Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Badland:yet ANOTHER anti troop/war/America movie!
http://www.badlandfilm.com/ ^

Posted on 11/28/2007 8:16:42 AM PST by World_Events

SYNOPSIS (from main website):

"Jerry is a Marine reservist who was a young patriot and idealist when he served in the first Gulf War. But when he is called up for deployment to Afghanistan and Iraq, Jerry is a father of three; older and embittered by a life besieged by broken promises, and unfulfilled desires.

Jerry returns a changed man, transformed by horrors committed that go beyond comprehension and sanity, pain inflicted that cannot be forgiven. He lives a life of poverty, his children afraid of his unexplained outbursts of rage, his wife, Nora, unsympathetic to the nosebleeds and night terrors he suffers. She hides money her sons earn from their paper route in case they need to leave. Their crowded trailer home becomes a prison. His failure as a man, his actions as a soldier, is the punishment which they share. He realizes that the respect and dignity he has spent his life trying to achieve will always elude him.

When Jerry discovers that Nora has betrayed him, his anger and despair drive him to commit an act so heinous and irreversible that nothing he has experienced in combat could have prepared him for.

Badland is a gut-wrenching, poignant look at the aftermath of war on a returning Iraq war veteran and his family. It is the story of a man who loses his soul and how a daughter's love and faith brings redemption to his unspeakable crimes"

(Excerpt) Read more at badlandfilm.com ...


TOPICS: TV/Movies
KEYWORDS:
Unbelievable. We had to suffer from movie after movie beating us over the head about how bad the war is, how evil our troops are, etc. etc. etc. Flop after flop like redacted, lions for lambs, valley of elah, and yet they STILL come out with this garbage. Can't they at least come up with something a wee bit more original than the "vet" who comes home traumatized and goes john rambo?

I swear....

1 posted on 11/28/2007 8:16:45 AM PST by World_Events
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: World_Events
Hollywood Hatefest.
2 posted on 11/28/2007 8:18:52 AM PST by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: World_Events
I suspect that Hollywood keeps making these anti-American propaganda films even though they lose tons of money at the box-office because they will eventually make their way to cable, where they will run ad nauseam to an impressionable, semi-captive audience.

By the time election season rolls around, these films will have spent a couple of months on Showtime, HBO, Cinemax, Starz, Encore and maybe even on USA or TNT.

3 posted on 11/28/2007 8:21:35 AM PST by wideawake (Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: World_Events
Just think of the phrase "Stuck on Stupid"...It describes Hollywood perfectly.


4 posted on 11/28/2007 8:24:34 AM PST by darkwing104 (Let's get dangerous)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: World_Events
Can't they at least come up with something a wee bit more original than the "vet" who comes home traumatized and goes john rambo?

They will when it becomes too painful to make crap like this, i.e. when it hurts their wallets. I've heard reports that Hwood is rethinking the whole lefty war movie concept because no one (including lefties) is watching them. Unfortunately, I don't think they'll completely turn the corner and make good war movies. I think the era of "Midway" et.al. is long gone.

5 posted on 11/28/2007 8:25:05 AM PST by randog (What the...?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: World_Events

I liked the movie better when it was called, “Born On the Fourth of July.”


6 posted on 11/28/2007 8:27:52 AM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

I liked the plot better when it was called “Iliad and Odyssey”.


7 posted on 11/28/2007 8:43:14 AM PST by Thrownatbirth (.....when the sidewalks are safe for the little guy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

I suspect they are being funded by our enemies...


8 posted on 11/28/2007 8:44:36 AM PST by Little Ray (Rudy Guiliani: If his wives can't trust him, why should we?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
Hollywood Hatefest.

It's not just Hollywood. Colleges, Universities, Congress and a husband of the leading Donkey candidate.

9 posted on 11/28/2007 8:59:28 AM PST by afnamvet (Duncan Hunter in 08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

This appears to be a Canadian film.


10 posted on 11/28/2007 9:18:37 AM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Borges

Thanks for the detail. I was taken in by its Hollywood premiere.


11 posted on 11/28/2007 9:24:57 AM PST by wideawake (Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: wideawake

Well it was made by a Canadian filmmaker and filmed in Canada. And the production company is ‘Badlands Productions’.


12 posted on 11/28/2007 9:26:03 AM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Borges
Well it was made by a Canadian filmmaker and filmed in Canada.

You raise an interesting question.

What makes a Hollywood film a Hollywood film?

Clearly any production by a major Hollywood studio is a Hollywood film. But what are the limiting factors?

Having a Canadian director, like Norman Jewison, doesn't necessarily deHollywoodify a film.

Being filmed in Canada doesn't either, e.g. Billy Madison or How To Lose A Guy In 10 Days.

The cast of Badland is more English and American than Canadian (except presumably for the bit parts on location).

The production company, Badland Corporation, lists its address in North Hollywood.

The executive producers seem to have two other productions in common - the director's first film 20 years ago, and the decidedly Hollywood I, Robot.

And the film is premiering in LA and New York.

Less important is that the film's action putatively takes place in America and its characters are Americans.

Maybe the question should be, what qualifies a film as a foreign film for Academy purposes?

Or maybe the question should be, is the production company fully independent, or does it have studio backers?

13 posted on 11/28/2007 10:09:44 AM PST by wideawake (Why is it that so many self-proclaimed "Constitutionalists" know so little about the Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wideawake
The same principal applies to something like Redacted. One may as well call it an NBA film.

I regard Hollywood as the Big Studios (Disney, Time Warner, NBC Universal, Viacom, Sony/Columbia). Anytime someone starts a production co. that's named after the film they're currently making I take it as an Indie.

The Academy Foreign Film Branch only considers films that were submitted by a given country. They don't go out hunting for foreign films to choose from. I suspect this rule is a Cold War relic so they don't cause the sort of problems for filmmakers in oppressive circumstances that the Nobel Committee caused for Pasternak.
14 posted on 11/28/2007 11:17:12 AM PST by Borges
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson