Comments on: Me? A Neocon? Really?

By: John RIDLEY @ BIG HOLLYWOOD | Political News Now

John RIDLEY @ BIG HOLLYWOOD | Political News Now — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 19:50:34 +0000

[...] Read the Rest from John Ridley at Big Hollywood [...]

By: Sesso

Sesso — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:32:18 +0000

Great site.

By: Big Hollywood: Conservatives Rock! « On Deaf Ears

Big Hollywood: Conservatives Rock! « On Deaf Ears — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:30:33 +0000

[...] capable John Nolte. In the first few days after launch, liberal scribe John Ridley dropped in to explain that his script for Three Kings was neither “neo-con” nor filmed the way it was [...]

By: Big Hollywood » Blog Archive » Big Thanks: A Really Big Launch, A Really Big Tent, A Really Big Future

Sun, 11 Jan 2009 01:01:19 +0000

[...] even had esteemed screenwriter and self-confessed “flaming liberal” John Ridley debunk the notion that “Three Kings” was crafted as a neo-con critique of the first [...]

By: Dale G

Dale G — Fri, 09 Jan 2009 05:27:44 +0000

When I watched THREE KINGS many many moons ago, I never got the impression that it was a neocon movie, especially when one of the terrorists was trying make Wahlberg eat Arab oil. I thought it lost its logic on that since I never seen any liberal or Hollywood-type ride a bicycle to the Academy Awards.

Anyhow, be glad at least Hollywood put on a happy ending to THREE KINGS. The 8 anti-Iraq war movies that came out in 2008 all flopped, even when using Hollywood measurements.

By: Roger

Roger — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:37:04 +0000

TVO’s Film 101 did a show interviewing people involved with this movie and the movie about the Afgan war called “The Beast”.
http://www.tvo.org/pdf/TVOListingsJan09.pdf
Three Kings’ ?Producer said that he was worried about offending large groups of people, and surprised that the movie won an Muslim Media Award. http://www.mpac.org/about/timeline/
I appreciated the movie scene where Mark Wahlberg was being tortured by the Iraqi whose family was bombed and asked Mark how he would feel if his family was being bombed. But I couldn’t understand if the producer was worried about offending the people who gave the award to the movie’s producers. It was about U.S. soldiers using the invasion as an excuse to steal Middle Eastern gold. They should have expected the award.

By: LionPaw

LionPaw — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 07:08:31 +0000

Someone asked,
“Would a Homeland for Whites be ok?”

Sure. It wouldn’t bother me. But you’re mixing apples and oranges.

Both blacks and whites live in Israel.

Jews don’t limit Israel to Jews only, they also allow Muslims to live there, as well as atheists, Christians, and any other group.

Most of Europe was predominantly Christian for hundreds of years (so too the USA), and most Middle Eastern nations, along with some in Africa are predominantly or solely Muslim.

I don’t get why it’s okay for Christians to have Christian nations or Muslims to have Muslim nations, but it’s not okay with some people for Jews to have one lone Jewish nation station?

Bonnie said,
“These “dark-skinned” Muslims are at this very moment enslaving black Africans across the continent, and have done so since Mohammed first came up with his death cult.”

I’m I’m recalling correctly, black Muslims are killing black Christians in some areas of Africa.

By: Steven

Steven — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 06:49:39 +0000

I concur with JIC.

By: jic

jic — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 03:02:23 +0000

I don’t know if Big Hollywood is operating an ‘anything goes’ policy with respect to comments. If so, that’s fine. But if that’s not what’s happening, surely Terry has done more than enough to get himself kicked out of here? He’s either an antisemitic nutcase, a pure troll with no real goal other than to cause disruption, or both. Either way, he’s hijacked an otherwise interesting thread with his nonsense.

If he’s not going to get kicked out of here, can we at least stop feeding him?

By: masha

masha — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 01:43:36 +0000

Alright, moving on to Three Kings…I didn’t hink it was all that anti-American. It was anti- America abandoning people through unfinished wars. It made me think more of Vietnam than anything else. I also didn’t see moral equivalency in there. An Iraqui abusing an American prisoner while spouting anti-American propaganda does not constitute moral equivalency. There’s some critique leveled at military bureaucratic process, but still that’s not anti-American per se.

As to the original intent of the story, yeah well, that’s what happens when you hand control over to Hollywood bigwigs. That’s why so few good books get made into decent movies.