Funny thing - the movie Collateral Damage, though it appears to demonise terrorism, actually glorifies it. Sure, Schwarzenegger's character is enraged by the actions of terrorists/freedom fighters, but how does he react?
Well, some people from another country came to his country, killed his wife and kid and a bunch of other people, and called it collateral damage. His response is to sneak into their country illegally, and kill a bunch of people in unilateral retaliation. The hero of the movie is, essentially, doing the very same thing the villain is. But he's a hero and they're a terrorist, because we see it from his point of view. Or maybe because he's American - try doing the exact same plot with the man from the small country as the hero and an American soldier as the villain who killed his wife and kid, and see how people feel about it.
To be fair, it does give a nod to the idea, with a "how are you different from me?" conversation with the baddie 'terrorist', but that's shrugged off with an "I'm only going to kill you!" answer, despite the fact that our hero has caused lots of uncontrolled explosions and fires by then which might well have killed other people, and he kills several other people later, not to mention that he has only one person who killed his wife and kid so he can afford to kill only one, where the other guy has probably had friends and family killed by several different groups of people, who are promising to keep doing it, and who he has no way of identifying individually. And that doesn't change the fact that the same plot with the countries reversed would horrify most people and would almost certainly be impossible to get distributed in America.
[07:07]
|