Why an Evil Jew in Act of Valor?
A reader in Amsterdam wrote to remonstrate with me because my positive review of the film Act of Valor ignored the evil Jew character and thus missed the film’s anti-Semitic message. This is a fair criticism: I meant to mention this scene but, having thought it through to my own satisfaction, neglected to include my thoughts in the blog.
This is a small spoiler. It turns out the Islamist plot against America that powers the movie is being financed, irony of ironies, by a Jewish guy. When I saw this reveal, my jaw dropped and my first thought was: “You have got to be kidding me!” Was the movie selling some sort of Elders of Zion scenario where the Jews financed everything, including the work of those dedicated to wiping them off the face of the earth?
On reflection (and after consulting with the mighty and also all-knowing John Nolte at Big Hollywood), I came to feel that this was not the intent of the film. Rather I thought it was a ham-handed attempt to avoid the appearance of Islamophobia and give the picture some sort of moral complexity. Often, as we know, it’s the person who is NOT bigoted who says the most awkward thing — “Boy, that black gymnast is swinging around like a monkey!” — because he hasn’t got the implied slur in his mind. I believe that to be the case here.
Still, it was unfortunate, not to say stupid, to include the scene. I’m not interested in racial “sensitivity” in art, but I can’t believe Jewish funding of Islamic terror is representative of reality any more than the occasional crime by a US soldier is representative of the military (as it is made to seem in such ugly films as In The Valley of Elah and Redaction). In a world in which the anti-semitic Tsarist forgery Protocols of the Elders of Zion can be purchased in many bookstores in the Islamic world, and where “anti Zionism” forms a respectable mask for the oldest hatred in western universities and churches, a little care in these matters would not go amiss.
So — my verdict is that this is a good action film with stirring patriotism, but the filmmakers definitely made a bad choice which could easily be misinterpreted by viewers of good will.
I’d love to hear someone involved in the film speak about this.
***
Cross-Posted from Klavan on the Culture
More from Andrew Klavan at PJ Lifestyle:
Time for a Moratorium on Whining ‘I’m Offended!’
Soros.
Why did I think the same thing?
A lot of people thought that. Soros or some amoral Russian billionaire. Those guys make the worst robber barons the US ever had look like St. Francis of Assisi.
There is an arms trafficker/all round bad guy Semyon Mogilovitch, Jewish sadly, who would sell anything to anyone, there are people who will do anything regardless of their faith.
I never took AoV’s villain choice to be anti semitism.
Perhaps it was a PC/CYA nervous tic of a plot device, but nowhere in the same league as the wholly blatant nervous-Nelly-PC neutering of one of Tom Clancy’s novels-turned-movies to expunge the core (shhhh!) Islamic-inspired-mayhem (ok, ok, there, we actually dared utter the hate that not be named) that was the initial flashpoint of the story.
Actually, given information about that scene from an interview with the actor who was being interrogated, I don’t think it was “part” of the film at all.
If you’ve seen the movie, you might recall the interrogator asking the financier if he spoke Serbo-croatian. A pretty strange thing to ask a Russian wouldn’t you say? Well, it turns out the ACTOR playing the financier had recently toured in Croatia, and the SEAL playing the interrogator had researched the actor’s background and was using that reference to unsettle the actor as he would use information to unsettle an actual person he would interrogate, and according to the actor playing the financier it worked quite well.
Well, guess what? The actor playing the financier is also Jewish.
Barring any direct statement from the movie people, my first thought would be that was also something from the research that the SEAL playing the interrogator used to try and unsettle the actor playing the financier. It clearly worked quite well to unsettle viewers.
Think of it like reverse method acting – you make the people around you into their characters.
And even positive reviews say the SEALs weren’t the best of actors. Maybe that needs some rethinking.
And even positive reviews say the SEALs weren’t the best of actors. Maybe that needs some rethinking.
Actually, I thought the SEAL acting was better than most of the crap that comes from Hollywood. Tom Cruise, Matt Damon, etc etc, could be considered “not the best actors”. And yet they get awards and press conferences.
The novelization by a fmr. Seal commander and a fmr, Navy Captain, paints the villain as a Russian of Chechen extraction, who somehow came to the US, and earned an MBA, it’s unlikely he would be Jewish (the interrogation scene, glosses over much of the dialogue)
Tell you the truth, I didn’t get that he was terribly Jewish. More like a very typical Russian Billionaire with highly questionable morals and equally questionable acquaintances.
I did hear from someone involved in the film. I blogged about it here:
http://www.bookwormroom.com/2012/02/25/act-of-valor-cleared-of-antisemitism/
My conclusion: The scene (and, therefore, the whole movie) was antisemitic in presentation, but it arose from an amateur movie-maker mistake, rather than from any antisemitic intent. There was no bad motive involved.
Presumably in the next effort (and I hope there are more films such as Act of Valor), the amateurishness will be smoothed out, so that moments like this won’t happen again.
What a bunch of garbage! What about all of the Jews who were in the Mafia? Or the Jews who worked in the camps to keep the other Jews in line? Jews are people and they represent the same rainbow of good and evil that all races and ethnic people do. Are mafia movies anti Italian? Are western movies anti indian? As for the acting I can tell you I found it refreshing to not hear and see the likes of actors and their pumped up ways for a change. In the “Hurt Locker” the protagonist was so over the top that he was unbelievable. No one I ever knew in the military acted anything like he did and if they had NO one would have worked with him. AOV is the first movie in a long time that does not paint the military and its members as monsters who all should be locked up. For God’s sake just enjoy it and reflect on the men and women working for us 24/7 without complaint.
I agree. To some people, the idea that any member of a minority could be a bad guy is politically incorrect. A couple years ago, there was a home security company that ran a series of commericals about scared women being home when someone attempted to break in. Of course, all of the bad guys were lily white. Bad people come in all shades of skin color, all nationalities, all genders and all religions.
I love those commercials. I also love when a TV “street gang” made up of more ethnicitys than a Benneton ad.
Because we all know the Crips and Latin Kings strive for diversity.
I thought that was a huge mistake in AOV – truly unnecessary backstory detail.
Would it have made any difference if the childhood friend of the Chechen muslim was Christian? No. (I thought they were both Ukrainians)
I was so upset by this one detail that I stopped going to movies after AOV, which I had been looking forward to so much.
To be blunt, NCIS gets it right. In fact, I think NCIS has done more for a positive view of Israel and Jews by Americans who watch it (20+ million per episode, not counting all of us addicted to the re-runs on cable, of which the two part “Kill Ari” is the most repeated).
Maybe the AOV people should hire Don Bellisario…
Leroy Jethro Gibbs for President!
(I wonder how well it would work during the debates, when he slaps Barry-O upside the back of the head, because he’s being a fipshit?!)
Can’t type tonight, damnit. “Dipshit.”
ah, the fantasy of Leroy Jethro Gibbs debating Obama? No head slap, but Gibbs’ Rule 16: “If someone thinks they have the upper hand, break it.”
metaphorically – no touching allowed during presidential debates
I actually believe Gibbs could win as a write-in. too bad the actor Mark Harmon is actually a bit giddy in real life.
I’m still wanting to know what happens to ducky. Surely dying on the beach isn’t ‘it’? Can I trade SecNav for ducky? How about SecNav and Vance? This is not the way a man from U.N.C.L.E. should go. Or perhaps death from natural causes is all one of this background can aspire to.
Besides from everything, isn’t it possible to have some characters appear,who are Jewish and are evil? I mean, there are bad guys in EVERY group of humans, regardless if national,ethnic,gender or religious.(in WW2,the s.c Judenrate,Jewish Police,or certain Jews even collaborated eagerly with the German Nazis,sold out their co-religionists for personal gain).Of course, it should be made clear at the same time that the “bad Jewish character” is just that, bad,not bad because he/she is Jewish.
Eagerly? I think they tried to prolong their lives. A better example would be the leftwing anti-Israel jews who participate in the smear campaigns. Think Norman Finkelstein. Europa has quite a few of them.
I think you miss the disinformation agenda being pushed against Israel and Jews from such subtle attacks and how so many are falling for the lies.
Last week the popular Alex Jones web site/New media pushed the ‘idea’ that the Islamic terrorist attack on Egyptian troops in the Sinai was and Israeli false flag operation and it sold,seducing and brainwashing many more young minds.
I wrote about it but just about everyone is asleep.
The disinformation keeps getting better and better traction. It’s not hard to see where this is going.
When the Iran keg blows,Israel will be blamed and the Muslim destroyers will be given a pass by the media who never miss an opportunity as with the subtle ‘Act of Valor’ propaganda film.
You might appreciate reading the book “The Jewish Enemy: Nazi Propaganda during World War II and the Holocaust” by Jeffrey Herf. Sounds very academic, and it is to a degree, but a surprisingly easy read. The facts confirm your viewpoint. These carefully crafted, and false, messages about “Jews” were disseminated by Hitler in great volume through his monopolistic media outlets. Everything evil he conceived of doing, he projected onto the “Jews,” and thus proclaimed that he had to take the actions he took to save the German people from being wiped out by the “Jews.” Astounding mental contortion on his part. Classic paranoia and projection. But he was in power. He pounded this message into the German people relentlessly through every type of media, over and over again. It would have been impossible for them not to know Hitler’s intent unless they couldn’t hear and couldn’t see. They knew, despite any proclamations otherwise. Propaganda is based on putting the herd mentality to work — getting the majority of people to resonate with a false message put forth relentlessly by an authority figure, with the target of getting them to turn a blind eye to evil. It is so easy to put that false message out when there is a media monopoly. It is being done today — relentlessly. So this is the challenge. What’s the solution?
I suspect you are correct that if the bad guy behind the scenes was supposed to be an evil Jewish guy, it was a sop to shield the movie from criticism as being “Islamophobic”. But if he was actually deliberately supposed to be an evil Jewish behind-the-scenes criminal manipulator, so what? Are you telling me that George Soros doesn’t exist in real life?
And what about every single cop show on regular mainstream TV, where every episode, the evil bad guy who did the murder turns out to be a middle-class White Christian businessman? If people get their ideas of who is the criminal element in the country from such shows, then everyone must conclude that the most murderous, scheming evil criminals in this country are all White professionals and White businessmen.
BTW, how many Black Americans in Chicago were shot and killed by other Black Americans during the month of July 2012? I’ve read it set a new record for Chicago violence.
so what ?
It’s a big deal because it proves beyond any doubt that the West (but especially the western media) are well behaved dhimmi’s who pay their jizya on time and understand who is in charge.
We wouldn’t want to tell the truth about this great religion of peace and so we continue the lies and delusion to appease evil is the mantra of the collapsing,decadent West.
‘Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter.’
Isaiah 5:20
For me the most moving part of the film was at the very end when they rolled the names of all the SEALS killed since 9/11.
“Why an Evil Jew in Act of Valor?”
Why NOT an Evil Jew in Act of Valor? Are Jews immune from being evil?
Does EVERYTHING have to be politically correct?
Does EVERYTHING have to be politically correct?
Tommy why not an evil Muslim instead of jumping on Satan’s bandwagon ? (Revelation 12)
So why did the cowards of Hollywood appease evil and play their dhimmi’s role of not offending the offensive death cult and make a politically correct movie with the proverbial Jew as the villain ?
Why not stick with reality,you know,the truth and show Islam in it’s true light not the politically correct lie that President Bush and his cousin Obama sold us that Islam is a religion of peace.
Does EVERYTHING have to be politically correct?
Tommy why not an evil Muslim instead of jumping on Satan’s bandwagon ? (Revelation 12)
So why did the cowards of Hollywood appease evil and play their dhimmi’s role of not offending the offensive death cult and make a politically correct movie with the proverbial Jew as the villain ?
Why not stick with reality,you know,the truth and show Islam in it’s true light not the politically correct lie that President Bush and his cousin Obama sold us that Islam is a religion of peace.
Shortly after 9/11, a movie adaptation of “Sum of All Fears” came out and the Muslim terrorist in the book was transformed into a neo-nazi in the movie. Even after the worst Muslim atrocity on American soil, PC dictates that Muslim sensibilities are paramount. Offense to islam is a crime against humanity; men, woman and children murdered in the name of Islam is a product of Muslim oppression by crusaders and zionists. It doesn’t surprise me that even in a “patriotic” film, a non-Muslim, in this case an evil Joooo, is the terror master. All this is paving the way for a new holocaust, particularly when there are supposedly well-educated Muslims who believe the Mossad was responsible for 9/11. Hollywood has so many Jews, but most could care less about being Jewish and would gladly throw their people under the bus or herd them into the ovens to defend multicultural political correctness.
I believe there is a book out called “Prayers for the Assassin” where after a major Muslim terror attack, the Jews are scapegoated as the perpetrators. As a result, half of Hollywood converts to Islam, and Jews are expelled from America. This is our future, and Jews in Hollywood and the democratic party are paving the way for this dystopian scenario.
Debbie Schlussel already wrote about this. The Navy put this in to recruit more Muslim Arabs (and African Americans) to the Seals:
http://www.debbieschlussel.com/49203/navy-seals-too-white-seek-more-arabs-muslims-why-anti-semitism-was-added-to-act-of-valor/
You see, the aforementioned groups respond positively to anti-Semitic themes.
Indeed.
Few, if any, would ever be able to complete BUD/S training. We used to train foreign troops from nay nations in Air Defense at Fort Bliss, back during the latter 70s. Our common experience there were groups of very together soldiers marching off to their training – neat uniforms, organized formations, very military.
And then, off in the distance, we’d hear the noise of people chattering. And presently along would come a disorganized mob of unwashed, unshaven men, looking as if they’d slept in their uniform under a blazing sun, then rolled in the dirt for a while. No organization. Nothing military to them.
The Arab troops.
Since the Jews have been blamed for every evil in the world since recorded history began, it’s not surprising to hear of this, along with the cries of “it’s not antisemitism!” If the writer was trying to be PC by implicating a Jewish financier beacause he didn’t want to rile Muslims, than he’s doing the same thing the rabid antisemites do in the Arab world. “911? It wasn’t us! It was the Jews!” Just pay a visit to your local search engine and see how many groups, Muslim and otherwise blame 911 on the Jews. Then see how many hits come up. I typed in “Jew responsible for 911″ ( without the quotes and pulled up 54,000 hits. You may want to try it replacing “911″ with tems like “attack on the world trade center” and add them up all up.
This is what fuelled Hitler and Nazism. The German economy tanked? It was the Jews, and the international Jewish conspiracy. This is the kind of crap one still hears today from Neo-Nazis and certain conspiracy theorists.
It’s sad to hear people say, “who cares, just shut up and enjoy it.” Saying, “Well, Jews were in the Mafia and were made to watch other Jews in concentration camps,” is just ignorant.Yes, as one poster said, Jews are like everone else, but to play into anisemitic stereotypes is playing a dangerous game. People who don’t see the problem *are* the problem.
At a time when every anti-semitic lie gains traction and the dhimmi elite appease jidahist at every turn, It is exactly as Mr Lucas Brice says:”to play into anisemitic stereotypes is playing a dangerous game. People who don’t see the problem *are* the problem.”
… but I can’t believe Jewish funding of Islamic terror is representative of reality any more than …
Yeah, there are a lotta Jews in Hollywood, no question about that. But they all seem to be anti-Israel, maybe that’s a Jewish Guilt turned poisonous thing.
But here’s a proof question: if the IJC controls the media (probably from its HQ in a skyscraper subbasement compound in Midtown Manhattan, why does Israel alway get bad press?
So because the choice can be “misinterpreted,” it’s the filmmakers’ responsibility to avoid it? We mustn’t credit the viewer with sufficient awareness to realize that there is evil, and that there are evilly minded men, in every subsector of Mankind?
You appear not to think much of the viewers’ intelligence, Mr. Klavan.
Maybe they could have made him an evil country club WASP with a tennis sweater wrapped around his shoulders. His wife could have been Buffy and his kids — Thurston and Emily.
He could have selling “Tommy Hilfiger” missles.
Or they could have made him a rouge IRA guy named — Paul Ryan. And given him big ears to drive the point home.
Didn’t you know?
Jews make the best scapegoats,they’re easy targets,they won’t cut your head off or burn down you city or cut off the oil if you bully and trash them.
And then we have the best example from the (IFAABI) International Federation for Abusing and Always Bashing Israel,also known as the United Nations.
Making the ultimate financier and mover in the film a Jew lies beyond the realm of the ordinary spectrum of good and evil people distributed among the Jewish population in a typical curve of moral culpability. This is because of the simple implausibility of the situation – a Jew financing Islamic terrorists, the very group most likely to want to eliminate not just Israel but likely all but the most servile and miserable dhimmi Jews everywhere. Just as there would be a disconnect in claiming that the Rothschilds were responsible for financing Hitler’s rise to power, so is this movie’s premise untenable and, finally, morally suspect, no matter how naive or random were its original intentions.
As to Soros, even he would not stoop to directly finance Islamic terrorists, although his delusional, moronic and self-destructive Left-Fascist fantasies of political restructuring might certainly leave the door much more open to such terrorists, as his goal of weakening the fabric of the only society now able to counter them would be disastrous in that respect, just as it would be in all others.
To the movie’s scriptwriter: I would very much doubt that a conscious anti-Semitic theme was intended by the film, but I would certainly have him reflect upon this meme as a serious mistake that could be taken by others as endorsement of a very old canard. Try to do better next time to bring home the idea of the wonderful valor of our real fighting men and women without any unnecessary complications that could cloud an otherwise necessary message of real hope and pride in our very real and exceptional history.
I have to disagree. I thought it made it kind of plausible for why he was willing to give up his friend so easily. If he was a jihadi wouldn’t he have resisted interrogation? I suppose he didn’t have to be Jewish, but why not Jewish? It added to the irony of his friend turning into a head-chopping loon.
I’m not at all sure why the film deserves such debate. Could be just our system, but the resolution and sound on our screen was poor. To us it was just one more chaotic, overly busy, action adventure, without much plot, mystery, well developed characters, or deep meaning. Like many others we had anticipated its release with relish, but rented it, and was glad we had. Have no desire to own it: can’t consider it a keeper.
The movie was as much a message to our enemies, or perhaps more so, as it was to the American public. The American military, and in particular US Navy SEALs, are not confused, superhero nitwits the left Hollywood mainstream continuously portray them. They are clear headed, family men who have devoted their lives to protecting America from anyone, anywhere who would cause us harm. The message being specifically targeted to Islamic viewers is that we are not in anyone’s pocket, contrary to any Great Satan doctrines being preached in their local mosques. We are REAL, not Hollywood.
While you may view that as an anti-Semitic theme, it is a message of hope for anyone in the Islamic world that thinks America hates all Muslims and loves all Jews. Work with us and we will respect you. Try to kill us and we will destroy you. It’s the cowboy way, faithful and true. I love it.
I actually like that there’s a non-muslim enemy even though that they’re fighting Islamic terrorists. It just shows we’re not just fighting a bunch of muslim terrorists. That there are actually people who supported them even though the implication is that they’re supporting their own destruction. Some of us call these people “dhimwits”. The fact that he’s a jew (a group most hated by these people) is the simply the irony icing on the cake.
If anyone watched the movie with the directors commentary, you learned that in the entire movie, the SEAL team guys had no script. They were just saying what they would have normally said during a real world mission.
The directors also point out that that interrogation scene was completely improved. When the SEAL team interrogator walks into that cabin to “interrogate” the other actor, that was the first time those 2 people had ever met in person.
So based on the directors commentaries, I am satisfied there was no secret anti-Jewish message. The senior chief was just interrogating and learned some information.
There have been times while employed as an instructor of arab/islamist tank crewman that I have elicited responses from my students that they realized that sometimes there is an objective reality. Disbelieve it and the hardware will very likely kill you.
Without absolute, current time in your face no $hit evidence that the infidel is right they’ll still blame the jews. And even with this, the next day they’ll claim that there is no reality and what they believe is supreme. The little indian kid with the spoon in The Matrix may as well be Mohammed, to these idjits.
The way propaganda works is that if you want to stereotype a group, then you have to stereotype them. You have to present every person in the group in the same negative manner. A few example of how movies apparently hostile to some sub group managed to avoid producing a stereotype:
In the French Connection (an excellent movie) all the French characters were creepy in one way or another. To avoid the impression they were following the old British tendency to run down the French, they threw in, very early on, an otherwise unnecessary scene with a very respectable looking British women. She was portrayed in a very negative way.
The movie Colors presents a lot of Hispanic low-lifes. I think the writer of the movie wanted to avoid running down Hispanics, and he did it by putting in an apparently stable Hispanic family very early on. I think the director did not get the message because visually he pretty much presented the family as low-lifes also. They should have been presented as an unusually wholesome family, a regular ‘Leave it to Beaver’ group.
If the move under discussion here had only one Jewish character, then it is unlikely that it was an attempt to present a Jewish stereotype. Unless a stereotype is already established, it requires at least two and the more the better. In this case I think it would have been better if they had presented some particular reason for why a Jew was involved, or a second Jew who was respectable. The role for the second Jew could be very minor and it would still work to kill the stereotype.
If as supposed here, the desire was to avoid stereotyping Arabs, a better way would have been to have a few ‘good’ Arabs in the production.