years ago

Wait til Trumps becomes president.

reply

[–] lizw80-4-723546 9 years ago

Idiot republicans won't see the resemblance between this and Trump wanting to put up a wall to keep Mexicans out.

reply

[–] vampslayer33000 9 years ago

There's a resemblance between a wall keeping people in versus one keeping people out? They're the complete opposite of each other, but if you say one resembles the other.

reply

[–] Movie-Jay 9 years ago

What's so fictional about overzealous right-wing bigots (ORWB) threatening such a man for defending a commie spy? They're precisely the people who would and do make such threats.

After 9/11, it was none other than ORWB who were responsible for harm against not only Muslim Americans, but Sikh Americans (who aren't even of the Islamic faith) right on down to dogs of the afghan breed.

That's just how stupid our right-wing morons are. OP is a fool.

reply

[–] vampslayer33000 9 years ago

Back in the real world the type of people who would make such threats are:

1) the homo-fascists who try to get anybody who disagrees with them in a public manner fired from their jobs and banned from speaking,
2) black lives matter types that grab microphones from people like Bernie Sanders
3) teacher's unions that threaten and silence any opposing view (the local teacher's union did just that recently while on strike - wonderful people)

What harm was committed against Muslim Americans after 9/11 at the hands of right-wing bigots?

I suppose in a backwards world the 90% of violent interracial crime involving a black assailant and a white victim would be 100% coincidence, not to be laid at the doorsteps of movements like black-lives-matter.

reply

[–] hugh1971 9 years ago

The one part I did feel was a bit 'liberal agenda' was when Spielbe..er...I mean Donovan was saying in Abel's defence about how he was a good man, just doing his duty etc. Spielberg wouldn't, I'm sure, have made a film in which a Nazi agent was defended in that way. In fact, the 'only following orders' was a widely mocked defence at Nuremberg.

Of course, it's possible that Donovan was just clutching at straws in an attempt to offer a defence.

'Monsters? We're British!'

reply

[–] sluggr-2 9 years ago

Disagree here. Most of my conservative friends and I hold the view that although we may not agree with what you have to say, we will defend to the death your right to say it. Pretty much all attacks against free speech recently have come from the left in the form of political correctness, which to me is analogous to fascism in its purest form.

To me, the only issue was whether the trial should be in civilian court or military court, since that period was vague as to whether we were in a cold or a shootin war. In times of declared war a soldier out of uniform is considered a spy and is usually executed without a thought. But the cold war was a gray zone as to the execution of that protocol.

I think my percentage of Chimp DNA is higher than others. Cleaver Greene

reply

[–] darkavenger77 9 years ago

OP is a fool.

OP is a troll. They posted a controversial topic and disappeared. Look at what happened (typical arguments and name calling). See below for some advice on trolls.

Found an IMDB troll? Remember:
The best thing you can do is report + ignore them.

reply

[–] puirt-a-beul 9 years ago

Over zealous rightwing bigots threatening Donavan because he defended a communist spy.

I'm guessing you don't know a lot about the time period in which the film is set. The attitude of the prosecution and judge at the first trial, for example, and the people on the train, are very easy to credit. There weren't many dissenting views shown, partly because film works in shorthand, but also because it wasn't like now, when everyone has an opinion and wants the world to hear it. Dissenters at the time would have largely kept their mouths shut.

And it didn't fit into the currently-prevailing American Manichaeist mythology of good vs. bad, liberal vs. conservative, Democrat vs. Republican.

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

reply

[–] information_police 9 years ago

I'm guessing you don't know a lot about the time period in which the film is set.

I think it would be true in any time period. In another post up in this thread, I mentioned John Adams taking heat for defending the British soldiers on trial for the Boston Massacre.

I would also point to the great speech given by Thomas More in "A Man for All Seasons" about how he would give the benefit of law to the Devil himself, because if all the laws were cut down, there would be nothing left to defend yourself from the Devil.

"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules. "
-Walter Sobchak

reply

[–] puirt-a-beul 9 years ago

Hi i_p, my point was only that suggesting that Donovan was publicly reviled for defending a Commie was "typical liberal fiction" misses the truth of the history of the time. i.e. It's not simply "propaganda" for a modern mindset, and that's true no matter how many other times it's happened as well. People seeing history only through a prism of current attitudes and assuming that must be what other people must be doing as well is an immensely strong argument for history being taught.

You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

reply

[–] information_police 9 years ago

Agree entirely!

"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules. "
-Walter Sobchak

reply

[–] bigmyc04 9 years ago

Good Lord (not pardoning the pun). I thought that you were going to state something else entirely and yet, you came up with that?

If I could hit the "dismiss" button, I would. As it is, I'm far too deep into my response to what is probably a political baiting session conducted by you. Congrats. You have another catch, killer.

Anyhow, if you think that there wasn't any of that type of nonsense from some of the "citizens" of this country during that time, you are a bigger fool than I give you credit for.

Furthermore, it it was truly liberal propaganda, do you think that they would have depicted Powers in such a neutral light? If anything, you could say that he was portrayed as heroic. A true liberal white wash would have had the guy say, "*beep* this!" and ditch as soon as his plane was compromised, I'm fairly certain.

reply