With a $5,000,000 budget, as of 11/18/07, Redacted has pulled in a whopping $25,628 nationwide, and $97,596 worldwide. Conservative voices has said this would be a flop. Sure, plenty of people believe in the propaganda, but people still want to see stories of heroes. Not villains. Especially when it comes to our soldiers. Any thoughts?
From what I have read, it's just a bad film. I'm sure the subject matter plays a role in the lack of interest, but if it was a better film with more recognizable actors it would undoubtedly generate more interest.
Also, I understand that many people want escapist entertainment (e.g., stories of heroes, etc.), but that says nothing about the quality of the film or whether it should have been made. There are many films that have dealt with uncomfortable issues and done well.
Sure, but my understanding is this film, about rape and murder, is dealt with in a fictional way from a true incident. Problem is, it couldn't be an anti-establishment film if it dealt with the story honestly.
Awesome.
Problem is, it's a bad film by a hack director.
He would have done much better by just releasing a director's cut of Casualties of War, his best film and pretty much the same exact story, and letting the critics and public make the connections themselves. DePalma has never been one for subtleties however.
Soldiers are pawns, not Deciders.
Their "heroism", lives, and bodies, aka signing up for the $$$ and "just doing their job" for $$$ like any other employee, is being wasted in Iraq. and then they come home to bad health, unemployment, homelessnes, life-long disability, abandoned by dubya, and high rates of suicide.
And did y'all see where the military wants injured soldiers to give back their sign-up bonses because they violated sign-up contract by being unable/disabled to complete their sign-up period?
Support troops? GMAFB Slap a yellow sticker on your bumper is about as far as it goes.
Higher taxes to pay for dubya's bul war and to pay for caring for the military? no. read my lips: " the military, no more taxes"
And for what? An oil-grab.
The military heroes have been suckered by the Repug/neo- /MIC plutocracy.
Last edited by boutons_; 11-25-2007 at 03:56 PM.
Exactly.
I've not seen it nor do I want to get into the war debate, but you do realize it's in about 15 theatres, right?
Here's a couple of thoughts: When going to the movies most people want to be entertained. When going to the movies most people understand it's just a movie.
Speaking of propoganda, do you realise those 'conservative voices' you refer to are propogandists themselves?
Yeah, but if you agree with it, it's not propaganda. It's well-informed opinion or fact (as some see it).
I don't remember if it was only 15, but yes. It is a pretty low number. Shows you from the start nobody was willing to invest in showing such a film. Still, for it’s first 3 days, that’s pretty bad. If they charged $6.00 per ticket, that is less than 100 seats per day per theater average.
Actually, I separate the definition with how factual something is. I am technically wrong in doing so, and you guys are technically right, but when I refer to propaganda, I refer to something with embedded lies rather than fact.
Please take no offense, I wasn't talking about you. Just a statement about how people regard information from their favorite/most disliked talking heads.
I didn't take offense, but thought the word required some definition as to how I use it. Thanks for the consideration.
So what are the embedded lies you have gleaned from this movie without watching it?when I refer to propaganda, I refer to something with embedded lies rather than fact.
well, our soldiers did this, so, the victims must have asked for it.
or just call it a sexual surge.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
