Comments on: “Unlike filmgoers during World War II, contemporary audiences are avoiding these event-driven pictures”

By: FrmrArtyOffcr

FrmrArtyOffcr — Tue, 13 Nov 2007 02:59:58 +0000

Perhaps if they actually produced a movie that showed our soldiers and their mission in a positive light, perhaps people would actually go see it. I don’t recall the Die Hard movies dying at the box office. I don’t believe “Stealth” was a box office bomb. I know the Rambo flicks pulled in a lot of dough. WHY? Because they depicted a HERO doing things that inspire people to emulate them. NOONE wants to see a movie that depicts people who should be considered heroes being denigrated for their actions.

Just this weekend I was talking with a woman I know and told her about how the Army had medically disqualified me when I tried to reenlist last year. I said that it would make more sense to send a divorced orphan with an attitude than someone with a wife and children. She agreed and then called our service members “Kids”. I exploded on her. I informed her that they are NOT “kids” they are young men and women who have made the conscious decision to risk their lives to defend this country and she should not degrade them by calling them “kids”. She apologized and scurried away. I don’t think anyone there had ever seen me blow up on anyone like that before.

By: snowy egret

snowy egret — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 15:12:21 +0000

And those same liberal hollywood wackos who shout NO BLOOD FOR OIL also do it from the back seat of their 4 mpg limos what a bunch of spoiled brats

By: PCD

PCD — Mon, 12 Nov 2007 13:30:14 +0000

All the anti-war asshats delude themselves with the declaration that they are the majority.

By: Robert

Robert — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:32:12 +0000

Well Bochco and other anti-war Libs feel this war is misguided because Saddam really wasn’t a threat, he actually was a stabilizing force in the ME, he had nothing to do with 9/11, He had no WMD, nothing to do with Al Qaeda, never sought yellowcake from Niger, and Bush lied 100s died, blah, blah, blah.

1. Saddam was not a threat. Yes he was, as stated in no uncertain terms by all leading politicians, Democrite and Rpub alike.
2. Saddam had no WMD. Bullshit, his WMD were self-reported at the end of the Gulf War and CATALOGUED by the U.N. inspectors. There was never any records or evidence of their destruction. Clearly they were moved.
3. He was a stabilizing force (for evil) and the post invasion management was botched.
4. Yes he had no involvement in 9/11. So what?
5. HBad no invo9lvement with Al Qaeda. Yes he did, that has been proven/documented.
6. Tried to buy yellowcake: Yes he did, despite the manipulations and lies of Joe pos Wilson and Valerie “analyst” Plame
7. Bush lied 100s died: Bush operated on the same intelligence information available and provided to all the other politicians who also forcefully spoke that Saddam needed to go.

So sorry, Bochup, you are wrong and another Hollywood pos/idiot.

By: Robert

Robert — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 17:23:53 +0000

I agree; Botchup doesn’t understand the differences between WWII and now.

Another Hollywood idiot shown to be so…

By: snowy egret

snowy egret — Sun, 11 Nov 2007 05:36:45 +0000

JIMMY STEWART,JOHN WAYNE,GLENN FORD,BETTY GRABEL and all we have today are a whole bunch of no good spoiled wacko mug whumps