"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 20:02:21 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


Who has criticized the networks? Besides jps, that is. You mean to say
that a decent movie about war can be made *without* foul language?

Save those facetious questions for someone else, John. Movies without
that
language were made at a point in history when the country was still
living a
fairy tale existence. But, they can still be historically accurate in
their
own way.


So you feel that when we lived in a time of greater respect, and
consideration for other people, and had better manners, that was
living a "fairy tale" existence?

There is no need to be crude, rude, and abusive. If you can't get your
point across without having to resort to the lowest common
denominator, then I would suggest that you are what you watch.

Dave

It's not nothing to do with "greater respect". In the 1950s and earlier,
most war movies presented a squeaky clean image of what war and the armed
forces were like. Even the most brutal of them are not as explicit as newer
ones like "Deer Hunter" or "Full Metal Jacket".

My dad flew a TBF Avenger (torpedo bomber) in the pacific. After a
successful mission and returning to his carrier, he'd get a handshake from
his CO. Afterward, he had to deal with a half dozen guys who thought it was
a kick to beat up the Jew-boys. He'd been a pretty decent boxer in high
school. His CO suggested that he might not notice if some of the half dozen
ended up too black & blue to walk straight for a few days. That's how the
problem got straightened out.

You don't see details like that in old movies. You *do* see it in movies
about Vietnam - major friction within groups who are supposed to be on the
same side. So yeah - this country saw fairy-tale war movies at a certain
point in history.