• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EPA was the bad guy in Ghostbusters

Matt Foley

Matt Foley

Death2Globalists
Joined
Dec 28, 2011
Messages
5,574
Reaction score
641
Location
ExecuteTheTraitors
Political Leaning
Other
EPA was the bad guy in Ghostbusters, now the EPA is the savior of the world today.

The American Air Force was the bad guy in Slaughterhouse Five for bombing Dresden, heck even the German soldier was portrayed as normal humans in that movie. Now WW2 is the "good war", and German soldiers of WW2 are evil blood sucking red skulls.

Ghostbusters was a movie about 25 years ago. Slaughterhouse Five was a movie about 35 years ago. How much propaganda can change in a generation or two.
 
When a movie comes out with conservative villains and liberal heroes, some people say that you can't make a movie with the roles reversed, but you can.

This isn't just a strawman. This issue came up after the Muppet movie.
 
I thought the bad guy in Ghostbusters was Zuul. The EPA's role is no different than reality. In fact, if you had a bunch of people running around New York with nuclear reactors strapped to their backs, the EPA would be the least of their worries.

I never saw the movie "Slaughterhouse Five," but I have read the book a few times. The bad guy isn't either side in the war as much as it is war itself.

In the Muppets, the guy wanted to drill for oil right in the middle of Los Angeles. If he didn't get stopped by a frog puppet, I'm sure getting the permits would have been a bitch. "The Muppets" was really about the power of dreams -- same as the original was in 1980.

Two of those movies were about as apolitical as they get. If you think they were propaganda, go watch some films by Sergei Eisenstein or Leni Reifenstahl.
 
rocket88 said:
In the Muppets, the guy wanted to drill for oil right in the middle of Los Angeles. If he didn't get stopped by a frog puppet, I'm sure getting the permits would have been a bitch. "The Muppets" was really about the power of dreams -- same as the original was in 1980.
Click to expand...

There are oil drills all throughout Los Angeles in those large windowless buildings you see everywhere.
 
Matt Foley said:
EPA was the bad guy in Ghostbusters, now the EPA is the savior of the world today.

The American Air Force was the bad guy in Slaughterhouse Five for bombing Dresden, heck even the German soldier was portrayed as normal humans in that movie. Now WW2 is the "good war", and German soldiers of WW2 are evil blood sucking red skulls.

Ghostbusters was a movie about 25 years ago. Slaughterhouse Five was a movie about 35 years ago. How much propaganda can change in a generation or two.
Click to expand...
Are these movies actually examples of propaganda?
Or are they entertainment?

Out of the thousands of possible choices, why are we only examining two pieces and extrapolating so much from so little data?
 
Last edited:
Matt Foley said:
It's pretty clear that Walter 'Pecker' the EPA guy was the villain.
Click to expand...

He was not the villain so much as the incompetent bureaucrat that interfered with proper duties. He played a secondary role in the film. That role is pretty common in cop/detective films.
 
Last edited:
Fiddytree said:
He was not the villain so much as the incompetent bureaucrat that interfered with proper duties. He played a secondary role in the film. That role is pretty common in cop/detective films.
Click to expand...

Nope, he was the primary villain.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Are these movies actually examples of propaganda?
Or are they entertainment?

Out of the thousands of possible choices, why are we only examining two pieces and extrapolating so much from so little data?
Click to expand...

Remember how in 1984 where the enemy went from Eurasia to Eastasia, and nobody batted an eye?
 
Peck wasn't the primary villain.

But he does represent what happens when a group of guys, using their genius and business acumen, create an industry and its support technology from scratch and become successful at it. Sooner or later the government is going to nose about, interfere, and cause needless problems, especially if they go on a "respect mah authoritah!!!!!" trip like Peck did.

The EPA nosed into something it didn't understand and blew up a block of the lower west side. Now that's symbolism.
 


He looks like a bureaucratic idiot, but then thats most government officials when they encounter something they dont know how to deal with.
 
I really wish this guy could've had a bigger role:

staypuft.jpg
 
Matt Foley said:
EPA was the bad guy in Ghostbusters, now the EPA is the savior of the world today.

The American Air Force was the bad guy in Slaughterhouse Five for bombing Dresden, heck even the German soldier was portrayed as normal humans in that movie. Now WW2 is the "good war", and German soldiers of WW2 are evil blood sucking red skulls.

