Crosswords1 min ago
Should The Superb Film Zulu Be Banned?
187 Answers
Answers
Jackie@
13:14 Tue 26th Jun 2018
Hooray we are still at this then ! anything good ?
have anyone said that Othello should be banned because it is beastly to black people or er Moors
and the Duchess of Malfi is off the menu because it is not nice to women ( doesnt she have her eyes poked out on stage?) and portrays modern Amalfi as a not-very-nice-place-to-live ?
Righto!
have anyone said that Othello should be banned because it is beastly to black people or er Moors
and the Duchess of Malfi is off the menu because it is not nice to women ( doesnt she have her eyes poked out on stage?) and portrays modern Amalfi as a not-very-nice-place-to-live ?
Righto!
sp, //you've got the wrong end of the stick.//
I don’t think so. As I read it the author of the thread you’ve linked to wasn’t referring to the comfort or otherwise of audiences, but rather to what he perceives to be an incentive to black people to continue voicing their resentment of history, expecting the rest of the world to do I know not what. You used the word ‘uncomfortable’ and I imagine that’s because you think movies such as ’12 Years a Slave’ should have the effect of making the rest of us feel uncomfortable – and guilty – about the past. I don’t.
PeterPedant, I’m flattered that you choose to copy and paste my posts so frequently. However, even though rather than use my name, you consistently refer to me as ‘someone’, we have to stop meeting like this. People will notice. ;o)
I don’t think so. As I read it the author of the thread you’ve linked to wasn’t referring to the comfort or otherwise of audiences, but rather to what he perceives to be an incentive to black people to continue voicing their resentment of history, expecting the rest of the world to do I know not what. You used the word ‘uncomfortable’ and I imagine that’s because you think movies such as ’12 Years a Slave’ should have the effect of making the rest of us feel uncomfortable – and guilty – about the past. I don’t.
PeterPedant, I’m flattered that you choose to copy and paste my posts so frequently. However, even though rather than use my name, you consistently refer to me as ‘someone’, we have to stop meeting like this. People will notice. ;o)
No naomi24, you’ve inferred incorrectly.
My point is that there are people who are unhappy at films that depict periods of history they don’t want shown.
There is no difference between not wanting ‘12 Years A Slave’ made and not wanting Zulu shown.
These events happened (both films are based on true events).
People today shouldn’t be shielded from depictions of the past, especially if the film in question is a commercial and critical, Oscar-winning success.
My point is that there are people who are unhappy at films that depict periods of history they don’t want shown.
There is no difference between not wanting ‘12 Years A Slave’ made and not wanting Zulu shown.
These events happened (both films are based on true events).
People today shouldn’t be shielded from depictions of the past, especially if the film in question is a commercial and critical, Oscar-winning success.
But...I’m still sure this is a publicity stunt.
What doesn’t ring true is that the organisers received this letter, and then told the press about it.
That literally doesn’t make sense.
Surely the people protesting would have written an open letter to the local paper?
What is in it for the organisers to publicise the letter?
I call shenanigans.
What doesn’t ring true is that the organisers received this letter, and then told the press about it.
That literally doesn’t make sense.
Surely the people protesting would have written an open letter to the local paper?
What is in it for the organisers to publicise the letter?
I call shenanigans.
naomi24
Their reasons are irrelevant. The end result is the same as those who complained about 12 Years A Slave.
They don’t want OTHERS to see it, because they have a problem with it.
That’s the essence of all people who want art banned. They think they have the right to dictate to the rest of us.
That’s IF the 28 protesters actually exist.
Do we know the name of the person who wrote the letter?
The first thing that the journalist who wrote this story should’ve done would be to contact the letter writer to get some more detail on the campaign.
The way this has been handled doesn’t make any sense.
I think it’s a publicity stunt.
And a good one at that.
Their reasons are irrelevant. The end result is the same as those who complained about 12 Years A Slave.
They don’t want OTHERS to see it, because they have a problem with it.
That’s the essence of all people who want art banned. They think they have the right to dictate to the rest of us.
That’s IF the 28 protesters actually exist.
Do we know the name of the person who wrote the letter?
The first thing that the journalist who wrote this story should’ve done would be to contact the letter writer to get some more detail on the campaign.
The way this has been handled doesn’t make any sense.
I think it’s a publicity stunt.
And a good one at that.
This story is cobblers.
Look:
http://
http://
https:/
All ctrl-C / ctrl-V versions of this story end with a bold faced advert for the event:
//Come and see this rare screening of Zulu on Armed Forces Day, Saturday 30th June, help raise funds for SSAFA.
“Make up your own mind whether this is a timeless tale of courage, honour and pride or a product of yesteryear that has no currency and should be banned.//
This is manufactured outrage. I would lay nasty money that the 28 protesters actually work for the cinema.
Brilliant.
Look:
http://
http://
https:/
All ctrl-C / ctrl-V versions of this story end with a bold faced advert for the event:
//Come and see this rare screening of Zulu on Armed Forces Day, Saturday 30th June, help raise funds for SSAFA.
“Make up your own mind whether this is a timeless tale of courage, honour and pride or a product of yesteryear that has no currency and should be banned.//
This is manufactured outrage. I would lay nasty money that the 28 protesters actually work for the cinema.
Brilliant.
jim - I can't agree that the film is brilliant, or that 28 people are not worth bothering about.
It's a good film, but a long way from deserving the adjective 'brilliant'.
The validity of a protest should never be based purely on numbers - 28 is less valid than 280 and so on.
Rosa Parkes was just one - but her protest was undoubtedly valid.
It's a good film, but a long way from deserving the adjective 'brilliant'.
The validity of a protest should never be based purely on numbers - 28 is less valid than 280 and so on.
Rosa Parkes was just one - but her protest was undoubtedly valid.
Twice I have said that I thought this was an attempt to drum up publicity to get people to pay to see a dated film for a good cause....and now it seems that others are waking up to the fact that this might be the case.....
and for once I don't agree with Jim.....its not a brilliant film...I don't think it ever was....and the rightness/wrongness/downright silliness of a cause cannot and should not be measured by numbers....
and for once I don't agree with Jim.....its not a brilliant film...I don't think it ever was....and the rightness/wrongness/downright silliness of a cause cannot and should not be measured by numbers....
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.