I think I'll rent before i buy it. Only because Meryl Streep is in it. Not for science boy Queer TOM.

Sam Spade wrote: mcswainiac wrote: So this movie isn't inter-species erotica? 'Cause the title sure threw me...

Well Tom Cruise is a Scientologist...Exactly - and those lambs were brought down in the spaceship with them...

mcswainiac wrote: So this movie isn't inter-species erotica? 'Cause the title sure threw me...

Well Tom Cruise is a Scientologist...

carlvjack wrote:

That is what confused me about the movie and I felt the writers and director kind of messed up with the direction of the film.  They were talking about how the media fell for the big push for the Iraq war but instead focused on some soldiers going to Afghanistan.

What I "think" the director was trying to do but did not emphasize enough was how much attention was focused on Iraq and the government lost focus on Afghanistan.

Tom Cruise hit the nail on the head about where our country's focus though when he said that Afghanistan will always be a third world country at best but Iraq has potential.

You see this is what I mean.

Iraq WAS a farce.  A con.  He was a Muslim problem for other Muslims he was no threat to us.

Human Rights WAS an issue (Muslims who have never seen Iraq shout, burn and plot a lot over iraq, yet cared not one bit when Saddam was chopping off the ears of these Muslim brothers they suddenly care sooooo much about), but as we see there are far worse human Rights abusers than Saddam and his gang.

Iraq was not only a con, but a waste of men and resources that WILL be needed eleswhere.
That does not mean a like all these anti-West films in the middle of a war though, especially those that ignore the utter, unique barbarity and real threat of the Islamic world.

But Afghanistan is utterly different.  It WAS a terrorist base connected to 9/11.
It is in fact (although the others don't pull their weight) a UNITED NATIONS mission.
And if anyone want to defend the Taleban....feel free to defend the Nazis too.

But Afghanistan always gets linked in with Iraq, people still wrongly think its a Brit/American, f**k the U.N. mission and people still go on about those poor 'invaded' Afghans...forgetting the Afghan people were very happy to wave goodbye to the murderous Taleban, Afghan people worlk side by side as Policeman and soldiers with Western troops to fight the Taleban etc etc etc.

The only 'wrong' in Afghanistan is that, yes, it's so badly planned and resourced.  But that's the typical farce the current Amercan and UK governments love so much.

But, unless you take an utterly 'we will not get involved in anything at all, no matter what the provocation or right, no matter where it is' stance then I fail to see why anyone is against the war in Afghanitsan or the reasons why we are there.

moan about the waste of troops and men in Iraq we NEED in Afghanistan, moan about the lack of funding for Afghanistan, moan about botched planning in Afghanistan...But don't moan about Afghanistan from any moral or idealogical stance as yo have not got one.  Not when fighting a terrorist base connected to 9/11 and a regime that hacks the heads of teachers who educate girls.

As such no films based on that stance are welcome.

Dave Brock wrote: carlvjack wrote: As someone in the military and who went with people in the military and actualy served in the Middle East a couple of tours, I feel the movie had an excellent message.  Not sure how many of the negative comments are from "armchair patriots".  If your an armchair patriot then yes the movie would have offended you.

I was reminded from the college class scene how many people love to watch the war on Fox News and try to be macho via proxy but very few will actually serve to make a real point as to why they believe the way they believe.
I agree the best part of the movie was Tom Cruise's character

Then I refer you to my post above concerning Afghanistan specifically.

Answers would be nice.

That is what confused me about the movie and I felt the writers and director kind of messed up with the direction of the film.  They were talking about how the media fell for the big push for the Iraq war but instead focused on some soldiers going to Afghanistan.

What I "think" the director was trying to do but did not emphasize enough was how much attention was focused on Iraq and the government lost focus on Afghanistan.

Tom Cruise hit the nail on the head about where our country's focus though when he said that Afghanistan will always be a third world country at best but Iraq has potential.

carlvjack wrote: As someone in the military and who went with people in the military and actualy served in the Middle East a couple of tours, I feel the movie had an excellent message.  Not sure how many of the negative comments are from "armchair patriots".  If your an armchair patriot then yes the movie would have offended you.

I was reminded from the college class scene how many people love to watch the war on Fox News and try to be macho via proxy but very few will actually serve to make a real point as to why they believe the way they believe.
I agree the best part of the movie was Tom Cruise's character

Then I refer you to my post above concerning Afghanistan specifically.

Answers would be nice.

Lincoln6Echo wrote: When will the Hollywood liberal elite realize that most Americans are not interested in seeing these anti-American films?

Americans, Americans, Americans - there are other nations too, you know, or do you ? And those just might have dvd players aswell - ever heard that kind or rumour, back in the ignoraceville - you seem to live in ?

As someone in the military and who went with people in the military and actualy served in the Middle East a couple of tours, I feel the movie had an excellent message.  Not sure how many of the negative comments are from "armchair patriots".  If your an armchair patriot then yes the movie would have offended you.

I was reminded from the college class scene how many people love to watch the war on Fox News and try to be macho via proxy but very few will actually serve to make a real point as to why they believe the way they believe.
I agree the best part of the movie was Tom Cruise's character

I liked the film, although it needed some restructuring (the subplot concerning Robert Redford's character, the slacker student and the two Iraq soldiers could've been better written or done away with entirely). Basically, what made the whole movie was the subplot with Cruise and Streep's characters was just riveting... Cruise just nails the part of a slick, corrupt politician perfectly. The movie would've been terrific had the entire film been centered around those two. But the other actors were wasted, such as a shame, as even Redford himself was underutilized.

As for the DVD, I'll wait for a price reduction and then get it.

The most disappointing Oscar-hyped movie this year!

And that cover looks a lot like Hollywoodland's.

I like that cover, despite the fact that Robert Redford looks like an old woman.

That background may not have been a good choice as it sort of matches the behavior of  Redfords flesh. Wish Cruise was wearing his Scientology Medallion of Freedom thingy on this cover.

(FYI, names have to follow billing and/or contracts, that's why the names don't always correspond to the art below them... and frankly, the art shouldn't have to.)

I think Tom Cruise is extremely pathetic. And I don't plan to follow his movies.

Although I agreed with most of the arguments made in this movie, watching it, I still felt like I was being smacked over the head with its ideals. This movie made almost no attempt to try and organize its arguments in at least a semi enganing, cinematic way.
And that college kid really pissed me off!

At least the Floating heads have part of a body and as mentioned earlier, the names are lined up too.  Too bad I won't be wasting my 90min on this piece of anti-American garbage.

When will the Hollywood liberal elite realize that most Americans are not interested in seeing these anti-American films?

Well at least for once on a DVD cover, the names matched with the positions of the actors..

LOL....so mean.....

I have no interest in this either.

Synopsis:

Quote: Robert Redford, Tom Cruise and Meryl Streep deliver “three knockout performances” (Vue Weekly) in this powerful, provocative thriller that explores the consequences of taking a stand. An idealistic professor (Redford) in California attempts to inspire a student to do more with his life, while a charismatic Senator (Cruise) in Washington D.C. pitches a new Middle East war strategy to a probing TV journalist (Streep). And halfway across the world, two of the professor’s former students are trapped behind enemy lines in Afghanistan, fighting for freedom—and their very lives. As the tension mounts and the bullets fly, these Americans will change each other’s lives and the world in ways they never could have imagined.