Anti-communist films.

[Gonzo Journalism]

If you loved a film, would you change your opinion on it if you became communist and then found out that the film was anti-communist?

I would say no. When I watch a film, I examine such things as the cinematography, editing, acting, etc, and whether it's pro-communist, anti-communist, or has no stance at all a great film is a great film and I don't think you should hate it just because your political beliefs have changed. The same applies to music.

[vox_populi]

I find it hard to really enjoy a movie if it takes a clear stance against my views...it's like if someone makes a song about how much s/he hates you...and it's a really good song...

But seriously though...I can't enjoy anti-communist movies as much as i do other movies...

[YKTMX]

Well, there have been legions of jingoistic films, from basically every Western ever made, to John "draft dodger" Wayne's war films.

Then there are the ridiculous Cold War paranoia films, like the hilarious Red Dawn, The Red Menace etc.

Then there are better films like the original Manchurian candidate.

[1984]

Humm... I cannot recall any "anti-communist" movie that was good enough...

[Rockfan]

I still love Rambo!!!! :D , Jokes.

[timbaly]

Even though Dr. Zhivago is an anti-communist film I still found it very entertaining. The subject matter of the Soviet Union kept me captivated and the story is very enertaining. The acting was superb as well.

[drain.you]

Scarface has an anti-Castro stance which offends me alot but its a good film.
Alot of Bond films came from the anti-soviet coldwar era but they are still good for the action, the storylines in bond never have been too strong :P
I dunno, theres lots of films with anti-communist views but the majority of them are still okay though they do make me quite angry. I like the films on WW2 where the russians come in and save the jews :-D

[Hegemonicretribution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2006, 12:50 PM
Humm... I cannot recall any "anti-communist" movie that was good enough...
Even 1984 ;)?

Seriously though, I can enjoy a movie with a message I disagree with, because I don't watch film to be pleasantly agreed with. I like to laugh, or be shocked, or apalled by what I see,and I jusdge a film on its ability to do these things.

The same is true of music, art, and most other mediums of expression.

[1984]

Originally posted by Hegemonicretribution+Feb 21 2006, 01:11 AM--> (Hegemonicretribution @ Feb 21 2006, 01:11 AM)
[email protected] 18 2006, 12:50 PM
Humm... I cannot recall any "anti-communist" movie that was good enough...
Even 1984 ;)?

Seriously though, I can enjoy a movie with a message I disagree with, because I don't watch film to be pleasantly agreed with. I like to laugh, or be shocked, or apalled by what I see,and I jusdge a film on its ability to do these things.

The same is true of music, art, and most other mediums of expression. [/b]
Well, even though I do not see 1984 as "anti-communist", my nickname comes from the fact that I was born in that year. Since it's also the title of the famous (and polemical) book...

:rolleyes:

And also, Scarface does not have the "anti-Castro" stance - it's different when one character of a movie shows one particular political stance and when the whole movie has a political message. And besides, Tony isn't exactly a "protagonist", so... I suppose the film is pretty neutral.

A true "anti-Castro" movie would be Bad Boys II. Now THAT was a horrible film...

<_<

[Jimmie Higgins]

I think "On the Waterfront" is a really well made film even though it is basically anti-union and pro-snitch (i.e. like how the director sinitched to the HUAC).

On the other hand I could not get down to a nazi-punk band no matter how good they were. If something is overtly and singularily anti-communist, I would not be able to enjoy it.

Anyone see the movie "crash"? I couldn&#39;t enjoy that racist piece of poop.

[tambourine_man]

some people say that fritz lang&#39;s &#39;metropolis&#39; was anti-communist, which is why hitler was allegedly very impressed with it. personally, i always saw the film as more anti-capitalist/division of labor, etc. though i don&#39;t know too much about lang&#39;s politics. so to answer your question, if it became clear to me that &#39;metropolis&#39; was in fact intended as an anti-communist propoganda piece, then no, it wouldn&#39;t affect my opinion of it, since my own interpretation is more important to me than anything else.

[ItalianCommie]

Humm... I cannot recall any "anti-communist" movie that was good enough...

Even 1984?

1984 wasn&#39;t anticommunist or anti-socialist. He considered himself a socialist, and I read an old interview of him where he said it wasn&#39;t anti-communist.

Want some pure, visceral, anticommunism? Look out for anything with Chuck Norris, Sylvester Stallone, Charlton Heston, Schwarzenegger, Van Damme or some other nationalistic crap.


Even though Dr. Zhivago is an anti-communist film I still found it very entertaining. The subject matter of the Soviet Union kept me captivated and the story is very enertaining. The acting was superb as well.

Dr.Zhivago is one of my favourite flms, a classic. I don&#39;t see it as particularly anti-communist. Can somebody please elaborate on the matter?


some people say that fritz lang&#39;s &#39;metropolis&#39; was anti-communist, which is why hitler was allegedly very impressed with it.

When I saw that film I was a bit confused. In the end though I think it held a staunchly anti-communist message. I think there was a lot of proreligiousness in it too. Remember the rich girl that goes into the pits with the starving workers, almost promising eternal salvation? Reminded me of the Virgin Mary.

[1984]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2006, 07:15 PM
Want some pure, visceral, anticommunism? Look out for anything with Chuck Norris, Sylvester Stallone, Charlton Heston, Schwarzenegger, Van Damme or some other nationalistic crap.
That was exactly the type of crap that I had considered to be "anti-communist".

:angry:

[Hegemonicretribution]

Originally posted by [email protected] 27 2006, 07:15 PM
1984 wasn&#39;t anticommunist or anti-socialist. He considered himself a socialist, and I read an old interview of him where he said it wasn&#39;t anti-communist.

Orwell considered himself a socialist, and against authoritarianism which I can appreciate. However in his later stuff such as Animal Farm, but more so 1984, he seems like more of a disillusioned moderate.

Orwell was not only a snitch, but also neglected to make any reference to a viable revolutionary prospect in either of his two most famous works. Although he hints at the hidden power of the proletariat, he also takes the reactionary stance that it will never happen.

Perhaps he considered himself too much of an established leftist to feel that he had to include such sentiments in these works, and fell victim to his own ego. Certainly Orwell&#39;s own socialist stance is something they don&#39;t teach you at the more remedial level of education, although here at least most 16/17 year olds are vaguely aware that he harboured some socialist tendenciers; that is when they know what socialism is, or have ever studied his works.

I was content with Orwell&#39;s position as a socialist for some time, largely based of writings such as "Homage to Catalonia," but through debate here I have found better arguments to the contrary regarding his later position.

There are other members that are far more knowledgable about this than I am, and I would suggest searching this forum for the hundreds of previous threads on the matter, or viewing Redstar2000&#39;s website where he has pieces dedicated to this.

[EwokUtopia]

Attacking true communism and attacking Soviet communism are very different things. Orwell wanted western Europe to become its own socialist state, free of the Soviet interperetation of socialism (which became a dictatorship of the proletarians, who eventually arranged a hierarchy of the powerful elites of the party). Communism is not by any means a dangerous or bad thing, infact, it is quite the opposite, but the USSR was not true communism. Cuba is the best socialist state ever concieved with the name communism, it actually lives up to the true egalitarian values marx spoke about, Russia after the revolution was not a good example, indeed, they became anti-imperialist imperialists after the second war. China or North Korea are the worst examples, im not sure which is worse, China, being one of the worlds leading states in neoliberal capitalism while still bearing an absulte control of the "communist" party (I call them the Capcoms), or the little isolated kingdom with Prince Jong-Il ruling second place to the dead, but still powerful King Il-Sung. no, these are not good communist states, indeed, they nearly reach the despicableness of the American Empire. Attacking their pitiful interperetations is not attacking communism. I attack the practises of Jesus Christ Inc. every day, yet i bear respect for the origional christians, before Roman Imperialism stopped oppressing Christians and began attacking their enemies (the indigenous peoples of Europe, the Mid-East and north africa) with their version of "Christianity". There are still good sects in Christianity, but they are all small ones, not like the various branches of Jesus Christ Inc. But I digress....All i intended to do was back up Orwell and Pasternak. They didnt attack communism, they attacked the corrupted apparatus of wrong interperetations of communism. Totalitarianism is not a communist ideal, and it is a great danger, for the people, and for the Earth.