Lord of War

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pretty good flick, although it did seem to have a very jaded but nonetheless anti-gun message: "The guns are bad but they will never stop flowing". It never painted them in any sort of positive light.

The main question I have is, was that part in the M16 warehouse true? That the US govt just buys new weapons and just dumps the old ones? I really really hope that's not true :what: Here they'll sell guns to third world black markets but their own citizens can't own one :banghead::banghead:
 
That the US govt just buys new weapons and just dumps the old ones?
Yep, where do you think the CMP folks get all of those M1s? The Iraqi army is getting a bunch of M16s. We gave Osama stingers, Libya F14s, and the list goes on.
 
I thought it was pretty good. Some think the story line good have been better, but to me it was good. He was basically a door-to-door salesman(so to speak)peddling his wares. They kept it simple and to the point and not a lot of fluff.

At they very least, it portrays governments as the root of evil, NOT the guns. The gun is just a tool, it is the owner that is supposed to have the common sense, humanity, compassion, etc.
 
I liked the movie but expected a lot more.

I do like the part when the gaurd gets shot. " Why did you do that? Do you know how hard it is to sell a used gun?"

Nice save, but totally unbelievable.
 
I just noticed that the photo above are VZ58's, not AK's. Look closely at the buttstocks and tell me if I'm wrong?
 
Neat movie. I liked it. I don't think it was pro or anti.

Now, for a movie with a confusing message about guns, what about "American Beauty"? I still can't figure that one out, although I think that too is neither especially pro nor especially anti.
 
I felt it was strongly anti. Went to see it with a couple of anti friends, and they couldn't stop gushing about the obvious evil of guns afterwards.
 
I thought it was definitely, strongly anti. Maybe it was anti-government, too; but I don't see how anybody could say it wasn't anti-gun.
It was entertaining, but it isn't a movie I'd care to see again.
 
Now, for a movie with a confusing message about guns, what about "American Beauty"?
That's got nothing on the gun-related message of the classic film 'Zardoz'. Is the message of the film really what the flying stone head spouts? "The gun is good, the penis is evil"... or is it the other way around? What is the significance of the oddball Webley semi-auto revolver? And where does he carry the thing? Why the shotgun shells? Does the sharpied-on mustache seen on Niall Buggy have a deeper meaning?
 
The story is told very much like the movie 'Blow". Yeah, it does definately have some anti-gun overtones, but to me more anti-government.

The main anti-gun lines was when Hawke told Cage's wife that the gun used to kill her parents was bought by someone like her husband. Man that was dirty!!
 
yesit'sloaded said:
Yep, where do you think the CMP folks get all of those M1s? The Iraqi army is getting a bunch of M16s. We gave Osama stingers, Libya F14s, and the list goes on.

You need to stop reading your history & news off the back of cereal boxes. For the record, the Iraqi army is purchasing new rifles direct from Colt, not surplus military rifles from the United States Government.

We never gave Osama Stingers during the Soviet-Afghan war. Even in the 1980s, Osama hated Americans and had threatened to kill several American citizens in that area. There were many separate factions of muj fighting the Soviets, we did arm factions friendly to us with Stingers; but that isn't quite the same as giving them to Osama.

Libya has never owned or operated F-14s. Likely as not, you are thinking of Iran who purchased F-14s from Grumman (not the United States) while the Shah was still in power (1974). These export model F-14s are basically no longer flying since once the Shah was overthrown they had to cannibalize the aircraft to keep them operational. They served mostly in an AWACS role due to the advanced radar.

Normally I would let it go since it is off topic; but it is rare that someone gets so many things wrong about so many different subjects.
 
I seen the movie when it first came out, I personally liked it. I guess it's how you interpret the movie to say if it's anti or not anti.
 
"These export model F-14s are basically no longer flying since once the Shah was overthrown they had to cannibalize the aircraft to keep them operational."

Uh, this was true... but no longer the case. They've fitted the F-14's with engines from SU-27's and have actually improved the F-14's performance, reliability, and turn around time. They made the F-14 better, and they are flying them again. Possible threat to US aircraft? Maybe. But it's still a 4th Gen fighter and can't touch our 5th Gens.
 
One of the few movies I turned off in the first 20 minutes. Can't say it was terrible as I did not give it enough time to get any worse.
 
Sorry to bring this back from the dead.

I just bought the double disc DVD from Target at $10.

The second disc has additional features, even a weapons menu!
They did make a mistake on the M16 using 7.62 caliber rounds, rather than 5.56...darn Hollywood!

I enjoyed the movie with the extras. If you don't have the movie, go pick up the two disc version!
 
was reading a production notes article on the film... they actually used real gun runners instead of props companies for the guns... the props companies wanted too much money.... plus they found that the gun runners were more punctual and more likely to deliver exactly what they needed
 
Krochus says
I rank Lord Of War right down there with that Sindbad movie that starred Lou Ferrigno
Man thats harsh, LOL.
Haven't seen the Sinbad but his Herecules made me physically ill.

Glad I have yet to stay awake all the way through Lord of War then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top