The POV of the film The Boondock Saints is simplistic, reactionary, and generally dumb. It espouses vigilantism in such a way that it seems like the filmmakers really believe that killing all the criminals, even “pimps and drug dealers and all that shit”, would be a good solution to our society’s problems. I can’t go along with that, but nevertheless I find many of the scenes genuinely entertaining. It’s not even that they’re particularly original, but they’re approached with a refreshing sort of enthusiasm and naïveté that it’s hard not to switch off your brain and enjoy them.
For me, the best example of this is Dave. A presidential look-alike somehow gets into the Oval Office and just starts changing shit and screwing with the system. That’s a scary, scary thing, even if he’s just trying to do good.
That said, it was funny and lighthearted, and I really, really liked Dave, both the character and the movie.
But damn, it’s still a pretty messed-up premise.
Another favorite is Easy Rider (Man, I’ve been talking a lot about this movie over the week). I’m no fan of the 60’s counterculture–though it produced some truly excellent music–and the hippy-dippy commune didn’t exactly make me long to get back with nature, but overall, I thought it was a fantastic movie. Very moving, very touching, and I found myself simultaneously caring about Billy and Wyatt and shaking my head at them at the same time.
Ok it’s been a long time since I watched this movie so correct me if I’m wrong. I thought it was clear in the movie that they were guilty, Morant and Brian Brown’s character anyway. They killed the Dutch priest and were not sorry about it. He was a Boer spy and caused the deaths of some of the troops.
So you’re okay with destroying Leia’s entire home planet and everyone there, then?
I can’t recall a specific movie right now. As for other media, I am generally a pretty conservative guy but I am a huge fan of Frank Zappa. In comedy I have been a fan of George Carlin and Al Franken, until recently. Carlin has forgotten how to be funny and Franken chooses not to be most of the time. Along thoose lines I used to be a big fan of Dennis Miller but he is not as funny since he came out of the conservative closet. I like funny. If you are funny you can make any message you want and I’ll listen.
Well, after reading the Dope that Linty Fresh linked to, I’ll concede that it’s possible that I misconstrued the evidence. Perhaps even like a :wally
Though, it’s still incredibly ambiguous to me – it’s sort of like saying that Jeffrey Dahmer served lunches in settings which made his guests uncomfortable – it’s difficult to analyze if I can’t put into an appropriate context. I wish I understood the context of Carrol’s fascinations better. But exploring the topic gives me the crawling heebie-jeebies, especially now that I have kids of my own.
All I can say is, if I caught someone doing this with one of my children, I would feel compelled to discuss it with the pedophile one-on-one, after which one person would quickly end up in jail and the other in the hospital.
Doesn’t change the fact that he could write, tho.
Not to mention the sins and crimes of Palpatine! Using the Senate to further his own ends, using the Trade Federation and then having Anakin murder every last one of them, destroying Anakin, etc. Murdering the Jedi sneakily. I’m not sure how the rebels got to be murderers, it’s always difficult to be part of guerilla warfare but of course people will get killed. Then we get on to Anakin’s life.
In answer to the OP, I loved the book Lolita - well-written, entertaining, even humorous. That doesn’t mean I approve of Humburt’s philiosophies. With a well-written book you can disagree with almost every line and still like it.
Well, like the bearded guy’s ghost in the bathrobe said in Episode V, it all depends on your point of view. The Empire was directly responsible for the death of a single world, true, in addition to the killings and disappearences and so on in their power grab.
Contrast this with the rebels destroying not one but three worlds - both Death Stars and the moon of Endor - as well as the utter chaos the galaxy went through when the rebels toppled a government framework they couldn’t hope to replace.
That’s just looking at the relative scale of the atrocities. Looking at the motives, it’s hard to sympathize with the rebels. I mean, the Empire was all about order and law and sleek droids with black paint jobs and cool uniforms with bling. Whereas the rebels were just pissed that their ineffective galactic senate didn’t work, and thought they could blame the failure on the Empire. About the only thing the rebels can be credited with (aside from that little military victory, which we’ll ignore for the time being) is their audacious marketing strategy.
