Posted on 03/07/2006 9:22:24 PM PST by george76
The divide between conservative and liberal America was on full display at the Oscars, with both the winners and losers championing social and political topics heralded by the left.
Across the United States, in blogs and on call-in radio talk shows, conservatives seethed that their point of view was not represented in the choice films honored with nominations -- let alone among those given awards.
"This year's Oscar nominees include stories of homosexual sheep herders, a transvestite and Japanese prostitutes," ...
American conservatives are accustomed to frowning at liberal Hollywood, but they were more disaffected than ever by the left-of-center themes of this year's Oscar nominees.
the conservative Concerned Women for America (CWA)...complained that the few Hollywood films it approved of had loads of popular appeal and impressive box office, but "got the cold shoulder from Hollywood elitists."
Conservative America long has been at odds with liberal Tinseltown, championing films with religious overtones like the blockbuster "Passion of the Christ," which was snubbed at the 2004 Oscars.
This year another hit with Christian overtones was the film "The Chronicles of Narnia...which has raked in more than 637 million dollars in ticket receipts around the world...
Narnia's ticket sales nearly equaled those of the five best picture Oscar nominees combined.
"This year's anticipated Oscar-winning movies, reviewed in light of their box office appeal, reveal Hollywood's true motives.
They are far less concerned about entertaining people than they are with trying to shape the culture and advance a political agenda."
"If you want to be truly courageous and take actual risks then make a movie that gives conservatives a fair shake or, God forbid, make a movie where a Liberal is the bad guy."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
According to boxofficemojo.com, Narnia cost $180 million and has made $677 million worldwide equalling 3.76 times its produciton cost. Imagine what it would've done with the media singing it's praises on every TV show for weeks on end.....
Munich cost $70 million and has made $107 million worldwide Source
Interesting that Munich has made more Internationally than in the US.
The majority of the movies released DON'T break even at the box office.
How were Crash or Capote 'liberal garbage'? Whatever their flaws were, they certainly weren't pro forma liberal baiting.
'liberal baiting' as in 'liberals who are baiting' not 'baiting liberals' :-)
It's one of the lowest grossing films of Spielberg's career. I don't think he really thought it would be all that popular to begin with. It's slowly paced and rather turgid.
Contast that with Syriana that made 84% of its total domestically. On the surface, I agree with you that the international audiences would like it more. I just wonder why that wasn't true for Syriana.
And the sheep.
I prefer to be entertained when I go to see a movie so I rarely find that type of movie anything but painful.
Like I said, there is not a single movie that was up for best picture that I had the slightest interest in ever seeing. As a matter of fact I bet if you gave me a list of the movies picked in the last 10 years for this category I will have seen very few of them except LOTR.
I am out of touch with the pickers of the Oscars but I usually go to see 20 to 27 movies a year at the theaters, the ones that everybody else sees also, you know the ones that actually make lots of money.
Second the motion.
Thanks for the corrections. I was working from memory. Apparently poor memory. (That's what the imdb is for, but my connection is running slow today.)
Which is why Pauly Shore had such a string of "hits" for a while there. The movies were crap, but they made between 20-30 million, before video sales and rentals, but were produced for about 2-3 million. If I wanted to make money in Hollywood and had no pride in the outcome of what I was making, Shore would've been a great bet.
Uh, YES!
Everybody dumbed down to the lowest common denominator to not make anybody feel bad. Those who live the American dream are to be rewarded by having it taken away from them with taxes, you know hate the rich. They hate competition, somebody might win and make others feel bad. Oh dear, where do I stop?
Budduh buh buh buh, I'm lovin' it!
The race card! The race card! The race card!
Liberals are all the same.
IBTZ
William Peck's character was the Hollywood Standard A-hole in a Suit . The authority guy, who the protaganist must overcome. These are always white, heterosexual, and possibly conservative. The only difference was that in Ghostbusters, William Peck worked for the Environmental Protection Agency, which would be a liberal redoubt in the Federal Government. Peck was full of himself and his authority, which, however, was used to protect the environment. So, basically, he was a standard conservative AHIAS, but worked for the EPA and thus conceivably, was liberal.
No other example exists in any Hollywood movie of any liberal villian. 100% of the time, the villian is clearly identified as a likely conservative or Republican.
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.