list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around Stop-Loss on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/Stop_Loss/296248/default.aspx Title: Stop-Loss
Year: 2008
Director: Kimberly Peirce
Plot: After serving his tour of duty in Iraq, a young American soldier who is ordered to return to the front lines as part of the military's controversial stop-loss opts instead to go AWOL in a thought-provoking military drama directed by Kimberly Peirce. Sgt. Brandon King (Ryan Philippe) is a decorated Iraq War veteran who once served his country with pride. After his tour of duty comes to an end, King returns to his Texas hometown and attempts to pick up where he once left off with a little help from his family, as well as long-time best friend and war buddy Steve Shriver (Channing Tatum). But just as Brandon, Steve, and the rest of their war buddies begin to setle back into civilian life, Uncle Sam comes calling on them once again. Suddenly ordered back into active duty, the disillusioned war veteran begins to question not just his ties to family and his longtime friendships, but his capacity for love and sense of honor as well. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 27
Number of Lists: 7
Number of blog posts: 10
Number of discussion threads: 1
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 07:12:57 GMTStop-Loss2008Kimberly PeirceAfter serving his tour of duty in Iraq, a young American soldier who is ordered to return to the front lines as part of the military's controversial stop-loss opts instead to go AWOL in a thought-provoking military drama directed by <a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___271477/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Kimberly Peirce</a>. Sgt. Brandon King (Ryan Philippe) is a decorated Iraq War veteran who once served his country with pride. After his tour of duty comes to an end, King returns to his Texas hometown and attempts to pick up where he once left off with a little help from his family, as well as long-time best friend and war buddy Steve Shriver (<a href="http://www.spout.com/players/P___419915/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Channing Tatum</a>). But just as Brandon, Steve, and the rest of their war buddies begin to setle back into civilian life, Uncle Sam comes calling on them once again. Suddenly ordered back into active duty, the disillusioned war veteran begins to question not just his ties to family and his longtime friendships, but his capacity for love and sense of honor as well. ~ Jason Buchanan, All Movie Guide27Tag Target (>10)71013http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/s296248.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/Stop_Loss/296248/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/tenenbaums/archive/2008/10/8/36031.aspx Post By: Tenenbaums
Post To: Tenenbaums Blog
Post Date: 10/8/2008 12:09:05 PM
Body: I've recently watched a string of bad movies.They're not bad as in they never should have been made. It's more disappointing than that. They're bad because a good idea and often talent was wasted on poor execution.I should have known better than to throw away my time on them. They were all released in the dumping ground casually referred to as the Spring Season. Few decent U.S. films debut during this time. It's home for stupid family fare featuring Martin Lawrence (College Road Trip and Wild Hogs) and now random offerings from this year's unexpected double-dipper, Dennis Quaid. 2007 was a rare exception to the rule with Zodiac, Grindhouse, and the widely liked but personally loathed 300. Typically, it's an overall mess.The films that I ignored post-Oscar rush and pre-Summer Blockbuster are now on DVD and at the library. Since now I don't have to pay to see them, the slightest bit of interest that I suppressed in March and April by staying home now looks at me every day at work and has, in several cases, followed me home.The results have not been pretty.Smart People looked like another potential Wonder Boys. It was not. Thomas Hayden Church's performance was the only bright spot, but Quaid, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Ellen Page were wasted. The trailer for Vantage Point looked great. The actual thing was far from it. The movie makes you wonder what kind of dirt the director had on Sigourney Weaver, William Hurt, Forrest Whitaker, Matthew Fox, and, yes, Quaid.Then there's Stop-Loss, which holds a special place in my heart. It's the first movie that I've watched alone and couldn't get through.*I won't see just any movie. Pass the Grey Poupon. Since there are so many new releases in addition to the monstrous back-log of DVDs and videos, I can only see so many and the ones I choose to see must meet a certain criteria to even be considered. So, if I'm watching a film, it's certifiably special.Of the films I see, I like 95% of them. Of the sour 5%, I'll watch them to their completion because, up until now, my hope in them has been rewarded by enough imagination and intrigue on their part to keep me away from the Eject button. When the credits roll, I may not have liked what I've seen overall (see above titles), but, as was expected when the film became personally desirable, it had its moments. I wouldn't recommend these films, but they're not total disasters.Stop-Loss, however, is a class-5 hurricane hitting Cape Cod. It's hard to imagine a more heavy-handed approach to the Iraq war, and that's saying a lot. Give credit to co-writer/director Kimberly Peirce (who guided Hilary Swank to her first Oscar in Boys Don't Cry) for bluntly stating the opinions of returning (and subsequently departing) soldiers that aren't always voiced. These thoughts are genuine and I agree with them. They are also the same thing that Mr. Bullhorn is spouting in front of the White House.The ridiculously wooden dialogue and Ryan Phillippe at his unexpected worst (did they tape him when he was working out his Texas accent in rehearsals?) combined with a hokey plot to ruin a great concept. The hardships of this generation of soldiers' home lives had yet to be explored in a major film, but Stop-Loss does no justice to our military. The film adds to the pile of recent failed attempts to translate the current conflict to the screen, and had me skipping scenes by the half-hour mark. Unfortunately (or fortunately for my free time), the beginning of each new DVD chapter began with the same dumb talk or events that plagued the film's start. When the credits showed up, I was glad to be done. It's doubly disappointing that I was forced to skim through the rest because the opening Iraq combat scenes were done so well. Peirce does a fantastic job of depicting the mammoth tension of Baghdad roadblocks and of putting the audience amidst the squad as they fall under attack. She should have stayed in the Middle East and taken most of the Spring releases with her.But it's not all a pile of poo.Drillbit Taylor was awful on most fronts, but there was enough charm and general Owen-Wilsonness to elicit a positive feeling. Most surprising was In Bruges, a.k.a. Colin Farrell's Coming Out Party. Witty dialogue: check. Great acting: check. Expert direction and cinematography: check, check. Everything I could want from a film is found in this sleepy Belgium town. Plus, Mr. Consistency (Ralph Fiennes) is there in a role that rivals his Voldemort, Tooth Fairy (Red Dragon), and Amon Goeth (Schindler's List) for Most Menacing. The guy can play bad and play it very well.But these two bright spots (one, really) don't excuse the regularity of stinkers during this time of the year. Spring should be left for Oscar-nominated films that were given little or no release to be screened at the national level. Often, excellent foreign films will trickle in during this time, and they're welcome, too. Studios are cheating audiences and themselves by putting out sub-par material Spring after Spring. Filmgoers deserve more. Spring is an opportunity for catching up on the under-appreciated foreign, indie, documentary, and short films. We should continually be celebrating the best, not being fed soggy leftovers. Anything less is not good enough.Are you with me?*My fiancee Sarah embraces the attitude that you don't have to finish a book if you don't like it or don't want to. I agree with that, but since I read about 1/10 as many titles as she does in a year, the books I choose meet an even harder criteria than the films I see. If you look at my GoodReads ratings, you won't find anything I read outside of school that I didn't at least like (and, more than likely, loved). She also, according to the frequency in which she conks out on the sofa, believes that you don't have to finish a film. With Stop-Loss, despite my rigorous initial screening process, perhaps I've come to agree with that, too. It's not that I didn't believe you could drop a film; I'd just never been pushed to the point of losing faith in a film ever getting better. Still, since I continue to keep up my guard, I don't expect to repeat the Stop-Loss massacre very often.
]]>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 16:09:05 GMTTenenbaumsTenenbaums Blog10/8/2008 12:09:05 PMI've recently watched a string of bad movies.They're not bad as in they never should have been made. It's more disappointing than that. They're bad because a good idea and often talent was wasted on poor execution.I should have known better than to throw away my time on them. They were all released in the dumping ground casually referred to as the Spring Season. Few decent U.S. films debut during this time. It's home for stupid family fare featuring Martin Lawrence (College Road Trip and Wild Hogs) and now random offerings from this year's unexpected double-dipper, Dennis Quaid. 2007 was a rare exception to the rule with Zodiac, Grindhouse, and the widely liked but personally loathed 300. Typically, it's an overall mess.The films that I ignored post-Oscar rush and pre-Summer Blockbuster are now on DVD and at the library. Since now I don't have to pay to see them, the slightest bit of interest that I suppressed in March and April by staying home now looks at me every day at work and has, in several cases, followed me home.The results have not been pretty.Smart People looked like another potential Wonder Boys. It was not. Thomas Hayden Church's performance was the only bright spot, but Quaid, Sarah Jessica Parker, and Ellen Page were wasted. The trailer for Vantage Point looked great. The actual thing was far from it. The movie makes you wonder what kind of dirt the director had on Sigourney Weaver, William Hurt, Forrest Whitaker, Matthew Fox, and, yes, Quaid.Then there's Stop-Loss, which holds a special place in my heart. It's the first movie that I've watched alone and couldn't get through.*I won't see just any movie. Pass the Grey Poupon. Since there are so many new releases in addition to the monstrous back-log of DVDs and videos, I can only see so many and the ones I choose to see must meet a certain criteria to even be considered. So, if I'm watching a film, it's certifiably special.Of the films I see, I like 95% of them. Of the sour 5%, I'll watch them to their completion because, up until now, my hope in them has been rewarded by enough imagination and intrigue on their part to keep me away from the Eject button. When the credits roll, I may not have liked what I've seen overall (see above titles), but, as was expected when the film became personally desirable, it had its moments. I wouldn't recommend these films, but they're not total disasters.Stop-Loss, however, is a class-5 hurricane hitting Cape Cod. It's hard to imagine a more heavy-handed approach to the Iraq war, and that's saying a lot. Give credit to co-writer/director Kimberly Peirce (who guided Hilary Swank to her first Oscar in Boys Don't Cry) for bluntly stating the opinions of returning (and subsequently departing) soldiers that aren't always voiced. These thoughts are genuine and I agree with them. They are also the same thing that Mr. Bullhorn is spouting in front of the White House.The ridiculously wooden dialogue and Ryan Phillippe at his unexpected worst (did they tape him when he was working out his Texas accent in rehearsals?) combined with a hokey plot to ruin a great concept. The hardships of this generation of soldiers' home lives had yet to be explored in a major film, but Stop-Loss does no justice to our military. The film adds to the pile of recent failed attempts to translate the current conflict to the screen, and had me skipping scenes by the half-hour mark. Unfortunately (or fortunately for my free time), the beginning of each new DVD chapter began with the same dumb talk or events that plagued the film's start. When the credits showed up, I was glad to be done. It's doubly disappointing that I was forced to skim through the rest because the opening Iraq combat scenes were done so well. Peirce does a fantastic job of depicting the mammoth tension of Baghdad roadblocks and of putting the audience amidst the squad as they fall under attack. She should have stayed in the Middle East and taken most of the Spring releases with her.But it's not all a pile of poo.Drillbit Taylor was awful on most fronts, but there was enough charm and general Owen-Wilsonness to elicit a positive feeling. Most surprising was In Bruges, a.k.a. Colin Farrell's Coming Out Party. Witty dialogue: check. Great acting: check. Expert direction and cinematography: check, check. Everything I could want from a film is found in this sleepy Belgium town. Plus, Mr. Consistency (Ralph Fiennes) is there in a role that rivals his Voldemort, Tooth Fairy (Red Dragon), and Amon Goeth (Schindler's List) for Most Menacing. The guy can play bad and play it very well.But these two bright spots (one, really) don't excuse the regularity of stinkers during this time of the year. Spring should be left for Oscar-nominated films that were given little or no release to be screened at the national level. Often, excellent foreign films will trickle in during this time, and they're welcome, too. Studios are cheating audiences and themselves by putting out sub-par material Spring after Spring. Filmgoers deserve more. Spring is an opportunity for catching up on the under-appreciated foreign, indie, documentary, and short films. We should continually be celebrating the best, not being fed soggy leftovers. Anything less is not good enough.Are you with me?*My fiancee Sarah embraces the attitude that you don't have to finish a book if you don't like it or don't want to. I agree with that, but since I read about 1/10 as many titles as she does in a year, the books I choose meet an even harder criteria than the films I see. If you look at my GoodReads ratings, you won't find anything I read outside of school that I didn't at least like (and, more than likely, loved). She also, according to the frequency in which she conks out on the sofa, believes that you don't have to finish a film. With Stop-Loss, despite my rigorous initial screening process, perhaps I've come to agree with that, too. It's not that I didn't believe you could drop a film; I'd just never been pushed to the point of losing faith in a film ever getting better. Still, since I continue to keep up my guard, I don't expect to repeat the Stop-Loss massacre very often. http://www.spout.com/blogs/warmovieblog/archive/2008/7/11/32433.aspx Post By: WarMovieBlog
Post To: WarMovieBlog Blog
Post Date: 7/11/2008 12:01:35 PM
Body: Stop-Loss (2008) IMDB When you go into a movie expecting less, and wind up getting way more, that's usually a good thing (I need to start watching every film this way!) and Stop-Loss is no exception.Honestly, from what I'd heard I was expecting a Redacted-style bash-fest. Thank God that's not what I found. Stop-Loss is a film that, at its core, could have been made in 1991, 1969, 1952, or 1945. Its a story about the veteran coming home, and the trials he faces as he returns a changed man, to a world that he vaguely remembers, but no longer quite fits in the same way. Alright, I'll concede that there is another aspect to the story of Stop-Loss, but we'll get to that later, as it really isn't that important to getting the most from this picture. After errantly leading his squad into an ambush in Iraq (even I was like, "Don't drive into the alley! It's a trap! Duh!) and losing a few of his men, Staff Sergeant Brandon King (Ryan Phillippe) returns home to his west-Texas hometown with his soldiers-in-arms and friends Steve (Channing Tatum), Tommy (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and "Eyeball" (Rob Brown.) He and his buds are hailed as heroes, a role which they really don't seem to fit.The first night back it's painfully clear that these guys returned different from when they left. From Steve's drunken flashback, digging a foxhole in his girlfriend Michelle's (Abbie Cornish) front yard, to Tommy, who drinks himself into a stupor from which he'll never return. Both of these guys wind up on the outs with their girlfriends, which only complicates matters.Still there is Brandon, who remains the most level-headed among them. He's done, you see. His tour is up, and he's ready to return to life on the ranch. But Uncle Sam has other ideas, and the drama begins. He's "a victim" of the military's "Stop Loss" policy, which basically means that they've got him and there's nothing he can do about it. Furious that he'll have to return to Iraq and face more of the same, he blows up at his CO, and makes a run for it as he's led to the brig.He and Steve's Ex, Michelle decide to make the road trip to Washington, to find the Senator who pinned the Bronze Star on his chest. But now that he's AWOL, and a fugitive, nobody seems to want to help him, and after a few episodes and mis-adventures, he eventually returns home....I'm going to go out on a limb and say that none of the above really matters. This isn't about the road-trip to DC. It's about returning from war, and dealing with the evil and terrible things you've had to deal with, and be a part of. From Steve's decision to continue his military career and start sniper school, to Tommy's eventual suicide, and Brandon's running from his situation.... That's what its about. That's what you should take away from the movie. All the political crap that starts the picture, the whole "stop-loss policy sucks" thing, and the closing frames where the film is basically ruined by a couple of title frames whining about said policy.Speaking of the end of the picture. Maybe I missed something, but I just don't understand it. (Spoiler Warning!) We really needed to get some insight into why King decided to turn himself in and resign his fate to the Army. The "thousand-yard stare" while he's sitting on the bus, with even more fresh recruits from his hometown really doesn't tell us anything. Did he just decide that he couldn't run forever? That he couldn't leave his family? After all of that, he just says, "Er, yeah, you're right, my bad" and goes back to "the shit?" I just don't get it. Maybe its supposed to be up to us to figure out why he did it, if so it just didn't work for me.Stop-Loss is a well-acted film. Performances are good all around, for the most part. Nobody inparticular comes to mind as standing out as bad, anyway. I also have to drop kudos to the writers and director, for not letting Brandon and Michelle get romantically involved. I thought for sure that they'd head down that road and make a distracting complication to the story. Thanks. (Actually this point is touched on during the "deleted scenes" commentary on the DVD.) Watch Stop-Loss for the drama of the story, in that respect its a very good film, but only if you ignore the "premise" of it all. Stop-Loss (2008) on Spout.com Originally posted on:War Movie Reviews and News
]]>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:01:35 GMTWarMovieBlogWarMovieBlog Blog7/11/2008 12:01:35 PMStop-Loss (2008) IMDB When you go into a movie expecting less, and wind up getting way more, that's usually a good thing (I need to start watching every film this way!) and Stop-Loss is no exception.Honestly, from what I'd heard I was expecting a Redacted-style bash-fest. Thank God that's not what I found. Stop-Loss is a film that, at its core, could have been made in 1991, 1969, 1952, or 1945. Its a story about the veteran coming home, and the trials he faces as he returns a changed man, to a world that he vaguely remembers, but no longer quite fits in the same way. Alright, I'll concede that there is another aspect to the story of Stop-Loss, but we'll get to that later, as it really isn't that important to getting the most from this picture. After errantly leading his squad into an ambush in Iraq (even I was like, "Don't drive into the alley! It's a trap! Duh!) and losing a few of his men, Staff Sergeant Brandon King (Ryan Phillippe) returns home to his west-Texas hometown with his soldiers-in-arms and friends Steve (Channing Tatum), Tommy (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and "Eyeball" (Rob Brown.) He and his buds are hailed as heroes, a role which they really don't seem to fit.The first night back it's painfully clear that these guys returned different from when they left. From Steve's drunken flashback, digging a foxhole in his girlfriend Michelle's (Abbie Cornish) front yard, to Tommy, who drinks himself into a stupor from which he'll never return. Both of these guys wind up on the outs with their girlfriends, which only complicates matters.Still there is Brandon, who remains the most level-headed among them. He's done, you see. His tour is up, and he's ready to return to life on the ranch. But Uncle Sam has other ideas, and the drama begins. He's "a victim" of the military's "Stop Loss" policy, which basically means that they've got him and there's nothing he can do about it. Furious that he'll have to return to Iraq and face more of the same, he blows