Nicolas Cage and "Lord of War" misfires as anti-gun statement

Status
Not open for further replies.

AZRickD

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
1,684
Gawd, I just love being preached to. I'll wait until it gets to the dollar theater in a few weeks.

Rick

http://www.dailycardinal.com/media/...ar.Misfires.As.AntiGun.Statement-989010.shtml

'Lord of War' misfires as anti-gun statement
By Aaron Ensweiler

"Lord of War" opens with one of the most impressive and provocative credit sequences in recent memory. Adopting a point-of-view perspective, the camera follows a bullet from its manufacture in an American factory to various ports, then across the globe to a small African village where it is placed in the chamber of a pistol and shot through the skull of a young boy.

In time, the viewer learns that the bullet from the opening is no different than the ammunition that arms dealer Yuri Orlov (Nicolas Cage) sells every day. During a confrontation between Yuri and Interpol agent Jack Valentine (Ethan Hawke), Yuri is told, "you get rich by giving the poorest people on the face of the planet the means to continue killing themselves." Maybe so, but as Yuri sees it, like his immigrant parents who run a restaurant, he too helps fulfill a basic human need.

The film, written and directed by Andrew Niccol ("Gattaca," writer of "The Truman Show"), has already garnered comparisons to "Goodfellas," and not without reason. Like the latter, "War" is heavy on voice-over narration and charters the rise and fall of a man in an immoral business. However, while "Goodfellas" allowed us to sympathize with its protagonist, "War" does not.

The plot follows Yuri's rise to the top of the international gunrunning business, stopping along the way to introduce his sometimes business partner and cocaine addict brother, Vitaly (Jared Leto), his model turned trophy wife (Bridget Moynahan), a rival arms dealer who wants him dead (Ian Holm), a syntactically challenged, gun-loving African warlord (Eamonn Walker) and Valentine, the government agent tracking Yuri down.

If this summary of characters seems hollow, it's a fair representation of the film itself, which deals in archetypes. "War" is a film in which the story takes a backseat to the subject, the characters on-screen serving primarily as agents by which to deliver an anti-gun diatribe.

To Niccol's credit, the screenplay is full of one-liners that contain more wit than entire movies. Take, for instance, Yuri's observation that, "Often, the most barbaric encounters occur when both sides declare themselves 'freedom fighters'," or that "bullets change governments far better than votes."

Ironically, for a film concerned with the tools of war, it seems to be at war with itself. In the hands of Niccol, the film feels like a documentary operating under the guise of a slick, Hollywood action picture.

Heavy on voice-over, statistics and adopting the fall of the Berlin wall, the O.J. Simpson trial and the Bush-Gore election as political backdrops, the film seems unconcerned with telling a story after the first act, reverting instead to aggressive didacticism. While Niccol criticizes the violence onscreen, the slick production values act contrary to his intentions, glamorizing weapons in a film that has more AK-47s than Willy Wonka had chocolate.

There can be little doubt that "War" is a politically relevant film. Because of its shortcomings, however, it fails to be an important film. Despite an abundance of satire, the bleak film will fail to properly inform or entertain mainstream audiences.
 
There can be little doubt that "War" is a politically relevant film. Because of its shortcomings, however, it fails to be an important film. Despite an abundance of satire, the bleak film will fail to properly inform or entertain mainstream audiences.

Hmmm. "properly inform". I wonder if that is another term for "re-education". It seems that the Hollywood types and liberals will never realize that violence, conflict and warfare are as natural as breathing to human beings. It is particularly ironic as many liberal groups perpetuate violence, Black Panthers, Weather Underground, Animal Liberation Front, etc.
 
"Adopting a point-of-view perspective, the camera follows a bullet from its manufacture in an American factory to various ports"

Follows the manufacture of the 7.62x39 cartridge. The actual bullet comes a bit later. Yeah maybe this one is nitpicking

"then across the globe to a small African village where it is placed in the chamber of a pistol and shot through the skull of a young boy"


...Pistol? Im pretty sure that it was shot from a rifle. Idiot.
 
If this summary of characters seems hollow, it's a fair representation of the film itself, which deals in archetypes. "War" is a film in which the story takes a backseat to the subject, the characters on-screen serving primarily as agents by which to deliver an anti-gun diatribe.

I wondered if that wasn't the underlying motive. :fire:

We all know that the days of Hollywood pictures boosting national firearm enthusiasm pretty much ended after "The Enforcer". Eastwood, Selleck, Gibson and the rest of our allies out there are nearing the ends of their careers and I don't expect we'll see very many new faces with the same values.
 
"Adopting a point-of-view perspective, the camera follows a bullet from its manufacture in an American factory to various ports"

It follows the bullet being seated, shipped and fired. It wasn't from an American manufacturer. I think the wanted to come off as antigun but it failed in that respect, with me.
 
Lets make a film that follows an automobile from it's assembly line to the bar parking lot where the drunk owner drives off and kills a family of 4 in a minivan. This is exactly the same idiotic thinking.
 
With so many better things to do, I wonder why anyone watches TV or movies at all.
 
The Left's good friend, the People's Republic of China, owns Africa, supplying a staggering amount of small arms to many nations. The factory referenced is in Eastern Europe. However, the article takes the time to mention "an American factory" as supplying the ammunition.

Leftist history lesson: America is the source of all misery in the world. As soon as the USA falls, a new utopia will emerge (supervised by the PRC and the thugocracies of the world). Always take the time to run down the USA as I am still angry with my parents.
 
I wondered if that wasn't the underlying motive.
We are having a discussion on a local gunnie e-list. My point is that Hollywood producers directors and actors will sacrifice good box office $$ to make a film which will leave them in good standing with their peers. Pushing leftwing dogma is what they do at home, work, and play.

Giving voice to a liberal cause (via producing, directing or actin in one) is a good way to get invited to all the right parties or find a young starlet in your bed.

Not unlike being a Supreme Court Justice. This explains the usual drift from conservative to liberal (as they "grow" in Office).

Every other year or so Hollywood will put out a "major blockbuster" which will seek to explore (yet again), the issues behind ("gun control," "the right to choose," the death penalty.) And each time one or more of those movies find themselves nominated and even winning the Golden Globe or Oscar.

http://www.boxofficeguru.com/intlarch1.htm

"Cider house rules": Gross = 57 Million

"Chicken Run": 106 Million

"Cider house rules" made 3mil less than that great effort of cinema "Coyote Ugly."

Besides the infamous "Lethal Weapon" series, can you name a movie which pushes the agenda of the left (gun issue or not, and only two per post, please, no massive list to spoil all the fun). Before anyone else does, I'll mention the newer Mel Gibson-produced/directed movies (Braveheart, Passion of the Christ) from the right.

Rick
 
I think some of you guys try to read too much into these things. It was a decent movie with a lot of action that said to me that there are always going to be wars and someone will supply them. Yuri did it because he was good at it but the United States, Russia, Britain, France and China were a lot better. :evil:
 
Besides the infamous "Lethal Weapon" series, can you name a movie which pushes the agenda of the left (gun issue or not, and only two per post, please, no massive list to spoil all the fun). Before anyone else does, I'll mention the newer Mel Gibson-produced/directed movies (Braveheart, Passion of the Christ) from the right.

From the left:
Runaway Jury

From the right:
Big Jim McLain


As far as LOW goes I will wait until it comes out on DVD and borrow it from a friend if they rent it. Maybe...
 
We need movies where a car is followed through assembly and then it runs into a little kids and smushes him. Or maybe some water flows through a stream, gets evaporated, comes down as rain, goes into the water system, enters a suburban swimming pool and drowns a kid. Then maybe the anti-gun people would get a hint of how dumb their stuff is.
 
"you get rich by giving the poorest people on the face of the planet the means to continue killing themselves."

Last I heard, homemade machetes worked too well in Rwanda.

:(
 
Well, I haven't seen the movie and probably won't, since the interview I saw with the director seem to indicate he has the intelligence of a cocker spaniel on thorazine. I did, however, like one of the trailers, where the Cage voice-over says something to the effect, "One in 12 people in the world own a firearm...we're interested in reaching the other 11."

Hey, I'd buy into that agenda! LOL!

Michael B
 
Gibson's career is nearing its end? I don't know. Maybe his career as an actor, but he's only beginning to produce/direct, whatever he's doing now.
 
The article makes it sound like it was supposed to support the UN/Soros small arms treaty.

I am really baffled by the utter stupidity of this issue. Are they really so dumb that they don't understand how easy it is to make, say, a Sten gun or AK-47? I've seen video of spear-chucking Cambodian villagers making AKs literally in thatched huts. It's a bit harder to make brass, but bullets and gunpowder are very easy, in fact a good chemist can make nitroglycerine from nothing more exotic than animal fat, manure, and sulfur (or battery acid if available).

If it's just a cover story for trying to push gun control onto every country, I have a hard time believing this line of argument could change anybody's mind. I mean even Brady etc aren't talking about it, probably because they know how foolish they'd sound in a debate.
 
A History of Violence

I haven't seen it yet, but have y'all heard anything about "A History of Violence"? I believe its coming out this week. I saw a review/preview/director's cut, and basically he said that the theme of the film was that even though violence was never attractive, often ugly, and never something to aspire to, it is often necessary, especially in the establishment of justice and the rights of the good common man. Any thoughts? I thought the trailer of the movie looked interesting as well.
 
am really baffled by the utter stupidity of this issue. Are they really so dumb that they don't understand how easy it is to make, say, a Sten gun or AK-47? I've seen video of spear-chucking Cambodian villagers making AKs literally in thatched huts. It's a bit harder to make brass, but bullets and gunpowder are very easy, in fact a good chemist can make nitroglycerine from nothing more exotic than animal fat, manure, and sulfur (or battery acid if available).
IMO the component of ammo that would be the hardest for pre-industrial communities to make is the primer.
 
I went to the movie, and guess what, I really enjoyed it. You know, as a piece of entertainment. That's why I go to movies, to be entertained. I'll never care about somebody's agenda or political motivation for making a movie, or politely listen to an actor's or movie's views on what the "best" political views are. They exist to entertain. Either I will be entertained, or I won't. For this movie, I was.

Funny as all get out. "They're shooting bullets at our bullets!" HA!

If you want to be offended by antis, you will be offended by this movie. If you want to watch a darkly funny movie with a lot of guns, you'll love it.
 
History of Violence

Looks interesting. Its based on a graphic novel put out by DC whick probably places it on the anti side. We'll aee.

------------------
There is only one basic human right, the
right to do as you damn well please. And
with it comes the only basic human duty,
the duty to take the consequences.

P.J. O'Rourke
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top