Showtime's The Reagans as Belittling and Derogatory as Feared

MediaResearch ^ | 7:10am EST, Monday December 1, 2003 | BrentBaker

[fight_truth_decay]

REVIEWS:

TV: 'The Reagans' is an offensive, unfair look at the
president - Vince Horichi
TV Columnist
Salt Lake Tribune

Beyond `Reagans' hoopla, a critical,
typical biopic By Matthew Gilbert, Boston Globe

Robert Bianco, USA TODAY
CBS did The Reagans a favor - "The Reagans is exactly the film CBS says it was promised: An impeccably produced movie propelled by a strong performance from James Brolin and an extraordinary one from Judy Davis."

Also Showtime is running a poll: Did you watch The Reagans on Showtime?
http://www.sho.com/site/movies/thereagans/controversy.do

[Ichneumon]

"Nearly all of the historical facts in the movie can be substantiated and have been carefully researched."

Translation: In history there really was a Reagan presidency, there really was a hostage crisis, there really was... So therefore our show is "historically accurate", even if it fictionalizes all of the dialog and personal events.

[claudiustg]

You can hardly buy that kind of support. Every time they trash us a few more votes slip into the Republican column. The only ones that believe their slime are the already committed Democrats. Look at how the trash they tried to pile on Arnold backfired. I know of committed Democrats that switched their votes after the LA Times buffoonery.

[bruin66]

"Nearly all of the historical facts in the movie can be substantiated and have been carefully researched."

This sounds so Clintonesque (with apologies to the owner of that term). Since when do "historical facts" need to be "substantiated"? A "fact" is a fact. And, "is" doesn't need parsing.

[LiteKeeper]

Oh, like the lefts merciless attack on Mel Gibson's new movie, The Passion? But, that's somehow different, huh?

The difference is that large numbers of people have already seen "The Passion" - and the overwheliming majority of people who have seen it, including Billy Graham and Jim Dobson, have endorsed it with vigor. "The Passion" is not an "unknown" entity!

[Puppage]

The difference is that large numbers of people have already seen "The Passion"

Come on....the left started screaming about The Passion BEFORE it was even completed. Besides, my (rhetorical) question wasn't aimed at you. I just threw it out there because of the hypocrisy.

[eskimo]

The hollywood PC disease is universal and not limited to "the Reagans." It is a product of arrogance.

I believe the disease you speak of is simply the insanity associated with insatiable greed and lust for power and I do not believe it is limited to Hollywood.

Reagan, in my opinion, is as good and decent a man as God ever made and must not be viewed in the context of the events dictated by the dirty little apolitical, amoral olygarchy that has surrounded the presidential caricature, regardless of political party, for quite some time.

[LiteKeeper]

Come on....the left started screaming about The Passion BEFORE it was even completed. Besides, my (rhetorical) question wasn't aimed at you. I just threw it out there because of the hypocrisy.

Aha...I agree. The criticims were based more on false assumptions, and perhaps not a little bit of guilt, before anyone had seen the movie.

[The UnVeiled Lady]

I did not watch either, I do not own Showtime. If I did, I'd have canceled my subscription...

I did have Showtime when this all erupted, but I canceled and spent lots of time with the supervisor explaining exactly why.

Said tht maybe he should take a look at the number of cancelations within the last month and see if he sees a coralation.

[mewzilla]

And this was shown the day before World AIDS day. What a co-inkydink...

[JSloth]

"Since when do "historical facts" need to be "substantiated"?"

And a little twist on that line of thought: "...nearly all the facts are true..."

They produced such a convoluted storyline that not even all the facts are true!! (whatever that means)

Liberal idiots.

[Eala]

Did anyone get a list of advertisers? It's been too long since my "Permanent Boycott" had any new inductees...

[Eala]

Argh! Did anyone get a list of advertisers? It's been too long since my "Permanent Boycott" list had any new inductees...

[thesummerwind]

Robert Bianco, USA TODAY CBS did The Reagans a favor - "The Reagans is exactly the film CBS says it was promised: An impeccably produced movie propelled by a strong performance from James Brolin and an extraordinary one from Judy Davis."

Bianco must be about as low as Hillary! Scum.

[Lazamataz]

I watched it and critiqued it live on this thread. Early on, you will see me taken to task by my fellow freepers because I am cutting them a lot of slack. I don't think I was -- I was simply calling it as I saw it, and it really didn't start out too bad.

But it rapidly degenerated. It quickly became very hateful, ticking off every liberal lie about the man -- and especially his wife -- in their little red book. It was, simply, the most savage hit-piece I have ever seen.

I have taken a personal interest in making sure Barbra Streisand becomes very embarrassed, and, if possible, politically destroyed. She is -- in a pair of words -- pure evil.

[untwist]

I watched the first hour, was repulsed, then came back for the last half hour. Some basic thoughts: Brolin's caricature of Reagan, with always a confused, indecisive painful look on his face, constant shallow references to commies; "Handlers" pushing him into the GOP, pushing him to run for governor (with Nancy's insistence), all these people pushing and feeding a hapless, confused actor. The portrayal of his kids and the "fact" that Patty and Ron never heard of, much less met, Michael or Maureen until Patty was at least about 12, is hard to believe, but in the film they just "show up" uninvited and bringing shock and dismay to the younger kids and Nancy and disrupt the more important business of running for governor. Very disrespectful and bad portrayal, especially since it's obvious the writers didn't consult with the family or those who were close to the family.

The dressing down that John Tower gives the President about what he did in Iran-Contra and the gravity of the issue to his presidency, is extremely overdone in its drama and looks much more like the Left's wish about how the President and Mrs. Reagan reacted. Tower basically reduces the President to tears and has Nancy pathetically lashing back. I remember the time and what I truly recall was the foaming at the mouth of Lawrence Walsh at trying to pin anything he could on the President with no avail, not a desparate Reagan reduced to tears.

All in all, this movie is just a silly, liberal dream of what they wish we all thought of Reagan and what they wanted history to show. The reason this did not go on CBS is because it would have been a PR disaster for them - really a piece of trash.

[hattend]

"Today in the United States, 890,000 people live with the AIDS virus. Over 500,000 have died from the disease, including the 150,000 during the Reagan Administration."

Unless Ronaldus Magnus was "patient zero" there is no way the left can hang this canard on him.

[KC_Conspirator]

It sounds even worse than I thought. Its not like this was some little politician - this movie was about a man who many consider one of the greatest president in US history. To not mention his accomplishments of defeating the Soviets or his role in reviving the economy is evidence this movie was at worst a hatchet job and at best a three hour slight.

[hnorris]

View results of the Showtime poll at
http://www.sho.com/site/movies/thereagans/controversy.do?showresults=1

Did you watch The Reagans on Showtime?
Yes 93%
No 7%

Did the movie change your opinion about the Reagan Presidency?
It changed my opinion favorably 10%
It changed my opinion negatively 7%
It did not change my opinion 82%


How do you think the movie will influence other people's opinions of the Reagan years?
It will positively influence people's opinions 14%
It will negatively influence people's opinions 48%
It will not influence people's opinions 39%

How would you characterize the point of view of the movie?
Conservative 10%
Liberal 47%
Balanced 43%

How warranted was the controversy over the movie "The Reagans?"
Very warranted 35%
Somewhat warranted 12%
Not very warranted 14%
Not at all warranted 36%
I don't know 2%

How much do you agree with CBS's decision not to run the movie?
Agree completely 34%
Agree somewhat 5%
Neither agree or disagree 6%
Disagree somewhat 7%
Disagree completely 48%

Did you vote for Ronald Reagan in either 1980 or 1984?
Yes 46%
No 54%

[kevao]

I'm sorry I'm not a Showtime subscriber. I would have loved to cancel my subscription over this. Well, too late now.