up at his CO, and makes a run for it as he's led to the brig.He and Steve's Ex, Michelle decide to make the road trip to Washington, to find the Senator who pinned the Bronze Star on his chest. But now that he's AWOL, and a fugitive, nobody seems to want to help him, and after a few episodes and mis-adventures, he eventually returns home....I'm going to go out on a limb and say that none of the above really matters. This isn't about the road-trip to DC. It's about returning from war, and dealing with the evil and terrible things you've had to deal with, and be a part of. From Steve's decision to continue his military career and start sniper school, to Tommy's eventual suicide, and Brandon's running from his situation.... That's what its about. That's what you should take away from the movie. All the political crap that starts the picture, the whole "stop-loss policy sucks" thing, and the closing frames where the film is basically ruined by a couple of title frames whining about said policy.Speaking of the end of the picture. Maybe I missed something, but I just don't understand it. (Spoiler Warning!) We really needed to get some insight into why King decided to turn himself in and resign his fate to the Army. The "thousand-yard stare" while he's sitting on the bus, with even more fresh recruits from his hometown really doesn't tell us anything. Did he just decide that he couldn't run forever? That he couldn't leave his family? After all of that, he just says, "Er, yeah, you're right, my bad" and goes back to "the shit?" I just don't get it. Maybe its supposed to be up to us to figure out why he did it, if so it just didn't work for me.Stop-Loss is a well-acted film. Performances are good all around, for the most part. Nobody inparticular comes to mind as standing out as bad, anyway. I also have to drop kudos to the writers and director, for not letting Brandon and Michelle get romantically involved. I thought for sure that they'd head down that road and make a distracting complication to the story. Thanks. (Actually this point is touched on during the "deleted scenes" commentary on the DVD.) Watch Stop-Loss for the drama of the story, in that respect its a very good film, but only if you ignore the "premise" of it all. Stop-Loss (2008) on Spout.com Originally posted on:War Movie Reviews and News http://www.spout.com/groups/Filmgaming/Re_Recasting_THE_BREAKFAST_CLUB_1985/563/28132/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: indieabby88
Post To: Filmgaming
Post Date: 5/3/2008 1:12:10 AM
Body: Alright, let's take a stab at this thing, shall we? Channing Tatum (Stop-Loss) - Andrew Clark Lou Taylor Pucci (Thumbsucker) - Brian Ralph Johnson Charlie Hunnam (Green Street Hooligans)- John Bender Kate Bosworth (21) -Claire Standish Nora Zehetner (Brick) -Allison Reynolds Vincent D'Onofrio -Richard Vernon Anthony Michael Hall- Carl
]]>Sat, 03 May 2008 05:12:10 GMTindieabby88Filmgaming5/3/2008 1:12:10 AMAlright, let's take a stab at this thing, shall we? Channing Tatum (Stop-Loss) - Andrew Clark Lou Taylor Pucci (Thumbsucker) - Brian Ralph Johnson Charlie Hunnam (Green Street Hooligans)- John Bender Kate Bosworth (21) -Claire Standish Nora Zehetner (Brick) -Allison Reynolds Vincent D'Onofrio -Richard Vernon Anthony Michael Hall- Carl http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/4/17/27402.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 4/17/2008 12:01:10 PM
Body: Filmmaker and former Marine JD Johannes is selling a compilation DVD called Outside the Wire on his website. The DVD contains three short documentaries that Johannes shot himself whilst embedded with troops in Iraq (a trailer is embedded above). On a blog on the site, Johannes positions his “pro-victory, pro-troop” films in opposition to docs like Body of War and The Ground Truth. “Actually going to Iraq, living down in the dirt with the grunts and making documentaries about what is happening on the ground appears to be a rather novel concept, but I think the best way to understand Iraq is to see it from 5′10″ off the ground,” he writes. Fair enough. But wait––there’s a gimmick! Johannes is trying to sell 2,900 copies of his DVD in six weeks, in order to match the domestic box office gross of Brian DePalma’s fall flop Redacted. I haven’t seen Johannes’ movies, and I’m certainly not opposed to as many views of the war as possible getting out into the market place. In fact, I’ve argued previously that the reason why films like Lions For Lambs and Stop-Loss are so disappointing creatively and commercially is due to a homogeneity of perspective––the anti-war choir really doesn’t need to be pandered to anymore. But what is a little illogical to me is that Johannes has chosen Redacted as the target to beat. Redacted, a film widely panned by critics and pundits from all points on the political spectrum. Redacted, whose box office gross was potentially diluted by its day-and-date release on VOD and DVD. Redacted, instead of an actual documentary, such as Iraq in Fragments (also shot independently, by a cameraman/director, on the streets of Iraq) or Taxi to the Dark Side or The War Tapes (which, to my mind, is as honest a documentary about troops on the ground in Iraq as is conceivable, being that it was shot by the troops themselves), all of which grossed many times more than Redacted’s pitiful $65k domestic. Isn’t this setting the bar a bit low? I don’t argue that grossing $65k through direct DVD sales would be a victory for the usual independent filmmaker, but Johannes has higher aspirations. “My thesis is this: If it can be demonstrated that a pro-troop, pro-victory documentary can succeed in the market place by beating the domestic box office gross of an anti-war film like Redacted the money loving side of Hollywood will back a pro-troop movie.” I wish him luck in his endeavors (after about three weeks, he’s 34% of the way to his goal, according to the “Beat Hollywood!” graph on the sidebar of his site). I just don’t see how “beating” Redacted––a film no one in Hollywood or elsewhere was impressed with––will make much of an impression. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth
]]>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:01:10 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog4/17/2008 12:01:10 PM Filmmaker and former Marine JD Johannes is selling a compilation DVD called Outside the Wire on his website. The DVD contains three short documentaries that Johannes shot himself whilst embedded with troops in Iraq (a trailer is embedded above). On a blog on the site, Johannes positions his “pro-victory, pro-troop” films in opposition to docs like Body of War and The Ground Truth. “Actually going to Iraq, living down in the dirt with the grunts and making documentaries about what is happening on the ground appears to be a rather novel concept, but I think the best way to understand Iraq is to see it from 5′10″ off the ground,” he writes. Fair enough. But wait––there’s a gimmick! Johannes is trying to sell 2,900 copies of his DVD in six weeks, in order to match the domestic box office gross of Brian DePalma’s fall flop Redacted. I haven’t seen Johannes’ movies, and I’m certainly not opposed to as many views of the war as possible getting out into the market place. In fact, I’ve argued previously that the reason why films like Lions For Lambs and Stop-Loss are so disappointing creatively and commercially is due to a homogeneity of perspective––the anti-war choir really doesn’t need to be pandered to anymore. But what is a little illogical to me is that Johannes has chosen Redacted as the target to beat. Redacted, a film widely panned by critics and pundits from all points on the political spectrum. Redacted, whose box office gross was potentially diluted by its day-and-date release on VOD and DVD. Redacted, instead of an actual documentary, such as Iraq in Fragments (also shot independently, by a cameraman/director, on the streets of Iraq) or Taxi to the Dark Side or The War Tapes (which, to my mind, is as honest a documentary about troops on the ground in Iraq as is conceivable, being that it was shot by the troops themselves), all of which grossed many times more than Redacted’s pitiful $65k domestic. Isn’t this setting the bar a bit low? I don’t argue that grossing $65k through direct DVD sales would be a victory for the usual independent filmmaker, but Johannes has higher aspirations. “My thesis is this: If it can be demonstrated that a pro-troop, pro-victory documentary can succeed in the market place by beating the domestic box office gross of an anti-war film like Redacted the money loving side of Hollywood will back a pro-troop movie.” I wish him luck in his endeavors (after about three weeks, he’s 34% of the way to his goal, according to the “Beat Hollywood!” graph on the sidebar of his site). I just don’t see how “beating” Redacted––a film no one in Hollywood or elsewhere was impressed with––will make much of an impression. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Karina Longworth http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/4/17/27401.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 4/17/2008 12:00:53 PM
Body: Filmmaker and former Marine JD Johannes is selling a compilation DVD called Outside the Wire on his website. The DVD contains three short documentaries that Johannes shot himself whilst embedded with troops in Iraq (a trailer is embedded above). On a blog on the site, Johannes positions his “pro-victory, pro-troop” films in opposition to docs like Body of War and The Ground Truth. “Actually going to Iraq, living down in the dirt with the grunts and making documentaries about what is happening on the ground appears to be a rather novel concept, but I think the best way to understand Iraq is to see it from 5′10″ off the ground,” he writes. Fair enough. But wait––there’s a gimmick! Johannes is trying to sell 2,900 copies of his DVD in six weeks, in order to match the domestic box office gross of Brian DePalma’s fall flop Redacted. I haven’t seen Johannes’ movies, and I’m certainly not opposed to as many views of the war as possible getting out into the market place. In fact, I’ve argued previously that the reason why films like Lions For Lambs and Stop-Loss are so disappointing creatively and commercially is due to a homogeneity of perspective––the anti-war choir really doesn’t need to be pandered to anymore. But what is a little illogical to me is that Johannes has chosen Redacted as the target to beat. Redacted, a film widely panned by critics and pundits from all points on the political spectrum. Redacted, whose box office gross was potentially diluted by its day-and-date release on VOD and DVD. Redacted, instead of an actual documentary, such as Iraq in Fragments (also shot independently, by a cameraman/director, on the streets of Iraq) or Taxi to the Dark Side or The War Tapes (which, to my mind, is as honest a documentary about troops on the ground in Iraq as is conceivable, being that it was shot by the troops themselves), all of which grossed many times more than Redacted’s pitiful $65k domestic. Isn’t this setting the bar a bit low? I don’t argue that grossing $65k through direct DVD sales would be a victory for the usual independent filmmaker, but Johannes has higher aspirations. “My thesis is this: If it can be demonstrated that a pro-troop, pro-victory documentary can succeed in the market place by beating the domestic box office gross of an anti-war film like Redacted the money loving side of Hollywood will back a pro-troop movie.” I wish him luck in his endeavors (after about three weeks, he’s 34% of the way to his goal, according to the “Beat Hollywood!” graph on the sidebar of his site). I just don’t see how “beating” Redacted––a film no one in Hollywood or elsewhere was impressed with––will make much of an impression. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 16:00:53 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com4/17/2008 12:00:53 PM Filmmaker and former Marine JD Johannes is selling a compilation DVD called Outside the Wire on his website. The DVD contains three short documentaries that Johannes shot himself whilst embedded with troops in Iraq (a trailer is embedded above). On a blog on the site, Johannes positions his “pro-victory, pro-troop” films in opposition to docs like Body of War and The Ground Truth. “Actually going to Iraq, living down in the dirt with the grunts and making documentaries about what is happening on the ground appears to be a rather novel concept, but I think the best way to understand Iraq is to see it from 5′10″ off the ground,” he writes. Fair enough. But wait––there’s a gimmick! Johannes is trying to sell 2,900 copies of his DVD in six weeks, in order to match the domestic box office gross of Brian DePalma’s fall flop Redacted. I haven’t seen Johannes’ movies, and I’m certainly not opposed to as many views of the war as possible getting out into the market place. In fact, I’ve argued previously that the reason why films like Lions For Lambs and Stop-Loss are so disappointing creatively and commercially is due to a homogeneity of perspective––the anti-war choir really doesn’t need to be pandered to anymore. But what is a little illogical to me is that Johannes has chosen Redacted as the target to beat. Redacted, a film widely panned by critics and pundits from all points on the political spectrum. Redacted, whose box office gross was potentially diluted by its day-and-date release on VOD and DVD. Redacted, instead of an actual documentary, such as Iraq in Fragments (also shot independently, by a cameraman/director, on the streets of Iraq) or Taxi to the Dark Side or The War Tapes (which, to my mind, is as honest a documentary about troops on the ground in Iraq as is conceivable, being that it was shot by the troops themselves), all of which grossed many times more than Redacted’s pitiful $65k domestic. Isn’t this setting the bar a bit low? I don’t argue that grossing $65k through direct DVD sales would be a victory for the usual independent filmmaker, but Johannes has higher aspirations. “My thesis is this: If it can be demonstrated that a pro-troop, pro-victory documentary can succeed in the market place by beating the domestic box office gross of an anti-war film like Redacted the money loving side of Hollywood will back a pro-troop movie.” I wish him luck in his endeavors (after about three weeks, he’s 34% of the way to his goal, according to the “Beat Hollywood!” graph on the sidebar of his site). I just don’t see how “beating” Redacted––a film no one in Hollywood or elsewhere was impressed with––will make much of an impression. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/4/4/26952.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 4/4/2008 10:00:42 AM
Body: Iraq fatigue: the conventional wisdom settled on in the last year that nobody wants to go to a movie theater for an Iraq war movie (most recently: Stop-Loss). Is it a new phenomenon or are all movies questioning war during wartime doomed to financial failure? The new Wholphin quarterly DVD magazine is out. It’s probably the best curated source for short films outside a major festival and we give it the attention its due on FilmCouch. FilmCouch 64 (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store and an episode will download each Friday) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 14:00:42 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com4/4/2008 10:00:42 AM Iraq fatigue: the conventional wisdom settled on in the last year that nobody wants to go to a movie theater for an Iraq war movie (most recently: Stop-Loss). Is it a new phenomenon or are all movies questioning war during wartime doomed to financial failure? The new Wholphin quarterly DVD magazine is out. It’s probably the best curated source for short films outside a major festival and we give it the attention its due on FilmCouch. FilmCouch 64 (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store and an episode will download each Friday) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/paul/archive/2008/4/4/26951.aspx Post By: paul
Post To: paul on spout.com
Post Date: 4/4/2008 10:00:30 AM
Body: Iraq fatigue: the conventional wisdom settled on in the last year that nobody wants to go to a movie theater for an Iraq war movie (most recently: Stop-Loss). Is it a new phenomenon or are all movies questioning war during wartime doomed to financial failure? The new Wholphin quarterly DVD magazine is out. It’s probably the best curated source for short films outside a major festival and we give it the attention its due on FilmCouch. FilmCouch 64 (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store and an episode will download each Friday) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Paul
]]>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 14:00:30 GMTpaulpaul on spout.com4/4/2008 10:00:30 AM Iraq fatigue: the conventional wisdom settled on in the last year that nobody wants to go to a movie theater for an Iraq war movie (most recently: Stop-Loss). Is it a new phenomenon or are all movies questioning war during wartime doomed to financial failure? The new Wholphin quarterly DVD magazine is out. It’s probably the best curated source for short films outside a major festival and we give it the attention its due on FilmCouch. FilmCouch 64 (Subscribe to FilmCouch–Spout’s weekly movie podcast–in the iTunes store and an episode will download each Friday) Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » Paul http://www.spout.com/blogs/minjoe/archive/2008/4/3/26939.aspx Post By: minjoe
Post To: minjoe Blog
Post Date: 4/3/2008 8:21:37 PM
Body: Did I really want to go see Stop-Loss? No.Do I see too many movies, was bored, and therefore had no other movies currently available for me to see? Yes.Anyone who happened to stumble upon a trailer for the film Stop-Loss could probably give you the idea of what the movie was going to be about. Part of me wondered whether or not they would deviate, in any way, from the trailers message of the war in Iraq being wrong and the United States Stop-Loss program being evil. As I expected, the film veered very little from the path of shoving the idea that the war in Iraq is wrong and being handled poorly down the audiences throat. To be fair, the film was well shot, had some fairly consistent and well thought out characters, and an ending that made you think. However, the film will be simply catalouged as "another anti-war" picture because of its inability to grow beyond that subtext. There were many opportunities for the film to examine, more in-depth, the effect the war has on a soldiers mind, on his family life, etc. Unfortunately, the plot revolves around the main character going AWOL and essentially running away from all those issues which could have made for an infinitely more interesting and poingant movie.In the end, Stop-Loss just left me wanting so much more. It wasn't a terrible movie, but it wasn't very great either. I haven't felt so much indifference toward a movie in a long time. If you're a big advocate for or against the war, you may want to take a look at Stop-Loss to see what it has to say--but don't expect to hear anything new or original.
]]>Fri, 04 Apr 2008 00:21:37 GMTminjoeminjoe Blog4/3/2008 8:21:37 PMDid I really want to go see Stop-Loss? No.Do I see too many movies, was bored, and therefore had no other movies currently available for me to see? Yes.Anyone who happened to stumble upon a trailer for the film Stop-Loss could probably give you the idea of what the movie was going to be about. Part of me wondered whether or not they would deviate, in any way, from the trailers message of the war in Iraq being wrong and the United States Stop-Loss program being evil. As I expected, the film veered very little from the path of shoving the idea that the war in Iraq is wrong and being handled poorly down the audiences throat. To be fair, the film was well shot, had some fairly consistent and well thought out characters, and an ending that made you think. However, the film will be simply catalouged as &quot;another anti-war&quot; picture because of its inability to grow beyond that subtext. There were many opportunities for the film to examine, more in-depth, the effect the war has on a soldiers mind, on his family life, etc. Unfortunately, the plot revolves around the main character going AWOL and essentially running away from all those issues which could have made for an infinitely more interesting and poingant movie.In the end, Stop-Loss just left me wanting so much more. It wasn&#39;t a terrible movie, but it wasn&#39;t very great either. I haven&#39;t felt so much indifference toward a movie in a long time. If you&#39;re a big advocate for or against the war, you may want to take a look at Stop-Loss to see what it has to say--but don&#39;t expect to hear anything new or original. http://www.spout.com/blogs/karina/archive/2008/3/25/26600.aspx Post By: Karina
Post To: Karina on SpoutBlog
Post Date: 3/25/2008 5:01:25 PM
Body: There seems to be a lot of eye-rolling over Kimberley Pierce’s Stop-Loss, as if there’s some kind of collective embarrassment over the fact that this highly-stylized policy polemic––literally, an MTV Film––is seeing the light of day so many months after last fall’s D.O.A. Iraq movie wave. Mainstream reviews have so far been mixed, and blog chatter has (predictably) skewed towards suspicious, but there’s one potential audience sector that’s apparently not ready to write it off yet: actual veterans. In a post at Eat the Press on military media, Rachel Sklar points to this post at VetVoice.com, where members of the community weigh in on the Stop-Loss trailer. Of the 17 comments on the post as of this writing, most express some interest in seeing the film, even if it’s just to justify the commenter’s previously held assumptions that Hollywood is ideologically out of touch and, in terms of military accuracy, either willfully ignorant or just plain incompetent. As ThisDudesArmy puts it, “Me and some buddies are going opening day. Planning on laughing at all the inaccurate hoopla. Just from one promo picture I saw, there were two guys in a parade with CIBs, but no combat patch. Yikes!” Another commenter argues that even if a movie like this gets details wrong, he/she will still pay money to see it because “If the mainstream media is going to continue to keep Iraq off the public’s radar screen, then culture has to pick up the ball.” But accuracy might be a double-edged sword. As clejeune puts it in a comment titled “Would love to see it, but won’t”: “Movies like this are either too hokey, and I pick them apart, or they are way too real, and I’m up all night.” It’s a losing proposition either way. Are contemporary war films failing because we’re asking them to strike a balance––in terms of political stance, in terms of moral address, in terms of realism––that may be impossible to achieve? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » karina
]]>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:01:25 GMTKarinaKarina on SpoutBlog3/25/2008 5:01:25 PMThere seems to be a lot of eye-rolling over Kimberley Pierce’s Stop-Loss, as if there’s some kind of collective embarrassment over the fact that this highly-stylized policy polemic––literally, an MTV Film––is seeing the light of day so many months after last fall’s D.O.A. Iraq movie wave. Mainstream reviews have so far been mixed, and blog chatter has (predictably) skewed towards suspicious, but there’s one potential audience sector that’s apparently not ready to write it off yet: actual veterans. In a post at Eat the Press on military media, Rachel Sklar points to this post at VetVoice.com, where members of the community weigh in on the Stop-Loss trailer. Of the 17 comments on the post as of this writing, most express some interest in seeing the film, even if it’s just to justify the commenter’s previously held assumptions that Hollywood is ideologically out of touch and, in terms of military accuracy, either willfully ignorant or just plain incompetent. As ThisDudesArmy puts it, “Me and some buddies are going opening day. Planning on laughing at all the inaccurate hoopla. Just from one promo picture I saw, there were two guys in a parade with CIBs, but no combat patch. Yikes!” Another commenter argues that even if a movie like this gets details wrong, he/she will still pay money to see it because “If the mainstream media is going to continue to keep Iraq off the public’s radar screen, then culture has to pick up the ball.” But accuracy might be a double-edged sword. As clejeune puts it in a comment titled “Would love to see it, but won’t”: “Movies like this are either too hokey, and I pick them apart, or they are way too real, and I’m up all night.” It’s a losing proposition either way. Are contemporary war films failing because we’re asking them to strike a balance––in terms of political stance, in terms of moral address, in terms of realism––that may be impossible to achieve? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog » karina http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/3/25/26598.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 3/25/2008 5:01:15 PM
Body: There seems to be a lot of eye-rolling over Kimberley Pierce’s Stop-Loss, as if there’s some kind of collective embarrassment over the fact that this highly-stylized policy polemic––literally, an MTV Film––is seeing the light of day so many months after last fall’s D.O.A. Iraq movie wave. Mainstream reviews have so far been mixed, and blog chatter has (predictably) skewed towards suspicious, but there’s one potential audience sector that’s apparently not ready to write it off yet: actual veterans. In a post at Eat the Press on military media, Rachel Sklar points to this post at VetVoice.com, where members of the community weigh in on the Stop-Loss trailer. Of the 17 comments on the post as of this writing, most express some interest in seeing the film, even if it’s just to justify the commenter’s previously held assumptions that Hollywood is ideologically out of touch and, in terms of military accuracy, either willfully ignorant or just plain incompetent. As ThisDudesArmy puts it, “Me and some buddies are going opening day. Planning on laughing at all the inaccurate hoopla. Just from one promo picture I saw, there were two guys in a parade with CIBs, but no combat patch. Yikes!” Another commenter argues that even if a movie like this gets details wrong, he/she will still pay money to see it because “If the mainstream media is going to continue to keep Iraq off the public’s radar screen, then culture has to pick up the ball.” But accuracy might be a double-edged sword. As clejeune puts it in a comment titled “Would love to see it, but won’t”: “Movies like this are either too hokey, and I pick them apart, or they are way too real, and I’m up all night.” It’s a losing proposition either way. Are contemporary war films failing because we’re asking them to strike a balance––in terms of political stance, in terms of moral address, in terms of realism––that may be impossible to achieve? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 21:01:15 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com3/25/2008 5:01:15 PMThere seems to be a lot of eye-rolling over Kimberley Pierce’s Stop-Loss, as if there’s some kind of collective embarrassment over the fact that this highly-stylized policy polemic––literally, an MTV Film––is seeing the light of day so many months after last fall’s D.O.A. Iraq movie wave. Mainstream reviews have so far been mixed, and blog chatter has (predictably) skewed towards suspicious, but there’s one potential audience sector that’s apparently not ready to write it off yet: actual veterans. In a post at Eat the Press on military media, Rachel Sklar points to this post at VetVoice.com, where members of the community weigh in on the Stop-Loss trailer. Of the 17 comments on the post as of this writing, most express some interest in seeing the film, even if it’s just to justify the commenter’s previously held assumptions that Hollywood is ideologically out of touch and, in terms of military accuracy, either willfully ignorant or just plain incompetent. As ThisDudesArmy puts it, “Me and some buddies are going opening day. Planning on laughing at all the inaccurate hoopla. Just from one promo picture I saw, there were two guys in a parade with CIBs, but no combat patch. Yikes!” Another commenter argues that even if a movie like this gets details wrong, he/she will still pay money to see it because “If the mainstream media is going to continue to keep Iraq off the public’s radar screen, then culture has to pick up the ball.” But accuracy might be a double-edged sword. As clejeune puts it in a comment titled “Would love to see it, but won’t”: “Movies like this are either too hokey, and I pick them apart, or they are way too real, and I’m up all night.” It’s a losing proposition either way. Are contemporary war films failing because we’re asking them to strike a balance––in terms of political stance, in terms of moral address, in terms of realism––that may be impossible to achieve? Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12478

Number of people who tagged: 338

Number of times used: 1479

]]>Thu, 10 Dec 2009 06:48:35 GMT124783381479Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/family/MemberTagFilms.aspxfamily
Number of films tagged: 6288

Number of people who tagged: 226

Number of times used: 1138

]]>Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:09:21 GMT62882261138Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/friends/MemberTagFilms.aspxfriends
Number of films tagged: 157

Number of people who tagged: 36

Number of times used: 181

]]>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:50:40 GMT15736181Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/military/MemberTagFilms.aspxmilitary
Number of films tagged: 1650

Number of people who tagged: 30

Number of times used: 95

]]>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:38:51 GMT16503095Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/honor/MemberTagFilms.aspxhonor
Number of films tagged: 32

Number of people who tagged: 25

Number of times used: 40

]]>Wed, 07 Oct 2009 18:03:03 GMT322540Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/soldier/MemberTagFilms.aspxsoldier
Number of films tagged: 1749

Number of people who tagged: 18

Number of times used: 46

]]>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:51:21 GMT17491846Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/iraq/MemberTagFilms.aspxiraq
Number of films tagged: 241

Number of people who tagged: 17

Number of times used: 40

]]>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 17:18:09 GMT2411740Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/SXSW/MemberTagFilms.aspxSXSW
Number of films tagged: 213

Number of people who tagged: 14

Number of times used: 274

]]>Thu, 02 Apr 2009 02:26:40 GMT21314274Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/usa/MemberTagFilms.aspxusa
Number of films tagged: 30

Number of people who tagged: 11

Number of times used: 32

]]>Fri, 29 May 2009 16:27:26 GMT301132Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mtv/MemberTagFilms.aspxmtv
Number of films tagged: 39

Number of people who tagged: 6

Number of times used: 40

]]>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 19:52:21 GMT39640Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/disillusionment/MemberTagFilms.aspxdisillusionment
Number of films tagged: 265

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 6

]]>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:05:23 GMT26556Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/sxsw-film-festival/MemberTagFilms.aspxsxsw-film-festival
Number of films tagged: 182

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 230

]]>Thu, 24 Sep 2009 02:07:10 GMT1825230Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/veteran/MemberTagFilms.aspxveteran
Number of films tagged: 14

Number of people who tagged: 5

Number of times used: 14

]]>Wed, 20 May 2009 00:26:39 GMT14514Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/awol/MemberTagFilms.aspxawol
Number of films tagged: 4

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 5

]]>Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:14:03 GMT445Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/iraq-war/MemberTagFilms.aspxiraq-war
Number of films tagged: 11

Number of people who tagged: 4

Number of times used: 11

]]>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 20:54:47 GMT11411Tag