This is all about collapsing DVD sales, but what the studios refuse to come to terms with is that if their movies didn’t stink, we would purchase more of them. Right now, “Rise of the Planet of the Apes” is selling plenty of DVD copies. That’s because it’s a terrific film. See how that works? Furthermore, through the Blockbuster Pass, I will  still only pay what I would watch through Netflix. So this move makes even less sense.

And now you know why Hollywood hates capitalism.

Anyway, more desperate and counter-productive behavior from an industry increasingly unable to create a product the customers would like to own:

Warner Bros., which was the first to impose a 28-day embargo on the release of DVDs to Netflix, RedBox, and other cheap rental companies, is likely to double that delay this year, according to published reports on Thursday. The studio, which is believed to have taken a big hit on DVD sales in the third quarter, is expected to announce the new delay at the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas next week. Universal and 20th Century Fox, which also impose 28-day embargoes on Netflix and Redbox, are also expected to double that time period.

This will fix nothing. Oh, there might be a small bump for pay-per-view and brick-and-mortar Blockbuster, but the real money is in sales, and not only are we losing our passion and the all-important “impulse” to buy new films, we are also getting used to waiting for a longer period of time to see them. And that’s a huge mistake on Hollywood’s part. Sixty days after the release-hype dies down, the movie is released to two of the biggest outlets on the planet. Moreover, this genius move will only hurt sales. That’s how short-sighted  and desperate it is.

(more…)

Bestselling horror novelist Stephen King recently helped out his fellow Mainers by holding a contest through his Bangor-based radio station: however much money listeners donated, King would match. The money would then be donated to lower-income Mainers to help pay for heat this winter.

King raised $242,370. Not too shabby. Clearly, this is a commendable and gracious effort on the part of King. It says a lot about his character. But when you bring it into context with past King quotes and his overall liberalism, it brings up an interesting hypocrisy in what famous liberals and 1 percent types do and say.

In the past, King has stated that he thinks people who make as much as he does should be taxed as much as 50 percent. Why? Has King fully thought about a world where 50 percent of his money is taken by Big Government and then they decide where it goes? Just because it goes to the government with the “best intentions” does not mean it will help heat fellow Mainers’ homes. Yet liberal entertainers like King continue to beg Obama to tax them more when they are fully capable as individuals who have found financial success to use their disposable income anyway they see fit, including helping those they see as needy.

How Stephen King has not connected his actions with his beliefs is really quite amazing.

(more…)

Playwright, screenwriter, novelist, and Pulitzer Prize Winner David Mamet has a book of essays coming out June 2nd, The Secret Knowledge: On the Dismantling of American Culture. The fact that Amazon recommends it next to Ann Coulter’s upcoming “Demonic” and Breitbart’s “Righteous Indignation” says a lot. In an absolute must-read, Andrew Fuerguson’s outstanding Weekly Standard profile of Mamet goes into greater detail about both the book and the man. 

Weekly Standard:

[David] Mamet had been brought to campus by Hillel, and the subject of his talk was “Art, Politics, Judaism, and the Mind of David Mamet.” There wasn’t much talk of Judaism, however, at least not explicitly. He arrived late and took the stage looking vaguely lost. He withdrew from his jacket a sheaf of papers that quickly became disarranged. He lost his place often. He stumbled over his sentences. But the unease that began to ripple through the audience had less to do with the speaker’s delivery than with his speech’s content. Mamet was delivering a frontal assault on American higher education, the provider of the livelihood of nearly everyone in his audience.

Higher ed, he said, was an elaborate scheme to deprive young people of their freedom of thought. He compared four years of college to a lab experiment in which a rat is trained to pull a lever for a pellet of food. A student recites some bit of received and unexamined wisdom—“Thomas Jefferson: slave owner, adulterer, pull the lever”—and is rewarded with his pellet: a grade, a degree, and ultimately a lifelong membership in a tribe of people educated to see the world in the same way.

(more…)

Michael Moore simply makes it too easy for me to go back to the well. I like to write about stuff other than the guy I made a flick about many years ago, but every now and again I open my email accounts to find myself inundated with questions from friends, fans and reporters about what I think about the latest Moore dust-up. This week, Moore sued Bob and Harvey Weinstein for a boatload of money he claims they hid from him in the accounting for “Fahrenheit 9/11” and I’ve been asked repeatedly what I think.

First, I see no problem with Moore suing the Weinsteins. If Moore’s audit showed irregularities, he should go after the dough. As someone who’s seen this very issue first hand, I can tell you that it is extraordinarily painful to see someone else spending your money on a big, expensive lunch, while smiling at you from across the table. Moore sued, they’ll likely settle, nobody will be happy, and in their unhappiness, they’ll all know they got a good deal.

But Mike Moore (and to some extent, the Weinsteins) has made a living espousing socialism and communism, wherein the government divvies up the money. You don’t like the result? Well, you can go fuck yourself, because you ain’t suin’ the government. And if you do, your monthly bag of government rice might come with a little hole in the bottom that allowed half of it to leak out during transit.

And that juxtaposition is what we in fly-over country most dislike about Hollywood. While we dig the music and the shallow celebrities we follow on TMZ and provide the bulk of the ticket receipts for the flicks, it’s the juxtaposition of big, rich guys using the system we espouse – where courts ARE one of the few Constitutional functions of government to help settle such disputes, and where we think Mike, Bob and Harvey should be able to make ungodly amounts of money and spend it however the hell they want – versus the ideology of slavish socialism they wish to inflict on those of us who can’t fly to Cannes on a private jet at any given moment.

It’s not just hypocritical (as my friend Penn says of hypocrites: “If someone does one thing and says another, it only doubles their chances of being half right”), but I think it’s immoral. It’s immoral to literally strive and campaign for your fellow Americans to lose their rights to do the things you have done to take yourself from being unemployed in Davison, Michigan to a “multi, multi-millionaire” (and let’s give Moore credit, he IS a self-made “multi, multi-millionaire”). (more…)

Deceiver:

And really, what’s one or two predominantly situated Dunkin’ Donuts cups? It’s not like there’s some laundry list of other products that bought their way into the movie. Oh, hang on . . .

This production of Wall Street 2: Money Never Sleeps is brought to you by:

Shun Lee
Barton Perreira Halston
Bulgari
CNBC
Moët
Ducati
Vacheron Constantin
Belstaff
Lay’s
Bed Bath and Beyond
NY Daily News
Nintendo
NY1
Jaeger-LeCoultre
Ferrari

(more…)

Although he probably didn’t mean to say this, director Godfrey Reggio’s excellent 1982 film Koyaanisqatsi has a sequence that beautifully illustrates the failure of large socialized programs vs free market capitalism. This illustration reveals why if government spending often results in poor services and bankrupt results over time.

—–

Here’s the clip. We start with scenes of New York majesty followed by a street slum, followed by rows of project apartment buildings as urban blight. Then, at the end, we’re shown gleaming glass towers which are the product of free market capitalism. The project buildings were products of President Johnson’s war on poverty which spent billions and did exactly what you’d expect billions of tax dollars thrown at an abstract problem like poverty would do. Those apartment buildings would have gone up in the 60s. The film was shot around 1979. Less than 20 years. Think on that when you watch the clip above.

That’s government in action right there. Some of those buildings were barely 20 years old, if that. And they want to take over 1/6th of our economy, the health care business, and manage it the way they do everything else. You know, as effectively as Medicare, Social Security, The Post Office, Amtrak which are all about to go under. Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae? Failing badly. Hey, why not just show the government debt while we’re at it to see how well they run things. They’ve created trillions in debt based on promises they made. Promises made by politicians that you and your descendants would be footing these bills. They didn’t ask for your consent. Just as they are ignoring the public’s will with the health care bills. (more…)

On this, the one-year anniversary of Big Hollywood, it is fitting that ‘One Pissed Off Dude’ should mark it with a proper lambasting of one of America’s favorite films ever: “It’s a Wonderful Life.”  I’ve intentionally held off until after the holidays.  I didn’t want to be a Grinch Who Attempted to Steal Christmas…or a Scrooge Who Wallowed in Contrariness… or worse, a Reid-Pelosi Christmas Eve Douchebag.

I am a huge fan of Frank Capra.   And whereas it pains me to do so, I must call a proper spade a spade.  In my (what I presume will be ‘lonely’) opinion…this single movie has done more to undermine  America than any other in memory. 

And yes, I realize I’m about to infuriate both the Left and the Right… Christians and Atheists… Socialists and the ACLU… Jimmy Stewart fans, movie buffs, my entire readership, and my mother…but I have to say it:  There is an insidious lie placed smack dab within the heart of this otherwise exquisite movie.  And the strange thing is – along with hundreds of millions of people worldwide — it is still one of my favorite movies of all time.  And therein lies the rub. 

The most dangerous and injurious of falsehoods is the one that is shuffled in with the Truth. (more…)

There’s no hiding that Avatar is a politically correct piece of semi-coherent agit-prop lurking behind a lot of over-praised CGI effects.  While the fanboys hype it as the next great leap forward in filmmaking, it actually takes a huge step backward by employing one of the oldest and lamest of clichés – the white guy hero representing Western civilization who comes along and saves the natives while embracing their simple yet wise ways.

–

This “noble savage” archetype, embraced by the romantic primativists of the past and today by those who stopped their intellectual development as UC Berkeley sophomores, has been around for centuries.  In Avatar, James Cameron substitutes his blue-skinned Na’vi aliens for American Indians and it’s off to the races with Seen That Before taking an early lead and Gimme A Break a close second. 

Now, the purpose of this cliché is to critique Western culture by comparing the culture of the children-of-the-Earth, in-touch-with-nature, “authentic” natives with the hero’s repressed, emotionally-stunted, alienated-from-nature, technology-obsessed Western culture.  This cliché requires that the natives be portrayed as paragons of moral and physical perfection – and that those of the hero’s culture be shown as just the opposite.  (more…)

“Relax, it’s just a movie.”

You often hear that when you step up to point out the lefty assumptions, biases and what John Nolte calls the “liberal tells” within popular entertainment.  You are allowed to praise the technical achievements of an Avatar – such as they are, since many of us think it looks freakin’ stupid – but heaven forbid that you dare question the hackneyed liberal noble savage clichés that James Cameron offers up instead of a story.  The message is clear – our proper role as pop culture consumers is to sit back, open our eyes, slacken our jaws and swallow Hollywood’s agenda.

But what is remarkable – and crucial – is that we are no longer passively accepting whatever Hollywood dumps on us.  The backlash to Avatar’s flabby thinking and tired ideology is the new paradigm, with even reviewers outside the conservative movement slagging it for its staggering intellectual hypocrisy, cardboard military/corporate villains and sophomoric Mother Earth enviro-babblings.

(more…)

Every circus needs a clown, but sometimes it takes a clown to tell the truth.

And so we have Hugo Chavez, the pockmarked prince of all things petulant – paying a visit to the Climate Change conference to rousing, delirious applause. Check out the human sausage below.

In sum, Chavez is all about ending “imperial dictatorships,” and that “capitalism is the road to hell.” He says, “Let’s fight against capitalism and make it obey us.”

He also said he liked to have sex with goats while Sean Penn watched, but I may have gotten that translation wrong.

Anyway, according to the Herald Sun, all of this was greeted with a standing ovation. And Hugo deserves it – for he’s exposing this crap fest for what it is: a massive transfer of wealth from the west to scumbags like him.

But Chavez wasn’t the only one to lecture America on how evil we are. There was Zimbabwe President, Robert Mugabe, who noted that as “these capitalist gods of carbon…belch their dangerous emissions,” it’s “the lesser mortals of the developing sphere” who die. Yeah, we’re the murderers. Not Mugabe – who delighted in the torture, starvation and killing of his own people, for years. (more…)

Children are uniquely malleable beings, readily convinced of magically colorful tales – Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy are the first that come to mind. This innocence is beautiful, but it is a quality that can easily fall victim to radically foreign ideas if taught consistently and pervasively at an early age. One need only look at the birth of fascism or socialism to see a recipe for how radical ideas become ubiquitous among a nation’s youth.

Enter Howard Zinn – an author, professor and American historian – who, with the help of Hollywood and the History Channel, intends to change the way our pre-K through high school children learn American history. His current curriculum suggestions, like introducing three-year-olds to the lynching of African-Americans, or quizzing seven-year-olds on which Presidents owned slaves, should be a red flag to parents.

Zinn has spent a lifetime teaching college students about the evils of capitalism, the promise of Marxism, and his version of American history – a history that has, in his view, been kept from students. His controversial 1980-book The People’s History of the United States paints traditional American history as a façade – one that has grotesquely immortalized flawed leaders and is based on principles that victimize the common man. In 2004, Zinn wrote a companion book entitled Voices Of A People’s History Of The United States, which includes speeches and writings from many of the people featured in The People’s History.

These two books have now become the basis for a new documentary, entitled The People Speak, to be aired December 13th at 8pm on the History Channel. The trailer portrays the documentary as a collage of compelling one-person readings, told through the words of “ordinary” people who have struggled throughout American history against oppression. Produced by Zinn, Matt Damon, Josh Brolin, and Chris Moore, the documentary appears to be cloaked, ironically (given Zinn’s admitted socialist agenda), in many of the traditional ideas that were behind our founding. The verdict is still out on the doc, but it is not for the books that inspired the film as well as the educational initiative associated with it. (more…)

Someone asked a great question the other day: Why is leftist Hollywood so enamored with dictators and socialism? You would think they would fear having their artistic expression stifled under a Castro or having all their wealth confiscated under Hugo’s socialist or communist regime. It seems counter-intuitive, no…? That’s a damn good question but erroneously based on the premise that we’re discussing normal people.

Hugo Chavez: Toast of the Venice Film Festival

When you and I picture life under Obama’s vision for America, we see a dreary existence spent in breadlines, drab apartments and small jail cells with rat cages strapped to our face conditioning us to say “Herstory” instead of “History.” These Castro-lovers and Polanski-defenders see something completely different.

Watch “The Lives of Others.” Not only is it one of the best films of the decade, it also answers the opening question. You’ll see how life under fascism is the complete fulfillment of every narcissistic desire Susan Sarandon, Barbra Streisand, Oliver Stone, Sean Penn and the rest of their sorry lot has ever had. (more…)

Robert Zemeckis’s motion-capture-animation version of the Charles Dickens classic A Christmas Carol had a fairly blah opening weekend at the North American box office, finishing first with an unexpectedly miserly total of $31 million in ticket sales. Industry insiders had figured the film to bring in up to $45 million.

Disney studio representatives predict that this latest adaptation of the Dickens classic will do well over time, like Zemeckis’s 2004 The Polar Express. My assessment is that the biggest element limiting the film’s appeal in the pre-release period was the annoyingly frenetic and superficial quality suggested by its promotional trailers and commercials.

Jim Carrey’s noisiness appears to be wearing quite thin, and a film that features him as not only the protagonist but also three other characters sounds like far too much of a no longer good thing. Carrey would do well to follow the path of the equally obnoxious Robin Williams and move on to more serious film roles, even if it kills his career. Yes, I’m well aware that Carrey’s occasional serious performances have been pretty awful, but he’s dead either way, and it would be best to die with honor instead of ignominy. (more…)

I do not listen to the Rush Limbaugh Show.  That is not to say that I think he of the golden microphone is not worth listening to.  On the contrary, I think that Rush might be the most important voice in America. It just happens that talk radio isn’t my personal cup of tea. 

Still, when I do take in the rare hour or two, I have always found Rush to be a profoundly insightful thinker.  Far from the partisan blowhard the left portrays him to be, Rush is, from my limited listenings, a true philosopher, perhaps a bit more crude than his toga-wearing, boy-loving predecessors, but one of them just the same.  His philosophy is American Conservatism, and he champions it far above party.  In fact, I suspect it is the soft-left members of the GOP that fear him most, since the DNC cannot by their very nature be held to the standards of limited government and natural-liberty over enforced-equality he champions in the first place.  (more…)

I know that to many of us Conservatives, the name “Michael Moore” is simply more off-putting than upsetting. He’s not really a key player anymore, so we often don’t even give him the time of day. I do think it’s important to know one’s enemy however, which is why this mini-documentary is incredibly important. Follow me into the belly of the beast, no pun intended.

(more…)

Last weekend, Michael Phillips and A.O. Scott reviewed, among other films, Michael Moore’s latest farce, “Capitalism: A Love Story.” I don’t know their track records or political leanings, but Phillips for one noticed that Michael Moore is growing tiresome. He didn’t mention the blatant hypocrisy of a multi-millionaire who has reaped the benefits of capitalism calling for its demise, but still, he’s getting tired of the schtick, which leaves me hopeful.

A.O. Scott raved about the movie, and I agree on one hand that Michael Moore has finally chosen the most logical topic for his kind of film. At least Michael Moore has the nerve to finally say it: he doesn’t like capitalism. It’s absurd, it’s ridiculous, it’s akin to Lieutenant Kaffee rising and sleeping under the very blanket of freedom that Colonel Jessep provides, then questioning the manner in which he, Colonel Jessup, provides it.  I’m sure Goldman Sachs would rather Mikey just thank them and go on his way… but I digress… (more…)

A friend recently invited me to a private screening of Michael Moore’s new film, Capitalism: A Love Story. The September 16 invite, not surprisingly, leaned in a certain direction: 

“Moore takes us into the homes of ordinary people whose lives have been turned upside down; and he goes looking for explanations in Washington, DC and elsewhere. What he finds are the all-too-familiar symptoms of a love affair gone astray: lies, abuse, betrayal and 14,000 jobs being lost every day. Capitalism: A Love Story is Michael Moore’s ultimate quest to answer the question he’s posed throughout his illustrious filmmaking career: Who are we and why do we behave the way that we do?” 

Considering Moore was going to be there for a Q&A after (moderated by Arianna Huffington), I quickly signed on. Now before painting a picture of Moore’s new film, let me be honest: my belief set is essentially libertarian (“Government out of my bedroom and my pocketbook”). Not only do government solutions not excite me, they scare the living blank out of me. Remember when George Bush declared, “I’ve abandoned free-market principles to save the free-market system to make sure the economy doesn’t collapse”? He might as well of said, “Hide your money, kids — ’cause I’m coming to take it!” 

Oh sure, in theory I would like to see everyone with their own homestead, money in their pocket for regular shopping frenzies, and no health worries despite eating at Burger King 24/7, but arriving at those goals is not exactly doable unless government robs Peter to pay Paul and/or starts up the printing press.  (more…)

The cruel exploitation of the impoverished masses has been a staple of Hollywood storytelling since the earliest days of movie making.  In fact, thanks to big-screen classics from The Grapes of Wrath to Slumdog Millionaire you might say that grinding poverty has been a real gold mine for Tinseltown.  Given Hollywood’s progressive politics you might also think that a good chunk of the vast box office earnings inspired by the world’s poor might by now have filtered down to the same unwashed throngs who are, in a sense, responsible for it.  And in most cases you would be wrong.

Crystal Lee Sutton, 68, died a couple of weeks ago of brain cancer.  You might know her better by her Hollywood name: Norma Rae.  Crystal’s life story was the inspiration for the 1979 Sally Field blockbuster that grossed $22 million (in 1979 dollars), four Oscar nominations, and two Oscars including Best Actress for the aforementioned Ms. Field.  Norma Rae’s character is #15 on the American Film Institute’s list of all-time greatest screen heroes; Norma Rae is rated 16^th of their “100 Most Inspiring Movies of All Time.”  Given all this you probably think that Crystal Lee Sutton died in relative comfort, content with her life’s work and unencumbered by material concerns such as medical bills.  Well, guess again. (more…)