- Feb 12, 2007
- 59,384
- 24,018
- 2,290
Yeah all that's totally in the movie. You're real claim is that landing on the moon and being the first to ever walk on the moon is totally secondary to planting a flag that was blasted into dirt a few minutes after being put up. Maybe D'Souza can do a 2 hour slow motion piece of some tall Aryan portraying Armstrong planting the flag on the moon. At the exit can be a booth where conservatives swear a holy oath to the state as as act of patriotism.This movie is about Neil Armstrong. Not an American propaganda piece. Are you pissed he said "giant leap for mankind" instead of "giant leap for AMERICA" too? Good grief, snowflake. The flag was blow over into the dirt when they took off anyways. Is it "rewriting history" if they had shown that?That is not revisionist history. By your logic, they could be "re-writing" anything by not showing it. You could claim they're re-writing the Vietnam war by not including it.It excludes the iconic symbol of the U.S. flag on the moon. If you don't grok how that is revisionist history, tough toenails.
What a clueless boob you are. This movie is about the first man to walk on the moon - an American. One of the most iconic images of the 20th century is the American flag on the moon.
IOW, Get Woke and Go Broke.
The only reason Neil Armstrong is a worthy subject for a movie is because he is the First Man to walk on the Moon...and was an American.
It would be more interesting than your drivel.