From the story:
"The short film pulls no punches. It opens with the Smurfs dancing, hand-in-hand, around a campfire and singing the Smurf song. Bluebirds flutter past and rabbits gambol around their familiar village of mushroom- shaped houses until, without warning, bombs begin to rain from the sky.
Tiny Smurfs scatter and run in vain from the whistling bombs, before being felled by blast waves and fiery explosions. The final scene shows a scorched and tattered Baby Smurf sobbing inconsolably, surrounded by prone Smurfs."
2 comments:
Based on your description of the short, the plot sounds very similar to the attacks Saddam Hussein pulled on the Kurds, and the Shias, not to mention it's a fairly accurate description of the events of September 11. In fact, the scenario seems more reflective of terrorist acts in general rather than warfare.
But since you see it as a condemnation of war in general, then let me ask you; Are you against all war, or just the war on terror? Do you believe individuals and/or nations have the right to defend themselves from attack? If so, do you believe that they have to wait for the attack before defending themselves, even if that attack could cost thousands of lives? If so, what would you say to the thousands of families who lose mothers, fathers, or children in that initial attack?
Using the film as an example, how do you explain to Baby Smurf that the rest of the village had to die before you could act to stop the threat?
These are the hard questions that most antiwar propaganda, like this film, glosses over.
Yes, war is horrible, but sometimes the alternative is even worse.
wow. I killed this thread...sorry about that.
Post a Comment