NewsBusted: Who Will Replace Lou Dobbs?
by NewsBusters

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with a respectful, big-budget biopic of the prophet Muhammad – that’s not the point – but it’s well worth remembering that while he was one of the biggest movie stars in the world, Oscar-winning director Mel Gibson had his ”Passion of the Christ” turned down by every studio in town. You know, even though 70% of Americans identify themselves as Christians.
Now, if Gibson had produced “The Pissing on the Christ…”
Producer Barrie Osborne cast Keanu Reeves as the messiah in The Matrix and helped defeat the dark lord Sauron in his record-breaking Lord of the Rings trilogy. Now the Oscar-winning American film-maker is set to embark on his most perilous quest to date: making a big-screen biopic of the prophet Muhammad.
Budgeted at around $150m (£91.5m), the film will chart Muhammad’s life and examine his teachings. Osborne told Reuters that he envisages it as “an international epic production aimed at bridging cultures. The film will educate people about the true meaning of Islam“.
The article then goes on to inform us that out of respect for Islamic law Muhammad will not be shown on the screen. If only such respect was extended to every major religion. Which isn’t to say religion, including Christianity, is above satire, but what we have here is another example of the mindset of those who control the most powerful propaganda machine ever created. Think about it: “The Passion” remains one of the most profitable films ever and yet an industry frequently ridiculed for reproducing ad nauseum anything resembling a hit will have none of it. (more…)
Yesterday, our own Chris Yogerst weighed in on Greg Gutfeld’s criticism of Hollywood — specifically Greg’s criticism of “G.I. Joe,” Stallone’s new Rambo film and “Inglourious Basterds” — for choosing politically correct villains over the real ones we face today. Chris is correct that turning Nazis into Jihadists is not something a filmmaker like Quentin Tarantino would do. If he has any, Tarantino’s politics have remained hidden in his work. Up on that screen the only thing he advocates for is overlooked 70’s B-movies and audacious entertainment. However, that doesn’t make the director’s decision to use Nazis any less politically correct or Hollywood’s moral cowardice in this area any more defensible.
Where my colleague Chris and I most disagree is with the assertion that Hollywood chooses “politically correct” or “safe” villains because Hollywood is all about the money and therefore wants to appeal to audiences who care what the villain looks like:
The film industry, like any other business, generally wants to appeal to the largest audience possible. Picking “safe” enemies is one way to do that.
Two of the most profitable films released this past year were “Gran Torino,” where our hero confronts black and Asian street gangs, and “Taken,” where the henchmen are Muslims and the arch-villain Middle Eastern. (more…)

The Brothers Emanuel: Ari (L) – Rahm (R)
July 31st, 2006 – Hollywood, California:
At a time of escalating tensions in the world, the entertainment industry cannot idly stand by and allow Mel Gibson to get away with such tragically inflammatory statements. People in the entertainment community, whether Jew or gentile, need to demonstrate that they understand how much is at stake in this by professionally shunning Mel Gibson and refusing to work with him, even if it means a sacrifice to their bottom line. There are times in history when standing up against bigotry and racism is more important than money.
That is a portion of a Huffington Post entry authored by a prominent Hollywood talent agent. It was written exactly two years ago this week after the arrest of actor Mel Gibson. During the stop, an angry and intoxicated Gibson made physical threats and was reported to say, “The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world,” and asked the arresting officer, “Are you a Jew?” (more…)
So Mel Gibson’s getting flack for having sex with a woman who was not his wife – something that never happens in Hollywood – but made newsworthy because he’s a hardcore Catholic. Meanwhile, Carrie Prejean continues to be crucified – for she’s a Christian who posed topless to get a job. And of course, there’s Bristol Palin, unwed and baby in tow, talking abstinence.
Of course, when it comes to this stuff, the media shifts into the only gear they know – the typed-in equivalent of Nelson Munz`s laugh.
Yeah, we get it: these Christians are all hypocrites, and you’re not. (more…)
As I mentioned in my last article, Hollywood is more interested in Christian, or “faith-based,” films than ever. The mind-blowing success of “The Passion” got it started, but then it waned as studios couldn’t quite figure out how to match that success. It heated up again recently with the success of the micro-budget, church-produced “Fireproof,” which was the highest grossing indie of 2008.
These trends beg a few questions. What took Hollywood so long to discover the Christian market? Why can’t they replicate even half the success of “The Passion?” And when Christians make up over half the population, why are faith-based films still relegated to the low-budget, straight to DVD world? The seemingly obvious answer would be that there are few Christians in Hollywood, both at the studio and creative level, but even that would raise the question of why.
I think I know the reason(s), although it’s a bit embarrassing because I happen to be a Christian evangelical. But we must face the truth, and as Dr. Phil so eloquently and charmingly puts it, “You can’t change what you don’t acknowledge.” The fact is, Christian movies have been pretty bad for a few decades. Yes, Hollywood had largely ignored the Christian market, but it’s not like there have been good examples for Hollywood to learn from. And now that Hollywood is actively seeking faith-based material, there’s still a lack of quality scripts and filmmakers available, with a few exceptions, and among the films that are being made in this genre, there are still more crappy ones than good ones. (more…)