Head of Britain's Armed Forces begging a broadcaster..

The idea of the show may be interesting, but I would never watch a fictionalized movie about a real person being seriously harmed (except for a Utah Jazz player). It just seems wrong to me.

 

Is Prince Harry still in Afghanistan? Thats just wrong Channel 4 to do that, especially if he's still there. If he is still serving, then I think the gov. should have the ability to stop the broadcast with concern to the safety of the troops in mind..if not, I guess they have the right to show it..although I think its highly disrespectful. That reminds me of the Bush Assasination film - Just plain disrespectful...I'm no Obama fan, but I would NEVER advocate film about Obama being assasinated or kidnapped. I know Prince Harry has no real political power, but he is a figurehead for the UK. Its pretty disgusting what some people will do in the name of entertainment or politics.

 

Nah, it's probably for shock ratings. I don't imagine showing any active head of state being kidnapped, held at gunpoint and forced to act on the part of the Taliban is a good thing no matter how much defensive spin is put on it.

 

I was wondering too if this was made by the same people who made the Bush Assassination film.

Its disrespectful but I would defend the showing of this under the same principle that cartoons of Mohammed were published, artistic freedom.

 

On a related note 24 a few years ago had an episode with the US Secretary of Defense kidnapped, tortured and forced to do propaganda by terrorists and there was no outcry. Now while this was a fictional Secretary of Defense a fictional Sec. of Defense wields the same amount of power as Prince Harry.

 

not amused.

it's not in any way similar to a story a about a fictional head of state or character.

 

Yes in terms that we are talking about a real person named "Harry Windsor" but frankly the Royal family, especially Prince Harry who isn't even Crown Prince, doesn't wield any power. I consider this as serious as a fictionalized account of Jason Mraz being captured by the Taliban.

 

well....there was a very real concern that the boy prince might be kidnapped -- hence the media blackout. I'm not sure who Jason Mraz is. Certainly more people are wild about Harry.

This would be more along the lines of a fictionalized account of kidnapping Sasha Obama on her way to school. Just for journalistic examination reasons, you know. Totally made up -- no harm meant.

 

Frankly I wish I didn't know who Jason Mraz was but just for the sake of information. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkHTsc9PU2A

And Jason Mraz might at the moment be more popular than Prince Harry.

In regard to the media blackout let me ask you do you think the cartoons of Mohamed should've been blacked out even though there were actual riots and threats of severe violence to Harry and the rest of the NATO troops in Afghanistan over those?

I agree that this is purely for sensationalistic reasons and there really is no reason to do this other than for those reasons but if we hold the principle of artistic freedom sacrosanct then it should be allowed.

Also at the same time there is a long tradition of mocking and even threatening the Royal family from the UK and without.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MeP220xx7Bs?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MeP220xx7Bs?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

I will even agree that this puts Prince Harry at greater risk, but putting him in a combat zone already puts him at risk and there were many who felt that having him there put his unit at greater risk since there was such a target at his back. That said he understood the risk when he agreed to go and in the big picture.

Also this isn't exactly equivalent to an account Obama's daughters getting kidnapped on the way to school as they aren't in a war zone and also Obama is a head of state with actual power.

 

Just to add about fictionalized threats to the British Royal family in the name of art.

<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/D2GGODqyDYE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/D2GGODqyDYE?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>

 

Hey..I like that Mraz song! And the Pistols is always worth a rep. But I'm not so sure the makers of this film would agree they were mocking or threatening the royal family? That's actually the criticism they are fighting.

And the Irish are generally given a pass about fictionalized threats to the Royal Family. It's sort of tradition and all. Besides, there's some sort of implied immunity for anything that's said (or sung) in an Irish pub. I think it's a law.

I'm not suggesting this film should be banned. Just saying it's in very bad taste.

 

And we also had a movie about the President being kidnapped on Air Force One...but he was a fictional President -just like the Secretary of Defense on 24. You are correct that Prince Harry has no real governmental power, but he is still a major Figurehead for the UK - he represents the country, its people, and the Government. I know its harder for us Americans to understand his role because we don't live there, but he means quite a bit more to them than Jason Mraz does to us.

Again, If he is no longer in Afghanistan or in danger of going back, then they SHOULD be allowed to show the film...but if he is still there, then I think its a matter of troop endangerment - in that it could encourage more aggressive attacks etc against the UK troops. Either way, I think its in poor, poor taste.

 

As I noted before Harry put himself and his troops by going to Afghanistan, something that many in British army were against, in the first place. While the film might make things a bit more dangerous I doubt that Al Qaeda is going to suddenly get the idea to try to capture Prince Harry from a new movie.

As far as his importance to the British yes he has some social import but it has been his choice to put himself in danger in the first place. If they were so concerned perhaps they should've just not allowed him to go.

Regarding poor taste that is subjective and without seeing it I'm not going to comment on it. There are plenty of excellent movies about very controversial topics but even if it is in terrible taste and about as well made of a movie as Meatballs 3 under the principle of artistic freedom it still should be shown. I mean if people were arguing that the Mohamed cartoons should be even though there were riots over it then so should this movie even if it increases the risk to Prince Harry.

 

strip the royals of their titles, estates, and (stolen) jewels and let them go work in a mine somewhere

 

1,200 years of cultural identity, pivotal Western history and a wholly democratic society notwithstanding, I wonder why Britain doesn't ditch the monarchy already.

 

They make great tourist attractions and fodder for tabloids.

 

...and all this time I thought a Jock Stirrup was something b-bob wore to the beach