• Hey! We're on Twitter!

  • Buy The Book!

  •  

     

    Click to Buy The Mug

    Buy The Book

Archive for January 10th, 2009

Proof That “The Secret” Works!

Posted by scott on January 10th, 2009

Even in !  (Via a tweet from Bill Corbett)

Really? | 4 Comments »

You Can’t Swing A Dead Token Minority Without Hitting A Conservative Movie These Days

Posted by scott on January 10th, 2009

Big Hollywood is sailing around the internets, planting its flag in every film and TV show it can find, and claiming them for conservatism.  But American Thinker’s Ben-Peter Terpstra is not content to eat their dust, and has issued his own proprietary list of 30 Politically Incorrect Characters.  Warning:  his choices may shock you.

1. Detective Harry Callahan (Clint Eastwood) in Dirty Harry. Why: Because sometimes the “politically correct” system is too political, and because vigilante justice always beats death in a gripping police thriller. So, yes, Harry stands up to liberal San Francisco’s recidivist culture. “Well, do you, punk?”

Or they may bore you.  Not to go off-topic, but I notice that no matter how much conservative kulturkampfers may adore Dirty Harry (some, like Big Hollywood’s John Nolte, even going so far as to adopt the film title as a nom de blog) they really don’t seem to care much for the sequel, Magnum Force, in which Harry is pitted against a cabal of rogue cops who take his anti-civil liberties bias to its logical conclusion.

5. Jack Moore (Richard Gere) in Red Corner. Why: An American capitalist in Red China finds himself at the mercy of the corrupt Chinese court system in a jail for a murder he didn’t commit. What’s not to like?

Personally, I would have preferred more dance numbers.

6. William Wallace (Mel Gibson) in Braveheart. Why: Scottish-Americans have the right to enjoy 13th-century Scottish warriors taking on effeminate Englishmen.  

And getting their asses kicked.  I guess the lesson here is, don’t tauntingly flip your kilt and bare your bum to a group of effeminate, but armed Englishmen, ’cause those teabags will make you give up the booty.

7. Spider-Man (Tobey Maguire) in Spider-Man. Why: Spider-Man is just an all American guy, who happens to be the clean Dirty Harry of Superheroes. Oh, yes, and he adores his Bible-quoting aunt. Altogether now: “Ah…”

Except Spider-Man believes in personal responsibility, and abhors the abuse of power.  Also, he went to ESU rather than Messiah College, so even if he did apply for a position in the Bush Administration, I doubt he would make it through one of Monica Goodling’s job interviews.

9. Charlotte Gray (Cate Blanchett) in Charlotte Gray. Why: Now, honestly, how many women are willing to (a) drop out of the sky and land in France; (b) save Jews; (c) fight appeasing frogs and (d) undermine Hitler’s National Socialists? Okay, besides Australia’s Nancy Wake. You go girlfriend.

And why is she “politically incorrect?”  Because liberals believe that women should be out burning their bras and aborting their babies, not doing something useful and practical like skydiving, or undermining Hitler.

10. Spartacus (Kirk Douglas) in Spartacus. Why: Because Stanley Kubrick’s 1960s classic reminds me of a time, when Americans were free to talk about white and black slaves in the same sentence, man’s eternal struggle against the state, and…okay, let’s be honest, the gladiator fights are awesome dude.

If we are ever to heal the lingering wounds of racial injustice in this country, both white and black must unite on common ground, and agree that while African-Americans have some legitimate beefs about the Southern plantation system and Jim Crow, white-on-white slavery during the Roman Empire was worse, because Kirk Douglas was crucified, while Kunte Kinte only had part of his foot lopped off.

11. King Leonidas (Gerard Butler) in 300. Why: Because, let’s face it, this is one of the greatest post-9/11 movies, with groundbreaking visual statements, a comically camp Persian King (read: Iran), an anti-appeasement narrative (read: War on Terror), and…well, okay more great battle scenes (read: testosterone).

It’s funny that the activists who want to ban same-sex marriage are the same people slobbering over a movie that was, to borrow a phrase from Patton Oswalt, “gayer than eight guys blowing nine guys.”

17. James Bond (Daniel Craig) in Quantum of Solace. Why: Our enemy, Dominic Greene (Mathieu Amalric), works for the mysterious Quantum organization, Green Planet, a green front group. We witness him preaching about green destruction, and learn about his great land “gifts” to save the green planet. And, we laugh – or at least I do – when Greene praises his own good green works. So outrageous. So now. So Gore. And, yes, only the gun-loving 007 can take on this green nut.

Of course, the “green front group” was just that, camouflage for a plan to seize control of a major natural resource, and slowly bankrupt a world in desperate need of it.  The story would have made as much, if not more sense, and probably would have lead to a more emotionally satisfying climax, if Greene had been the CEO of Exxon-Mobil.

20. Jesus (James Caviezel) in The Passion of the Christ. Why: I hate to topple Frank Rich’s theory. No, I didn’t instigate a pogrom after watching this movie in London. But, I probably said, “Isn’t it great that God sent a Jew to save us?” Honestly. How many Londoners participated in pogroms after the premiere? 

Not nearly as many as those who slowly backed away from you in the lobby after the show.

24. Jack Bauer (Kiefer Sutherland) in 24: Redemption. Why: Finally, Jack Bauer is tapping into his inner Sean Hannity again.

In fact, he spent his entire hiatus living inside Sean Hannity’s neck.

You’ll see him working with a missionary in Africa. You’ll see Africans killing Africans. And, you’ll see how the United Nations corrupts the continent. This is thought-provoking stuff people.

Specifically, the thought it provokes is, “Where’s the hell’s the remote?”

26.  Swoff (Jake Gyllenhaal) in Jarhead. Why: Not the anti-war sermon liberals were expecting. In fact, Swofford, a Marine Sniper in Gulf War I, is a likeable, albeit imperfect character, with penchant for pranks and he’s really in love with his gun. I mean, really in love with his gun. He’s a walking NRA advertisement. 

So a movie about a Marine sniper who never fires his rifle is an advertisement for the NRA?  Hey, I’m not complaining; if the gun enthusiasts would rather shoot less and spend more time caressing their pieces in the privacy of their own homes, I’m all for it.  It just seems odd.  Anyway, cue the late, great, Don LaFontaine:  “In a world without subtext or double entendres, one man is free to love the penis substitute of his choice without having to hear a bunch of Freudian crap.  This summer, Jack Gyllenhaal is Don Knotts in, The Reluctant Sniper.”

But perhaps Ben-Peter’s most eye-opening choices were his picks for Politically Incorrect Characters 2 and 3:

2 & 3: The Clones (Ewan McGregor and Scarlett Johansson) in The Island. Why: Because it takes two pro-life clones to expose the body party parts industry. 

Well, the clones were pro-life in the sense that they, themselves, wanted to live, and didn’t much care if other people had to die to ensure their own survival.  But I guess the only genuinely surprising thing about The Island is its staying power.  Theatrically, it came and went in the blink of an eye, but right-wing culture warriors have been clutching this movie to their bosoms without surcease since 2005; Human Events Online named it the third most conservative movie of the year:

3. The Island: Reviewers despised it. Audiences treated it as just another sci-fi flick. But The Island is a forceful and compelling pro-life statement.

Is it?  Is it really?  Well, we gave it the treatment back in 2006, and for those who missed it the first time, we present a special encore engagement below the fold:

(more…)

Movies | 23 Comments »

Post-Friday Beast Blogging: The “Would You Skootch Over?!” Edition

Posted by scott on January 10th, 2009

skootchover.jpg

Riley:  We need to get bunkbeds in this joint.

Wild Things | 4 Comments »

Where’s Fredrick Wertham When You Need Him?

Posted by scott on January 10th, 2009

Sadly, No! grazed the ravings of Poster Girl for Overprocessed Hair and secret comic book nerd Debbie Schlussel, who is outraged that “Spider-Man is in the tank for Obama.”  During the campaign, the president-elect named Spider-Man and Batman as his favorite characters, and Marvel has rushed to exploit the endorsement, releasing an issue featuring an Obama cameo less than a week before the inauguration.  But Debbie is appalled by the company’s attempts to dupe direct market aficianados into buying multiple copies of this naked chunk of collector bait, and believes such crass commercialism has no place in an industry that was apparently founded to fight the Nazis.

Once, comic books were against Nazis and Hitler and were very up front in supporting America’s fight against them.  But those days are over.

Once again, Debbie goes where others fear to tread (whether for reasons of cowardice, self-respect, or a restraining order) and exposes Obama’s use of comic book characters to conceal his membership in the Aryan Brotherhood (although, to be fair, they only accepted his white half).

In the plot, the Chameleon tries to kill Barack Obama before he gets inaugurated–feeding into the BS narrative that Obama is a martyr-in-waiting more so than any other President.

This narrative, of course, depends on that old canard about there being a rash of attempted and successful political assassinations within living memory, and — and! — a history of racial violence in this country.  The incredible coincidence of events that would require both those things to be true — at the same time — strains probability until it’s just shy of popping a hernia.  In fact, Obama is less likely to be attacked than previous presidents; as a practicing Muslim, his fellow terrorists would hesitate to martyr him for fear they’d just be dispatching the guy straight to heaven and his 72 virgins.

Boy, I long for the days of Superman, Sgt. Fury, and other comic book superheroes fighting the Nazis . . . not sitting down to talk and eat wienerschnitzel with them or praising Presidents who want to do just that.

Screw that.  I long for the day when our Presidents were fighting the bad guys!  And not just Super-President, either:
reagancomic.jpg

From Toonopedia:

The basic idea was to go the 1960s TV cartoon Super President one better, putting presidential incumbent Ronald Reagan himself, along with several top members of his administration, in red, white and blue costumes like Captain America’s or The Shield’s, and sending them out to do superhero work among the rice paddies and sand dunes of America’s most hated enemies. This was accomplished by means of a technological marvel invented by a Professor Cashchaser, that gave the Raiders the bodies of young men (and instantly instilled commando training too, apparently).

The stories were just packed with the visceral thrills of seeing America’s Main Man in action. And that’s not all! They were also packed with amazingly dumb, campy references to Ron’s film career. This comic book version of Reagan seemed to have trouble distinguishing between movies and reality — which, of course, many political pundits would have thought made it true to life, if they’d been aware of the comic’s existence.

Reagan’s Raiders was about as successful as the rest of the Solson comics line. It lasted three issues, all published in 1987, and has since been seen mostly in “Best of the Worst” retrospectives.

It’s a wonder Ben Domenech and other Red White & Blue-diaper babies raised on Red Dawn didn’t use a small part of their allowances or trust funds to snap this title up at the time and make into a 3-color sensation, bigger than Mr. Muscles or even Brides in Love.  But comic books are not solely about presidents gaining superpowers or the support of superpowered partisans; sometimes the medium is used to send our children uplifting, conservative messages in a graphic, but tasteful way.
nicolesimpsoncomic.jpg

I saw this in a collectibles shop in Portland, and while I didn’t feel inclined to pony up $18 for the book, the subhead, “THE CASE FOR THE PROSECUTION” makes me think Debbie probably has this one securely bagged in mylar and resting snuggly between her mint copies of The Haunted Tank and Tintin in the Congo.

My Country Right, Wrong or Decline to State | 1 Comment »