I Can't Believe We Saw the Same Movie, Gene

Last week I filed a review of the right-wing Liberty Film Festival. If any of you were itching for an alternate take, you're in luck: It just got a glowing write-up in Ain't It Cool News.

Comments

[Phil]

Like last year, the 2005 Liberty Film Festival was composed primarily of documentary film, which is of no surprise, considering the conservative voice on many issues has been suppressed on the screen and is only now allowed to be heard.

Translation: Modern conservatives are generally too heavy-handed and untalented to make movies that anyone wants to see.

"Suppressed." Oh, brother. Everybody's a victim.

I won't even get into the UN one. "We'll cry like babies at the merest idea that the UN should have the power to deploy or control any of our troops, then berate it for not doing a better job of stopping conflicts."

[Isaac Bartram]

Mr. Horowitz? speech was interrupted by two protestors who infiltrated the festival and stormed the stage, championing their love for the first amendment by shouting at him, "You have no right to speak!"

Am I the only one who thinks Horowitz staged this for effect?

[Akira MacKenzie]

Translation: Modern conservatives are generally too heavy-handed and untalented to make movies that anyone wants to see.

What do you expect from people who consider Christian rock and Tobey Keith entertainment?

[Frank]

Could somebody please explain the far right's paranoia about the UN? I occasionally come upon bizarre rantings about the evil UN, but I've never understood what the tin-foil hat types are all upset about when it comes to the UN. Insight, anybody?

[zach]

I consider Christian rock entertainment... but for entirely different reasons, I expect.

[zach]

There's a lot to be said about it Frank, but I suspect the most simple explanation is that the majority of UN members are more liberal than the U.S.

[Hakluyt]

Frank,

The U.N. represents the concept of
one world government to many folks. They find it problematic. My concern is pragmatic. Who wants a decision body made up of a majority of dictatorial or otherwise viles regimes to have any real power (and here I mean the General Assembly)?

[Hakluyt]

zach,

Have you looked at the actual composition of the U.N.? How many dictatorships and overall thugocracies make up its ranks? What planet do you live on?

[Hakluyt]

zach,

Here's a list: http://www.un.org/Overview/unmember.html

[mediageek]

What do you expect from people who consider Christian rock and Tobey Keith entertainment?

Hey, man, Toby's Shockin' Y'all.

[Akira MacKenzie]

Anti-UN sentiment has largely to do with A)a large portion of the World's governments are thug states, b) the one's that aren't

However, if you throw in the Hal Lindsey/Texe Marrs wing of the Christian Right, the UN is the evil, Satanic world government who will come to oppress believers during the end times with global gun control, black helicopters, and tattoos (they're the "Mark Of The Beast, after all).

[David]

Could somebody please explain the far right's paranoia about the UN? I occasionally come upon bizarre rantings about the evil UN, but I've never understood what the tin-foil hat types are all upset about when it comes to the UN. Insight, anybody?

I would guess it where the are on the hierarchy of distrust and their level of accountability.

For instance, my distrust levels from lowest to highest are:

State Gov.
Local Gov. (In the towns where I've lived, local seem more corrupt, state more inept and out of touch.)
Federal Gov.
U.N.

The accountabity of these entities runs in the opposite direction.

[Rich Ard]

From the Ain't it Cool News:

Humanistic films dominated Hollywood since the birth of the studios, which, in case you weren?t aware, were entirely founded and operated by Jewish, conservative republicans, from Louis B. Mayer to Jack Warner.

This article could have been in the Onion without changing a single word. Hilarious.

[Franklin Harris]

To go back to Jesse's article of a week ago:

"There was even a presentation on a forthcoming sequel to the '80s anime series Robotech, included here because of the show's pro-military themes."

"Pro-military themes"? The show doesn't have any pro-military themes, fer chrissakes! The whole thing (and especially the three Japanese cartoons edited together to comprise it as they were originally) is about the futility of war, the stupidity of military leaders and politicians, and the dicotomy between violence and war on the one hand and love, art, music and communication on the other.

[smacky]

What do you expect from people who consider Christian rock and Tobey Keith entertainment?

What's wrong with Toby Keith and Christian rock?

...Ha ha, just kidding.

[Phil]

All I can say is that my assumption is, as bad as some of the members of the UN are, imagine how bad they might be if they didn't feel they had an ongoing worldwide diplomatic outlet in which they could air grievances and where they might, once in a while, be held even a little accountable.

[Hakluyt]

Phil,

Most of the member states of the U.N. aren't held accountable for anything.

[Sandy]

What's wrong with Toby Keith and Christian rock?

Nothing another 20 years of German occupation won't fi...oh, wait, wrong question, never mind.

[Pro Libertate]

I understand a vague distrust and a less vague disgust with the U.N., but I do not understand any fear of it. It's largely a failure and is 80% inept, and we can stop any action it might get into its little head to perform if we really had a problem with it.

I think our big mistake with the U.N. was pretending that every nation should be treated equally. No. Liberal governments are better and should have more say. Back when we thought more that way, we pressured countries like Taiwan to liberalize, both politically and economically. Once they came along, of course, we betrayed and murdered them for the PRC, but that's just because we like to keep the rest of the world guessing. Anyway, back to the lunancy at the U.N.: It's just nuts to have oppressive countries having ANY VOICE AT ALL at human rights commission meetings or in ECOSOC, or maybe anywhere at all. I mean, come on. We need a little liberal snobbery at the international level (strange how "liberal" in international politics still retains its original meaning. Huh.).

[SR]

"we betrayed and [b]murdered[/b] them for the PRC,"

Huh-wha???

[zach]

Have you looked at the actual composition of the U.N.? How many dictatorships and overall thugocracies make up its ranks? What planet do you live on?

Yeah, sorry. I'm an idiot. I was thinking more along the lines of the security council types, France, Germany and the like. But hey, if that's the way this stupid American generalizes the U.N., maybe that's the way conservatives do also.

[mediageek]

Anyway, why all the surprise over a glowing review of something even vaguely movie-related on AICN?

You could shoot 2 hours of a mug of coffee and those guys would praise it as the utter height of cinematic glory.

[zach]

You can't buy fake opposition like this.

Haha, why not?

[Harry Knowles]

"COFFEE MUG"!!! BEST STUFF SINCE "THE MATRIX"!!!! QUINT HAS THE DETAILS!!!!

[spur]

its sad the festival didn't have a more libertarian bent to it, or by the description, barely any at all...

[Isaac Bartram]

just another lurker at November 4, 2005 12:39 PM

Oh, I'm aware that Horowitz enrages the left (it's the only thing I appreciate about him). But compare this incident (two protesters) with the kind of mass protest he's provoked before. Sorry, but the needle on my bullshit detector is off the scale.

[Pro Libertate]

SR, sorry for the seeming hyperbole--I was throwing out a gratuitous Star Wars quote, which I shouldn't do, as increasingly scornful that I grow of ubiquitous pop-culture references. Still, here's the source:

Luke: How did my father die?
Ben: A young Jedi named Darth Vader, who was a pupil of mine until he turned to evil, helped the Empire hunt down and destroy the Jedi Knights. He betrayed and murdered your father. Now the Jedi are all but extinct. Vader was seduced by the dark side of the Force.

I do feel that we screwed Taiwan, though, but not quite that much 🙂

[zach]

Well Bartram, this didn't exaclty happen on neutral ground. It was a conservative film festival.

[spur]

"Anyway, why all the surprise over a glowing review of something even vaguely movie-related on AICN?

You could shoot 2 hours of a mug of coffee and those guys would praise it as the utter height of cinematic glory."

boooo -- they pan stuff all the time over at 'Ain't it cool' they would have panned this festival since they are liberal, or not covered it at all, but gave it to an outside reviewer.

I wonder if the pov film of the GI would have been made (or made by someone else) had he been blown up by an IED -- or shot himself shooting a child -- would the military really have let this be made had it not been more than bedtime for bongo bordedom?

[mediageek]

boooo -- they pan stuff all the time over at 'Ain't it cool'

Uwe Boll "films" don't count.

[just another lurker]

You can't buy fake opposition like this.

Zach asked:

Haha, why not?

Well, umm, you got me there, Zach. I figured it was probably not cost effective to have 25-35 people on my private payroll for each speaking event of maybe 150-200 attendees. And they have to be really good actors, too.

But maybe you're right and it was all a big conspiracy. Believe what you want.

[Akira MacKenzie]

I was throwing out a gratuitous Star Wars quote, which I shouldn't do, as increasingly scornful that I grow of ubiquitous pop-culture references.

From: http://www.geekson.com/audio/Star_Wars_Ep_3.mp3 (Not a work-friendly link due to some language.)

Jimmy Smitts: "Say, if you know about Leia now, why do you refer to Luke is "our last hope" in Empire?"

Ian McGregor: "'I' know about Leia, but Alec Guiness doesn't."

[Larry A]

Translation: Modern conservatives are generally too heavy-handed and untalented to make movies that anyone wants to see.

Well, the folks who make documentaries certainly are. However, conservative film makers also start out with several strikes against them.

• The "And Suddenly GOD Fixed Everything" climax gets old quick.
• Many of the stories in the one Book they have available contradict what they preach. "If Ruth crawled under the blanket with Boaz to get his attention, why can't I sleep with the quarterback?"
• The big story, Left Behind/Armageddon, is an interesting plot, but it's been done 666 times.
• Plots that practice what they preach, i.e. "Johnny never thought about women from the time he was weaned until he got married at 25 and then had a wonderful wedding night but we can't show that filth" are believable only in the Twilight Zone or Outer Limits context.

[zach]

Well, umm, you got me there, Zach. I figured it was probably not cost effective to have 25-35 people on my private payroll for each speaking event of maybe 150-200 attendees. And they have to be really good actors, too.

Historically, this sort of thing is done by paying off organizers to take advantage of unwitting but readily available crowds of protesters.

Anyway, for the record, I'm with you on this one, there's no big conspiracy.

[Jesse Walker]

Franklin: Take it up with the guy who gave the presentation. He thought the show was basically pro-military; he convinced the festival organizers to include him on the grounds that the show was pro-military; and he presented some clips -- maybe out of context, maybe not -- in which allegedly sympathetic characters expressed some rather militarist views.

Isaac: I really doubt that Horowitz arranged the interruption, since -- as I mentioned in my piece! read it now! -- he was sufficiently shaken to leave early and cancel his dinner plans. It's possible, I suppose, that some other conservative staged it. Maybe Melrose Larry Green!

[Isaac Bartram]

Jesse

What set me off was the fact that there were only two protesters. My recollection is that Horowitz gets masses of protesters (and I agree noone can afford to buy that kind of attention) and their value seems to mostly be a demonstration that the left is as capable of intolerance as the right.

I think I might have read your article last week. Reading it just now I had a deja vu feeling and I have to confess that that may have planted the seed. It seems some other spectators had the same idea.

I'm a little surprized Horowitz got so upset though. I would have thought he would be used to it by now and even got the impression he rather enjoyed it. Perhaps he thought he was safe in such a friendly venue.

[Jesse Walker]

Perhaps he thought he was safe in such a friendly venue.

That's my theory too.

[SR]

"SR, sorry for the seeming hyperbole--I was throwing out a gratuitous Star Wars quote, which I shouldn't do, as increasingly scornful that I grow of ubiquitous pop-culture references."

No sweat, but despite my having seen all of the Star Wars films dozens of times, I think you can still understand why I wouldn't immediately recognize the reference from the context:

Once they came along, of course, we betrayed and murdered them for the PRC, but that's just because we like to keep the rest of the world guessing.

[parse]

I learned from the review that two things I believed about conservatives were just plain wrong.

Govindini characterizes ?conservative? movies today as being something more than just political statements on screen, but rather films containing humanisitic stories, characters, and scenarios. Humanism, she says, is primarily what is lacking in today?s nihilistic entertainment culture, and this deficit is most likely a major contributing factor in the recent box office slump.

And here I thought (secular) humanism was what liberals believed in because they don?t believe in religion. Wasn?t that the point of a conservative lawsuit several years ago?

The film does a masterful job of showing that being a soldier is more than just fighting terrorists, its rebuilding schools and providing aid.

Wait?isn?t the conservative point that all this nation-building stuff was NOT the proper job of a soldier, unless you?re a Clinton-loving liberal who doesn?t understand the real mission of the armed forces.

Go figure.

[Morat]

Horowitz's isn't on a campus to speak. He's there to piss off college kids (which is really easy) and then go make his REAL speech about how colleges are hotbeds of liberal intolerence.

He skips over the part where colleges are ALSO filled with 19 year old twits with more energy than brains.

In short: I would say the bulk of the time Horowitz gets his protesters the usual way -- by pissing people off. However, I would not put it past him to hire a provacateur or two --- getting 'censored' is how he makes his living.

Did he in this case? I have no idea. Nor do I really care. It's frickin' Horowitz, and it's frickin' college kids. They're all twits and assholes. At least the college kids might grow up and amount to something some day.....

[Don Mynack]

Translation: Modern conservatives are generally too heavy-handed and untalented to make movies that anyone wants to see.

You mean all of Hollywood is conservative?

[Phil]

Touche!

[PoliSciGuy]

Maybe it's just me but "Conservative Film Festival"? - when did we start categorizing film politically? The whole thing sounds more like propoganda than artistic expression.

[Hakluyt]

PolisciGuy,

Well, we all know what gaius marius would say about it. Its just more "balkanization" and a further indication that we're all headed to hell in a handbasket.

[Larry A]

Maybe it's just me but "Conservative Film Festival"? - when did we start categorizing film politically? The whole thing sounds more like propoganda than artistic expression.

Personally, when I noticed that virtually any average person (as opposed to action hero) in any Hollywood film who is identified as a gun owner, recreational shooter, or hunter inevitably turns out to be the bad guy.

As in "The new Charlie's Angels kung fu everyone, instead of using icky guns."

Perhaps this is personal, as I've spent the last fifteen years explaining to every New York/California agent/publisher I've sent my novel to that a female character who participate in shooting sports is indeed "realistic." I know many of them, and there are three magazines that cater to them.

I finally found a publisher in Austin who believed me. I wrote The Mark of Abel in 1990, and it only just hit Amazon.

[Dan]

Personally, when I noticed that virtually any average person (as opposed to action hero) in any Hollywood film who is identified as a gun owner, recreational shooter, or hunter inevitably turns out to be the bad guy.

So you're saying that anybody who has a gun turns out to be the bad guy, except when he turns out to be the hero. Fair enough.

[Larry A]

So you're saying that anybody who has a gun turns out to be the bad guy, except when he turns out to be the hero. Fair enough.

Not quite. I said action hero.

Lara Croft can pack a pair of semiautos and whatever other weaponry she can get her hands on and fake using, and blow away dozens of bad guys. Hollywood finds that acceptable, if not laudable.

But if the detectives/CSIs/FBI/etc. walk into an ordinary citizen's house and spot a gun cabinet, shooting trophy, stuffed animal, or even a box of ammunition you can be 99% sure they've got their perp.

[Isaac Bartram]

But if the detectives/CSIs/FBI/etc. walk into an ordinary citizen's house and spot a gun cabinet, shooting trophy, stuffed animal, or even a box of ammunition you can be 99% sure they've got their perp.

That's pretty much how cops feel in real life, contrary to the NRA's line.