Knees, knees are important

One of my colleagues at Forbes points out that a certain movie hasn’t done all that well this weekend. OK.

knees

The three hot blondes obviously play a part in all of this.

Knees, obviously important then. For that’s the only bit that ….well, they are prominent, no?

27 thoughts on “Knees, knees are important”

  1. So Much For Subtlety

    I am afraid I don’t even know what film this is. At what age is it acceptable to be unaware of exactly what popular beat combo is trending these days? Is it ever socially acceptable to be proud of being unaware?

    Anyway, enjoying making these sorts of comments while you can. The “Tory” government is moving to implement American-style Title IX rules on British universities:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3224152/Government-orders-inquiry-sexist-lad-culture-universities-amid-fears-endangering-female-students.html

    One American university is defining sexist comments as rape. So no doubt Dave will get around to that too.

    Remind me again of why it was important to vote for the “Conservatives” as opposed to Labour or any other Lib-Dem clone run by the same metropolitan metrosexual elites?

  2. So Much For Subtlety

    Speaking of our Lib-Dem government, and wildly off topic, thanks to Dave’s embrace of the Greens, Britain now faces black outs:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/utilities/11844750/Electricity-network-in-uncharted-territory-as-blackouts-loom.html

    At some point the Left’s war against reality has to stop and the grown ups have to take over. In Number 10 and in Hollywood. You cannot make films that don’t appeal to the audience for long. Hollywood is determined to put politics first and if they keep it up they will be out of business. Alas we have less choice when it comes to Number 10.

  3. Reminds me of an Agatha Christie novel (I think) where the detective detected that the teenage schoolgirl was not in fact teenage, because of the knobblyness of her knees.

    Not sure there’s any scientific truth in that, but it has stuck with me all these years.

  4. @SMFS: there will not be blackouts, nor even brownouts, thanks to STOR. It is a stupid expensive scheme but it will ensure the lights stay on.

  5. SMFS,

    “At some point the Left’s war against reality has to stop and the grown ups have to take over. In Number 10 and in Hollywood. You cannot make films that don’t appeal to the audience for long. Hollywood is determined to put politics first and if they keep it up they will be out of business. Alas we have less choice when it comes to Number 10.”

    Hollywood is actually mostly on the “right” of things. OK, George Clooney and Michael Moore makes their political movies, but no-one goes to see them except Guardian readers anyway.

    In terms of big box office, one theme in big cinema for around 40 years has been that the state is broken. Almost every action hero, from Dirty Harry to John McClane, Rambo to Tony Stark is not only fighting the bad guys but is also fighting the government that wants them to follow the rules, not get involved, leave it to them. The state is shown to be lazy, corrupt or incompetent.

  6. So Much For Subtlety

    Sebastian Weetabix – “there will not be blackouts, nor even brownouts, thanks to STOR. It is a stupid expensive scheme but it will ensure the lights stay on.”

    It occurred to me after I wrote that, that EdF has a conflict of interest. If they don’t get the reactor built, Britain will have to buy electricity from elsewhere. From the mainland of Europe in fact. Which means French nuclear power plants. Run by the French-government-owned EdF. Are we going to end up paying for their nuclear power programme?

    STOR promises 3 MW for 2 hours. I am not convinced that is enough.

  7. So Much For Subtlety

    The Stigler – “Hollywood is actually mostly on the “right” of things. OK, George Clooney and Michael Moore makes their political movies, but no-one goes to see them except Guardian readers anyway.”

    Remind me of how many pro-War-on-Terror films Hollywood made? Until Sniper that would be precisely zero wouldn’t it? They saw that Top Gun made a fortune and is still one of the most popular films of all time. So they declined to remake it. They saw that the Passion of the Christ made a lot of money. So they dragged their heels in order not to make something like it, and when they had to, they made it an anti-Christian film about the environment.

    Hollywood is on the hard left. They hate America. They hate men. They hate White heterosexual men especially. They insist on lying about every other ethnic group on the planet.

    “In terms of big box office, one theme in big cinema for around 40 years has been that the state is broken.”

    America is shown as broken. This is an area where there have been Right Wing films. But Hollywood films like to show America is corrupt. Not France. God forbid they would show African corruption if they could avoid it.

  8. S2,

    It’s the Transporter reboot, The Transporter Refuelled.

    It’ll still make money because it only cost about $30m to make. $7m sounds terrible, but bear in mind, this isn’t really a cinema film. It’s a DVD/streaming film that can make a little money and cinemas are happy to put it on now because it’s hard for them to get good stuff. No-one releases blockbusters in the fallow period just after the summer holidays.

  9. SMFS,

    “Remind me of how many pro-War-on-Terror films Hollywood made? ”

    At least 1, The Dark Knight, a film that is explicitly about terrorism, that deals with questions of reasoning with terrorists, that includes what we might call “extraordinary rendition”, that somewhat advocates for times when people should be intrusive beyond normal boundaries for a greater purpose.

    “They saw that Top Gun made a fortune and is still one of the most popular films of all time. So they declined to remake it.”

    Errr no. Top Gun 2 is currently in production.

    “They saw that the Passion of the Christ made a lot of money. So they dragged their heels in order not to make something like it, and when they had to, they made it an anti-Christian film about the environment.”

    Again, no. There’s a whole industry that’s appeared off the back of Passion of the Christ with films like Left Behind, A Walk to Remember and War Room. Hollywood didn’t go off religious movies because they’re a bunch of left-wing atheists. They went off them because they lost a ton of money on epic films in the 1960s like King of Kings and The Greatest Story Ever Told. What made Passion of the Christ work was that the marketing campaign was aimed at church groups rather than a general audience, and Hollywood realised Gibson’s innovation and started doing likewise.

    “Hollywood is on the hard left. They hate America. They hate men. They hate White heterosexual men especially. They insist on lying about every other ethnic group on the planet.”

    Right. How many Asians are there in The Avengers? How many gay Bonds have there been? How many films have you seen where the world is about to end because of alien forces, and the French or the Russians save the day? In a film with a white and a black man fighting the bad guys, who is going to die before the end? How many times have you ever seen a romance between a black man and a white woman depicted?

  10. Sebastian Weetabix: there will not be blackouts, nor even brownouts, thanks to STOR. It is a stupid expensive scheme but it will ensure the lights stay on.

    Energy-intensive industry will be shut down. And while the (untested) STOR load balancing is being sorted plenty of domestic users will go dark. And, as SMFS says, that’s just for the first 2 hours: if it goes on for days, people will die.

  11. > God forbid they would show African corruption if they could avoid it.

    The Last King Of Scotland wasn’t a Hollywood film, but Hollywood did give a Hollywood actor an Oscar for his brilliant portrayal not just of African corruption but of crazy paranoid murderous tribal African corruption in it. Which is not exactly a cover-up.

  12. Stig,

    > It’s the Transporter reboot

    Aha, and therefore on the list of films whose trailers I won’t even bother with. The title and having watched the original are enough to keep me well away from it.

    Quite shocking, though, that a film like that doesn’t have good-looking women in it. I mean, I look for a bit more in a film, but, if I were just looking for eye-candy, I’d’ve thought a cheap OTT action film made by the French would be a pretty good bet. Tsk.

    > What made Passion of the Christ work was that the marketing campaign was aimed at church groups rather than a general audience

    Hmm. Possibly, but I think what mainly made it work was that it treated the source material as straight and didn’t try to reinterpret it in a way that makes actors and directors proud of their work and baffled when the audience don’t go for it. Gibson simply realised that a film about Christ is aimed at Christians. Shouldn’t have been a revelation.

    To be fair, I’m not convinced that’s a left-wing thing so much as a luvvie thing. They keep putting Shakespeare into any historical setting other than the ones Shakespeare wrote his plays in, convinced by their own echo chamber that a load of (say) Edwardians talking in Elizabethan language isn’t jarring or weird at all. They love reinterpreting source material — and I can see why, when you’re performing old material that’s been done a thousand times, you’d want to put a new twist on it. They just never understood that the religious don’t want a new twist, and in fact may find such twists extremely offensive.

    Although they have twigged that you shouldn’t try it with Islam. Funny that.

    > How many gay Bonds have there been?

    Bond isn’t Hollywood; it’s British.

    That aside, you’re right about Hollywood’s output. But I think that’s actually part of what makes Hollywood’s people so hard-left (and come on, we all know they are): they have to struggle with this dichotomy between what they make because they know it works and what they believe.

    Megan Fox was openly insulting in interviews to the people who live in Flyover Country. Some said that this was despite her success being built almost entirely on their money and showed how cluelessly stupid she was, insulting the very people who’ve made her. But I don’t think it was despite; it was because. It’s not cluelessness; it’s bitterness.

    I remember one director saying that his deal was that, for every six profit-making blockbusters he made, the studio would give him free reign to do whatever he liked on one film, profits be damned. It’s that one film in seven you need to look at if you want to divine what the filmmakers really think.

    On the other side, the reason there were so many historical epics made in the Fifties was to avoid the HUAC: make a film about the Roman Empire and you’ll always have plausible deniability for any Communist message anyone claims to see in there. And the same thing’s happening today — except that it’s to avoid the Hollywood elite themselves, not government censorship. Ridley Scott’s work since 9/11 has been interesting. A lot of people thought Kingdom Of Heaven was unreasonably sympathetic to the Muslim cause during the Crusades, missing the point that it’s really not about the Crusades — it’s about NOW. (You can tell Scott’s sympathies pretty easily by listening to a lefty explode with bile after they’ve watched Black Hawk Down.)

  13. S2,

    “Quite shocking, though, that a film like that doesn’t have good-looking women in it. I mean, I look for a bit more in a film, but, if I were just looking for eye-candy, I’d’ve thought a cheap OTT action film made by the French would be a pretty good bet. Tsk.”

    Yeah. Good looking birds to appear in minor parts in films aren’t actually that pricey.

    “Hmm. Possibly, but I think what mainly made it work was that it treated the source material as straight and didn’t try to reinterpret it in a way that makes actors and directors proud of their work and baffled when the audience don’t go for it. Gibson simply realised that a film about Christ is aimed at Christians. Shouldn’t have been a revelation.”

    I must confess to not having seen it, but that makes some sense and also fits in with the marketing (which I’m not saying was cynical). It wasn’t targetting mainstream audiences like The Ten Commandments or Ben Hur did.

    “To be fair, I’m not convinced that’s a left-wing thing so much as a luvvie thing. They keep putting Shakespeare into any historical setting other than the ones Shakespeare wrote his plays in, convinced by their own echo chamber that a load of (say) Edwardians talking in Elizabethan language isn’t jarring or weird at all. They love reinterpreting source material — and I can see why, when you’re performing old material that’s been done a thousand times, you’d want to put a new twist on it. They just never understood that the religious don’t want a new twist, and in fact may find such twists extremely offensive.”

    I find a lot of Shakespeare on screen odd because theatre isn’t cinema. Shakespeare needed all that dialogue to let the audience know everything because of the restrictions of theatre. Cinema doesn’t and can be more exciting by showing the audience. West Side Story does away with pages of dialogue that were in Romeo and Juliet by just showing you the knife fight as a ballet.

    “That aside, you’re right about Hollywood’s output. But I think that’s actually part of what makes Hollywood’s people so hard-left (and come on, we all know they are): they have to struggle with this dichotomy between what they make because they know it works and what they believe.”

    I don’t know that they all are. We hear a lot more from people who are on the left, mostly because they make explicitly left-wing films sometimes. We also have a thing of what do we define as “left”? Pro-government spending? Pro-abortion? Anti-war? Pro-gay rights? Pro-gun control? Few like to openly say they support the Republicans because of so much nutjob baggage that they carry around now, but rich people tend to like political parties that reduce their taxes.

    “I remember one director saying that his deal was that, for every six profit-making blockbusters he made, the studio would give him free reign to do whatever he liked on one film, profits be damned. It’s that one film in seven you need to look at if you want to divine what the filmmakers really think.”

    Yes, there are lefty directors. But how many? And my biggest point: how much cultural influence do they have? I bitch and moan about my taxes being given to Ken Loach, but he’s never even made a dent in the drive towards neoliberalism. His films get watched in arts centres by lefties. Most people look at it and go “a film about striking cleaners? fuck that, lets see the Avengers”.

  14. Stig,

    I recommend reading Robert Avrech’s Help! I’m a Hollywood Republican. Answers some of your questions about the politics of Hollywood.

    Robert has written since about the fallout from writing that piece — from even daring to come out as Republican publicly. He was immediately fired from two jobs. Friends he’d known for years or even decades simply cut him off and never spoke to him again.

    Another example. Loads of good stuff at Robert’s site — including some brilliant movie anecdotes and photos. And his piece about being stuck in the LA riots is superb.

  15. Oh, and this:

    > rich people tend to like political parties that reduce their taxes.

    True, but Rob Long said something interesting about this. The best bit of campaigning a Republican candidate can do is just to get people to look at their payslip and see the big chunk being taken by the government. But Hollywood actors (a) never see their payslips and (b) never pay for anything. Their money is simply there, the end of a long tail after their managers and agents and everyone have taken their cuts; and they don’t even handle it themselves, literally having people whose job is to follow them around and deal with bar tabs and so on. If they say they want something, it just turns up.

    Long reckons a lot of them would become more right-wing if they had to face up to how much value for money they get in return for their taxes, but most of them only have the haziest idea what their income even is.

  16. @smfs Britain now faces black outs – there will be no widescale domestic blackouts, perhaps some industrial blackouts. There may well be a crash program to build CCGT plants (see how fast they can knock em up when govt says “never mind the regulations get em up” ).

    At some point the Left’s war against reality has to stop and the grown ups have to take over. – no, it doesn’t, so long as the engineers continue to create more than the cutn-in-the-brains destroy. There may never be another Maggie to bring sweet reason and truth to heart of policy – its a disease of wealth sort of thing.

  17. @smfs STOR promises 3 MW for 2 hours. I am not convinced that is enough. – me either, its pissant compared with the nation’s requirements on a becalmed winter’s evening. That’s why there will be lots of CCGT for the foreseeable … (you can knock em up quick and relatively cheap, and they are suitable to standing idle for long periods).

    We’re a rich country and engineered stuff gets cheaper all the time, no reason why we can’t have big CCGT standing by for 363 days of the year so gov’t doesn’t get clobbered for mass blackouts on 2 days of the year.

  18. So Much For Subtlety

    The Stigler – “At least 1, The Dark Knight, a film that is explicitly about terrorism, that deals with questions of reasoning with terrorists, that includes what we might call “extraordinary rendition”, that somewhat advocates for times when people should be intrusive beyond normal boundaries for a greater purpose.”

    I am not sure. Certainly it had plausible deniability as a film about how corrupt and evil the American government was. It was not a film about heroic American soldiers. It was not about Muslim terror. At best there is a sub-text that could be read either way.

    “Errr no. Top Gun 2 is currently in production.”

    I am not sure what you mean by currently in production. If you mean they have been talking for the best part of a decade about doing it but have not been able to put a deal together, sure. But isn’t that evidence of how utterly and totally uninterested Hollywood is in this film? If they wanted to make it, they would have made it. Instead they are just talking and talking and talking about making it.

    What is worse, if they do make it, what are they going to make? Not, I suspect, Top Gun:

    n June 2015, while promoting Terminator Genisys, Skydance CEO David Ellison confirmed Marks was writing the screenplay, with the plot emphasizing “drone technology and fifth generation fighters. It’s really exploring the end of an era of dogfighting and fighter pilots and what that culture is today.”

    So basically a misery-fest about decline and the end of White men. Like that will sell well.

    “Again, no. There’s a whole industry that’s appeared off the back of Passion of the Christ with films like Left Behind, A Walk to Remember and War Room. Hollywood didn’t go off religious movies because they’re a bunch of left-wing atheists.”

    Yes they did. Left Behind? Here’s what Christianity Today had to say about it:

    “Left Behind is not a Christian movie, whatever ‘Christian Movie’ could even possibly mean. In fact, most Christians within the world of the movie—whether the street-preacher lady at the airport or Rayford Steele’s wife—are portrayed as insistent, crazy, delusional, or at the very least just really annoying. They want churches to book whole theaters and take their congregations, want it to be a Youth Group event, want magazines like this one to publish Discussion Questions at the end of their reviews—want the system to churn away, all the while netting them cash, without ever having to have cared a shred about actual Christian belief. They want to trick you into caring about the movie. Don’t.”

    You would think this is a no-brainer. The Left Behind series is one of the best selling book series in recent times. There is a huge market for it. But they could not make a Christian film out of it. They just hate their audience too much.

    War Room is more interesting but the Kendrick brothers had to start their own studio and distribute their own films to get anything made. You cannot argue that they are part of Hollywood. At least not yet. None of these films, to the best of my knowledge, came out of Hollywood or had any Hollywood involvement. It was only after Fireproof made so much money that they could get a mainstream distribution deal.

    “What made Passion of the Christ work was that the marketing campaign was aimed at church groups rather than a general audience, and Hollywood realised Gibson’s innovation and started doing likewise.”

    So …. Gibson showed them that there was a Christian market, made it pay, and so Hollywood has been trying to sell their anti-Christian pap to them ever since? The idea that actually most Americans, who are Christians, might watch films obviously did not occur to the people who run Hollywood.

    “Right. How many Asians are there in The Avengers? How many gay Bonds have there been?”

    They know their audience. They may hate them but they know them.

    “How many times have you ever seen a romance between a black man and a white woman depicted?”

    In fairness that cuts both ways. Denzel Washington long had a clause in his contracts specifically forbidding any sort of inter-racial romance. Which probably means Flight has ended his career.

    But this is Hollywood’s dilemma. They hate us but they need us to come and see their films. They have to show a minimum interest in what interests us. So they can insult us better. And they do.

  19. So Much For Subtlety

    Squander Two – “The Last King Of Scotland wasn’t a Hollywood film, but Hollywood did give a Hollywood actor an Oscar for his brilliant portrayal not just of African corruption but of crazy paranoid murderous tribal African corruption in it. Which is not exactly a cover-up.”

    Yes but they do have an odd attitude towards Blacks. It is not as if they give them awards all that often. Despite some of the best actors in Hollywood being Black – and usually working with extremely poor material. Perhaps that year it was Quota Time and Forest Whitacker was the only possible candidate?

    Squander Two – “Gibson simply realised that a film about Christ is aimed at Christians. Shouldn’t have been a revelation.”

    What is unforgivable is that after Gibson showed them the market, they still couldn’t do it. They had to make Noah. They just hate Christians too much.

    “But I think that’s actually part of what makes Hollywood’s people so hard-left (and come on, we all know they are): they have to struggle with this dichotomy between what they make because they know it works and what they believe.”

    Isn’t that a circular argument? They believe what they believe because they believe it? They want to be taken more seriously, I agree. That requires them to hate fly over country. But it is more than that.

    “Megan Fox was openly insulting in interviews to the people who live in Flyover Country.”

    But what killed her career was comparing Michael Bay to Hitler. Stephen Spielberg rang around and she has never had a mainstream film again. You can insult ordinary people. Hollywood actors do all the time. Susan Sarandon is still working. But you can’t make inappropriate Hitler comparisons in an industry dominated by …. people very sensitive to Hitler comparisons.

    “make a film about the Roman Empire and you’ll always have plausible deniability for any Communist message anyone claims to see in there.”

    What do you mean “claims”? Spartacus was openly Communist.

    “A lot of people thought Kingdom Of Heaven was unreasonably sympathetic to the Muslim cause during the Crusades, missing the point that it’s really not about the Crusades — it’s about NOW.”

    That is even worse – making excuses for Saladin is one thing, but doing so for ISIS is vile.

  20. So Much For Subtlety

    johnny bonk – “no, it doesn’t, so long as the engineers continue to create more than the cutn-in-the-brains destroy.”

    But can they? We keep inflicting needless damage to ourselves. So far the productive parts of society have been able to carry the load. But there will come a point where the useless parasites will simply break the productive economy’s back.

    johnny bonk – “That’s why there will be lots of CCGT for the foreseeable … (you can knock em up quick and relatively cheap, and they are suitable to standing idle for long periods).”

    Which is also why we will frack. No matter what.

  21. So Much For Subtlety

    The Stigler – “We also have a thing of what do we define as “left”? Pro-government spending? Pro-abortion? Anti-war? Pro-gay rights? Pro-gun control?”

    It is not hard to spot left wing Hollywood directors. This is a non-issue.

    “Few like to openly say they support the Republicans because of so much nutjob baggage that they carry around now,”

    You have got that exactly backwards. There has been the usual Gramscian march through the institutions, not that it was hard in Hollywood, so the Left uses their control of the media to show Republicans, and conservatives, Christians, Whites, men, whatever, as having baggage. They don’t. Compare how Hollywood shows Christians with the actual Christians you know. At least they do not have more than Democrats. How hard is it to condemn the selling of baby parts from abortion? Or the murder of foetuses that have been born alive due to botched abortions? Or to show something slightly close to reality when it comes to racial disparities in crime in the US?

    So having created this fictional bad guy, “a Republican”, it is obvious no one wants to be associated with them. It is not about baggage. It is about demonisation.

    “but rich people tend to like political parties that reduce their taxes.”

    Hollywood is heavily Jewish. Jewish Americans are strongly and irredeemably left voting. Not just for the Democrats but for the hard core left wing of the Democrats. Just as the poorest Americans vote for the Republicans, the richest tend to vote Left.

    Sometimes politics is not about taxes. Sometimes it is about race. Which is probably why Chomsky – and I am willing to bet every single Left wing Jewish radical in Hollywood – has an off shore trust to minimise taxes. It is not about social justice. It is about the Cossacks. So Chomksy is not being inconsistent. He is just not being honest with himself.

    “Yes, there are lefty directors. But how many? And my biggest point: how much cultural influence do they have?”

    All of them. They have a lot. Young Americans have had two generations of assaults on Christians – and now do not identify as Christian very often. Hollywood is abolishing Evangelicals. Young British people have two a generation of pro-Gay propaganda in schools and now something like a half do not identify as heterosexual.

    It matters.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *