Act of Valor

[Slammr (imported)]

This movie was made using real Navy Seals. I had my doubts about how good it would be, but it was an edge of the seat thriller. I enjoyed it.

[bobover3 (imported)]

Yes, it was fun. The action sequences - most of the movie - had an authentic feel and were exciting. The non-action scenes were stiff and the dialogue unconvincing. The SEALS were depicted as admirable in every way, not only brave and skillful fighters, but restrained, fair, compassionate, ideal husbands and fathers (even though they've chosen a profession that will take them away from their families) and law abiding - not characteristics usually sought or expected in fighters. Though I enjoyed it, it has no images or ideas that stuck with me.

The film is covertly political, in that it presents a whitewashed version of fighters. Of course, SEALS may really be a cut above. I was amused at the reviews, some of which were clearly motivated by politics. Left-leaning publications were least likely to publish favorable reviews.

[Dave (imported)]

I haven't seen the movie yet. I'll catch it on the cable channels.

However, I am wondering what strange and highly political person would ever put a list of reviews together and rank those reviews by right-wing and left wing politics and then match that rank against the right leaning and left leaning of the magazines or newspapers that printed the reviews.

Would you possibly share the methodology? It might lead us to undiscovered wonders.

[Slammr (imported)]

Yes, it was fun. The action sequences - most of the movie - had an authentic feel and were exciting. The non-action scenes were stiff and the dialogue unconvincing. The SEALS were depicted as admirable in every way, not only brave and skillful fighters, but restrained, fair, compassionate, ideal husbands and fathers (even though they've chosen a profession that will take them away from their families) and law abiding - not characteristics usually sought or expected in fighters. Though I enjoyed it, it has no images or ideas that stuck with me.

The film is covertly political, in that it presents a whitewashed version of fighters. Of course, SEALS may really be a cut above. I was amused at the reviews, some of which were clearly motivated by politics. Left-leaning publications wer

e least likely to publish favorable reviews.

I haven't seen the movie yet. I'll catch it on the cable channels.

However, I am wondering what strange and highly political person would ever put a list of reviews together and rank those reviews by right-wing and left wing politics and then match that rank against the right leaning and left leaning of the magazines or newspapers that printed the reviews.

Would you possibly share th

e methodology? It might lead us to undiscovered wonders.

Isn't any War movie covertly political, but can't they also be entertaining? WWII movies were political, but I like them. While the acting scenes by the members of the Seals wouldn't win any Oscars, it was such a small part of this movie, which was all about the action scenes.

I went to the movie for the action not for any political message, and unlike bob, I don't need to mix politics with a movie review.

I read books by Vince Flynn and enjoy them. For those that aren't familiar with Flynn, he writes about Mitch Rapp a CIA assassin. While I wouldn't necessarily approve of a real Mitch Rapp, I love reading about him, and I don't have to mix politics with entertainment in this case either. Mitch Rapp would definitely be considered Right-wing.

I will not read anything by Tom Clancy, however. The last book of his I read was so overtly Right-wing, mixing in politics that had nothing to do with the story, that I'll never read another of his books.

[bobover3 (imported)]

Dave, the method is simple. I use Metacritic (http://www.metacritic.com/movies) which presents and summarizes the reviews of most major critics. It's a really valuable site.

Actually, I just took a second look at the reviews for Act of Valor, and the political slant wasn't as clear as I had thought. Over the years, I've noticed that reviewers with known political views tend, unsurprisingly, to favor movies sympathetic to their views and disfavor the opposite.

And yes, Act of Valor was entertaining.

[Dave (imported)]

I do not trust critics. IT's not that I agree or disagree with them after viewing a movie, it's that I don't blithely accept their words without a great deal of skepticism. That includes the "haters" who simply think one person or the other is a bd actor and can't do nuthin' right.

I once asked an old and very venerable critic from the Pittsburgh Post Gazette why when I listened to the Symphony on Sunday afternoons, the concert was so at odds with his review of the Friday performance of the same music. HE didn't have an answer. The current critic at the PG (who I haven't met yet) critiques the music as if his audience consisted of third or fourth year collegiate music majors. Like Dude, I"m there to have a good listen for an afternoon and I don't care if the horns bleated the wrong way in your favorite passage and didn't carry over the rest of the orchestra... I just go to listen.

Recently, THE LORAX (I gave my original book copy to my brother's kids) was made into a movie and before it opened there was all sorts of speculation about it being so environmental and what that meant to the box office. How would families explain raging environmentalism, tadum, tadum, tadum...

WELL, it turned out that family movies with laughs and silly kiddish action trumped environmentalism because the opening weekend was 70 million plus. It seems that a family having fun trumped environmentalism because 3,4,5,6,7 year olds simply want to be entertained with mummy and daddy as long as they bought big bags of popcorn.

I'll wait for ACT OF VALOR to hit the cable to see it. The only bad thing I've heard about it was that the plot is a little thin but that never stopped me from enjoying a movie.

[DeaconBlues (imported)]

I have not seen "Act of Valor" and probably will never see it for the same reason that I absolutely hate the movie "Top Gun."

Many years ago (I think it was 1986), the movie "Top Gun" was a hit, really really popular. Before that move, most people knew that the Navy had airplanes and not much more, but oh boy, AFTER "Top Gun" everybody wanted to know everything about anything when it came to Naval Aviation. "Pride goeth before the fall." For a short while (1986 to 1991), the U.S. Navy, and the Aviation community in particular was in the limelight, then came "Tailhook." Does anyone here remember the "Tailhook Convention of 1991?" I sure do remember it.

Basically, the "Tailhook" organization was a society of U.S. Navy officers and a few (very few) enlisted Aircrewmen who flew on U.S. Navy aircraft carrier based planes, that is to say, the airplanes that have a "tailhook" to "catch the wire" on the aircraft carrier's deck as they come in to land. So, the "Tailhook" society was just what the movie "Top Gun" was all about, men like "Mavrick" and all that you know? UP UNTIL that movie put Naval Aviation in the limelight, our Navy pretty much was only interested in efficiently and safely operating it's aircraft, but then.... as I said, everybody wanted to know everything about the men like "Mavrick." And when a bunch of the "Mavricks" came together in a Las Vegas hotel and (gasp! OMG!) got drunk... and hired a stripper.... and groped and .... OH MY GOODNESS! A bunch of drunken sailors?!? That was so so soooooooo unheard of that the "Tailhook" convention became FRONT PAGE NEWS all over the world! Oh my goodness, who ever heard of sailors getting drunk?!? Within a month of the "news" story breaking, the U.S. Navy had taken insanely DRASTIC and Draconian measures to achieve a perfectly and politically correct environment, mandatory sexual harrassment sensitivity training and hypersensitivity toward anything that could ever be construed to be a "hostile" work environment for women and or minorities. Career sailors could be separated from the Navy (i.e. FIRED) with no benefits or pension at all for ANY incident of sexual harrassment. If you had a bad day and lost your temper momentarily, you would be OUT, no if's and's or but's, they "adseped" (administratively separated) you IMMEDIATELY without any process or appeal available. I blame this latter day witch hunt almost completely on the ever so popular "Top Gun" movie.

I think this movie "Act of Valor" is probably the WORST thing that can happen to the Navy's Special Warfare community.

[punkypink (imported)]

Slammr, isn't Act of Valour by Tom Clancy?

I've not had a chance to read any of his books, I've sort of stopped at the Rainbow Six ones and honestly, the ones where Jack Ryan or John Kelly aren't main characters just seem to have lost their attraction. Can you tell me which was the one that was overtly right-wing?

[Slammr (imported)]

I'm referring to Dead or Alive. He wrote this book using the Dick Cheney playbook: Torture is good, and if you have Democrats in office, as they are in the book, they will destroy the CIA, fire all the good people in it, and file murder charges against special ops soldiers for killing a bad guy without giving him a chance to surrender. He even spends several pages talking about how excessive debt, regulation of corporations, and taxes on corporations and the rich are ruining the country, issue

s that had nothing to do with the story.

Anyone with a moderate or liberal view is presented as an idiot.

The story, without the politics, isn't particularly good. It meanders all over the place.

If you want Fox Speak, buy a Glen Beck book. At least, you know what you're getting.

[punkypink (imported)]

I'm referring to Dead or Alive. He wrote this book using the Dick Cheney playbook: Torture is good, and if you have Democrats in office, as they are in the book, they will destroy the CIA, fire all the good people in it, and file murder charges against special ops soldiers for killing a bad guy without giving him a chance to surrender. He even spends several pages talking about how excessive debt, regulation of corporations, and taxes on corporations and the rich are ruining the country, issue

60]
s that had nothing to do with the story.

Anyone with a moderate or liberal view is presented as an idiot.

The story, without the politics, isn't particularly good. It meanders all over the place.

If you want Fox Speak, buy a G
[/quote]
len Beck book. At least, you know what you're getting.

Wow that's a far cry from his Jack Ryan books from the 90s.