Hollywood’s Leftist Standard on Biographies
by Mike LaChanceWho doesn’t like a good biography movie? In Hollywood they’re called bio pics and they often do very well at the box office, especially when the subject has a compelling life story. Of course, filmmakers are like any other type of creative artist in that they tend to focus on subjects that interest them.
Hollywood doesn’t seem very interested in the life stories of conservative icons unless they’re slandering them as in Oliver Stone’s hit piece on George W. Bush called “W.” which was released (sheerly by coincidence) a month before the 2008 presidential election.
Stone is currently working on a documentary series about Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other fiends which is, in his own words, designed to educate the American people so we can learn to “empathize” with them. Well isn’t that just ducky? I can hardly wait to be taught how to empathize with Hitler and Stalin.
In recent years we were treated to biographies like Steven Soderbergh’s heroic homage to Che Guevara, the murderous villain whose face can be seen on numerous t-shirts at your local hipster joint. And who could forget the Ed Harris tribute to the poor misunderstood genius Jackson Pollock? He revolutionized the art world when he wasn’t getting drunk and abusing his wife.
The 1996 film “The People Vs. Larry Flynt” made some interesting points regarding the first amendment but otherwise portrayed Flynt as a victim of censorship and therefore some sort of hero. Couldn’t Director Miloš Forman find a better subject for a movie about free speech than a pornographer?
There’s a movie about Howard Stern but no movie about Rush Limbaugh, a man whose story of overcoming addiction and deafness is the very stuff great biopics are made of. There’s a movie about the Marquis De Sade but no movie (other than a television film) about the life of Pope John Paul II — a man whose leadership was pivotal in the liberation of Eastern Europe from Communism. There’s a movie about John Wayne Gacy but no movie about John Wayne — who’s as popular today as ever! Julia Child rates but not Margaret Thatcher?
Has anyone noticed that there’s not a single decent film about the life of Ronald Reagan? Is his life story not compelling enough? He only brought down the Berlin Wall, won the Cold War and led America to one of its most prosperous ages. Not to mention that prior to his political career, Reagan was a movie actor so well regarded by his colleagues that he was elected to leadership roles in the Screen Actors Guild in the 1940’s.
Am I crazy for thinking that William F. Buckley’s life story would make a great movie? Here’s a man who spoke Spanish and French as his first languages and didn’t begin to learn English until he was seven, yet went on to become known for his brilliant writing and speaking style. Buckley had tremendous wit which he displayed on television as the host of “Firing Line” for over thirty years. Imagine the challenge to an actor to convincingly imitate Buckley’s distinct mannerisms and way of speaking. Buckley worked in the intelligence industry for the CIA and then went on to found National Review, a conservative political journal of unmatched regard.
Speaking of National Review, Heaven forbid anyone in Hollywood make a film about someone like Whittaker Chambers. An American Communist and Soviet spy, Chambers ultimately defected from Communism and became one of its fiercest opponents. He was befriended by William F. Buckley and was part of National Review’s founding editorial board. He was also responsible for identifying former assistant to the Secretary of State, Alger Hiss as a Communist spy in 1948. That’s a pretty compelling story.
What’s that? You’ve never heard of Whittaker Chambers?
Maybe someone should make a movie about him.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
98 Comments
I would prefer NOT to see a biopic of John Wayne or Rush or Lady Thatcher if some anti-American cretin like Oliver Stone decides to direct it. Best leave that one alone.
On the other hand, a film about Ronald Reagan directed by Clint Eastwood would be killer. I'd be first in line.
Don't hold your breath. To Hollywood, the Right is forever the Establishment – the enemy that needs to be subverted by "brave" moviemakers who risk it all to speak truth to power.
I'm waiting for the remake of Sargeant York where this religious tongues speaking fanatic hillbilly mercilessly slaughters a battalion of helpless wounded Germans and then covers it up to get some medals in order to impress a nationalistic American public into putting him on the dole for the rest of his life which he lives out in an alcoholic haze. Oh yes, he molests his children in between hunting trips killing innocent bunnies.
Starring Sean Penn and directed by Oliver Stone.
'Sounds about right. I wouldn't expect anything else from people whose highest aspiration is to become a cockroach.
Excellent article. When will Hollywood make these movies..when pigs fly…we must stop waiting and complaining about it..and do it ourselves. Who would have thought 20 years ago that Fox News or a conservative news network would be number one in ratings and viewership? The time is ripe for both a conservative major television network and movie production company that educates and promotes the ideas of traditional american values, exceptionalism, and constutional republican democracy founded by our forefathers. After a century of liberal socialist progressive agitation and controll of government,media, and the eduction system, is it not about time that we utilize our remaing freedom and resources in defense of our founding fathers vision and values?
[...] the original post: Hollywood’s Leftist Standard on Biographies This entry is filed under America – Blogs, Big Hollywood. You can follow any responses to this [...]
A biopic of Ronald Reagan? Who would they get to start? Well, duh. Will Ferrell. Because that's how little regard Hollyweird has for true heroes.
Goodness, can you imagine them making To Hell and Back today? Me neither.
no reagan movie?
i guess you're forgetting the "tripper". a david arquette film about a reagan lookalike axe murderer who stalks the woods slaughtering hippies. you'd think it would be impossible to make a bad movie with such an awesome premise. but they did.
not in Hollywood. Not in this climate…
The decision has been made. Profits come second to ideological purity. This lot is 'writing' the history THEY want preserved, and don't really care about the economics of it.
Why, you ask?
Well, they make their money on films like "Garden of Elah' and other such crap UP FRONT. A wasteful budget is greenlit- say $45 million- and maybe 10 or 15 million is actually on the screen. The featherbedding pays all the Hollywood exorbitant union scale costs, the actors get their fees and maybe it'll make money in foreign release.
Either way the propaganda gets made and they get paid. Sweet deal, that…
A biopic of David Horowitz is my choice, now that would be something to chew on. Horowitz the well-known ex leftie leftie of Ramparts/Berkeley fame. His books, Destructive Generation and Radical Son were real eye openers for me . He was at the center of the Berkeley Black Panthers situations and seemingly knew everyone on the left in the 60's and 70's. His change of heart from committed leftist to conservative is an interesting journey and would make a great documentary.
As an artist, I hated the movie Pollack. It's Lee Krasner's version of her husband. Krasner was a mediocrity whose artwork mimicked better artists without ever understanding them. If you watch the movie, you'll have no idea where Pollack's creativity came from or what it meant – because she had no idea. To the extent that his work is 'understood' at all, it's through the gasbagging of parasitic left-wing art critics, who used his work as a Rorschach for their own cultural agenda. It's a tragedy that Pollack's life and legacy have been defined by people who didn't understand him, and who did him so much damage.
you want a biopic….
aimless teenager joins the army in world war one and becomes one of the country's first bomber pilots. stays in europe afterwards and experiences the glory of paris in the twenties. gets bored and joins the polish air force in their war with bolshevik russia. is shot down and imprisoned. kills a guard with his bare hands and escapes. ends up back in america with $2 in his pocket. finds wrk as a stunt man in hollywood. buys a camera and goes to persia for a few years. practically invents the documentary film. wins an oscar. comes home and co-writes a film called king kong. turns to producing. responsible for the best f the john ford/john wayne westerns. in his spare time stomps on hollywood communists. all of this really happened. his name was merian cooper.
in a town based on self glorification he has somehow been ignored.
I agree with pressman, David Horowitz would be the most interesting. When he realizes that his Black Panther buddies were murderous thugs would be a really interesting screen moment.
Why do we complain about Hollywood not producing these types of movies? Mike, you mentioned several great potential projects. I have thought of dozens of others as well. We know the American people will spend their dollars on these shows. Why not create a movie studio and simply produce them? We could find the capital. There are thousands of capable waiters and waitresses in LA who would jump at the chance regardless of politics. If distribution is a problem, then let's convince a right-leaning billionaire to buy a theatre chain with the express purpose of providing a place for these films. There seems to be plenty of money in the movie business. It just needs to be better channeled.
If I am missing something, please tell me. But it seems almost odd that we would gripe regularly on movies that should be made when we know there is a market for it. I mean, a movie that featured Reagan, Thatcher, Pope John Paul, and Gorby about the end of the cold war would kill at the box office.
If conservatives simply aren't talented enough to pull this off, then we need to ask the question why.
And if he does, and they do take off and make a fortune, you had better come back here and kiss his backside loudly and enthusiastically, all the while proclaiming your faulty intelligence…
THERE"S a movie I would see…
Would love to see a movie done on P.J. O'Rourke, or Orson Bean or David Horowitz.
While it may sound like a good idea, do you really want these kind of people committing these stories to film? Even if the project started with the right attitude, how many hands does it have to pass through before it finally hits the big screen? And how much damage could any of them do?
"EMPATHIZE" with HITLER, STALIN, and MAO…?!?!?!
IS STONE HIGH??!?
(Wait a minute, you don't have to answer that…)
I would like to have "empathized" them, and "empathize" their current day successors, like Bin Laden and Ahmadinejad, right to "room temperature"…by the most expedient means possible…
I feverently hope this piece of trash under-performs "Delgo"…unfortunately, it won't…
- " Stone is currently working on a documentary series about Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other fiends which is, in his own words, designed to educate the American people so we can learn to “empathize” with them." –
Wow, what a great new documentary for our schools, the kids are getting tired of watching 'An Inconvenient Truth'.
Excellent choice, attack. Early Hollywood is a wonderful place to find extraordinary characters. There are many stories of bravery and patriotism from this era. Another person with a deserving story would be the director, William Wellman, who was the first American to join the Lafayette Flying Corps. Later he made Wings, the first film to win the Academy Award.
Isn't America Great!
We provide freedoms, rights and protections to the very people who hate US and seek to destroy US from within. I'd love to see a gay film, starring Oliver Stone as Barney Frank, and Miachel Moore as Teddy Kennedy. It could be a love story. The Sailor who fell from Grace Redux..
I'd pay good money to watch that as long as it wasn't done by lefties.
Let's get Andy Hardy and Polly Benedict and go out to the barn and build a studio!!
Seriously, I like your enthusiasm, WL. That is the kind of American idealism that gets things done!! Instead of asking Why, let's answer Why Not?
I guarantee you there are studio executives out there who are not interested in an agenda, but only see dollar signs. They just need to be convinced that these kind of films will bring in the scratch.
I would love to see a film about Buckley…he was a great conservative, and truly brilliant. However, I don't know many in Hollywood that could emulate his finesse with the English language. I recently finished a compendium of some of his speeches….just for grins, I've listed below some of the more exotic words that I came across…see how many of these you really know:
lachrymose, contumace(i)ous, asseveratively, progenitive, atavism, postlapsarian, manichaeism, hortatory,
nescience, extrautilitarian, iconoclasm, arrant, pulchritude, lapidary, solecism, supererogate, tocsin, prophylaxis, prestidigitative, shrive, dithyrambic, parthenogenesis, decennial, anacoluthon, advective, immanentize, eschaton, pedagogy, inchoate, ineluctable, deracinated, antinomianism, gravamen, deliquescent, mordancy, abstruse, oleaginous, solipsism, recondite, infra dignitatum, apodictically, dirigiste, saponaceous.
(the IntenseDebate spell-check is going nuts)
i forgot that he chased pancho villa. and was on the pan am board.
in a life so full, you wouldn't think he had time for a hobby. cooper's pastime was anti-communism. he was a friend of joe mccarthy. and involved in creating the blacklist. he was too great a man for hollywood to vilify. so they choose to pretend he never existed.
You know… Clint might just do that one day. I'll be the first in line to see it. In fact, Clint would be a Hell of a director for a picture on John Wayne.
I don't know if Gary Oldman every liked Thatcher, but he's supposed to be a conservative or at least Tory. I hope he directs again, and if he does I hope he'd be willing to do a film about Maggie Thatcher.
As for Rush, maybe John Voigt could take up directing.
Excellent.
The Hollywood system wouldn't produce a slate of such films, if anything, it would be one a year as window-dressing.
Any positive bio pics produced about conservatives or the military, have only a chance through the independent path…sad but true. We've got to tell out own stories….and support them when they appear.
"The Aviator", which concentrated on Howard Hughes mental problems more than his engineering accomplishments or even his movie production wackiness is the state of the art in biopics. So be grateful that W.F. Buckley isn't having one made of his life, it would mainly feature his smoking dope on his yacht outside the 3 mile limit to avoid breaking the law.
I know you´re not supposed to immanentize the eschaton. I can´t really explain it but … just try not to.
What faulty intelligence? If he actually were to do this, I'd be the first to congratulate him. If someone has the passion to create a work of art and it becomes popular, I think that's great, no matter whether I agree with his politics or not.
But that's not what you get here. You get people whining about how the mean libs won't buy their scripts — or, more often, how they could write great scripts, but since they know the mean libs won't buy them they'll just watch TV instead.
It's called whining, and it's the sport of losers.
Ray Charles as a Republican. Of course, they somehow managed to neglect mentioning that fact in a two and a half hour long movie. It was much more important that we understand he was a drug addict and a cheater.
I agree. We are on the advent of an independent, conservative, film making wave in the near future. There are major players out there who would be fit to produce/direct conservative films- Gary Senise and his associate Jerry Bruckheimer come immediately to mind. How about Bryan Cranston portraying Ronald Reagan?
Buckley attend Yale, worked full time and still got straight A's.____As an aside, here's my Buckley story:
One night back in 1971, I was surprised to find Eddy, a leader of the commune, reading the San Francisco Examiner. At the time the Chronicle was on the side of the Democrats and the Examiner, the more Republican paper.
I said, "I didn't know you were a Democrat."
He answered, "I'm not a Democrat."
So since he was an older guy and a leader, I started buying the Examiner, where I discovered William F. Buckley Jr. In 1972, I voted Republican for the first time.
Eventually, I subscribed to the National Review, which for several years I read cover to cover. When I lived in Manhattan (1984 – 1990), I often also regularly read most of The Village Voice to compare ideologies – but it never convinced me to vote for a Democrat.
While in Manhattan I ran into Eddy. I told him how he had inspired me to become a Republican like he was.
He said, "I'm not a Republican. I'm a Communist."
I've read Whit Chambers' biography and autobiography when they came out in the late 90's. I thought they would make good movies, too.
They did a good job on Patton, even though there were some anti-war lefties involved. But that was 40 years ago.
Today's anti-war leftie is also an anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Israel leftie.
I would like to see the movies you mentioned, but like many of the posters have said, I don't want to see their stories turned into left wing hit jobs by todays hollywood directors.
I like to see good biopics regardless of the politics of the subject. I think the life of Che would make a good movie, but I have no interest in seeing the Soderberg love letter. I think the life of Paul Robeson, who was just as left as Che, would make a tremendous movie. But I don't see hollywood making it without praising the guy.
As a footnote I believe Scorsese's The Avaitor was one of the worst portrayles of Howard Huges ever made. Huges was one of the most interesting men to walk the face of the earth. Scorsese turned him into a millionair playboy.
WOW….your darker angels are showing. I hope you find some peace. Bitter..party of one!
Indeed. Especially since such a great deal of Ray Charles work was about his Republicanism.
Can't imagine why we'd want to know about the marital difficulties of the guy behind "Hit The Road, Jack"
Maybe not…..apparently He and John Wayne did not get along. After making High Plains Drifter, he sent a note to John Wayne about working together. John Wayne responded by basically saying, when hell freezes over. John Wayne HATED High Plains Drifter. He said it was a very inaccurate portrayal of the old west.
Neither can I. The movie was boring. But if we're going to use his oeuvre to validate movie points, the man sung the quintessential 'America the Beautiful'. Under your logic, his views as to America are now relevant, biographically speaking.
I was going to say "Please don't give these people any ideas" but Ideas are not what these people are about. "lowest common denominator" is more like it.
Expect to see "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" re-released as "The Glenn Beck Story: The Early Years" in time for that all meaningful Oscar Nomination this spring.
Obtuse…party of Zero!
Making an O'Rourke movie would be fun as hell. A conservative answer to Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, perhaps.
Radical Son is a terrific book. I loaned it to a liberal friend who liked it.
I was thinking the same exact thing as u were Simon. Have a Conservative, or group of conservatives, form a Production Company and start making conservative films and Bio's. And I give u credit for openly stating that Fox News is a conservative News Network. They certainly aren''t fair and balanced. Just as MSNBC isn't fair and balanced. Fox just claims to be. to talk about conservative films, I think that people forget that News Corp ownes 20th Century Fox. I'm fiscally conservative, but socially Liberal(to an extent) And I really enjoyed that article. I tend to agree with atleast 1 of the people there should be a movie made of.. Ronald Reagan. As much as Rupert Murdoch loves Ronald Reagan, I'm surprised he hasn't had 20th Century Fox produce a movie yet. I do wish people would stop complaining about liberal media bias. That was a term made up in 1992 by Republicans to use as a political strategy. If a story ran on the networks that was bad for Republicans, they claimed liberal bias, and if a story ran that was good for Democrats, the Republicans could claim liberal media bias. Now that there is Cable News, the media field has never been more balanced
I think Oliver's brain just needs a little adustment, in the form of a lobotomy with a crow bar.
I would love to see a good biopic on Buckley — esp. his mutual admiration of Kerouac. That would so irk the Left since most Libs still think Kerouac was one of them.
Hell, I'll do it. Anyone want to help fund it?
But the TRAILER was killer, man!
The left wants people to "empathize" with Hitler and Stalin because Hitler was a fellow-traveler LEFTIST.
Gosh, Mike, your bio says you're a playwright. So why don't you sit down and start writing these films you believe are so crucial? If you think those evil libs in Hollywood will never make them, then write them as plays first. If you're right, they'll be such huge successes someone will pony up to film them. Or if not, you'll make so much money from their massive success you'll be able to fund the films yourself.
What's that you say? That would be hard? Much harder than whining about how mean those liberals in Hollywood are? I guess you'd better not do it then.
Shhhhhh, you just gave Hollywood the best plot idea it's had in years. I won't mention having an incestuous mom/aunt that would clinch an Oscar.
The money errr quote might be: Frank, my dear, I do give a damn.
Can't say enough about the great William F. Buckley!
It goes something like this: BUCKLEY, RUSH, DRUDGE, FOX….
Che is a great man, I have all his records and posters.
I'm not sure you could make a movie about O'Rourke… his writing style works very well on the page, but in a film you'd need to make it play out like a scene… or, narrate using O'Rourke's written words with the scenes playing out before, during, or after the narration.
Hmmm… on second thought, that could be really funny. Holidays in Hell (or whatever they were called) and All the Trouble in the World… think of the pseudo-documentary style with Parliament of Whores!!!
ever notice there are no heros from iraq or afghanistan? just the generic service members, where are the parades for the medal winners, where are the medal winners on talk shows, or news reports? when i visited my parents for christmas, i was asked if i wanted to see a medal ceremony for somebody from the air force from afghanistan. he was getting his second bronze star, not even one person from the press was there, but i was, and it was cool to see him honored for doing something like saving the lives of his whole unit, they were there, and cheered loudest.
You left out serving as intel chief to both Stilwell and MacArthur, befriending the King of Thailand, introducing Fred Astaire to Ginger Rogers, helping develop Cinerama, and standing on the deck of the Missouri when Japan surrendered.
Cooper always said that he believed he should have died when his plane crashed in WWI, so every day he lived after that was a gift to be used to the fullest.
Actually, there were at least *two* TV movies about Pope John Paul II. One starred Cary Elwes and Jon Voight, and the other Thomas Kretschmann. Not that it changes your argument, but since I remember watching both of them, I had to point it out.
An interesting drama could be made of the William F. Buckley v. Gore Vidal debates at the 1968 Democratic convention. What a spectacle that was. But I think the budget would have to be HBO sized because there would be a lot of interesting dialog and not much action — the real conflict was played out in the streets of Chicago, witnessed by a national audience.
straight off the success of his phenomenal "Dirt Squirrel" arquette created "the tripper".
i loved the trailer. and had to see it. even though i was sure i'd be appreciating it on a level the writers did not intend. what a spectacular disappointment. shame. reagan is the monster under their beds. somebody with an understanding and a sense of humor regarding the minds of leftists could have really run with the idea.
I wish someone would make a proper movie about the Venona Project, Pumpkin Papers, Chambers vs. Hiss, and the REAL Joe McCarthy. It would certainly take a very courageous film maker to show how Hollywood, and leftists in general, have twisted the history of communist infiltration in the U.S. They still maintain the innocence of the Rosenbergs for crying out loud! They also still believe that McCarthy was the leader of the Hollywood hearings in the House. [McCarthy was a little known, new Senator at the time of the The House Committee on Un-American Activities inquiries - in the Senate - not the House]. It would send the Leftywood crowd and establishment left into spasms of confused rage. Liberals invent their own reality – conservative Hollywood should put the truth in their faces; it may serve to put an end to the oppressive atmosphere of politically correct Hollywood.
and he's supposed to have romanced some of the most spectacular actresses of the 20s and 30s. i'm convinced there will never be a decent movie about him because no one can figure out how to make him look bad.
Are there scripts out there for conservative biopics that no one is financing? It's a supply side world. Write the script then find the backers.
Here's an idea: write the story of, say, Ronald Reagan. When you pitch the script, substitute the name Reagan with another governor turned president, say, Jimmy Carter. Then tell the money guys that you have to make a "teenie tiny tweak" to script to lend accuracy and change it back to Reagan. Then get ready for your trip to the podium.
(Like Marxism, this plan works perfectly on paper.)
Besides, who could play John Wayne? I can't think of any actors today with even an OUNCE of the alpha or gravitas needed for a guy like that.
I shudder to think they'd get some girly boy Leo DiCaprio, etc.
Is Cranston a conservative? I hadn't heard that. That would be awesome! I loved him in Malcolm in the Middle and Breaking Bad.
While I definitely believe it's true that most of the newscasters and pundits on Fox News are conservative, the reason I think they can truthfully claim the "fair and balanced" title is that they at least also bring on people to represent the other viewpoints and give them a fair chance to defend their arguments (and not rudely cutting off their mics etc.).
Many other news channels won't do that. Or, at best, they bring in a "token" conservative to get ambushed unfairly or just not let them talk. (Keith Olberman, anyone?)
That sounds awesome! Why haven't we seen this guy's biopic already?
Okay, then you can provide the funds. Otherwise, shut up.
It makes me wonder whether there are plans for a preemptive biopic strike against Sarah Palin planned for Fall '12. Just in case.
Back in 1982, I got chased out of a film school class one evening for pointing out to the class and professor that according to William F. Buckley, three of the Hollywood 10 had since admitted that they were communists.
Is the Ayatollah Muslim. Does a camel take a sh*t in the desert?
Hey wr1,
How do you know I'm not already doing that?
-Mike LaChance
You make an excellent point, Walker! Well taken!
-Mike LaChance
LOL!!!!!
Now that you mention it, I read in the local hipster press last year that some Memphis-based literary sort intends to adapt the 1968 Buckley-Vidal debates for the stage. He actually supervised a theatrical showing of the entire debates at a local art museum. Apparently, he was inspired by [i]Frost/Nixon[/i].
Through the magic of Google I've found a web copy of the article:
http://www.memphisflyer.com/memphis/blast-from-th...
Nice to know that my memory serves. For those who aren't familiar with it, the [i]Memphis Flyer[/i] is essentially the [i]Village Voice[/i] slow-smoked Memphis-style. Any dramatization of the 1968 debates between William F. Buckley and Gore Vidal enthusiastically received by their staff would undoubtedly characterize Bill Buckley as a polysyllabic puritan bedeviled by Gore Vidal's libertine loquacity. Imagine if the play is actually produced and does well enough to merit a big-screen adaptation. Which side will Hollywood take in a contest of wits between a "crypto-fascist" and a "queer?"
Abraham Lincoln. Then Buckley. Spielberg initially sought to film a Lincoln biopic, which he dropped in recent memory, I suppose when he realized Honest Abe was Republican and not an invertebrate in Oliver Stone's tradition. Or the Forefathers–not a single mention in Hollywood in past years for these heroes. My hatred for industry liberals is such to where I intend, if ever I witness a centipede assaulting or raping Di Caprio, I would probably keep walking. Reportedly the chap in question is playing Theodore Roosevelt in a future Scorsese picture. Sheesh. Another winner is Harry Houdini. I have yet to watch the Houdini boxed set I bought recently, consisting of his silent ventures made prior to 1927. Or John Brown?
Without a doubt, Merian Cooper is the GREATEST American nobody has ever heard of. He was captured by the Germans during WWI as a pilot, and the Reds captured him during the Russo-Polish War. If they had known who he really was (he wore another pilot's uniform when he was shot down, so the Soviets didn't know he was their nemesis, Cooper). he would have been executed immediately. Instead, he escaped from the prison camp near Moscow and WALKED his way to freedom in the West.
When I told my friends about Cooper's adventures, they unanimously agreed his story was more exciting than the cinematic tale he had crafted, "King Kong."
Anyone interested in reading up on Cooper's life, which I highly recommend, should peruse "A Question of Honor" (a book that delves into the horror inflicted on Poland in WWII and the accomplishments of the Polish warriors in exile) and "Living Dangerously," a biography of Cooper that opens with a useless essay by film director Peter Jackson, the director of the latest "King Kong remake." The rest of the book is a superb biography of Cooper, one of the great men of the 20th century.
Fire your proofreader man. "Whose" is a possesive determiner. "Who's" is the proper contracted usage for "who is." So the proper phrase would be: "…John Wayne, who's as popular as ever."
I don't normally pick nits like this–I'm far from perfect–but this one is particularly annoying and I'm in a bad mood this morning. A bout of insomnia is messing up my schedule.
I think the usual suspects in Hollywood would do bio-pics on conservative icons provided the scripts were vetted and blessed by their mentors: Hugo; Fidel; Vladimir; Daniel; Raul; Nancy; Harry; Rahm; and, POTUS, of course.
But, as someone above noted, best leave that one alone if historical accuracy will be trampled in the name of getting the message out to the collective.
Maybe Andrew & Co. should get into the producing business?
Read Witness by Whittaker Chambers. Then you will know him (and love him) as I did when I read it.
There you go again — "Somebody else needs to do this right now!" It's the clarion call of Bighollywood.
You want someone to make the movies you want to see? Then do something about it. Don't come crawling to me — I never said I wanted to see movies telling me that Reagan was the greatest human being on the world, despite the mass murder of Central American civillians. I'm not the one complaning that the world is a poor place because there have only been two movies about Pope John Paul 2. Why would I put up money to prove a point you insist on and I think is twaddle?
Hope you are. Best of luck.
I hope before they "chased you out," someone pointed out that there is no law in the United States against believing in any political philosophy or religion, and the criminalization of that — as was the intent of McCarthy and HUAC — was a disastrous violation of the First Amendment.
Yes, because there are so many movies being made about Jimmy Carter.
The Whittaker Chambers Story would make a good movie but I'd concentrate on Alger Hiss. Well-born and Ivy League educated, Hiss became a high official in the State Department, presiding over the opening session of the United Nations in San Francisco. He was accused by Chambers of having engaged in espionage for the Soviet Union. Chambers knew Hiss as a fellow communist. Hiss sued his old friend for libel. The character witnesses who testified for Hiss included Supreme Court Justice Frankfurter and Eleanor Roosevelt. Hiss sat at FDR's side when the president met with Churchill and Stalin at Yalta. Hiss was a Soviet spy as the Venona files confirmed later. So were Harry Dexter White, a high Treasury official, Laurence Duggan of the US State Dept. and Lauchlin Currie, personal asisstant to President Roosevelt. In 1999 Yale U Press published Venona- Decoding Soviet Espionage in America. Anybody interested in learning about Soviet espionage in the US should begin with this book. Liberals won't read it, of course. For most liberals the Soviets weren't much of a problem. They feel the same about islamic terror. Liberals don't change.
"Narcotics police are an enormous, corrupt international bureaucracy … and now fund a coterie of researchers who provide them with 'scientific support' … fanatics who distort the legitimate research of others. … The anti-marijuana campaign is a cancerous tissue of lies, undermining law enforcement, aggravating the drug problem, depriving the sick of needed help, and suckering well-intentioned conservatives and countless frightened parents."
~ William F. Buckley, Jr. RIP
Commentary in The National Review,
April 29, 1983, p. 495
DWR: Wednesday, February 27, 2008 "
The majority of the movies that he says don't exist, do exist. I posted this to my facebook page and quickly removed it when it was pointed out the Mr. LaChance didn't do his homework. All you got to do is a couple of searches on IMDB. I guess I need to my homework before I share anything from this site.
Man, that would be gun-in-the-mouth time. The perfect movie to watch while standing in line at a guvmint office.
[...] [...]
In the class there was no discussion of the First Amendment. Nothing was so direct. The professor began insulting me, although in a way that could not be proven to have anything to do with my opinions. It was all more by implication. So I just left for the night.
The date that I could get out of it according to SFSU's rules had expired a couple weeks earlier. Since I wanted the credits for the class and to know more about film noir, I had to go back to finish the last half of the semester.
The point here is that in many situations, it is not the legal structure that is wielded to control victims, but social structures. So what I just said about being driven from a class can never be proven. In other words, overtly didn't happen.
I did my research, artword. Please enlighten me. If I am wrong I would like to learn the titles of the movies you say already exist.
By the way, I don't count "made for TV" as a "movie."
Good catches, but – and it's a big but – the first two movies you mention are documentaries, not biopics. If you look at the other movies I mention earlier in the post they are all dramatic biopics, not documentaries.
The third film you cite, looks like a biopic, but the fact is that I was a movie going teen in 1981 and I have never heard of this film, despite my searches on Google and IMDB. On the other hand, it was pretty darn easy to find information on "Che."
Your point is well taken but I stand by the premise of my post. I think you know what I mean and I truly appreciate your input. Thanks!
You are correct and I have notified the editor. Thank you.
I agree with your article, however you stated that there was no movie on John Wayne. However I do believe there was one: John Wayne: Bigger Than Life. You also stated that there was no movie (other than a television film) about the life of Pope John Paul II. However, I do believe there was Witness to Hope: The Life of Karol Wojtyla, Pope John Paul II (2002) and From a Far Country (1981).
I had a link to the article on my FB page, and what I listed above was quickly pointed out. I ended up removing the link instead of being able to debate it.
[...] likely be very favorite, one should not expect such a bi-op on the big screen anytime soon. As Mike LaChance writes in Big Hollywood, conservatives don’t pick up bi-ops unless they are critical, such as the fresh Oliver Stone [...]
You must be logged in to post a comment.