Ghostbusters was a movie about 25 years ago. Slaughterhouse Five was a movie about 35 years ago. How much propaganda can change in a generation or two.
Click to expand...

You cannot ****ing equate "Ghostbusters" to "Slaughterhouse Five."

Kurt Vonnegut was a POW who was in Dresden when the firebombing of the city happened. He witnessed the destruction, which was very real. Vonnegut wrote "Slaughterhouse Five" to help cope with his experiences fighting in World War II.

"Ghostbusters" is a pop culture film that, while funny, has incredibly little substance to it. It is pure and utter fiction through and through.

The two aren't even comparable.
 
Harshaw said:
Peck wasn't the primary villain.

But he does represent what happens when a group of guys, using their genius and business acumen, create an industry and its support technology from scratch and become successful at it. Sooner or later the government is going to nose about, interfere, and cause needless problems, especially if they go on a "respect mah authoritah!!!!!" trip like Peck did.

The EPA nosed into something it didn't understand and blew up a block of the lower west side. Now that's symbolism.
Click to expand...

No, the reason why the EPA shut down the containment device was because the Ghostbusters were operating an unlicensed nuclear device in the middle of New York City. The government has the power and duty to ensure people's safety, especially when it comes to nuclear devices.

If the Ghostbusters had just licensed their device like they should have and Venkman hadn't acted like such a douchebag that incident wouldn't have happened either.
 
samsmart said:
No, the reason why the EPA shut down the containment device was because the Ghostbusters were operating an unlicensed nuclear device in the middle of New York City. The government has the power and duty to ensure people's safety, especially when it comes to nuclear devices.

If the Ghostbusters had just licensed their device like they should have and Venkman hadn't acted like such a douchebag that incident wouldn't have happened either.
Click to expand...

When Peck read off his list of charges, not to mention when he told Venkman what he was looking for, he never said one thing about the nuclear devices. The containment device wasn't nuclear. (In fact, he called their work a "fake electronic light show.") Peck was concerned with chemicals and gases.

Nuclear devices wouldn't even be the purview of the EPA. It would be the NRC.

Peck had no idea what he was talking about and was running on assumptions and an ego trip.
 
Last edited:
No, wait. I'm wrong.

It was Gozer. Zuul was just the minion.
 
Harshaw said:
When Peck read off his list of charges, not to mention when he told Venkman what he was looking for, he never said one thing about the nuclear devices. The containment device wasn't nuclear. (In fact, he called their work a "fake electronic light show.") Peck was concerned with chemicals and gases.

Nuclear devices wouldn't even be the purview of the EPA. It would be the NRC.

Peck had no idea what he was talking about and was running on assumptions and an ego trip.
Click to expand...

Peck would have known what he was talking about if the Ghostbusters allowed him to inspect it to ensure it was safe.
 
samsmart said:
Peck would have known what he was talking about if the Ghostbusters allowed him to inspect it to ensure it was safe.
Click to expand...

He had no authority to do it, and once he did, he had already decided what's what without actually ascertaining anything, shut down the grid, and blew up a city block.
 
Could a better version of political propaganda through a movie be Avatar?
 
Harshaw said:
He had no authority to do it, and once he did, he had already decided what's what without actually ascertaining anything, shut down the grid, and blew up a city block.
Click to expand...

Yes, because the Ghostbusters never cleared their equipment according to municipal, state, and federal laws. If they just cleared it first everything would have been fine.
 
samsmart said:
Yes, because the Ghostbusters never cleared their equipment according to municipal, state, and federal laws. If they just cleared it first everything would have been fine.
Click to expand...

Well, how do you know?

It's true that Venkman said they were unlicensed nuclear accelerators, but how many times was he sarcastic throughout the movie? Plus, the packs were profiled in Omni magazine, so if they really had been, the NRC would have been all over them.
 
samsmart said:
You cannot ****ing equate "Ghostbusters" to "Slaughterhouse Five."

Kurt Vonnegut was a POW who was in Dresden when the firebombing of the city happened. He witnessed the destruction, which was very real. Vonnegut wrote "Slaughterhouse Five" to help cope with his experiences fighting in World War II.

"Ghostbusters" is a pop culture film that, while funny, has incredibly little substance to it. It is pure and utter fiction through and through.

The two aren't even comparable.
Click to expand...

Seriously I wasn't trying to "equate" them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom