My Cold, Dead Hand
As I've remarked elsewhere, I get a lot of right-wing screeds in my email, some of which I laugh at, some of which I ignore, some of which I actually take seriously. An email I got from an NRA buddy at least had the backing of an internet link to a reliable news source: in this case, Reuters. The issue that caught my attention was the U.S. expressing willingness to support the Conference on the Arms Trade Treaty, which is a UN-supported organization designed to negotiate arms control treaties. While the emphasis is on strategic (nuclear) arms, the thing that has the NRA in a twist is that it also covers sales of conventional arms (e.g. guns and ammo) overseas, saying that this would be the "first major step in a plan to ban all firearms in the United States."
Come on, people!
The point of this treaty is to bring some law and order to the process of shipping arms to overseas customers--you know: like Iran, the Contras, or the Mujahadeen. Be that as it may, the U.S. Government has some of the strictest rules for sales of arms overseas, so we could only raise the tenor of debate. I do find it interesting that a staunch ally of ours, Israel, as well as two theoretical rivals, China and Russia, all abstained on this treaty last time it came up for a vote in the UN. They don't like the idea of American standards tying their hands on who they can sell weapons to.
On the flip side, do we want our decision to, say, arm pro-freedom demonstrators in Iran, China, Cuba, or elsewhere, subject to a veto by the UN, a body that has taken great pleasure in thwarting U.S. plans at every turn? So if you're going to oppose the treaty, pick that reason. It's a lonnnnng stretch to say that this is a ban on domestic sales of handguns, and I can name half a dozen people off the top of my head who would argue the point most strenuously if any American government even tried such a stunt.
Every year I get stockholder ballots that include arguments from the Sisters of Mercy (or somesuch group) complaining that Such-and-such defense contractor is making money selling [X weapons] to unsavory characters overseas. And every year I check the box voting No, occasionally adding the comment, "If you're so concerned about making money on weapons, sell your stock. That, or write your congresscritter complaining to them about who the U.S. Government allows to receive American-made arms."
Again, the point of this treaty is to bring the U.S. into the UN process for restricting how many arms we sell overseas. If the arms dealers are cheesed off about losing money because the government restricts how much money they can make selling overseas, they can lobby like every other Beltway Bandit. That is not the same as putting a clamp on the sale of handguns and other toys to American citizens. I don't even buy the slippery slope argument on this one. In this case, the NRA is barking up the wrong tree.
Books, product reviews, thoughts on technology, random philosophizing, citizen science, science cheerleading, and unsolicited comments about space exploration, back in action.
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Showing posts with label propaganda. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Sunday, October 05, 2008
Movie Review: An American Carol
There's been maybe one person who managed to make propaganda funny, and that was Walt Disney, in Der Fuehrer's Face.
After that, face it: propaganda is what it is: it's a humorless rant for your side against the other side. Alas, for every nearly humorless conservative propaganda piece there are about ten liberal ones. Regardless, An American Carol is more pedantic than funny. The big studios could have let it flop on its own merits (or lack thereof). Instead, they made the mistake of refusing to market the film, thereby giving the conservative base a chance to push the film via underground marketing.
But I digress. What is this film about? Imagine that a Michael Moore-type Hollywood director experiences a series of Christmas Carol visits from patriotic spirits who try to show him the error of his ways as he tries to ban Independence Day. Now here's the problem I had with the film: I really like David Zucker's films. Airplane II is one of my favorite bits, and I usually laugh my way through most of the movie.
Such is not the case here. Where one might persuade with humor, Zucker becomes pedantic. The funny bits in the movie tend to NOT be political, but Zucker's usual slapstick or wordplay. The concerns of the film and the characterizations/impersonations will not age well because they are very much a product of their time. In fact, they're already past their time: this film would've had more of an impact about 5 years ago, when the Iraq War was hot and heavy.
Be that as it may, I suppose the conservatives deserve a B for effort. This one film stands up in the face of Fahrenheit 9/11, Rendition, Syriana, Sicko, Munich, Redacted, The Road to Guantanamo, and other anti-war films and says, "To heck with it, we're gonna laugh at YOU!" Again, the problem I have is that it's not as funny as it could have been. For instance, there was one bit that was taken out of the final cut of the film where a bunch of police officers is stopped at airport security while a group of bomb-carrying terrorists is allowed to just pass by. Now to me that's funny because it's aggravating and has a grain of truth. Alas, the scene didn't make the final cut. But then, let's be serious for a moment: it's very difficult to make the war on terrorism funny, period.
And then there's this: any piece of propaganda runs the risk of becoming forced, desperate, creepy, or contrived. Consider, for instance, the faux grandeur of "Tomorrow Belongs to Me" in Cabaret.
Or one might consider the attempt to create "great leader" songs for children of Obama voters.
So anyway, An American Carol is every bit the piece of red meat for conservatives to devour as Fahrenheit 9/11 is for liberals. If you go in knowing that, you may devour it (or not) as you see fit. Personally, I like my red meat served with a little better seasoning and taste, to extend the metaphor.
Of course, just for fun, I'd advise my conservative friends to go see the movie once or twice, just to jack up the sales and annoy some liberal entertainment reporters for a week. But after the first week, buy a ticket, then go sneak into Appaloosa instead because Viggo Mortensen can do no wrong, and he even manages to be funny occasionally.
There's been maybe one person who managed to make propaganda funny, and that was Walt Disney, in Der Fuehrer's Face.
After that, face it: propaganda is what it is: it's a humorless rant for your side against the other side. Alas, for every nearly humorless conservative propaganda piece there are about ten liberal ones. Regardless, An American Carol is more pedantic than funny. The big studios could have let it flop on its own merits (or lack thereof). Instead, they made the mistake of refusing to market the film, thereby giving the conservative base a chance to push the film via underground marketing.
But I digress. What is this film about? Imagine that a Michael Moore-type Hollywood director experiences a series of Christmas Carol visits from patriotic spirits who try to show him the error of his ways as he tries to ban Independence Day. Now here's the problem I had with the film: I really like David Zucker's films. Airplane II is one of my favorite bits, and I usually laugh my way through most of the movie.
Such is not the case here. Where one might persuade with humor, Zucker becomes pedantic. The funny bits in the movie tend to NOT be political, but Zucker's usual slapstick or wordplay. The concerns of the film and the characterizations/impersonations will not age well because they are very much a product of their time. In fact, they're already past their time: this film would've had more of an impact about 5 years ago, when the Iraq War was hot and heavy.
Be that as it may, I suppose the conservatives deserve a B for effort. This one film stands up in the face of Fahrenheit 9/11, Rendition, Syriana, Sicko, Munich, Redacted, The Road to Guantanamo, and other anti-war films and says, "To heck with it, we're gonna laugh at YOU!" Again, the problem I have is that it's not as funny as it could have been. For instance, there was one bit that was taken out of the final cut of the film where a bunch of police officers is stopped at airport security while a group of bomb-carrying terrorists is allowed to just pass by. Now to me that's funny because it's aggravating and has a grain of truth. Alas, the scene didn't make the final cut. But then, let's be serious for a moment: it's very difficult to make the war on terrorism funny, period.
And then there's this: any piece of propaganda runs the risk of becoming forced, desperate, creepy, or contrived. Consider, for instance, the faux grandeur of "Tomorrow Belongs to Me" in Cabaret.
Or one might consider the attempt to create "great leader" songs for children of Obama voters.
So anyway, An American Carol is every bit the piece of red meat for conservatives to devour as Fahrenheit 9/11 is for liberals. If you go in knowing that, you may devour it (or not) as you see fit. Personally, I like my red meat served with a little better seasoning and taste, to extend the metaphor.
Of course, just for fun, I'd advise my conservative friends to go see the movie once or twice, just to jack up the sales and annoy some liberal entertainment reporters for a week. But after the first week, buy a ticket, then go sneak into Appaloosa instead because Viggo Mortensen can do no wrong, and he even manages to be funny occasionally.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)