LETTER: Stallone is Stallone, not Rocky or Rambo
There exist a number of glaring inaccuracies and inconsistencies put forth by the "Voters..." commentary published by the Daily on Tuesday. I will try, for the most part, to shy away from the party bias dripping from the column, whereby the Democratic endorsements from Oprah, Bono and Kennedy are acceptable because, gee, they seem like nice people, but the Republican endorsements are misguided.
I would agree with the central premise that celebrity endorsements shouldn't account for much for either party. But I feel it important to address some of the character assassination in that article. First, Stallone is not Rocky or Rambo, and Chuck Norris never fought on the real Delta Force. These are characters they portray. I know, for some people, it can be difficult to separate the actor from the alter-ego, but that is not the fault of the actor.
It is true that Stallone often plays dim-witted characters, and as a consequence, many people may feel Stallone himself must be dim. That is like saying Marilyn Manson is actually the anti-Christ, when in reality he is an extremely intelligent self-promoter. Now, I have never met Stallone in person; he may be dim. But then again, he may be a genius. An endorsement from Stallone is just that - an endorsement from a wealthy, socially-connected individual.
Second, the author obviously can't see the deeper meaning in films. The first Rambo movie, "First Blood," was actually anti-war and anti-hate. It was about a man who was emotionally and mentally scarred from the brutality of war only to return home to be hated, jeered and spit on by his own countrymen. It was about the hell thousands of servicemen faced, not only abroad at the hands of those who sought to kill them, but at home by those who sought to ostracize and blame them for participating in a war they didn't enjoy any more than the rest of society. And Rocky was not solely about boxing. It was about the American spirit - the courage it takes to stand in the face of the seemingly impossible and say, "I can because I believe."
Were these movies violent? Yes. Were they bloody? Yes. But to overlook their message out of ignorance would be like seeing only pretty blue colors in a Picasso painting, not the deep, heart-wrenching depression it represents. And yes, I realize Rambo is not on the same cultural level as Picasso.
It is important that we all take time to understand the presidential candidates' stances on the issues at hand. It is important that we all realize a celebrity endorsement is altogether irrelevant in terms of addressing those issues. But it is also important that we all take a moment to realize that actors are not, in fact, the characters they portray. Movies are works of art, with multiple layers of symbolism and meaning. Take the time to be informed.
Michael Miller
Graduate Student
Genetics, Development and Cell Biology
I would agree with the central premise that celebrity endorsements shouldn't account for much for either party. But I feel it important to address some of the character assassination in that article. First, Stallone is not Rocky or Rambo, and Chuck Norris never fought on the real Delta Force. These are characters they portray. I know, for some people, it can be difficult to separate the actor from the alter-ego, but that is not the fault of the actor.
It is true that Stallone often plays dim-witted characters, and as a consequence, many people may feel Stallone himself must be dim. That is like saying Marilyn Manson is actually the anti-Christ, when in reality he is an extremely intelligent self-promoter. Now, I have never met Stallone in person; he may be dim. But then again, he may be a genius. An endorsement from Stallone is just that - an endorsement from a wealthy, socially-connected individual.
Second, the author obviously can't see the deeper meaning in films. The first Rambo movie, "First Blood," was actually anti-war and anti-hate. It was about a man who was emotionally and mentally scarred from the brutality of war only to return home to be hated, jeered and spit on by his own countrymen. It was about the hell thousands of servicemen faced, not only abroad at the hands of those who sought to kill them, but at home by those who sought to ostracize and blame them for participating in a war they didn't enjoy any more than the rest of society. And Rocky was not solely about boxing. It was about the American spirit - the courage it takes to stand in the face of the seemingly impossible and say, "I can because I believe."
Were these movies violent? Yes. Were they bloody? Yes. But to overlook their message out of ignorance would be like seeing only pretty blue colors in a Picasso painting, not the deep, heart-wrenching depression it represents. And yes, I realize Rambo is not on the same cultural level as Picasso.
It is important that we all take time to understand the presidential candidates' stances on the issues at hand. It is important that we all realize a celebrity endorsement is altogether irrelevant in terms of addressing those issues. But it is also important that we all take a moment to realize that actors are not, in fact, the characters they portray. Movies are works of art, with multiple layers of symbolism and meaning. Take the time to be informed.
Michael Miller
Graduate Student
Genetics, Development and Cell Biology
Copyright © 2008 - Iowa State Daily