The Four Color Media Monitor

A new so-called family movie came out shortly ago, called Hoot, and it seems that the emphasis is on eco-terrorism. It's already gotten more than enough criticism (and flopped at the box office). But what's really a shame is that the scriptwriter/director of the movie, Wil Shriner,* clearly didn't ever read a thing about Ra's al Ghul, the Bat-nemesis who was quite an eco-terrorist in his time. Here's a profile of one of Batman's most craftiest foes:

Ra's's goal is a world in perfect environmental balance, a goal he will achieve at any cost. Since he believes that the best way to do so is to eliminate most of humanity, he may be regarded as an ecoterrorist bent upon global genocide. That he has the means to achieve his goal makes him extremely dangerous and brings him into frequent conflict with Batman. Ra's usually tries to assault the world's human populace with a biological weapon, such as a genetically-engineered virus.

The Hoot movie, pried from a Carl Hiaasen novel, may not go quite as far as Ra's did, but ecoterror is still ecoterror, and what a shame that these days, putting emphasis on lawbreaking is the attempted norm of the moviemakers. After all, isn't threatening people with deadly weapons, whether or not they be alligators, and kidnapping, among the many crimes Ra's specialized in? Indeed. And the director of Hoot should be ashamed of himself for promoting acts of violence in the movie almost like what Ra's did to his innocent targets years ago.

It's true that animals, even owls, have rights, but it pales in comparison with the subject of human rights. And promoting violation of human rights for the sake of animal rights, not to mention breaking the law, which superheroes wouldn't approve of, is a bad example.

More on the movie from: Okie on the Lam in LA, Three Sources, The Dragon and the Phoenix.

* Argh, why must the browser window narrow itself whenever I access that page!

Labels: terrorism