Comments on: Um, You Mind If We Screen That?

By: Claytonian

Claytonian — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 22:26:41 +0000

I don’t think anyone is suggesting tearing it down.

By: maki

maki — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 18:08:47 +0000

what most people don’t know is that the yasukuni shrine was not made just for those infamous war criminals of WWII. it also houses the memories and shrines for all the people who have lost their lives in Japanese battles and civil wars from way before WWII. about 90% of Yasukuni is dedicated to people that had nothing to do with the atrocities of what happened in Asia during WWII. most are of the countless young Kamikaze pilots that lost their lives to the war. i personally do not think such people as Hideki Tojo and others should be allowed to have their memory honored there. But if Americans and everyone else want to take down the Yasukuni because of some of it’s members’ ties to war crimes, then I think the Vietnam war memorials should be taken down too. Didn’t America do inhumane things in Vietnam???

By: The Overthinker

The Overthinker — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 12:51:50 +0000

Incidentally, who decides what is “fairly”?

By: Marco

Marco — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:54:52 +0000

That’s just logical: yasukumi + yasuki = yasukuni!

If the diet members watch the movie now for the first time, it sounds to me that this movie is made quite independent.

What wonders me the most is that a movie with such an important content gets just around 75’000 dollars.
Here in switzerland they are paying 800’000 dollars for an art movie (pepperminta) and 1’300’000 (of 28 millions from other culture funds) for an animation movie (Max & co.).

The animation movie totally flopped. Isn’t that just a great waste of tax money?

I don’t know what other movies get in Japan but I think this wasn’t much of a help. (sorry for the length!)

By: Ron

Ron — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:28:13 +0000

The problem with government support of the arts is, who decides what art is deemed supportable. If the government decides, then it is technically propaganda. You need a group who are on the payroll, but who’s decision can not be revoked by the government; the group should be nominated by artists and individuals not be approved by the government if they satisfy basic criteria laid down by a 3d party (e.g., education, work, etc.)

By: parkmount

parkmount — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 00:43:46 +0000

Those who are for using the tax for Art must explain why the tax payers have to support the enemies’ propaganda by supporting their Art to express their position.
Or you can give me your signed consent allow me to withdraw all your money from your bank accounts.

By: otsuka

otsuka — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 20:20:53 +0000

I don’t think gov’t monies should go towards movies/documentaries but I think money going towards public works involving the arts is fine.

By: David

David — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:31:58 +0000

“yasukumi” lol

anyway judging from this interview it doesn’t sound like it’s necessarily the kind of anti-Japanese propaganda you usually associate with China… Maybe it’s a reasonable and balanced film.

By: shazzb0t

shazzb0t — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:49:53 +0000

I say that if it isn’t going to deal with the issue fairly the film makers shouldn’t be subsidized. Some might argue with that, but people would be up in arms if film makers like Michael Moore received government checks for their art.

By: RYO

RYO — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:47:18 +0000

It’s hardly censorship if government subsidies are withdrawn or simply not granted. Contrast such a withdrawal of subsidies (were it to hypothetically happen in this case) to what occurs in China all the time.

By: sireB

sireB — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 18:45:53 +0000

Typical Japanese solution to an international problem:

Keep mouth shut, make it look objective by using a foreign face, and throw $$$ at it.