ARLINGTON ROAD: Movie Review

P

Paul Revere

New member
My recommendation of this film would be based solely on its underlying curious propaganda message rather than its quality. It will be interesting to see what other patriotic Americans think of this film.

Not to ruin the plot for you, I will just summarize what I saw. The movie, starring Jeff Bridges and Tim Robbins, begins in an almost dreamlike state, drawing you in emotionally by showing a young boy staggering down his street with his hand blown off (from a fireworks related accident). Bridges plays a university professor teaching a class on terrorism who finds the boy and takes him to the hospital. Tim Robbins and Joan Cusak play the kid's parents who live across the street.

There are many twists and turns which bring the characters together as neighbors, but it's mostly their children that cause the bonding. Bridges suspects Robbins is hiding his true identity, and begins investigating his past. Bridges then learns that Robbins was involved in a federal building bombing when he 16, and has since changed his name.

Bridges' deceased wife was an FBI agent killed in the line of duty in an incident that almost mirrored Ruby Ridge.

All the while Robbins (the all American neighbor) and his mysterious friends are planning something big, which Bridges believes to be another federal building bombing. Bridges becomes entrenched in this investigation in which he includes his wife's FBI partner, to find out what these guys are up to. Bridges then discovers that another federal building bombing in which there was alledgedly a lone bomber, who was killed in the bombing, was in fact tied to the same "right wing extremist" group as Robbins. These "anti-government" terrorists were in fact conspiring to damage more federal property, and Bridges felt compelled to stop them when his son was kidnapped by Robbins (for bait).

And eventhough there were some pointedly positive things said along the way, the ending will surprise you, leaving you with a couple of conclusions. This is what I believe the underlying messages were...1) That one should not believe the "lone bomber" story, since it is inevitable that a larger "conspiracy" actually existed, 2) That the "government" couldn't possibly be involved in such a conspiracy, 3) If such a conspiracy existed, it has to be the "right wing extremist's anti government groups" who are perpetuating this domestic terrorism, and 4) Even your next door neighbor could be one of the potentially lethal domestic terrorists that we keep hearing about.

I think the movie's concluding message would be to tell the American people that their true threat today is not by foreign terrorists or our own government, but these, "right wing extremists". Again, focusing the American public's onto a perceived problem, while the true conspirators work feverishly to destroy our Bill of Rights.
 
Seems to me that most of the violence in the past 30 years or so has come from LEFT wing extremists. Ted Kazynski(sp) was no right winger. Animal rights extremists, eco terrorist groups etc.

The biggest threat to this country is coming from the left. Although hollowood always portrays the right as the real problem.

One thing that really scares me is the Green movement in Germany. The Germans always seem to be in the forefront of extreemist movements and this is the latest one. They bear close watching.
 
Nothing to add but my by-line...

------------------
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2
 
I was surprised and pleased by the plot twist at the end. The plot has more than it's share of logical inconsistencies, but that is pretty much to be expected in a run-of-the-mill thriller. I fully expected that the movie would be thinly-veiled pro-government propaganda, but it wasn't. The movie was very fair in portraying the anti-government folks as being very angry and having nowhere to take their legitimate grievances rather than as cartoonish villains. The FBI was portrayed at best as well-intentioned dorks and at worst as callous murderers. As a thriller, it was mediocre, but since I went into the theatre expecting to be pissed off by a propaganda film, I was surprised and pleased.
 
Just a little bit of trivia, The release for Arlington Road was held off for a year here in the states. Anyone care to guess why?

Can you say political pressure?

msn.com actually has these words in their
review of the movie, quote
"Audience: Males aged 18 to 45, including right-wing extremists checking up on their media image."
 
Well, I'll look forward to seeing the film, and making up my own mind.

I do find it interesting that if one believes in freedom, liberty, the principles America was founded upon, personal responsibility, etc., that you are often classified as a 'right wing extremist'. Especially if one believes in the right to keep and bear arms. Even if you don't believe in coercion.

That, of course, proceeds to being lumped in with racists, fascists, white supremicists and so on. Fascinating.

[This message has been edited by Jeff Thomas (edited July 13, 1999).]
 
It is the objective of the socialist leftists to portray their enemies (the conservative right), using all of their owned media influence, as the true bad guys (and threat to peace) in our society today. And if you think about it for a few minutes, they have succeeded. Anytime the words; militia, right wing extremist, guns, or gunowner, to name a few, are used, they portray in the eyes of sheeple across this great nation, a negative undertone.

What is most fascinating is their use of the term, "anti-government". What this would infer to the ignorant masses is someone who does not believe in the Constitution or the republican form of government that was intended by our founding fathers. This couldn't be farther from the truth. It is this movement ("anti-government") which should be called, "pro-Constitutionally based government movement". It is the monster that has grown out of this nation's capital that offends and disgusts these Americans. It is the complete disregard for the rule of law, the Constitution, and the founding principles of our government's functions, and the blantant intrusiveness that causes people to be against what's going on. The "anti-government movement" is really in fact the, "anti-establishment movement". And the leftists do everything to hush these patriotic Americans at every turn. It is the leftists who are indeed the enemy of our freedom and the true threat to our Constitutionally based government. History has shown us that it is the leftists who have threatened humanity and inflicted genocide upon populations.

This film does nothing to clear up these definitions for the viewers. In fact it perpetuates the lies from the left. I personally liked the irony regarding the FBI raid that mirrored Ruby Ridge. It was completely unnecessary and unjustified, and citizens defended their property from armed thugs who failed to identify themselves. I also liked what Tim Robbins said about bad politicians.
 
I think the movie was designed to scare the hell out of people who are susceptable to that stuff. The message I saw was that there is entirely too much freedom here in this country. Why, even your next door neighbor could be a right wing terrorist spreading death and destruction across the land. That the government is powerless to stop it so it promotes the "lone terrorist with a grudge" explanation to keep the people from getting too worked up and demanding that "something be done".

I think that this movie plants the seed that we need more control over the people to keep everyone "safe". Conspiracies are everywhere and the government just has to do something about it.

The bit about the "Ruby Ridge" like incident was a bone to the right wingers to show that there is "balance" in the story.

I have to admit though, I didn't expect that ending. The movie was well done, with a good story. I just ain't buying it.

------------------
Dennis

"That no free man should ever be disarmed".
wrightknife@ixpres.com
 
I would not spend a damn penny on this Hoolyweird crap. The last real movie I saw was Red Dawn and the producer was John Milius, a patriot in a den of vipers(Hollyweird) Hollyweird is basically a propaganda mill for the leftist ,communist crowd who never saw a Christian or patriot in general that they did not want to demonize. We know who the demons are and we gunowners and patriots in general should be stocking up and getting the word out about the coming martial law with foreign troops in our streets. Hollyweird is conditioning the sheeple to get ready for troops in the streets to protect them against the big, bad right wingers . The right wingers, a term which means nothing, are probably every one on this forum! The irony of the term antigovernment is this: We the people are the government,not the other way around. So we the people cannot be against ourselves! That is impossible! It is the ursurpers that all people should be against. The ursurpers of the corporate state have replaced the Constitutional republic that the Founders created. Hollyweird will not make movies of this subject. Why give the B------s a nickel of your hard earned money(even if it is phony fiat money)?
 
I watched the movie last night. I don't think they were right wing extremist. I think they were just extremists. THe movie didn't really go into particular believes of the terrorists, except they were angry ar gov't and that happends on both sides.
I enjoyed the movie cuz it was real, the technology was present day, not outragous super hi tech stuff that only the gov't had and has happened and could probably will happen again.
No real slant pro or con on about guns. just that they will raise FBI flags.

------------------
It ain't mah fault. did I do dat?
 
tim robbin's isn't he that bc friend who along with his side kick susan sarandon are 2 of the most gun hating death penatly foes there are?
"if we could prevent one violent movie from being made. wouldn't it be worth it?"
 
Jimc - You're absolutely right about Robbins and Sarandan. They are two peas in a leftist pod. Anti-gun, anti-death penalty, bleeding heart, socialist elitists with an agenda. I refuse to pay any money to see a film by either of these "artists."

------------------
Safe shooting - PKAY
 
On the pro side, the movie had a detailed portrayal of some "fringe" guy who had obtained 100+ guns, lived in the woods with friends & family and was paranoid about any strangers entering the property. Four feds approach, an alarm is raised, and seven people (three civilians, four feds) are killed. Turns out the guy had inherited a bunch of money and was in the process of starting a normal gun shop. His concern was of someone coming to steal the guns.

That subplot was arguably pro-gun: just because someone fits a "profile" doesn't mean that they're a crazed loonie ready to wreak havoc on society.

On a larger scale, the movie strongly impresses that there may be more to these "lone bomber" stories that is reported, a fact which is politically neutral.

If someone draws an anti-gun/anti-right-wing conclusion from Arlington Road, it's probably more because they already held such bigoted views.
 
That was one movie that you come out thinking "What the hell was that supposed to mean?". Very interesting plot twist at the end, and they did a good job of hiding it until the last moment.

Jeff Bridges' character, as a college professor who teaches American history, was also teaching a course on "Domestic terrorism". The pseudo-Ruby Ridge and OK City images were presented as part of a classroom lecture. I found it interesting that his character would be of the very strong opinion that the government is "creating" terrorists where no such thing exists. The government screws up, people get hurt or killed, and someone is labeled a "terrorist".

Despite the above message, the movie nevertheless leads the viewer to consider snooping on your neighbors. I guess the message is sort of "The government makes mistakes, but it's still better than these radical people who want to maim and kill others (a/k/a the "Patriots". Recall the line about how "some people believe the Revolutionary War is still being fought"...).

So, be good sheep and inform on your friends, neighbors and acquaintances.
 
I had mixed feelings about the message of the movie, liked the twist at the end though.
As far as supporting the lefty actors, went to a multiplex theater and snuck into this one for free after seeing the movie I paid to see. Made it worth what I paid...zip!!
 
Theft Of Service, Idaho02...? tsk, tsk. It's one thing to pay for one and go to another, but you actually stole from the theater, there. Can't say I hold with that.

Too bad about Sarandon and Robins-- they're good actors, really. Sarandon is one of the more attractive 50+ women you'll see. Agree that they're both idiots where guns are concerned. However, have seen several flicks they've been in now that show both sides pretty fairly. Example: _Dead Man Walking_. Sure, I disagreed with Sarandon's character. But so would most people. I still empathised some with the character, though. (Empathy doesn't mean "agreed with." It just means that you could see how they could feel that way. It means you could possibly put yourself in their shoes.)

I try not to give $ to my foes. But I can sometimes respect other aspects of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top