They make anti-American films that bomb at the box office and lose money. Then they make more films that make fun of the conservative base of the country, they lose more money. They make films that attack, belittle and infantalize our men and women at arms -- all as we are in a war, adding insult to injury -- and they lose still more money. So what do they do? They make yet more films like these previous lemons. Any guesses what will happen next? That's right, box office poison.
There is a whole raft of new projects that are sure to become box office stinkers that make Americans rather want to stay home instead of stream to the movies. There's Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS) extravaganzas, anti-capitalist potboilers and global warming scaremongering galore all coming to a theater near you!
Of course, we all know of the Oliver Stone movie about George W. Bush that is beginning principle filming now. We've heard how everyone that has any knowledge of president Bush is saying that this schlock entirely misses Bush the man and presents a silly, unbelievable caricature instead of a serious movie (when even the entertainment press is reporting that the Stone debacle is over-the-top, you know we have trouble). But, then again, it is Oliver Stone who has proven over and over again that truth is not what he is interested in. On the contrary, his own special brand of far left propaganda is his real goal.
But, Hollyweird has no shortage of leftist tripe masquerading as "entertainment" soon to be forced upon the country. At least three more such exercises in leftist tropes are making news in moviedom. First up is the announced sequel to Point Break, the 1991 Patrick Swayze/Keanu Reeves flick that featured bank robbers that wore U.S. President masks in the execution of their crimes. A Sci Fi channel extravaganza called Lost City Raiders that absurdly features a post global warming world that is almost entirely under water (even though there isn't that much water on the planet!). And yet another anti-war flick, this one disguised as a comedy.
It has been announced that the Point Break sequel will feature a new gang of bank robbers. For those unaware, in the last film the bank robber gang that wore masks of past U.S. presidents was called "The Ex-presidents" gang. Well, impugning all the presidents jointly wasn't intense enough for the sequel, apparently. The new gang in the film will be called "The Bush Administration" because, well, we all know what crooks Bush and his administration are, right? This is deep writing, folks. I guess "deep" and "Keanu Reeves" aren't compatible concepts, though.
When Billy Dalton, military special ops and star surfer, is disqualified from the pro-surfing tour, he takes off for the coast of Bali looking for the perfect wave. While there he’s recruited by a private security force who are trying to find a gang known as The Bush Administration, surfing outlaws and modern day pirates who work like “The Ex-Presidents,” a bank robbing crew from Malibu twenty years ago.
I would like to suggest that the new film be titled "Point Bleak" for the box office bomb it will surely become.
Another film, this time premised on Goregasmic global warming hype, is so far titled Lost City Raiders. It is set in 2079 after that eeevil global warming has melted all the ice caps and flooded the entire Earth with the ocean's waters. In this flick a roving band of explorers in their own little yellow submarine will spend their damp days visiting the sites of submerged cities looking for a sacred object that will reverse "the rising." Apparently, a Catholic leader at the Vatican sends the explorers looking for this object of power. I am pretty sure that by the end of the film we will all discover that what they seek is Al Gore's Oscar statuette. After all, what else could have such globaloney power? But in this one we get global warming AND a nice diminution of the Catholic Church taking the Church from one of the World's greatest religions to glorified treasure hunters. That's a two for one deal for Hollyweird, folks.
I found a great article on this project published in German, but there is a small recap of it on the homepage of one of the actors in the flick, too. (Here is the full article in German, for those Teutonicly inclined readers out there.)
Lastly, soon to open, is the new anti-war flick starring John Cussack called War,Inc.. This one tries to make a comedy out of America's supposed war-like interests in the Middle East. Turaqistan, a fictional country, is invaded and taken over by a warmongering former U.S. vice president who is in control of a private corporation with its own army -- shades of Darth Cheney and his henchmen in Haliburton, we can only assume. See, this one is funny cuz it's an American corporation stealing oil from a helpless Middle Eastern country... see, funny stuff man! I mean, it's funny cuz it's so true, right? All sorts of American corporations have taken over countries and are stealing their oil we all know. Just hilarious stuff.
There are several other projects in the works, like the dreary Watchmen which I will be writing about when this film gets closer to completion. These are just some of the latest attempts by Hollywood to attack, impugn, and ridicule the ideas and values held by most Americans, folks that these producers imagine to be their customers, curiously enough.
Yes, with this long line of stinkers about to accost you at the cineplex and your paraded across your TV screens, I'd say this calls for a renewal of your library card, or refamiliarizing yourself with with your local book store. Maybe even taking up golf or hiking. Obviously Hollyweird isn't interested in making films that most Americans care to see, anyway.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Geez, why don't they just
May 14, 2008 - 19:18 ET by Chris NormanGeez, why don't they just show these stinkeroos to their circle of liberal Hollywood friends in their own home theatres and dispense with the marketing expenses and embarrassment?
Hey, Cusack. Branson MO is calling.
Rrrowrr! I never thought of
May 14, 2008 - 19:55 ET by balboaRrrowrr!
I never thought of Point Break as anti-American because the gang was called the Ex-Presidents. I was too busy loving Gary Busey chewing up scene after scene, and Keanu trying to pass as a Midwesterner.
"Utah! Gimme two."
That movie does have a great on-foot chase scene, though.
I don't know if WTH was
May 14, 2008 - 20:07 ET by Chris NormanI don't know if WTH was pointing to Point Break as being particularly anti-American. I think he's pointing to it's "sequel" as making BDS as part of the plot. By the way, if the SciFi Channel was involved, you just know it's going to be gooood. I wonder if they'll have some of their realistic CG monsters in it.
My favorite Keanu mis-casting was his attempt at Shakespeare in Much Ado About Nothing. "Forsooth, dude".
My summer movie is already
May 14, 2008 - 20:23 ET by balboaMy summer movie is already off to a great start with Iron Man. And with Indiana Jones coming soon...that's all I need!
Agreed. This is the best
May 14, 2008 - 20:27 ET by muh-oonAgreed. This is the best start to the summer movie season in many years.
I don't go the the movies
May 14, 2008 - 20:30 ET by Chris NormanI don't go the the movies much anymore, unless I get stuck taking my nephew and his friends - but - there are two series I insist on seeing in a a movie theatre - James Bond and Indiana Jones - it's been a long wait for the latter. I just pray it doesn't come off being Indiana Jones and the Rest Home of Doom. :)
By the way, Star Wars used to be in there, but after the The Phantom Menace - I had to shorten my list.
Comedian Patton Oswalt does
May 14, 2008 - 20:32 ET by balboaComedian Patton Oswalt does a hilarious bit on his latest album about how if he could go back in time, he'd go to when George Lucas was thinking about the prequels, and "kill him with a shovel."
I think the title, The
May 14, 2008 - 20:42 ET by Chris NormanI think the title, The Phantom Menace, was a warning about what was to come.
Chris - you should add Iron Man to your list
May 14, 2008 - 21:00 ET by Dee BunkIt's a fun movie. I'm looking forward to the New Indiana Jones one also, but what did they do to Harrison Ford? In the previews he looks so much younger than he does in real life.
Dee, thanks, I think I will
May 14, 2008 - 21:24 ET by Chris NormanDee, thanks, I think I will go see Iron Man this weekend - the crowds must have cooled off somewhat by now - I hope. As for Ford - it's amazing, isn't it, what they can do with filters, makeup, and lord knows what else. :)
Indiana Jones and the Lost
May 14, 2008 - 22:36 ET by ahusserIndiana Jones and the Lost Nursing Home. Sorry guys he's 65 years old. Reminds me of Sean Connery in Entrapment, getting the babe, Katherine Zeta-Jones, fighting and acrobatics all at 69 years old. It's a nice fantasy and it is a movie after all but really. This movie should have been made right after the Last Crusade in 1989 when he was only 47.
I can't stand the movies.
May 14, 2008 - 20:46 ET by FoolicanI can't stand the movies. No, I just prefer to stay at home and watch Monty Python, Dr. Strangelove, and my old James Bond movies. I don't think I'll be getting Quantum of Solace if Daniel Craig ends up playing "gay Bond" as he stated he would.
I'm a libertarian, and all for gay rights as any man would be, but I think that would just trainwreck Bond's presumed heterosexual status.
The greatest movie I've ever seen was a foreign film, Pan's Labyrinth. I guess it shows us how far Hollywound/Follywood/Hollywhoops has come.
That's kind of a short
May 14, 2008 - 21:01 ET by Chris NormanThat's kind of a short revolving list to watch, isn't it? :)As for Craig, I think he must be joking. No way are the producers going to destroy the Bond franchise.
Yes, it is a short list. I'm
May 14, 2008 - 21:05 ET by FoolicanYes, it is a short list. I'm hoping it gets the point across. :-)
Wow. I've got to say,
May 14, 2008 - 21:11 ET by Chris NormanWow. I've got to say, however, "Quantum of Solace" is kind of clumsy title. I would think they might want to consider changing it.
Quantum of Solace is
May 15, 2008 - 08:03 ET by Hero Squad...the third story in Ian Fleming's "For Your Eyes Only" book; so it does have Ian Fleming cred (unlike the titles used during the Pierce Brosnan era.)
Other possibilities could be "Risico," "The Hildebrand Rarity," or "The Property of a Lady."
I think they may have made the best choice among the titles remaining. (They could always look into the John Gardner novels, I guess.)
Maybe they could redo "The Spy Who Loved Me," which did not follow the book at all in the 1975 Roger Moore version.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
They used Propert of a Lady
May 15, 2008 - 09:55 ET by Chris NormanThey used "Property of a Lady" as a reference in Octopussy, I believe. Goldeneye was the name of Fleming's house. So, they are running out of "fleming connections". I don't know if you read the link or not, but the writer suggests that they name the next movie after Fleming's school or waist measurement. They could remake most of the Bond movies past Thunderball, as none of them were even close to the admittedly non-movie-like book plots. The only problem with the original Spy Who Loved Me is that it was a short story about one night in an empty hotel with bad guys chasing a woman, when Bond appears. It was really kind of a nothing burger...
Chris, we don't
May 14, 2008 - 21:43 ET by DEVILDOCMOMgo to the movies much either and I am with you on James Bond and Indiana Jones...I hope the latter will be good, after all he had not ripped off his chest hair yet...
My husband and I still remember seeing the first Indiana Jones the day it opened. We were both enthralled from the opening credits. My husband is a pilot (bush, not big stuff) and we had a small resort at the time. We did fly-ins and had the owner and the plane from Indiana Jones at the fly-in. My husband flew the float plane, was a real kick.
The Hulk
May 14, 2008 - 22:58 ET by shawn228That actually looks like that will be pretty good. I also enjoyed watching Forbidden Kingdom. Great fighting scenes.
Agree mine to and Prince
May 15, 2008 - 14:30 ET by mjgAgree mine to and Prince Caspian along with those 2. Should be all I need.
And no one swallowed Waterworld either
May 14, 2008 - 19:30 ET by Jack BauerThey really should ask the star of the last major movie flick set entirely around H2O... that would be the bomb called Waterworld...
And it just about killed the then high-riding career of Kevin Cosner.
Hey guys how about a post-global warming flick about a Postman... ooops, that bombed too.
I think the real problem
May 14, 2008 - 19:37 ET by MidAmericaI think the problem is that there is no real talent left in hollyweird. Probably they are all strung out on drugs.
And over on HBO...
May 14, 2008 - 19:56 ET by TheDeuceHave you heard about the upcoming HBO movie "Recount", about the 2000 Presidential election and the recount in Florida? The NYT says the film is coming under fire from Democrats because it supposed "portrays them as too kind hearted to stand up to the diabolical republicans."
That, and Moore is planning a Farenheit 9/11 sequel due just before the November elections.
Isn't that just special? I mean, like short bus special, obviously.
I am a big comic fan, and I
May 14, 2008 - 20:24 ET by muh-oonI am a big comic fan, and I actually have high hopes for the Watchmen movie. The story in the comic is great- the liberal superhero of the story does somthing incredibly evil in the name of the "greater good" and the "right wing" vigilante hero is the one character that refuses to compromise and go along with the plan. I think it will be good unless Hollywood changes the ending- but what am I saying? -they always change the ending.
Watchmen was garbage. It was
May 14, 2008 - 20:32 ET by Warner Todd HustonWatchmen was garbage. It was a communist manifesto hidden as a comic book. It was anti-American, anti-Ronald Reagan, and against conservative principles. In fact, the writer, Alan Moore, IS a communist by admission and meant the 12 book series of Watchman to be one that attacks the USA.
The movie can only be better if it DOES change the original!
I admit I have not read it
May 14, 2008 - 20:54 ET by muh-oonI admit I have not read it since it came out but I don't remember it being that bad- I thought it left things open to interpretation. I did try to go back and read V for Vendetta again and I was disgusted- so I might be surprised by watchmen too. But I do remember the character Rorschach-"Rorschach is described by Alan Moore as an extremely right-wing character." Dont know if Alan Moore meant him to be the hero of the story- probably not, but I do remember him being the true hero to me as he was the only character to stay true to his beliefs.
I dunno, muh-oon makes some
May 14, 2008 - 21:03 ET by balboaI dunno, muh-oon makes some good points. The guy spouting "greater good" was the bad guy in the end, and Rorschach was the only one that wouldn't budge on his principals. Ozy is the liberal who thinks he's doing good but isn't actually...
Thanks Balboa. I really
May 14, 2008 - 21:26 ET by muh-oonThanks Balboa. I really didn't know anything about politics back when I read watchmen, but I remember reading the ending and thinking - I guess I am right wing. It might well have been a communist manifesto, but if so, Alan Moore made a big mistake. He accurately portrayed the evil of communism and good men who do nothing to stop it.
Keanu Reeves
May 14, 2008 - 20:54 ET by zoro7957........has got to be one of THE worst actors i've ever seen on film...........
This guy would like to
May 15, 2008 - 08:07 ET by Hero SquadThis guy would like to take issue with your previous comment.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
I guess it's the directors
May 14, 2008 - 21:27 ET by ladyrvtI guess it's the directors and advertisers with deep pockets who keep bankrolling these losing formulas, because any film studio head worth his/her salt would dump a cinematic turd that didn't bring in the dineros.
But other than that, Duh, I can't believe no one's figured out yet why they keep making these obvious financial bombs:
If the crap isn't made, it can't go to the DVD market and generate more buzz, and it can't win Oscars and the celebs have no reason to get all dolled up for a night of preaching "do as I say but not as I do."
I'm just proud that I haven't watched the Oscars - deliberately - since Mr. Holland's Opus was nominated (and unfairly lost). That and Toy Story are the most recent films in my library. If you want good movie-making, avoid the current stuff.
Theaters are over-rated too, what with sticky floors, overpriced food & drink, and cell phone talkers. And DVDs I can refuse to buy. Hey, I'm just following Hollywood's own advice for when they make something offensive or controversial: "don't watch it." Problem solved.
Do not support Hollywierd
May 14, 2008 - 22:32 ET by jefflebowskiI don't go to movies by big mouth actors who espouse their liberal ideologies. I really don't go to movies much anymore. I also cancelled my subscription to HBO last year because of the liberal programming there, i.e. Bill Maher.
I don't know if Rupert Murdoch is a lib or conservative or somewhere in between, but he was smart enough to give conservatives equal time (or close to it) on Fox News. Why Hollywierd and newspapers can't figure this out is beyond me.
Express your distaste by not giving libs your hard earned money. To hell with them!
Bill Maher
May 14, 2008 - 22:55 ET by shawn228Wow boycott a channel because of one person? That is like boycotting the FOX network and sacrificing 24, House, Sunday Football and American Idol, because you don't like their news channel.
No it's not Shawn
May 14, 2008 - 23:12 ET by Dee BunkFOX network is Free.
It's a little more like boycotting FNC because you don't like one show, but even still, FNC is free with basic cable.
HBO is a premium channel. I don't know why anyone would pay for it to begin with, but surely making bad program decisions would be a great reason not to give them your money.
Dee
May 14, 2008 - 23:19 ET by shawn228Its a few hours every week. I don't have much time to watch as much tv as I used to, but when I did watch HBO, there was boxing, The Sopranos, Sex and the City, lots of great shows.
Hate Bill Maher, fine great. If there truly is nothing else you enjoy on HBO fine, why cancel it for someone that says things you don't agree with?
He has every right to do, i'm just asking why take it so seriously?
Shawn
May 15, 2008 - 00:54 ET by jefflebowskiI didn't cancel because of Maher only. I watched the Sopranos every week and once the series ended, there was nothing of interest for me. As well, they seemed to run Maher's show ad nauseum and it was a waste of money. That being said, they had a few good series over the years but all of their documentaries were very left wing and I don't like to support lefties with my dollars.
fair enough Jeff
May 15, 2008 - 01:02 ET by shawn228I thought you cancelled HBO simply because of one person.
Used to be great to have in
May 15, 2008 - 08:11 ET by Hero SquadUsed to be great to have in the 1990s when Larry Sanders, Dream On and Dennis Miller. Then The Sopranos made it essential. Once Miller was dropped and they only made a few Sopranos episodes every 15 months, it was no longer worth subscribing. Heck, for what I was paying I could buy the DVDs a few months later. Or have a friend record them and watch them for free.
Which reminds me... I still have to watch the final season.
*****
"People only insist that a debate stop when they are afraid of what might be learned if it continues." - George Will
I couldn't stand Dream On.
May 15, 2008 - 09:11 ET by balboaI couldn't stand Dream On. Never got that. The only thing worse was "The Mind of a Married Man."
Liberals live in a fantasy
May 15, 2008 - 07:58 ET by buddycLiberals live in a fantasy world. They get their news from comedy shows, editorials from cartons and their history from movies. Their view of how John Kennedy died was based on the movie JFK. Viacom owns the History channel and that is sad. Their view of Nixon and now Bush will be based on the movies of a mentally challenged, drug and alchohol effected director who has significant emotional and mental issues to deal with.
I agree 100% with your article but at this point I could care less what Hollywood has done or will do. I tuned them out 5 years ago. It was hard at first but now I have gotten use to it. I don't go to their movies and their propaganda channels are blocked. I have adjusted. Meanwhile they continue to lose money. There are only so many investors left to fund their propaganda crap. Someday soon it will collapse and Hollywood will consolidated with its silent partner, the porn industry in the Valley.
Hollyweird
May 15, 2008 - 09:13 ET by Robert KnightInformative piece. The good news is that Mr. Huston is safe in predicting box office disaster here in the U.S. The bad news is that these flicks go all over the world, where they fan the flames of anti-American fanatics.
One of them is Waterworld 2:
May 15, 2008 - 10:34 ET by RbastidOne of them is Waterworld 2: BS Hubaloo?