Michael Wong x4241 (Michael.Wong@nsc.com)
Thu, 14 Sep 2000 16:38:06 -0700 (PDT)

Dear List:
> First of all, I could care less about anyone trying to get an Oscar. Anyone
> that makes films is trying to do that. It'd be like blaming a soldier for
> killing someone before they killed him in a battle.

Not true, I don't think Ed Wood had any illusions about his films ever winning
the Oscar (not that he wouldn't like one!). There are those people who make
films because they enjoy doing it, there are those who make films to make money,
and then there are those who make films to satisfy their ego and win awards.
A soldier kills in a battle to survive (the killing for country is trully
secondary), and can't be blamed. Spielberg won't die if he keeps making movies
that entertains, but he HAS to have his Oscar to stroke his ego, and that's a
different story.

> As for Schindler being an asshole...well, seems a good portion of the Jewish
> community would debate that. Like anyone else, he had his faults. His reasons

As with all things historical, everything is up to debate. There are those who
still debate whether Jesus really existed and what he is really like as a
person. But there are strong evidence to support the claims.

> for freeing the Jews can't be figured out now, only the results. It's like
> debating whether or not Lincoln issued his Emancipation Proclomation for good

And he might as have have issued the Emancipation Proclamation for selfish
reasons. If it was for selfish/political reasons, than he deserves to be
reviled. The reasults may have been good, but the intentions count even more
(at least to me), which is why you have so succinctly pointed out, I am biased
against Spielberg.

> reasons or not. All we have to judge from are the results. Did he save the
> lives of hundreds of Jews? YES. And frankly, I know several Jews that would
> find your blasting of the man insulting. Including one I used to work for

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, I judge people by their intentions,
which is why I would prefer an outright racist/bigot over those who act P.C.
and claim to be for equal rights (though they are racist/bigot in their core).

> (God rest his soul). As for Schindler's foibles, they are included in the
> film, if you merely look for them.

I won't say they are not, but it's merely skimmed over the surface and made
unimportant when they are really his essential character.
> Additionally, from what I understand and have read, not all of the showerheads
> you mention released poison gas. It was part of the psychological torture of
> the Jewish prisoners. Many were killed by the gas, but not all. That way, the
> prisoners were tortured by knowing they could die at any time, but never
> knowing when.

That's a new one, please tell me the sources so I can verify it because it was
quite different from what I've read. By the way, that doesn't change the fact
that the scene I described NEVER happened to those actual people on the list.
The fact that Spielberg deigned to use it for cheap thrills to entertain viewers
in lieu of presenting historical facts still make me hate the movie.
> As for the Jewish people placing the stones on his grave...DAMNATION!!!!! IT

Right, as in the 2.5 hour of torture that I was subjected prior to that was
not enough to show the man and his his actions have not been forgotten!! The
movie alone is enough to do that, it certainly doesn't need this to hammer it
in, but Spielberg with his usual heavy-handedness, chose add something which
isn't really needed and spoiled the movie even further.

> Hell and damnation, you people are starting to sound like those A-holes that
> try to claim the Holocaust never happened! That scene was put in there to

Nope, I never claimed the Holocaust never happened. I am one of those Assholes
that insist:-

(1) What the Japanese did to the Chinese, Korean, POW is every bit as cruel if
        not WORSE than Germans did in the Holocaust. YET, never gets any
        media attention because we are Asians and do not look white (like Jews)
        and hence are not marketable as films.

(2) Massacres and ethnic cleansing are STILL happening around the world globally
        this day, but also do not get the recognition. While movies about the
        holocaust that happened over 50 years ago still gets made and talked
        about. With people like you who act like you cared when someone speaks
        out against this but conveniently ignores the killings that are still
        going on.

(3) Sick and tired of people benefitting and profitting from victims of
        yesteryears, and puts up the false front like they actually cared about

(4) Most people are deluded and easily fooled.

> remind everyone that so long as we remember, the chance of such things
> happening again are lessened. Maybe you want to forget it, but I don't.

Hell no, the scene was heavy-handed, sloppily handled, ill-thoughtout, clumsy
and unnecessary.

> Maybe you'd look at the movie differently if you didn't already have a bias
> against Spielberg, which is what your message leads me to believe.

Maybe if you stop worshipping Spielberg you will see through the hypocrisy, that
Schindler's list was made first and foremost to get him his Oscar, then it was
made mainly as entertainment (with all those artificially constructed scenes),
with the noble intentions you've mentioned already built-in and is pretty much
an afterthought.

> Whatever...actually, for me, the love story was a secondary thing. It gave a
> basis for showing people the various events you said were a side story and
> for showing the differences in the classes at the time. I thought it did a

Which can also be done without the poorly done fictional romanctic story as
the backdrop.

> good job of it, and as I said, the imagery produced not only visually, but
> with words was some of the best I've heard. As for throwing the necklace

"The Night to Remember" was much better in this regard.

> overboard, it's completely understandable. Rose has finally been able to tell
> something she has had bottled up inside her for so long, and has finally laid
> her past to rest. Throwing the necklace away merely completes the action that
> her retelling started.

No, she could have given the Necklace up to the treasure hunters. Who have
spent a fortune to recover this non-existent necklace, and were kind enough to
fly her over to the station, and were patient enough to endure her retelling
of a badly written long-winded romance.

> It seems that some people can't appreciate good work.

There are people like that, and there are people who won't bow down to pressure
and speak their minds, recognizing crap as they really are.

> Whatever again...I felt like I had to take an hour long shower afterwards and
> then rip the top five layers of my skin off of myself after that movie. It
> was almost like I had been raped, I think, in many ways. I felt violated by
> it. All during the movie I felt the intense need to vomit all over the
> screen. Sorry, but I don't think it was all that good. Several people have
> commented (on other lists I participate in) that it was one of the best ads
> against the use of drugs, alcohol and crime that they had ever seen, and in
> some ways I agree, but still...The only other movie I have ever seen that
> made me feel the way I did after I finished watching that film was Natural
> Born Killers.

People have different levels of tolerance towards this kind of stuff, "Man
Bites Dog", "Harry, the Portrait of a Serial Killer", and "Blue Velvet" are
other examples of this type of films that are set out to disturb. I don't
find them as hard to stomach as other folks and enjoyed all films of this
type immensely. Different strokes for different folks, I am a pretty big
fan of disturbing films myself, since they show the darker side of humans
that most of us refuse to admit to even exist or are afraid to face.

> Roland


Gundam Mailing List Archives are available at http://gundam.aeug.org/

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri Sep 15 2000 - 08:30:08 JST