Rachel Marsden
Yeeeeeah, Canada's Ann Coulter!
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em, Down Hezbullies.)
Posted on 07/24/2006 1:16:47 AM PDT by goldstategop
Hollywood director Oliver Stone dropped by Toronto’s Varsity Cinemas this week to premiere his new movie, World Trade Center, about two of the last police officers who were pulled alive from the World Trade Center rubble, post-9/11.
With him was Scott Strauss, one of the real-life police rescuers. Stone says Strauss and the other 9/11 families kept him in check. That’s quite the feat, given that Stone has called the Cold War “irritating”, says nationalism and patriotism are “evil forces”, considers Fidel Castro a personal friend, and mused that if he was George W. Bush he would “shoot himself”.
With this film, Stone has created a historically accurate, riveting human interest piece—a Hollywood rarity nowadays.
Every strong political leader in the movie is Republican. The caption at the bottom of TV newscasts repeatedly reads “Attack on America”—a handy reminder for liberal moviegoers who may have forgotten why we’re still fighting.
One character is a former Marine who leaves his civilian office job to help with rescue efforts, saying to his colleagues, “Don’t know if you guys know it yet, but this country’s at war.” He later says that the U.S.A. will need “a few good men to avenge what happened here”, and we’re told in the epilogue that he reenlisted in the military and served two tours of duty in Iraq—you know, that place where terrorists are being killed every day, even though liberals constantly tell us that it has nothing to do with terrorism or 9/11.
It’s a welcome departure from recent self-indulgent Hollyweird pap. Stone’s movie about Alexander the Great was basically soft gay porn. Apparently, this great warrior got about as much action in the sack as he did on the battlefield. And this was supposed to be a war movie?
Why stop there? How about remaking Patton from the perspective of the general’s “privates”? Or maybe redo Full Metal Jacket, showing why straight soldiers might have really needed one.
Legendary cowboy, John Wayne, would never have put up with Brokeback Mountain’s director telling him, “Okay, John, there’s really no plot or bad guys. You’ll just be riding around the countryside with Tonto, stopping periodically to erect a tent and have a sausage toss, if you get my drift.”
Brokeback wasn’t exactly a box office smash, but was considered “groundbreaking” by Hollyweird standards—perhaps because they took George Bush’s people (cowboys) and had them screw each other. Men making out with men, and people watching it unfold on a big screen—how daring! Haven’t they heard of Pride parades, or World Cup soccer?
Actor/director George Clooney fancies himself a rebel, too. Last year, he made two politically skewed flops, ignored by everyone except in Hollyweird.
In Good Night and Good Luck, Clooney sought to demonstrate how U.S. Senator Joe McCarthy ruined people’s lives by targeting communists in America—but failed to show a single innocent person whose life he actually ruined.
And no wonder the Hollyweird left loved Clooney’s movie, Syriana. It was like a Noam Chomsky lecture: boring, nonsensical, and driven by themes like “America sucks”, “oil companies are evil”, and “terrorists are poor, misunderstood schmucks”.
Maybe studios are just tired of losing money on narcissistic flights of celluloid fantasy that the bore the rest of us “unenlightened” folks? No one wants to watch a feature length PowerPoint presentation by Al Gore about toasty weather and melting ice. The penguins are happy and have lots of ice—I saw that in the March of the Penguins documentary that beat Al Gore’s at the box office.
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em, Down Hezbullies.)
Rachel Marsden
Yeeeeeah, Canada's Ann Coulter!
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em, Down Hezbullies.)
I think Stone stopped doing the funny stuff long enough to crank out a good movie for once in his life.
If it is truly as good as the conservative pundits proclaim, he should be rewarded as such, and might encourage him to stay clean.
Well, it sounds like Stone won't be invited to any Hollyweird Democratic fundraisers for a while!
She's prettier than Annie.
BS. The movie cost less than $20 million and took in $178 million worldwide. It does us no service to lie about the success of a movie like this. Stick to facts.
I don't think the success of Brokeback Mountain will be repeated, nor do I think it means "liberal" movies make money, since it wasn't a political movie like Syriana (which was so godawful BORING that I hope those who rented it associate other liberal films with it--"This looks like Syriana, forget it!") which is a better example of both a liberal movie and a liberal movie that wasn't a boxoffice hit.
LOL
The Doors, Any Given Sunday, The People vs. Larry Flynt, Nixon, JFK, and Born on the Fourth of July were all good movies.
Stone, if anything, is a total genius when it comes to making an entertaining movie.
Someday, even conservatives will admit it.
I didn' see Brokeback, so I can't comment on it, but I did rent Syriana. I agree with your view. It was painfully boring. 30 minutes into it, even my liberal wife (not a 'bat), had had enough.
I'm glad to hear that Stone's flic is a good one, tho.
Saw her on Fox News. Another welcome breath of fresh air from our friends in the North.
[...is a total (genius?) when it comes to making an entertaining movie.]
Stone is a business man with a POV he expresses with the use of film. Even HE see's there has been a change of the paradigm in the country and, as a businessman, will make money by tapping into it.
Someday even 'moderates' and leftists will see and admit it.
Hilarious description!
"Someday, even conservatives will admit it."
OK, you broke me down, I'll admit I'm a conservative who likes some of his films. Stone is a talented director, but also a delusional nutcase whose films try to rewrite history. "JFK" was a ridiculous work of fiction. "Nixon" had scenes of private conversations between Pat and Richard Nixon with totally fabricated dialogue. Still, both films were well paced and entertaining.
Whenever Stone gets away from his 'message film' obsession you can expect a very good movie, which seems to be the case with "World Trade Center."
Just out of curiosity, was the 178 mil gross or net? Because after marketing costs are figured in, if the 178 was the net figure, I'll bet the pic made a lot less than that. Art house films cost more to market.
The advertising budget alone must have been more than 20 million.
I don't think the success of Brokeback Mountain will be repeated...
I disagree. I think it's going to be repeated again and again. Get name brand actors, known director, a niche script and a small budget -- throw them together and see what happens. A small money gamble by Hollywood standards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.