Excerpt from Charlie Rose interview, December 03, 2002

Viggo Mortensen, Peter Jackson and Elijah Wood were guests on PBS' talk show, Charlie Rose, on Dec 03, 2002, to discuss their upcoming movie The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers. Viggo wore a T-shirt emblazoned with "No More Blood On Oil" which provoked the following dialogue on current events.


Charlie Rose: You're obviously making a political statement with your T-shirt.

Viggo Mortensen: I wouldn't normally, but it's sort of a reaction to... I've heard a lot of people say to me and I've read in a lot of places about the first movie, and increasingly about the second one... I've seen where people try to relate it to current situation, specifically the United States and their role in the world right now. And I—if you're going to compare them, then you should get it right—I don't like hearing... I mean I play the character who's defending Helm's Deep and I don't think that The Two Towers or Tolkien's writing or Peter's work or our work has anything to do with the United States' foreign ventures at this time. And it upsets me to hear that in a way. And it upsets me even more that questioning what's going on right now, what the United States is doing, is considered treasonous really: "How dare you say that? How un-American of you." And really, this country is founded on the principle that if the government isn't serving the people you at least have the right to say, "Wait a minute. What's going on?" And there're no questions really being asked, at large, about what we're doing. Whereas in The Two Towers you have different races, nations, cultures coming together and examining their conscience and unifying against a very real and terrifying enemy. What the United States has been doing for the past year is bombing innocent civilians without having come anywhere close to catching Osama bin Laden or any presumed enemy, and, as a distraction, we're now—apparently it's a given—we're hell bent on increasing the bombing that's been going on for the past eleven years in Iraq. And I don't think that the civilians on the ground in those countries look at us in the way that maybe Europeans did at the end of World War II, waving flags in the streets. I think that they see the US government as Saruman.

Elijah Wood: As a threat.

VM: Yeah, as a threat. And they're terrified—and have been for a long time—and we are not the good guys, unfortunately, in this case, and ...

CR: Even though right after 9/11 there was an extraordinary amount of public support for the United States to do something.

VM: I'm supportive of the United States. I'm an American. And I have nothing against patriotism. But if one is going to compare then the comparison is quite the opposite of what is being made.

CR: Let me just make sure of the comparison. Because I asked you about the T-shirt at the beginning and you said you made it yourself.

VM: Yeah.

CR: The idea... you object to the comparison of this film with respect to American involvement with Iraq or—

VM: United States government

CR: —with the Afghanistan war or the war against terrorism—in comparison with the film because of your opposition to American policy.

VM: And the idea is—in that comparison—is that the United States is like the good guys in our movie against the bad guys in our movie and I think the opposite is true unfortunately.

CR: We're the bad guys because we responded to—

VM: You know, the people who are terrified at Helms Deep, who are outnumbered in this incredible violence and desire to control—to destroy—the people of Rohan and the rest of the free peoples of Middle-earth, and to control their wills, to control their infrastructure—or destroy it—that's what we're doing in these countries. That's really what we're doing unfortunately. I'm not saying to anyone, to you, or to you, or to you: "This is what you should believe." I'm just saying, why not ask the question: "Why are we doing this?"

EW: Sure.

VM: And I don't like the comparison—and I keep hearing it, so I felt like saying something about it. You know, I'm not really a fan of the saying, "My country right or wrong"—well, that's an incomplete quote too, the rest of it is more reasonable—I'm more of a fan of saying let's make an honest effort to get it right. I think the rest of the quote is if we're getting it right let's keep trying to do so and if we're getting it wrong, let's try to get it right. I think he said something like that.

CR: I want to turn from this, but let me just stay with the idea for a second though. What would you have had the United States do after the attack at the Pentagon and at the twin towers?

VM: I would not have continually bombed innocent civilians from 30,000 feet with no possibility of being accurate and maiming and killing and destroying the lives of many more people than died at the World Trade Center. What does that do? Does bombing people make us safer? Does bombing people make us more loved or appreciated overseas? Will this be forgotten? "Oh well, it was just a little mistake."

CR: Would they have been able to stop Al Qaeda and you wouldn't have had... if there is the connection which many people think it is... in terms of the attacks in Kenya, for example? Or other acts of terrorism against the United States and other countries?

VM: I just find—

CR: Somehow by responding, you can say... because most people believe that if in fact you don't respond you're inviting more terrorism.

VM: There's nothing wrong with responding. It's how do you respond. The fact that if one even questions the way that we responded, that that's considered some kind of fifth column thinking, that it's treasonous, and that those attacks are used as an excuse to limit civil liberties in this country, and that we are coercing other countries whose populations... England, for example. I saw a poll where 70 percent of English people say they are more afraid of George Bush than they are of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. Because we are... our government is incredibly violent and aggressive and rapacious. And we want to control those regions. It's beyond a response. And there are other ways, I would think, of responding. We've done this before in our history. Even World War II. Was it necessary to kill so many civilians in Dresden and places like that? Was it necessary to do things that way? It's hindsight and so forth. But here we are now. We've been doing this for a year in Afghanistan; we've been doing it for eleven years in Iraq. Can we not think about this? You know, I read in The New York Times—which you have here, I looked at it yesterday—the front page is , it's not even, "should we do this?" or is it a question. It's just the countdown—as if it was a holiday countdown—for the big war and this and that. And then the Science or whatever section... it's bigger weapons and faster vehicles for the military. And then photographs of the women serving. It's all kind of fun. And it's like the people on the ground in those countries, who are the ones who are being affected, they're invisible. If they're not American, if they're not European, they don't exist, they're disposable. And more of them have died in the past year than died at the World Trade Center. What... does that mean anything? And now just because we focused on Iraq for many reasons, not the least of which is oil...

CR: But not only oil.

VM: And some kind of vendetta maybe that our President's father has... Who knows what the reasons are? It doesn't really matter.

CR: But I was going to suggest those two—and I know we want to just get on.

VM: Yeah.

Pardon me if I dont give a crap.

Clueless idiots!

This is the thing, he's just another Joe like the rest of us, and he's entitled to his opinion. It's just that because he's famous we apparently "need" to hear his opinion. I'd hold Charlie Rose at fault over Viggo Mortensen.

continued:

CR: And I think I have some sort of respect for you for the candor and the forthrightness—I know I do—of your views, and invite you back to this program. Because we talk about Iraq a lot here.

VM: Right.

CR: Before I turn back—

VM: Just to dialogue about it. That's all. I mean if somebody wants to compare our movie—which is just a movie—

EW: People say it's a pro-war movie too which I also have a problem with.

CR: Elijah, do you essentially agree with what Viggo said?

EW: I agree with questioning. Absolutely. I agree with asking questions, which I don't know if people do enough. In that kind of honest way.

CR: Let me... interesting things... you make some of these political points—the president's supporters would want me to contest each one and there's no time for me... Or if you were making an opposite political statement in support of president, then the people from the other side would want me to contest it and we can't do all that now. But we'll come back to some of these as it pertains to this particular movie.

Okay, everyone here who's ideas and opinions are changed on any topic just because some actor or actress pontificates about it in a sound bite, raise your hand now.









Alright then.  So then it is understood that we like 'x' actor or actress in a movie because of the job that they do on-screen, not because of the opinions they have off-screen.  In short, who gives a flying rat's ass?

Back to you, Jim.

Shocker!!!  A Hollywood liberal blaming America first and taking the side of the ones who would obliterate us.  Absolutely shocking!!!

If there ever was a commodity that was worth shedding blood for, it's oil.

I'm not saying that the Iraq situation is about oil, in fact, I think it's about small pox.

America's economy runs on oil. Oil and gas heat our homes, generate our power, drive our cars and have a direct relationship to the cost of every product sold in this country. Your food, shelter, water and every product you buy are completely dependant on oil.

These liberals that complain that we are over involved with the middle east because of oil completely miss the point.

Hmm, I just noticed something. The subject line of this thread states that Mortensen "says WE are evil and rapacious". I believe he clarified that he was pointing to the U.S. government, not the U.S. as a whole. Mr Rose tried to get him to say that it was the U.S. as a whole.

As much mistrust as there is for the government on this website I think we can cut him some slack.

He's just another know-nothing Hollywood liberal that thinks being an actor makes him an expert on foreign policy.  Hell with him.

It's important to understand that Viggo Mortensen is ALSO  Danish.  His father was a Dane and he proudly retains a Scandinavian perspective.  In many interviews long before 9/11, he has made a variety of comments critical to U.S. policy.

Viggo also portrays himself as an artist and a poet as well as an actor.  Well I've never met a single artist or poet who THOUGHT about anything, they all concentrate on FEELING.

So I completely ignore everything Viggo's got to say about anything other than his part.

Make your movies, shut the f*ck up and go away. You don't contribute anything to this society other than your "art". So until you have a real job, where you sweat and work hard to put food on the table and to make ends meet, stay the hell in the little fantasy world you're creating.
Just because you view yourselves as "enlightened", don't tell me how to think and act and that what I believe is wrong. Bomb Iraq for Oil...sure...but if we're gonna do it....Let's own em! I say take the damn country. How does your Hollywood skewed consciousness like that? Maybe you could make a movie about it...after all...the rest of us stopped "pretending" when we were kids and grew up to get real jobs.

As soon as you stop "pretending" and call it a career, maybe I'll listen to your crap.

Sorry fellow members...you hit a sore spot here. I'm normally a quiet ...not often posting member.

Well, you guys said it all.  Nothing else to say...

I'll still see the Return of the King when it comes out, and buy the DVD Trilogy box-set thingy.

If Viggo is simply questioning the US Gov't's motives and actions, I can cut him plenty of slack. Heck, we do that all the time here. I know I do (and not only here, mind you).

If he is calling us evil, well then, I've got some issues with that. However, I don't think that is what he was trying to say.

C'mon, guys, we gripe and talk about how we hate the gov't when it does this and that, perhaps he's doing the same thing.

I don't think he's calling us evil either, and I have a healthy distrust of the gov't too. I don't agree with much he is saying, but I don't really care what an actor has to say anyway.

By the way, I got the extended version DVD of the first film for Christmas, and the extra ~30 minutes of stuff sprinkled though the film make it flow MUCH better, and improves the movie tremendously. If you liked the first film as it was released to the theaters, make sure you catch the extended version!!!

Honestly guys....

...who cares what that brain-dead, pretty-boy, midget thinks, or says about anything?

So what?

About a year ago I stopped watching or listening to any program that interviewed entertainers.  The vast majority of them are vacuous twits who simply parrot the popular leftist sentiment of the day.  Watch their movies and stop lending their opinions credence by getting bent out of shape over them.  




The only people who actually are influenced by entertainers are people who leaned in that political direction anyway.

I care about what he says, perhaps even more than what you say. He's on national TV telling millions of people what he thinks. Regardless of what you think of him as an actor, person, or spokesman, he has a vast audience. That makes what he says more important than what I say or you say.

When [i]you[/i] get opportunities to make an impression on that many people, I will care more about what you have to say.

I have this opinion b/c the greater the audience, the greater the chance of affecting change in people.

Oh, yeah. I'm SO surprised... [rolleyes]

EXACTLY!!!

I'll bet that Ted Nugent would kick his ass...

Well, excuse if me if I fail to give a tenth of a rat's rosy red ass what a dickhead whose only claim to fame is that he starred in a stunningly looooong three hour epic film about returning bad jewelry thinks about, well, anything.

He may most decidedly shove his little shirt where the sun doesn't shine.

Pit

   The_Reject said:

Oh Oh Oh Oh Oh

Ok, my hand is up, my hand is up!!!
My opinions are changed when someone in the Hollywood left like this opens their mouth, My personal opinion of them as a person changes from disinterest to dislike, from that moment on, I do make a conscious effort not to buy or use what they are making or selling.
No, I don't get out my little black book and jot it down, but now that I have read this thread, I will make no effort to go to see Lord of the Rings II.
Will it make any difference? No, probably not, but all the water in the Mississippi river starts out as raindrops.

Rancid Lance

None of this takes away from the fact that LOTR is two of the ass-kickingist movies ever and I can't wait for number three.

I'd have to agree.

What he had to say is, for better or worse really the common view in much of the world.  Here is an article along the same lines that I got from Drudge.

[url]http://www.sobran.com/columns/021212.htm[/url]

Actors are stupid and lazy.

They make their living saying a bunch of junk written down by other people.  

Stupid actors.  

It is important to know the mind of your enemies.

To ignore them, while they move to plot your demise, is foolish and arrogant.

American could be defeated by a determined enemy if three billion people decided to take on three hundred million.

We could find ourselves out numbered by the immigrants. We could find the Suez Canal and the Panama Canal off limits one day. We could find our overseas bases closed or occupied. We could find all that equipment we have stored overseas turned against us.

Things could get damned ugly. Don't fall asleep at the wheel.

I remember what a bunch of Vietnamese teenagers can do to American Infantry and Marines. It wasn't pretty.

I actually saw that segment when it aired.  What bugged me the most about Moretensen's comments was when he said variations of this several times:

"We're going to war, and no one is questioning or debating why we're doing it and whether it's right."




And that's just not true.  We've debated the Iraq question in the UN and action was affirmed in the US Congress.  People demonstrate against the war across the nation on a near monthly basis.

Two Towers was an ok movie but terribly disappointing.  


Elijah's careful answers in that interview were good.  

The [b]REAL[/b] Aragorn would go to war.  

Fortunately for Viggo, the character he plays and the story he represents is far larger than his political views.

This kind of BS is why i stopped watching The West Wing. Besides it tumbles over itself with liberalism.

Martin Sheen had made the comment at an interview that GWB was an idiot. I guess that is why Martin only "PLAYS a president and GWB is one!

I agree with him 100%.

I think the US is a bullying power that dominates the world militarily, culturally, socially and economically.  I think that we export Britney Spears, Nsync, McDonalds, porn, avarice, greed and all manner of immorality in bright neon that proves irresistible to most people around the world.  I think that if countries don't do what we tell them to do, we punish them economically and sometimes militarily.

Bah!  I'm sick of repeating this crap.  

Flame away neo-cons.

Just saw LOTR - TTT again.  Viggo kicks ass even if he is a liberal f*ck.

Did he mean Saruman or [b]Sauron[/b]?  Either way, he's an asshole.