Free Republic

I think it was fairly well advertised, it seems like they ran a lot of ads for it on network TV, especially Fox, the week before last. I was very busy with work last week so I don't know if they were running ads before it opened, but I frequently saw TV ads for it - but they did not contain the Hillary joke.

The other really significant thing is that this is an Eddie Murphy movie - and whatever one thinks of him he is a consistent box office draw. I read once that no Eddie Murphy movie has ever not opened in the top five, and no Eddie Murphy movie has ever not made a profit. This movie is looking to be the dog of his career - and I suspect all because that single scene was included in the theatrical trailer.

This article should point out that the theatrical trailer for this film, shown for almost the last year, all contain the footage where someone hands Murphy a wad of cash, and he flips through them, revealing Hillary's face on the bills, and says "Where'd you get all these Hillaries?"

This seems significant, especially because the TV ads for the movie, which play to a much wider audience and probably were produced later, do not contain this scene. In fact, I wonder if it the scene made it into the final film.

When I saw the trailer for this film - I believe in front of Shrek in summer '01 - in a theatre in DC, there was a scattering of boos from the audience.

When I saw the trailer again recently, this time in front of the new Austin Powers trailer, and this time in Austin TX, there were a few cheers, some groans, and one man who said quite audibly "Why did she give him all that toilet paper?"

Moviegoers go to movies - this is a law of marketing motion pictures. I don't think it's too far a stretch to say that this movie - well-advertised on TV in the last weeks - is doing poorly because the core group of die hard film goers, the people who see virtually any movie - were turned off in the past year when they saw that scene with that horrible woman's porcine face on the money of the future. I bet a lot of them thought that the whole film would be some left-o clinton-loving comedy and stayed away in droves.

This is very, very significant.

His song "Johnny Come Lately" starts out almost the same way - "I'm an American boy . . . ". That song is more patriotic, about the service American soldiers and airmen gave in WWII, contrasting their return home with the way we greeted our Vietnam vets.

As soon as such a thing happens, FEMA isn't going to have to drive around and round anyone up. The refugees and injured are going to form mobs all on their own and demand relief. While there is a role for the state and private relief organizations, the federal government will have to take a major role. I don't think anyone likes the idea of refugee camps, but if the need is there and the camps are voluntary, then I have no problem with at least putting a plan on the drawing boards. The sad fact is we need to plan for contingencies like this.

Well, the easiest proof to see if the fin really gave him an advantage is to have a race where all the swimmers' wear one. I'm actually pretty skeptical that this fin gives him an advantage, though I agree the ADA goes too far, too often.

As an advertising professional who has dabbled in political advertising, I can tell you that an ad like this could be extremely effective, it just depends on the execution and how much they can afford to run it. People who don't even support medicinal marijuana could sympathize with this woman's plight, especially fence sitting soccer moms. Between this ad (if it's effective) and the gun blooper last week, I think Barr is in trouble, he may see this race slip through his fingers.

He was good in the recent remake of the Count of Monte Cristo - an underrated film in my opinion. At times, especially in the later Chateau d'If scenes, Caviezel exuded this sort of blissed out calm and resignation to his fate. It was an interesting performance, I could see him pulling off The Greatest Role. Also, if Gibson really wants him to play Christ, you can bank on it that Gibson thinks he would pull it off.

I'm a lot more interested in Gibson directing this movie. I wonder if he could pull off telling this story, with all the excitement and drama of Braveheart.

Here's that story.

A Reuters story this morning says that Gibson is only producing and as I remember possibly directing the film, and he wants Jim Caviezel to play Jesus. I believe this story contains some inaccuracies.

I am suspicious of any story of the variety: "Members of the US armed forces should not take a tested, prescribed drug that enables them to perform more efficiently in theatres of way occupied by Islamofascist terrorists." This countries enemies are everywhere, and murders occasionally do just occur in random clusters.

You know, I'm about as reactionary as the next guy, but if there was some sort of worst case terrorist scenario, like jihaddis setting off nukes in 5 or 6 major american cities, we would have at least a few million homeless refugees and maybe even more wounded casualties, a crisis never before experienced by this country. How could this country not implement some sort of plan to temporarily house the refugees, in addition to caring for the hundreds of thousands of survivors, and emergency clean-up of the blast areas? Does anyone really think the American people would sit back and let people die of exposure after losing everything? Look at the outpouring of support to NYC after 9-11?

I agree, it's a frighening prospect, open to abuse. But we would have to implement some sort of relief operation, and it would have to include housing for the millions of refugees.

Even if it was, why would that guy not want to ban alcohol as well. Oh well, maybe he does. People don't have enough real things to worry about in their own lives, so they worry about other people's lives.

I challenge all Freepers who recognize Torch as the foe of liberty he is to visit Forrester's web site and donate $10. A tight race like this will be decided in the final weeks on the basis of who spends the most money on advertising. Forrester needs all the financial help he can get.

What is your source that McPherson is a Marxist?

They're just setting it up for Bush. Do you really think W would attack if they didn't have proof that Iraq either:

1) Bombed WTC in 1993

2) Helped Atta and Co. for their 9-11 operation

3) Has a timetable operation in place to make some sort of weapon of mass destruction.

I gaurantee that they have proof of one of those, and they will share this info with us, and the result will be an actual declaration of war in congress. Internationalists like Bush want their wars nice and legal and proper.

Exactly. The federal drug war ends when the feds are the ones that have to serve warrants, make the arrests, prosecute, and incarcerate, all at the federal level. Just think of all the Waco- and Elian-like images there will be, flooding the media.

At least one positive at NYPost, that woman got it on her finger, and then they put a photo of her on the NYPost cover, showing the terrorists her finger.

Whether they want that to happen, or they just know that he will act again, is probably the question. However, you probably answered it in another post on this thread - I believe you used the word "clueless". Then again, the brutal calculus is - no new leads until he does something again . . . so . . .

However, things usually are as they appear - Hatfill probably really is their only suspect, the leaks and planted stories put there so we think the Fibbies are doing something other than going after corrupt olympics judges and marijuana toking cancer victims.

The sad fact is, when you have a cold case like this, that's sometimes the only way you get new leads - the killer strikes again. If he sent it in the mail again, I doubt anyone would die, there are some really paranoid procedures built into the mail systems now. The bigger threat is if the anthrax mailer graduates to some bigger, better delivery system.