The termites within the movie business
Looks like Jodie Foster's got some competition now for who can be the worst Islamophile in the film industry: a sports team owner by the name of Mark Cuban. In this latest act of sympathy for the devil from Hollywood, "The War Within", reviewed by Debbie Schlussel, the concept is a "sympathetic" Pakistani homicide bomber who blows up NYC's Grand Central:
As long as Cuban is owner of the Dallas Mavericks, I don't think I can be a fan of theirs either until he leaves ownership. He later went and wrote Schlussel a letter featuring a classic implication, that she had no idea what she was talking about and needed to see the movie, implying that she hadn't! That's typical moonbattery for you, folks. And Cuban is decidedly a millionaire who doesn't deserve his wealth.
See also at The View From the Nest.
While we're on the subject of the big screen, here's an interesting subject from the small screen too: an episode of Law & Order supposedly inspired by the Terri Schiavo case, that just goes to show how underwhelming and unbold the program actually is. As Newsbusters says:
If that's how the producers of L&O are going to write things, then simply put, they're being no more realistic in their approach than even the movies are. And I think it's already due time that the series was cancelled.
Also available at The Mudville Gazette, Cafe Oregano, Soldier's Angel.
The movie, about a Pakistani Muslim homicide bomber who blows up New York's Grand Central Station, is especially frightening because the goal is to get you to like the terrorist, Hassan (played by Ayad Akhtar). Hassan does not have a scary looking Mohammed Atta-esque visage. He is a laid back, very likeable, devout guy, with regular values that could be those of the religious Christian or Jew next door.There are a couple of other examples in showbiz items where it's been written to say, or even implied, that the victims are to blame for creating a "golem" that turns against them. (When Marvel Comics went and abused their own property in 2002 by forcing a similar approach upon Captain America, that was certainly one example.) It's truly offensive, and must be protested, most definitely by not paying any money to see this current dud.
And that's the point. Producers want you to sympathize with Hassan, understand his point of view. At the end of the film, viewers may find themselves actually rooting for this hail-terrorist-well-met to blow up Grand Central.
In media notes provided by the movie's publicists, Director and Co-Writer Joseph Castelo's answers to questions are mortifying. "How are we ever going to understand what's going on right now if we don't see these people [homicide bombers/terrorists] as human beings?" Is he asking or telling us?
His "Director's Statement" is the written definition of chutzpah:
"I understand the reluctance to extend sympathy to those who wish to do us harm. But I am a firm believer in the power of empathy. Whereas a sympathetic portrayal would imply an affinity, either emotional or intellectual, with Hassan, our protagonist, an empathetic depiction implies a more complex and potentially enlightening dynamic: that of coming into an awareness of the experience of another."
Huh?
Empathy. Sympathy. Whatever. It's a distinction without a difference, and this absurd psychobabble to justify rooting for terrorists is flat-out disgusting.
No film should EVER have a homicide bomber as its "protagonist." Period.
Then, there is the story of the "protagonist," Hassan, and why he chose to become a terrorist. When the movie begins, we see Hassan on the streets of Paris, a secular Muslim speaking on the phone about going to the movies. Then, he is called several obscene names and violently nabbed by American agents. We next see secular, innocent Hassan in a dark Karachi, Pakistan dungeon--questioned, tortured, and mutilated. Throughout the film we are treated to views of his various ugly scars and his flashbacks of the torture.
Yes, predictably, it's the Americans' fault. We turned this nice guy into a terrorist through torture.
As long as Cuban is owner of the Dallas Mavericks, I don't think I can be a fan of theirs either until he leaves ownership. He later went and wrote Schlussel a letter featuring a classic implication, that she had no idea what she was talking about and needed to see the movie, implying that she hadn't! That's typical moonbattery for you, folks. And Cuban is decidedly a millionaire who doesn't deserve his wealth.
See also at The View From the Nest.
While we're on the subject of the big screen, here's an interesting subject from the small screen too: an episode of Law & Order supposedly inspired by the Terri Schiavo case, that just goes to show how underwhelming and unbold the program actually is. As Newsbusters says:
Ripped from the headlines: The plot for Wednesday's Law & Order on NBC is inspired by the Schiavo case -- and it looks like one of those fighting to keep the Schiavo-like character alive may also be a murderer since the NBC Web site's description of the episode says that “a car bomb kills the husband of an incapacitated woman shortly before the victim planned to disconnect her feeding tube.” I would caution, however, that L&O plots often first pursue logical suspects before discovering an alternate motivation for the crime.While they certainly make a good point there, the trouble is that when the "plots" go in the direction of the alternate motivations more often than they do the logical suspects, then it becomes more fiction that reality. And here I thought that the latter was meant to be what the show was about. Looks like I was wrong. One the replies to the thread tells what's going on here:
...I saw this episode - no one blew up in the Schaivo case of course - much to the MSM's dismay - so they made a "reality" it on TV (the only way they can ever get their way anymore). Of course the evil bomber turned out to be (suprise!) an evil pro-life Christian. MJB will be back here later promoting "how everyone knows" that all pro-lifers are really avid pipe bombers hell-bent on blowing up all ("truly decent") pro-choicers...This pretty much sums up what I've thought L&O was really like all these years (and I suspect it's still going for the same reasons the Simpsons are too: they just don't know when to quit!): bending over backwards, underwhelming, and afraid or unwilling to do any better than the MSM it's more or less part of. I remember they pulled some anti-Jewish propaganda possibly three times as well years ago, and early in its run, I vaguely remember an episode where a pro-life Christian was pegged as the culprit in an attack on an abortion clinic. And there were a few episodes where they pretty much backed away from any meaty possibilities regarding the subject of Islamic terrorism as well.
The bigger implication of the episode was that a pro-life clergyman cleverly orchestrated the bombing with diabolical mind-manipulation methods in order to gain media exposure...when is the last time we saw a positive pro-life character or conservative Christian on a major network televison program? The answer of course is never...they are all evil or mind-numbed robots in MSM la-la land...
The main ploy here here is to make the pro-lifers look like the killers - take the focus off of the REAL pro-choice killers. This is a common lib tactic I've noticed now as we also saw in New Orleans where racist libs tried to paint conservatives as the racists...
As I watch these programs week after week I increasingly wonder about these writers...their anti-Christian propaganda and agenda is now so transparent. They are so hate-filled, guilt-ridden, and bitter about their lives. They are such fear-mongers, such bigots...what truly pathetic lives they live...
If that's how the producers of L&O are going to write things, then simply put, they're being no more realistic in their approach than even the movies are. And I think it's already due time that the series was cancelled.
Also available at The Mudville Gazette, Cafe Oregano, Soldier's Angel.
Labels: showbiz
