Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Movie Mix

Hollywood Is Becoming the Pentagon's Mouthpiece for Propaganda

By Nick Turse, Tomdispatch.com. Posted May 22, 2008.


In the new film Iron Man, the people cast as terrorists take the fall for what the U.S. has done in the real world.
Advertisement

"Liberal Hollywood" is a favorite whipping-boy of right-wingers who suppose the town and its signature industry are ever-at-work undermining the U.S. military. In reality, the military has been deeply involved with the film industry since the Silent Era. Today, however, the ad hoc arrangements of the past have been replaced by a full-scale one-stop shop, occupying a floor of a Los Angeles office building. There, the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard, and the Department of Defense itself have established entertainment liaison offices to help ensure that Hollywood makes movies the military way.

What they have to trade, especially when it comes to blockbuster films, is access to high-tech, tax-payer funded, otherwise unavailable gear. What they get in return is usually the right to alter or shape scripts to suit their needs. If you want to see the fruits of this relationship in action, all you need to do is head down to your local multiplex. Chances are that Iron Man -- the latest military-entertainment masterpiece -- is playing on a couple of screens.

For the past three weeks, Iron Man --a film produced by its comic-book parent Marvel and distributed by Paramount Pictures -- has cleaned up at the box office, taking in a staggering $222.5 million in the U.S. and $428.5 million worldwide. The movie, which opened with "the tenth biggest weekend box office performance of all time" and the second biggest for a non-sequel, has the added distinction of being the "best-reviewed movie of 2008 so far." For instance, in the New York Times, movie reviewer A.O. Scott called Iron Man "an unusually good superhero picture," while Roger Ebert wrote: "The world needs another comic book movie like it needs another Bush administration... [but] if we must have one more... 'Iron Man' is a swell one to have." There has even been nascent Oscar buzz.

Robert Downey Jr. has been nearly universally praised for a winning performance as playboy-billionaire-merchant-of-death-genius-inventor Tony Stark, head of Stark Industries, a fictional version of Lockheed or Boeing. In the film, Stark travels to Afghanistan to showcase a new weapon of massive destruction to American military commanders occupying that country. On a Humvee journey through the Afghan backlands, his military convoy is caught up in a deadly ambush by al-Qaeda stand-ins, who capture him and promptly subject him to what Vice President Dick Cheney once dubbed "a dunk in the water," but used to be known as "the Water Torture." The object is to force him to build his Jericho weapons system, one of his "masterpieces of death," in their Tora Bora-like mountain cave complex.

As practically everyone in the world already knows, Stark instead builds a prototype metal super-suit and busts out of his cave of confinement, slaughtering his terrorist captors as he goes. Back in the U.S., a born-again Stark announces that his company needs to get out of the weapons game, claiming he has "more to offer the world than making things blow up." Yet, what he proceeds to build is, of course, a souped-up model of the suit he designed in the Afghan cave. Back inside it, as Iron Man, he then uses it to "blow up" bad guys in Afghanistan, taking on the role of a kind of (super-)human-rights vigilante. He even tangles with U.S. forces in the skies over that occupied land, but when the Air Force's sleek, ultra high-tech, F-22A Raptors try to shoot him down, he refrains from using his awesome powers of invention to blow them away. This isn't the only free pass doled out to the U.S. military in the film.


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iron man, iron man movie, hollywood, air force, pentagon, propaganda, terrorism, war on terror

Nick Turse is the associate editor and research director of Tomdispatch.com. He has written for the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle, the Nation, the Village Voice, and regularly for Tomdispatch.



Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Well written article
Posted by: Uriahz on May 22, 2008 1:34 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Having seen it twice by circumstantial social pressures, I don't feel Iron Man was particularly pro-war at all. I saw my own anti-war predilections mirrored back to me in the film. Tony Stark battles the military industrial complex, as represented by Obadiah Stone, and the vaunted 'Al-Qaeda- style' terrorists are clearly and obviously funded by American interests, made obvious with a close-up shot of an as-yet-unexploded rpg with Stark Industries printed on it, blowing up and permanently crippling the very man who sold it. I thought it an appropriate and damning commentary on the history of American foreign policy in the Middle East as well as the greed and self-congratulatory war-mongering of the military industrial complex in general. The hero has a change of heart during an extremely intense experience and sees the liberal light, for god's sakes.

Is it an action film, with shit blowing up? Yes, and as such it glorifies violence. That said, I think it would be rather out of character for a man whose best friend is in the Air Force to blow up American fighter jets as anything but a last resort, and moreover, completely against the entire superhero ethic. Killing the terrorists who kidnapped and tortured you is a different thing than wanton vigilantism.

I would have to agree with the critics; it's an exceptional superhero film. But that's just me.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Well written article Posted by: Woodpecker
» They're ALL Bad Guys Posted by: JackieGiles
» RE: Well written article Posted by: thinkforyourself
Brilliant Insight ...
Posted by: mmckinl on May 22, 2008 1:36 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Kudos for Nick Turse ...

And all the more frightening to realize the grip our Military Industrial Complex has on our lives and the lives of our children.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Brilliant Insight ... Posted by: EncinoM
Transformers
Posted by: ender on May 22, 2008 2:01 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Haven't seen "Iron Man" yet, but I'd add "Transformers" to the list of movies that are advertisements for the military and even more overtly, for General Motors' new Camaro.

(And Megan Fox as a high school junior? Oh, I'm a bad, bad man.)

Can't wait to see John Cusak's new film, "War Inc."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Transformers Posted by: Woodpecker
A bit naive
Posted by: arlsutroa on May 22, 2008 4:13 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author is either incredibly naive or has never learned proper grammar. Instead of using the present progressive tense he should be using the present perfect progressive tense.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» WOW !!! I am impressed Posted by: zyclop
» RE: A bit naive Posted by: badkitty
what a joke
Posted by: pete1029 on May 22, 2008 4:35 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
what a joke this article is, so what if Iron Man has a pro US slant to it, has the reviewer forgoten that there have been nurerous anti US films and some of late focusing on the Iraq War. Or mabye its just that the writer only wants movies to be produced that satisfy his personal views of the world.

the writer also has a problem that in this movie its portreys terrorists as capturing an american and containing him "in exceedingly grim conditions", by this is a problem because the writer seems to think that only the American's do this. wet in the article the author does not mention that in fact al-Qaeda have been know to capture western's and even cut their heads off on occasion. so he has a go at the movie for not protreying the americans as capturing members of al-Qaeda and the Taliban (as well as untold innocents) and holding them in exceedingly grim conditions. yet he himself in the article does not mention that al-Qaeda also have a habbit of this. so he commits the same mistake that he castrates Iron Man for doing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: what a joke Posted by: Carlos111
» RE: what a joke Posted by: pete1029
» RE: what a joke Posted by: Carlos111
» RE: what a joke Posted by: dmaciewski
Eisenhower saw it coming!!!
Posted by: xvictor on May 22, 2008 4:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Arguably the last decent Repub president this country ever had (never mind the bad decision to install Honest John nuclear missiles in Turkey targeting Soviet territory). He understood the unwieldly influence the military industrialist have over Congress and public opinion. His farewell speech was a warning to America and to the world. Perhaps it was his conscience talking as well.

I believe it ranks up there with Washington's farewell speech ("no foreign entanglements").

We must listen, again and again!!!!

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ike.htm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hollywood a Propaganda Machine??
Posted by: ankhet on May 22, 2008 4:50 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When was it not? Wakey-wakey!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Admittedly it is a decent flick
Posted by: Smiggsy on May 22, 2008 5:37 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do admit it is a decent flick but they didn't get any coin for my privilege.....

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, DUH !!!! Hollywood has already RAPED the "Left" for years !!
Posted by: maxpayne on May 22, 2008 5:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess now that the so-called "Left" has already allowed Hollywood to RAPE it and push the working class into the rightwing brownshirt camp followed by slapping FRIVOLOUS LAWSUITS against P2P in the name of wiping out what's left of the middle class who are SICK AND TIRED of paying too much for poorer quality bullshit because they're afraid they're unethical and even ILLEGAL pricing, now they're FINALLY realizing that Hollywood is a puppet for the Pentagon who in turn is a puppet for the warmongering pols ! Here's a solution. TURN OFF YOUR TV !! That'll drain the money out of all these elite scumbags !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Makes sense
Posted by: everton9 on May 22, 2008 6:55 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Although I haven't seen Iron Man, it seems pretty clear that they writers have flipped the script (no pun intended) and portrayed the misdeeds of the American Empire as those of its enemies. Its an interesting tactic and will probably fool the many uncritical Americans who will be watching this movie.

I have seen Transformers, and as far as that goes I'm not convinced. Yeah, the army gets involved and helps saves the day. But, at least to me, that doesn't make it pro-army. Its a movie and is therefore fictional. What I remember from that movie were Shia Lebouf's (sp?) awesome performance, that sweet looking Camaro, and Megan Fox.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Makes sense Posted by: Livemike
Simple-minded
Posted by: Incertus (Bradley) on May 22, 2008 7:19 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In order to build his argument-- Iron Man is a piece of jingoistic, pro-military propaganda-- the author of this article has willfully ignored the protagonist's entire narrative arc. Tony Stark begins the movie spouting right-wing talking points about peace through strength, but then winds up learning that he has been wrong, as he's suddenly put in the very situation he has put other people in. He's victimized by his own country's interrogation techniques and he's attacked with the very weapons he designed. Stark returns from captivity with the knowledge that he has been a bad guy, and seeks to undo the damage that his war profiteering has wrought.

The author of this article also suggests that the villainous masterminds in this movie are the terrorists who kidnap Stark; this is not the case. The villain in this movie is the military industrial complex, as embodied by Jeff Briges's Obadiah Stane. The author is correct in one instance-- Iron Man does not go around blowing up American troops. Instead, he fights the rich, callous corporate interests that manufacture the wars that those troops are sent to fight. Frankly, I fail to see how a refusal to engage in a mindless and ineffective murder spree makes this character less heroic-- the author doesn't really articulate a persuasive argument in favor of the slaughter of innocent people.

One of the things that makes Iron Man a more successful action movie than your typical Michael Bay-style explosionfest is this nuanced and carefully considered morality at its core. This is especially remarkable because-- as the author of this article points out-- the character of Iron Man comes out of a particularly simple-minded comic book notion of good vs. evil as embodied in the struggle between America and the forces of Communism. When you reflect on this film, I think you start to realize how subtly subversive it actually is-- the supervillains in this movie aren't mutated monstrosities bent on world domination-- it's the people who run our country. But I've been noticing more and more often that the people who write reviews for AlterNet don't seem to get subtlety or nuance...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I agree totally! Posted by: IntelliGent
» RE: Simple-minded Posted by: thinkforyourself
» RE: Simple-minded unlike th Hulk Posted by: nightgaunt
» RE: Simple-minded Posted by: Livemike
» RE: Simple-minded Posted by: Incertus (Bradley)
Carlos111
Posted by: Carlos111 on May 22, 2008 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
War and its mesmerizing violence is extremely profitable and coercive. It taps into our aggressive "Reptilian" mid-brains. The Bush neocon lunatic fringe exploited it after 9-11, while Hollywood's greed recognized the extreme potential for profit right along with the military-industrial complex. IRON MAN represents what most people fantasize... transforming from a weak and vulnerable human into a powerful force of good or evil. The profiteers thrive on our vulnerability to be scared out of our skulls, so it's easy to demonize whoever or whatever to fill the ballot boxes, the guns and the box offices. So who is good, and who is evil? Who is our worst enemy? WE are our worst enemy! Irrational and induced fear does that to us, and some people know how to do it like a snake charmer.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What ever happened to Archie
Posted by: grn1 on May 22, 2008 8:21 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I want people to walk away from this movie with a really good impression of the Air Force, like they got about the Navy seeing Top Gun." Is that what happened when I saw Top Gun, dream on. The masters of disguise, fiction, impression and propaganda are aeons ahead of your interpretation. Hollywoods misdirected ego has transpired to life imitating art. The art being comics. Too bad.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pro War Movie Celebrated while Speed Movie Sabotaged
Posted by: DeaconJ on May 22, 2008 8:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm glad someone finally has written a synopsis similar to what others have observed. I found it so odd that Iron Man got such praise and a pass by the cynical baby boomer big media critics and a movie of more wholesome values being Speed Racer had the knives drawn on it. After movies like V for Vendetta I bet it will be hard to operate in a Pentagon controlled Hollywood. Better get minions like Rupert Owned Wall Street Journal media critic to give it a Zero rating. But that same critic sure did love Iron Man.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You miss a big point
Posted by: Arkham42 on May 22, 2008 9:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been reading comics since the late 70's and while I agree with some of you points, I think, however, that you are focusing on the wrong hero.

While Iron Man used to be an industrialist that specialized in war, he transcended that to become a Humanist and using his vast fortune to try to help people. Contrast this with Superman. In one of my favorite comics, Superman and Wonder Woman where on a 'date' very early on in comic 'history' She asks him what he does, to which he replied, "I fight crime" She said, "No, you beat up criminals, what do you do to fight crime?"

Which is the big point. Most super-heros just beat people up. Very few do any work to prevent people from becoming criminals. At least Batman as Bruce Wayne tries to provide jobs and does a lot of programs to help ex-cons become law abiding citizens again. Most heros, like Superman, just beat up the criminal and then fly off to leave the cops to deal with these people like so much trash that needs to be taken out.

That is the lesson that most comics are sending, conflict resolution via violence. At least in the movie Iron Man, Tony Stark was accepting his personal responsibility in the suffering of the people by weapons he designed. That's more than we get out of our government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hollywood Spooks...
Posted by: bokkeman on May 22, 2008 9:38 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Those readers interested in the links between the Hollywood establishment and the CIA/NSA/assorted spooks would be well entertained by Dave McGowan's unfolding chronicles about the history of Laurel Canyon (linked at the top of the page under the heading Inside The LC: The Strange but Mostly True Story of Laurel Canyon and the Birth of the Hippie Generation.
Especially Part IV which describes the USAF film production facility operated at the secret Lookout Mountain facility which produced 19,000 classified films. John Ford, Jimmy Stewart, Howard Hawks, Ronald Reagan, Bing Crosby, Walt Disney and Marilyn Monroe all worked there on "undisclosed projects"...

Wake up, people. Your "entertainment" is a powerful propaganda machine and those that seek to shape your thinking have long put it to good use.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hollywood has always been the US propaganda machine
Posted by: zyclop on May 22, 2008 9:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
from the days of Hearst and his papers before WWI when they lied the US population into the war.

And before that the war against the Spanish way south of the border.

Once they found out "it" WORKS they never stopped.

And of course you have to sell to the American population that all the Imperial grabbings around the world were only meant to save the world from evil by using the rightfully so called mass media.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's about the Money
Posted by: BCcovers on May 22, 2008 10:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hollywood is interested in one thing, money. Why did Iron Man have a pro-American we're the good guys bias? Because that's what sells.

Hollywood tried time and again with several different Iraq/anti-war pics. These were miserable failures at the box office. Americans generally go to the movies to be entertained and to come out feeling good about themselves. That's why Iron Man is a successful film and that's why this formula is used by the bigger studios.

In these volatile times attempts to bring the heavy issues into the theater have been met with crickets. People go to the movies to escape, not to be lectured to about how bad their country is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's about the Money Posted by: Livemike
Hollywood is a business, just like the rest
Posted by: Reader11722 on May 22, 2008 10:13 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hollywood is one of the world's largest businesses. Of course, they take their orders from the gov't. After all, corporations and gov't are merely quid-pro-quo whorehouses sold to the highest bidder. When the gov't needs illegal wire-taps, Verizon and Sprint allow them secret rooms to listen in on calls. When Haliburton (and KBR) need more revenue, the gov't hands out no-bid contracts. When the gov't dislikes literature, Amazon and Wikipedia ban the book America Deceived (book). We The People had our gov't (and our entertainment) sold out from beneath us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need "Iron Men" in Iraq!
Posted by: taxidriver on May 22, 2008 11:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps another way of looking at "Iron Man" is how much it tells us about ourselves and our way of war. We attempt to solve complex social/cultural/political problems by inventing superior technology. In a way, isn't "Iron Man" a manned "Predator" or "Reaper" drone? Yet, is developing high-tech armor and firing missiles really the best way to defeat the enemy--whether it's al Qaeda or the MI complex? Is it wise to fight fire with fire? I'd say "Iron Man" tends to support such simplistic thinking. I can see people leaving the theater saying, "Golly! If only we had a few 'Iron Man' suits for the troops in Iraq, we'd win in a heartbeat."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Perverse Psychology of the Left
Posted by: ot on May 22, 2008 11:23 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The writer has conveniently ignored the Islamist snuff films circulating the Web showing the inhuman slaughter of Daniel Pearl and Nick Berg by beheading not to mention the killing of American troops by sniping and roadside bombs. If there ever was a valid reason to criticize a film this might very well be it. But most likely the author would say that they deserved it and instead chooses to criticize the side opposing these monsters. Go figure...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm at a loss on this one...
Posted by: ianfan on May 22, 2008 12:06 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author seems to understand the underlying narrative of the main character of this comic...but then completely ignores it to continue on an anti-military rant for it's own sake.

Stark doesn't return from his experience to build a suit to better blow up bad guys, he builds a suit to use to destroy the weapons he created.

You talk about Iron Man targteting todays enemy of choice just like in the past he battled the "evil a ians", but todays enemy of choice in this film is clearly the greed of the military industrial complex, not al-Queda stand-ins. You seem to understand this as you even mention these villians are puppets of the true villian...but then you just seem to disregard that inconvenient fact.

I think there is a lot of criticism to be leveled at WWII era comics and even after that in reflecting simple good vs. evil thinking on complicated problems and in demonizing whatever enemy the USA faced on that day (Iron Man was strongly anti-commie early on, and there is some criticism warrented). However, if you talk to a guy like Stan Lee who was actually there and responsible for this stuff, even he will be quick to point out how in error they were at the time. They recognize their mistake and have tried to correct it when possible.

The only thing I can get out of this piece is that the author seems to think that it's dangerous to show sexy technology to the public because their little attention defecit raveged minds will be so seduced by even the plain image of flashy military hardware that they won't be able to even see the crystal clear message of the story being told with the images.

Don't hold up a gun to show people how dangerous it is because even seeing one will make people love guns because they are so damn sexy.

So, I suppose you could have a story that deals with the evils of war and greed without showing any military hardware...but this is a comic book we're talking about here. You kind of have to take the medium for what it is.

The big signature scene being talked about here with the F-22's displays the airforce as incompetant (they don't have a clue what they are fighting, can't effectively attack it, end up shooting down one of their own planes in the process, and their biggest victory here is when a pilot doesn't die in an accident of his own creation), and on top of that impotent (they can't address the issue of the terrorists who have the weapons Iron Man is going there to destroy in the first place)...

...and yet the author here is claiming that simply by showing the image of two fighter planes in flight this is a huge advertisement for the military and a big Top Gun style win for their PR.

Okay. That seems like a pretty ridiculous way to look at it, but I suppose you have a right to feel that way.

I'm really at a loss to think that way myself.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Missed the Point.
Posted by: mahargm on May 22, 2008 1:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I think the author of this article has missed the point. As stated by others, indeed the enemy is the military industrial complex who are making money off both sides of the conflict.

Tony Stark finds out that his company (which could well be named Lockheed-Martin or Haliburton) is a traitor to the people of America and goes about a quest to rid the world of the wrong that he has wrought. As mentioned before, the Afghan terrorists were a patsy of the Military Industrial Co mplex (MIC), although they had their own interests. As in reality, they are using weapons sold to them by the United States, which Tony Stark (as most Americans) didn't know.

Much like the American people, Tony Stark had been misled on the nature of the war machine. He had been indoctrinated in thinking military might prevents wars, not that it might actually be used to kill people. Showing the corruption of the industry in such a slick package might go over the heads of some people, but I would like to hope that it sowed seeds of doubt about the morality of those who work in weapons.

Stane acting as MIC pays terrorists in arms (power) to capture Stark with no regards to the lives of the American soldiers. The MIC supports those who torture, separate families, and capture women and children. Tony Stark declares that they are no longer producing weapons, stock drops 50 points. We find their is a high economic cost to morality. One must make a large sacrifice in order to climb out of the moral pit of arms dealing. Those driven by greed try to lock him out, making the point that they care little about the consequences of their product, just the proceeds.

The military is shown as inept. Soldiers fail to protect Stark, fail to locate where he is captured, are unable to engage when human rights are being violated.

The use of the Jericho missiles by the terrorists as well as their attack on the village give a human face to the frighting power of weapons. The Afghani villagers are only able to be abused because of the power granted to 10 Rings group by arms dealers.

Stark role of naive collaborator can be likened to the American people's lack of understanding of what is going on in the world and our role in it. His path of discovery from being a jingoistic flag-waver to a critical thinking man of conscience is choir preaching to the left but may change a few minds or stick in the subconscious of the right.


So I don't think that it is pentagon propaganda. Rhodes was presented as a square. The military was hopelessly worthless. The only thing they did successfully was locate Stark in the desert after a huge village and giant flare (his armor) went up in flames, and even then it seems like it took them many hours. It struck an anti-war chord with me, especially showing the humanity of those struggling against weapons.

