Yeah I watched this too.
See here for explanation on this enigmatic post.
Yeah I watched this too.
See here for explanation on this enigmatic post.
I just watched Transformers 2, and while it’s just a little draggy at 2 & 1/2 hours and has some unnecessary toilet/frat humour, it’s great entertainment on the whole.
The non-bigoted among you will also be glad to know that Megan Fox thankfully keeps her tasteless rhetoric for which she isn’t going to apologize for off-screen (not that anyone actually goes to see her instead of the giant robots – even director Michael Bay dismisses some of her rantings, then she hits back by calling him Napoleon and Hitler-wannabe!).
MINOR SPOILERS FOLLOW
But get this: In contrast to the first film where the President of the United States’ identity is hinted at but not made explicit, and a fictional Vice President calls the shots, this time around the President is clearly named as Obama.
And a very true to life Obama it is! Because while he doesn’t make an actual appearance, his presence is left throughout the movie.
Observe the following:
1) An official representative is sent by the President (Obama) himself to carry out the President’s will with the authority of the President’s signature. Said representative is nothing but an ostentatious career bureauweenie who is appointed – czar-like and overruling – over the heads of the military by the President himself, to oversee and eventually dismantle the Human-Autobot alliance… Despite having a total lack of experience or hands-on knowledge about the subject matter. [Leon Panetta and the CIA, Brian Deese and GM's dismantling]
2) He ignores and belittles the experience and advice of troops on the ground who have actually been working with the Autobots to fight the Decepticons, in favour of his own (and by extension, Obama’s) pre-conceived notions. [Obama's attitude towards General Petraeus and the Surge in Iraq]
4) He blames the Autobots for ‘attracting the Decepticons’ to attack Earth. [Much like Obama blames America for provoking terrorist attacks worldwide]
5) When the Decepticons issue an ultimatum and threats of mass destruction, he delivers the President’s policy of seeking diplomatic negotiations despite advice from those who know the Decepticons that negotiations and appeasement do not work with genocidal fanatics… And even if it means acquiescing to the enemy’s demands and sacrificing one of their own, innocent people. [Iran's protests and nukes, North Korea and nukes, Russia and missile defense vis-a-vis Poland, Taliban in the Swat Valley of Pakistan]
Wahkakakakakaka! Who said there’s no reality in Hollywood? Apparently, Michael Bay isn’t much in the tank for Chairman Zero!
I watched it long ago.
Why is this post here?
If I don’t blog it, I forget that I watched the show. So this post is for my own reference.
At long last, a Hollywood film that isn’t flamingly Moonbatty, An American Carol:
Some screen capture images:
And some essential interview previews of the film excerpted from an article from The Weekly Standard:
Hollywood Takes on the Left
David Zucker, the director who brought us ‘Airplane!’ and ‘The Naked Gun,’ turns his sights on anti-Americanism.
The set jumps to life. Two young men–both terrorists–enter the station. They are surprised to see a security checkpoint manned by two NYPD officers. “I’ll need to see your bag, please,” says one of the officers. The lead terrorist glances nervously at his friend and swings his backpack down from his shoulder to present it to the cops.
Just as the officer pulls on the zipper, however, a small army of ACLU lawyers marches up to the policemen with a stop-search order. The cops look at each other and shrug their shoulders. “This says we can’t search their bags.”
The young men are relieved. They smile fiendishly as they walk toward the crowded platform. As the lead terrorist once again slips the backpack over his shoulder, he mutters his appreciation.
“Thank Allah for the ACLU.”
Zucker’s latest movie, An American Carol, is unlike anything that has ever come out of Hollywood. It is a frontal attack on the excesses of the American left from several prominent members of a growing class of Hollywood conservatives. Until now, conservatives in Hollywood have always been too few and too worried about a backlash to do anything serious to challenge the left-wing status quo.
The holiday in An American Carol is not Christmas and the antagonist is not Ebenezer Scrooge. Instead, the film follows the exploits of a slovenly, anti-American filmmaker named Michael Malone, who has joined with a left-wing activist group (Moovealong.org) to ban the Fourth of July.
Along the way, Malone is visited by the ghosts of three American heroes–George Washington, George S. Patton, and John F. Kennedy–who try to convince him he’s got it all wrong.
When terrorists from Afghanistan realize that they need to recruit more operatives to make up for the ever-diminishing supply of suicide bombers, they begin a search for just the right person to help produce a new propaganda video. “This will not be hard to find in Hollywood,” says one. “They all hate America.”
When they settle on Malone, who is in need of work after his last film (Die You American Pigs) bombed at the box office, he unwittingly helps them with their plans to launch another attack on American soil.
The entire film is an extended rebuttal to the vacuous antiwar slogan that “War Is Not the Answer.” Zucker’s response, in effect: “It Depends on the Question.”
McEveety is one of several big names that will make it hard for the Hollywood establishment to ignore An American Carol. Jon Voight plays George Washington. Dennis Hopper makes an appearance as a judge who defends his courthouse by gunning down ACLU lawyers trying to take down the Ten Commandments. James Woods plays Michael Malone’s agent. And Kelsey Grammer plays General George S. Patton, Malone’s guide to American history and the mouthpiece of the film’s writers.
The war on terror, of course, does not lend itself to hilarity. But Zucker knows comedy and has spent nearly four decades making people laugh. With his friend Lewis Friedman, a comedy writer, Zucker went looking for the absurd in the political left and found an abundance of material.
Zucker and Friedman poked fun of the know-nothing culture of antiwar protests. During a rally at Columbia University, students chant: “Peace Now, We Don’t Care How!” Some of their protest signs are ones you’d find at any antiwar rally. Some are not. “9/11 Was an Inside Job,” “Kick Army Recruiters Off Campus!” “End Violence–War Is Not the Answer!” “End Disease–Medicine Is Not the Answer!” “It’s Too Dark Outside, The Sun Is Not the Answer!” “Overpopulation–Gay Marriage Is the Answer!”
Other claims were so absurd they didn’t require exaggeration. “We really didn’t have to do a lot of stretching,” says Zucker.
When he heard Rosie O’Donnell claim that “radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America where we have a separation of church and state,” he knew he had several minutes of material.
In the film, a rotund comedian named Rosie O’Connell makes an appearance on The O’Reilly Factor to promote her documentary, The Truth About Radical Christians. O’Reilly shows a clip, which opens with a pair of priests walking through an airport–as seen from pre-hijacking surveillance video–before boarding the airplane. Once onboard, they storm the cockpit using crucifixes as their weapon of choice.
Next the documentary looks at the growing phenomenon of nuns as suicide bombers, seeking 72 virgins in heaven. A dramatization shows two nuns, strapped with explosives, board a bus to the cries of the other passengers. “Oh, no! Not the Christians!” O’Connell’s work ends with a warning about new threats and the particular menace of the “Episcopal suppository bomber.”
Zucker is plainly not worried about offending anyone. David Alan Grier plays a slave in a scene designed to show Malone what might have happened if the United States had not fought the Civil War. As Patton explains to a dumbfounded Malone that the plantation they are visiting is his own, Grier thanks the documentarian for being such a humane owner.
As they leave, another slave, played by Gary Coleman, finishes polishing a car and yells “Hey, Barack!” before tossing the sponge to someone off-camera.
Lots of political views and exposure of liberal nonsense at the full article.
For more on the unhinged Moonbats mocked in the film, check out the below:
I just watched The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor with my wife.
If you don’t take the film seriously, and just sit back and enjoy the rollicking non-stop action and comedy, then The Mummy will be a good watch.
It keeps the good-fun spirit, over-the-top sequences and visual candy of its predecessors. You start to realize the director didn’t intend for you to suspend your disbelief – he wants you to chuck it out the window entirely – when you see the kungfu monsters, shape-shifting antics, and undead battles.
If you’re looking for an original, un-cliched movie… Ha ha ha! Too bad for you. There’s even a tribute to/rip-off of Raiders of the Lost Ark in there.
If you’re watching it just to see Michelle Yeoh or Jet Li… You’ll get quite a bit, but they aren’t really the focus of the show (you’ll see what I mean despite Jet Li playing the main villain). But you will have some Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon reunion nostalgia.
If you want seriousness, drama and realistic action, you’re in the wrong cinema – Batman is over that-a-way. Otherwise, welcome to 2 hours of unthinking adventure!
On a tip from commentor ying.
VERY MINOR SPOILERS for the film The Dark Knight.
Taken in whole from Wall Street Journal:
What Bush and Batman Have in Common
By ANDREW KLAVAN
A cry for help goes out from a city beleaguered by violence and fear: A beam of light flashed into the night sky, the dark symbol of a bat projected onto the surface of the racing clouds . . .
Oh, wait a minute. That’s not a bat, actually. In fact, when you trace the outline with your finger, it looks kind of like . . . a “W.”
There seems to me no question that the Batman film “The Dark Knight,” currently breaking every box office record in history, is at some level a paean of praise to the fortitude and moral courage that has been shown by George W. Bush in this time of terror and war. Like W, Batman is vilified and despised for confronting terrorists in the only terms they understand. Like W, Batman sometimes has to push the boundaries of civil rights to deal with an emergency, certain that he will re-establish those boundaries when the emergency is past.
And like W, Batman understands that there is no moral equivalence between a free society — in which people sometimes make the wrong choices — and a criminal sect bent on destruction. The former must be cherished even in its moments of folly; the latter must be hounded to the gates of Hell.
“The Dark Knight,” then, is a conservative movie about the war on terror. And like another such film, last year’s “300,” “The Dark Knight” is making a fortune depicting the values and necessities that the Bush administration cannot seem to articulate for beans.
Conversely, time after time, left-wing films about the war on terror — films like “In The Valley of Elah,” “Rendition” and “Redacted” — which preach moral equivalence and advocate surrender, that disrespect the military and their mission, that seem unable to distinguish the difference between America and Islamo-fascism, have bombed more spectacularly than Operation Shock and Awe.
Why is it then that left-wingers feel free to make their films direct and realistic, whereas Hollywood conservatives have to put on a mask in order to speak what they know to be the truth? Why is it, indeed, that the conservative values that power our defense — values like morality, faith, self-sacrifice and the nobility of fighting for the right — only appear in fantasy or comic-inspired films like “300,” “Lord of the Rings,” “Narnia,” “Spiderman 3″ and now “The Dark Knight”?
The moment filmmakers take on the problem of Islamic terrorism in realistic films, suddenly those values vanish. The good guys become indistinguishable from the bad guys, and we end up denigrating the very heroes who defend us. Why should this be?
The answers to these questions seem to me to be embedded in the story of “The Dark Knight” itself: Doing what’s right is hard, and speaking the truth is dangerous. Many have been abhorred for it, some killed, one crucified.
Leftists frequently complain that right-wing morality is simplistic. Morality is relative, they say; nuanced, complex. They’re wrong, of course, even on their own terms.
Left and right, all Americans know that freedom is better than slavery, that love is better than hate, kindness better than cruelty, tolerance better than bigotry. We don’t always know how we know these things, and yet mysteriously we know them nonetheless.
The true complexity arises when we must defend these values in a world that does not universally embrace them — when we reach the place where we must be intolerant in order to defend tolerance, or unkind in order to defend kindness, or hateful in order to defend what we love.
When heroes arise who take those difficult duties on themselves, it is tempting for the rest of us to turn our backs on them, to vilify them in order to protect our own appearance of righteousness. We prosecute and execrate the violent soldier or the cruel interrogator in order to parade ourselves as paragons of the peaceful values they preserve. As Gary Oldman’s Commissioner Gordon says of the hated and hunted Batman, “He has to run away — because we have to chase him.”
That’s real moral complexity. And when our artistic community is ready to show that sometimes men must kill in order to preserve life; that sometimes they must violate their values in order to maintain those values; and that while movie stars may strut in the bright light of our adulation for pretending to be heroes, true heroes often must slink in the shadows, slump-shouldered and despised — then and only then will we be able to pay President Bush his due and make good and true films about the war on terror.
Perhaps that’s when Hollywood conservatives will be able to take off their masks and speak plainly in the light of day.
Mr. Klavan has won two Edgar Awards from the Mystery Writers of America. His new novel, “Empire of Lies” (An Otto Penzler Book, Harcourt), is about an ordinary man confronting the war on terror.
Some people like Batman for his uncompromising stance against crime. Some people like Bush for his uncompromising stance against terrorism.
Many people hate Batman for his vigilantism. Many people hate Bush for his unilateral actions.
The criminal underworld of Gotham hate and fear Batman for his effectiveness in crushing their unlawful operations. The terrorists of the world hate (and fear, though they would never admit it) Bush for his effectiveness in killing more than 20,000 of their fighters sent to Iraq.
Batman’s campaign caused a temporary increase in casualties, as the mob and the Joker struck back with a vengeance. Bush’s crusade caused a temporary increase in casualties, as the terrorists and their supporters struck back in the name of jihad.
But after the darkest hour, Batman’s victory brings Gotham into a new dawn of peace and order. Bush has brought peace and order to Iraq, but we are still in the darkest hour as Bush’s victory may yet be snatched away by the defeatist rhetoric and intentions of a potential successor.
In the end, Batman is outcast and hunted for pushing against the status quo – which was to let crime run along as usual while the populace cowers in submission. At the end of his two terms, Bush is one of the least popular Presidents for pushing against the status quo – which was to appease terrorist demands while they blow up the cowering populace.
See also how another box office winning superhero show, Iron Man, featured an unrepentant crusade against terrorists in Iron Man Review at Townhall.com: No Apologies in Killing Terrorists.
And compare to the terrorist-pandering, self-defeatist antics of Redacted, Stop Loss and other films which flopped spectacularly in Brian De Palma’s Redacted Rejected by Audiences.
Finally, a lesser-known factoid: Conservative Republican strongman Leahy Coburn who bravely fights against Democrat bullying in Congress had a guest appearance in The Dark Knight! How’s that for prophetic?
Hey, did the South Park guys read the same article? To wit:
Actually, we had this one storyline where Bush was going to show up at the end and take the blame – like Batman does in Dark Knight. Because people need someone to hate. And we’d make him this heroic figure who takes the blame, because that would just f*** with people.”
PS See also The Sacrificial Presidency of George W. Bush.
WARNING: Young children are not recommended to watch this Batman film! It contains many highly disturbing scenes of violence, torture, gore and psychological suspense. This is NOT the Batman of their cartoons.
That aside, The Dark Knight is a superb piece of writing. Without being a non-stop action explosion fest, our attention wasn’t lost for even a minute. The suspense, surprises and twists kept us guessing from the start of the Joker’s plans to the end.
The film is still full of action, but feels much more like a plot-driven thriller. I could see this film winning Best Film of the year for its intricate storyline that would make the best Batman comic plots proud (on which, its themes, are based), along with superb acting and timing.
This is like an action film, a drama, a thriller, a detective mystery and a horror film – and a bit of that superhero stuff it’s supposed to be. No wonder it’s been killing at the box office!
The late Heath Ledger has done for the Joker what Danny Devito did for the Penguin way back in Batman Returns – namely, discarded all trace of goofiness and replaced it with disturbing and demented twistedness.
The real star actor of The Dark Knight
This Joker doesn’t play silly tricks or use lame gags. He is a pure psychopath, of the most highly disturbing and chaotically unpredictable kind.
He is a clown only in the mould of Stephen King’s It – laughing at the sick twistedness of the horrors he inflicts upon the populace. I can see why Heath Ledger’s playing of the Joker is considered superior to even Jack Nicholson’s.
While Batman is supposed to be ‘the great detective’, this Joker out-schemes him at every turn. The Bat’s physical superiority and fighting skill amounts to almost nothing in the face of the Joker’s evil, anarchic genius.
(In comic fan terms, Heath Ledger’s Joker has Dr. Doom’s infinite plotting without any of Doom’s honour or sanity. Replace ‘Batman’ with ‘Joker’ in this comic – this Joker is exactly like that. You’ll understand after watching the film. Hey… This Joker minus the craziness is exactly what Doom should have been like instead of that sucky movie version!)
I vote Heath Ledger for Best Actor. Playing the pretty nice-boy in films like A Knight’s Tale and The Patriot are who he is, but playing the Joker is truly acting.
A running theme repeated throughout the film is: Would you take a life to save a life? To save many lives? To save yourself? Are humans merely glorified, amoral animals?
And the film ties up the ‘loose ends’ introduced by the previous movie (i.e. Batman Begins). Though that film was dark, it was nothing compared to the darkness of the sequel…
Overall, a must-see that is far more thought-provoking and mature than Iron Man, and puts the eye-candy antics of Spider-Man 3 to shame.
See also the post, Batman = Bush? for some comparisons.
Get Smart is a fun watch!
There’s a lot of nostalgia and references to the original series, such as the various gadgets (including, of course, the Shoe Phone and the Cone of Silence) and classic old jokes, without being unoriginal or imploding the spacetime-line.
Max himself is true to the original too, with all his bumbling success and knowledge of all things trivial and irrelevant (and not so irrelevant), including versions of these classic Max phrases:
…Missed it by that much.
The old [insert convoluted name of trick here] trick.
Would you believe…?
The supporting cast pull their weight too, with a very modern-sensibilities 99 still pulling Max from the fire. Watch out for the instantly recognizable The Rock and Hiro Nakamura too!
Overall, a rather slow start but it quickly picks up the pace of bungling action and fun. Worth the watch, especially if you saw the original series!
And you’re lucky, before the film starts you’ll get to see the trailer/silence your handphones short. One features the modern-day ‘chemistry’ between Max and 99, the other has The Rock doing what he does best!
Little political comment from Day by Day Cartoon that you should get the joke of after watching Get Smart:
One word description of Made of Honor: : Clichéd.
If you’ve watched My Best Friend’s Wedding, Runaway Bride or any other romantic comedy involving the love of the protagonist’s life about to marry someone else, you can guess the overall plot, minor plot points and ending to this film.
So minor spoilers are included below.
When the hero realizes he loves the girl, you already know she will announce her upcoming sudden marriage just then.
When the hero tries to prove his superiority against the rival, you already know who will come out looking better.
When the rival seems all to perfect, you already know that even more perfection will pop up.
When the hero finally repents of his lifetime of womanizing and turns over a new leaf, you already know that some girl is going to hit on him… And you already know that the girl he loves will stumble upon this compromising position.
And at the last minute, when the hero has given up and the marriage is underway and the priest reaches the “If anyone objects to this marriage” bit… Yup, that’s right.
Only two things I didn’t predict quite right – how the dogs fit in, and how the geek at the basketball games fit in.
Other than that, the show is a pretty decent watch – but kinda short on laughs.
The gals will of course love the show’s romantic plot full of romantic and manly Scotsmen with romantic accents doing romantic things in the romantically beautiful countryside.
The guys on the other hand may have catatonic flashbacks to the repeated sinkings of the Titanic. (We’ll get you for this one day, James Cameron!!!!)
But hey, if you want your girl to come with you to watch Hulk or Hellboy II… Quid pro quo.
*2 MINOR SPOILERS, AND 1 MAJOR SPOILER WARNING*
The major spoiler is at #3, and is in White colour text. Highlight it with your mouse to view it.
Kung Fu Panda: A secular animated comedy featuring Jack Black as a clumsy, lazy panda in China who learns the ancient Chinese martial art/culture of Kung Fu. (With perhaps some Japanese imperialism suggested?)
Totally unrelated to Christianity? Here’s what Jamie Thong has to note:
CHRISTIAN LESSONS IN KUNG FU PANDA
#1: When Master Wu Gui (Oogway) tells Master Shifu that he needs to just believe and learn to let go of his control even if he can’t see how things will turn out.
Lesson: We all need to learn how to let go of the control over our lives and have faith in God to let Him have control, even when we can’t see the way forward.
#2: When Master Shifu brings Po Panda to the birthplace of Kung Fu when he is discouraged, and he suddenly is inspired to learn Kung Fu.
Lesson: As leaders, there are times when our followers might get discouraged. What we can do to help them get up again is to help them see the vision of what they are running for once again. We do that by bringing them back to the birthplace of that vision, which is in God’s presence. Once they catch the vision again, they will be ready to continue running.
#3: (In White font, highlight to see) The fact that there is nothing inside the Dragon Scroll but a reflective surface. Once Po Panda understood that there is no secret he was ready to face Tai Long.Lesson: Many times we think that if we have the perfect method, or if the circumstances are just right we can succeed. We always ask God to “give us this, give us that” or “if only You’d do this and that then I could be successful”. Yet it is not the method that God chooses to empower, it is the person. God has already put whatever we need to succeed into us. All we need to do is to take the first step of faith and as we walk, God will draw it out of us and make it manifest.
What thinkest thou?