Skip to comments.
Hollyweird's Wake-Up Call? (Rachel Marsden On Oliver Stone's New 911 DocPic Alert)
Frontpagemag.com ^
| 07/24/06
| Rachel Marsden
Posted on 07/24/2006 1:16:47 AM PDT by goldstategop
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81 next last
In Hollyweird's stream of politically correct movies lauding gays, global warming and bashing America, Oliver's Stone's new 9/11 doc pic may actually present something of a change. It shows Republicans as strong leaders and reminds the audience we were attacked, something liberals appear to have forgotten. Finally, it depicts Iraq as a place where terrorists are killed daily by the good guys even as the Left incessantly informs us it had neither to do with 9/11 or with terrorism. Its been five years since 9/11 happened and in all that time Hollywood has made one - just one - documentary about it. This is the second one to arrive on the big screen. And as Rachel Marsden writes its not too much to hope Hollyweid has a wake-up call on the subject.
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em, Down Hezbullies.)
To: goldstategop
I know - this thread is worthless without pics - so here's the FR rule:
![](http://www.frontpagemag.com/Media/Homepage/rachelmarsden.gif)
Rachel Marsden
Yeeeeeah, Canada's Ann Coulter!
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em, Down Hezbullies.)
2
posted on
07/24/2006 1:18:58 AM PDT
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
Now the Left will think he's a conspiracy theorist.
3
posted on
07/24/2006 1:25:09 AM PDT
by
skr
(We cannot play innocents abroad in a world that is not innocent.-- Ronald Reagan)
To: goldstategop
Every strong political leader in the movie is Republican. The caption at the bottom of TV newscasts repeatedly reads Attack on Americaa handy reminder for liberal moviegoers who may have forgotten why were still fighting.
Wow. I thought hell would freeze over before Stone would make a film characterized in such a way.
To: goldstategop
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.
5
posted on
07/24/2006 1:34:45 AM PDT
by
Crazieman
(The Democratic Party: Culture of Treason)
To: goldstategop
Well, it sounds like Stone won't be invited to any Hollyweird Democratic fundraisers for a while!
6
posted on
07/24/2006 1:35:20 AM PDT
by
WestVirginiaRebel
(Common sense will do to liberalism what the atomic bomb did to Nagasaki-Rush Limbaugh)
To: goldstategop
She's prettier than Annie.
7
posted on
07/24/2006 2:05:37 AM PDT
by
beyond the sea
(The truth exists even when it is ignored.)
To: goldstategop
Brokeback wasnt exactly a box office smashBS. 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.
8
posted on
07/24/2006 2:06:49 AM PDT
by
Darkwolf377
(http://www.savethesoldiers.com/)
To: Crazieman; goldstategop
a good movie for once in his life. 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.
9
posted on
07/24/2006 2:14:39 AM PDT
by
beyond the sea
(The truth exists even when it is ignored.)
To: Darkwolf377
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.
To: goldstategop
Saw her on Fox News. Another welcome breath of fresh air from our friends in the North.
11
posted on
07/24/2006 3:33:05 AM PDT
by
SueRae
To: beyond the sea
[...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.
12
posted on
07/24/2006 3:39:55 AM PDT
by
RetSignman
(New York Times.."All the news that fits our agenda")
To: goldstategop; kstewskis; Victoria Delsoul; Dog; The Raven
Legendary cowboy, John Wayne, would never have put up with Brokeback Mountains director telling him, Okay, John, theres really no plot or bad guys. Youll just be riding around the countryside with Tonto, stopping periodically to erect a tent and have a sausage toss, if you get my drift. Hilarious description!
To: beyond the sea
"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."
14
posted on
07/24/2006 3:59:25 AM PDT
by
drierice
To: Darkwolf377
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. 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.
15
posted on
07/24/2006 4:04:10 AM PDT
by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: Darkwolf377
The advertising budget alone must have been more than 20 million.
To: mewzilla
....if the 178 was the gross figure, I'll bet the pic made a lot less than that. Art house films cost more to market.
17
posted on
07/24/2006 4:05:12 AM PDT
by
mewzilla
(Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist. John Adams)
To: Darkwolf377
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.
18
posted on
07/24/2006 4:11:42 AM PDT
by
durasell
(!)
To: goldstategop
World Trade Center looks like a great movie. I can't wait to see it.
It does seem strange that Oliver Stone made the movie. Maybe he just liked the story.
To: goldstategop
"Iraqyou know, that place where terrorists are being killed every day.."
20
posted on
07/24/2006 4:25:12 AM PDT
by
Jaxter
("Vivit Post Funera Virtus")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson