The conjunction of life and art: the burned Coptic Christian churches in Egypt are right out of the opening scenes of the 1961 movie EL CID.
Sunday, August 18, 2013
Sunday, July 14, 2013
Saving the Culture
THE WAY to save Western civilization is for both Europe and America, each in their own way, to embrace their cultural roots and historical heritage. For America, this means the mythic, artistic West.
Toward that end I’ve produced a new ebook, ABOUT WESTERN MOVIES, available now at Amazon’s Kindle and B&N’s Nook. Don’t wait to read it.
Monday, June 17, 2013
Coming Attraction
PRE-REVIEW OF “THE LONE RANGER” MOVIE
The big (only?) Western movie for 2013 is "The Lone Ranger." I've seen the trailer. The movie doesn't look promising.
Johnny Depp in white face. Is this a gag? Depp is a terrible choice for Tonto for numerous reasons. One being that he's the most overcivilized, foppish, overmannered pretentiously egoistical actor in Hollywood. Be ready for a stereotypical offbeat portrayal.
The movie itself will be hyperpaced and filled with special effects. The Western on speed, combined with Five Hour Energy.
The ideas look to be hypocritical and simplistic. A Custer-style Army officer is the bad guy. Expanding Capitalism is no doubt eviscerated. This from a movie produced by monster conglomerate Disney, and certain to be promoted by multi-national media conglomerates, with a bankable big name (Depp) paid many millions, and starring as Ranger, Armie Hammer, scion of the billion-dollar Armand Hammer empire. The story appears to be a celebration of primitivism, of the natural Native American way, while the movie itself is created in as high-tech a manner as possible, from advanced lenses to complicated computer-image graphics; hundreds of technicians everyplace, not a primitivist in sight. Least of all Mr. Depp, who's already back in glitzy sophisticated France tinkering with his wineries, more millions in the bank.
The most cynical movie ever made?
We'll see if it's entertaining. The popcorn pop images will move so fast no one will notice the ideas.
Friday, May 10, 2013
Media Distorting the Benghazi Story
So-called journalists from establishment media are in fact propagandists. Which means, they’re not seeking objective truth. They have a set narrative in mind when they begin to write—often but not always based in partisan politics. Everything in the article will comply with the predetermined narrative.
We see this from mainstream media about Wednesday’s Benghazi hearings. Perhaps the most distorted account of those hearings comes from esteemed Time writer Joe Klein. It’s not really an account, but more of a diatribe in defense of the Administration, with not a speck of objectivity, and scarcely any honesty.
http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/08/benghazi-again/
Much of what Klein says is pure misdirection, away from the actual subject. For instance, the question of adequate funding provided to defend embassies and consulates. We should all be able to agree that there are adequate funds in the federal budget in general, and the State Department in particular, to move funds around, if necessary, to protect crisis points. Others have pointed out the lavish sums of money for embassies in safer places like Jordan. Or Moscow, for that matter. No money to protect a mission in the middle of a global hot spot? The idea is ridiculous.
Amid the constant mentions of, and apologies for, a YouTube video, by Obama, Hillary, and Susan Rice, did the President in fact call the 9/11 Benghazi attack an “act of terror”? Yes and no. In his Rose Garden remarks Obama mentioned “acts of terror” in general. Klein’s presentation is a half-truth that fits well with the slanted thrust of his article. See the matter discussed here:
http://www.forextv.com/forex-news-story/full-transcript-of-obama-s-rose-garden-speech-after-sept-11-benghazi-attack
More important than Joe Klein’s misdirections about the Benghazi hearings are his omissions, and his outright lies.
Note the caption under the photo on the page of a “protester.” The caption says, “A protester reacts . . . during a protest by an armed group said to have been protesting a film. . . .”
Two quick comments. 1.) Note the weapon. That’s a hell of a protest! 2.) “said” to have been protesting a film? “Said”—by whom?
Joe Klein and his Time editors seem not to have listened to the hearings the article is supposed to be about. In his testimony, Gregory Hicks said there was “No protest” at the consulate. Everyone involved in the 9/11 events—everyone—called it an attack. Hicks also dismissed the idea of an obscure YouTube video being the cause, calling it “a non-event in Libya.” If anyone was in a position to know, he was.
To confirm this, we have the email from Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Beth Jones, quoted at the hearings (Klein and Time seem to have missed it), dated 9/12, the day after the attacks, in which this assistant to Hillary Clinton said, “—the group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.”
Hmm. Doesn’t sound quite like the “local street gang” in Joe Klein’s depiction.
No mention in Joe Klein’s article of the stand down order, and the Administration’s failure to act—in particular, Hillary Clinton’s failure to act to protect her own people, once the battle began—which is always the first test of leadership.
No mention by Joe Klein of the outright lies by Hillary, Susan Rice, and even the President blaming the attack on the obscure video, with no evidence presented then, or now, least of all by Joe Klein, showing that said video had ANYTHING to do with the Benghazi attacks. An administration lied to the American public—saying what they surely knew were lies. They tried to cover-up their inaction and incompetence. Esteemed journalist Joe Klein is like Sergeant Schultz from the TV show “Hogan’s Heroes”: “I see nothing. NOTHING!”
I could go on. The bottom line is that this magazine, and its scoundrel of a propagandist, are considered “legitimate” media. One has to laugh about it, because the alternative is to cry over what’s happened to the press in this country.
We see this from mainstream media about Wednesday’s Benghazi hearings. Perhaps the most distorted account of those hearings comes from esteemed Time writer Joe Klein. It’s not really an account, but more of a diatribe in defense of the Administration, with not a speck of objectivity, and scarcely any honesty.
http://swampland.time.com/2013/05/08/benghazi-again/
Much of what Klein says is pure misdirection, away from the actual subject. For instance, the question of adequate funding provided to defend embassies and consulates. We should all be able to agree that there are adequate funds in the federal budget in general, and the State Department in particular, to move funds around, if necessary, to protect crisis points. Others have pointed out the lavish sums of money for embassies in safer places like Jordan. Or Moscow, for that matter. No money to protect a mission in the middle of a global hot spot? The idea is ridiculous.
Amid the constant mentions of, and apologies for, a YouTube video, by Obama, Hillary, and Susan Rice, did the President in fact call the 9/11 Benghazi attack an “act of terror”? Yes and no. In his Rose Garden remarks Obama mentioned “acts of terror” in general. Klein’s presentation is a half-truth that fits well with the slanted thrust of his article. See the matter discussed here:
http://www.forextv.com/forex-news-story/full-transcript-of-obama-s-rose-garden-speech-after-sept-11-benghazi-attack
More important than Joe Klein’s misdirections about the Benghazi hearings are his omissions, and his outright lies.
Note the caption under the photo on the page of a “protester.” The caption says, “A protester reacts . . . during a protest by an armed group said to have been protesting a film. . . .”
Two quick comments. 1.) Note the weapon. That’s a hell of a protest! 2.) “said” to have been protesting a film? “Said”—by whom?
Joe Klein and his Time editors seem not to have listened to the hearings the article is supposed to be about. In his testimony, Gregory Hicks said there was “No protest” at the consulate. Everyone involved in the 9/11 events—everyone—called it an attack. Hicks also dismissed the idea of an obscure YouTube video being the cause, calling it “a non-event in Libya.” If anyone was in a position to know, he was.
To confirm this, we have the email from Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern Affairs Beth Jones, quoted at the hearings (Klein and Time seem to have missed it), dated 9/12, the day after the attacks, in which this assistant to Hillary Clinton said, “—the group that conducted the attacks, Ansar al sharia, is affiliated with Islamic terrorists.”
Hmm. Doesn’t sound quite like the “local street gang” in Joe Klein’s depiction.
No mention in Joe Klein’s article of the stand down order, and the Administration’s failure to act—in particular, Hillary Clinton’s failure to act to protect her own people, once the battle began—which is always the first test of leadership.
No mention by Joe Klein of the outright lies by Hillary, Susan Rice, and even the President blaming the attack on the obscure video, with no evidence presented then, or now, least of all by Joe Klein, showing that said video had ANYTHING to do with the Benghazi attacks. An administration lied to the American public—saying what they surely knew were lies. They tried to cover-up their inaction and incompetence. Esteemed journalist Joe Klein is like Sergeant Schultz from the TV show “Hogan’s Heroes”: “I see nothing. NOTHING!”
I could go on. The bottom line is that this magazine, and its scoundrel of a propagandist, are considered “legitimate” media. One has to laugh about it, because the alternative is to cry over what’s happened to the press in this country.
Friday, January 25, 2013
Being Played
Hillary Clinton and President Obama have taken a huge risk in putting their faith in Egypt’s Mohamed Morsi. Is he a moderate? In any way a moderate? Or is he not, as he’s been demonstrating with his anti-democratic consolidation of power, anything BUT a moderate?
For all their high intelligence, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have been played. It’s embarrassing, and for the west, it’s tragedy.
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
Prophetic Scenes
On this 11th anniversary of 9/11, there's no getting around the opening scenes of the 1961 film "El Cid," with the threats of a Bin Laden-like fanatic followed by scenes of smoldering devastation.
Friday, August 10, 2012
About Movies Today
Today’s blockbuster movies are an insult to the audience. They mock the stupidity of today’s moviegoer. Fast, jerky editing where you can’t see what’s happening combined with sadistic in-your-face violence is something today’s brainwashed-by-MTV accept unquestioningly. One doesn’t have to be against artful editing or violence in film to state this.
Today’s blockbuster movies feed on the darkest and most degrading aspects of the human personality.
“El Cid” surely has its share of violence, but it’s part of an overarching historical, cultural, artistic framework and message. No film has ever had more beautiful cinematography. Unlike today’s “Dark Knight,” “Bourne,” et.al. movies one is allowed to actually see and appreciate the incredible camera shots. The presentation isn’t a tease or a scam.
I understand why Islamists have no respect for those who inhabit the West. I see why they consider us to be unthinking unblinking weak consumerist zombies without morals, character, principles, or sense—accepting of any nonsensical nihilistic art or idea if it’s properly packaged with the right amount of hype and glitz and is properly approved by the mendacious mandarins of the mainstream media.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)