In the previews, you see the journalists interacting with different people involved in the civil war and allegedly making it all the way through.

I my opinion, this is echoing movies like Salvador and Under Fire and not based on the reality that journalists are now seen as propagandists for the government, no better than Tokio Rose or Hanoi Hanna.

And they would be summarily executed on the spot.

“Hi! We are Journalists covering….”


The End

(roll credits)

Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

13 thoughts on “A faulty premise in a movie.”
  1. I cannot envision a scenario in which, if things ever go kinetic, regionally or nationally, media personnel and their resources are not among the first targets.

  2. yup… actually there would be lots of thumping and banging amidst grunts and brief screams…… journalists aren’t worth the .17 cents…. sticks are plentiful and free. I refuse to speak to any so called journalists about any topic. media today makes Pravda look like a ladies sewing circle…

  3. “Before the rebels get to DC” You mean the III% who believe in the Constitution as our Founders constructed it? I’m cheering for the Rebels!

  4. Ya know…..if a number these talking heads suddenly had those heads become a pink mist, live on national TV maybe things might improve…because the survivors might start doing their job again instead of shilling for the
    corrupt politicians and other interests.

    1. “If the media lies, the media dies.
      You take a side, you’re along for the ride.
      A traitor in front of a camera is still just a traitor.”
      — Matt Bracken, What I Saw at the Coup
      Great short story, highly recommended. It had been posted for free reading at Western Rifle Shooters, but that site apparently violated some B.S. WordPress terms of service and is now unreachable. (Link, in case it comes back.)

      1. It’s part of the “Bracken Anthology” which has a whole bunch of short stories and non-fiction essays, all very much worth reading. One that’s unfortunately very relevant is “Professor Raoul X”.

        If you want more Bracken, there is his “Enemies trilogy”, seriously scary.

      2. Whenever you run into a broken link, especially when censors are involved, go to and paste the link into its “Wayback machine” field. That site saves a vast amount of web content, tracking its history. If something disappears, or you want to find the version from before some rewrite, chances are good they will have it.
        In this case, they do:
        BTW, it appears the nuking of that website happened somewhere between April and June of 2020.

  5. In all seriousness … One, “reporters” will have the problem of being not only seen as biased in their reporting, but also suspected of actively aiding the other side, e.g. with contact reports.
    Two, just from the premise in the image above, this looks bad. You can’t seize the reins of power in the US just by capturing the White House, any more than you can by wandering around the Capital rotunda. As someone pointed out a few years back, this isn’t Halo, the floor doesn’t light up and declare you ruler. No, our government is effectively quite distributed. The national level gets lots of news coverage, but state and local is in fact pretty independent.

  6. Boy howdy does this movie look stupid. The “Rebels” are apparently lead by “The Texas-California Alliance.”

    BWAHAHAHAHAAAAAA! Tell me you don’t know jack about American inter-state relationships without actually saying that you don’t know jack about American inter-state relationships.

    1. My thoughts exactly, when I heard about the “antagonists”.
      “Suspension of disbelief” is a principle of the entertainment industry that says that things can be fantastical, as long as they’re not SO fantastical that the audience simple CANNOT reconcile it. For example, Red Dawn worked because it was the Soviet Russians invading, at a time when they probably had the capability (even if they weren’t stupid enough to try); if the invaders had been Ethiopian, it’d be too unbelievable.
      Texas allying with California against the federal government, for any cause or reason, is just too unreal. It’s a level of disbelief that cannot be suspended even for the duration of a movie.
      I’ll probably give it a watch; I’m kind of hoping they chose Texas and California BECAUSE it’s too unbelievable — so as not to give the “FBI’s ‘greatest threat'” (a.k.a. middle-class, white, armed conservatives) any ideas — and the rest of the movie is half-decent.

      1. Your Red Dawn scenario about Ethiopia actually happened with the remake. Originally the invading force was supposed to be China’s People’s Liberation Army, China made it known to the studio it was displeased with the idea and it might effect how their films were distributed in China.

        So the studio went back and changed all the flags and patches digitally to make the bad guys North Korean.

        While China might vaguely have the ability to put troops on US soil, if you squint hard enough and make a few assumptions (like the USSR in 1984), there is no way the DPRK could ever manage it.

        There were certainly some other major issues with the remake of Red Dawn, but no matter how good it turned out to be artistically and technically, that major flaw would keep it from ever being a good film.

        1. Part of the reason I watched Red Dawn (the real one, before the remake was even created) is Neil Smith’s comment about it, in particular that it referenced form 4473. (The invaders send their soldiers off to the local sporting goods stores to collect all the form 4473s.)

Only one rule: Don't be a dick.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.