Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

PROTEST AGAINST RUSSELL CROWE'S DISTORTION OF HISTORY


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 January 2015 - 10:44 AM

PROTEST AGAINST RUSSELL CROWE'S DISTORTION OF HISTORY

From: The Greek Genocide: 1914-1923 <greekgenocide1914@gmail.com>
To: Greek Genocide <greekgenocide1914@gmail.com>
Sent: Mon, Jan 12, 2015 6:43 pm
Subject: PROTEST: Russell Crowe's new film a distortion of history

Russell Crowe's new film about Gallipoli, The Water Diviner,
has offended many descendants of genocide survivors - Greeks and
Armenians alike - through its false portrayal of the events during
the period which the film is set. There has been public outrage on
our Facebook page, and for that reason, we've drafted a letter which
you may use to voice your opinion. You may address it to whomever you
choose, however we have listed some recommendations at the bottom of
the draft (see below) includingAndrew Anastasios the screenwriter,
and The Rabbitohs Rugby League team which Crowe is shareholder of,
and which is currently chaired by a good friend of Crowe's, Dr Nick
Pappas. Let's stand up and be a voice for our ancestors who were
brutally massacred during that period!

Dear

I am writing this letter to express my shock at the false portrayal of
historical events in the Russell Crowe film 'The Water Diviner'. The
film is presented as being 'inspired by actual events', but as a person
whose family has been deeply affected by the genocide perpetrated
by the Ottoman Government during that period (1914-1923), I can say
that the events in the movie are far from the truth. In fact, they
are a gross distortion of it.

In May of 2013, the New South Wales Parliament officially recognised
the mass killing of Greeks, Armenians and Assyrians during that period
as an act of genocide. Similar recognitions have occurred throughout
the world condemning the acts as genocide. Geoffrey Robertson QC has
for years been calling on Turkey to recognize its past, using the term
'genocide' to describe the events. Turkey has continuously denied
committing genocide, while the rest of the world has been calling
for recognition.

So how can a film such as The Water Diviner be made? How can a film
show the exact opposite? How can Russell Crowe direct a film in which
he portrays Greeks as satanic, while he portrays the Turks as victims?

Just two weeks before the ANZAC landings, some 32,000 indigenous Greeks
living in the Gallipoli peninsula were forcibly deported by the Ottoman
Turkish government, and many died of harsh conditions. Other Greeks
of Asia Minor such as those from Livissi (today Kayakoy) were also
victims of the genocidal campaign during that period. Ironically,
the final scenes in the movie were shot at the current ghost town of
Livissi, Turkey.

In 1919, the Greek Army was sent to the western Ottoman port city
of Smyrna (Izmir) via a British mandate, to protect the remaining
Christian population in Anatolia from further massacre. When Greek
forces landed, the Christians saw them as liberators. During and
after WW1, the international media widely reported Turkish massacres
against Greeks and Armenians. The methods used included mass killings,
death marches, rape, forced conversion to Islam and confiscation of
property amongst others.

On April 24, 1915, just one day prior to the ANZAC landing at
Gallipoli, the Ottoman government rounded up some 240 Armenian
intellectuals and most were killed. By 1923, over half of the Armenian
population (1.5 million people) was massacred, some 1 million Greeks,
and several hundred thousand Assyrians. All these events were happening
during the time period of the scenes depicted in The Water Diviner,
yet Russell Crowe managed to paint the Turks as victims.

The Water Diviner is a film that offends the descendants of genocide
victims and should therefore be condemned. If a film depicting Adolf
Hitler as a hero and the Jews as terrorists were made, the reaction
would be one of shock and outrage. Russell Crowe's film is a distortion
of history that only serves to appease Turkey and its continued agenda
of genocide denial.

Regards

SEND EMAILS TO:

ANDREW ANASTASIOS: ajana@bigpond.net.au eOne
PRODUCTION HOUSE: info.au@entonegroup.com SOUTH SYDNEY
RABBITOHS: thumper@rabbitohs.com.au WARNER BROTHERS:
http://www.warnerbro...ustomer-service THE SYDNEY
MORNING HERALD: letters@smh.com.au THE AUSTRALIAN NEWSPAPER:
letters@theaustralian.com.au NATIONAL FILM EDITOR. FAIRFAX MEDIA:
kquinn@fairfaxmedia.com.au

Other ways to PROTEST include going to IMDB and ROTTEN TOMATOES and
giving it a really low rating and leaving a negative comment.

IMDB: http://www.imdb.com/...2/?ref_=nv_sr_1 ROTTEN
TOMATOES: http://www.rottentom..._water_diviner/

http://www.keghart.c...istortion-Crowe

 


#2 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 January 2015 - 08:09 AM

CROWE'S WATER DIVINER IS OUT OF HIS DEPTH

January 13, 2015

By Anthony McAdam

Leaving aside aesthetic considerations, the fact is the film's lack
of any historical context is breathtaking. There are many, but there
is one really glaring omission.

It so happens that the well-documented genocide of the Armenians at
the hands of the Turks was initiated on the day immediately before
the Gallipoli landing, an overlap that traditionally receives hardly
a mention from Australian historians, and no reference whatsoever in
this film.

The Spectator - To much fanfare, Russell Crowe's first film as a
director, The Water Diviner, was released on Boxing Day. It appears at
a key moment - the focus of the film, Gallipoli, is about to become
the centrepiece in an elaborate nation-wide commemoration to mark
the centenary of the landing in 1915.

If intentions are taken seriously, the film is a huge disappointment.

Its release came packaged to suggest that it presents a more honest
and more understanding appreciation of our then enemy, the Turks.

Besides being the director, Crowe is the star and driving force in
the film's conception, and hence fully responsible for the result. His
intention: 'It is time to teach our children the other side [i.e. the
Turkish side] of the Gallipoli story'.

Many of the media reviews have been just as presumptuous and
wrong-headed. The Age, for instance, tells us 'This is perhaps the
first Australian war movie to deal honestly with the Turks and that
is one of its achievements'.

Well, not really. This highly sentimentalised and rather pointless
attempt to depict the human dimension of the Gallipoli campaign, as
experienced by an Aussie father (Crowe) searching for the bodies of
his three sons, fails both as plausible drama and as an honest attempt
to confront the actual behaviour of the enemy (the Ottoman empire),
not to mention the moral justification for the terrible sacrifice of
Allied lives.

On that last point, distinguished British historian Jeremy Black
recently wrote: 'The current fashion for commemorating the dead
by honouring their struggle does not in fact honour them unless we
explain why they were fighting and facing the personal, moral and
religious challenges of risking and inflicting death. Why did men
volunteer in 1914? Why did they advance across the 'killing ground'?

To mark the struggle without recalling its point and value is both
to lack a moral compass and, indeed, not really to seek one'.

And for those who believe, as Crowe seems to, that Britain and
Australia entered the war for ignoble reasons, or no reason at all,
it is worth 'remembering' that Britain was responding to a clear act
of German aggression against a neutral country, Belgium, with which
it was honour bound by treaty to defend, a decision overwhelmingly
supported at the time by the Australian government and the Australian
people. Turkey threw in its lot with the Germans and made itself
the enemy.

Not only does the film fail to show the slightest inkling of interest
as to why the allies fought and, for that matter, why the hero's sons
died, but Crowe bathes the whole story in a painfully mawkish and
barely credible tale of a heart-broken water diviner (Crowe himself)
who miraculously emerges as a body diviner rambling around the rocky
cliffs of Gallipoli 'bonding' with the very soldiers responsible
for his sons' deaths, with of course the now obligatory Aussie sneer
directed towards a British officer made out to be a right pompous git
(shades of Weir's Gallipoli?).

Leaving aside aesthetic considerations, the fact is the film's lack
of any historical context is breathtaking. There are many, but there
is one really glaring omission.

It so happens that the well-documented genocide of the Armenians at
the hands of the Turks was initiated on the day immediately before
the Gallipoli landing, an overlap that traditionally receives hardly
a mention from Australian historians, and no reference whatsoever in
this film.

What happened to the Armenians? Kristian Coates Ulrichsen, author of
The First World War in the Middle East (2014) paints the basic picture:

The Armenian genocide started in earnest on 24 April 1915 with the
arrest and deportation of thousands of Armenian political leaders
and intellectuals. This act triggered widespread massacres that
subsequently killed an estimated 1 million Armenians. The combination
of the outright killings and the forced marches through the Syrian
Desert constituted one of the earliest examples of a 'crime against
humanity'...

The mass murder of this ancient Christian community made no exception
for women and children and was conducted with a barbarity that
shocked even officers of the Ottoman's German allies, some of whom
witnessed the gruesome scenes first hand, as did missionaries and
other outsiders.

The legacy of what happened a hundred years ago in Turkey this April
is now taking on all the characteristics of a diplomatic perfect
storm. Obviously, the Australian centenary commemorations at Gallipoli
will be more elaborate than anything previous, the worldwide protests
by the Armenian Diaspora will be more vociferous than ever, and the
Turkish government's fierce opposition to even the mention of the
word genocide will be as aggressive as ever.

This combination of factors is now coming to a head with Turkey
virtually ruling itself out of any hope of having its stalled
application to join the EU accepted, its position on the Armenian
issue being a major factor. If all this were not enough, more evidence
is emerging that highlights Turkey's current machiavellian position
vis-a-vis the Islamic State's forces on its borders, a savage army
currently trying to murder what's left of Iraq's and Syria's Christian
communities, and other demonised faith communities.

Where does Australia sit in this gathering storm with its myriad
strategic and moral conundrums? Not well. While Opposition Leader
Tony Abbott did not hesitate to condemn the Armenian genocide, last
June Foreign Minister Julie Bishop issued a statement that called
the Armenian killings 'a tragedy' but added, quite unnecessarily,
'we do not recognise the events as genocide' for which, according to
(former Speccie Diarist) Geoffrey Robertson QC, 'she was duly lauded
in Turkey as a genocide denier'.

The moral issue at stake is neatly captured in the subtitle of
Robertson's recently published book on the genocide: 'Who now remembers
the annihilation of the Armenians?' It was Hitler's comment to his
generals on the eve of the invasion of Poland urging them to show no
mercy as there would be no retribution. It's all part of 'the other
side of the Gallipoli story' that Russell Crowe somehow didn't get
around to even hinting at.

http://www.horizonwe...s/details/59284
 



#3 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 January 2015 - 10:14 AM

A FUNDAMENTALLY SILLY FILM: ANOTHER PERSPECTIVE ON THE WATER DIVINER

Honest History, Australia
Jan 13 2015

Honest History President, Peter Stanley, reviews Russell Crowe's film,
The Water Diviner. Other material on the film, including links to
other reviews.

Spoiler alert! This review contains spoilers: if you don't want to
know, don't read on.

'Inspired by true events'? Well, yes; an unnamed Australian father
is indeed supposed to have turned up on Gallipoli after the war in
search of a dead son; there was a First World War; there were farmers
and wells in north-western Victoria ... But just about everything
else in The Water Diviner is made up and not very convincingly
either. As so often happens with historical films, the mistakes and
the misrepresentations could so easily have been avoided. This is
basically a silly film, full of impossibilities, and isn't worth the
attention it's getting.

Members of the Australian Historical Mission and Major Zeki Bey at
lunch on Hill 60, February-March 1919. Left to right: Herbert Buchanan;
Zeki Bey; Hubert Wilkins; CEW Bean; George Lambert (Australian War
Memorial A05258)

My criticisms of The Water Diviner as a filmed story revolve around
its fundamental lack of credibility. A bereaved father finds the
remains of two of his sons on the site of the fight for Lone Pine -
a place where, the film tells us, mistakenly, 7000 men were killed.

(Actually, that was the figure for total casualties - wounded as well
as deaths, both sides - but still it's ludicrous to think that finding
two bodies among that many was remotely possible.) Then he somehow
finds himself somewhere in Anatolia and senses the presence of his
surviving son, who has somehow made the transition from prisoner of
war to icon painter and Dervish. (Don't ask how he manages to both
paint Christian icons, in a ruined Greek church, and participate
in Islamic Sufi ritual. Why should you ask? The producers obviously
didn't.) Add the devices of corpse divining and coffee-ground readings
(not to mention the father finding the surviving son by merely sensing
his presence in a random bit of Anatolia) and you have a plot that
substitutes coincidences and credulity for plausibility. Excuse
the spoilers, but if they save you from going to see this load of
tosh you'll thank me when you see it for nothing on TV in a year or
so's time.

As a drama the execution is clunky and predictable. Of course,
we can see the romance developing between the widower Joshua and
the Turkish widow Ayshe from the moment they meet. Their candlelit
supper the night before Joshua is to be seen off from Constantinople
resembles nothing but a stylish coffee commercial and the cute kid
with astonishingly good English is just ridiculous. The film also
includes the philosophical exchanges between former enemies that we
have come to expect in films of this kind. 'Lieutenant-Colonel Hughes',
based on the real Australian war graves representative at Anzac, and
'Major Hasan', based on Zeki Bey, Charles Bean's Turkish informant,
duly share their reflections on the Tragedy of War. 'How much blood
do you need to make [a battlefield] holy?'; 'I don't know if I can
forgive any of us'. This is predictable and mostly just irritating.

So much for the unconvincing plot. But The Water Diviner is an
historical film and its historical gaffes begin in its opening
moments. We are shown Ottoman troops attacking the Anzac line on
20 December 1915, the morning after the allied evacuation of Anzac
and Suvla. It's a bright sunny, seemingly warm morning - men are
wearing just tunics and shirts - quite different to the freezing
dawn of Gallipoli in December. Strike one. The Turks attack, though
in reality they sent out patrols to investigate the unaccustomed
silence. Strike two. They find the famous 'drip guns', still not
firing ten or so hours after the Anzacs' departure (but the Anzacs'
ships are still close enough to be seen through binoculars). Strike
three, and the film isn't five minutes old.

At times The Water Diviner is an evocative portrayal of aspects of
Gallipoli: the claustrophobic hand-to-hand fighting in the covered
trenches of Lone Pine is depicted convincingly, indeed terrifyingly.

(That it culminates with an Australian shooting Turkish wounded is
a point in its favour.) It hints at the horror that such fighting
probably entailed. The agonised groans of the mortally wounded brother
are convincingly wrenching: full marks for truth-telling there.

Major Zeki Bey, lent by the Ottoman General Staff to the Australian
Historical Mission to Gallipoli in 1919 to provide information of the
campaign from the Turkish side. He had been at Gallipoli for much
of the Anzac occupation and was able to give first hand accounts
(Australian War Memorial ART2868/George Lambert)

But generally the film's writers, Andrew Knight and Andrew Anastasios,
simply haven't thought about the historical reality they are trying to
depict. Presumably they want us to find the story they tell convincing
- they tell us that it's 'inspired by true events', after all - but
they couldn't be arsed with the details. Of course, as an Australian
film it has to have a go at the silly-ass Pommy officer, who is baited,
given a horse named 'Widowmaker' when he asks for a mount.

This is so much par for the course in Australian war films that it's
barely worth mentioning. There are lots of relatively minor historical
errors, none especially important in themselves but collectively
demonstrating that once again film-makers basically are happy to
pillage history for 'stories' but can't be bothered to pay their dues
by getting it right.

For example, Joshua Connor's three sons are supposedly killed at
Lone Pine, on 7 August. They're in the 7th Battalion, but the 7th
Battalion didn't join the fight until 8 August. Alright, it's just
a day different, but it points to sloppy research; getting the right
date would have taken a minute to check.

Connor's youngest son is aged 17 years and 7 months, according to
the cross set up over his grave. This is well under-age: he shouldn't
have been allowed to go overseas until he turned 19 but he must have
embarked when he'd just turned 17. Of course, it was possible for
under-age youths to be accepted, with or without a parent's written
permission. (Would Joshua have given his permission? Perhaps - but
what would his wife have felt? The writers just haven't thought this
through.) But why introduce this complication at all, since instances
of soldiers that young were so rare? The film contributes needlessly
to the misconception that Australia's Gallipoli dead included under-age
youths - one in three of the Connor sons.

Does Russell Crowe especially like beards, besides his own? A British
soldier in Constantinople (a Scotsman in the Lancashire Fusiliers)
has one, as does Sergeant Tucker of the 4th Light Horse, supposedly
a member of the 'Imperial War Graves Unit' [sic] on Gallipoli in 1919.

British Empire soldiers weren't allowed to grow beards in the Great
War. Actually, this is even more odd. No battalion of the Lancashire
Fusiliers was ever in the division that occupied Constantinople;
a detail, but one easily checked. While there were Australian Light
Horsemen on Gallipoli in 1919, they were members of the 7th Light
Horse, not the 4th. Tucker describes being in the fight at Lone Pine
but the Light Horse took no part in that attack. These are fiddly
mistakes, of no relevance to the plot. But that's the point: with a
proper historical adviser they wouldn't have been made.

The film's only 'research' credit is to a Dr Meaghan Wilson-Anastasios,
presumably related to one of the writers and hardly a source of
independent advice, even if she possessed specialist expertise in
Gallipoli or the Great War, not to mention the complex post-war
situation of Turkey.

(Dr Wilson-Anastasios's website describes her as

a lapsed archaeologist who worked in Greece and the Middle East,
but now uses her PhD in art history and cultural economics to impart
knowledge to impressionable postgraduate students at the University
of Melbourne. It also comes in handy every now and then in her work
as a researcher and script writer for film and TV, if only to convince
producers that she might occasionally know what she's talking about.

One is tempted to add: 'enough said'.)

The Water Diviner, filmed partly in Turkey and produced with the
co-operation of the Turkish government, paints the Greeks as barbaric
invaders. That, of course, plays to Turkish nationalist mythology. But
it is certainly true that the Greeks invaded Anatolia in the wake
of the Great War and that atrocities were committed (on both sides,
though the film portrays them as being one-sided). The Greek troops
are dressed and act as murderous banditti, not as Evzones, who
wore a khaki military uniform and who operated as formed military
units. Some Greek troops did operate as banditti, as depicted in the
film, but the film-makers have basically reflected a Turkish view of
the Greek invasion.

Constantinople: panoramic view of the city in the 1870s as seen from
the Galata Tower (Wikimedia Commons)

Let me differ from some commentators in the Honest History community
and say that some aspects of the film that have caused offence didn't
bother me. As several people have mentioned, there isn't any reference
to the massacres of Armenians that were such an important part of
the last years of the Ottoman Empire. That's true, but it seems to me
that the Armenian agony simply has no relevance to the film's plot,
risible though the plot is. Ottoman and Turkish outrages against the
Armenian community deserve attention but The Water Diviner is a work
of fiction, not a history of post-war Turkey. Let's cut Russell Crowe
and his writers some slack.

But not too much slack because The Water Diviner has a ridiculously
implausible plot that along the way portrays several aspects of the
Great War and its aftermath in highly-coloured or misleading ways. We
ought to criticise both the writers and the director for failing in
their duty to do their jobs.

http://honesthistory...-water-diviner/
 



#4 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 January 2015 - 10:20 AM

THE WATER DIVINER: FANTASY NOT HISTORY

Neos Kosmos - Hellenic Perspective
Jan 14 2015

The premise of an Australian wandering around western Anatolia in
1920-21 is itself incredulous

DR PANAYIOTIS DIAMANTIS

'Satan's army: the dark side of The Water Diviner', 'Bizarre',
'Disgusting', 'Lies' and 'Disgraceful'. These are some of the responses
to the depiction of Hellenes in The Water Diviner, screenplay and novel
by Andrew Anastasios and associates. Anastasios and his co-writers
have done serious disservice to both Kleio, Muse of History, and
to Hellenism.

A daughter of Zeus, Këåßù may translate as 'to recount', 'to make
famous', or 'to celebrate'. Anastasios' misconstructions and omissions
result in the film and its accompanying novel presenting the indigenous
Hellenes of Anatolia as 'Satan's army', as barbarous invaders. In
its drive to create an anti-war message, The Water Diviner ends up as
fantastic propaganda where victims become perpetrators and perpetrators
become victims.

In The Water Diviner, Anastasios omits that Hellenes, Armenians
and Assyrians are the indigenous peoples of Anatolia, omits that
Armenians lived in the region where most of the action in the film and
the novel takes place, depicts the indigenous Hellenes of Anatolia
so disparagingly even the Turkish newspaper Zaman decries it, and
much more.

In a recent interview, Russell Crowe claimed that "after 100 years,
it's time to expand that mythology", Australia "should be mature enough
as a nation to take into account the story that the other blokes have
to tell". Fair enough. This should include the story of the indigenous
peoples of Anatolia who were being subjected to genocide at the time
when the film is set, in the land where the film's action unfolds.

The first step in setting right a litany of wrongs is a disclaimer
at the beginning of each screening of this film acknowledging that
Hellenes, Armenians and Assyrians are the indigenous peoples of
Anatolia and that the film may offend them and their descendants.

History and fantasy

The Water Diviner is about a man who travels to eastern Thrace and
Anatolia after the Battle of Gallipoli to try to find his three missing
sons. The premise of an Australian wandering around western Anatolia
in 1920-21 is itself incredulous. Australian World War One veteran
Major George Devine Treloar told the Sydney Morning Herald in May
1927 that "Turkey was a bad place for foreigners at the present time".

The story deals (in part) with the Anzac prisoners-of-war of the
Ottoman Empire in World War One. The climax of the story takes
place in a medieval Orthodox church in the city of Akroinos (modern
Afyonkarahisar).

Anzac and other Allied POWs (especially Indians) died in captivity by
the thousand. Anzac POWs recorded how Armenian and Hellenic churches
and houses across Anatolia were their prison camps. Akroinos' main
prisoner-of-war camps were the massive Armenian church and its
neighbourhood of formerly Armenian-owned houses.

The Water Diviner paints indigenous Anatolian Hellenes as barbaric
invaders, at one point being labelled 'Satan's army' by one character.

Surviving Anzac prisoners recorded how Hellenes assisted in their
survival - and in some cases, their escape.

Crowe and his writers are derided by Guy Walters of The Telegraph
(London), Barry John Clark, president of the New Zealand Veterans
Association, and Major General David McLachlan, president of the
Victorian RSL, amongst others, for holding positions "utterly without
foundation".

In Major General McLachlan's words, "Russ must have been asleep
during that lesson at school", referring to the inclusion of the
Turkish view of Gallipoli in this country's schools and universities.

The danger of this and other similar films that claim to be 'inspired
by actual events' is that because Crowe is a famous actor, his words
are taken as being authoritative. His film may be treated as actual
history. As educators and as consumers, we should take this problem
seriously.

As demonstrated by Peter Weir's Gallipoli (1980) - a favourite of
secondary school teachers - the problem with the glib Anastasios-Crowe
approach is that audiences develop completely skewed, often false,
historical knowledge; implanting false memories in public history.

As seen with the explosion of 'Anzackery' over the last generation,
this collective false memory has major effects on our understanding
of our own past, how we explain our past to ourselves, how we regard
ourselves, and how we act as a national collective. The 1934 Mustafa
Kemal 'statement' about mothers and sons exemplifies this point. As
illustrated by Professor Peter Stanley, there is no evidence Mustafa
Kemal ever addressed a message to grieving Australian mothers. Yet
the 'statement' is omnipresent in political and historical writing
around Anzac.

Similarly, Anastasios and Crowe 'expand' the very mythologies they
are seeking to undermine. As Crowe stated: "You know, because we did
invade a sovereign nation that we'd never had an angry word with ...

we shouldn't celebrate the parts of that mythology that shouldn't
be celebrated."

The Ottoman Empire launched a campaign of destruction against its
indigenous peoples from January 1914, beginning with violent expulsions
of Hellenes from the very region (the Gallipoli Peninsula) where so
many Anzacs and other allies fell only months later.

The Ottoman Empire joined the Central Powers and invaded British Egypt
and the Russian Caucasus in 1914. On New Year's Day 1915, two Afghan
cameleers flew the Ottoman banner in their assault on a trainload of
picnickers outside Broken Hill, NSW.

In seeking to promote an anti-war message at a time when extreme
ideologies are wreaking havoc, Anastasios and Crowe are engaging in
a dangerous revisionism of historical events. In some aspects, this
constitutes genocide denial by omission. While Anastasios may claim
'artistic licence', that this film and its novel are entertainment,
historical events should not be used as the basis of works that
distort them. This is not the History Kleio personifies.

Dr Panayiotis Diamadis lectures in Genocide Studies at the University
of Technology, Sydney.

http://neoskosmos.co...iMawEw.facebook
 



#5 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2015 - 11:10 AM

LEADING PROFESSOR SLAMS RUSSELL CROWE FILM AS 'SILLY', AND FOR OMITTING ARMENIAN GENOCIDE

Thursday, 15 January 2015

SYDNEY: Leading Australian World War I historian, Dr. Peter Stanley,
has openly referred to Russell Crowe's latest movie, The Water Diviner,
as a "fundamentally silly film" and slammed it for not referring to
the Armenian Genocide.

Stanley, the former head of Historical Research and Principal Historian
at the Australian War Memorial, has written an extensive account
on the historical inaccuracies of this movie, which claims to be
"inspired by true events".

The movie, which has been released to coincide with the centenary
of ANZAC Day, tells the story of an Australian father who visits
Gallipoli after the war in search of his dead son.

Stanley criticises The Water Diviner on the basis of the "fundamental
lack of credibility".

He says: "...just about everything else in The Water Diviner is made
up and not very convincingly either....This is basically a silly film,
full of impossibilities, and isn't worth the attention it's getting,"
Stanley writes.

He adds: "There isn't any reference to the massacres of Armenians that
were such an important part of the last years of the Ottoman Empire.

That's true, but it seems to me that the Armenian agony simply has
no relevance to the film's plot, risible though the plot is."

Under the guise of World War I, the Ottoman Turkish government
implemented and carried out the first genocide of the 20th century
against its Armenian population, as well as Greeks and Assyrians.

Turkey continues to run an international campaign of denial.

Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of Australia,
Vache Kahramanian, remarked: "It is not unsurprising that Turkey
is heavily promoting this film, which aim to portray the Turk as a
victim, even though one of the greatest crimes against humanity was
committed against its Armenian subjects from 1915 to 1923."

The Water Diviner, already out in Australian cinemas, is scheduled
to premiere in the United States on the Centenary anniversary of the
Armenian Genocide, the 24th of April, 2015.


http://anc.org.au/ne...menian-Genocide



#6 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2015 - 11:14 AM

'SATAN'S ARMY': THE DARK SIDE OF THE WATER DIVINER

Source: Dr Panayiotis Diamadis | Wednesday, 14 January 2015

Dr Panayiotis Diamadis lectures in Genocide Studies at the University
of Technology, Sydney.

'Bizarre', 'Disgusting', 'Lies' and 'Disgraceful'. These are some
of the responses to the depiction of Hellenes in The Water Diviner,
screenplay and novel by Andrew Anastasios and associates. Anastasios
and his co-writers have done serious dis-service to both Kleio,
Muse of History, and to Hellenism.

A daughter of Zeus, Këåßù may translate as 'to recount', 'to make
famous', or 'to celebrate'. Anastasios' misconstructions and omissions
result in the film and its accompanying novel presenting the indigenous
Hellenes of Anatolia as 'Satan's Army', as barbarous invaders. In
its drive to create an anti-war message,The Water Diviner ends up as
fantastic propaganda where victims become perpetrators and perpetrators
become victims.

In The Water Diviner, Anastasios omits that Hellenes, Armenians
and Assyrians are the indigenous peoples of Anatolia, omits that
Armenians lived in the region where most of the action in the film and
the novel takes place, depicts the indigenous Hellenes of Anatolia
so disparagingly even the Turkish newspaper Zamandecries it, and
much more.

In a recent interview, Russell Crowe claimed that "after 100 years,
it's time to expand that mythology", Australia "should be mature enough
as a nation to take into account the story that the other blokes have
to tell." Fair enough. This should include the story of the indigenous
peoples of Anatolia who were being subjected to genocide at the time
when the film is set, in the land where the film's action unfolds.

The first step in setting right a litany of wrongs is a disclaimer
at the beginning of each screening of this film acknowledging that
Hellenes, Armenians and Assyrians are the indigenous peoples of
Anatolia and that the film may offend them and their descendants.

History and Fantasy

The Water Diviner is about a man who travels to eastern Thrace and
Anatolia after the Battle of Gallipoli to try to find his three
missing sons. The premise of an Australian wandering around western
Anatolia in 1919 is incredulous. Australian World War One veteran
Major George Devine Treloar told the Sydney Morning Herald in May 1927
"that Turkey was a bad place for foreigners at the present time".

The story deals (in part) with the Anzac prisoners-of-war of the
Ottoman Empire in World War One. The climax of the story takes
place in a medieval Orthodox church in the city of Akroinos (modern
Afyonkarahisar).

Anzac and other Allied POWs (especially Indians) died in captivity by
the thousand. Anzac POWs recorded how Armenian and Hellenic churches
and houses across Anatolia were their prison camps. Akroinos' main
prisoner-of-war camps were the massive Armenian Church and its
neighbourhood of formerly Armenian-owned houses.

The Water Diviner paints indigenous Anatolian Hellenes as barbaric
invaders, at one point being labelled 'Satan's Army' by one character.

Surviving Anzac prisoners recorded how Hellenes assisted in their
survival - and in some cases, their escape.

Crowe and his writers are derided by Guy Walters of The Telegraph
(London), Barry John Clark, President of the New Zealand Veterans
Association, and Major General David McLachlan, President of the
Victorian RSL amongst others for holding positions that are "utterly
without foundation".

In Major General McLachlan's words, "Russ must have been asleep
during that lesson at school," referring to the inclusion of the
Turkish view of Gallipoli in this country's schools and universities.

The danger of this and other similar films that claim to be 'inspired
by actual events' is that because Crowe is a famous actor, his words
are taken as being authoritative. His film may be treated as actual
history. As educators and as consumers, we should take this problem
seriously.

As demonstrated by Peter Weir's Gallipoli (1980) - a favourite of
secondary school teachers - the problem with the glib Anastasios-Crowe
approach is that audiences develop completely skewed, often false,
historical knowledge; implanting false memories in public history.

As seen with the explosion of 'Anzackery' over the last generation,
this collective false memory has major effects on our understanding
of our own past, how we explain our past to ourselves, how we regard
ourselves, and how we act as a national collective. The 1934 Mustafa
Kemal 'statement' about mothers and sons exemplifies this point. As
illustrated by Prof Peter Stanley, there is no evidence Mustafa
Kemal ever addressed a message to grieving Australian mothers. Yet
the 'statement' is omnipresent in political and historical writing
around Anzac.

Similarly, Anastasios and Crowe "expand" the very mythologies they
are seeking to undermine. As Crowe stated, "You know, because we
did invade a sovereign nation that we'd never had an angry word
with. ... we shouldn't celebrate the parts of that mythology that
shouldn't be celebrated."

The Ottoman Empire launched a campaign of destruction against its
indigenous peoples from January 1914, beginning with violent expulsions
of the Hellenes of the very region (the Gallipoli Peninsula) where
so many Anzacs and other allies fell months only later.

The Ottoman Empire joined the Central Powers and invaded British Egypt
and the Russian Caucasus in 1914. On New Year's Day 1915, two Afghan
cameleers flew the Ottoman banner in their assault on a trainload of
picnickers outside Broken Hill NSW.

In seeking to promote an anti-war message at a time when extreme
ideologies are wreaking havoc, Anastasios and Crowe are engaging in
a dangerous revisionism of historical events. In some aspects, this
constitutes genocide denial by omission. While Anastasios may claim
'artistic licence', that this film and its novel are entertainment,
historical events should not be used as the basis of works that
distort them. This is not the History Kleio personifies.

http://www.armenia.c...e-Water-Diviner



#7 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2015 - 11:15 AM

I wonder how much the actor for hire Crowe got from the history falsifying turks?



#8 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 January 2015 - 12:12 PM

ARMENIANS AND GREEKS BEGIN PETITION ON RUSSELL CROWE'S LATEST MOVIE

11:12, 16 January, 2015

YEREVAN, JANAURY 16, ARMENPRESS. The latest movie by the Australian
actor Russell Crowe caused a lot of noise in the Diaspora.

It was originally represented as a historical movie telling about the
genocide of the Armenian and Greek people during the WWI in the Ottoman
Empire. But, actually, the historical facts have been distorted in
the movie and the audience can encounter solely the Turkish standpoint
on the historical events. A number of internet users called the move
"Turkish Diviner".

As reports "Armenpress", a huge wave of protest was raised regarding
the movie in the United States and Australia. The Spectator published
a vast article on the movie. The prominent periodical characterized
the movie as "a huge disappointment" and particularly underscored:
"This highly sentimentalised and rather pointless attempt to depict
the human dimension of the Gallipoli campaign, as experienced by an
Aussie father (Crowe) searching for the bodies of his three sons,
fails both as plausible drama and as an honest attempt to confront
the actual behaviour of the enemy (the Ottoman empire), not to mention
the moral justification for the terrible sacrifice of Allied lives.

On that last point, distinguished British historian Jeremy Black
recently wrote: 'The current fashion for commemorating the dead
by honouring their struggle does not in fact honour them unless we
explain why they were fighting and facing the personal, moral and
religious challenges of risking and inflicting death. Why did men
volunteer in 1914? Why did they advance across the 'killing ground'?

To mark the struggle without recalling its point and value is both
to lack a moral compass and, indeed, not really to seek one'.

Leaving aside aesthetic considerations, the fact is the film's lack
of any historical context is breathtaking. There are many, but there
is one really glaring omission.

It so happens that the well-documented genocide of the Armenians at
the hands of the Turks was initiated on the day immediately before
the Gallipoli landing, an overlap that traditionally receives hardly
a mention from Australian historians, and no reference whatsoever in
this film.

The mass murder of this ancient Christian community made no exception
for women and children and was conducted with a barbarity that
shocked even officers of the Ottoman's German allies, some of whom
witnessed the gruesome scenes first hand, as did missionaries and
other outsiders.

The moral issue at stake is neatly captured in the subtitle of
Robertson's recently published book on the genocide: 'Who now remembers
the annihilation of the Armenians?' It was Hitler's comment to his
generals on the eve of the invasion of Poland urging them to show no
mercy as there would be no retribution. It's all part of 'the other
side of the Gallipoli story' that Russell Crowe somehow didn't get
around to even hinting at."

In this regard, "Horizon Weekly" stated: "The Water Diviner, as a
"fundamentally silly film" and slammed it for not referring to the
Armenian Genocide.

Stanley, the former head of Historical Research and Principal Historian
at the Australian War Memorial, has written an extensive account
on the historical inaccuracies of this movie, which claims to be
"inspired by true events".

He adds: "There isn't any reference to the massacres of Armenians that
were such an important part of the last years of the Ottoman Empire.

That's true, but it seems to me that the Armenian agony simply has
no relevance to the film's plot, risible though the plot is."

Under the guise of World War I, the Ottoman Turkish government
implemented and carried out the first genocide of the 20th century
against16/1/2015 Armenians and Greeks begin petition on Russell
Crowe's latest movie |

its Armenian population, as well as Greeks and Assyrians. Turkey
continues to run an international campaign of denial.

Executive Director of the Armenian National Committee of Australia,
Vache Kahramanian, remarked: "It is not unsurprising that Turkey
is heavily promoting this film, which aim to portray the Turk as a
victim, even though one of the greatest crimes against humanity was
committed against its Armenian subjects from 1915 to 1923."

The Water Diviner, already out in Australian cinemas, is scheduled
to premiere in the United States on the Centenary anniversary of the
Armenian Genocide, the 24th of April, 2015.

Also, Horizon weekly stated: "Russell Crowe's The Water Diviner,
has offended many descendants of genocide survivors - Greeks and
Armenians alike - through its false portrayal of the events during
the period which the film is set. There has been public outrage on
our Facebook page, and for that reason, we've drafted a letter which
you may use to voice your opinion. You may address it to whomever you
choose, however we have listed some recommendations at the bottom of
the draft (see below) including Andrew Anastasios the screenwriter,
and The Rabbitohs Rugby League team which Crowe is shareholder of,
and which is currently chaired by a good friend of Crowe's, Dr Nick
Pappas. Let's stand up and be a voice for our ancestors who were
brutally massacred during that period!"

Article by HASMIK HARUTYUNYAN

ARMENPRESS Armenian News Agency
http://armenpress.am...test-movie.html



#9 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:01 AM

Standard Hollywood Double-Standard

Editorial, 17 January 2015

As we were about to "go to the press", Russell Crowe's "The Water
Diviner" began to make negative headlines in the Armenian media mostly
because of its false narrative. The execrable production, made to
coincide with the centenary of the Gallipoli disaster, is replete with
falsehood and propaganda.

Movie-makers--in Hollywood, California or Sydney, Australia--have the
unfortunate habit of consistently tampering with the truth. They try
to draw ticket buyers by making movies about the colorful lives of
historical figures such as Alexander the Great, the Borgias, Napoleon,
General Patton, etc., but when the same movie makers are criticized
for turning the biographies into cartoons, they sheepishly say that
they are in the entertainment business, not in the history business.
Crowe's torturing of the truth seems to be a similar exercise.

Distortion of history isn't the only crime of mainstream film makers.
While everyone--at least in the civilized world--boasts that freedom
of speech is a given in our societies, film makers often partner their
governments in spreading propaganda and falsehood. They are also
easily cowed by the same "democratic" governments to suppress the
truth for political expedience. "Standard Hollywood Double-Standard"
editorial focuses on several such high-profile cases.

Hollywood, the White House, the media world--and for all we know the
universe--were agog in December when North Korea expressed its
displeasure with an infantile movieland comedy concoction ("The
Interview") which featured two American spies on a mission to kill
North Korean leader Kim Jong-un. The killer/spies were posing as
journalists.

In retaliation for the spoof, hackers supposedly loyal to North Korea
stole Sony Pictures Entertainment (the studio which produced the
comedy) leaked sensitive Sony emails to the world and threatened the
company with violence if it released the movie starring James Franco
and Seth Rogen.

When an intimidated Sony cancelled the release of the film, President
Obama accused North Korea of cyber vandalism. World-famous
luminaries, such as Tony Kushner and Neil Gaiman, were in high
dudgeon. So was Salman Rushdie who said so in his usual verbose way.
The great thespian Rob Lowe jumped into the stage declaiming on
Twitter: "Hollywood has done Neville Chamberlain proud today." Rob
Lowe? Who knew?

While the hullaballoo was clawing serious time and space on the
airwaves and newsprint, no one mentioned that a movie featuring
assassins who pose as journalists could damage journalists and their
credibility, especially these days when ISIS chops the heads of
journalists suspected of being Western spies. But that's a sidebar to
the story of the celluloid tsunami between the US and North Korea.

The "Interview" crisis continued for a week. A somber Eric Schultz,
speaking on behalf of President Obama, said: "...we are a country that
believes in free speech, and the right of artistic expression." An
outraged American politician accused North Korea of muzzling free
speech and said: "We cannot be a society in which some dictator in
some place can start imposing censorship in the U.S." A PEN petition
urged North Korea to reconsider the hack attack.

And then a not-so-mysterious retaliation: the North Korean Internet
went dark. Soon after, Sony announced "The Interview" would be
released after all. Sony CEO Michael Lynton said North Korea had
failed in its attempt to suppress free speech. Rogen tweeted: "The
people have spoken! Freedom has prevailed. Sony didn't give up." His
co-star Franco tweeted: "Victory!!!!!!! [Seven exclamation marks].The
PEOPLE and the PRESIDENT have spoken."

The movie opened. Americans rushed to buy tickets. It was the
patriotic thing to do. All was well with the world and democracy.

In the rush to salvage America's reputation as the land of the free
and secure the bottom line of a misguided B-movie, no one pointed out
that Hollywood, the White House, the media, are regularly selective on
matters of free speech.

Back in the mid-'30s at least twice Turkey stopped the production of
epic movies in Britain and in the United States. Sir Alexander Korda,
one of the more famous producers of the era, bought the film rights of
"Revolt in the Desert" about the adventures of Lawrence of Arabia.
British star Leslie Howard was to play Lawrence. The movie was to be
shot on the border between Saudi Arabia and Transjordan, with
Jerusalem standing in for Damascus. But then Turkey complained to the
Foreign Office about the proposed scenes of Turkish atrocities,
according to "The Golden Warrior: the Legend of Lawrence of Arabia" by
Lawrence James. "Korda was forced to bow to pressure from the censors
of the British Board of Film Control and the Foreign Office, which
were both anxious not to upset Turkey."

About the same time Hollywood's MGM bought the rights to Franz
Werfel's bestselling "Forty Days of Musa Dagh". A screenplay was
written and Clark Gable was to play the hero of the legendary Armenian
resistance to the Turkish Army on a mountain called Musa Dagh in
Antioch, now occupied by Turkey. That project was also shelved because
of threats by Turkey.

In recent years such superstars as Sylvester Stallone and Mel Gibson
have announced their intention to produce "Forty Days of Musa Dagh",
but in both instances, the projects have evaporated in silence. One
doesn't have to be Stephen Hawking to suspect the reason for the
demise of the projects. And yet there has been no outrage about Turkey
curbing the freedom of speech of Americans. Rob Lowe, Tony Kushner,
Neil Gaiman, Salman Rushdie, President Obama, PEN, CNN, et al have not
protested. Neville Chamberlain's name hasn't been taken in vain.

It's business as usual in the West's politics vis-à-vis Turkey. Turkey
can jail more journalists than other country. Turkey can deny US air
force access to Turkish bases forcing the US to use distant bases when
attacking ISIL. Turkey can protect ISIL butchers and buy stolen gas
from them. Turkey can ignore West's trade sanctions against Iran.
Turkey can tangle with Israel. Turkey can hold military exercises with
China. Turkey can demonstrate extreme Islamist tendencies. Turkey can
be ruled by an authoritarian megalomaniac who attacks the West at the
drop of fez. Turkey can oppress its minorities. Turkey can punish
people for "insulting Turkishness" if they refer to the Genocide of
Armenians. Turkey can be the biggest investor in mad Khadafy's Libya.
Turkey can hail Sudan's genocidier Omar el-Bashir and twice play host
to him. Turkey can interfere in European elections. Turkey can be an
expressway for Afghan opium headed to Europe and for ISIL recruits
headed to Syria/Iraq. Turkey can go to bed with Hamas. Turkey can sign
multibillion dollar trade deals with Russia and try to scupper the
West's sanctions against Russia. Turkey can invade and occupy Cyprus.
Turkey can illegally blockade Armenia, Turkey can...

To paraphrase the old song about Lola: Whatever Turkey wants, Turkey gets.

Until when?

When will the West wake up and realize that its NATO partner is a
hostile and rogue state par excellence?

http://www.keghart.c...Double-Standard
 



#10 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 January 2015 - 10:18 AM

Greek Reporter
Jan 18 2015

Greek-Australians Offended by Russel Crowe's Directorial Debut


Russell Crowe's directorial debut has caused some strong reactions
among members of the Greek Diaspora in Australia. The film, entitled
"The Water Diviner," which premiered in the country during Christmas,
is set in the early '20s and focuses on the Australian and New Zealand
Army Corps (ANZAC) in the Battle of Gallipoli.

An Australian farmer travels to Istanbul in search of his three sons
after the Battle of Gallipoli. He meets Turkish officials who tell him
their side of the story about what happened to ANZAC when they were
overtaken by Turkish forces, assisted by German and Austrian troops.

According to Dr. Panagiotis Diamantis, Professor of History
(specializing in genocide) at the University of Sydney, Crowe and
Greek-Australian screenwriter Andrew Anastasios, who wrote the book
that inspired the film, tried to send an anti-war message but ended
portraying the victims as perpetrators and the perpetrators as
victims.

Both the Armenians and Greeks who lived in the region are portrayed as
barbaric and bloodthirsty conquerors, not as natives who were forced
to defend themselves against the 1914 Ottoman Empire campaign.

Crowe defended his decision, saying that 100 years later, Australians
had the maturity to hear the opposite side of the story. However,
Diamantis disagrees, stating that Crowe presented distorted facts.

"The first step in setting right a litany of wrongs is a disclaimer at
the beginning of each screening of this film, acknowledging that
Hellenes, Armenians and Assyrians are the indigenous peoples of
Anatolia and that the film may offend them and their descendants,"
wrote the professor in an extensive article, published in the Greek
Diaspora newspaper Neos Kosmos.


http://au.greekrepor...ectorial-debut/
 



#11 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 April 2015 - 12:02 PM

Directors slam Russell Crowe's 'Water Diviner' over Armenian Genocide denial

00:22, 18 Apr 2015
Siranush Ghazanchyan


"We do not know how Mr. Crowe and now Warner Bros. have ended up here
-- by ignorance alone or by bad luck," say writer-directors of "1915
The Movie"

Garin Hovannisian and Alec Mouhibian, co-directors of "1915 The
Movie," present an open letter to Warner Bros., regarding the film
"The Water Diviner." On the April 24, 2015, the authors will mark the
anniversary of the 1915 Armenian genocide along with tens of thousands
of Armenians in a march from Hollywood Blvd. to the Turkish consulate
to protest the country's ongoing denial of the tragedy. Similar events
will be held in New York and other major cities across the globe. The
filmmakers will then travel to Armenia to screen "1915" for the
Armenian government and their Armenian Genocide Centennial Committee.

The Wrap presents the full text of the letter:

Dear Warner Bros.,

On April 24, 2015, your studio is set to release Russell Crowe's
directorial debut "The Water Diviner" -- a historical drama about an
Australian father who travels to Gallipoli, Turkey, in search of his
dead sons, who were among the Australian troops that landed there in
1915. He discovers, among other things, that the Turks were never
really his enemies. In fact they were the noble victims who ultimately
triumphed against the imperial West in World War I.

The problem is that April 24, 2015, also happens to be the 100th
anniversary of the Armenian Genocide, which was perpetrated by the
very Turkish government whitewashed by "The Water Diviner." It was on
April 24, 1915 -- the night before the Gallipoli landing -- that the
Young Turk regime set into motion its unprecedented plan: the
efficient deportation and slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians and the
destruction of their homeland of thousands of years.

To this day the Turkish government denies that a genocide ever
happened. Through lobby groups in Washington, professors at Ivy League
universities, and studios in Hollywood, it has been on a quiet
century-long campaign to rewrite the history of 1915. Mr. Crowe's film
goes to show how successful this campaign has been. Nobody watching
"The Water Diviner" would know that Armenians had ever existed in the
Ottoman Turkish Empire -- let alone that they were being exterminated
there in the first genocide of modern history.

If released, "The Water Diviner" will become the highest profile piece
of propaganda ever produced in the service of genocide denial.

Of course we do not know how Mr. Crowe and now Warner Bros. have ended
up here -- by ignorance alone or by bad luck -- so we remain polite in
how we ask you to consider the consequences of what you are about to
do. On April 24, millions of Armenians across the world will be
marching on the streets of their cities to remember their dead and
protest the ongoing denial of the Turkish government. A hundred
thousand Armenians will be marching in Los Angeles, too. How do you
expect us to react to the release of your film on the very day we are
mourning our dead and demanding that Turkey face its dark past?

"In the First World War (1914-1918), more than 37 million military
personnel and civilians were killed or wounded," "The Water Diviner"
concludes. "Over 8 million were listed as missing, presumed to have
perished. This film is dedicated to all those who remain 'lost and
nameless' and who live on in the hearts and memories of their
families."

We simply wanted to inform you that the lost, nameless, and
unrecognized Armenians, Greeks, Assyrians, and other minorities
systematically slaughtered by the Turkish government in 1915 do, in
fact, continue to live on in the hearts and memories of their families
-- in our hearts and memories.

Our communities might ultimately forgive Mr. Crowe for desecrating and
insulting these millions of victims by accident, if it was an
accident. But if you now move forward with the release of "The Water
Diviner" this April, we can no longer consider it an accident. It can
only be viewed as complicity -- in the denial of the worst crime ever
imagined, one that has been repeated throughout the world since 1915 --
and it will be met with the offense and outrage it deserves.

Sincerely,
Garin Hovannisian & Alec Mouhibian
Co-directors, "1915 The Movie"
An upcoming film commemorating the Armenian Genocide of 1915

http://www.thewrap.c...ial-guest-blog/

http://www.armradio....enocide-denial/



#12 Yervant1

Yervant1

    The True North!

  • Super Moderator
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,086 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 30 April 2015 - 10:14 AM

ARMENIAN GENOCIDE CONTROVERSY SNARES RUSSELL CROWE'S THE WATER DIVINER THAT OPENS NBFF

OC Weekly, CA
April 21 2015

By Matt Coker

This is something you don't want to see on opening night of your 16th
annual film festival: controversy surrounding your opening night
picture. But that's the situation the Newport Beach Film Festival
finds itself in with The Water Diviner, which opens the 2015 cinematic
extravaganza at 7:30 p.m. Thursday.

The picture has so much going for it. The Water Diviner marks Russell
Crowe's directorial debut, with the Oscar winner playing an Australian
farmer who travels to Istanbul to discover the fate of his son, who
was reported missing in action during the devastating 1915 World War
I battle of Gallipoli in Turkey.

Who would have a problem with that? Garin Hovannisian and Alec
Mouhibian, the co-directors of the new movie 1915, which is about
the Armenian genocide that happened in Turkey the night before the
Gallipoli landing.

According to an open letter Hovannisian and Mouhibian sent last
week to Warner Bros., the Australian movie's American distributor,
Crowe is either ignorant, suffering bad luck or being insensitive to
"the efficient deportation and slaughter of 1.5 million Armenians
and the destruction of their homeland of thousands of years." (The
Turkish government denies this ever happened.)

The overlapping events depicted in 1915 and The Water Diviner happened
100 years ago this week, but Hovannisian and Mouhibian's film opened
last Friday in some theaters. They do not mention the Newport Beach
Film Festival (NBFF) opening night screening in their letter, only this
Friday's theatrical release of The Water Diviner, something they claim
is insensitive because April 24 marks the Armenian genocide centennial.

The release date and avoidance of the Armenian genocide in The Water
Diviner makes Crowe's film "the highest profile piece of propaganda
ever produced in the service of genocide denial," charge the 1915
directing pair.

Now that they have enlightened Warner Bros. about their beef, if
the film is released as scheduled, the Hollywood studio is complicit
"in the denial of the worst crime ever imagined, one that has been
repeated throughout the world since 1915--and it will be met with
the offense and outrage it deserves."

Crowe has not commented about the controversy since it was first
brought up in the winter. Neither his camp, Warner Bros. or the NBFF
have commented on the letter, but this post will be updated should
any response arrive.

http://blogs.ocweekl...er_diviners.php
 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users