Polat Alemdar and his men comprise a Turkish commando team are going to Palestine to get revenge of the aid workers who were killed by israeli commandos in the Flotilla bound to Gaza... See full synopsis »
After the crew of the Enterprise find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one-man weapon of mass destruction.
Neo and the rebel leaders estimate that they have 72 hours until 250,000 probes discover Zion and destroy it and its inhabitants. During this, Neo must decide how he can save Trinity from a dark fate in his dreams.
This film was the the subject of heated discussions in Germany. Originally it was rated "Not under 18" by the FSK, but distributor Maxximum appealed this decision which resulted in a "Not under 16" rating. Then the film became a success, especially amongst turkish teenagers. The success resulted in massive media coverage. This in turn resulted in broad discussions from politicians (especially from the Bavarian conservative CSU party), youth organisations etc. about the films "Anti-American statements" and their influence on youngsters. After another appeal (from the minister for family and integration from Northrhine Westphalia) the FSK raised the rating back to the original "Not under 18". See more »
During the final firefight when Polat sneaks up behind an American, the American turns and can be heard firing his rifle, however there is no muzzle flash visible. See more »
This movie can help us understand how many Turkish, Arabic or Muslim people feel and think
Most German newspapers (e.g. www.spiegel.de) said the film is anti-American, anti-Jewish, anti-Christian, and is bad because it deepens the existing "culture clash" even more.
I don't agree. Well, of course the movie is one-sided. With a single exception the Americans in the movie are unscrupulous, dead-heartened and bloodthirsty. They humiliate people of other countries/cultures/religion, don't care about deaths of innocent civilians, maltreat prisoners, etc. Of course most Americans are not like this, but as we know from the pictures and videos from Abu Ghureib and from several other incidents, most of these things did really happen. Why should it be not allowed to show these things in a movie? One scene remind me strongly of holocaust movies: captives are transported on a long journey in a container on a truck. One guard says to the other: they might suffocate in the container because there is no fresh air supply. The truck stops, the (American) guard gets off the truck and fires with an automatic gun hundreds of bullet-holes into the container and creates a bloodbath among the captives. Well, if a holocaust movie shows German Nazis committing terrible things, I don't object too. OK, I don't really know if something like this container incident did really happen in Iraq, but we know that many bad enough things did actually happen.
There are interesting scenes e.g. where a sheik stops some fanatists from executing an American journalist and confronts them with facts why this has nothing to do with Islam, or another one where he discusses with suicide bombers why their plans are wrong.
This movie can help us understand how many Turkish, Arabic or Muslim people feel and think. It is provocative, one-sided, and mixes historic truth with fiction in a questionable way. However isn't that a good starting point for discussing these issues? Sometimes provocation is necessary to get people start talking. First we need to learn to talk about our own feelings. Then we can talk to each other. It's not very healthy if the political correctness keeps telling us to not talk about what we really think and feel just because it could violate other peoples feelings.
133 of 209 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?