Jump to content

What do you think about war films?


Markito.

Recommended Posts

Is it a propaganda to recruit young people?

Is it a propaganda about gun ?

Just an entertainment?

For me, gun is synonymous of violence, for others people is protection, I watched a lot of films of war during my life, but some situations is too diferent.

At least, some films lately show about post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), that's a good point to warn about the damage of wars inside a person.

 

I can give an example, if someday I have a gun for ''protection'', something happens with my family or son, I dont will use the gun, I will call for emergency.

What's most important save the life him/her or desire of vengeance?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I mean there's likely films of both kinds: ones that unrealistically romanticize it and ones that depict the cruel reality.


An interesting example of the former kind is the movie 300 and how it caricatured ancient Iranians (context: Iran was described being part of the "axis of evil" by the then-president of the US, where the film was made): https://www.quora.com/Is-300-considered-to-be-an-anti-Iranian-movie

 

I'm reminded of a recent visit to a large mining museum, where in its arts section was featured the artistic portrayal of miners: a dichotomy between romanticized ultra-muscular heroes that help run the nation – and malnourished, sickly, coal-stained workers. In the same vein, war movies have different approaches to them.

 

Edited by S3lvah

uE3dJ81.png

iA0XAqV.png

Fools / CU / DI / FF / Elu Warlord – TT Captain – TKO / TB / Desc / Tempy Member

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Violence and protection sometimes go hand in hand. 

 

Here are my states laws on this:

 

§ 14-51.3. Use of force in defense of person; relief from criminal or civil liability. (a) A person is justified in using force, except deadly force, against another when and to the extent that the person reasonably believes that the conduct is necessary to defend himself or herself or another against the other's imminent use of unlawful force. However, a person is justified in the use of deadly force and does not have a duty to retreat in any place he or she has the lawful right to be if either of the following applies: (1) He or she reasonably believes that such force is necessary to prevent imminent death or great bodily harm to himself or herself or another. (2) Under the circumstances permitted pursuant to G.S. 14-51.2. (b) A person who uses force as permitted by this section is justified in using such force and is immune from civil or criminal liability for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman who was lawfully acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer or bail bondsman identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman in the lawful performance of his or her official duties. (2011-268, s. 1.)

 

§ 14-51.2. Home, workplace, and motor vehicle protection; presumption of fear of death or serious bodily harm. (a) The following definitions apply in this section: (1) Home. – A building or conveyance of any kind, to include its curtilage, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, and is designed as a temporary or permanent residence. (2) Law enforcement officer. – Any person employed or appointed as a full-time, part-time, or auxiliary law enforcement officer, correctional officer, probation officer, post-release supervision officer, or parole officer. (3) Motor vehicle. – As defined in G.S. 20-4.01(23). (4) Workplace. – A building or conveyance of any kind, whether the building or conveyance is temporary or permanent, mobile or immobile, which has a roof over it, including a tent, which is being used for commercial purposes. (b) The lawful occupant of a home, motor vehicle, or workplace is presumed to have held a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm to himself or herself or another when using defensive force that is intended or likely to cause death or serious bodily harm to another if both of the following apply: (1) The person against whom the defensive force was used was in the process of unlawfully and forcefully entering, or had unlawfully and forcibly entered, a home, motor vehicle, or workplace, or if that person had removed or was attempting to remove another against that person's will from the home, motor vehicle, or workplace. (2) The person who uses defensive force knew or had reason to believe that an unlawful and forcible entry or unlawful and forcible act was occurring or had occurred. (c) The presumption set forth in subsection (b) of this section shall be rebuttable and does not apply in any of the following circumstances: (1) The person against whom the defensive force is used has the right to be in or is a lawful resident of the home, motor vehicle, or workplace, such as an owner or lessee, and there is not an injunction for protection from domestic violence or a written pretrial supervision order of no contact against that person. (2) The person sought to be removed from the home, motor vehicle, or workplace is a child or grandchild or is otherwise in the lawful custody or under the lawful guardianship of the person against whom the defensive force is used. (3) The person who uses defensive force is engaged in, attempting to escape from, or using the home, motor vehicle, or workplace to further any criminal offense that involves the use or threat of physical force or violence against any individual. (4) The person against whom the defensive force is used is a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman who enters or attempts to enter a home, motor vehicle, or workplace in the lawful performance of his or her official duties, and the officer or bail bondsman identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person entering or attempting to enter was a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman in the lawful performance of his or her official duties. G.S. 14-51.2 Page 2 (5) The person against whom the defensive force is used (i) has discontinued all efforts to unlawfully and forcefully enter the home, motor vehicle, or workplace and (ii) has exited the home, motor vehicle, or workplace. (d) A person who unlawfully and by force enters or attempts to enter a person's home, motor vehicle, or workplace is presumed to be doing so with the intent to commit an unlawful act involving force or violence. (e) A person who uses force as permitted by this section is justified in using such force and is immune from civil or criminal liability for the use of such force, unless the person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman who was lawfully acting in the performance of his or her official duties and the officer or bail bondsman identified himself or herself in accordance with any applicable law or the person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer or bail bondsman in the lawful performance of his or her official duties. (f) A lawful occupant within his or her home, motor vehicle, or workplace does not have a duty to retreat from an intruder in the circumstances described in this section. (g) This section is not intended to repeal or limit any other defense that may exist under the common law. (2011-268, s. 1.)

KLxCxWm.gif

Legendz | The Titans | Tempest

[Templar Jan & Feb 2023]

Spoiler

 

eRp6JoP.gif

CVEebzD.gif

RwjQ9pi.gif

JlotNFB.gif

SG9UgzJ.gif

image.png.6b35b2c7b85eae4569a1efc860175b7a.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel like it's half propaganda just because there are people who is born in a military family and regular people like us who enjoys war films but would never dear to step into the battlefield unlike those Military brats. But for sure with exposure of war films to many younger audience, it triggers them into joining the military..

spacer.png
RIVxF9m.gif
Demonic Empire | Tempest 

Spoiler


image.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh but yeah war movies are the shit. Good one's, not hollywooded up nonsense

KLxCxWm.gif

Legendz | The Titans | Tempest

[Templar Jan & Feb 2023]

Spoiler

 

eRp6JoP.gif

CVEebzD.gif

RwjQ9pi.gif

JlotNFB.gif

SG9UgzJ.gif

image.png.6b35b2c7b85eae4569a1efc860175b7a.png

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Markito. said:

What's most important save the life him/her or desire of vengeance?

Bruh you can't really risk your relative's life so you don't cross your self-centered interest and then say the society animalize humans 

 

Being able to protect the lives of your own despite your personal beliefs is what makes you human. Ngl, calling the police anyway could be seen as the same thing, you're just worried you're not the one using the gun to do the job. That'd make you not only "desire vengeance" but also make you a coward

7jmTOjL.png     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i love war films, i love guns i love to shoot them, to clean them and look at it. I love my CZ p07

 

and yes i live in a country with no army and of peace, but i like having a gun at home to protect my family just in case 

s7pG1Vv.png.359242d156235cbd59b4f50ad28e6cd3.png

Sn0NtFU.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
  • Create New...