NBC’s Friday night series “Grimm” is a fantasy show, but for reasons I cannot fathom the program’s writers chose to mine that most heinous relic of Mittel-Europa: the story of the seemingly good and kind Jew who is really a demonic creature underneath for last week’s episode “Organ Grinders.”

A brief history of blood libels, courtesy of Wikipedia:

• In England in 1144, the Jews of Norwich were accused of ritual murder after a boy was found dead with stab wounds in the woods. This was followed by similar accusations elsewhere, leading to massacres in London and York. In 1190, “the Norwich Jews were butchered in their homes.”

• In France in 1171, a similar accusation against the Jewish community of Bloise led to the massacre by fire of some 40 Jews.

• In Germany, a boy’s body was found in the Lauter river. Based on “miraculous” evidence that “proved” the Jews had hung the boy by the feet and had opened every artery in his body to obtain the blood, the Jews were executed.

• In Russia in 1820, a Jew in Zverki is accused of kidnapping a six year old boy, draining his blood for nine days and dumping his body. In 1997, “Belorussian state TV showed a film alleging the story is true.”

This is the gist of the blood libel: the belief that Jews kidnap children to drain them of their blood. It didn’t die with the Nazis. It is still in currency today. You have only to turn on Syrian or Egyptian television to see. But American TV? (Spoilers Ahead)

(more…)

Name this movie: An ace CIA operative, condemned as a rogue and now hunted by the Company, bashes and crashes his way through colorful foreign settings, pursued by heavily armed hit men, while back at Langley headquarters an inscrutable deputy director and one of his top lieutenants are arousing the suspicion of another officer, a woman, who’s starting to wonder why her two bosses are so intent on terminating this troublesome renegade.

Yes, it does sound like a “Bourne” movie, doesn’t it? But no, this is “Safe House,” with Denzel Washington taking over for Matt Damon, Sam Shepard replacing Scott Glenn as the steely Agency overseer, Brendan Gleeson in for Brian Cox as the dodgy controller, and Vera Farmiga stepping into the Joan Allen role as his straight-shooting subordinate.

The picture has a familiar swarming hand-held visual style, thanks to cinematographer Oliver Wood (who shot all three “Bourne” films) and editor Richard Pearson (who worked on “The Bourne Supremacy”). At one point, an agitated spook even yelps out a demand for remote surveillance with the words “I want eyes on this!”—a line previously yelped by David Strathairn’s agitated spook in “The Bourne Ultimatum.”

“Safe House” may be faux Bourne, but for those counting the moments till the release of “The Bourne Legacy” next August, it might seem better than no Bourne at all. Swedish director Daniel Espinosa has a flair for action staging—the one-on-one fight scenes, agreeably many in number and often set in confined spaces, are smashingly effective. And first-time screenwriter David Guggenheim has usefully adjusted the Bourne template. Here, Washington’s character, Tobin Frost—nominally the Jason Bourne figure—isn’t an unwitting innocent being set up by his shadowy CIA masters; he’s an actual traitor who has been selling Agency secrets for nearly a decade.

Read the full review at Reason.com

Conservatives will start rolling their eyes early on in the new movie “Safe House.”

Denzel Washington stars as a rogue CIA agent who turns himself in to U.S. authorities, and before you can say “human rights abuse” his character undergoes a waterboarding treatment.

Had “Safe House” come out five years ago, the scene might have included jabs at the Bush administration, the War on Terror or both. Likely both. Instead, the scene arrives and leaves without any sermonizing to lessen the moment’s impact.

We’re supposed to learn that Washington’s character, the colorfully named Tobin Frost, is a certifiable bad-ass, and that the information he possesses is critically important to the story. And that’s it.

Nice.

(more…)

Yesterday, the creators of the hit show “House” announced that at the end of this, its eighth season, Dr. House and his cast of characters would fade into the distance.

“The decision to end the show now, or ever, is a painful one, as it risks putting asunder hundreds of close friendships that have developed over the last eight years,” said executive producers David Shore, Katie Jacobs and Hugh Laurie, “but also because the show itself has been a source of great pride to everyone involved.

The producers have always imagined House as an enigmatic creature;  he should never be the last one to leave the party.  How much better to disappear before the music stops, while there is still some promise and mystique in the air.”

Now’s as good a time as any for a post-mortem on one of the quirkiest, most interesting character shows of the last decade. “House’s” focus on a thoroughly unlikeable character was risky, and it paid off; the creators’ decision to make him a thoroughgoing atheist constantly at conflict with others subtly made the case for the bankruptcy of his ideology.  Or, at the very least, it offered philosophical contrast.

Most famously, “House” featured a very pro-life episode in 2007, “Fetal Position,” in which an unborn child reached out of the womb and touched House’s hand, mirroring the famous photograph. That was mirrored by a pro-choice episode that same season that made the case for abortion for a religious rape victim. That was House’s style.

(more…)

Madonna – love her or hate her. Some think she has no talent, while others have named their daughters after her.

Some think her career is pure marketing and her fans believe she’s a real trend setter. There has always been a wide range of opinions about this woman, an entertainer who has enough monikers to be in the witness protection program. As her personal life has evolved through marriages, children and boyfriends, her songs are what are more familiar to people.

For the first time since she became famous, she got to be the star attraction at the Super Bowl Halftime Show. What aspect of her performance did people focus on? Her voice? Nope. What she wore? Not really. Her new song? Sure, a little. Her age? Bingo, report her to AARP, stat!

How dare she try to pull off that type of show as a woman who has experienced more than three decades on the planet? Perish the thought! She has some nerve being on that stage and lifting her leg up at the age of 53. Where are her Mom jeans with the elastic waist? How could she be in high-heeled, thigh high boots when she knows she should be in Easy Spirits? This is even more of an abomination than her performance in “Swept Away.”

Doesn’t she know that woman over 35, let alone 40 in this country, are considered older than Methuselah? You mean she has no clue that she should be referring to herself as “long in the tooth” “an old bag” and a “has-been.” Doesn’t she realize that she has to grow into her date of birth by talking about things she can’t do anymore? Where is her rheumatoid arthritis? COPD? High cholesterol? She should be punished for doing a jumping jack.

Just check the reaction to her performance on social media outlets if you think I am exaggerating.

(more…)

Whatever your opinion might be of stoner, gross-out comedies, there’s much to admire in the third chapter of the adventures of Harold Lee (John Cho) and Kumar Patel (Kal Penn). For what was a mid-level budget, the look of the production is first-rate. Nothing screams low-budget and the Christmas “feel” does come through. There’s also an actual theme at work here, which is established quickly, manages to hold on through all the shenanigans, and does pay off.

A few years have passed since Harold and Kumar escaped from Guantanamo or killed time hanging out together smoking their beloved mary jane. And sometime over the course of the last few years, the boys went their separate ways and became estranged. They’re now two completely different people who haven’t seen each other in over a year and probably wouldn’t become friends were they to meet for the first time today.  In fact, they would probably hate each other.

Harold now works in high finance. His is now THE MAN and even has to deal with Occupy Wall Street-types who protest outside his offices. Harold also enjoys an upper middle-class life in the suburbs with a nice car and an even nicer fiancée. Kumar, however, is still Kumar — an unemployed burn-out who smokes weed all day and avoids responsibility like he does a shower. Closing in on 30, sadly, the reefer’s become an escape for Kumar, a way to avoid coming to terms with the emptiness of his life and the loss of his girlfriend. What had been recreational and rebellious in his youth, is now a pathetic crutch.

It’s Christmastime and Harold’s smoking-hot fiancee’s rather large family has come to stay for the holidays. The most important thing to Harold’s future father-in-law (Danny Trejo), a man who’s crazy about Christmas and someone with whom Harold is desperate to make a good impression, is the perfect tree. Harold promises everyone that when they return from church, the perfect tree will be decorated and waiting for them. They leave. Kumar shows up. Mayhem ensues.  

(more…)

Conservative movies can rock the box office, as anyone who so much as glanced at the balance sheets for “The Passion of the Christ” can attest. But a new study by Movieguide, a faith-friendly film outlet, claims the big picture is far more positive for movies promoting patriotism and faith.

The Hollywood Reporter:

The Movieguide report rates movies using more than two dozen criteria, such as whether a title promotes capitalism or socialism or if it promotes or denigrates biblical principles. Violence, sex, political correctness, revisionist history, environmentalism, feminism, homosexuality and more hot-button political issues all are taken into consideration.

This year’s report concludes that seven of the top 10 films of 2011 scored high on Movieguide’s index and therefore qualify as films with “strong or very strong Christian, biblical, moral and redemptive content.”

(more…)

Actress Scarlett Johansson once famously swapped emails with future president Barack Obama.

Now, the curvy star of “We Bought a Zoo” is carrying Obama’s water for his 2012 campaign.

Johansson announced she’s back on Team Obama, reading off the Celebrity Apology script while chatting to The Huffington Post about her return to the Hope and Change Express:

I think people are really in dire straits and they are very reasonably and understandably upset,” she said. “I mean Obama inherited a turkey, he really did, and he’s working to… he’s fighting a kind of uphill battle in a sense and he has these past four years. And he never ran his first term as that — he was always going to be a two-term election in that sense. And change doesn’t happen overnight, you know, we know that.

(more…)

Wipe away the torrent of blood from the 2010 film “Machete” and you saw a coarse treatise on illegal immigration and those eeee-vil folks who dare to care about controlling the borders.

The film wasn’t a flop, but its $26 million haul hardly screamed “franchise.” Yet a sequel is on the way all the same, but this time it looks like we’ll see more of Machete the killing machine and less obtuse political content.

Deadline.com:

The new film finds Machete recruited by the U.S. Government for a mission which would be impossible for any mortal man. Machete must battle his way through Mexico to take down a madman cartel leader and an eccentric billionaire arms dealer who has hatched a plan to spread war across the planet with a weapon in space. Machete takes on an army in an effort to dismantle a plan for global anarchy.

“Machete” writer/producer Robert Rodriguez is one of the more pragmatic talents in Hollywood. His early claim to fame was making “El Mariachi” for a measly $7,000. Since then, he’s wisely concentrated on keeping his budgets relatively low and ensuring a decent return on investment for his projects. It’s clear he still has a grasp for the bottom line.

(more…)

The reports and books that were timed with Reagan’s 100th birthday last February tended to mention the Hollywood years as a mere afterthought. Moreover, most Reagan biographers typically focus on the more well-known movies such as “Kings Row and “Knute Rockne.”

But there are several films worth revisiting that have gone largely unheralded. At a time when Reagan has earned high marks from historians and academics for his time in office, the caricature of him as just a B actor persists. But Reagan’s uncommon human touch and affable
personality are on full display in films that are worth revisiting.

Furthermore, his conversion from New Deal liberalism over to Goldwater conservatism is directly tied in with Reagan’s Hollywood years. And, as Gorbachev learned during their summit meetings, Reagan could be a tenacious, shrew negotiator; a skill that can be traced back to his time as head of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) union.

The steel behind the congenial smile was forged during some of the more intense altercations with Hollywood communists intent on taking over the union and organizing the film industry. “Thugs” attached to the “red-dominated” Conference of Studio Unions were significant players here, Kengor informs readers in his book. They went after Reagan personally and even threatened to throw acid on his face. Reagan began to carry a gun for his own personal safety and did not give any quarter.

(more…)

El Rushbo didn’t mince words on EastwoodGate today.

Rush Limbaugh, back behind the golden EIB microphone following a one-day vacation, addressed the Chrysler Super Bowl ad featuring Clint Eastwood. And the talk show titan didn’t like what he heard.

I think he got scammed. I think he got roped into doing something he thought was patriotic and ended up being played. I do,” the conservative radio host said on his show on Tuesday. “I’m just going to give him the benefit of the doubt and suggest he got suckered into this.”

Limbaugh … said “all of this talk of ‘working together’” is something people say when Democrats are “about to get shellacked.”

(more…)

Everyone knows that the typical advertisement on the Super Bowl goes for millions of dollars.  And we all wonder why the ads they produce for that money feature children peeing in pools, monkeys farting, and bungee jumping cars.  Those don’t seem like particularly good uses of company funding.

And they aren’t.  They’re commercials targeted to the younger demographic.  And as the Super Bowl itself shows, the younger demographic isn’t where the cash is.  The advertising agencies had better wake up and smell the coffee: older, more conservative audiences are the ones that should be targeted now.

The networks and the NFL get it: we’re getting old as a country.  Seven of the last eight Super Bowl halftime shows have featured Boomer and Gen X icons: Paul McCartney (2005), the Rolling Stones (2006), Prince (2007), Tom Petty and the Heartbreakers (2008), Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band (2009), The Who (2010), and Madonna (2012)?  Perhaps the under-40 crowd remembers Madonna, but if they do, it’s in a very vague half-sleep state.

And yet America’s commercial advertisers seem to think that the most valuable audience is the 18-49 crowd.  For years, American advertising has been run on the notion that young audiences are more valuable than older audiences; that if you grab a youngster’s brand loyalty early, you’ll grab ‘em for life; and that older audiences are set in their ways.  That’s how so much liberal television has been sneaked past advertising honchos – young people tend to be liberal, and so the honchos figure that liberal television will appeal to the most lucrative demographic.  Even if more older people watch than younger people, the advertisers figure, they need to greenlight young-skewing programs to hit the target demo.

(more…)

“You can fool all the people half the time, and half the people all the time.” That quote has been attributed to everyone from Abe Lincoln to P.T. Barnum. Whoever said it doesn’t matter. It’s true. Polls show that about half the people still believe in man-made global warming, despite Climategate and despite an avalanche of evidence to the contrary.

What we found in our movie “An Inconsistent Truth” is that belief in man-made global warming is wide but very shallow. Ask people on the street, as we did, if they believe in global warming and you’re likely to get a confident affirmation. Ask them why they believe it and you’re likely to get the dull stare of a dairy cow or the puzzled and confused gaze of Edith Bunker.

The trouble is most people have been spoon-fed only half the story and as Thomas B. Macaulay once said, “Half knowledge is worse than ignorance.” Indeed. People have taken Al Gore’s claims of global calamity at face value despite his propensity to lie. Remember, he’s the man who once claimed to have created the Internet.

It’s a shame but most people are simply incurious creatures. Some may call it intellectual laziness but the fact is people are just too busy living their own lives to devote any serious study to global warming. Being a talk radio host I do nothing but study the issues, and we spent two-and-a-half years researching and filming “An Inconsistent Truth.” We learned there was actually more time spent by the global warming alarmists trying to scare away the curious than actually cementing their argument. Phrases like “settled science” and “consensus” are the parlance of
politicians and political hacks, not scientists.

(more…)

Actor Clint Eastwood’s Super Bowl ad for Chrysler got a quick and hearty welcome from Obama administration officials who saw it as an unofficial endorsement for the president’s auto bailout.

But the 81-year-old screen icon worked nearly as fast to shut down the notion his ad was meant to be taken that way.

Here’s the erstwhile Dirty Harry setting the record straight to a producer from Fox News’ “The O’Reilly Factor”:

I just want to say that the spin stops with you guys, and there is no spin in that ad. On this I am certain.

l am certainly not politically affiliated with Mr. Obama. It was meant to be a message about just about job growth and the spirit of America. I think all politicians will agree with it. I thought the spirit was OK.

I am not supporting any politician at this time.

Chrysler to their credit didn’t even have cars in the ad.

Anything they gave me for it went for charity.

If any Obama or any other politician wants to run with the spirit of that ad, go for it.

Judge for yourself:

(more…)

***ADDED: Would Dirty Harry ask for a handout?

“The Obama reelection campaign couldn’t buy a better endorsement.”

—–

THR:

The Super Bowl is televised advertising’s equivalent of the Cannes Film Festival, so White House political strategists must have been smiling when what’s generally being hailed as this year’s best spot — the Chrysler “Halftime in America” commercial — subtly echoed the themes of President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign.

Just to ice the cake, the gritty two-minute spot featured actor/director Clint Eastwood, whose politics usually put him on the Republican side of the aisle. In the spot, Eastwood’s voice narrates an account of Detroit’s comeback and, then, when his unmistakably craggy face appears on screen, talks of how America has arrived at half-time in its struggle back from the financial precipice with good things to follow in the coming second half.

(more…)

The ads are always a major draw when the Super Bowl plays. Some of those advertisements rely entirely on a major celebrity appearance and the advertisement usually succeeds epically or fails disastrously based on that appearance. Let’s take a look at three advertisements from last night’s Super Bowl and which ones were winners and which ones were losers:

—–

The clear winner is easy. When I heard Clint Eastwood would appear in a car commercial and have a pep talk with America, I expected something a little more light. Maybe they’d use his “Dirty Harry” image in some satirical way. Who knows. But, when the advertisement started playing, the entire room (which was previously filled with talk and laughter and some yelling) went silent. Everyone was glued and listened to every word that slipped from Eastwood’s mouth. It was a pep talk alright. And I say we band together and start a petition to nominate Eastwood for an Oscar for his little pep talk. The second he starts walking towards the screen, he consumes you in his shadow. He speaks from experience and he speaks almost as a godfather to us all. By the end of it I wanted to stand up and salute the flag. It makes one more and more excited to see Eastwood return to the front of the cameras for his next flick.

(more…)

There’s nothing better than being able to do the right thing and the politically savvy thing while simultaneously paying back a long-time abuser in spades.

And that’s just what the Republicans in Congress did to Hollywood when it abandoned the rush to pass SOPA and regulate the Internet for the benefit of Tinseltown. Astonishingly, considering its usual inability to perform competently at even the most basic level, the GOP not only managed to embrace good policy but drove a wedge into the Democratic coalition that may well have dramatic consequences down the road. And, best of all, it provided a bit of long overdue payback to the smug oligarchs of LA’s West Side who have spent the last couple decades treating Republicans like something you’d hasten to flush.

Hey, suckers, how do ya like us now?

The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) is only the latest attempt by Hollywood to breathe some life back into its dying business model. Enraged that online “pirates” are passing around bootleg copies of movies, shows, books, music, and all other manner of intellectual property, the industry did what it has done for years: ran to Congress for ever more burdensome and onerous laws designed to hold back the inevitable consequences of progress. 

But this time, it went too far. Perhaps it was Hollywood’s arrogance. Perhaps it was the provisions allowing Hollywood to use the United States government to shut down any website it pleased on the mere accusation of “piracy” without any due process, a power lefty–fascist bureaucrats would be only too eager to accept.

Not surprisingly, the people who make their living on the web were less than thrilled about giving Uncle Sam and the media conglomerates an off-switch.

(more…)

With “Chronicle,” the shaky-cam “real footage” movie, on the cusp of propelling some viewers into face-clawing lamentation, finally grows up.

The picture has a rousing spirit and an unexpected emotional warmth. It features good (if little-known) actors, a solid genre plot, and surprisingly slick effects that are especially impressive for being so seamlessly woven into the film’s low-budget look. The movie hustles by in less than 90 minutes, and it’s a lot of fun.

The story, by director Josh Trank and screenwriter Max Landis—both feature-film first-timers—is a clever riff on the superhero theme. Andrew Detmer (Dane DeHaan, a True Blood alumnus) is the kid with the video cam—a lonely nerd documenting his miserable homelife with an abusive father (Michael Kelly) and bedridden, dying mother (Bo Petersen). Andrew is a high-school senior, shunned by the cool kids and tormented by the usual crew of varsity troglodytes—all the more so after he starts bringing his new camera to school. His only semi-friends are his amiable cousin Matt (Alex Russell) and, for reasons unclear, the gleamingly popular Steve Montgomery (Michael B. Jordan, of Friday Night Lights).

One day, out in the woods, these three happen across a large hole that leads deep underground. Descending into it, they find something very strange, and soon after clambering back up to the surface discover that they’ve suddenly developed nifty new telekinetic powers. At first they use this gift for fun and pranks—floating little Lego bricks up into the air, baffling car owners by shuffling their vehicles around in parking lots. Then, with continued practice, they discover that they can rise up into the air themselves, and soon they’re swooping around through the clouds.

(more…)

If you love B-movies with plenty of camp, comedy and gore, then you’ve probably seen a few films created by the writer/producer/director Roger Corman, the man behind SyFy channel pictures like “Dinocroc vs. Supergator” and older classics like the original “Little Shop of Horrors.”

Up-and-coming director Alex Stapleton turned the camera onto the camp master in her film “Corman’s World: Exploits of a Hollywood Rebel.”

—–

It follows Corman’s career – over half a century of cheap-as-dirt indie filmmaking – and the resulting 400-plus films that he created in that time. The film launched earlier this month, and Stapleton called BH recently for an interview about her film, Corman’s influence, and getting Jack Nicholson to cry on camera.

BH: Where does Roger Corman fit into the history of cinema?

Stapleton: I definitely think he’s part of the backbone of cinema. I think, creatively speaking as a filmmaker and director, he kind of helped – along with his compatriots – to birth the kind of blockbuster genre film experiences that we experience today that the studios are making.

I think Roger was definitely one of the pioneers in that movement. When you look at the movie “Avatar,” you look at the director and it’s James Cameron, and James Cameron [worked] under Roger Corman for years and… I think that James Cameron would probably tell you the same thing: that he learned a lot about how to put together a genre story by working for Roger.

I also think that as far as moments in cinema history, Roger has had a huge influence, specifically with the American new Hollywood movement, by finding and mentoring people like Peter Fonda, Jack Nicholson, [and] Peter Bogdanovich, starting their careers but also giving them the idea – Peter Fonda, Denis Hopper and Jack Nicholson – giving them the idea to make the movie “Easy Rider,” which is a hybrid movie of Roger’s movies “The Trip” and “Wild Angels.” (more…)

I loved going to the movies.  I always have, but I’m not so sure I do anymore.

We all know Hollywood is spinning around the bowl, waiting for the final flush. Attendance at theaters is not just flat-lining, it’s in free fall. There are a lot of reasons, some of which Hollywood really cannot do much about. Video games occupy young eyeballs. Technology now delivers a tsunami of entertainment options to our TVs, computers and iThings. But there are ways that Hollywood can respond. It can make movies that don’t suck, but that’s another subject for another time. And it can make the theaters into something new and different – that is, it can make them into places we want to be.

I (and folks like me) should be a target demographic for the green eyeshade guys who supposedly run Hollywood.  While, even if all the conditions were perfect, I wouldn’t go as much as I used to, I used to go a couple times a week before I was married, and even after I’d go weekly. I’ll spend my few free bucks (including the fortune for babysitters) if there’s something I want to see (doubtful, and again another issue for another time) and if going to the theater itself is something other than a nightmarish death march.

Which brings me to my trip to the El Segundo, California, ArcLight Cinemas on a recent Friday night to see “Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy”…

The ArcLight, and other “premium” theaters, represents the industry’s attempt to address some of the more common complaints about theaters from people like me – decrepit facilities, careless projection, and snack options that range from bland to hideous.  As a drunken college student, I didn’t mind going to some hellhole theater on dollar night to see awesome fare like “The Exterminator II” and “Pieces”– hey, aesthetics aren’t Consideration No. 1 when your flick’s tagline is “You don’t have to go to Texas for a chainsaw massacre!” But today, I want a little more than sticky floors and discreet ticket takers who overlook the beer cans I had obviously secreted in my pockets. (more…)