Joe Rogan isn’t afraid to speak his mind.

The muscle-bound comic, podcast host and UFC commentator returns to his television franchise “Fear Factor” at 8 p.m. EST tonight on NBC. That means he’s doing the publicity rounds to drum interest in the rebooted show, and it’s pretty clear Rogan isn’t concerned about insulting his fellow celebrities.

Consider how he takes down singer Miley Cyrus, and today’s celebrity mindset, in one glorious rant.

I watch Miley Cyrus talk in interviews — I really study her, from a psychological standpoint. This poor f–king kid! What kind of a life is that? Sure, she’s got a ton of money. Yes, she’s not going to have to deal with the financial problems that a lot of people have. But my god, her character! Her mind! She’s delusional. Her perception of reality must be so twisted. They really do think that what they have to say is more important than what a “regular” person has to say. The reason you hear a lot of famous people say a lot of really egotistical things or do really stupid sh-t … your whole life is series of actions and reactions. “I show up at work everyday, and everyone kisses my ass.” They develop thinking that is a normal part of life.

(more…)

Parents listen to their teen’s choice of music at their own peril.

Between the sexualized lyrics and anti-capitalist choruses, today’s music often clashes with the messages parents are trying to teach their children.

That’s not the case with country crooner Taylor Swift, according to Bloomberg.com’s Amity Shlaes. The columnist argues that Swift is the anti-Miley Cyrus, an uber-popular entertainer whose songs should be listened to by young and old alike.

Swift, who happens to be named after James Taylor, isn’t occasionally pro-parent, like Kanye West (See his 2005 “Hey Mama”), with whom she tangled at the MTV Video Music Awards ceremony in 2009.

Swift is, in fact, systematically pro-parent and pro- family. She sings about men, yes, but she also sings about mom, dad, being nice, putting bullies in their place and backing up friends, all in a perfectly irony-free tone. She even publicly thanks father chaperones accompanying their daughters to her concerts.

(more…)

The leftist Hollywood machine is in full force this season, as we’ve seen with both the Bachmann/Fallon incident and more recently, Miley Cyrus’ new foray into political commentary. The fact is that when it comes to the entertainment industry, liberals need to stick together (and attack conservatives) … especially if you can’t sing or act, or in Cyrus’ case, if you can do neither … and sound like Selma and Patty Simpson.

Note: No Miley Cyrus songs were actually listened to during the making of this video. Earmuffs!

Pop princess Miley Cyrus got blasted by Occupy Wall Street types for daring to support the rag-tag movement. Now, Hannah Montana herself is taking fire from conservative columnist Michelle Malkin.

And it isn’t pretty.

Malkin says Cyrus’ attempt to co-opt one of her songs for the OWS crowd “smells like opportunistic teen queen spirit.” It’s also a perfect fit for the movement itself.

In so many ways, Miley and the Occu-mob are a match made in heaven. Vacuous. Hypocritical. Entitled. Vain. Nihilist. Exhibitionist. Coddled. Forever adolescent, treating life like an endless “Party in the U.S.A.,” and demanding that everyone else pay for it.

(more…)

Before you click the “Play” button on this video, make sure your pants are literally sewn into the flesh of your pelvis. The euphoria you will experience just might make them spontaneously fly off your body if you fail to take that precaution.

That’s right, former Disney pop sensation Miley Cyrus (performing under the moniker “Miley Cyrus Rock Mafia”) has done what Grammy nominee Joseph Arthur and the stars of Rage Against the Machine couldn’t do–voice the passion of the 99% with such perfect glitzy angst, the rest of the world will have no choice but to finally pay attention. Here it is, the inevitable protest song classic “Liberty Walk”:

“This is dedicated to the thousands of people who are standing up for what they believe in,” the solemn opening title proclaims. Then, as Miley belts out inspirational revolutionary lyrics such as “Here’s to all the boys tryin’ to hold you back / Tryin’ to make you feel like you’re less than that” or “Don’t listen to all the people who hate,” we’re treated to a stirring montage of Occupy protests from around the world, including clashes with police and footage of a thrown explosive device or two. Despite the inescapable visceral joy of the music, it’s almost depressing how effective a rallying cry this 176-second epic will be for the enemies of capitalism and liberty. (more…)

Several weeks ago, Justin Bieber entered the political arena when a Rolling Stone article quoted him saying that he opposed abortion but supported Canadian-style health care. Although people can agree or disagree with such political stances, it’s difficult to dislike the young pop star who has worked tirelessly to achieve success. The documentary “Justin Bieber: Never Say Never” tells the story of Bieber’s meteoric rise to fame.

—–

The documentary fittingly begins by focusing on YouTube.com, the popular video site that has introduced millions of Americans to “the sneezing panda” and “the dramatic chipmunk.”  That site also serves as a launching pad for talented artists and it’s where Bieber was discovered by his manager. Before then, Bieber was just another youngster with a good singing voice who was making videos with his family.

Soon enough, the manager and others in the music industry show interest in Bieber but even with their support, his fame is never guaranteed. To become a megastar, Bieber travels  across the United States visiting local radio stations and performing on air. His popularity is never handed to him; he has to fight for it, one song after another. It’s difficult to imagine Bieber having to fight for attention but the documentary shows how driven he was even at a young age. While other young people may have given up, Bieber never stops working towards his goals.

(more…)

Hollywood, hear our plea:  Could you make some mainstream movies that don’t suck?  There’s nothing worse than a Christmas season where going to the movies seems about as appealing as sharing a straw with Lindsay Lohan.

Throw us a bone – how about more than just one or two flicks a year not targeted to the demographic that thinks Lady Gaga is a boundary-pushing icon of limitless creative vision?  Maybe a couple that are not focused on shiny supernatural creatures who chat about their feelings and stare longingly into the eyes of dead-eyed starlets acting as the surrogate for the millions of lonely shut-ins who adore them?  Just a few films not aimed squarely at creepy man-children dwelling in their moms’ Kleenex-strewn basements wishing they too could winch their bloated tushes into tights and fight crime just like their cinematic heroes.

How about more than just a handful of movies for men and women who need more than five hands to count out their age, who breathe through their noses, who have lives?  I have some dough – well, at least until the President and his fellow travelers declare me rich too – and I’d like to take my hot wife out once in a while to see a movie.  I used to go a lot, a few times a month.  But it seemed that five years ago there were always at least a few movies that piqued my interest.  Perhaps it’s me – perhaps I’m too demanding, what with my stubborn insistence on interesting stories told in a coherent manner by competent actors.  Or perhaps it’s just that the recent crop of movies is exceptionally crappy.

Let’s address the curmudgeon question here and now – yes, I have occasionally turned my hose on those damn kids when they messed up my lawn, but hobbies aside, the fact is that Hollywood is both leaving money on the table and sacrificing what little artistic credibility it has left by ignoring the normal adult demographic.  It appears that Hollywood has simply thrown in the towel and decided to focus on feeding formulaic moron fodder to a waiting cohort of slack-jawed ninnies eager for the next story about a magical robot or a superhero with issues. (more…)

“Feminism is a Crock – and Other True Stories.” That’s the title for a book I’d like to write someday. The reason I say feminism is a crock is because it has morphed from “equal rights for all” to “women are better than men, and if you disagree you’re a sexist pig who should be castrated.” It’s also morphed into a sexual free-for-all: what used to be sauce for the gander (and those ganders were usually considered cads) is now sauce for the goose. This image is being perpetuated by pop culture and entertainment, and women are more and more frequently being portrayed as strong through their sexuality, not through their actual accomplishments. Is this the standard to which we want our daughters to aspire?

Early feminists fought against the centuries-old image of a “woman on a pedestal.” Gloria Steinem (she of the “a woman without a man is like a fish without a bicycle” who in later years ended up getting married anyway) once said, “A pedestal is as much a prison as any small, confined space.” I suppose a bra is also a small, confined space, which might explain the bra burnings of the 1960s. But the early feminists had a point – to a point. If a woman wants to be put on a pedestal and admired and adored, fine. But if she doesn’t, she should have the right to do with her life as she chooses. She should be free to pursue any vocation for which she is qualified, either as a single or married woman, children or no children.

But one of the problems with the new feminism was the annoying little fact that children could get in the way of this brave new world. Having to either stay at home with the little tykes or find daycare for them – not to mention all of the discomfort and disfiguration that comes with pregnancy itself – sure put a damper on Gloria Steinem’s idea of a “liberated woman” being “one who has sex before marriage and a job after.” Unbridled sex does, after all, have consequences. And so, according to historian Elaine Tyler May, birth control was “an important tool to gain control over their lives.” (more…)

When Andrew Breitbart takes on a left-wing news meme, you’ve gotta give him credit:  he comes prepared.  After drawing the ire of the NAACP for challenging their resolution against alleged Tea Party racism, Breitbart’s Big Government set off the blogosphere with video of Shirley Sherrod, a government official speaking at an NAACP-sponsored event, drawing cheers and laughter from her audience while recounting a time when she denied help to a white farmer solely because of his race.  While Ms. Sherrod went on to make a point about looking past racial differences, these questions remain: why did no one speak up?  Why was there only positive feedback from the audience at this point in the story? 

For which group is there more evidence of members assenting to racist comments:  the Tea Party or the NAACP?  

While the national leftist media outlets continue to fall over themselves trying to figure out a spin on the story that sticks, we at Big Hollywood thought we’d double down with some analysis of the NAACP’s treatment of racism in the entertainment industry.

For 41 years, the NAACP has awarded “Image” awards to black entertainers who achieve excellence in the arts.  Despite its rightful role in celebrating the accomplishments of people of color in the arts, the awards show has also been beset by controversy.  Several nominees and winners of awards have engaged in openly racist behavior.  For example, Jamie Foxx, a winner of multiple NAACP Image awards, called Miley Cyrus a “little white bitch” who should “catch chlamydia on a bicycle seat.”  The NAACP has yet to comment on Foxx’s remarks.  Going beyond hatred for one white person, rapper Ice Cube released a song in 1993 titled “Enemy,” with lyrics that state: (more…)

Have you seen the new music videos by Miley Cyrus and Christina Aguilera? If you haven’t, let me save you nine minutes of precious time. Both videos feature the young, attractive, talented singers clad in lingerie dancing, gyrating and engaging in simulated sex acts with both men and women.

In a word, boring.

Rather than hit these two from the completely legitimate position of criticizing their moral bankruptcy (especially in the case of the the underage Cyrus), let’s have some fun and hit them from the other side. That’s right, let’s talk about “art” and “feminism”.

Sure ladies, your new videos are “edgy,” “stylish,” “provocative,” “liberating” and “artistic”….for 1985. Fact is, we’ve seen this all before. The crazy wardrobe, stylized lighting, racy sexuality, blah, blah, blah. Madonna was doing this stuff 25 years ago. I have to laugh when people point out the obvious comparisons between the new Xtina video and Lady Gaga’s recent video achievements. Both of them are simply poor imitations for the “Grandmother of Smut” herself. Taking Xtina to task for ripping off Lady Gaga is like criticizing a Tarantino parrot without acknowledging the wealth of films that QT has paid “homage” to himself. (more…)

The left in this country has a problem.  Well, they have a lot of problems, many of which involve personal hygiene and anger management issues.  That is a column for another day though.  The left is losing the pop culture media war in this country, and it bothers them.  In 2008 Reuters reported that the top four radio formats in United States were news talk, country, contemporary Christian, and Christian teaching. 

 
Stripper Pole!

Liberals failed miserably when they tried to take over the talk radio industry with Air America.  It reminded me a lot of the time that Pearl Jam took on Ticketmaster, which in turn reminded me a lot of a bowl of jell-o taking on a herd of wildebeests.  The left can’t compete in the Christian market.  Let’s face it, the folks who declare Robert Mapplethorpe “art” simply have no credibility in that particular market.  With that said, Country is a family friendly format they still think they have a chance of corrupting, and Miley Cyrus may be their perky little Trojan horse into that industry. 

Music and American politics have become linked, with most of the genres in the “Hope and Change” category.  During the 2008 presidential campaign, a country artist I am acquainted with talked about the stress of that election and how her vote was putting her at odds with her family, friends, fans, and industry (three guesses who she voted for).  To change the very culture of that industry, you need to pave the way for the shrill Natalie Maines types with the seemingly harmless Miley types.  Ms. Cyrus is presented to us a fully Disneyfied young lady with a Christian background and the values to boot.  This is the sort of person that the Middle America country fans should love, right?  As with many things in the entertainment world, her image is a well manufactured myth and the truth is that this young lady brings an entire suitcase of San Francisco values with her as baggage when she eventually breaks into the country music scene.   (more…)

It’s easy to be cynical about the movies adapted from Nicholas Sparks’ stories. Earlier this year there was “Dear John” (which I reviewed here), a sentimental, adolescent, old-fashioned romance. And so is “The Last Song,” but this is a stronger film than its predecessor that manages to overcome its flaws thanks to an idealistic story about young love.

—–

A couple of young siblings are sent to their estranged father’s house for the summer. Singer Miley Cyrus and Bobby Soleman play the brother and sister, Ronnie and Jonah Miller, who are both unhappy to find themselves forced to spend time with their old man, Steve Miller (played by Oscar-nominee Greg Kinnear). While sulking and adrift in teen angst, Ronnie (Cyrus) meets a local boy and starts to fall in love with him. The boy, Will Blakelee, is played by Liam Hemsworth, and he charms his way into dating the new girl in town.

The story focuses on Ronnie’s budding relationship with Will and her damaged relationship with her father. The former relationship quickly develops even though Ronnie’s first impression of Will is negative, to say the least. The romance is an innocent and sentimental one depicting Will as a rich young lad whose parents are predictably not impressed by Will’s new and less-privileged girlfriend. The love story is sometimes dorky and goofy but the characters are likable and the couple does have chemistry. (more…)

Somewhere over the last 25 years, the idea of what constitutes a “celebrity” changed from a person with some kind of history of achievement to pretty much anyone with a pulse who manages to get his, her or its mug splashed across a TV screen.  Actually, as the wailing and gnashing of teeth surrounding the death of Michael Jackson demonstrated last year, the pulse is now optional.

Nowhere is this more apparent than the ridiculous, cynical remake of “We are the World,” an exercise that according to news accounts seemed less focused on assisting the people of Haiti than on stroking the egos of the pseudo-stars and future nobodies who did the yodeling.

The tiresome video (directed by the tiresome Paul Haggis) raises an important question – who the hell are these people?  I think one of them – the dude with the expensive clothes and dull stare – was Puff Diddley or P. Daddy or whatever idiotic moniker he’s using this week.  You know, there was a time when grown men used their given names instead of childish nicknames that are just emblems of the eternal adolescence that modern pop culture worships. 

Now, the original “We are the World” was itself nearly unlistenable, but that’s a matter of taste and reasonable people can disagree (I thought the British supergroup Band-Aid’s “Do They Know It’s Christmas?” was a much better song, though it shared “World’s” inexcusable refusal to confront the reason the Ethiopian drought turned into the Ethiopian famine – the cruelty and stupidity of its left wing government ).  However, at least most of the participants were people with track records of success.  You had Bruce Springsteen, Paul Simon, Billy Joel, Diana Ross, Bob Dylan, Dionne Warwick and a bunch of others.  Now, not all of them might have been your cup of tea – I’d rather pass a kidney stone made of broken glass than listen to the Boss – but you had at least heard of them. (more…)

Hollywood’s neo-blacklist against mainstream conservative values and those who believe in them isn’t an actual list. It’s worse. It’s nothing tangible you can point to, but rather a bullying peer pressure system like a high school in a John Hughes film. And it works something like this…

The big stars and directors are the cool kids – the jocks – the preppies – James Spader in “Pretty in Pink.” They own the school, strut the halls and decide who’s in and who’s out based on one’s ability and willingness to conform into one of them.

The Motion Picture Academy is the Student Council packed with James Spaders who game the system in order to keep the pecking order ordered and to their liking.

Variety and the Hollywood Reporter are the school paper. Both are staffed with wannabes and once-weres who protect the myth and clothe the emperor living for those moments when James Spader gives them a taste of the inside where they can bask in his glow. (more…)

Rebooting Bond with Daniel Craig was Bold. Christopher Nolan’s Reinvention of Batman was genius. But some thought it was overly-ambitious, even audacious, to attempt to restart the Star Trek franchise. It has begun to pay off already for Paramount Pictures, and there will dividends for years to come.

A shiny new Enterprise is luring in a new generation of STAR TREK fans

J.J. Abrams is officially the Lazarus of movie directors as his all-new Star Trek has gone “Boldly Gone Where No Star Trek Movie has Gone Before.” With a cast of relative unknowns, the 42-year-old has resurrected a franchise that had been killed by insular “nerdyness” and timid imagination. The Gene Rodenberry creation didn’t so much bomb as it died slowly over a period of years. First, the 2002 movie Star Trek: Nemesis starring the Next Generation cast disappointed with a meager $43.3M domestic. Then, the final TV series Enterprise, which starred Scott Bakula, was not embraced by core fans or broader audiences and was canceled after four seasons, ending May 13, 2005.

(more…)

Several sources at competing studios have told me that J.J. Abrams’ all-new reboot of Star Trek (Paramount), which debuted last night at 7pm at many of its 3,849 locations, may have grossed as much as $6.5M-$7.5M. Studio honchos are “locked down tight” about actual numbers, but that is in the same ballpark as Transformers (Dreamworks/Paramount), which grabbed $8.8M in its previews starting at 8pm on Monday, July 2 during the summer of 2007. (What portion of ticket sales fall into Thursday and what percentage fall into Friday will likely be an open question even after final numbers are in.)

William Shatner (left) with Captain Kirk 2.0 Chris Pine

Keep in mind that Paramount never changed its Star Trek marketing to promote the 7pm Thursday start, so the opening night audience was likely heavy on Trekkers or Trekkies (not sure which term is “politically correct” anymore). So this was a “soft” opening and what amounts to a night of word-of-mouth screenings. Keep in mind that Transformers premiered during the summer when kids are more available while Star Trek has made its premiere during the school year.

(more…)

The all-new J.J. Abrams reboot of Star Trek (Paramount) will win the second weekend of the Hollywood Summer Box Office season by at least a couple of light years over Fox’s fast-fading X-Men Origins: Wolverine, but some of the astronomical numbers I’ve seen floating around in the blogosphere are very over-heated. Make no mistake, this movie will open extraordinarily well, but it’s not going to play out as a typical front-loaded blockbuster. Moviegoers need time to shake off the disappointment of the final TV series Enterprise (starring Scott Bakula and canceled after four seasons) and the disastrous 2002 final film Star Trek: Nemesis ($43.3M domestic). It will take time for a new generation of fans to discover the magic of Gene Rodenberry’s vision of the future through Abrams’ magical lens.

As of Wednesday night, Star Trek is cruising with 94% Fresh (positive) reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, and critics are slinging some seriously glowing hyperbole.

(more…)

In my Final Weekend Tracking column posted on Wednesday, I predicted that X-Men Origins: Wolverine (Fox) would reach $92M on opening weekend, despite soft reviews (now only 38% Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes). My first fearless forecast of the 2009 summer blockbuster season appears to be close to dead-on (missed by only 5%).

Star-turned-producer Hugh Jackman has scored his second-biggest opening ever and, easily, his biggest as a solo star. Wolverine has mauled the competition with a massive $34.75M opening day (including $5M or so in Thursday midnight sales). That could translate to a 3-day of $86.8M, getting Hollywood’s most lucrative season off to a spectacular start.

(more…)

The great thing about a sequel is that it has a built-in audience. The problem with sequels is that, as the numbers after the title go up, so does the production budget. Very hard to know for sure, but sources have told me that the production budget for X-Men was in the $75M range. X-2: X-Men United may have had a budget of about $110M, while the cost of X-Men: The Last Stand was, in all likelihood, as much as $210M. Why doesn’t it make sense to just churn out X-Men 4?

Look at these numbers.

(more…)