WILL 'THE IRVING MOVIE' BE GOOD OR BAD FOR REVISIONISM?

Read and post various viewpoints or search our large archives.

Moderator: Moderator

Forum rules
Be sure to read the Rules/guidelines before you post!
User avatar
AngelofDeath
Member
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 10:03 pm

WILL 'THE IRVING MOVIE' BE GOOD OR BAD FOR REVISIONISM?

Postby AngelofDeath » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Jun 30, 2003 12:39 am)

Will it be a smear of Revisionsim? If so, will the West's apathy concerning the Holocaust lead to Revisonists losing any traction they may have gained? That is, will it stimulate even more debate, or will Revisionsits be seen as not credible?

I believe Zundel will be deported just in time (so there will be a trial in Europe with the accompanying media buzz) for the movie release in the West.

I think this movie will be good for Revisonism in the long term.


http://www.fpp.co.uk/Legal/Penguin/film ... 90603.html

User avatar
Braveheart
Member
Member
Posts: 29
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2003 12:00 am

Postby Braveheart » 1 decade 6 years ago (Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:52 pm)

Although I am sure that this upcoming film will portray Irving in a less-than-flattering manner, I think that anything that gets people to wonder about the historical truth (or lack thereof) of the Holocaust is a good thing.

User avatar
AngelofDeath
Member
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Sun May 04, 2003 10:03 pm

Postby AngelofDeath » 1 decade 6 years ago (Thu Jul 03, 2003 7:02 pm)

"Although I am sure that this upcoming film will portray Irving in a less-than-flattering manner, I think that anything that gets people to wonder about the historical truth (or lack thereof) of the Holocaust is a good thing."

In the long run, I think it’s a good thing that Irving lost as far as Revisionism is concerned. If Irving had won in court, would Holocaust Inc. continue to bring up Irving in the media? No. Do you think the Trial would have been mentioned on ABC’s This Week? NEVER! Would there ever been a movie about Irving if he had won? Obviously not

I also believe that Zundel's current treatment is great for Revisionism. Holocaust Inc. must appear very desperate to those who are interested in WW2 History and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. If you enter into the equation the radical left’s (i.e. Democracy Now, etc) new criticism of Zionism and the West’s distance in time from WW2, then the censorship of Revisionists by Zionists is reaching critical mass. People from the left and the right will eventually start to take notice and speak up. The censorship can’t go on forever. I think the next wave of Revisionism will come from the academic left in America.

Every time a Revisionist is jailed or maligned, Revisionism scores another point. The HI’s only approach is to ignore Revisionists (it is the lesser of two evils). Otherwise, they give Revisionism credibility and free publicity. HI does not seem to get it.

Also, I am certain that this movie will be maliciously released about the same time that Zundel is either deported to Germany or tried in German courts. If this is their plan, then this could very well backfire on HI.

Turpitz
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 975
Joined: Sun May 11, 2003 12:57 pm

Postby Turpitz » 1 decade 6 years ago (Fri Jul 04, 2003 2:00 pm)

I agree with you Braveheart, this is just another hideous chapter in their calculated methods of destroying everyone who has felt a need to dispute the H-Industry’s ever-evolving story. As you mention the more they draw attention to the subject in their desperate attempts to sustain its longevity and validity, there will be more than a few who will no-doubt see the cracks in the armour. You cannot but help thinking they are going to shoot themselves in the foot!
Once again, ‘Willy Shakes’ sums it up. ‘Tis a consummation devoutly to be wished.’

As to the obvious goal of the film, well it is plain to all that it will just be a one-sided smear, pouring scorn, and spitting bile as usual. Hollywood (there are a fair few who would call it by another name ‘Zionwood’ for instance) lost its innocence in the thirties all it has spewed since is driven by two objectives, either political or financial gain.

One has to ask the question why they need to stoop so low and take the path of the coward by hissing behind his back and counterpunching from the safety of the cinema screen. I know this is the tried and tested method of slander that we have all come to love and accept, but surely, if their arguments could stand up to criticism, they would do the decent thing and invite him on to the screen to put his point across. Christ what an improbable thought; that spectacle, should never be allowed to happen, it might induce the gullibles to start thinking. We could never have that!

In addition, let me make one thing known to all. Those judges and sham court’s in Britain are no more than tools for the despicable gangsters, money-launderers, and murderers that frequent the ancient halls of Westminster. I ask you how many of these same judges of the establishment sent countless numbers of IRA suspects to the H-Blocks to be kneecapped and murdered! Irving should never have let himself be lured into that no-win situation; he gave them all the ammunition they required. His chances of having those ridiculous clown-like wigged gangster’s return a verdict in his favour were non-existent, that scenario simply did not exist. From the moment he stepped onto those money-saturated steps of intrigue and deception that is the entrance to the courthouses, he was doomed! He was not there on those fateful days to fight his case against that odious mossad hag Lipstadt. Unbeknown to him, he was there to fight the establishment!

The stench of money floating around in the opaque air of those departmental buildings was enough to stifle one’s breath. I think the Zionist Spielberg contributed no less than ‘six-million’ alone; bloody disgrace! It makes you ashamed to live in a land where justice is determined by financial arguments rather than truthful ones.

Temporary on hold
Member
Member
Posts: 119
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 8:31 pm

Postby Temporary on hold » 1 decade 6 years ago (Sun Jul 06, 2003 9:21 pm)

Given the Hollywood record on the subject it is impossible to be optmistic that the film will be anything but a smear of Irving personally and revisionism as a subject. Optimists may feel that the mere exposure of the subject will be good for the cause of truth and justice but this has never proven to be the case in the past. Irving himself, with his typical brimming self-confidence, seems hopeful but then he thought he would win his case on his own too.

It will be interesting to see if Irving's skillful exposure of Professor Van Pelt in his cross examination during the trial will be presented fairly. This will be a sort of litmus test as far as I'm concerned.

Alain
Member
Member
Posts: 46
Joined: Sat Jun 21, 2003 5:00 pm
Location: Ottawa, Ontartio, Canada

Postby Alain » 1 decade 6 years ago (Mon Jul 07, 2003 10:26 pm)

Temporary on hold wrote:Given the Hollywood record on the subject it is impossible to be optmistic that the film will be anything but a smear of Irving personally and revisionism as a subject. Optimists may feel that the mere exposure of the subject will be good for the cause of truth and justice but this has never proven to be the case in the past. Irving himself, with his typical brimming self-confidence, seems hopeful but then he thought he would win his case on his own too.

It will be interesting to see if Irving's skillful exposure of Professor Van Pelt in his cross examination during the trial will be presented fairly. This will be a sort of litmus test as far as I'm concerned.


I tend to agree that there's no way Mr Irving will receive a fair depiction from Hollyweird, but I also think that, just like his trial, this movie will gain more attention for Revisionism, and that's always a good thing.

Alain (back from vacation and posting to stay active!)

Review
Member
Member
Posts: 115
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 2:53 pm

Re:

Postby Review » 3 years 6 months ago (Fri Jun 03, 2016 2:16 am)

Alain wrote:.....but I also think that, just like his trial, this movie will gain more attention for Revisionism, and that's always a good thing.

Alain (back from vacation and posting to stay active!)


I guess that's why the movie never came out (?)...

Although, there is apparently still some kind of discussions about making a movie, 10 years later.

http://forward.com/the-assimilator/3242 ... ie-denial/

Mortimer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:27 am

Re: WILL 'THE IRVING MOVIE' BE GOOD OR BAD FOR REVISIONISM?

Postby Mortimer » 3 years 6 months ago (Tue Jun 07, 2016 3:09 am)

This movie was covered here at CODOH last year. The shooting title is Denial and the production company is Cornerstone Films. David Merlin wrote to the producers but I doubt if he received a reply -
http://codoh.com/library/document/3442/
There are 2 sides to every story - always listen or read both points of view and make up your own mind. Don't let others do your thinking for you.

EtienneSC
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 513
Joined: Mon Nov 21, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: WILL 'THE IRVING MOVIE' BE GOOD OR BAD FOR REVISIONISM?

Postby EtienneSC » 3 years 6 months ago (Tue Jun 07, 2016 6:16 am)

Mortimer wrote:[...] The shooting title is Denial and the production company is Cornerstone Films. David Merlin wrote to the producers but I doubt if he received a reply -
http://codoh.com/library/document/3442/

Merlin's articles name Cornerstone films as promoting and marketing the film. However, the American distribution rights were sold to Bleeker Street in November 2015, a month or two after the CODOH articles by David Merlin appeared in September/October 2015. Bleeker Street is described as a new film distribution company in Variety. The screenplay was by David Hare. Apparently, there is an executive producer from BBC Films, which suggests to me that the level of knowledge of revisionism would be low.
http://variety.com/2016/film/news/rachel-weisz-holocaust-denier-drama-denial-september-1201786734/
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/denial-release-date-rachel-weisz-898696

Mortimer
Valued contributor
Valued contributor
Posts: 422
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2007 2:27 am

Re: WILL 'THE IRVING MOVIE' BE GOOD OR BAD FOR REVISIONISM?

Postby Mortimer » 3 years 6 months ago (Tue Jun 07, 2016 11:47 am)

EtienneSC wrote:
Mortimer wrote:[...] The shooting title is Denial and the production company is Cornerstone Films. David Merlin wrote to the producers but I doubt if he received a reply -
http://codoh.com/library/document/3442/

Merlin's articles name Cornerstone films as promoting and marketing the film. However, the American distribution rights were sold to Bleeker Street in November 2015, a month or two after the CODOH articles by David Merlin appeared in September/October 2015. Bleeker Street is described as a new film distribution company in Variety. The screenplay was by David Hare. Apparently, there is an executive producer from BBC Films, which suggests to me that the level of knowledge of revisionism would be low.
http://variety.com/2016/film/news/rachel-weisz-holocaust-denier-drama-denial-september-1201786734/
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/denial-release-date-rachel-weisz-898696

Thanks for the update. The IMDB listing for this film has a release date of September 2016 - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4645330/
They already have a message board up and running if anyone would like to make a comment - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4645330/board
There are 2 sides to every story - always listen or read both points of view and make up your own mind. Don't let others do your thinking for you.

User avatar
Lamprecht
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 1351
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 6:32 pm

re WILL 'THE IRVING MOVIE' BE GOOD OR BAD FOR REVISIONISM?

Postby Lamprecht » 3 years 5 months ago (Fri Jun 17, 2016 8:14 pm)

[Previously posted under 'New documentary on the Irving trial -- Denial'.
Moved to this earlier thread by Moderator, 6/17/2016]

Image

There is a new documentary (or fiction? :lol: ) on the Irving trial.


From: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/r ... ial-902822
In Denial, Rachel Weisz stars as historian Deborah E. Lipstadt, who was accused of libel by writer David Irving when she called him a Holocaust denier.

Timothy Spall will star as Irving in the Mick Jackson-directed drama, which is based on the book History on Trial: My Day in Court With a Holocaust Denier, which was adapted by David Hare. Tom Wilkinson will also star as lawyer Richard Rampton.


The IMDb link can be found here: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt4645330/
Denial (2016)
Biography, Drama, History | 30 September 2016 (USA)

Director: Mick Jackson
Writers: David Hare (screenplay), Deborah Lipstadt (book)
Stars: Rachel Weisz, Andrew Scott, Timothy Spall


The hoaxters are losing their touch, this just seems like it will be boring and quite silly honestly, a movie about a libel lawsuit in the UK :lol:



The trailer is on youtube
"There is a principal which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance -- that principal is contempt prior to investigation."
-- Herbert Spencer

User avatar
borjastick
Valuable asset
Valuable asset
Posts: 2536
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 5:52 am
Location: Europe

Re: WILL 'THE IRVING MOVIE' BE GOOD OR BAD FOR REVISIONISM?

Postby borjastick » 3 years 5 months ago (Sat Jun 18, 2016 12:29 am)

Actually any film that features Tim Spall and Andrew Scott is well worth an hour or two of my time. Of course this won't get much coverage and even fewer bums on seats at the pictures but hey there's no such thing as bad publicity, as they say...
'Of the four million Jews under Nazi control in WW2, six million died and alas only five million survived.'

'We don't need evidence, we have survivors' - israeli politician


Return to “'Holocaust' Debate / Controversies / Comments / News”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests