A Few Words About A few words about...™ Tora Tora Tora -- in Blu-ray (1 Viewer)

[Rick Thompson]

In the Hollywood vs. History statements, it would be well to keep in mind that film-makers are trying to create a cohesive narrative that will entertain the audience and also make money. Even with a commitment to being historically accurate -- which Tora! Tora! Tora! had and Pearl Harbor did not -- choices are made.
Things are left out, others are changed, still others combined or made up. The end quote in Tora! is made up to give the film an ending. It was, however, a statement that Adm. Yamamoto would have totally agreed with; historical fact is that when he heard the statement of war wasn't delivered until after the attack began, he was incensed and believed the American people would be bent on total revenge against Japan.
Putting that statement, or something like it, in a scene labeled "two months later" or some such would have pretty much destroyed its impact. As done in the film, it's powerful.
Facts are messy; they don't happen in proper dramatic form. There's a reason that playwrights and movie makers say, "God writes lousy theater."

 

[JNagarya]

Read the thread: I'm not the first to speak to the issue of US "stupidity" portrayed in "Tora! Tora! Tora!". In fact, it was the estemmed Mr. Harris who raised the issue. But "gawd" forbid anyone else dare pick up on that theme (even though others than I have as well).
And I qualified it: complacency, and arrogance.
Question: are participants in this thread required to be "US can do know wrong" jingoists? Or does truth still trump self-congratulation?

 

[JNagarya]

This is your first post in this forum. I hope your next post will have something to do with movies and/or home theatre.

The blu-ray of "Tora! Tora! Tora!" is superb.

 

[JNagarya]

Political conversation prohibited?
I oppose gag orders, so I'm out of here.

 

[Mike Frezon]

Joseph:

While it is true that political discussion is prohibited on the HTF, there is leeway given in the context of discussions that take place with regards to film/TV shows/etc.

From the HTF rulebook (you'll find a link in my signature):

4. No politics or religion. We do not permit the discussion of politics or religion at HTF. However, there is a narrow exception to this rule. If the subject matter of a movie or television show includes politics and/or religion, then they may be discussed insofar as they pertain to that specific movie or television show. We stress, however, that such discussions are carefully monitored and will be moderated if it appears that any participant is using this narrow exception to introduce a broader political or religious discussion than is warranted by the movie or television show under discussion. Also, anyone who has not seen a particular movie or television show is disqualified from discussing its political and/or religious content under this rule.

So, no--the following is not true:

Question: are participants in this thread required to be "US can do know wrong" jingoists?

But, it is good for all members to know that we are closely following this (and all other threads) to be sure discussions do not veer too far off course in terms of political or religious discussions.

With all that said, I hope you'll stick around and engage in the discussion (within house rules, of course) and give us your opinions on movies.

 

[Robert Harris]

Originally Posted by JNagarya /t/316847/a-few-words-about-tora-tora-tora-in-blu-ray/60#post_3942392
Read the thread: I'm not the first to speak to the issue of US "stupidity" portrayed in "Tora! Tora! Tora!". In fact, it was the estemmed Mr. Harris who raised the issue. But "gawd" forbid anyone else dare pick up on that theme (even though others than I have as well).
And I qualified it: complacency, and arrogance.
Question: are participants in this thread required to be "US can do know wrong" jingoists? Or does truth still trump self-congratulation?

My point was that the way that the U.S. military was portrayed made them appear to be not terribly intelligent, even if history and facts may tend toward accuracy. In certain ways, and it's extremely unfortunate that the attack on Pearl Harbor in TTT almost makes things at the outset appear comical, and I'm certain that was not the intent.

RAH

 

[TravisR]

Political conversation prohibited?
I oppose gag orders, so I'm out of here.

I've found that it's done to keep things friendly between all participants here rather than a desire to censor people. Plus, there's more suitable places to talk politics or religion or any other topic that will likely result in some people being pissed off than a message board dedicated to home theater topics.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

I've found that it's done to keep things friendly between all participants here rather than a desire to censor people. Plus, there's more suitable place to talk politics or religion than a message board dedicated to home theater topics.

Thank you.

There is no attempt to censor people.

You wouldn't walk into a home filled with strangers you know
nothing about (other than their first names) and start discussing
religious or political topics without knowing how it may offend
others.

The same rule of etiquette is applied here.

 

[Doctorossi]

You wouldn't walk into a home filled with strangers you know
nothing about (other than their first names) and start discussing
religious or political topics without knowing how it may offend 
others.

Only because they might have a shotgun.

 

[Ronald Epstein]

Only because they might have a shotgun

A very good point I hadn't considered.

 

[FoxyMulder]

 

[Ronald Epstein]

On the other side of the coin i would say if you want everyone to be friends, and i do think this site has that nice approach, then friends should be able to discuss anything between each other, what i like about the site is it's friendly nature compared to other sites with aggressive moderation which alienates people.

Thing is, the moment discussion veers into forbidden
territory, we know about it because members do complain.

It's a proven fact you can't just talk about anything on an
online forum without negative consequences.

 

[FoxyMulder]

Originally Posted by Ronald Epstein /t/316847/a-few-words-about-tora-tora-tora-in-blu-ray/60#post_3942434
Thing is, the moment discussion veers into forbidden
territory, we know about it because members do complain.

It's a proven fact you can't just talk about anything on an
online forum without negative consequences.

I think you are right, maybe a separate area where only certain people can discuss a subject, for example perhaps a member asks to make up a thread where like minded people can openly discuss politics or religion and only people invited can take part, those who feel they would be offended by such discussion don't have to view it because it would be invite only.

 

[Robin9]

Question: are participants in this thread required to be "US can do know wrong" jingoists? Or does truth still trump self-congratulation?

Answer: Participants in this thread are required to have an interest in movies and/or home theatre and to contribute for that reason. People who show no interest in movies but who use this thread - and this forum - merely to air their political prejudices and obsessions will not be welcomed by the majority of regular contributors.

 

[ahollis]

Originally Posted by FoxyMulder /t/316847/a-few-words-about-tora-tora-tora-in-blu-ray/60#post_3942480

I think you are right, maybe a separate area where only certain people can discuss a subject, for example perhaps a member asks to make up a thread where like minded people can openly discuss politics or religion and only people invited can take part, those who feel they would be offended by such discussion don't have to view it because it would be invite only.

But is that not what the private messages are for? You can discuss anything and invite who you want in to the conversation I have used the area to converse with many a member, with subjects that would not be interesting to other members or may offend some members.

 

[David_B_K]

Political conversation prohibited?
I oppose gag orders, so I'm out of here.

I for one would not visit the forum if remarks like those of JNagara became the norm. He's now made 6 posts, and none were substantive comments about Tora, Tora, Tora. Seriously, he registers with the forum just to make political or nationalistic comments that are dripping with hostility? I cannot see how posts like that can be good for the forum. There are tons of forums on the internet. There are many history forums, religious forums and political forums of every stripe. If I want to discuss and learn about such subjects, I go there. They may discuss home theater on those forums; but not to the degree of information and experience one finds here. So, I go to other forums for other things; Home Theater Forum for Home Theater.
This is the best Home Theater forum on the internet. I hope it stays as a home theater forum and leaves political rants to other sites.

 

[JNagarya]

My ccomment was in context.
But as said, I oppose gag orders as being juvenile cowardice.
But let's discuss books instead -- but only their titles and bindings.

 

[JNagarya]

The website is on the Internet, which is a public space. It is not the equivalent of one's private home. It is the equivalent of setting up a soap box on a street corner where those listening are not prohibited speaking.
Those are points of law, not of "politics".

 

[JNagarya]

My point was in response to yours, which invited response. Yours is held to be in context, mine is held not to be. "Experts" are held to a different standard.
I asked that my account be deleted. That has been ignored.

 

[JNagarya]

I didn't know you were elected to speak for everyone else.
And your pejoratives -- "prejudices" and "obsessions" -- are out of line and insults to intelligence. The point I made was consistent with the theme of military "stupidity," first raised by "expert" Mr. Harris.
And the point I made about more recent military "stupidity" is based in fact and law, not "politics" and political partisanship.
Interesting how you're about defending "friendliness" in such a hostile mannter, and premising that upon a so-far unsupported claim to represent the majority.
_____
"Common sense is much too common." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson.
"Common sense is none too common." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson.
"Common sense" is an appeal to an invisible mob which may not exist; and if it does exist has not been polled for its opinion/s. To invoke it is not only intellectually dishonest and vacuous, and also to give the appearance that one's view is shared by that mob, it is also to engage in the "appeal to authority" fallacy.