You make a good point, but remember that even Vietnam wasn't heavily covered in movies until much later. Most of the films tended to focus on the 'crazy ex-Vietnam" soldier. And again, the controversy over 'Nam was another reason it was avoided for years; hence "MASH" took place in Korea, even though everyone knew the creators were thinking about 'Nam.
The movie you're thinking about is "The Hurt Locker", which has gotten great reviews. I want to see it. But one more time, even that is more of a movie focused on the day-to-day of the soldiers' lives, the human drama at the heart of any war. Movies like "In the Valley of Elah" and "Rendition" tried to capture that on the homefront, but audiences didn't show. People unfortunately want big battles, lots of explosions--spectacle. I think that you're right that more media coverage might make the struggles more immediate and perhaps even exciting, but still think that the detachment Americans feel, the controversy over them, and the relatively confined nature of the campaigns makes Hollywood say "nah". At best they're trying to figure out how to copy and top the Hurt Locker's success. I bet suits are right now trying to figure out how they can bring Brad Pitt and a Tarentino take to Afghanistan or Iraq. More's the pity, because hundreds of thousands of US soldiers, support, and family are impacted every moment of every day, and H'Wood can't be bothered. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mr. Worf" <hellomahog...@gmail.com> To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday, September 25, 2009 3:41:12 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] ARK II has not aged well That may be because of the tight control over the media's coverage war. This is the first war where the media hasn't really been allowed to travel to the front with the soldiers. Totally different than Viet Nam. Desert Storm was like watching a video game or movie. This one feels like we are watching a crime scene. We see the damage of an exploded tank or Hummer but not the bodies or the combatants. I remembered just now that a movie about Iraq came out a few months back about a guy that was on the bomb squad. On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:23 PM, Keith Johnson < keithbjohn...@comcast.net > wrote: That's true about WWII. I don't know that Hollywood execs have had a summit like that. The general wisdom has been that war movies based on Iraq and Iran don't pull in the audiences. Reasons given are that they're hugely divisive, so there's no assurance people will pay to see films about them. At the same time, the "wars" themselves aren't as engaging in our everyday lives as WWII was. Many of us can go about our daily lives and honestly not think of the people fighting and dying over there. WWII was universal in its effect on all Americans, whether it was those fighting, relatives of soldiers, the women who had to work in the factories, the need for people to conserve rubber, gas, etc. Iraq and Iran just don't tough our lives in that way. And finally, these "wars" aren't as "exciting". They take place in dessert countries with one enemy, and the campaigns are more about hide-and-seek, skirmishes, and roadside bombs. There's not of the spectacle of a world war, with battles on several fronts, wars in trenches, beaches stormed, skies filled with fighters and bombers raining death, seas covered with ships, debris, and battles. They're too "boring" for Hollywood's tastes. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mr. Worf" < hellomahog...@gmail.com > To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2009 4:51:04 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] ARK II has not aged well This reminded me of something. I read that during WW2 the government had a sit down with the heads of the studios in Hollywood about making films that encourage the troops and to keep people's minds off of the war. So Hollywood made propaganda films, musicals, and other types of films that softened the reality of the war. Could it be that the same thing may be going on now? The war has been going on for years in Iraq and we have only seen 3 films about it. How many films have we seen about other issues that are important? On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 9:57 AM, Keith Johnson < keithbjohn...@comcast.net > wrote: You know, we joke about some of the failures, but the period from the late '60s to late '70s saw some of the best scifi movies, either at the theatre or made for TV. Demon Seed, Colossus: The Forbin Project, Planet of the Apes, Soylent Green, 2001: A Space Odyssey. As Worf said, at least back then scifi was often dealing with social issues, questions of how will humanity survive our own aggressions, etc. It's why, although I hated the bigotry shown toward Nigerians in "District 9", I loved the realistic take on other types of racism depicted in the film. And, perhaps, another reason why I wasn't as taken with the Star Trek film as some, as it was more of an action/FX romp designed to bring in mass audiences. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Daryle Lockhart" < dar...@darylelockhart.com > To: scifinoir2@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 9:43:14 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [scifinoir2] ARK II has not aged well Ha! You'd have been better off with "The Questor Tapes" Daryle On Sep 22, 2009, at 8:31 PM, George Arterberry < brotherfromhow...@yahoo.com > wrote: noir, Feeling sort of nostalgic and Netflix (ing) those 70's sci-fi shows of my youth. UFO,Space 1999,Logan's Run and several others. ARK was as horrid as a remember. Stay away __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail . yahoo.com -- Bringing diversity to perversity for 9 years! Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/ -- Bringing diversity to perversity for 9 years! Mahogany at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mahogany_pleasures_of_darkness/
