oliver stone on castro

ALB: Now, when you were talking to the prisoners who tried to hijack a plane, one told you he was a fisherman, and you said, "Why then didn't you take a boat?" Why did you ask that?

OS: Well, it seemed to me that if they were familiar with boats, it seemed to be the best way.

ALB: Did you know that in Cuba there are virtually no boats? The boats that are used for fishermen are tightly controlled. One of the more surreal aspects of Cuba, being the largest island in the Caribbean, is that there are no visible boats.

OS: I see.

My personal moment of OS idiocy revelation -- when I actually watched _Wild Palms_ when it was broadcast (when William Gibson steals the show with a brief cameo, it is a sign) and there was a bit where on TV Stone himself is interviewed (I think by Harry Shearer!) because it turns out that newly released records showed that all the allegations in JFK were justified oh ho ho. DIE YOU WISH FULFILLMENT FUCKER.

I heard a great story from a friend of mine about how Stone ended up partying long into the night with said friend b/c Stone was on a long cocaine binge and Stone started hanging out with him b/c Stone thought that the two were old old friends when in fact my friend had never seen him before. Oh, and my friend was only in his early 20's when this happened.

Anyway, yeah, I'll defend him as a filmmaker until the apocalypse, but if you honestly need to dig in on his political sense after 12+ years since JFK, you should look down more often, because the nag is not only dead, it's really just dried bones at this point.

i always thought he was a little politically naive, but i didn't guess at the depths of his ignorance and naivete if this interview is to be believed.

--plutarch

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/americas/12/30/stone.colombia/index.html

imagine being held hostage and finding out that oliver stone is coming to rescue you. would you despair more or less.

ok wau s1ocki

is Oliver going to pick up a kilo while he's down there?

of drugs!!!

"I have no illusions about the FARC, but it looks like they are a peasant army fighting for a decent living," Stone said in an interview with The Associated Press at his hotel bar. "And here, if you fight, you fight to win."

What an asshole.

Tonight's Larry King interview with Oliver Stone, Jessie Ventura, and some anonymous Republican congressmen provided enough lols and facepalming to last me through the rest of June. It performs the rare hat trick of embarrassing people from every political walk of life.

oliver stone: overrated director, f---g moron.

f---g???

Aren't these sorts of comments a serious shooting yourself in the foot career-wise for anyone that works in the Hollywood film industry? You think you'd probably not want to insult the better half of the industry in which you work.

yes. i tend to write "f--g" rather than "fucking." old habits.

and yes, stone's comments are unwise, career-wise. but -- setting that aside -- they're offensive, insensitive, and stupid.

Don't get me wrong, that's something I don't take with a grain of salt.

I just think the kind of irony here is that if there is any amalgamation of Jewish media power it exists in Hollywood (and I'm not stating that as a castigation). I guess amid the Mel Gibson fallout, I just find the whole scenario of people working in an industry full of people they apparently resent, and alienating themselves from that.

those comments are clumsily expressed, and most are at least partly true

how's that

no fuck it... bullshit is always bundled with shit that's "partly true"

he's a moron

well, drugs made him dumber than he should be.

Hollywood is not "the media". The entertainment industry is not "the media".

Most of what he said was actually worth saying. He should have left out the "domination of the media" type stuff, but the rest of it is worth saying.

Ugh, sorry. Terribly written, redundant post that I didn't mean to hit send on.

how much of what you said was actually worth saying?

The famed Hollywood director of such films as Platoon and JFK, also said that while "Hitler was a Frankenstein," there was also a "Dr Frankenstein."

"German industrialists, the Americans and the British. He had a lot of support," Stone told the Sunday Times, adding that "Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than the Jewish people, 25 or 30 [million killed]."

Referring to the alleged influence of the powerful Jewish lobby on U.S. foreign policy, Stone said that Israel had distorted "United States foreign policy for years," adding he felt U.S. policy toward Iran was "horrible."

"Iran isn't necessarily the good guy," Stone said, insisting that Americans did not "know the full story."

Stone's comments to the Sunday times echo previous remarks by the Hollywood director, regarding what he perceives as the distorted view of figures such as Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin in U.S. media.

Earlier this year, Stone, speaking at the at the Television Critics Association's semi-annual press tour in Pasadena said that "Hitler is an easy scapegoat throughout history and it's been used cheaply."

"He's the product of a series of actions. It's cause and effect ... People in America don't know the connection between World War I and World War II, Stone said adding that through his documentary work he has been able to "walk in Stalin's shoes and Hitler's shoes to understand their point of view."

"We're going to educate our minds and liberalize them and broaden them. We want to move beyond opinions ... Go into the funding of the Nazi party. How many American corporations were involved, from GM through IBM. Hitler is just a man who could have easily been assassinated," Stone said.

I'm not sure I entirely buy his slant but I think he's making a fairly nuanced point, and he's right that it's almost impossible to look at the Nazis or Hitler in a complex way because of the cartoonish vilification of them. Which is not to say they shouldn't be vilified, and I don't think Stone is saying that either.

stone is the classic example of "why do you have to be on my side?"

throughout history, there are many people who are unfairly villified in a cartoonish, absurd way.

adolph hitler isn't one of them.

The point isn't fairness. It's not a matter of "Hitler wasn't as bad as you make him out to be", and that's where I think Stone is being misunderstood; it's more about what brought the Nazis to power besides just the charisma of one evil man.

"German industrialists, the Americans and the British. He had a lot of support," Stone told the Sunday Times, adding that "Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than the Jewish people, 25 or 30 [million killed]."

Referring to the alleged influence of the powerful Jewish lobby on U.S. foreign policy, Stone said that Israel had distorted "United States foreign policy for years," adding he felt U.S. policy toward Iran was "horrible."

all of this is true

saying that the nazis had a constituency and int'l support: yeah ok, true

"walk in Stalin's shoes and Hitler's shoes to understand their point of view.": wait what

ya who the eff is denying that hitler had help ffs

ya who the eff is denying that hitler had help ffs

the Bush family!

does oliver stone really think that everyone really thinks hitler was some kind of bond villain super genius and not, like, a real political leader

His next task, the leviathan Secret History of America, tackles received versions of events in the last century, an extension, perhaps, of what he did in 1991’s JFK, when he suggested that the president’s assassination was in fact a high-level conspiracy. The 10-part documentary will address Stalin and Hitler “in context”, he says. “Hitler was a Frankenstein but there was also a Dr Frankenstein. German industrialists, the Americans and the British. He had a lot of support.”

He also seeks to put his atrocities in proportion: “Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than the Jewish people, 25 or 30m.”

Why such a focus on the Holocaust then? “The Jewish domination of the media,” he says. “There’s a major lobby in the United States. They are hard workers. They stay on top of every comment, the most powerful lobby in Washington. Israel has f***** up United States foreign policy for years.”

^^^the actual bit from the paywalled Sunday Times

I think his invocation of “The Jewish domination of the media” has more to do with the US MSM mostly bullhorning the AIPAC-to-Likud slice of the spectrum on Israeli issues, more than the leadership/owners of media companies.

A minor point, but Stone's dad was Jewish, yes?

i'm sure some of his best friends are too

He also seeks to put his atrocities in proportion: “Hitler did far more damage to the Russians than the Jewish people, 25 or 30m.”

this is a pretty odious sentiment to me

yeah, also dumb

a dumb sentiment

a dumb, odious sentiment

still love wall street tho

I wonder if there are any jews on wall street

and if so, I wonder what his views on these jews are

it's such a stupid comment. also, stone has a point that germany's loss in ww1, the impotence of the weimar republic, plus economic devestation, led to the rise of hitler and the NSDAP. but it seems to me that stone is suggesting that these conditions should moderate history's view of hitler and ww2-era germany. if that's what he means, it's moronic and monstorous. if he's just observing the conditions that led to hitler's ascent, he's making a completely unremarkable point.

I wonder if there are any jews on wall street

no. we are all busy running the media.

it's a full-time gig.

totally reporting him to the Elders of Zion

his career is over.

mel gibson's, too.

wait has oliver stone played the jesus movie card yet

Reporting him to the elders would be against protocol(s). Go through the proper channels!

you're right. first, the manischewitz-waterboarding. then, we report him.

wait when do we get to eat his babies

also would like a pound of flesh

y'know, for my kids!

No babies will be eaten til Passover, and even then, with some discretion. It's the 21st century, after all!

wait, Ollie's dad worked on Wall Street, of course he was Jewish.

Admittedly 'this mass murder is not as big as that one' is a loser's game, but I'd save "odious" for the actual killing.

a huge chunk of the millions of russian dead were in the red army. as a comparison, it's not even wrong, as the scientists say

yeah i guess odious is strong but goole points out its a bizarre comparison to even begin to make? i mean im as offended by the idiocy of the attempt as i am by the bean-counting impulse

how did "odious" get to be the worst adjective ever

i think "odious" is appropriate for that sentiment, tbh

seems like maybe the real damage hitler did... was to our adjectives

so many victims.

still love wall street

max, do you often ask the stars "Who am I?"