This movie seems a bit problematic to me. I think Garfield is a terrific actor and the (true) story is amazing, but the fact is that Gibson is a fundamentalist Christian who has made a film about a Seventh Day Adventist. Now to be fair, religious groups who refused to bear arms played a very important part in World War 2. It was mainly Mormons who took part in The Minnesota Starvation Experiment. And SDAs also allowed themselves to be used in medical experiments and also worked mainly in medical units. The problem here is Mel Bloody Gibson! I’m actually slightly mystified as to why Gibson has chosen this particular story.(apart from it being brilliant) He’s not a SDA. He was raised a Sedevacantist traditionalist Catholic. In fact S D Adventists advocate religious tolerance. Is this a story that’s actually about gun control? I find that hard to believe too. So what gives here? I suppose I’ll have to watch the movie to find out.
I’ve read about Desmond Dross…and his actual story is pretty amazing.
My worry is that Mad Mel doesn’t have a very good track record of sticking to the facts. Is he going to bloat this up….when he doesn’t really need too…?
(not that Hollywood in general lets the facts get in the way of a good story)
When it comes to historical drama, I think Ron Howard strikes the right balance.
Mad Mel is just crazy.
I agree with the comments about Gibson not making movies with much more concern about facts that Lucas had about quality in EP1-3.
Unlike other religions, SDA, Mennonites, &l, Mormans have always been fine with killing, as well as being in the US Army. In fact it was a major way the cult was founded. So any Morman who tried to play the Conscientious objector card doesn’t have a leg to stand on. That is however, another conversation.
This movie seems a bit problematic to me. I think Garfield is a terrific actor and the (true) story is amazing, but the fact is that Gibson is a fundamentalist Christian who has made a film about a Seventh Day Adventist. Now to be fair, religious groups who refused to bear arms played a very important part in World War 2. It was mainly Mormons who took part in The Minnesota Starvation Experiment. And SDAs also allowed themselves to be used in medical experiments and also worked mainly in medical units. The problem here is Mel Bloody Gibson! I’m actually slightly mystified as to why Gibson has chosen this particular story.(apart from it being brilliant) He’s not a SDA. He was raised a Sedevacantist traditionalist Catholic. In fact S D Adventists advocate religious tolerance. Is this a story that’s actually about gun control? I find that hard to believe too. So what gives here? I suppose I’ll have to watch the movie to find out.
I’ve read about Desmond Dross…and his actual story is pretty amazing.
My worry is that Mad Mel doesn’t have a very good track record of sticking to the facts. Is he going to bloat this up….when he doesn’t really need too…?
(not that Hollywood in general lets the facts get in the way of a good story)
When it comes to historical drama, I think Ron Howard strikes the right balance.
Mad Mel is just crazy.
ugh….Doss…
I agree with the comments about Gibson not making movies with much more concern about facts that Lucas had about quality in EP1-3.
Unlike other religions, SDA, Mennonites, &l, Mormans have always been fine with killing, as well as being in the US Army. In fact it was a major way the cult was founded. So any Morman who tried to play the Conscientious objector card doesn’t have a leg to stand on. That is however, another conversation.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desmond_Doss