Can Movies Lose Wars?
by Ben ShapiroThis is a tale of two cultures. Both cultures are faced with the threat of Islamic terrorism. Both have watched their soldiers fight and die. Both have watched their citizens burn alive.
But one culture has rejected a far-left film establishment that seeks to undermine its war on terror – the other has embraced it.
The first culture – the culture that rejects its morally relativistic artists – is America. The second culture – the culture that accepts and encourages its morally relativistic artists – is Israel.
Hollywood may make tons of movies like In the Valley of Elah, Rendition, and Stop-Loss, but those movies tank. Tel Aviv makes similar movies, and those movies are considered the greatest film achievements of the Jewish State.
There’s a reason for that: while Hollywood believes American exceptionalism is passé, most Americans disagree. By contrast, Tel Aviv believes that Zionism is passé – and that post-Zionist attitude has infected much of the Israeli populace.
It’s no wonder that America is winning its war on terror, while Israel is losing hers.
Let’s take just one example: Body of Lies vs. Waltz with Bashir.
DiCaprio and Crowe star in "Body of Lies"
Body of Lies had all the elements of a hit. Exciting action. Solid direction by Ridley Scott. Two first-rate stars in Leonardo DiCaprio and Russell Crowe.
And it bombed.
It bombed because watching Body of Lies was like watching an in-depth investigation by Al Jazeera. The movie did its best to equate American counter-terrorism efforts with Islamic terrorism.
Body of Lies opens with shots of Americans – led by CIA operative Leo DiCaprio — beating a terrorism suspect bloody. Near the end of the movie, as Leo is being tortured by an Islamic terrorism, he flashes back to beating an Islamic terrorist. The implication is clear: the US and its enemies aren’t so different, after all.
That’s not a message Americans really want to hear. We understand that our enemies are murderous thugs, and by and large, we also understand that we may need to hurt them in order to get information from them.
It’s no wonder, then, that Body of Lies was more of a sinking ship than Titanic.
It’s a different story in Israel.
The hottest new movie in Israel is Waltz with Bashir. The movie has already won Best Picture from the Israeli Film Academy, Best Picture from the National Society of Film Critics, Best Animated Film from the Los Angeles Film Critics, and Best Independent Foreign Film from the British Independent Film Awards.
Waltz with Bashir is an animated post-Zionist journey into the mind of a former IDF soldier who fought in the 1982 Lebanon War. It follows his investigation into what really happened during the Lebanon War, and it culminates in the Sabra and Shatilla massacres, in which the Israeli Defense Forces failed to prevent Christian Phalangists from killing 700-800 Palestinians in those refugee camps. The Phalangist attack was a response to the Islamist killing of Lebanese President Bashir Gemayel.
The film neglects to mention that only 35 out of the 700-800 killed were women and children – the rest were men, which suggests that most of those killed were in fact members of the terrorist Palestine Liberation Organization.
In short, Waltz with Bashir is the Israeli version of Body of Lies, with less realistic action and more psychotherapy.
In America, this sort of self-indulgent caterwauling is scorned by the mass public. In Israel, everyone’s just pleased to be accepted by the Europeans for engaging in such self-abnegation.
The film community in the United States may skew heavily to the left. It may see its true mission as reshaping American foreign policy along European lines. And it may make anti-war films with that mission in mind. But the American public rejects the Hollywood view. We want more Saving Private Ryan and less Redacted. We want more We Were Soldiers and less Rendition.
In Israel, the film community skews far left as well. But Israel embraces those films. Since 1948, Israeli film has been heavily focused on undermining Israelis’ patriotism – and Israelis have bought into it.
Film has an impact. It’s no wonder that so many Israelis are disillusioned with their state. It’s no wonder that they’re apologetic for defending themselves. It’s no wonder they keep trying to make amends for wrongs they haven’t committed. It’s no wonder they love Waltz with Bashir.
In America, it isn’t too late. The American film industry may ignore its profit margin in favor of trendy pacifism, but such willful blindness can only last so long. Eventually, Americans will demand to see movies that champion America. Americans won’t let their children be convinced by nonsense like Body of Lies.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
55 Comments
Mr. Shapiro – that is VERY disturbing to read. And it is also confusing. Of all the nations in this world, I would have thought that Israel was the one country who would most quickly recognize terrorists and their terrorist beliefs and for that reason most quickly reject them. After all, terrorism isn’t a distant or vague hypothesis in a nation where literally every day you wonder if a terrorist will kill you before the end of that day. To therefore hear that Israel applauds a film which gives sympathy towards those terrorists just – well, it doesn’t make sense.
Though – frankly – it DOES explain to me why it took so damned long for Israel to respond to Hamas rockets.
‘Can Movies Lose Wars?’
Hollywood has to know. And they’re not givin’ up ’til they get the answer.
Seriously, they’re invested in the belief that they can, and should, end the war. No matter what the consequences.
Because if a Republican’s in the White House, then it MUST be an illegal war.
What were the box office numbers of Waltz of Bashir?
To me its hard to imagine anyone living in Sderot or other towns being lashed with rockets, or the parent of a homicide bomber taking these films seriously. If they do and thats the case what has to happen to change people’s perspectives? What part of you are never going to make a lasting peace with people who give their children text books based on the Nazi Education system do people not understand?
This really scares me.
@ KIT
Box office numbers are here http://www.the-numbers.com/movies/2008/WBSHR.php
This is disturbing news, but then again, it’s the default mode of the Western world to look inward whenever confronted by barbarism. America, or at least most of America, seems to be an exception; I had hoped Israel would be as well.
It really is the most incredible kind of intellectual laziness. For people who proclaim themselves to be so enamored with complexity, nuance and the like it is amazing how simplistic and reflexively anti-American/Israeli these film narratives always are. It is difficult to pin down just how loathesome and infantile the left is from a single snapshot in time but when you throw together all their conflicting arguments over time it is impossible to see them as anything more than human excrement.
For some reason, I’m skeptical.
The movie WALTZ OF BASHIR made $5,000,000 worldwide.
4 questions
(1) How much of those $5,000,000 was made in America?
(2) How much did it cost?
(3) How does it compare to other films released in 2008?
(4) Was it well made? Was it a good movie? (A lot of recent anti-American films were not so good)
I noticed he points out that it won Best Picture at the Israeli film academy. Look at the box office numbers of possible American Best Picture nominees.
If you can prove my scepticism wrong, than good.
Mr. Shapiro,
I presume from your name that you are Jewish and therefore should know that Jews in general are very liberal and made an art form (no pun intended) out of self-criticism. As a Jew myself, I’ve been struggling to understand this, to no avail. But that’s the major reason why many American Jews as well as Israeli natives are hesitant to defend the Jewish state, both militarily and on a moral basis. In this case, movies are a symptom, not a cause of the disease.
Actually, Hollywood did come up with a few sneaky ways to show the Global War On Terror in a rousing pro-American light while still not tainting their semi-official leftist credentials. “Ironman” was a huge hit, yet had an obvious anti-jihad, pro-American, pro-GWOT imagery and subplot. In my opinion, picking movies based on the ACTORS publicly stated left/right, anti-jihad/pro-appeasement, political leanings says more about a movie than the movie itself. In other words, who the hell would go see a “war” or “war statement” movie starring Sean Penn or DiCaprio or Clooney or directed by Oliver Stone and then naively believe it to be a “truthful” representation of the conflict? That would be so naive… like Michael Moore or Al Gore actually deserve Oscars. tsk tsk.
reeko
Thought I’d fix your opening paragraph for you.
This is a tale of two cultures. Both cultures are faced with the threat of
Islamic terrorismJudeo-Christian Crusaders. Both have watched their soldiers fight and die. Both have watched their citizens burn alive.You’re welcome.
Would love to read more on this topic … hope you can follow up on this post. While “Bashir” initially went under the proverbial radar, it’s starting to pick up some cultural cache in the U.S. Could be peaking at just the right time for Oscar voters, especially given the circumstances in the Middle East at the moment.
Oh, “suggests,” does it? So they were mostly men, & probably “terrorists,” therefore just kill ‘em all & let gawd sort ‘em out?
You people are truly incredible in your filthy hypocrisy.
And as stupid as hell if you think that movies are “ruining” AmeriKKKa. You whine about the content of the movies, then you get all hot & bothered because most of the films dealing w/ the Bush Admin.’s crimes against humanity. Which is it? Is no one watching, or are AmeriKKKans being brain-washed?
The major reason Jews as well as Israelis are “hesitant to defend the Jewish state” is self-criticism? Isn’t a good idea to check yourself once in a while & be sure you aren’t turning into something you wouldn’t want to be? Or do you want to be this way?
If M.Bouffant is typical of the loony leftists this site will attract then it really is a win/win. Bring on the ent-o-tainment!
You people are truly incredible in your filthy hypocrisy.
And as stupid as hell if you think that movies are “ruining” AmeriKKKa. You whine about the content of the movies, then you get all hot & bothered because most of the films dealing w/ the Bush Admin.’s crimes against humanity. Which is it? Is no one watching, or are AmeriKKKans being brain-washed?
Ladies and gentlemen, let’s have a big hand for Big Hollywood’s first troll.
And yes, he’s a troll. No one with aspirations of making a serious point uses the word “AmeriKKKa” unironically.
popcorn anyone?
Between narratives and documentaries I’ve counted 16 anti-Iraq war films over the last two years. All have flopped, miserably. More are on the way.
The only film that touched on the War On Terror from a pro-American point of view was Vantage Point. It’s also the only war film that made a profit, nearly $150 worldwide.
Yet, Hollywood continues to make anti-war films.
Draw your own conclusions.
“AmeriKKKa”? Seriously? People still think that’s clever? Or accurate?
Learn something new, and depressing, every day, I guess.
The only box office numbers that matter in the context of Shapiro’s argument are the box office performance of Body of Lies and its fellow travellers in the American market, relative to the size of the market, vs. Waltz of Bashir in the Israeli market, again, relative to the size of the market. Was Waltz a top 10 film in Israel? Or did it tank like Body of Lies?
Note that a weakness of Shapiro’s argument is that he doesn’t compare the public acceptance. American critics have been as welcoming of the cultural toxin movies as the Israeli critics. Comparing Israeli critics to the American public is apples to oranges. let’s have Israeli public acceptance vs. American public acceptance. Step up Ben, we know you can do better.
Mr. Shapiro is sadly correct about the state of the Israeli cinema. It is not only post-Zionist and anti-war but almost always anti-religious. (one exception to this was the terrific “Uzhpizin”). Worse, the Israeli government often helps fund these pictures through its state film office. However, it has not always been this way, as Mr. Shapiro suggests. There was a time when Israel actually produced proud, patriotic movies such as “Operation Thunderbolt” (1977)and “Hill 24 Doesn’t Answer” (1955). Those days are long gone.
Hollywood’s recent political efforts don’t come off well when compared to that of the orginal political thriller, “The Day of the Jackal”.
In that movie, a high level terrorist OAS member is kidnapped by the French security forces, taken to France and the information of the plot in question is graphically tortured from him. The implication is that this is a normal process. In the book, the man dies in the process. Mention is made of the fact that torture was used by the French in both Algeria and Vietnam.
The movie is from a British POV and takes a dim view of the entire business, yet this is the way that the plot to kill the President is first discovered. So a nuanced, thought provoking statement about torture is made within the context of an excellent and entertaining movie.
More hyperbolic BS from the ’soul of Israel’.
[...] Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Can Movies Lose Wars? [...]
I’m still a skeptic.
How much money did it make IN Israel?
I’m with Bikerdad.
In an earlier post i put up four questions that were raised in my head after I read the piece:
“(1) How much of those $5,000,000 was made in America?
(2) How much did it cost?
(3) How does it compare to other films released in 2008?
(4) Was it well made? Was it a good movie? (A lot of recent anti-American films were not so good)”
I also said this:
“I noticed he points out that it won Best Picture at the Israeli film academy. Look at the box office numbers of possible American Best Picture nominees.”
Bikerdad makes the point better than I did:
“Note that a weakness of Shapiro’s argument is that he doesn’t compare the public acceptance. American critics have been as welcoming of the cultural toxin movies as the Israeli critics. Comparing Israeli critics to the American public is apples to oranges. let’s have Israeli public acceptance vs. American public acceptance.”
It is an article that when you first read it, it appears strong, but when you really think about it, flaws appear. It is shown to be a very weak argument.
Then Bikerdad says this:
“Step up Ben, we know you can do better.”
As a member of Film Independent, I was getting literature pushing Waltz With Bashir months ago. I glanced over it, saw “IDF” and knew exactly what it would be. Hollywood, especially the “indie” sector, is utterly predictable. I sometimes wonder if these passion projects are getting funding by investors who are prepared to use the loss as a tax write-off.
Mr. Shapiro, I can’t say enough how excited I am to see a young man like you here.
The last great American military movie I saw was Top Gun. Unfortunately since the great Reagan era, our patriotism has declined, and it sad to see the same happening in Israel.
Now I hope I am not confusing you, but I heard a young Conservative with same name was enlisting in the U.S. Army? Kudos to you! As more young conservatives begin military service they show that conservatives are truely prepaired to fight the wars they argue for.
[...] Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Can Movies Lose Wars? [...]
John Nolte,
Big ups to you, Breitbart, and friends. This site has been needed for some time.
I’m curious as to why you didn’t include The Kingdom with Vantage Point as pro-GWOT films that made money. Admittedly there was some queasy equivocating at the end, but I thought it was generally fair and certainly did not romanticize radical Islam.
Thanks, H.I. Glad to have you here.
I did mention “Vantage Point,” but as far as “The Kingdom” is concerned, it only made $87 million worldwide on a production budget of $70 million. When you include what the theatre owners took and marketing costs, it probably lost millions.
I think what you aptly describe as a “queasy equivocating” ending hurt it financially.
A rousing, intelligent film closed on a bummer.
I hope Larry didn’t think that was a clever dig, as the number of conservatives in the military vastly outnumbers the liberals who voluntarily live in countries operated under the systems they advocate.
John,
Wow. I didn’t realize TK’s numbers were that anemic. I think you’re right about the ending’s impact on the bottom line: I’ve told friends that if I ever watch it again I’ll just turn it off after the throw-down to save Bateman’s character.
Most Americans want to see U.S. soldiers kicking butt and taking hard to pronounce Arab names. I don’t know if you’ve seen Traitor but it suffers from the same tortured relativism that plagued TK. Don’t want to get into too many spoilers but those who’ve seen it probably know what I mean.
We don’t need more preaching that not all Muslims are bad; we really get that. We need more films that remind us that nearly all despicable terrorists these days are Muslim, and must be dealt with.
That’s the message Hollywood can’t seem to stomach. It’s a shame, too, ’cause the dollars are out there, waiting to be spent on entertainment that carries it. I know because some of them are in my wallet. And I have friends who feel the same way.
[...] Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Can Movies Lose Wars? [...]
I think the main issue with the anti-war/anti-American films failing is that we are currently at war.
How many past anti-war films were successful were released while the war was still being fought?
Coming Home (1978)
The Deer Hunter (1978)
Apocalypse Now (1979)
Hamburger Hill (1987)
Full Metal Jacket (1987)
Good/great movies, but all made after the war was over.
People don’t want to be introspective while our soldiers are in harms way.
Born in 84 eh? Old enough to have signed up for the Iraq war but I’m sure didn’t. Another Chicken Hawk braying for war as long as someone else does the dying.
[...] Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Can Movies Lose Wars? [...]
[...] THIS is what he wrote in his latest column: [...]
I think the main issue with the anti-war/anti-American films failing is that we are currently at war. How many past anti-war films were successful were released while the war was still being fought? [snipped list] Good/great movies, but all made after the war was over. People don’t want to be introspective while our soldiers are in harms way.
No, audiences don’t want to pay money to see films in which American soldiers are scurrilously portrayed as the villains in films which are little more than propaganda films for our enemies. I don’t think Hollyweird is deliberately channeling Leni Riefenstahl in their actions, but they are clearly so blinded with smug moral superiority that they don’t realize that Al Queda can take a film like Redacted and hold it up as proof that not only are American soldiers murderous barbarians, but that Hollywood happily memorializes their war crimes. Nice jihadi recruitment film ya got there, Mr. De Palma!
In WWII, Hollywood literally went to war as stars like Jimmy Stewart and Clark Gable put their movie star butts on the line. Can you imagine Will Smith or George Clooney doing the same? Pat Tillman was about as close as you can get to that level of sacrifice and we all know how he was denigrated after his death. Anyone see Eli Manning putting down the pigskin and picking up a SAW in Fallujah? Didn’t think so.
What’s fascinating about Hollyweird’s moguls is that as captains of publicly-held corporations they aren’t even pretending to put shareholder value and return on investment into their calculus as to whether it’s a good idea to pour tens of millions into projects that have no chance of recouping, much less turning a profit, and are little more than vanities to impress their fellow travelers and stroke their egos that they’re “speaking truth to power.” Has there ever been a less-risky proposition than attacking Dubya? If he was half the fascist he’s been accused of being, Sean Penn and just about everyone else in Hollyweird would’ve been “disappeared” long ago.
@Dirk Belligerent:
“Pat Tillman was about as close as you can get to that level of sacrifice”
For the record: Pat Tillman was shot in the forehead with three bullets shot from a Navy SPR rifle at a distance of 10 yards. That is, it was certainly friendly fire, and may well have been murder. The army lied to his family for weeks afterwards, telling them he was killed by Afghani militians when they knew otherwise. The Army did everything it could to cover up the fact that he was killed by friendly fire. They never investigated the possibility of murder. 10 yards is pretty close to land 3 shots in somebody’s forehead and not realize he’s not a mujahadeen.
It’s worth noting that Tillman was no fan of the Iraq war and didn’t support Bush’s reelection in 2004. He spoke against it to other soldiers. He was slated to have a meeting with Noam Chomsky, of all people, upon his return.
Pat Tillman was a real American hero, willing to speak his mind and put his life on the line. This is true patriotism, the pioneer spirit: you risk your life, you go out there, but you demonstrate independence of thought, you don’t believe everything you are told, you think for yourself and act on it courageously.
And who denigrated him, exactly? I have never read or heard a negative word about this man. I have, however, heard this, from the congressional investigation on the matter:
“The pervasive lack of recollection and absence of specific information makes it impossible for the Committee to assign responsibility for the misinformation in Corporal Tillman’s and Private Lynch’s cases. It is clear, however, that the Defense Department did not meet its most basic obligations in sharing accurate information with the families and with the American public.”
Body of Lies made $108 million worldwide against $70 million production…you lot will believe anything that supports your warped little view points.
Perhaps you folks could stop congratulating yourselves long enough to look at the actual numbers:
http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2009/01/big-hollywood-and-why-i-admire-david.html
1.) Body of Lies (2.714 theaters) — Actually the point of the column in question. Definitely War on Terror oriented. And as noted in the column cited, not profitable at only $39 million against a production budget of $70 million — oh I’m sorry, what? We’re using worldwide box office? Okay, not my idea, but okay. In that case, Body of Lies made $108 million against $70 million production, plainly in the black, even before after-market sales. That’s right, the movie they use as an example of a flop on Day One of their shiny new website actually made money according to their own standards. Way to bring the rain, boys. In profit.
Did anyone here actually SEE Waltz With Bashir?
It’s in theaters across the country. Go see it, then judge. Seriously. I did. I don’t think it’s about what you think it’s about.
“Between narratives and documentaries I’ve counted 16 anti-Iraq war films over the last two years.”
Name them. Let’s see if your numbers actually add up. I have a strong suspicion you’ll either be stretching the definition of “anti-Iraq war” beyond breaking point, or playing fast and loose with the numbers.
Facts versus the lie of “liberal, out-of-touch Hollywood”
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/01/08/facts-versus-the-lie.html
Oops! Looks like John Nolte is another conservative living in a fantasy world.
Don’t you people EVER get tired of being wrong?
In America, this sort of self-indulgent caterwauling is scorned by the mass public.
The film community in the United States may skew heavily to the left. It may see its true mission as reshaping American foreign policy along European lines. And it may make anti-war films with that mission in mind. But the American public rejects the Hollywood view.
The point isn’t that the films aren’t profitable, it’s that the “American public rejects the Hollywood view.”
So, why are you bringing up the fact that some of these films did have wonderful box office takes worldwide???
16 anti-war films, including documentaries, in two years? Out of how many total releases over the same two years? A few hundred, at least, I’d assume. Wow. How will patriotic Americans ever withstand that relentless flood of propaganda?
And of the hundreds of total releases, how many were pro-war/pro-American, or even just neutral in it’s treatment of the subject?
Where would anyone find a balanced view of the war in popular culture?
The news certainly hasn’t provided it.
This brings up an interesting fact of American life. American film-makers especially, but folks in TV and the news media, too, are exceptionally good at airing American ‘dirty laundry’. Thus, the entire world has an understanding of all the warts and faults of only their own country and America.
Since people worldwide have a higher tolerance for their own foibles than they do for those of others, the net effect of America airing its dirty laundry so efficiently is contempt for America.
If such a lens were placed on every other country, the world would see that America is not more evil, degraded and dysfunctional than other nations. Rather, the world would see that the problems besetting the US are human failings that affect all nations.
The world would also likely see that the people of the US are the most generous group in the world. Flawed, but well-intentioned and generous. And, Americans are largely lacking in the long-standing group vs. group hatreds that have festered for centuries in most other nations of the world.
@Sasha – “And who denigrated him, exactly? I have never read or heard a negative word about this man.”
Well, since you probably only seek out views that confirm your prejudices – typical of the incurious nature of liberals – you must’ve missed this charming Ted Rall cartoon which smears Tillman as a racist killer who is an “idiot” and “sap”. It was all over teh Intarwebz and you missed it? Really? Was there a Very Special Barney on that day?
Back under the bridge with ya, troll!
@Dirk – Yeah, that’s a pretty awful and uninformed cartoon. So, there was unfounded left-wing criticism of Tillman after his death. Despite appearances, I don’t spent every waking minute on the Internet.
Other than this isolated cartoon, was there widespread criticism of Tillman after his death?
My question is, which is more unfounded – a low-rent partisan cartoonist writing something out of his San Francisco studio, or the soldier’s commanding officers blatantly lying to his family and working to cover up the circumstances of his death?
I’m just saying, Tillman is a poor example to use to show a soldier being denigrated by liberals.
This kid is great! Do not let him get away. Between his article on “Lost” and this one, I can not wait. Like I said before, it is exactly like a car wreck I can’t stop looking at.
“Film has an impact.”
Yes, in the exact way that drivel “by Ben Shapiro” doesn’t and never, ever will.
Did this guy actually see Waltz with Bashir? It's not anti-Israeli or anti-USA. It's a soldiers story about reclaiming supressed memories from his time in Lebanon and how war affects the young people fighting it and it only shows the Israeli soldiers perspective of the war. So i really dont think you know what you're talking about.
Have you been to Israel? Have you lived with younger Israelis in Israel? Are your opinions about Israel based on what you see on TV News?
You must be logged in to post a comment.