I’m half-kidding, of course. I see the story’s moral about how living in liberty is better than living under tyranny, and so on. But if you don’t take that philosophy as a given before watching the movies, I think you’d be convinced that Lucas actually believes in the Empire.
:smack:
That should read, “I see the story’s moral about how living in liberty is better than living under tyranny, and so on, and agree wholeheartedy.”
I swear I previewed. I did!
S.M. Stirling insists his horrible Domination of the Draka is a “dystopia,” but rather suspect he actually admires it on some level. Still one of my all-time favorite AH series. (I don’t know if Stirling has ever been in battle, but he writes the most vivid combat scenes I’ve ever read.)
I love “The Lord of the Rings”, but Tolkien had some seriously wrong ideas about things and stuff.
Like monarchy…remember the scene in “The Hobbit” where the mayor of laketown pusses out, and afterwards the grateful Laketowners make Bard their king? And this is presented as a good thing…silly squabbling irresponsible democracy replaced by good old wholesome absolute monarchy. Yech.
And so on.
Yeah, Sauron is bad. How do we know he’s bad? Because we’re told he’s bad. The War of the Ring ushers in a new era of Empire, King Elessar will rule over us as an enlightened benevolent dictator instead of that nasty Saruman with his machines, or that nasty Sauron with his swarthy followers.
I like Heinlein’s works, even if I may not agree with his political philosophies or monetary ones. I even like the movie Starship Troopers, even though I disagree with its ideas, and think it’s trivializing and bastardizing Heinlein.
Never been in the military as far as I can tell. Just a damn good writer. If i remember the picture I saw of him correctly, the pudgy bearded guy I saw wasn’t very military.
But the moon of Endor was perfectly habitable and it’s residents appeared pretty happy at the end of Jedi. I’d hardly say it was destroyed.
But the Death Star was only the size of a “small moon”, not a planet (although that doesn’t necessarily indicate size). The more important point is that the Death Star was a ship of the Imperial Navy, and as such full of combatants. The planet Alderaan was not only full of innocents, but the planet was entirely pacifistic; they had no weapons and it’s destruction only earned the Empire fear, not a crippling of the Rebellion.
Eh, not really. While the Emperor was alive, he was all about perverting the entire galaxy to the dark side of the Force. His goal was essentially to twist everyone so there was no “good”. When he died (and this is going into EU territory), the leaders that took over were mostly trying to amass power and wealth for themselves.
In addition, under the Empire, non-humans were second-class citizens. This is made more clear in the EU books, but look at the Imp Navy; all human crews. Slavery of entire species was common; at the very least, the Wookiees and the Noghri were enslaved to use as a labor force/assassins respectively.
Actually, without the machinations of Palpatine, the senate was working. It lasted for 4000 years, after all. It was him stirring up trouble that lead to the collapse of the senate.
As anyone who’s ever read the intermittent JFK assassination threads in GD would probably recognize, I am pretty disdainful of the conspiracy theories, which really don’t survive even the most cursory factual analysis. But that doesn’t alter in the slightest my opinion that Oliver Stone’s JFK is a darn fine movie.
Zappa was sort of conservative personally, in a sense. He was definitely anti-drug, was no fan of hippies (Oh No, for instance or “Is that a Sears poncho…”) and was a big fan of personal responsibility. He was a perfectionist with his music and insisted that musicians who worked with/for him be as well. He was against censorship, which real conservatives should oppose. The character of the Central Scrutinizer doesn’t make it seem like he was in favor of governmental surveillance.
I guess it depends on what you mean by “conservative.”
My trial membership expired minutes after I last hit “Submit Reply”. I did a panicked “subscribe now!” move just to respond to this. I’m not saying you owe me $15, but if we ever meet face-to-face, you can buy me a Big Gulp. 
Rather than hijack this thread, I started a new one.
As well as listening to his music and hearing him on TV I also saw him personally at a lecture at my university. I certainly wouldn’t put him in the conservative category. I would place him on the liberal end of libertarian. He certainly was no fan of the Republican party and Reagan in particular. I have a pretty good idea how he would feel about GWB. I’m not sure what category he put himself into if any.