Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old May 30th, 2016 #21
steven clark
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,277
Default

I completely disagree. The Charge of the Light Brigade is a great film, and one of my favorites. It captures the military blockheadedness that was British command, when the Horse Guards ran the system. It captures accurately the situation of war: the middle class likes it because it is a matter of national honor, and the poor have to fight it. That's just the way it is. There are times when both classes coincide (The Franco-Prussian war or WWI), but the Crimean War wasn't like that.

The view of military life is very accurate. A lot of the officer corps were made up of men who couldn't fit in, and aristocrats who didn't know a fig about military science. Lord Cardigan was pretty much an obnoxious ass, although he did maintain the regiment. That was the British army. As Raglan alludes to, they were living on the memory of Wellington, and didn't know what to do after it. A continental army would have been more up to snuff.
Even in 1940, a lot of British officer's manuals placed more emphasis on table manners than tactics.

I thought the film was one of the few where people really looked like they did back then, and talked. Also, I enjoy seeing Vanessa Redgrave in it and Terence Stamp. The animation is delightful and encapsules the subconscious of the British, especially the going to war for 'poor little Turkey.'
Don't you notice the British always have that cry? In 1914 it was 'poor little Servia.' In 1939 it was Poland. I really think as a WN you'd catch that, especially the allusions to the Crimean War with the Gulf war and 911. It's the cry for endless intervention. 'Poor little Kuwait.' Yeah, right.

As for the actual battle scenes, they were quite realistic, especially seeing men drop from cholera. That was the reality of war. Also, the Light Brigade weren't vainglorious fools, just the victims of a great confusion and misunderstanding of orders. Remember, even Tennyson's poem, even he wrote 'even though knew someone had blundered.'
As for the scene where the opposing officers had their men keep rearranging tents, only to have the next CO make them go back...that's standard army BS, bot a class indictment. I was in the army, and it's perfectly believable.
Like Shaw said, the most successful generals are the ones who make the fewest mistakes.
There are good soldiers in the movie...Stamp, his friend, and the Sergeant major, but you have to weigh them in with the fatheads they serve under. Maybe you should read James Jone's From Here to Eternity. Tells you a lot about the military. if you think to gripe makes you a Marxist, then we see things differently.
I never get tired of watching the film.
 
Old May 30th, 2016 #22
Karl Lueger
Senior Member
 
Karl Lueger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Beograd
Posts: 3,186
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fury (2014)


This afternoon I decided to bite the proverbial bullet and sit down to watch Brad Pitt's latest film 'Fury'.
Saw this few years ago now, it was not as anti-German as every single movie on the topic, which was a bit of surprise, but still standard Germans are them dang "bad guys" and they did have a certain sadism in killing Germans;
its certainly a well made film,
but one interesting moment near the end was the only scene of mercy and compassion is show BY the Germans when they find the american GI hiding under the tank and instead of killing him as expected, they let him live..
__________________
"To survive a war, you gotta become war."

Rambo, John J.
 
Old June 12th, 2016 #23
Karl Radl
The Epitome of Evil
 
Karl Radl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Unseen University of New York
Posts: 3,130
Default

Peaky Blinders
(Season 3)
(2016)


Since the third season of the BBC series 'Peaky Blinders' has now finished. I figured that I would sit down this afternoon and spend it catching up with the gang from Birmingham. I rather enjoyed this latest season to be fair and I felt it was a significant improvement over the somewhat lackluster second season.

My only really quibbles with the third season are two fold.

Firstly that Tommy had a black Jamaican priest – who you may remember from the first season – conduct his wedding to Grace. What made the situation so obviously a politically correct injection to spread peace, love and moronic ideas was that Grace's family benches were filled with high-ranking members of the British military and government to act as a dramatic foil to said priest.

These are the sort of people of whom Tommy is manifestly afraid of (and with good reason) throughout the series. Grace's extended family clearly disapprove of the black priest and are made to whisper angrily among themselves in regards to his race. We then cut to these same extended family members being exposed as hypocritical buffoons and drug addicts by the roughly-hewn-but-roguishly-likeable anti-racist Shelby family.

The whole idea that so powerful a gathering of people would have tolerated such a priest is absurd as is the notion that a real Tommy Shelby would dare to do such a thing. After all these are the very people who are told have the power and the will to break him and the Shelby family should they so choose.

So why would he dare to provoke them on such a non-issue for the Shelby family?

In addition the historical setting for the series is the high point of the popularity of racialism (i.e. 1920s) in Europe. Further this is a time in which the unions and working class organizations (most notably in the maritime trade unions) in Britain in particular segregated themselves from and actively discriminated against those of different races. (1)

Hence the whole point of the inclusion of such a series of scenes in the third season 'Peaky Blinders' is simply politically correct a-historical propaganda intended to spread the delusion that nation states really don't exist.

