Tech Support Guy banner
1 - 15 of 15 Posts

· Always remembered in our hearts
Joined
·
82,265 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Are any of you going to watch "Homeland Security" on tv tomorrow night at 9 p.m. on NBC? Here is a synopsis of the story line:

"This NBC Original Movie takes you inside the war on terror, to meet the American warriors on the front lines. They wage a war with no rules. They pursue an enemy hiding throughout the world. They know that some of their greatest victories will never be made public. But together, their mission is a singular one: to protect the American homeland. TV14"

I think curiosity will make me watch the movie. Take care angel :)
 

· Always remembered in our hearts
Joined
·
82,265 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I'm not sure what they are showing this for....Easter sweeps or something? I'm sure it will be a most difficult movie for many people to watch. Take care. angel
 

· Gone but Never Forgotten
Joined
·
27,293 Posts
First Name -
Jim
"warriors"?

"greatest victories"?

"war on terror"?

"their mission is a singular one: to protect the American homeland"?

Did they forget to add "brave" to warriors? That is a manipulative word, it implies a certain greatness, above the level of mere "soldiers", as also implied in "greatest victories". May I ask exactly what their "greatest" victories have been? Not capturing Osama Bin-Laden. Not revealing the funding of Al-Qaeda by Saudia Arabia. Not the elimination of Al-Qaeda. Could make for a very short show.

War on Terror? I bet they dare to mention Iraq, thereby slyly tying together real terrorists and Saddam. For anybody that still buys that argument: I have a bridge for sale.

Protect the homeland? That always has been a vague notion. I hope they don't try to tell us that ridding Iraq of Saddam "has made the world a safer place". That old lie is getting very stale! ;)

Sorry Marlene, I cannot possibly watch the show without having preconceived notions. I remember at the height of anti-Viet Nam war protests a movie was produced called the "Green Berets". I wonder if this is going to be the modern version?
 

· Always remembered in our hearts
Joined
·
82,265 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Jim: Here's a review of the movie. Take care. Mar

TV Review: 'Homeland Security' too close to home
Friday, April 09, 2004

By Rob Owen, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Ah, a failed series pilot recycled as a TV movie. Networks don't do that often enough anymore, and it's a shame, because then viewers get to see the shows that weren't good enough to make the prime-time series schedule.

We all see what does end up on the air, which makes failed pilots telling: They're either brilliant and of the too-smart-for-TV variety or they're just real stinkers.

NBC's "Homeland Security," airing Sunday at 9 p.m. as a two-hour TV movie, is the latter.

Set before, on and after Sept. 11, 2001, this busted pilot chronicles the creation the Office of Homeland Security. It's not set in a parallel universe -- Gov. Tom Ridge is mentioned frequently -- and it focuses on Adm. Theodore McKee (Tom Skerritt), who's preparing to end his service to the country just before 9/11.

That doesn't happen, of course. "Homeland Security" chronicles his attempts to bring together members of several government agencies in a coordinated effort to smoke out terrorists at home and abroad.

Mostly these two hours are all set-up, showing each of the eventual team members at work individually. They include a CIA field operative (Grant Show), a CIA bureaucrat (Scott Glenn) and a national security expert (Leland Orser).

The program begins pre-9/11 with scenes of an Arab man at the controls of a small plane. His instructor calls the FBI to complain the guy was more interested in learning to aim a plane than to fly it.

Similarly, Show's CIA spy gets warnings from a reliable source, who says, "This time your country bleeds."

It's all an effort to depict the need for the coordination, cooperation and communication that were lacking in the pre-9/11 era, bolstering the case for Homeland Security.

Then on the morning of Sept. 11, McKee's daughter boards Flight 93.

Some viewers will simply object to the subject matter, which turns the 9/11 tragedies into popular entertainment. And it's true, we're not far enough removed from that sad day for it to somehow be OK (unlike, say, Civil War movies, JFK's assassination, etc.). But that's not my problem with "Homeland Security." The bigger issue is that it's just too on-the-nose, too predictable, too TV.

At the end, McKee gives an attempt at a rousing speech, encouraging the employees of various government agencies to take a chance on his start-up. In response, one recruit says, "I'm in," which leads to a chorus of "I'm ins" from the assembled crowd. Who couldn't have seen that coming?

I suppose the program deserves credit for its willingness to push buttons. An Arab-American is revealed to be a terrorist (liberals cringe!). McKee frets about trampling civil liberties after 9/11 (conservatives convulse!). But even that seems a little calculated. Should "Homeland Security" have become a series? Probably not. It appears that it would have been like CBS's short-lived CIA drama "The Agency," which began well but ultimately was ruined by TV gimmicks, romance among CIA agents topping its list of missteps.
 

· Gone but Never Forgotten
Joined
·
27,293 Posts
First Name -
Jim
Ok Marlene, thanks for that. Now I see that it is fictional. Your first description didn't say that and it sounded like a documentary.
 

· Always remembered in our hearts
Joined
·
82,265 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
No problem Jim! Have a nice weekend! :) Take care! Mar :)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
34,294 Posts
First Name -
Stephen
I am picturing a movie made for and by the CIA movie (advisors on the set) and the National Homeland Security Glorified. I see alot of Americans getting even more scared and losing sight of so many other things that are being done to Americans and the Constitution Ect.

;) :D

These terrorist's flew 2 Big jets into New York City in Broad Daylight and crash them into the world trade center very easily. Our Nuclear facilitys ect. are no where near protected as is most of America. Look at the countless mistakes always made in matters like this. Too many variables and too many ways for terrorist's to do evil to us.

So I see this movie as probably a large bending of the truth ect.

So I chose not to watch it. since alot of the truth and ramifications of this new Homeland security issue will be left out, I am sure of it.

><">
 

· Banned
Joined
·
47,448 Posts
Well, they better not come a knockin' on my door :eek:


BTW, have I mentioned that Ohio passed a law to permit the right to carry a concealed weapon? :D

Well, don' really need a permit for home defense, but what the hell....:)



Jack
 

· Always remembered in our hearts
Joined
·
82,265 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Hi Smilin' Jack! :) Well now you can carry that CW of yours legally!!! :D :p Enjoy the weekend Luv! :) Take care! Sparky angel :)
 

· Registered
Joined
·
34,294 Posts
First Name -
Stephen
Stoner said:
Well, they better not come a knockin' on my door :eek:
Naw, sheep can't talk stoner so you are safe! :D :eek: :D

hehehehehehehehehehe
 

· Banned
Joined
·
1,788 Posts
izme said:
(SNIP

Our Nuclear facilitys ect. are no where near protected as is most of America.

(SNIP)

><">
They chose their targets well. Had they crashed into a nuclear facility, the 10,000 gallons of jet fuel would have burned on the concrete. Or, the aircraft would have simply exploded on impact, the fireball not even getting to the reactors. Even if they had struck the big cooling towers, the fuel would have burned as it ran down the sides of those eight to 20 feet thick walls.

Had they hit the Empire State Building the same results: some of the fuel would have gotten inside and burned but the wings, where 88% of the fuel is, would have sheared off, and most of the fuel would have been consumed in the fireball.

The World Trade Center towers fell precisely because their almost hollow outer wall construction let the entire aircraft penetrate into the interior allowing 10,000 gallons of jet fuel to burn inside the towers, not outside.
 

· Moderator (deceased) Gone but never forgotten
Joined
·
48,309 Posts
Stoner said:
Well, they better not come a knockin' on my door :eek:

BTW, have I mentioned that Ohio passed a law to permit the right to carry a concealed weapon? :D

Well, don' really need a permit for home defense, but what the hell....:)

Jack
We hope to get that right here someday too! :D
 

· Registered
Joined
·
34,294 Posts
First Name -
Stephen
EdGreene said:
They chose their targets well. Had they crashed into a nuclear facility, the 10,000 gallons of jet fuel would have burned on the concrete. Or, the aircraft would have simply exploded on impact, the fireball not even getting to the reactors. Even if they had struck the big cooling towers, the fuel would have burned as it ran down the sides of those eight to 20 feet thick walls.

Had they hit the Empire State Building the same results: some of the fuel would have gotten inside and burned but the wings, where 88% of the fuel is, would have sheared off, and most of the fuel would have been consumed in the fireball.

The World Trade Center towers fell precisely because their almost hollow outer wall construction let the entire aircraft penetrate into the interior allowing 10,000 gallons of jet fuel to burn inside the towers, not outside.
Sounds pretty damned well plan to me ED
they definetely had plans of the World trade center?
I would think so
the big question is where next! :(

><">
 

· Always remembered in our hearts
Joined
·
82,265 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
The most unrealistic part of the movie was the scene where a cave had been hit with a bomb, they walk through the body parts and at the back of the cave was a dialysis machine and what was supposed to be Bin Laden's walking cane. :rolleyes: Yeah...it killed everyone else there but him and he mysteriously was able to escape a cave with no exit shown except out the front. Geee! :rolleyes:
 
1 - 15 of 15 Posts
Top