‘Osama’ film reveals plenty about Hollywood

‘Osama’ film reveals plenty about Hollywood

Next year, movie audiences will see a film about U.S. forces hunting down one of the most despicable men in modern history.

No, we’re not talking about Saddam Hussein. “Killing Osama bin Laden” tracks down the radical Muslim who helped usher in the modern age of terrorism.

Conservatives are incensed that the film is slated to hit theaters roughly a month before the 2012 presidential election. And rightly so. The movie will clearly be an unofficial boost to President Barack Obama’s hopes for re-election.

There’s technically nothing wrong with that from a strictly movie perspective. I’ll let others dissect the possible legal ramifications of the release date. It’s the faux nonpartisan spin emanating from the studio behind the project that reeks of insincerity.


Big Hollywood offered a great solution today – the filmmakers behind the movie should ask the studio to delay the film’s release until after the elections if there’s truly no ideological axe to grind.

Here’s my beef – why did it take so long for the “Osama” movie to hit theaters in the first place? Were the filmmakers really waiting for the King of All Terrorists to get his comeuppance? That could have taken another decade.Why not make the movie last year or, gulp, during the Bush administration if the project truly focused on the troops and not the politics behind his kill or capture?

And where is the Hussein huntin’ movie? Isn’t there a great story to tell with his rise and fall? He ran a country into the ground, sparked several wars, slaughtered his own civilians and his capture was one of the biggest military successes in recent memory.

Nothing to dramatize there? Not a thing?

If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Related posts:

  1. Hollywood keeps piling on Palin
  2. Why are laughs so expensive in Hollywood?
  3. Brangelina: Hollywood royalty
  4. The luckiest man in Hollywood?
  5. Hollywood is A-OK with this stereotype

{ 14 comments… read them below or add one }

OpusNo Gravatar August 12, 2011 at 8:01 pm

It would be a good time to also ask why they are refusing to release “Path to 911″ on dvd.

drewsterNo Gravatar August 12, 2011 at 8:30 pm

Opus beat me to it.

Sometime I would like to know (if it’s at all possible) to know how many great films either refuse to get green lit or shut down each year. I would also like to know what % of these films are not produced or released due to so called “business decisions”

In my world, we have a term for that as well. (BS)

JimmyCNo Gravatar August 12, 2011 at 9:34 pm

It’s amazing how many people are in denial about this. Imagine if Michael Bay had made a big-budget movie about our troops in Iraq bringing Saddam Hussein and his regime to justice, and released it on the eve of the 2004 election. Liberals would have been screaming from the rooftops that it was propaganda to boost Bush’s reelection chances. So how is this any different?

cftotoNo Gravatar August 12, 2011 at 10:49 pm

Great points, all. I covered the Path to 9/11 situation a few years back. There is no good reason for it not to be available on DVD.

KNo Gravatar August 13, 2011 at 12:30 am

MGM’s “Red Dawn” remake which was Red State red meat – the one that’s being redone because it’s not a good idea to offend the actual owners of your country – originally had a release date two weeks AFTER the 2010 midterms.

ScottDSNo Gravatar August 13, 2011 at 2:49 pm

“Here’s my beef – why did it take so long for the ‘Osama’ movie to hit theaters in the first place?”

This is just me but I wouldn’t have tried to make this movie until after he was captured and/or killed. It would be an unsatisfying ending to simply have a title card: “He’s still at large.”

Of course, there are other stories that could’ve/should’ve been filmed during the last ten years. I’m waiting for someone to film Col. Matthew Bogdanos’ book, Thieves of Baghdad.

LizNo Gravatar August 13, 2011 at 3:14 pm

Good point, ScottDS. I’d like Hollywood to make a film based on “House to House” by David Bellavia. We’ve given numerous medals of honor to soldiers who have fought and died in Iraq and Aghanistan, you’d think they could find a few great stories worth depicting on film.

Hollywood loves a good story about oppressed people overcoming adversity (like all of those civil-rights movies), how about profiling the Afghan people’s transition from oppression under the Taliban to freedom – images of the purple fingers on election day come to mind.

Mike B.No Gravatar August 13, 2011 at 3:16 pm
Taggart SnyderNo Gravatar August 13, 2011 at 5:55 pm

Who says it will be propaganda? Uh, the fact that it exists, and also the timing. Also, maybe check the title of the movie, too.

Eric BlakeNo Gravatar August 14, 2011 at 10:30 am

Liberals hate President Bush. They wanted Saddam Hussein to remain in power and humiliate Bush. There is no way on God’s green Earth that Hollywood liberals would make a movie putting Bush in a good light.

brutonyNo Gravatar August 14, 2011 at 3:58 pm

Dont hold your breath-Follyweird just wants to make films against the troops, or showing people whose lives have been “destroyed” by war, instead of gaining freedom and triumphing over adversity!

ThoughtfulNo Gravatar August 14, 2011 at 5:08 pm

Good point! plus I like what Opus said.

EricPNo Gravatar August 14, 2011 at 6:58 pm

>>It would be a good time to also ask why they are refusing to release “Path to 911? on dvd.>>

Using the Mouse House’s logic from the last time, because it would be damaging to a Hillary Clinton campaign.

JajavourNo Gravatar August 15, 2011 at 5:00 pm

Michael Moore’s “Farenheit 9/11″ was clearly intended and scheduled to ruin Bush’s re-election campaign and we know how things turned out. Next year’s election will probably be about the economy and in this context only two things may keep Obama in the White House: a miracle, or a bad Republican candidate. But a film about the capture of OBL, even in the hands of as seasoned a director as Bigelow, won’t do because the successful elimination of a terrorist is not going to put food on your table.

Leave a Comment