Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

‘LA Times’ To Hollywood: Please Ignore the Box Office Success of ‘The Expendables’
Big Hollywood ^

Posted on 08/16/2010 11:14:20 AM PDT by roses of sharon

Critics aren’t dumb, they know the public doesn’t much care which way their thumbs point. But critics do know that based on their opinions and reviews they can enjoy an influence over what kind of films get made. And that’s not a small amount of power. Culture is upstream from politics, after all.

If you have 95 percent of critics savaging a faithful retelling of the Gospels as anti-Semitic, no matter how successful “The Passion” is, no one’s going to go near that subject matter again. And that’s the goal. Same with anything that comes close to patriotism or conservatism. Such cinematic rarities are frequently labeled “jingoistic, fascist or simple minded.” This is all done consciously and for a desired effect.

You have to understand that when I look at the critical community I only see it for what it really is: a journolista cabal of left wingers deeply engaged in a cultural and ideological war, deeply committed to shaping the powerful messaging of sound and fury that emanate from our pop culture masters.

As if to prove my point, this very morning Left-winger Steven Zeitchik of the L.A. Times ran this propaganda piece; a not very subtle attempt on his and the paper’s part to tamp down any enthusiasm development execs might have to copycat what made “The Expendables” such a box office success and cultural phenomenon: [emphasis mine]

But the Stallone picture — with its hard-charging, take-no-prisoners patriotism unbothered by the vagaries of the real world (it takes place in a fictional country, for starters) and its caricature of freedom-hating enemies (”We will kill this American disease,” as the TV spot enticed us) — planted itself squarely in the old-school genre. And this weekend, the movie showed that there’s life in that category yet.

(Excerpt) Read more at bighollywood.breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: Arts/Photography; Business/Economy; TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: antiamericanism; boxoffice; business; culturewar; hollyweird; hollywood; hollywoodblacklist; hollywoodreds; moviereview; movies; theexpendables
Liberals running Hollywood ping!
1 posted on 08/16/2010 11:14:20 AM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Hollywood isn’t interested in always making blockbuster films. They will bury a film out of spite or even write the losses of a “protected” film off against a successful modestly budgeted film (burying it and it’s production team).

They have 75 years of film to sell/lease on cable and home video to remain solvent.


2 posted on 08/16/2010 11:19:02 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Those who support the construction of the WTC mosque oppose Christian missionaries working abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Stallone did a fund raiser for Obama. F Him

The only one in that movie who is not a lib is Mickey Rourke.

Hollywood can go to h*ll.


3 posted on 08/16/2010 11:20:15 AM PDT by Frantzie (Democrats are the party of Islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

The Expendables is being reviewed better than Eat Pray Love (barf) by the critics.

Eat Pray Love review: Self-indulgent... a talky travelogue — like riding a tour bus with a passenger who won’t shut up about her inner journey.


4 posted on 08/16/2010 11:23:57 AM PDT by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

If you’ve ever been there, you’d know they’re already there and just putting on a pretty face to deceive everyone into thinking they don’t notice.


5 posted on 08/16/2010 11:24:09 AM PDT by BelegStrongbow (St. Joseph, patron of fathers, pray for us!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Bruce Willis is in the movie, along with Schwarzenegger.
Willis is a conservative ~ Arnold?-Phfftt...


6 posted on 08/16/2010 11:25:45 AM PDT by libertarian27 (Ingsoc: Department of Life, Department of Liberty, Department of Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

The “paint by numbers” line was so worth reading this article.


7 posted on 08/16/2010 11:26:40 AM PDT by Psycho_Bunny (Hail To The Fail-In-Chief)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Expendables, A-Team, Red Dawn. Is it time to wallow in 80s nostalgia already? I thought we’d have a few more years. What next? Sixteen Candles with Megan Ringwald?


8 posted on 08/16/2010 11:37:57 AM PDT by Poison Pill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: libertarian27

Wills and Schwarzie are in it so momentarily they shouldn’t be listed in the credits, cameos at best.

My girlfriend went to see Eat, Pray, Vomit at the same time. I wish I had gone with her.


9 posted on 08/16/2010 11:38:28 AM PDT by Cyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Saw it and loved it.


10 posted on 08/16/2010 11:42:36 AM PDT by Sybeck1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cyman

They aren’t listed in the credits but they are there - just grasping at Republicans and Rinos ;)

The last line of the Arnold scene was funny though....


11 posted on 08/16/2010 11:42:41 AM PDT by libertarian27 (Ingsoc: Department of Life, Department of Liberty, Department of Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: libertarian27

Saw it this weekend. thought the lines were crappy. the one-liners that could have been funny were lame.

(Ahnold had the one decent one and only one the audience chuckled at) Lundgren still sounds like Ahnold’s more retarded brother.

I did like Sly’s rat-rod pickup.


12 posted on 08/16/2010 11:54:16 AM PDT by WOBBLY BOB (drain the swamp! ( then napalm it and pave it over ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

“They have 75 years of film to sell/lease on cable and home video to remain solvent.”

I agree with your first statement, but this one isn’t as true as it once was. MGM thought it could handle excessive debt due to its catalog of films. That turned out not to be the case :-).


13 posted on 08/16/2010 11:59:48 AM PDT by edh (I need a better tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WOBBLY BOB
Good movie poster (and advertising team)...


14 posted on 08/16/2010 12:00:39 PM PDT by Charles Martel ("Endeavor to persevere...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

I would rather have another Dark Knight than another Expendables, but maybe that is just me.


15 posted on 08/16/2010 12:01:00 PM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edh

MGM of 1968 or MGM of Time-Warner-Turner media empire today?


16 posted on 08/16/2010 12:01:25 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Those who support the construction of the WTC mosque oppose Christian missionaries working abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

Yet another remake of the Batman-Joker origin stories? That’s all it appears Hollywood is interested in filming.


17 posted on 08/16/2010 12:06:31 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Those who support the construction of the WTC mosque oppose Christian missionaries working abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Retired Greyhound

“...like riding a tour bus with a passenger who won’t shut up about her inner journey.”

LOL, and it fits with your name!


18 posted on 08/16/2010 12:07:55 PM PDT by jocon307
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: libertarian27

Sounds like a Planet Hollywood reunion.

But Hollywood appears to be against it as they’ve been on a decade run of anti-American films and even “heroic” films are quick to denounce any support for “the American way”.


19 posted on 08/16/2010 12:08:40 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Those who support the construction of the WTC mosque oppose Christian missionaries working abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde
I would rather have another Dark Knight than another Expendables, but maybe that is just me.

I fail to see the appeal of The Dark Knight. And I loved Batman Begins. I thought the only people who loved The Dark Knight were Heath Ledger fans.

20 posted on 08/16/2010 12:16:46 PM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

I was meaning more along the lines of what the LA Times writer said, “movies like “The Dark Knight” — with its themes of a destruction-bent enemy that can’t be bargained with, and the question of what constitutes an acceptable ethical compromise in fighting that enemy — have captured our imagination.”

Not specifically a Batman-Joker origin story, although I don’t think The Dark Knight qualifies as an origin story for either, but movies with a little more going on than white hats vs black hats.


21 posted on 08/16/2010 12:22:02 PM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Sans-Culotte

The Dark Knight is #3 on the all time domestic box office charts and #6 world wide. I don’t know how many Heath Ledger fans you think there are, but I think there are quite a few more Dark Knight fans than Ledger fans. Although I will say I am a big fan of pretty much everyone in the movie and Nolan.


22 posted on 08/16/2010 12:25:17 PM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

I understand the sentiment of the author. However, I doubt that this movie is the one to make that point with. It seemed to me like an Oceans 11 for 80’s action stars.


23 posted on 08/16/2010 12:31:47 PM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

MGM of, I guess, Time-Warner-Turner.

MGM kept accumulating debt to the tune of some $7B from what I understand. They kept using their DVD sales and other revenue (like cable on demand services) as a green light to keep piling on debt (i.e. to produce modern garbage, they relied on sales of their classic films). About a year ago, they kind of learned that they could no longer afford even interest payments on that debt.

End result is that the company is now up on the auction block. Some of the best offers they have been getting is in the $1B region. This has also halted production of some of their big money features like James Bond and the prequel to the Lord of the Rings (”The Hobbit”, but I am sure everyone knows that :-) ). They do not have the cash to produce these.

I know $1B is not chump change, but it kind of is from a former valuation of just under 7x that amount.


24 posted on 08/16/2010 12:37:37 PM PDT by edh (I need a better tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise

MGM of, I guess, Time-Warner-Turner.

MGM kept accumulating debt to the tune of some $7B from what I understand. They kept using their DVD sales and other revenue (like cable on demand services) as a green light to keep piling on debt (i.e. to produce modern garbage, they relied on sales of their classic films). About a year ago, they kind of learned that they could no longer afford even interest payments on that debt.

End result is that the company is now up on the auction block. Some of the best offers they have been getting is in the $1B region. This has also halted production of some of their big money features like James Bond and the prequel to the Lord of the Rings (”The Hobbit”, but I am sure everyone knows that :-) ). They do not have the cash to produce these.

I know $1B is not chump change, but it kind of is from a former valuation of just under 7x that amount.


25 posted on 08/16/2010 12:37:43 PM PDT by edh (I need a better tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon
But the Stallone picture — with its hard-charging, take-no-prisoners patriotism unbothered by the vagaries of the real world (it takes place in a fictional country, for starters) and its caricature of freedom-hating enemies (”We will kill this American disease,” as the TV spot enticed us) — planted itself squarely in the old-school genre. And this weekend, the movie showed that there’s life in that category yet.

Crap. I haven't seen a Stallone film since Spy Kids 3, but now I might have to.

26 posted on 08/16/2010 12:38:57 PM PDT by Tanniker Smith (If you call a tail a leg, how many legs has a dog?Five?No, calling a tail a leg don't make it a leg.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Hollywood is stupid, but not suicidal. They will continue to make stupid movies to soothe their political passions, but they will never stop making movies that make money. They have to have money to promote their agenda in the theaters, after all.


27 posted on 08/16/2010 12:44:36 PM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: edh

MGM’s back catalog was largely purchased by Ted Turner by the 1980s.

I think that MGM the modern film production/distribution studio was not part of the Time-Warner-Turner empire. So MGM itself had to be more accountable to the market.

Disney Corp. can afford to continue to p. off the masses with ABC etc. They have a perenial library of works dating back to the 1930s (including Snow White) that most all audiences watch/own at some point.


28 posted on 08/16/2010 12:52:52 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Those who support the construction of the WTC mosque oppose Christian missionaries working abroad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Silly Stallone. You’re not allowed to have masculine white male heros!! We’ll claw your eyes out!


29 posted on 08/16/2010 12:53:33 PM PDT by The Toll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poison Pill

I just saw the Expendables and thought it was a pretty good brainless entertaining movie. Both it and the A-Team didn’t get bogged down in soap box topics and just focused on blowing things up and whacking bad guys. The action in the Expendables is frenetic and sometimes suffers from the herky-jerky camera effect (but no where as bad as the 2nd Bourne movie). Across the board, my movie group gave it thumbs up and all expressed gun lust for the AA 12 shotgun which was a big scene stealer. This movie will definitely annoy the kum-ba-ya liberal who thinks we should all just give evil people a big hug.


30 posted on 08/16/2010 1:03:03 PM PDT by Gen-X-Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: The Toll

Winner, best post so far!

LOL


31 posted on 08/16/2010 1:04:28 PM PDT by roses of sharon (I can do all things through Him who strengthens me. Philippians 4:13)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: roses of sharon

Expendables didn’t do that well. 35 million is nice, but with an $82 million it’s going to be hard pressed to make it to profitability. And I think the critics savaged it largely because they hate action movies, there’s that big “old school” art movie worshiping of “critics” who will give the thumbs down to pretty much any movie where something blows up.


32 posted on 08/16/2010 1:11:29 PM PDT by discostu (like a dog being shown a card trick)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

I know TDK was a huge success. So were the Star Wars prequels and they were crap.I thought I’d like TDK. I just found it overlong and boring. Batman wasn’t in it enough. I really liked the first Nolan take on Batman; but TDK simply fell flat for me.


33 posted on 08/16/2010 2:11:50 PM PDT by Sans-Culotte ( Pray for Obama- Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

“Stallone did a fund raiser for Obama. F Him”

No he didn’t, he supported McCain along with Robert Duvall.

Source: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE48T8SH20080930


34 posted on 08/17/2010 7:17:07 AM PDT by tiggs (Kentucky Fried Condor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tiggs

My mistake. He did a fund rasier for Clinton or Kerry at his old home in Miami.


35 posted on 08/17/2010 7:27:04 AM PDT by Frantzie (Democrats are the party of Islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

The original Batman films sucked. Michael Keaton was okay. Clooney is a POS. Val Kilmer is slightly better.

I liked the British version because Michael Caine who is against the Labourt Party’s polocies, Gary Oldman who attacked Democrats for screwing him over in that one film, and Christian Bale for telling his lib step-mother Gloria Steinem to “shut up” because she always preached her crap at the dinner table.

Not too many libs in those films. The father of Ledger’s wife or girlfriend is a conservative by the way. Michelle Williams.


36 posted on 08/17/2010 7:36:39 AM PDT by Frantzie (Democrats are the party of Islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie

Yeah, if that stuff is important to you that is cool. I care if they are good actors. They all are. Oldman in particular.


37 posted on 08/17/2010 7:46:20 AM PDT by Mr. Blonde (You ever thought about being weird for a living?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Blonde

Oh no doubt. The Brits taking over Batman was the best thing that ever happened to it. The director (Nolan), Caine, Oldman and Bale was a tour de force. Very good actors *especially* Oldman.

Just about anything Gary Oldman or Michael Caine are in is good. The movie can suck but it is still good.

Also Liam Neeson, who I think is Irish. The other cast including the bad guy local gangster and creepy young doctor in the first movie were very good.

Chris Nolan took a dead franchise and turned it around.


38 posted on 08/17/2010 7:58:44 AM PDT by Frantzie (Democrats are the party of Islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: libertarian27
Bruce Willis is in the movie, along with Schwarzenegger. Willis is a conservative ~ Arnold?-Phfftt...

Willis voted "enthusiastically" for Obama. Phfftt on him, too.

39 posted on 08/17/2010 4:39:58 PM PDT by BlessedBeGod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BlessedBeGod; libertarian27
Bruce Willis is in the movie, along with Schwarzenegger. Willis is a conservative ~ Arnold?-Phfftt...

They are in the movie as cameo appearances not amounting to more than a few minutes.

It's a fun, small scope movie, though. I don't see where the R rating comes from.
40 posted on 08/17/2010 4:45:48 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson