Missing: US complicity in Latin American murderous coup d'etats

Bereta_Eder · January 26, 2003, 19:56

A drama concerning the actions which the US government takes in the name of its populace (but hides from them), Missing draws power from its true-life basis. Set in Chile, during the civil war years, Charles (John Shea) and Beth Horman (Sissy Spacek) are a duo of American citizens residing wherever their fancy takes them. Political neophytes, the pair simply enjoy the Chilean atmosphere and support themselves with a little writing, some translation and helping out like-minded folks. As the military coup brews, Charles begins to take notes on the situation and travels around with fellow American Terry Simon (Melanie Mayron). Along the way they see squads of troops on the move, corpses littering the streets and (strangely) US military officers in places where you wouldn't expect to find them. One of these men, Carter Babcock (Richard Bradford) chats cryptically about the onset of martial law and leaves the impression that he knows far more than he's willing to tell. With the rising level of spontaneous violence, Charles is desperate to return home to Beth (checking that she's safe and making plans to leave). Unfortunately, in the days before they can fly out Charles is arrested and taken away.
Initially Beth visits the consulate and embassy, hoping to determine where Charles has been taken and what's happened to him. However, they provide a poor level of service and after a few weeks Ed Horman (Jack Lemmon), Charles's father, travels down from New York. He's tried his best to push the issue within the US political system but it appears that the only way to make any progress is to be there in person, with Beth. The situation isn't quite that simple though since Charles doesn't actually like Beth, maybe because he blames her for "leading Charles astray". As far as Ed is concerned, the US authorities in Chile are the people to trust since they're bound to exert every effort in their search for Charles. Beth's flippant attitude towards these channels (she already knows what they're like) just pushes Ed further away (he categorises this as pure left-wing paranoia of authority). Combined with Ed's parochial viewpoint, there's scant chance of agreement between father and daughter-in-law.

More time passes, during which their visits to the consulate take on a frustrating tone. Each time they're promised that some action will be taken and yet they never seem to get any closer to a solution; all these "diplomats" achieve is to obfuscate the issue. Beth takes Ed on visits to eyewitnesses (who give quite contradictory statements), friends and associates with fragments of information. Gradually Ed constructs a picture of Charles at variance with the layabout, Marxist-type persona that he'd given his son. With this realisation arrives the knowledge that Beth is one of the most brave people that he's ever met and a fine daughter. This transformation provides the freedom to investigate much further, without relying on US officials, and to partially comprehend why Charles disappeared. It looks as though he knew a little too much about the US involvement in Chile; this alone was enough to ensure a death-sentence for a native, but would it for an American?

As a straightforward film, Missing has a great deal to impart on the behaviour of the US in foreign countries (particularly regarding covert operations). The crux of the matter is that Americans like their way of life and the Government works to sustain this, yet the citizens are quick to decry secret operations when knowledge of them becomes public. A two-edged sword, people's priorities shift when the matter becomes personal (as it has done for Ed Horman). The way in which Ed grows to know his son, just at a time when he may already be dead, is convincingly accomplished. The acting, upon which the plot rests, is generally excellent with Lemmon and Spacek projecting a realistic dynamic in their fraught relationship. The surrounding chaos (corpses littering the streets, randomly firing troops, earthquakes) is well established, although this could be any war-torn South American country (perhaps that's the point). The only drawback is that the script is too methodical, passing through the stages of Ed's transformation in a carefully planned sequence. More uncertainty would have helped, although this manipulation hardly detracts from the strong storyline.

Great movie!

Everyone should see it, if they haven't already

After seeing it, no American should ask

1) why the world hates us
2) why Al Qeada attacked us.

They are all self explanatory.

Brilliant film by Costas Gavras.

The Mad Monk · January 26, 2003, 19:57

US complicity is missing?

Well, I guess that settles that.

Bereta_Eder · January 26, 2003, 19:58

There should also be a movie about the UK's recently fiasco in protecting Pinochet from persecution.
Although the media already reported it, so I guess... there's no need.

Bereta_Eder · January 26, 2003, 20:00

"Missing" is the title of the movie of course about the US complicity in coup d'etats that killed hundrends of thousands all over the world.

Made in 1982.

Go see it

Datajack Franit · January 26, 2003, 20:05

Nice to see that my smart quotes are spreading across Poly

Bereta_Eder · January 26, 2003, 20:06

It was very funny

Bereta_Eder · January 26, 2003, 20:11

Anyway back to this brilliant movie about US complicity in murderous regimes, you can get it only in video now.

http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hv&id...6009&cf=awards

Odin · January 26, 2003, 20:19

Reminds me of all the people we've killed to protect corporations from the good leftist leaders. (Nicaragua ring a bell?) We've killed thousands of people just because Reagan lumped all leftists with the Soviet Union.

I'm suprised Fez isn't in this thread because you guys mentioned Pinochet, is he banned?

Shi Huangdi · January 26, 2003, 20:37

Why don't you focus instead on the shame of Greece and it's support of the Serbian murderers? When lookinf for a nation of blood that supports the murders of innocents, one need look no further then Greece.

Nubclear · January 26, 2003, 20:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Why don't you focus instead on the shame of Greece and it's support of the Serbian murderers? When lookinf for a nation of blood that supports the murders of innocents, one need look no further then Greece.

Why focus on Greece when you can focus on the world superpower?

Also Shi....what is that in your avatar?

JCG · January 26, 2003, 21:16

It all seems so simple when radical leftists give you the lowdown on things....

Nubclear · January 26, 2003, 23:14

Quote:

Originally posted by JCG
It all seems so simple when radical leftists give you the lowdown on things....

I agree. My favorite of their sayings is "Either your with us....or against us.".

Oh, wait............

Ramo · January 26, 2003, 23:36

There's an indie movie showing at the main artsy theatre around here called "The Trial of Henry Kissinger." (or something along those lines) Does anyone know if it's any good?

DinoDoc · January 26, 2003, 23:43

Quote:

Originally posted by Ramo
Does anyone know if it's any good?

You might want to go see it just to see how much actual plot they infused into the book. Sounds like trying to make a movie out of The Tragedy of Great Power Politics.

Sikander · January 26, 2003, 23:59

Quote:

Originally posted by Odin
Reminds me of all the people we've killed to protect corporations from the good leftist leaders. (Nicaragua ring a bell?) We've killed thousands of people just because Reagan lumped all leftists with the Soviet Union.

I'm suprised Fez isn't in this thread because you guys mentioned Pinochet, is he banned?

There were good leftist leaders in Nicaragua? Who? And which U.S. corporations led the counterattack? And why did the U.S. administration try to be nice to the Sandanistas until they were proven to be anti-democratic and a tool for Cuban / Soviet aggression in Central America? And why would America's most internationally popular president ( Carter ) come to such a conclusion and begin the process of turning them into international pariahs?

Bereta_Eder · January 27, 2003, 13:29

You supported and actualyl faciliated regimes to take the power by force and kill hundrend of thousands of people.
There is no justification for that, and you tried to do it again in Venezuela.

You wonder why the world hates you when the answer is staring you in the face

Sava · January 27, 2003, 13:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
Why don't you focus instead on the shame of Greece and it's support of the Serbian murderers? When lookinf for a nation of blood that supports the murders of innocents, one need look no further then Greece.

pffft, I think this is a troll, but I feel sorry for you if you really believe this

Clear Skies · January 27, 2003, 13:46

There are plenty of other examples...mostly justified by America looking out for its own interests. People have differing views on this, some think it's ok, others (myself included) think it isn't. I regard it as hypocritical that America says it's promoting democracy and human rights when in fact all it does is promote stability - imposing dictators on countries to protect business interests and often removing democratic governments. Others take different views, and I accept that.

Bereta_Eder · January 27, 2003, 15:16

When people are killed by the thousansd just to protect US interests, you think this is justified?

Clear Skies · January 27, 2003, 15:22

I don't, I thought I made that clear in my post. Not under any circumstances. But people always have the right to disagree with me...

Bereta_Eder · January 27, 2003, 15:26

You think this is a point where "disagreement" is acceptable?

"We support regimes that go kill people by the thousands and wouldnt be in a position to do so without our help but we do it to further our interests"

_I agree
_I disagree

And that is fine? Amazing.

Clear Skies · January 27, 2003, 15:33

I can't stop people from having a different opinion. I'll simply do all I can to prevent those people from getting into positions of power. I can't change the way they think.

Chris 62 · January 27, 2003, 15:41

So Paiktiss, how far back do you want to go, this is 2003, not 1973.

The pinheads today never even heard of what happened Chile.

BTW, your "Leftist" friends in Venezuela are busy trying to supress the people, who want the corrupt comunist dictator removed.

They shall be free.

Clear Skies · January 27, 2003, 15:48

Grenada and the Dominican Republic spring to mind.

Ozz · January 27, 2003, 16:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Chris 62
So Paiktiss, how far back do you want to go, this is 2003, not 1973.

They shall be free.

They keep the evidence of whats' going on locked up and won't show it to us until it's leaked or everyone
involved is dead. When lately WW2 info has been
released after 50 years. Thence you have to use
what is avaliable as proven.

They found that they are strong, and they shall be free.

chequita guevara · January 28, 2003, 03:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Sikander
There were good leftist leaders in Nicaragua?

Yes.

Quote:

Who?

The Sandinistas

Quote:

And why did the U.S. administration try to be nice to the Sandanistas until they were proven to be anti-democratic and a tool for Cuban / Soviet aggression in Central America?

Because the Somozistas hadn't reorganized yet and so there was no one for the US to give aid and money to.

Also, despite constant US declarations to he contrary, there was no Cuban/Soviet aggression in Central America, nor were the Sandanistas anti-democratic. Every election watcher in Nicaragua in 1984 declared those elections as free and fair except the US. Either we were wrong or everyone else was.

Ironically, given the massive funding to the opposition and the war waged gainst them, the US was kinda right, the elections weren't fair, but the Sandanistas were able to overcome that and win anyway.

Quote:

And why would America's most internationally popular president ( Carter ) come to such a conclusion and begin the process of turning them into international pariahs?

Domino theory. Immediately after Somoza fell, the people of El Salvador tried to get rid of their corrupt and evil government. One good example of people fighting for their freedom and winning can set a whole region aflame.

As for the movie, in the sequence where they tell Jack Lemon's character they've found his son and they take him to the temporary morgue and he sees an American kid lying there who isn't his son, that's Frank Terrugi, one of the founders of New World Resource Center, a radical bookstore I once co-managed.