One last note, Favreau and Downey have both said that they tried to steer clear of making a political message. Although they understand that there is certainly a message that you can project into it, they were just telling the story of Iron Man without putting their own slant onto it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Missed the Point. Posted by: badkitty
ackba
Posted by: albecomingroundthemountain on May 22, 2008 1:52 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
re:JackieGiles comment regarding Julius Ceasar, I suggest you read M. Parenti's book about J. Ceasar. He was a progressive much aligned by the distorted view of history in the majority of our books.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Iron Man"
Posted by: guybjones on May 22, 2008 1:59 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ironically enough, if you watch the lengthy credits after "Iron Man," you'll see a thank you to the DoD (ostensibly for cooperation provided during filming) as well as Boeing. I thought this was interesting, as it shows that the low-key but nonetheless unmistakable anti-military-industrial complex and war profiteering themes brought up in the film were totally over the heads of these entities.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hollywood has been in every war have they not?
Posted by: The Big Raven on May 22, 2008 3:43 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Either in support of the latest world war or police action or what ever the next buzz word is for the act of violence for profit , hollywood was there and as this article points out the warmaking hi-tech tool images are spread through-out all sorts of movies for all ages. hell in a hand-basket
Peace

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Really...This is DUMB
Posted by: TheJibreelaMonsters on May 22, 2008 4:49 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Can anyone enjoy a movie these days? Really, its just a flipping movie can you people lighting up as soon as possible. Hollywood makeing a "pro war" movie, as soon as I seen that, I said to myself: "they give out newspapers and internet access in the loony bin?" Hollywood has been the last place for a place that "pro war" or "pro America" so a movie with stuff blowing up with cool graphics is "pro war?" How about its just good movie in a time movies are not doing too well "can someone say stop loss?" I'm stop before I ramble away but really this was DUMB.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

rn
Posted by: mnatra on May 22, 2008 7:06 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Where have you been for the last 50 years.
since those militaristic Sci Fi films of the fifties.
What is new? About this new wave of pentagon films?
Do remember Frank Cpara's Why We Fight? films.
Financed by the US? Ask an elder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's a movie, not a documentary!
Posted by: 24&somuchmore on May 22, 2008 9:45 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I saw it. I enjoyed it. What are you going to do when the Hulk hits the screens in a couple weeks, blame some evil connection between Big Pharma and the Defense Industry? When Iron Man II comes out, I'll see that too. I grew up reading Iron Man comic books (and Thor, FF, Hulk, X-Men, Metal Men, Avengers, Nick Fury, Captain America) back in the 1960s and 70s. I read Alternet alot, I believe there is a lot of value in having these viewpoints out there. BTW - I probably see more evil conspiracies between Global Corporations / Big Government / International Banking families that got their start during the Renaissance, etc... than most of the other people I know, HOWEVER ---- not everything in the world is some evil plot. Some things are just fun. This was a fun movie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

?????
Posted by: gellero1 on May 22, 2008 10:44 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You write as if the Afghan Taliban Government didn't deserve to be destroyed by us, as if Al Quaida didn't have training camps for thousands who were going to bear arms against American civilians.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ????? Posted by: fanny666
Todd
Posted by: ToddSmith on May 23, 2008 10:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only product placement that I saw in Iron Man was for Burger King.
You are making much a do about a nothing kids movie.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Reminds me of the anti-corporate bias of "The Incredibles."
Posted by: nightgaunt on May 23, 2008 12:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found it strange that a staunch conservative like Charles Krauthammer (love that last name),praised the film for its right-wing "conservative values" while it skewared corporate values. The InsuraCare corp. that wanted to help itself,not its customers.The bottom line is their profits. Also Buddy Pine's ("Syndrome")making money from the weapons he creates too. Curious what Krauthammer would ignore that to see what he liked.He must have liked the meritocracy of the super endowed rising to the top.While ignoring all of the other subtext.
I see the same thing with "Iron Man" and some of the criticisms of it and for it.
Did you know that the theatrical film version of "Starship Troopers" was also anti-war? It was.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not so Curious Screening timing. Just wait unltil Captain America debues
Posted by: common intelligence on May 24, 2008 2:57 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not so Curious a Screening timing. Just wait until Captain America debuts


One can't argue that it is so applicably timed for screening such a movie.
(Which by the way Ironman was one of my favorite comic book heros growing up. Reading comic books taught me and influenced my screen writing knowledge method and a way to visualize scene to scene how to assemble ideas of all types.)

But just like comics and the movies that they manifest so go the thoughts into our heads.
I can't help from quoting pearls of wisdom that can wake people up such as,

"If it happens, it was planned"

-F.D.R.

On the social map of influencing the masses it does ring curiously timed that just when Bush needs somekind of support for pushing this country into a future of totalitarian rule and influence that seeds are planted in the nieve virgin soil of the new generations to propagate a future of "America is right and we insist our way or the highway attitude to the world and the future American public.

Just like when the Iraq/Afganistan support was waning radically the movie 300 comes out. The only thing wrong was I couldn't figure who was suppose to be the dumb surgers the mythical Egyptian demigod or the stupid Spartan with a policy of fight to the death even if every last one dies on all fronts.

It's kind of like and "eye for and eye, and everyone is blind!"

But wait, wait, don't tell me. Two, no three new super hero comics are in the cue. First we'll be hit with a new Batman ( the Black knight) this summer, then for Christmas come "Thor" (the white Nordic God!). Then not to far beyond come frigin Captain America! Now that has got to be the most propaganda influenced idea to resurface since,.... well since Captain America!

I don't think anyone can argue with that.

Ya see just when the Repukes need to justify "protecting America" from these so called terrorists, and more money has to be allocated to continue this surge invasion. Mean while Petraeus is getting ready to retire, we got a black man, a woman, and a geriatric running to become the next leaders of a nation of bigots and citizenry that isn't as "Smarter than a Fifith Grader" and a dumber than dirt President in control of the most economically strapped country on earth borrowing more money from the Chinese that is loosing control of it's own nation buried in the worst pollution in the world and suffering masses dying in droves because mother earth has unleashed hell on earth ........

I guess we all need a super hero because "god" is laughing his/her ass off at the worst failure of his career. The creating of the human species!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hollywood is not becomng...
Posted by: NDK on May 27, 2008 12:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...a mouthpiece.

Hollywood IS and has been for some time a military mouthpiece. This is part of modern American Mythology.
It prepares Americans for living in a nation whose sole business is world domination in the name of "freedom" and "democracy" none of which it actually creates, other than the freedom for itself to persecute others in deceptive, duplicitous and dangerous fashion.

That the creative industries generate so much profit for the government and whose taxable revenue then is used to create the worlds First Democratic Bully is anathema to any artist who loves creativity over destruction.

Watch 'Operation Hollywood' at free documentaries online. Quite an eye-opener.

The world no longer needs a propaganda machine providing "entertainment." We should no longer support such an industry that rakes in billions from "art & entertainment" only to use the revenues generated to destroy peace, prosperity and real human progress.

What we need is an independent industry focused on humanity and the advance of civilization into a higher state of existence with life, the universe and everything.

Hollywood is really Pentawood, and just as hellbent on destruction as any of the corporations that now move with overt confidence so secure in their power they don't even bother to hide what they are doing any more.

Plenty of independent educational movies at Free Documentaries, well worth watching. And no, I don't have a production up there yet. Perhaps one day.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A really bad ad for the US military.
Posted by: Livemike on May 27, 2008 11:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's examine what the US military actually do in Iron Man and the results.

Action 1) They escort a strategically and politically important VIP in a war zone. Note that there's no real reason why he should be in a war zone other than it makes a better sales pitch.
Result 1) The VIP is kidnapped by their enemies and only not killed because Tony is a genius.

Action 2) They discover Tony wandering in the desert and attempt to fly him back to the US.
Result 2) They succeed. Yay military! They managed to do what United and Continental do every day.

Action 3) They observe Iron Man fighting the bad guys.
Result 3) They attempt to shoot down someone who killed their enemies and rescued civilians because he's in their "no-fly" zone.

Action 4) They try to shoot down Iron Man.
Result 4) They lose a plane while scrathing his paintwork (maybe) and Tony has to save the pilot.

Action 5 (le) ) This is an action by law enforcement but the organisation is somewhat military. Agent walks out with Pepper.
Result 5 (le) ) Pepper saved. YAY! But the task wasn't that hard.

Action 6 (le) ) They raid a place known to have sophisticated military weaponry and suspected of having the lastest and most deadly prototype carrying pistols and some breaching charges.

Result 6 (le) ) What do you expect? They get their asses kicked in no uncertain terms.

Net result military screwed up 3/4 times and succeeded in only the simplest tasks. Law enforcement screwed up 1/2 the time and succeeded in only the simplest task. Some ad for the military.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment