Sony Pictures and Academy Award-winning director Kathryn Bigelow have already had to deal with the nightmare that resulted from the cynical release date of their upcoming film surrounding the hunt for and the killing of Osama bin Laden. The original idea was for Sony to release the dramatization this October, just a few weeks prior to the presidential election. Lame, dishonest  protestations aside, obviously the goal was to use the film to give President Obama a reelection boost, not only with the film itself but also with the complicit news media using the film as an excuse to resurrect one of the President’s only successes (thanks to the Bush Administrations willingness to waterboard). Last month, Sony wisely blinked and pushed the release date to after the election, but that doesn’t change what might have happened prior to that move.

Many have speculated (including me) that Sony, Bigelow, screenwriter Mark  Boal, and the White House all got into bed together to create a propaganda film that would hit theatres with the kind of exquisite timing that is never an accident. It’s no secret Sony, like the rest of Hollywood, is deep in the tank for President FailureTeleprompter, and this $40 to $70 million propaganda film would most certainly serve as an in-kind propaganda contribution  that delivered the kind of deus ex machina that can only be dreamed up in Hollywood. Yesterday, and for very good reason, the story turned once again when the Pentagon and CIA got involved.

Apparently, it’s not just us extreme right-wing Republicans who are concerned over the possibility that the White House might have given the studio and filmmakers classified information they weren’t cleared to receive:

(more…)

Sony Pictures, director Kathryn Bigelow, and screenwriter Mark Boal have already done a ton of damage to their own film with these intelligence-insulting claims that the current release date, set just a few weeks before the 2012 presidential election, is in no way motivated by partisan politics. Then what is it motivated by? Oscar season rolls well into December, long after the election, so it can’t be that. Sony has also claimed that that particular weekend is “the best available spot for an action-thriller on a crowded schedule.” Well, unless they’re using the Mayan calendar, that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense either.

If the studio and filmmakers want to begin to repair the damage they’ve created by pretending their multi-million dollar film’s release date wasn’t intended to be a multi-million dollar in-kind contribution to the Obama 2012 campaign, they need to bump the picture well into 2013. Or…

They can be honest about what they’re up to, like the “Atlas Shrugged” producers have been, and admit their desire to impact the election.

“Who, us?” just isn’t going to cut it. The good news is that someone over at Sony might be coming to their senses.

Hollywood Wiretap:

Sony’s planned October 12, 2012 release of Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal’s film about the hunt for Osama bin Laden may be shifting. The New York Times on Wednesday reported that the picture may be moving from its slot – which would have fallen shortly before next year’s presidential election – to a post-election date, and possibly not until 2013.

In its report, The NYT cited two people who were briefed on the studio’s plans.

(more…)

Last night, from the actor’s verified Twitter feed:

Now that director Kathryn Bigelow, screenwriter Mark Boal, and Sony Pictures have conspired to completely undermine any chance they had at garnering our goodwill with the upcoming saving Obama’s ass killing Osama bin Laden movie, we should look at it as a savings — a savings of the ticket price of around $10.

Those of us appalled by the idea that Sony Pictures and their politically-mercenary filmmakers would use a universal American triumph and our selfless troops in this partisan manner, need to find something to do with our sudden ten-dollar windfall. It’s quite likely that by the time the film’s released, just a few weeks prior to the election, America might need that ten bucks to buy a gallon of gas or milk. But let’s be optimistic and dream a little…

(more…)

The filmmakers of the upcoming movie about the pursuit and capture of Osama bin Laden, set to open in the heat of the 2012 campaign season, released the following statement claiming that the film is “non-partisan”:

Our upcoming film project about the decade long pursuit of Bin Laden has been in the works for many years and integrates the collective efforts of three administrations, including those of Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama, as well as the cooperative strategies and implementation by the Department of Defense and Central Intelligence Agency. Indeed, the dangerous work of finding the world’s most wanted man was carried out by individuals in the military and intelligence communities who put their lives at risk for the greater good without regard for political affiliation. This was an American triumph, both heroic, and non-partisan and there is no basis to suggest that our film will represent this enormous victory otherwise.

So the “Obama Got Osama” film is not meant to boost the re-election chances of our beleaguered president?

Prove it.

If the slated Oct. 12, 2012 release date is merely a coincidence–as the statement suggests–or solely based on opening the film during “Oscar season” (which runs through December and even into early January), surely those responsible for the film will agree that it is obscene to politicize the triumph of our most heroic Americans by unnecessarily injecting them into the election cycle against their will.

So, we call on Oscar winning director, Kathryn Bigelow, and Oscar winning screenwriter, Mark Boal, to formally ask Sony Pictures to release the bin Laden film in late December — long after the 2012 election season is over, long after the film itself and the publicity surrounding it can have any kind of impact. (more…)

—–

Not much new here to report but make sure to hang in until the end when Rep. Peter King reveals that members of the intelligence community and the CIA, who agreed to participate with the making of Kathryn Bigelow’s upcoming bin Laden film, were blindsided when they learned that that the release date was just a few weeks prior to the 2012 presidential election — an obvious betrayal of their trust and goodwill. 

And why wouldn’t they feel betrayed? My guess is that most were eager to see this story told and to see their years of sacrifice and hard work given a positive bigscreen portrayal for a change. So there’s little doubt it must have felt like a slap across the face once they learned they had been conned into contributing to a “Barack Obama 2012″ campaign commercial.

If you think about it, this is really a two-track story. On one track you have the issue of the White House possibly giving classified information to friendly filmmakers prepared to create  that $75 million campaign commercial — something that obviously needs to be investigated. And on the other track you have Sony’s unforgivable decision to use the heroism and sacrifice of our military and intelligence personnel to boost a failed president’s re-election chances.

The word “disgraceful” really doesn’t do this situation justice.

(more…)

Politico:

For ten years we’ve been waiting for Hollywood to engage in the War on Terror in a way that portrays our country and military personnel in a positive light — in a way that actually takes a side against the terrorists and for the Americans fighting and dying to stop them. Finally, just when it appears as though we might actually get that movie, it looks as though Sony Pictures has decided the Kathryn Bigelow directed, Mark Boal scripted October 2012 release should also be a $50 – $75 million re-election campaign commercial for Barack Obama.

What are your thoughts on this?

In its May 3, 2011 edition, University of New Mexico’s student newspaper, The Daily Lobo, published a political cartoon depicting a triumphal Barack Obama, as “Rafiki” from “The Lion King,” hoisting the decapitated head of the recently killed terrorist kingpin Osama bin Laden, in the role of baby “Simba”:

Never mind the cartoon’s irony, that bin Laden had for years mocked America as a “paper lion” and himself been aggrandized as a “Lion of Islam.”

Never mind Leftists screeching against President George W. Bush’s “triumphalism.”

Never mind the First Amendment, or that President Obama had publicly exploited “The Lion King” narrative to ridicule the “Birther” movement in general, and Donald Trump in particular only four days prior at the annual gala dinner event for White House Correspondents, April 30:

—–

(more…)

Quick note before we begin: The reason I haven’t started my promised countdown of the Top 25 Christian Films was in the discovery of how uncomfortable and unprepared I am to discuss such things. I’m no theologian and almost completely incapable of deep thinks when it comes to matter such as these. But I did want to respond to Bill Maher and therefore only ask that this post not be confused with an arrogant attempt to speak for anyone but myself. 

Always fun to wake up on Saturday morning to discover the latest nonsense coming from our friend Bill Maher. Sharply written, well-delivered nonsense for sure, but nonsense nonetheless:

—–

Personally, I don’t know of any Christian “for” torture nor do I know of any Christians “for” waterboarding (they’re two different things). That doesn’t mean, however, that as a Christian I don’t understand that stopping the spread of evil and the slaughter of innocents doesn’t sometimes require the making of some very difficult moral choices — like those involving enhanced interrogations and outright war. Furthermore, Christ Himself certainly wasn’t “for” charging into religious temples, throwing everyone out, and then violently turning over the tables of money changers. But sometimes….

And Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the moneychangers, and the seats of them that sold doves.

…action is required.

Every week I stand before God and pray for the forgiveness of my sins. Here’s how that prayer begins:

(more…)

No need to editorialize here. We’ll just let the man’s words, historical illiteracy and moral equivalency speak for itself. It took some work, but we were able to narrow down our list of The Stupid to 10. For context’s sake, Michael Moore’s piece can be read in full here.

Ladies and gentlemen, for this evening’s entertainment, quotes from Mr. Michael Moore:

1. It’s one thing to be happy that a criminal has been captured and dealt with. It’s another thing to throw a kegger celebrating his death at the site where the remains of his victims are still occasionally found. Is that who we are? Is that what Jesus would do?

2. There was no bloodlust euphoria on the day Timothy McVeigh was executed. We were silent. The families of the Oklahoma City dead were silent, relieved. What is the difference between McVeigh and bin Laden, other than the number they slaughtered? I wonder.

3. [T]he Taliban are Afghan citizens, not an invading force, and, for better or worse, they seem to enjoy the support of many of the common people throughout Afghanistan.

(more…)

So a lot of people deserve credit for killing bin Laden: President Obama, the Navy SEALS and our military in general, intelligence gatherers, the previous administration, and many other people.

But you also gotta give credit to Debra Burlingame, sister of one of the victims of 9/11, who used her chance to meet President Obama yesterday to gently prod him over the indictments of CIA interrogators.

Remember, CIA Director Leon Panetta admits that the initial info that led to finding bin Laden came, in part, from “enhanced interrogation techniques” used on detainees.

So why then, the prosecution? Well, Debra noted the irony, and asked the Prez to press Erik Holder to end them.

Obama said he wouldn’t.

Which is poop.

To me, prosecuting CIA agents after bin Laden’s death is like the Packers trading Aaron Rodgers to the Panthers after winning the Superbowl.

That’s not exactly like going to prison, but it is the Panthers.

(And yes, I made a sports metaphor. I do know my baseball)

(more…)

You’re not only able to understand people through their belief system but also through the priority of that belief system. With all the problems in the world right now, here you have an Oscar-winning, multi-millionaire film director who chooses to use his celebrity soapbox to defend … Osama bin Laden.

Excellent work from the Wrap:

The Oscar-winning director has been tweeting about his belief that Bin Laden should have received a trial, and his theory that Pakistan was keeping the Al Qaeda head under house arrest. TheWrap grilled Moore about his controversial views. 

Is Obama lying about how Bin Laden died?

Common sense tells you he was executed. That was the plan all along. Just tell us that and quit treating us like children.

I have a lot of faith in Obama, but we’ve received three different stories in three days. We heard, “There was a firefight.” “He used a woman as a shield.” Now it turns out none of these things were true. He wasn’t armed.

(more…)

ADDED: Dana Loesch has much, much more.

Via Jim Treacher, Stephen Colbert in April of 2009:

—–

But, but, but, now I’m confused. Last night, Stephen Colbert wildly and without any detectable irony celebrated the results of that same secret, lawless assassination squad that was also using intelligence achieved through “enhanced” interrogations at Gitmo. Oh, wait…

Maybe Colbert is practicing some sort of super secret kind of hipterism where you show no irony at all to increase the power of irony in order to make a devastating political point that… Secret, lawless assassination squads using intelligence achieved through enhanced interrogations at Gitmo are wrong even when they boost a Democrat President’s sagging polls!

That must be it. What else could it be? Did Colbert think we wouldn’t find the 2009 video? No one’s that insulated, are they?

So see if you can detect Colbert’s super secret message below. I couldn’t, but I’m no hipster:

(more…)

DHD:

[Kathryn] Bigelow and Mark Boal, her collaborator on The Hurt Locker, have been mobilizing their film to go into production as their follow-up to that Best Picture Academy Award winner. Their movie as planned was based on an earlier unsuccessful mission to try to kill the Al Qaeda leader responsible for the 9/11 terrorist attack on America as he hid in the border region between Pakistan and Afghanistan. But now they’ve certainly got a celebratory ending to that dramatic story with tonight’s announcement that the U.S. conducted a military operation that killed Bin Laden. …

[B]ack in 2006, Paramount Pictures optioned Jawbreaker, a book by U.S. intelligence operative Gary Berntsen about the December 2001 American-led military mission to hunt and kill Bin Laden right during the opening stages of the 9/11-prompted invasion of Afghanistan that the author as the CIA pointman had helped coordinate with Special Operations Forces. The heavily vetted book detailed how close those forces came to finding and executing Bin Laden in the rugged mountains of Tora Bora until they were pulled back after a decision was made to let Pakistan tribal leaders lead the search — a decision experts felt helped Bin Laden get away. The studio hired The Path To 9/11 scribe Cyrus Nowrasteh to rewrite a first draft by Berntsen’s co-author Ralph Pezzullo, and Oliver Stone had eyed it as a follow-up to his film World Trade Center. But the project stalled.

(more…)

Full coverage of this great moment for America, our military, our intelligence community,  President Obama and President Bush at Big Peace. 

—–

Big Hollywood officially gives all of our superhero delegates over to…

(more…)