RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,165107,00.html

One would think that movie producers would have enough access to Iraq and Afghanistan veterans by now, who could give them accurate and faithful portayals of our conduct of these wars. There is no shortage of former active duty officers and enlisted men, who have serious problems with these wars, and who therfore would give them plenty of grist for their mills.

I don't believe that good literature or good cinema should be "fair and balanced". If the author/director/screenwriter wants to dramatically present a certain point of view, he should be faithful to the facts up to a point (allowing for 'poetic license'); but above all, he should be clear about the point he wants to make.

The films exposing the Iraq War in an unfavorable light may or may not be critically good cinema. The country does not need to watch these movies in order to form its collective opinion of this war. Just as the images on videotape shaped America's opinion of the Vietnam war, satellite feeds have acccomplished the same for Iraq and Afghanistan.

quote:

Originally posted by AGBrina:
RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,165107,00.html

One would think that movie producers would have enough access to Iraq and Afghanistan veterans by now, who could give them accurate and faithful portayals of our conduct of these wars. There is no shortage of former active duty officers and enlisted men, who have serious problems with these wars, and who therfore would give them plenty of grist for their mills.

I don't believe that good literature or good cinema should be "fair and balanced". If the author/director/screenwriter wants to dramatically present a certain point of view, he should be faithful to the facts up to a point (allowing for 'poetic license'); but above all, he should be clear about the point he wants to make.

The films exposing the Iraq War in an unfavorable light may or may not be critically good cinema. The country does not need to watch these movies in order to form its collective opinion of this war. Just as the images on videotape shaped America's opinion of the Vietnam war, satellite feeds have acccomplished the same for Iraq and Afghanistan.

remember this is brought to you by MTV the same ones who produced all these so called reality tv shows about a bunch of spoil brats in different locations. then other show's showing some whacked out celeb tryna find love. i dont think that's much a good record but there are idiots who will watch that crap and probably this lame sounding movie as well.

quote:

Originally posted by TheSpectre:

quote:

Originally posted by AGBrina:
RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,165107,00.html

One would think that movie producers would have enough access to Iraq and Afghanistan veterans by now, who could give them accurate and faithful portayals of our conduct of these wars. There is no shortage of former active duty officers and enlisted men, who have serious problems with these wars, and who therfore would give them plenty of grist for their mills.

I don't believe that good literature or good cinema should be "fair and balanced". If the author/director/screenwriter wants to dramatically present a certain point of view, he should be faithful to the facts up to a point (allowing for 'poetic license'); but above all, he should be clear about the point he wants to make.

The films exposing the Iraq War in an unfavorable light may or may not be critically good cinema. The country does not need to watch these movies in order to form its collective opinion of this war. Just as the images on videotape shaped America's opinion of the Vietnam war, satellite feeds have acccomplished the same for Iraq and Afghanistan.

remember this is brought to you by MTV the same ones who produced all these so called reality tv shows about a bunch of spoil brats in different locations. then other show's showing some whacked out celeb tryna find love. i dont think that's much a good record but there are idiots who will watch that crap and probably this lame sounding movie as well.

I don't know... I tend to think the number of idiots who will watch this is pretty small based on the previous terrible attempts at GWOT movies. You'd think that producers could look at well received war movies of the past, i.e. Band of Brothers (yeah I know its a miniseries), and notice that yes, details matter. The whole calling an enlisted serviceman sir in a movie is a pretty ridiculous error and shows the lack of effort at presenting a realistic depiction of what's going on. I'd say that if you are making a movie about a group of people, for example those who've served in the sandbox, and the majority of them reject your movie as BS you've failed.

But who cares about accuracy when everyone is too busy trying to make their personal political statement, no matter how flawed or plan wrong it may be. Instead this garbage, why not make a movie about someone like Paul Smith, Jason Dunham, Doug Zembiec? There are enough real stories out there that there isn't a need to make s*** up.

I haven't read much about the movie and I don't plan on spending any of my economic stimulous on going to see it. I'll wait for it to come on TV like I waited for that anti-war movie "Born on the 4th of July" about a crippled Vietnam Vet.

It is Vietnam all over again. Vietnam veterans are portrayed in holly wood as a bunch of crazed murdering baby killers. While in Vietnam I never saw any atrocities perpetuated by Warriors. I do remember one incident when I saw some grunts in the back of a truck throwing C-ration cans at Vietnamese children. Vietnam vets were faced with hostilities from the USA public when they came back from Vietnam. The USA media portrayed Vietnam vets as a bunch of losers who lost the Vietnam War. Hundreds of thousands of Vietnam vets received other than honorable discharges from the military simply because they were unable to adjust to state side duty. Many Vietnam veterans came home strung out on drugs. Vietnam vets also ended up in jail because of their acting out. The Vietnam syndrome was the label Vietnam Vets wore who came home with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder(PTSD).

Back in the mid 70's I attended a conference at the University of Chicago. Papers were presented at the conference by mental health experts in the military or those who received their funding from the DOD. One shrink stated that menopausal women experienced more psychological problems than Vietnam veterans with PTSD.

After the conference I discovered that the University of Chicago received millions of dollars from DOD to research warrior behavior. Major studies by the University of Chicago discussed how much stress a warrior could take before becoming ineffective with PTSD.

The point I am trying to make is that at end of each war the USA starts at ground zero for veterans mental health issues. It is as though VA has never seen veterans of war with PTSD therefore veterans from all wars must fight the USA DOD and VA to receive treatment for PTSD. HELLO, IS ANYBODY OUT THERE?

Many Iraq and Afghan vets come home with brain damage caused by explosive concussions. WOW...what about all the USA Warriors from all wars who have undiagnosed brain damage cause by concussion. WILL SOMEBODY OUT THERE TELL THE TRUTH that WAR causes psychological and physiological disorders. SEMPER FI AND GOD BLESS AMERICA

quote:

Originally posted by TheSpectre:

quote:

Originally posted by AGBrina:
RE: http://www.military.com/opinion/0,15202,165107,00.html

One would think that movie producers would have enough access to Iraq and Afghanistan veterans by now, who could give them accurate and faithful portayals of our conduct of these wars. There is no shortage of former active duty officers and enlisted men, who have serious problems with these wars, and who therfore would give them plenty of grist for their mills.

I don't believe that good literature or good cinema should be "fair and balanced". If the author/director/screenwriter wants to dramatically present a certain point of view, he should be faithful to the facts up to a point (allowing for 'poetic license'); but above all, he should be clear about the point he wants to make.

The films exposing the Iraq War in an unfavorable light may or may not be critically good cinema. The country does not need to watch these movies in order to form its collective opinion of this war. Just as the images on videotape shaped America's opinion of the Vietnam war, satellite feeds have acccomplished the same for Iraq and Afghanistan.

remember this is brought to you by MTV the same ones who produced all these so called reality tv shows about a bunch of spoil brats in different locations. then other show's showing some whacked out celeb tryna find love. i dont think that's much a good record but there are idiots who will watch that crap and probably this lame sounding movie as well.

MTV was one of the 4 production companies involved. MTV was not the principle. Paramount Pictures is the principle production company and the principle distributor in the US. From what I can see, MTV (though listed as a production company) is only a secondary distributor and had no control over artistic direction.

The actual producers of the film are Kimberly Peirce, Scott Rudin, Mark Roybal and Gregory Goodman. These are the people that have control over the content and artistic direction of the film. Followed by the director; Kimberly Pierce, who is one of the Producers.

Trust me, I think that MTV is chit. But, I also do not like ignorant assumptions, either.

I do not watch B movie junk. I will not watch this movie. I've seen the stop loss drama from the best seat available.

quote:

The USA media portrayed Vietnam vets as a bunch of losers who lost the Vietnam War.

That played right into the bias of the "Greatest Generation" who won their war and look down on the Korean War vets and the Vietnam War vets because they lost.

Now it's the chickenhawks and neo-cons who would never put their a$$ on the line who are looking down on the Iraq vets for not winning.

quote:

Originally posted by bill_kananen:

quote:

The USA media portrayed Vietnam vets as a bunch of losers who lost the Vietnam War.

That played right into the bias of the "Greatest Generation" who won their war and look down on the Korean War vets and the Vietnam War vets because they lost.

Now it's the chickenhawks and neo-cons who would never put their a$$ on the line who are looking down on the Iraq vets for not winning.

Sad situation.

As a non-veteran I remember watching "Platoon" and being really impacted by it. I asked my brother, a Viet-Nam Vet, if he saw the movie and if so, was it "accurate." He said he wasn't interested in the movie. He said there is "NO WAY" a movie could even come close to "what it was like." Years later he mentioned he saw the movie eventually. His kids wanted to see it. Of the characters he said "there were guys sort of like that." He recognized the situations (e.g. the private getting killed on his first patrol, or the LTC calling for an air strike inside the perimeter). He said, "that kind of stuff happened." His final review... "It's a mooovie." If it wakes up a lot of people about the circumstances of today's Military? if it generates more inquiry and awareness about the troops? then it's a good thing. If it feeds negative stereotypes? Augh! We'll see.

quote:

Originally posted by VA90USAW5:
I do not watch B movie junk. I will not watch this movie. I've seen the stop loss drama from the best seat available.

You and me both! Anybody else here actually stop-lossed? It sucks.

My personal opinion is yes, this movie paints newly returned soldiers in a bad light. Is that unfair? Maybe, but when is the last time you had a serious heart to heart with a soldier? Things have to be pretty bad to get any idea how a soldier is feeling so maybe the readjustment difficulties were plot devices used to get the kind of frank responses non-military folks could understand. Maybe all of their interviews with soldiers (injured and uninjured) paid off. Or not, I was not super partial to the film but I thought it was the closest thing to 'accurate' I have seen yet.

Yeah I noticed the "Sir" event as well, but when I am wearing civvies I "Sir" most people I respect. Whether they outrank me or I outrank them, enlisted or otherwise. I am told its a southern custom and they were in Texas, after all.

Frankly, as a movie about stop-loss it was thought provoking. Interestingly they managed not to use the term PTSD once in the film, although I did here a "Trigger." The only folks I have ever heard utter that term are the VA mental health people, bless em.

So anyways, don't write the story off just because the soldiers in it are having a hard time readjusting to being back in the states and the directors didn't make a place for anyone otherwise. If you havent noticed, a lot of soldiers do at first.

The only thing I truly disliked was the exploration of dissertion/AWOL. That made me uncomfortable as all get out.

Keep thinking. Its the only way to win.

I'm just wondering what veterans they talked to in researching this movie. When I signed my contract, it was made clear to me that if war was declared, I would be in until six months after the duration of the war. Someone, JAG officer, put fifteen or so of us in a room, and went over our contracts with us, one clause at a time, and had us initial each and every clause as it was explained to us. There was no way in hell I would not have been able to understand my contract as it was written. Who's been telling this guy that soldiers and sailors don't know what they're getting into? I'm pretty tired of Hollywood trying to speak for me, and of them spouting off on subjects they don't know anything about.

Somebody needs to make an 'up' movie like "Baghdad Fantasy - the way things were supposed to go". Or a nice musical about 'Haji girls and dancin' Marines'. Or maybe even a little 'blue movie' poking some fun at ladies in Burquahs.

As it is, none of the realistic stuff 'Like Taxi to the Dark Side', or flicks like the 'Battle of Haditha' or 'Redacted' are what the stay-at-home audience wants to see. They want their killings done by monsters - not by the kid next door.

Or, better still, Horton Seeing a Whoo.

Saw 'Stop Loss' yesterday, would make a good AA educator.

Debate, awareness, inquiry, all good things.. but there has to be an open two-way flow of info or it turns into a runaway stampede..and i think I hear the distant thunder of hooves on the prairie....

I won't waste one penny on this movie at all. I will wait till it comes out on DirecTV and then I will watch it. I did not like the previews/trailers because of the way it portrays stop loss and the soldiers. I am no fond of stop loss but understood it because it happen to me. Late October 1991 I was in Korea on the DMZ when I was told that stop loss has started and I will stay in Korea until the First Gulf War ends. I stayed in Korea for 17 months! At first I was mad and then I understood why because if the North Koreans could take advantage of this situation and attack South Korea. Since most of our ground forces were at Kuwait the North Koreans might attack. So I had to suck it up and wait it out. As for the anti war movie Stop Loss it flop because common sense people are getting tired of far left loons attacking our soldiers. If anyone is to blame for the real stop loss it was Bush Sr., Clinton, and Congress who wanted to cash in for the Peace Dividend by slashing the manpower after the First Gulf War ended. I should know this because it happen to me in Nov 1994. I got my pink slip and had to salvage almost 15 years of active duty by joining the Army National Guard! If they left the manpower alone their would be no stop loss or 15 months tours like my Son is doing in Iraq! And their would be enough manpower to accomplish their mission over there. When you try to fight a war on a peace time economy you are going to have great difficulty in winning this war on terrorism.

1. I did see the movie
2. I actively encourage others to do so as well.


There was some very bold misconceptions displayed and active stereotyping.

1. Military soldiers are not all drunken, violent, country music "hicks". However, I can place real world names to each of those characters.

2. I have never seen 1 person actually go AWOL who was stop-lossed. I am not saying it happens, but it is the exception, not the norm.


Stop-loss has been hit by critics on both sides of the issue. Those who support stop-loss boycott the movie based on principle, and those who are against stop-loss criticize minor points because they do not fit their own conception of how it should have been portrayed. These people are not movie critics, and most haven't even seen it. Instead, they choose to base their dislike (or open hatred) on the biased reports of others who do not like it for one reason or another.

I am not saying that everybody who watches it will like it, but how many of you who have actually experienced stop-loss and return trips cannot empathize with the point that they are making?


Stop-loss is a Hollywood movie - not a documentary. Creative license is often taken in the interest of trying to get or keep an audience. Very few documentaries actually do well. For those that do; this isn't a cute and cuddly topic for the family like penguins, and I'd rather not have Micheal Moore try to make the point, thanks.

As an MTV movie, Stop-Loss has brought a despicable and appalling practice into mainstream. Despite the number of times this topic has been submitted, it has been generally ignored - to the detriment of our soldiers, sailors, and airmen. This movie portrayed the heartbreak and destruction that stop loss has caused. I could only have asked that it not downplay the hardships so much for a dramatic sideline about going AWOL.

A lot of people have been hit hard by stop-loss. At one point, my mother flew 4 blue stars on her flag poll... because of injuries, she now flies 2. She has a son who walks with a cane, a daughter who is in the hospital more times than she is out, and two more sons who have both earned multiple purple hearts.

My family, in addition to my sister's husband (4 tours), my fiance (just deployed), and a lot of friends - still in and out, openly recommend this movie.

As far as this family of veterans,

From big movie hit to TV production, good cinema or not, at least american people always attempt to portray their conflicts and wars.

In France we don't talk about it. It took decades to produce a movie about dien Bien Phu and Algerian war is still too contreversial, almost taboo. Not much of making documentaries films too...