The third season also sees the return of the least stereotypical looking jew ever in the form of Alfie Solomons. Who we see once again played extremely sympathetically. Although the historical Solomons was a brutal thug who was part and parcel of the disproportionately jewish organized crime gangs in Britain during the early twentieth century. (2)

Solomons is made to lecture Tsarist aristocrats from Georgia on their 'atrocities against the jews' and claims that they 'hunted his mother through the snow'. Thereby engaging the sympathy of the viewer even further for poor Alfie who dindu nuffin... ever.

That this is complete a-historical nonsense should go without saying to anyone who knows anything about the Russian Empire in the era of pogroms.

Russian aristocrats simply didn't hunt jews through the snow for no reason – it was against the law for one thing and for another hunting people through the snow is a very tiring and utterly pointless exercise when you could have just arraigned them in court and have them sent to Siberia for subversive activity.

When such atrocities against the jews did actually happen they tended not to be the product of the Tsarist aristocracy, but rather that of the peasantry and their fellow townsfolk. Who, for often fairly good reasons, had become frustrated with the slow pace of justice in the inefficient and hopelessly corrupt Tsarist bureaucracy and took to settling long-standing grievances and provocations in a more immediate and direct manner.

The idea that a murderous jewish thug like Solomons is to be sympathized with because of alleged (and nonsensical) 'anti-Semitism' should be morally repugnant to every thinking person. However the idea that 'anti-Semitism' excuses any and all jewish behaviour is not a new one (it is regularly trotted out to defend Israeli atrocities for one), but I had hoped for better than for it to be included in 'Peaky Blinders'.

That said: what should I expect from a show with the Weinstein Company as its distributor (3) and so jewish-dominated an organization as the BBC as its principal outlet? (4)


References


(1) Cf. Jacqueline Jenkinson, 2009, 'Black 1919: Riots, Racism and Resistance in Imperial Britain', 1st Edition, Liverpool University Press: Liverpool
(2) For example see Fergus Linnane, 2003, 'The Encyclopedia of London Crime & Vice', 1st Edition, Sutton: Stroud, pp. 21-23; 161; 173; 220; 239-240; 255; 257-262
(3) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peaky_Blinders_(TV_series)
(4) https://semiticcontroversies.blogspo...ce-at-bbc.html

------------------------------------------------

This was originally published at the following address: http://www.semiticcontroversies.blog...on-cinema.html
__________________
 
Old June 19th, 2016 #24
Karl Radl
The Epitome of Evil
 
Karl Radl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Unseen University of New York
Posts: 3,130
Default

Sunday Afternoon Cinema

Zulu Dawn (1979)


Today I sat down to watch the prequel to the iconic piece of low budget British cinema: the 1964 film 'Zulu'. Like 'Zulu' it was written by Cy Enfield, but unlike 'Zulu': the left wing bias of 'Zulu Dawn' is evident from the very beginning.

We see the Zulu nation under King Cetschwayo being portrayed as being full of noble and peaceful sentiments. While Lord Chelmsford (played by masterfully by Peter O'Toole) and Sir Henry Bartle Frere (similarly well acted by John Mills) are portrayed as extremely and irrationally racist in their motivations – as indeed are nearly all of the British soldiers – and thus they lose the battle of Isandlwana because they are foolish and are fighting against the 'freedom loving Zulus'.

This is obviously rather a-historical as the reason the British lost of the battle of Isandlwana was not because they were racist or because they were fighting against the 'freedom loving Zulus'. They lost the battle – although not the war – because their new rifles – Martini-Henry Mark 1 and 2s - had not been tested in a prolonged firefight in the high heat of Africa.

So nobody knew – least of all Lord Chelmsford and his men – that after prolonged firing: the guns would seize up and jam due to overheating in the firing mechanism. (1) This can be seen in the fact that right up until the point this occurred in the battle of Isandlwana: it had been a massacre for the Zulus.

Thus when we note that 'Zulu Dawn' was produced by Nate Kohn. (2) We can further link the fact that this anti-Western piece of left-wing cinema can be somewhat linked to jewish influence.


References


(1) Felix Machanik, 1979, 'Firepower and Firearms in the Zulu War of 1879', Military History Journal, Vol. 4, No. 6 (http://samilitaryhistory.org/vol046fm.html)
(2) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080180/...f_=tt_ov_st_sm

----------------------------------

This was originally published at the following address: https://semiticcontroversies.blogspo...cinema_19.html
__________________
 
Reply

Tags
karl radl

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:28 AM.
Page generated in 0.30486 seconds.