Hollywood’s dealing with a whole new world. New Media can now get the word out days before the hugely important opening weekend begins. And if Hollywood thinks this right-of-center nation is outraged over the dozen-or-so box office bombs they produced in order to give aid and comfort to our jihadist enemies, the targeting of our children with their noxious leftist lies is going to be an even bigger problem.

“Happy Feet Two” cost 600 people their jobs.

—-

Leftist Hollywood wants to sexualize our kids and leftist Hollywood wants to brainwash our kids.

There is no place a leftist is happier than in that sweet spot found between the influence of parent and child.

Paul Bond at THR:

Director George Miller acknowledged five years ago that he reworked the script for the first Happy Feet to amplify the environmental themes, and conservatives who weren’t turned off by them the first time around expected similar messages in the sequel. Some, though, complain that Happy Feet Two ramped up the liberalism to the point of propaganda, and these disenchanted right wingers are getting the word out to like-minded moviegoers.

[...]

There’s about 123 million adult conservatives in the U.S., so if Hollywood insists on inserting liberal messages in its family fare, it risks alienating a huge chunk of its potential audience. And many conservatives are accusing Hollywood of doing just that.

After Pixar head honcho John Lasseter revealed ahead of the opening of Cars 2 that the oil industry would be the “uber bad guy,” a blogger at LonelyConservative.com wrote this: “We conservatives and believers in free markets are accused of being paranoid when we say the Hollywood industry is trying to indoctrinate our children with left-wing propaganda. But now movie directors and producers are coming out and admitting what they’re doing. I’m just glad I found this out before I allowed my kids to persuade me to take them to see the movie Cars 2.”

Cars 2 this year, by the way, took in 22 percent less at the domestic box office than its predecessor did in 2006.

(more…)

Paul Bond of The Hollywood Reporter was one of the few media types to gain admission to the premiere of “The Undefeated,” which is appropriate because he’s one of the few honest reporters out there. He also had the opportunity to talk to the Governor afterwards and ask her about the never-ending stream of vile, profane and venomous attacks that come from our Entertainment Class — a point brought home in “The Undefeated,” which opens with a sickening montage of the worst of them.

Huge exclusive at THR:

Sarah Palin stared a bit uncomfortably at a movie screen Tuesday night watching a montage of Matt Damon, David Letterman, Madonna, Howard Stern, Bill Maher, Louis C.K. and other celebrities malign her, then asked The Hollywood Reporter: “What would make someone be so full of hate?” …

Palin said she hadn’t seen or heard much of the TV and radio footage before seeing it in the movie, which bleeped some of the dirtier language, though it was easy to determine what the entertainers were saying, including lots of profane references to the female anatomy.

“This is the first that I’ve seen much of that. It kind of takes you back,” she told THR. “It makes you want to reach out to some of these folks and say, What’s your problem? And what was the problem? And what is the problem?

“What would make a celebrity, like you saw on screen, so hate someone that they’d seek their destruction, their death, the death of their children? What would make someone be so full of hate and, I guess, a sense of being threatened that they would want to see that person destroyed?”

(more…)

Ed. Note: Video below is a must-watch.

THR:

Some members, though, told The Hollywood Reporter, on condition of anonymity, that the claim of being “non-political” is disingenous, considering the Caucus prides itself on evaluating political activities that affect the entertainment industry and it often invites political heavyweights to speak at its gatherings.

They also complain of hypocrisy, given that item five in the Caucus’s “Television Creative Bill of Rights” stipulates “the right of diverse ideas,” which they say seems unlikely if members of the liberal majority are allowed to discriminate against the conservative minority.

—–

The videos in question are portions of interviews that Ben Shapiro conducted with TV-industry elites for his just-released book, Primetime Propaganda: The True Hollywood Story of How the Left Took Over Your TV.

THR revealed the first batch of videos a week ago and Shapiro has been slowly rolling out more ever since.

The latest one is from Nicholas Meyer, director of The Day After, one of the most successful TV movies in history.

In the video, Shapiro says to Meyer, “Criticism from the right is usually that right-wingers get discriminated against.” Meyer responds: “Well, I hope so.” …

(more…)

Paul Bond in THR:

In clips that will hit the Internet to promote a new book, producers including “Friends” co-creator Marta Kauffman and “House” creator David Shore say Hollywood discriminates against and belittles conservatives.

Some of TV’s top executives from the past four decades may have gotten more than they bargained for when they agreed to be interviewed for a politically charged book that was released Tuesday, because video of their controversial remarks will soon be hitting the Internet.

The book makes the case that TV industry executives, writers and producers use their clout to advance a liberal political agenda. The author bases his thesis on, among other things, 39 taped interviews that he’ll roll out piecemeal during the next three weeks.

The Hollywood Reporter obtained several of the not-yet-released clips, embedded below. Each contains a snippet of an interview, usually some historical footage of the TV shows the interviewee was responsible for and, naturally, a plea to purchase the book, “Primetime Propaganda” by Ben Shapiro and published by Broad Side, an imprint of HarperCollins.

In one video, Friends co-creator Marta Kauffman says that when she cast Candace Gingrich-Jones, half-sister of Republican former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, as the minister of a lesbian wedding, “There was a bit of ‘fuck you’ in it to the right wing.”

(more…)

Paul Bond at the Hollywood Reporter:

Despite its “awful” marketing plan, as one distribution exec calls it, the movie earned a $5,640 per-theater average opening: “Things have turned for us,” producer Harmon Kaslow tells THR.

The power of Ayn Rand devotees have impressed some Hollywood distribution executives, who took note of the hefty $5,640 per-theater average scored by Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 during its opening weekend.

‘Atlas Shrugged’: First Movie to Target the Tea Party Atlas Shrugged Review”Shocking,” one executive said about the healthy business the low-budget film has been doing considering its “awful” marketing plan.

Awful or not, business has been brisk enough for producers Harmon Kaslow and John Aglialoro to expand from 299 theaters to 425 this weekend and to 1,000 by the end of the month, they told The Hollywood Reporter on Tuesday.

The two said they fielded 500 inquiries from theater bookers Monday but didn’t have enough film prints to fill orders.

“Things have turned for us,” Kaslow said. “When we started, exhibitors were not embracing the film like we thought they would. Now, we can pretty much go into as many theaters as we want. It’s just a matter of logistics.”

(more…)

More terrific reporting from the Hollywood Reporter:

About 9 million adults are active Tea Partiers, and 45 million support the movement, a CBS/New York Times poll says.

Atlas Shrugged, a novel in which society’s most productive citizens choose to disappear, was published in 1957, and filmmakers have spent nearly every year since trying to adapt it. They finally succeeded, and the first part of what’s planned as a trilogy comes out April 15. If you didn’t know that, it’s likely you’re not a member of the Tea Party.

—–

It was probably only a matter of time before Hollywood tried tapping the e-mail lists and social networks of the giant political movement, as distributor Rocky Mountain Pictures and filmmakers including co-producer Harmon Kaslow have for Atlas Shrugged: Part 1.

Despite years of cinematic interest and high hopes for stars and funding, the film was made for less than $10 million, with Taylor Schilling — who appeared on NBC’s short-lived Mercy — playing protagonist Dagny Taggart.

By Hollywood standards, the marketing budget is tiny, so word-of-mouth from Tea Partiers sympathetic to the film’s message is crucial to its success.

The film is also the perfect test case to see whether such an effort can work because Ayn Rand’s novel extols free markets and entrepreneurialism and excoriates government coercion and overtaxation, values that unite Tea Partiers. In fact, rallies invariably feature signs that mimic the book’s opening line: “Who Is John Galt?” Another common sign at Tea Party rallies asks, “Is Atlas Shrugging?” If Hollywood can’t persuade this demographic to support Atlas, it might as well write off the Tea Party as a marketing source.

(more…)

This might be the most revealing anecdote about the intolerant culture of present-day Hollywood in, well, ever. Get this: some genius producer at Sony digitally removed the words Holy Bible from a Holy Bible in a scene because he thought the sight of a Bible might hurt the film’s appeal beyond the Christian community — probably because he’s projecting and assuming everyone’s as bigoted as Hollywood. After some pressure from the family on which the film is based, he did put it back, but who thinks this way (he asked himself rhetorically). Good grief, there are all kinds mainstream films today where you see glimpses of various social and political symbols. Remember all that obnoxious PETA junk in Lethal Weapon 2, a movie I’ve only watched about a million times. But how many films these days show teenagers with the chicken track peace symbol on their book bag or a Greenpeace poster on the wall?

Hey, what’s that he’s reading?

But what does get digitally removed? The best-selling book in history. And what kind of movie does the best-selling book in history get digitally removed from? A movie based on the true story of a young Christian surfer who was attacked by a shark and credits her faith in God with her recovery. You can’t make this stuff up.

Now, below is that part of this story. But don’t go away, because this story somehow gets dumber. Via Paul Bond at THR:

Tom Hamilton prayed for the best but expected the worst. He and his family, all devoted Christians, thought they had lost their bid to keep an overt reference to the Bible in the upcoming film Soul Surfer, based on the true story of Hamilton’s daughter Bethany, who, at age 13, had her arm chewed off by a tiger shark in Kauai but returned to her board to pursue her dream of becoming a pro surfer.

When religious leaders were shown an early version of the Sony movie [Soul Surfer], set for release in April, the words “Holy Bible” had been digitally removed from the cover of the book in a scene depicting Hamilton reading in a hospital where his daughter was fighting for her life. Hamilton says producer David Zelon, an executive at Mandalay Pictures, had lobbied to tone down the film’s Christianity in an effort to broaden its appeal to non-Christian audiences. But the Hamilton family objected, and when they attended a subsequent screening, they were pleasantly surprised with what they saw.  

“I could see the words bright and clear,” Hamilton says.  “I looked at my wife and whispered, ‘Thank you God, they put it back.’ ”

Brace yourself for what’s coming:

(more…)

No more than three weeks ago, 17 days to be exact, Hollywood’s favorite overrated, race-obsessed, ex-scientologist Oscar-winner, Paul Haggis, raised the bloody shirt of the dreaded Hollywood blacklist of the 1940s and ’50s … again. For those of you might have missed one of the annual offerings from Hollywood’s self-referential masturbatory genre of films covering the blacklist, essentially what happened is that for a time entertainment professionals were denied employment based on real and perceived communist sympathies. A terrible thing to be sure, but not so terrible for today’s communist sympathizers who, for seven decades now, have lovingly fed, pruned and cared for this unfortunate era of Hollywood history in order to grow it into a Mighty Oak of Indignation. After all, how else would today’s Hollywood — the wealthiest, freest community of artists in the history of the world – feel the moral superiority that comes with being oppressed were it not for a scandal old enough to collect Social Security?

The irony of this, of course, is that the situation is now reversed. The only thing today’s Hollywood Left learned from the original blacklist was how to blacklist better. They leave no fingerprints today. There’s nothing official, there’s no list, so there’s no way for anyone to get caught. At the very least, The Hollywood Ten understood what had happened to them. There was a list, they were on it, and so they could work around it with the use of pseudonyms until the storm passed. Today’s Hollywood Blacklisters are shrewder and much more insidious. Their blacklist is an unspoken social one. There’s nothing official to tell you why the phone stops ringing.

The worst part is that those on this awful list aren’t even looked at as victims (not that they want to be). As we’ve documented ad nauseum, the entertainment media is a willing participant in the blacklisting of those who don’t conform to their political beliefs. Anyone who dares mention that it might not be the best career move to take the other side of a Global Warming debate in a production meeting or by the craft services table, is immediately pounced upon as a talentless, hasbeen, paranoid whiner by no less than Patrick Goldstein at the L.A. Times, among others. (more…)

Paul Bond at the Hollywood Reporter:

“Looks like “Land of the Lost” has earned star Will Ferrell the dubious distinction of being the most overpaid actor in show business, according to the list makers at Forbes magazine.

“Forbes looked at 100 top actors based on their widely released films over the past five years. It factored in the production costs of those movies against how much boxoffice, DVD and other revenue they generated in order to come up with an operating income for each film, which it then compared with the salaries the stars earned. (more…)