According to Nikki Finke the big-budget sci-fi comedy “Paul” will come in third place this weekend with a pretty weak debut take of just $12.5 million. Compare that to the second weekend take of the pro-military “Battle: Los Angeles,” which will land in second place with a predicted haul of $15.5 million —  this, despite a cabal of left-wing critics doing everything in their powers to kill it off.

Why two actors, Simon Pegg and Nick Frost, who bought an enormous amount of audience goodwill with “Shaun of the Dead” and “Hot Fuzz” would choose to go out of their way to antagonize Christians with a $40 million investment on the line is beyond me. I guess their bigotry just got the best of them. Once you add advertising costs to that budget, you’re probably looking at another $25 million, which means the sci-fi comedy will probably have to clear somewhere in the area of $120 million just to break even. Good luck with that.

Word got out fairly early that “Paul” intended to sucker punch we Jesus freaks and it was a controversy that dogged the film in almost every interview I came across with the film’s two stars. Obviously, they tried to downplay the religious bigotry, which is odd. After all, if the entertainment industry is driven only by profit and greed, the Christian-bashing must have been a financial decision, not a political one — so why try to spin it away if it’s going to put more butts in seats?

When sympathetic, left-wing critics wondered if ”Paul’s” Christian bashing would be too much, you had to assume it was even worse than advertised. Well, according to our friends at Screen Rant, from both a decency  and artistic standpoint, it’s even worse than I thought it would be:

 Screen Rant’s Vic Holtreman:

While on the lam our trio runs into Kristin Wigg as Ruth Buggs, a fundamentalist Christian living in a trailer park, and oppressed by her drinking, redneck father. She’s a creationist and “young-Earther,” painted as about as naive and ignorant a person as you’re likely to ever meet. Once she meets Paul, her worldview is completely shattered and she immediately loses her faith. The scene in which it happens is actually pretty funny – she decides that she can now drink, cuss and “fornicate” (that’s a quote). She starts using her newfound permission to spout foul language, but she doesn’t quite have the hang of how to combine the proper words, and it’s funny for the first couple of times she does it (until the joke becomes overused, as the gag is revisited a LOT throughout the film). …

(more…)

A friend and colleague has informed me that there appears to be a groundswell of outrage among conservatives regarding last night’s episode of the ABC TV mystery series Castle. The complaint is that the episode is anti-Christian, pro-Muslim, politically correct political propaganda.

In fact, ABC’s Castle web page today opens with the following pop-up window inviting visitors to take an extensive survey regarding the episode and the show in general (which I dutifully filled out):

We would like to invite you to participate in a short survey about the episode of CASTLE that aired on 2/28/11. This episode featured Castle and Beckett rejoining Fallon’s task force, the detectives suspecting a former U.S. soldier of planning a terrorist attack, and Castle and Beckett partnering with a Syrian official to track down the bomb.

Having seen the episode, I can assure you that the story cannot be fairly characterized as bigoted or anti-Christian.

The episode, “Countdown,” is the conclusion of a two-parter in which the show’s protagonists (NYC police detective Kate Beckett and her unpaid-consultant partner, mystery writer Richard Castle) attempt to prevent a mass murder through detonation of a nuclear “dirty bomb” in Manhattan. (Note: spoilers hereafter.)

(more…)

After a couple of weeks of unsubstantiated rumors, it has been confirmed that the forthcoming film The Invention of Lying is indeed intended to satirize religion and religious believers.

New York Post critic Kyle Smith has seen the film and describes it as “a full-on attack on religion in general and Christianity in particular. It might be the most blatantly, one-sidedly atheist movie ever released by a major studio, in this case Warner Bros.”

Although the commercials and theatrical trailers have presented the film as a cute comedy and made no allusion at all to any religious angle, much less a concerted case for atheism, Smith reports that the basis of the film is its attack on religion:

Gervais delights in what a faith-based society would call blasphemy, setting up an imaginary world in which no one ever lies. Except his character, who spreads what Gervais obviously sees as the biggest lie of all: Belief in God.

(more…)