Posted on 11/15/2007 5:28:24 AM PST by SJackson
It pleases me that this movie is a flop.
I bet it wins lots of academy awards though!
Lions for Lambs, the new movie directed by and starring Robert Redford, is designed to move us away from the "black-and-white" rhetoric of the war on terror and instead draw our focus to the "gray areas." This is necessary so that there can be a debate on issues--a debate we have been "denied" over the past six years.
I know this because I heard Robert Redford say it before a screening of Lions for Lambs at the Museum of Modern Art, where the movie was met with rapturous applause by an audience studded with has-beens, including a Mohawk-sporting Randy Quaid, Andrew (Pretty in Pink) McCarthy, Adam (Counting Crows) Duritz, and Janine (Northern Exposure) Turner. Redford's main hope, he said just before his film unspooled itself over the course of 88 of the most barren minutes anyone has ever spent at MOMA, is that his new film will make us think. That is, indeed, a noble purpose. So let me say on behalf of the American filmgoing public that we collectively owe an inexpressible debt to Redford for deigning to slalom down from his pristine Utah mountaintop to compel us to make unaccustomed use of our underutilized gray matter.
Redford did not have to bestir himself, God knows. What more has he to prove? What more must he give to the nation and the world to whom he has given so much, particularly by jumping off a cliff shouting "S--t" in Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid?
You have to be careful with them. They had a nasty tendency to you make you Sing with the Choir Invisible when hit in the rear..
I know Harry Reid and others in the Senate may wish it so, but since when do senators run the conduct of the war?
"Utterly contrived and tedious to the point of punishment, Lions for Lambs is unlikely to satisfy even the most vocal critics of the war on terror. For those on the other side, this agit-prop even fails as self-satire. But it does serve as a reminder that, for the Hollywood liberal elite, America is always the villain and inherently bad except, of course, for their mansion, Mercedes-Benz, and three-picture deal with Paramount. The film also confirms that there will always be a vast gap between that elite and those who volunteer to throw down with the Taliban."
Remember what Mr. Jensen told Howard Beal in Network during the come-to-Jesus scene?
Welllll Hollyweird & the Hollyweirdos have all that money, and now it has to come back.
...makes more sense then ever before. ;^)
Show me any vehicle that doesn’t introduce you to fire when hit from behind at 70 mph by another vehicle twice its weight. I loved my Pinto.
So far this “Lions for Lambs” movie seems a bust. I am disappointed that Janine Turner was at the premier, as I thought she was a lot smarter than that. L4L brought in only 6.7 million with its 4th place this week, which is just over 1/3 the take for the #3 movie. That says something about Robby Redman’s draw today.
The reviewer should have used the proper terminology for British soldiers, though: grunts are American. British ground pounders are Tommies.
Redford has been and continues to be deeply paranoid. Must be bad dope...
Another flop from the most over-paid, under-educated segment of US society, Follywood “stars.”
Nobody wants to see a movie that denigrates our troops? Huh, who would have thought./sarc
After my film was done I walked past a theater playing LFL and curiosity overwhelmed me as to Who, What and How many would be inside.
Stadium seating, so I had to go into the middle of the theater.
Lo and Behold - 2 - Count 'em - 2 - people in the entire place.
I literally laughed out loud as they slumped down in their seats.
Hollywood apparently lives in a fantasy world both off and on the screen.
As of today, Box Office Mojo shows this anti-American POS grossing $7.9 million. I doubt that amount of money even pays for the makeup that was needed to fill Redford’s enormous facial pits.
- I predict this turkey will ultimately earn under $20 million at the box office but because Redford might have persuaded it’s other “stars” to work for nothing as a gesture of support, it might break even.
Failing that, Redford probably took the precaution of ensuring that funding arrangements protected him against any losses that might result, but which will allow him to go about nobly proclaiming that he took a financial hit so he could speak, “truth to power”.
This movie represents a glimpse inside the warped mind of a typical Hollywood anti American socialist. It’s a scary, hate filled landscape.
The highlights would be
1. Truman slashes Post WWII military budget to the boneDemocratic president Truman "caused" more deaths in Korea in 2 months, than Bush "caused" in 4 years in Iraq.
2. 1949 - Truman oversees withdrawal of US troops from S. Korea (merely 4 years after the US freed SK from decades of heavy handed occupation by the Japanese.)
3. 1949 - US deliberately leaves behind a weakened S Korean army.
4. 1950 - North Korean army of Communist dictator Kim il-Sung invades and occupies most of South Korea.
5. 1950 - Truman sends US troops to SK to fight a "police action" against "bandits."
6. Close to 8,000 Americans die in the first 3 months of the war.
7. Jan 1951 - 6 months into the war, the severest press censorship in memory is imposed on correspondents, who are placed under the jurisdiction of the US Army and, among other things, are forbidden to criticize the handling of the war and forbidden to send demoralizing dispatches.
8. The military draft is ramped up
9. 30,000 Americans die, fighting to refree S. Korea, during 30 months that Truman is president
Knew Redford was an oddball on a grand scale, but paranoid?
Whose the clown think gives a tinker's damn about him?
Underneath whatever paranoia he suffers & at the core of lies an enormous, monstrous out-of-control ego. There's his biggest problem, and enemy.
Hey maybe this'll be the dog to bring 'em down, the one that'll *break* him once & for finally? ;^)
"Must be bad dope..."
HA!!
Hollyweirdos are used to the best, can't blame the dope.
In Red-ford's?
...it's a dope gone bad. :^)
Yup, sure do.
The man paid, and paid dearly for the sin of loving his country.
A stain on our history & the republic.
"He showed us then and we still have the same mindset and dribble flowing from CA."
Fortunately it isn't 1957.
The Liberal-Socialists controlling Hollyweird (& their lackeys), television, newspapers etc do not control the debate anymore.
One sees the signs all over, tanking stocks etc.
The punks -- *Pinch* for example -- have blown nearly all their political capital and soon will have squandered their financial resources, as well.
Nope, the Liberal-Socialist miscreants may not realize it.
...but they're going *down*. ;^)
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.