November 9, 2007, - 12:08 pm
By Debbie Schlussel
My friend, Detroit Newsistan film critic Tom Long–an unabashed, but thoughtful, liberal–has an interesting piece denoting what you, my readers, and I have been noting: American audiences don’t want anti-war movies.
Unfortunately, Tom uses the general term “war on terror movies,” but what he’s really referring to is this non-stop series of left-wing anti-war movies. Americans like War on Terror movies, where we are the good guys, as in real life. But Hollywood isn’t making those. What we don’t like and won’t patronize are movies that are anti-war and/or anti-American, and that’s what we’re getting en masse from Tinseltown.
And as he notes, since they are financially bombing at the box office, that, unfortunately, isn’t yet causing Hollywood to stop making them. But I think they will have to . . . or at least make less of them. The bottom line has always been and important constraint, eventually, even in Hollywood. They are in it for their mansions and luxury sportscars. You can’t fund a lavish vacation in Monaco on the massive net loss deservedly suffered by “The Kingdom.”
And I strongly disagree with Long’s conclusion that more of these movies are needed. None of them are needed. They are damaging to America in so many ways. But I like Long’s rundown on the movies that have failed–every single one is anti-American, a fact he fails to note.
‘No more war! No more war! No more war!”
The cry of protestors outside the White House?
No, the cry of movie audiences across America.
Today, “Lions for Lambs,” another film about the ongoing war on terror, opens in theaters. By Monday it should be the latest flop about the ongoing war on terror.
This despite the inclusion of three Big Hollywood Names in the cast: Tom Cruise, Meryl Streep and Robert Redford, who also directs the film.
Then again, Reese Witherspoon is a big name. But even Ms. Legally Blonde couldn’t help “Rendition,” the mid-October entry concerning torture and illegal interrogation that has so far earned a pitiful $9.3 million.
The average film starring Witherspoon earns about four times that much, according to boxofficemojo.com.
It’s very doubtful that Reese suddenly became unpopular, especially since she just took home an Oscar two years back for “Walk the Line.”
No, it’s the subject matter. American audiences have been voting against war-on-terror movies all year.
No, they’ve been voting against anti-war-on-terror films. That’s an important distinction.
When Hollywood starts making movies like “The Delta Force” again–where we fight back and win against Islamic terrorists who wrongly murdered innocent Americans–we’ll go see them. (And, no, I’m not joking. “Delta Force” accurately depicts the Hezbollah hijacking of TWA Flight 847 and murder of Navy Diver Robert Stethem. Go rent it. You’ll see it’s a very under-rated and unfairly panned movie.)
As long as we’re told by the silver screen that we are equal to the bad guys or even worse than them, we’ll stay home.
Tags: America, Debbie Schlussel My, Delta Force, Detroit Newsistan, film critic, Hizballah, Legally Blonde, Liberal Film Critic, Lions for Lambs, Meryl Streep, Monaco, Navy Diver Robert Stethem, Oscar, Reese Witherspoon, Rendition, Robert Redford, The Delta Force, Tinseltown, Tom Cruise, Tom Long, USD, Walk the Line, White House