The worst political movies of the last 50 years

posted at 11:57 am on January 18, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

This past week, we had a lot of fun (and a lot of arguments) over the candidates for the best conservative-themed movies from the last 25 years.  For the upcoming inauguration of Hollywood’s latest hero, Barack Obama, let’s try this again with an easier question.  What have been the worst explicitly political movies of the last 50 years, roughly the lifetime of our new President?  In order to qualify, the film has to have had a theatrical release, been considered a major motion picture (no cheapie, American International, drive-in flicks or straight-to-video nonsense), and dealt with explicitly political and/or policy themes.  They could be conservative or liberal, although good luck finding many of the former; it just has to stink.

I have a few in mind already, which will hopefully give some guidance:

  • The Day After Tomorrow (2004) – Utter cheese-fest of hysteria, bad writing, and bad science, but it’s Al Gore’s Citizen Kane.  Global warming meets Irwin Allen, and the dumbest moment comes when Americans become illegal immigrants into Mexico.  How ironic!
  • JFK (1991) – Oliver Stone takes the most ridiculous of the Kennedy assassination conspirators and glorifies him as some truth-teller to power.  Loaded with Stone’s paranoia, it’s fronted by Kevin Costner in his dead-wood period.  Requires equal parts Dramamine and No-Doz.
  • Nixon (1995) – Oliver Stone strikes again, this time in demonizing Richard Nixon.  A better director might have made a compelling portrait of the most reviled president in American history, but instead, Stone trowels on his hatred and stylized direction to turn this into an utter disaster.
  • The Dreamers (2003) – Three young adults get naked and have a lot of sex in order to rebel against the stifling culture … of Paris in 1968.  Complete with the glorification of the 1968 riots that led France into a Socialist economic coffin for four decades.
  • The China Syndrome (1979) – Another hysteria-driven film, but this one managed to kill nuclear power for decades when an accident at Three Mile Island occurred at the same time as the movie hit theaters.  Neither the movie nor the accident killed or injured anyone, but it handcuffed American energy production, and it’s still handcuffed to this day.  It misrepresents the safety procedures and the fail-safes in American reactors of the time.
  • Ishtar (1987) – Notorious bomb involves Americans caught up in the cold war, jihadis, and really bad singing.  What were Dustin Hoffman and Warren Beatty doing in a remake of Spies Like Us?
  • The Scarlet Letter (1995) – If Demi Moore had just stuck with the source material, perhaps the scenery-chewing would have been less egregious.  Instead, Hollywood changed Hawthorne’s plot to give us a happy ending.  Demi Moore explained this by saying a happy ending was okay, because not too many people had read the book.  Uh … right.  Terrible, terrible, simply awful version of the story without a performance to make it worthwhile despite the high-priced talent.  (Yes, it’s political.)
  • The Deer Hunter (1978) – Yeah, yeah, yeah, I know it won an Oscar for Best Picture.  It’s still a dreadfully boring movie shot by self-indulgent director Michael Cimino.  In 1978, any movie about Vietnam was considered high art.  When Cimino essentially remade this film two years later in Heaven’s Gate and set it in the Wild West, it bombed, and Cimino’s career went into the tank.

That should give us a good start.  Add your own suggestions in the comments, and be sure to explain your reasons for adding them.  Tomorrow, I’ll take your suggestions from the comments section and whittle them down into a poll.  I’ll announce the “winners” on Tuesday’s Ed Morrissey Show.

Update:  Lots of good suggestions in the comments.  Anything Michael Moore does automatically qualifies, but Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 911 should get special mention for their rank dishonesties.  A couple of more thoughts:

  • The Contender - While I hate the politics of the movie, I have to offer the small defense of it being perhaps the most realistic depiction of the tone in Washington.  Also, I thought about this film a lot during the ten weeks that Sarah Palin campaigned for VP.  Watch the film again with that in mind, and almost everything that happens in the movie has an analog with Palin, only with the bad guys and good guys reversed.
  • The American President - If we could divorce the politics from the movie, it would make a cute romantic comedy.  Unfortunately, Rob Reiner has all of the subtlety of a sledgehammer, and Michael Douglas gives an almost fascist speech at the end which Reiner expects us to cheer, including an explicit threat to go door to door to confiscate guns from law-abiding Americans.  Bonus points for bad with Richard Dreyfuss in the Snidely Whiplash Conservative role.  Yes, really.
  • Munich – Well made and simply awful.  I wrote a review of it when it first came out three years ago, and I was being kind.
  • V for Vendetta – Haven’t seen it, although it’s on my Netflix queue just so I can make up my own mind about it.  I heard it’s pretty objectionable on its politics.
  • The Constant Gardener – Sheer, unadulterated dreck.  My review can be found here.  Nothing but a stream of left-wing sloganeering, complete with laughable reliance on the UN as the only incorruptable presence in the Third World.
  • Children of Men – Another film filled with anti-Bush propaganda, although it seems a little out of place …. in 2027.  I reviewed this one, too, when it first hit theaters.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6 7

I can’t go back and look through all previous 5 pages, but are “Toys” (Robin Williams movie) or “Mars Attacks” listed yet?
Both like to portray the military in a psychotic light.

ToddonCapeCod on January 19, 2009 at 12:43 AM

JFK–because it was “back and to the left”. :) To bad they didn’t research the fact that you can get shot from the back and get blown backwards.

Dollayo on January 19, 2009 at 12:50 AM

There was a movie that came out a few years ago.
It was filmed in Turkey.
I think Gary Bussey played a doctor who was harvesting organs for “the Jews”-supposedly it pushed the “blood libel” angle.
Anyone?

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2009 at 12:22 AM

Valley of the Wolves, Billy Zane was in it too.

clearbluesky on January 19, 2009 at 1:21 AM

Bad liberal/politically themed movies….WHERE do I begin?:
Recount(2008): an HBO convoluted mess with Kevin Spacey that makes heroes out of the Democrats who were actually busy trying to steal the election here in Florida
The Tripper(2006) : a David Arquette horror film with self proclaimed important political undertones features a Ronald Reagan obsessed serial killer who executes hippies with an axe.
The Reagans (2003)A film badly written, badly acted, and badly directed .Though they claim that they are speaking the “truth” about the Reagans,the movie is laughably vicious in it’s portrayals.I mean,Cmon Ron Jr even hated it!The only redemptive quality this propaganda turkey has is that it reveals about how Reagan hatred still prevails among liberals and the depth of their dementia.

creatureofdust on January 19, 2009 at 1:40 AM

Don’t listen to them, Ed. Keep The Deer Hunter on this I come from the exact same kind of rust-belt town and I’ve been to actual wedding receptions that were shorter than the scene in The Deer Hunter!

Best quote about “Deer Hunter” from a contemporary review, and I wish I could remember who it was, “That wedding scene was so long, I felt like I should have brought a gift.”

Teacher in Tejas on January 19, 2009 at 1:59 AM

Other bad political/liberal films:
Buffalo Soldiers( 2001): Military people are thugs and thieves.Kelly’s Heroes did it better and funnier
Jarhead(2005)
The Way We Were (1973)
The Alamo( 2004):Just another Hollywood revisionist remake that says Crockett didn’t die fighting but was executed on his knees.
No Country For Old Men(2007): This is a distinctly UNAMERICAN film where the good guys are weak and lack the testicular fortitude to go after the bad guys.Evil eclipes good in this sort of inverted High Noon where Gary Cooper walks away instead of facing down the gunfighters.
Flag Of Our Fathers(2006)Another truly unpatriotic UNAMERICAN film!!Rather than focusing on the true heroos of both flag raisings and their stories, and on those men whose blood stained the beachsand at Iowa Jima, the movie would have us believe that the only significant thing about the iconic Marine Corps Memorial and the famous photo was how they were used for propaganda purposes and how those soldiers in the photo struggled with fame. Ugh!Eastwood self-admitted he intended this to be an anti-war film and as an antidote to patriotic war films of the past. It’s garbage.

creatureofdust on January 19, 2009 at 2:24 AM

I saw V for Vendetta and enjoyed it, but then I didn’t see the movie as attacking Bush no matter how many times the director attempted to say as much; if a political party like the BNP were to rise to power in Britan, I could easily imagine events unfolding like that. US isn’t quite as odious no matter what liberal critics of the GOP think.

As for Wall E, if you watch the movie with assorted hypersensitivities, you will find “propaganda” in the movie, which isn’t any different from other films either.

h0mi on January 19, 2009 at 4:54 AM

‘I’m sorry, Children of Men?It was a great story but if you trying to pass it up as liberal propaganda against Bush you are reading too much into it.’

Are you freaking kidding? Reading too much into it? This piece of crapola was packed full of overt, very specific Bush bashing. Subtle little things like the Stop Bush! sign with the big graphic splat of blood. And the Don’t Attack Iraq sign and the Abu Gharib images. And that’s just the overt stuff.

kit9 on January 19, 2009 at 5:44 AM

Here’s one I haven’t seen listed: Falling Down

From the link: “An unemployed defense worker frustrated with the various flaws he sees in society, begins to psychotically and violently lash out against them.”

Defense contract worker = bad; unemployed defense contract worker = evil and murderous.

RickZ on January 19, 2009 at 6:16 AM

Link didn’t work.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106856/

RickZ on January 19, 2009 at 6:17 AM

Defense contract worker = bad; unemployed defense contract worker = evil and murderous.

Shorter version (actually, the real shorthand used at the time) = Angry White Man

rhodeymark on January 19, 2009 at 7:47 AM

Are you freaking kidding? Reading too much into it? This piece of crapola was packed full of overt, very specific Bush bashing. Subtle little things like the Stop Bush! sign with the big graphic splat of blood. And the Don’t Attack Iraq sign and the Abu Gharib images. And that’s just the overt stuff.

kit9 on January 19, 2009 at 5:44 AM

So, graffitti that we see everyday depicted in a movie makes that movie left wing?

We want our movies to be close to real life then when they are we complain about it.

Background scenery does not a message make.

Pcoop on January 19, 2009 at 7:49 AM

On Deadly Ground:

Set in Alaska. Big Oil, Inc., builds a refinery with a drilling rig in the middle of it. Caring not for the environment, safety, or any other than profit, the owner decides to skimp on the “Blow Out Preventer,” which has as its only function to keep the drilling rig from blowing up. Seagal destroys the refinery which is somehow supposed to save everyone. I would think they will be less thankful when no one has a job.

Last scene is Seagal blathering on and on about every stereotypical left wing thing you can imagine. This movie was so bad, that even movies being shown on adjacent screens had to have a star removed from their ratings.

Wino on January 19, 2009 at 7:57 AM

So far, I have not seen the obvious. A movie giving Stone his trifecta:

W!!!!

themistocles on January 19, 2009 at 8:02 AM

The Right tends to glorify Israel, even now as they’re purposefully bombing civilian targets in order to terrorize the people of Gaza (Shimon Peres said it, not me). The truth is that both sides are immoral.
Mark Jaquith on January 18, 2009 at 11:57 PM

I went on the link you provided and Shimon Peres says no such thing.
This thread isn’t about the Israeli/Gaza conflict so I’ll just say that to sum everything up in these two neat little sentence “Both sides have no respect for human life. Both sides have murdered innocents and committed atrocities out of blind rage.” is the kind of moral equivocation and nuanced handwringing that will surely lead to Western civilizations downfall against Islam.

CarolynM on January 19, 2009 at 8:15 AM

How about “Clockwork Orange”?

lionheart on January 19, 2009 at 8:17 AM

What part of DIDI MAU don’t you understand?

HAHAHA OH WOW on January 19, 2009 at 8:23 AM

Wino on January 19, 2009 at 7:57 AM

Dude, “On Deadly Ground” is pure gold. One of the worst movies ever made, yet so bad it’s excellent.

Superman 4: The Quest For Peace has yet to be mentioned.

Krydor on January 19, 2009 at 8:25 AM

Hey, stop bashing The Dreamers. Have you seen the rack on that girl?

fossten on January 19, 2009 at 8:27 AM

Try “Fahrenheit 451″, a book burning odyssey that gave credence to Ken Keasy getting his Merry Pranksters onto the Big Yellow Bus to seek solitude at hideaways in Big Sur. Many of Pranksters were simply lost (mentally disoriented) or just avoiding prosecution for street crimes.

MSGTAS on January 19, 2009 at 8:43 AM

The Sum of All Fears – Villians were changed from Muslims to.. Left over Nazis? Wha? This is the only way Hollywood does Clancy i guess.

Star Wars Episode 1-3 – Lame lame lame attempts by the director and the cast to poke at Bush. They should have focused their energy on making better movies

I vaguely remember a few childrens movies in there that were the typical enviro-hyper nonsense that Hollyweird supplies. Little kids fighting evil oil tycoons to save Owls or some garbage. Can anyone name any?

tflst5 on January 19, 2009 at 9:07 AM

The list of “really bad” is getting so long that we should divide it into 1)a total turkey and 2)a good watch if you can stand the politics.

duff65 on January 19, 2009 at 9:22 AM

The top two in recent years are probably the Day After Tommorow and V for Vendetta. Blatant, hysteric, propaganda.

Any movie attempting to portray Che in a good light deserves mention too. What a bizarro world we live in. 10 years from now we could see “Mao” or “My Uncle Stalin” and it would feel natural.

tflst5 on January 19, 2009 at 9:26 AM

Agree with your list Ed, except JFK. JFK was a great movie in my book.

Maxx on January 19, 2009 at 9:36 AM

I can’t agree with Children of Men. There seems to be a good bit of social moral story there, but its a dystopian story anyway and didn’t seem anti-Bush to me. With Michael Caine’s character, there is a good bit of liberalism and leftist blabber, but there is some fantastic camera work in this film. Of note, the scene where the main protagonist is trying to enter an apartment complex to fetch the pregnant girl, and someone is shot as he moves through a bus. Blood splatters on the camera lens and the scene continues with the camera man trailing Clive Owen and the blood splatter remains. It gave it a very “live reporter at the front lines” feel to the scene.

Also, I can’t agree with V For Vendetta. Another dystopian theme, but its based upon a comic book. There seems to be strong anti-conservative slant, but that’s true for a lot of dystopian stories (see Clockwork Orange, 1984, Brazil, et al.). What’s odd is that you rarely see a dystopian/anti-hero story where the dystopia is caused by liberalism, or socialism. Mentioning that, it makes me think that I need to go back and review the previous topic about “Best Political Movies” and see if Red Dawn is mentioned (Wolverines!).

Did anyone mention any of Michael Moore’s movies? How about that travesty by George Clooney, Syriana or perhaps Good Night, and Good Luck?

Geministorm on January 19, 2009 at 9:55 AM

Star Wars Episode 1-3 – Lame lame lame attempts by the director and the cast to poke at Bush. They should have focused their energy on making better movies

What’s funny is how now you can kind of re-interpret parts of those movies to fit today.

When Obama gave his election speech in Chicago, I quoted the third movie on my facebook.

“So this is how liberty dies…with thunderous applause.”

Pcoop on January 19, 2009 at 10:16 AM

Not mentioned, because it’s dreck is seepgae-like,but “Day The Earth Stood Still” turns out to be an enviro-nut preach-fest.

PJ Emeritus on January 19, 2009 at 10:27 AM

Billy Jack and also The Trial of Billy Jack. People watching these in theatres were taken by ambulance to emergency rooms to be treated for pathological boredom.

whitetop on January 19, 2009 at 10:29 AM

At least you didn’t limit the size of the list, because it’s long with 9 out of 10, or probably closer to 98 out of 100 are crapful.

kirkill on January 19, 2009 at 10:31 AM

I think the only movies I’ve seen that are mentioned are China Syndrome and the Deer Hunter…but I used to fall asleep in the theater too…

kirkill on January 19, 2009 at 10:40 AM

Nobody mentioned Dances With Wolves?

Highest on my list are movies aimed at kids like Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron, or Fern Gully.

They all teach nothing but nature worship and hatred of modern society (America)

sgtpusmc on January 19, 2009 at 10:47 AM

I definitely think that Syriana has to be on this list.

Big Oil = EVIL (muhahahahaha!).
US = minions of Satan and the pawns of Big Oil.

Really, the idea that the CIA is bad while the controlling muslim emirs who own their countries’ oil reserves are innocent rubes who are being taken advantage of by the US and big oil is just so ridiculous Lucy! Plus, you have the added bonus of oil companies firing 1000s of immigrant workers when contracts don’t go through. Who would have thought that capitalism and the US could be so completely evil? Oh yeah, the Georges, Lucas and Looney-Clooney.

Geministorm on January 19, 2009 at 10:55 AM

See, this is what’s both fun and annoying about approaching films looking for a political bent on them. It can be fun to sit down and go ‘alright, so how can I find bias of X Y or Z variety in this film’.. and at the same time I sometimes find it excruciating to enjoy a film only to hear people bitching about it’s ‘under/overtones’ that I wasn’t even paying attention to and, chances are, weren’t even there anyway.

As someone else mentioned, I thought Children of Men could’ve been argued as a ‘conservative’ movie based on the whole ‘pro-life’ slant that you could, potentially, read into it. Star Wars 1-3? Jedi Council seemed pretty UN-ish to me, dontchaknow. And look what happened when everyone relied on them to take care of things.

So on and so on.

Unless, of course, we are talking about the ‘worst movies’ of the last 50 years… conservative or liberal or anything else.

I doubt we are, though.

Reaps on January 19, 2009 at 10:59 AM

I’d like to add War, Inc. to the list. Worst movie I’ve seen in years. Had to turn it off due to the ridiculous Liberal narrative. John and Joan Cusack earned their commie stripes in this one.

BiasedGirl on January 19, 2009 at 11:14 AM

One other point about Children of Men, the movie really does slam society for being so celebrity crazed. There was also a strong sentiment against messing with nature and fooling around with the reproductive cycle. I took that as a jibe at stem cell research and cloning or DNA manipulation for healthier births. If you look at the film from that angle, it is much more conservative. Society and law/government is breaking down because the usefulness of the government is to protect its citizenry. If the citizens recognize that humanity is dying out, then there is no use for government anymore. That is more of a sociological examination than a political comment I think.

I certainly don’t think that Children of Men was a ‘bad’ film, since I bought the DVD and have recommended it to a few friends.

Geministorm on January 19, 2009 at 11:14 AM

I second War, Inc. Unwatchable. I could feel the plot twist coming, but then I thought, “Hey, that’s my intestines”.

Peri Winkle on January 19, 2009 at 11:20 AM

What about “The Day the Earth Stood Still.” (remake more than the original.) It was basically a liberal paint by numbers in movie format.

Chubbs65 on January 19, 2009 at 11:22 AM

One thing that always got me about “China Syndrome” is at the end, the plants safety equipment worked, as advertised. Even without operator intervention, when the quake hit, the plant safely shut down, injuring no one.

Just how the heck this movie came to be viewed as “anti-nuclear” is beyond me.

MarkTheGreat on January 19, 2009 at 11:24 AM

It isn’t out yet, but I would be greatly surprised if “Frost-Nixon” does not qualify for this list.

I apologize if it’s already been nominated, but I’m not going to review 6 pages of comments in order to check.

MarkTheGreat on January 19, 2009 at 11:26 AM

‘So, graffitti that we see everyday depicted in a movie makes that movie left wing? We want our movies to be close to real life then when they are we complain about it.Background scenery does not a message make.’

I honestly don’t know where to begin with this. Who said anything about grafitti? The Abu Gharib image was an actual man in the film with a hood over his head in a cage holding his arms out just like, you know, the Abu Gharib prisoner. How could you have possibly missed that? And, the movie doesn’t reflect life in 2008, it’s supposed to reflect life in 2030 or whatever so why in the effing world would they have a character with a Stop Bush sign in his house? Because, the filmmaker is not so subtly drawing direct paralells to today and telling the audience that evil men like Bush directly led to the grim future he is depicting on film. A horrible world where mankind is paying for the evil deeds of past men(hello, George!) who raped the earth, brutalized the innocent, and inflicted horrible violence on the world. Among other evils, of course. And, please direct me to your ‘everyday’ world where the streets are lined with anti Bush grafitti besides a loony left parade? And, finally, background scenery in a film most certainly DOES a message make. You think those images just happened by accident? The filmmaker wasn’t aware of it? The director, with great deliberation, put those scenes and images in the film to make a point and shove his political views down our throats.

kit9 on January 19, 2009 at 11:27 AM

V for Vendetta is a pure libertarian flick

What’s libertarian about the Koran, the book that the “fascist” govt. in the film was banning and the stupid gay guy revered so highly?

Disturb the Universe on January 19, 2009 at 11:27 AM

I disagree about the movie ‘Nixon’. yes it was meant to be a hatchet job on Nixon but for some reason I had more respect for nixon not less after seeing this film. One of my favorites
Nixon farewell speech to his staff after he resigned was one of the best I have ever heard. One of the most manly things I have ever seen.
Here is a link
http://www.historyplace.com/speeches/nixon-farewell.htm
It is better to listen to it than to read it and you have to understand the context
The man was humilated for in public by the press and was hated by friend and foe but made this speech anyway.
In hindsight his presidency and even his faults look better and better to me. He at least understood the enemy was inside the gate.

kangjie on January 19, 2009 at 11:29 AM

Seriously, considering at least every third film released by Hollywood since the mid-60′s has had some kind of left-wing political message, making a list of the “worst” is almost impossible. Objectively speaking, “The China Syndrome” probably did the most social damage by instilling irrational paranoia about our best available oil alternative. “Silkwood” was a booster shot of the same inanity.

I’d rather go to back to discussing the best. A couple that (I think) got missed:

“1984″ A brilliant film adaptation of easily the most important political novel ever written, which everybody should see (especially now).

“Dirty Harry.” Not as political as some, but clearly a statement against the P.C. mindset that brought about Mirandization (not that I think Miranda’s a bad thing) and, worse, debilitating “protections” for even the most obviously guilty and most violent of criminals.

Blacklake on January 19, 2009 at 11:29 AM

“The Day After Tommorow” just plain sucked. Cool CGI…..but all else just blew.

A huge tidal wave is heading for the (unaware) heroine….it’s knocking everything down as it roars towards her. Jake Gyllenhall gets her attention and just says: “Look.” as he points towards the rushing wall of water.
Not: “JESUS H. CHRISTMAS!!!! GET THE HE**OUT OF THE WAY!!!!”
Just a simple: “Look.”

Seconds later he takes cover in the huge stone library building.
But before he goes deeper into the building, he stops and looks towards the front entrance he’d just come through.
“Hmmmm. Let me see if that enormous mountain of water is still punching it’s way down the street…..maybe it just stopped once I got past the front door….(*WOOOOOOSHHHHH!!!!)….Nope. There it is. I’d better continue running into the building…”

…..and, of course, he outruns it….

Sucked-out-loud.

guitarguy on January 19, 2009 at 11:32 AM

I thought V for Vendetta was a great movie. Don’t know why so many here hate it. I also disagree with a comment above about Flags of our Fathers. I didn’t think it was anti-war at all. It just tells the stories of the guys that raised the flag on Iwo Jima (sorry, but they were brought back from the Pacific to encourage people to buy war bonds, really happened). The story of Ira Hayes is truly tragic and is told better in the movie The Outsider. The movie was based off the book one of the Flag raisers son wrote (John Bradley).

I’ll expand on the list of terrible political movies:
1)W
2)Stop Loss
3)Rendition
4)Lions for Lambs

nazo311 on January 19, 2009 at 11:36 AM

I forgot, what do people think about Dave?

nazo311 on January 19, 2009 at 11:38 AM

Toss in Lucas’s ridiculous attempt to anti-Bush the Star Wars prequels by force-feeding Bushisms into young Darth Vader: “If you’re not with me, you’re against me,” and the Jedi master saying “Only Siths deal in absolutes (such as good and evil).”

That coming from a man who has made a fortune portraying the battle of absolutes against the dark side of the force.

Drivel.

John the Libertarian on January 19, 2009 at 11:51 AM

I saw Billy Jack when it first came out. Worst acting EVER! I was a high-school kid at the time and even at that age I could tell it was crap! I liked that ass kicking stuff though!

sabbott on January 19, 2009 at 11:51 AM

There was a movie that came out a few years ago.
It was filmed in Turkey.
I think Gary Bussey played a doctor who was harvesting organs for “the Jews”-supposedly it pushed the “blood libel” angle.
Anyone?

annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2009 at 12:22 AM

Here it is: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0493264/

abcurtis on January 19, 2009 at 11:55 AM

Last scene is Seagal blathering on and on about every stereotypical left wing thing you can imagine. This movie was so bad, that even movies being shown on adjacent screens had to have a star removed from their ratings.

Wino on January 19, 2009 at 7:57 AM

Didnt Seagal pretty much drop off of the movie radar after this stinkerooni?

abcurtis on January 19, 2009 at 11:59 AM

The thing that bugs me about movies like this, and books like 1984, is that the liberals go to these movies and think that they are movies warning about conservative extremism. Then they go home and pat themselves on the back for fighting for the freedom-lover Barry “H” Obama.

joe_doufu on January 19, 2009 at 12:30 AM

It should bug you, doesn’t it basically prove the book’s point? That people who have their head on straight in a sea of brainwashed individuals are usually needles in the haystack, few and far between.

LevStrauss on January 19, 2009 at 12:03 PM

I thought V for Vendetta was a great movie. Don’t know why so many here hate it.

Pro-Koran
Pro-Terrorism
Insufferable heroine with Stockholm Syndrome
Insufferable anti-hero with stupid Guy Fawlkes mask

Disturb the Universe on January 19, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Disturb the Universe on January 19, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Plus, based on a comic book that intended to portray Reagan and more specifically Thatcher as fascists.

It’s a crap movie.

emailnuevo on January 19, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Cider House Rules! One of the most blatantly pro-abortion movies ever. Teenage black girl is impregnated by her father, but can’t get an abortion… Kind, wonderful, compassionate abortionist Michael Caine breaks the law and saves the day. How much worse can you get?

missykat16 on January 19, 2009 at 12:40 PM

A few more suggestions for the list:

The Shooter: full-bore, hard-core leftist conspiracy lunacy, in which the evil Republicans conspire with evil Corporate Orcs to make a fortune in weapons sales, and murder innocent servicemen to do it.

Somehow you missed An Inconvenient Truth. ‘Nuff said.

Running Mates: The worst of a half-dozen Hollywood films released during the Clinton years with the message, “Hey, it’s ok if the President gets some on the side, he’s such a good and honest man.” Pull Eeeeeez. This film ruins my dictum, “If Laura Linney’s in it, it’s bound to have some redeeming virtue.”

Runaway Jury: John Grisham is a moon-howling coyote. This clever, formula trial flick reminds us that gun manufacturers delight in the murder of innocents.

Absence of Malice: another formula trial flick, in which the leftist symbolism is so heavy that the opposing counsel (James Mason) is actually referred to as “The Prince of Darkness.” Poor, drunken loser (but conscientious liberal) Paul Newman grows a spine like a conservative and stands up to medical professional bullies. Gag me.

The Sum of All Fears: Not all that bad, except that the Muslim terrorists in Tom Clancy’s novel transmogrify into ex-Soviet maniacs in the SMERSH tradition, an unforgivable and implausible PC alteration. Clancy’s Jack Ryan story gets mauled pretty badly as well.

Dave: Cute film, but as a testimony to the repetitive phenomenon of Democrat Presidents who love their wives for the camera but chase skirt IRL and who use the office for personal power enhancement, Hollywood gives us yet another film representation of a cynical Republican President who acts surprisingly like a Democrat, and of another “honest” leftist activist who Does The Right Thing.

War Games: In many ways an entertaining film and ground-breaking in its awareness of computer technology (for 1983, mind you,) the central message was “MAD makes no sense.” Bleah.

The Siege: Another leftist role reversal, in which a conservative general trashes the Constitution in order to save us from terrorists, and liberals Do The Right Thing and Save The Day again. It’s wonder they don’t all have dislocated shoulders from back-patting due to reflexive self-congratulation.

Enough for now. Got stuff to do.

philwynk on January 19, 2009 at 12:56 PM

The Election of 2008. Worst piece of liberal trash ever, with a horrible horrible ending.

Wait…that wasn’t a movie….

xblade on January 19, 2009 at 12:56 PM

“The Shooter: full-bore, hard-core leftist conspiracy lunacy, in which the evil Republicans conspire with evil Corporate Orcs to make a fortune in weapons sales, and murder innocent servicemen to do it.”

Dont forget the FBI agent wearing a Che T-Shirt.

Elric66 on January 19, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Cast my vote for Cider House Rules as well, a thoroughly contrived, thoroughly disingenuous tract for justifying the murder of babies. The fact that Toby McGuire’s and Michael Caine’s characters are so engaging makes it all that much more chilling.

philwynk on January 19, 2009 at 1:01 PM

Oh, for those who don’t understand why we’re so down on V for Vendetta, here’s a short version of the central premise:

Pedophile priests and drug-addicted religious conservatives are plotting with pharmaceutical companies to make millions by kidnapping soulful, empathetic homosexuals from their homes, impounding them, performing Mengele-like experiments on them using biological agents, and then releasing the results on an unsuspecting public in order to instill fear and usher in a Fourth Reich.

Any favorite leftist memes in there? Hmmmmm???

philwynk on January 19, 2009 at 1:06 PM

Kissing up to Islam while vilifying Christianity really got me in V for Vendetta. Very ironic because thats what the Brits are doing now. Only difference it will be imans and mullahs running things, not priests.

Elric66 on January 19, 2009 at 1:09 PM

Haven’t read all SIX pages of commentary, so I don’t know if anyone has done this yet, but I have to speak in defense of The Dreamers. Was it a terribly disturbing flick full of deviance? Good God, yes. However, I contend that their excesses, along with some well placed lines (delivered by the American whose name I forget) seem to indicate that their rebellion is nothing more than childish acting out by kids who have zero idea of how the real world works. If anything, by juxtaposing the parents homecoming with the finale of the Paris riots, the filmmaker seems to be inferring that, like the kids partying, the riots are nothing more than self indulgent youth behaving badly because the grownups have allowed them to. The “Paris Revolution” was a hothouse plant, unable to survive in the cold realities of life (as evidenced, for those who know the story, that it broke up (surprise!) when the school term started again. So much for socialist revolution!).

Meh, a full defense would take more space than I’ve got here. Suffice to say, there is more to the movie than it’s crass, hypersexualized appearance would have one believe. There is more depth and, dare I say, nuance to this film than a casual viewing would reveal. As a final note, I would like to mention that each of the children is an allegorical figure, especially the sister (art) and the brother (revolution). Mind, I’m not saying this is some great Conservative flick, just that it’s not the paean to socialism and the libertine life it may appear to be. Just think of the looks of disgust and disappointment on the oh-so-tolerant and understanding parents’ faces when they come home to find their house in shambles and you may get the idea.

Oh, and Eva Green is smokin’! But that had nothing whatsoever to do with this defense. Honest.

Militant Bibliophile on January 19, 2009 at 1:17 PM

Seven.
Everything is hopeless, and morality is evil. Lots of rubbing your nose in gruesome scenes.
Actually, just about any movie Keven Spacey is in has similar problems.

Count to 10 on January 19, 2009 at 1:24 PM

Great take on Munich Mark J.

dakine on January 19, 2009 at 2:31 PM

I am a fan of The Deer Hunter and don’t mind saying so. To me, that film is far more an in-depth character study, not really an anti-war film. To call it anti-war is to get fatally distracted from the film’s major thrust, I think. Even Stanley Myers’s beautiful theme song, “Cavatina”, tells us that that the film is all about the love between friends and the sorrow of personal loss. In particular DeNiro’s enigmatic and heroic character, who struggles to do the loving thing for his lost friends, makes the whole movie work for me.

Edouard on January 19, 2009 at 2:48 PM

A few here have suggested Dave belongs on this list of bad political movies. While it’s true that the “jobs bill” idea which figures prominently is a decidedly liberal policy notion, there are also other more conservative themes — most notably the idea that in order to fund a good program you should cut money from the budget to other less worthy programs, rather than just raise taxes or run a deficit. I think it’s a cute movie — one of my favorites, actually. And I like that a bipartisan cast of real-life politicos and commentators appeared in cameo roles.

acasilaco on January 19, 2009 at 3:11 PM

You missed a few. Among them are…

*The Handmaid’s Tale (1990), the movie based on the dystopic novel from bestselling Canadian writer Margaret Atwood. Essentially, it’s a cautionary tale of what the United States would look like if the Moral Majority seized control of government — or, more accurately, how a nitwit know-nothing foreign feminist thinks it would look like.

Here’s the first paragraph of the synopsis of the novel from CliffsNotes.com:

In the mid-1980s near Boston, Massachusetts, a cabal of right-wing fundamentalists murders the U.S. President and members of Congress, disenfranchises women by impounding their credit cards and denying them jobs and education, and sets up Gilead, a repressively conservative state bent on annihilating homosexuals, abortionists, and religious sects other than their own, and resettling Jews, old women, and nonwhite people in radioactive territory, known as the Colonies. Because nuclear and biological warfare has polluted vast areas, the population suffers a sharp decline in viable births and a rise in birth defects. Consequently, infertile and aged females, as well as homosexuals, are dispatched as clean-up crews in the Colonies. Fertile women involved in illicit liaisons or second marriages are apprehended, indoctrinated, and parceled out to Commanders of the secret police as Handmaids. These red-uniformed breeders live in seclusion and virtual slavery and are deprived of their real names and labeled with a patronym of the men who control their lives-as in “Ofcharles” and “Ofwarren.” The purpose of these polygynous relationships is the perpetuation of the white race, which carries on warfare in outlying areas in a struggle for supremacy.

*The Last Supper (1995) — A group of liberals who regularly dine together welcome a neighbor to the dinner table. He reveals himself to be a neo-Nazi, and is stabbed to death by one of the diners. They bury him in their backyard garden, and the corpse helps the growth of the tomatoes they grow. They get over their initial shock, and then strategize for ways to invite political opponents to dinner (male chauvinist, industrialist, a Farrakhan surrogate anti-semitic Muslim). They poison them with spiked beverages, watch as they choke and expire at the dinner table, and bury them in the garden. Their big target is Dr. Norman Arbuthnot, a cigar-smoking radio talkhost modeled on You-Know-Who.

L.N. Smithee on January 19, 2009 at 3:14 PM

Agree that Dave should not be on the list. The original President was corrupt and replaced with a decent VP. Corruption is certainly not a conservative virtue (although the liberals are better at ignoring it.)

Did I miss An Inconvenient Truth being mentioned. Lies which kids are forced to watch which may yet usher in the New World Order or at least Cap & Trade.

Christian Conservative on January 19, 2009 at 3:36 PM

I must issue a strong, heartfelt dissent to the inclusion of The China Syndrome on this list.

Contrary to popular belief, the movie was conceived and filmed long before the Three Mile Island incident nearly caused a meltdown in Pennsylvania. The studio pulled the movie from some theaters to avoid the appearance of trying to cash in on TMI, which happened within two weeks after the movie’s release.

The story was cobbled together not purely from hysterical activist hype, but also from the three-year-old real-life events involving whistleblowing nuke worker Karen Silkwood, who was killed in a car crash on her way to meet with a reporter to expose dangerous conditions at a Kerr-McGee plant. In any event, it’s only 50% about nukes — the remainder of the movie is a well-crafted, story about a TV reporter who feels she is trapped in a window-dressing role (Jane Fonda) and the love that a dedicated worker (Jack Lemmon, in a performance nothing short of brilliant) has for the nuke plant that he believes is a danger to the public due to cost-cutting, corporate corruption, and incompetence. Only one character — Michael Douglas’ cameraman — is an outright activist, and he just happens to be right this time. The dialogue sounds authentic and ending is chilling, but, it turns out, completely realistic.

The movie definitely has a point of view, but I don’t think it’s a “political movie.” No political parties are mentioned and even if you believe it is political, it’s not only not “bad,” it’s excellent. Thirty years after TMI, people who know what they’re talking about should be championing the safety of nuclear power. Don’t blame The China Syndrome if they either can’t or won’t.

L.N. Smithee on January 19, 2009 at 3:57 PM

The Alamo( 2004):Just another Hollywood revisionist remake that says Crockett didn’t die fighting but was executed on his knees.
creatureofdust on January 19, 2009 at 1:40 AM

…actually, the whole portrayal of Crockett in the latest version of The Alamo was as close to fact as Hollywood’s gotten in decades.

…mind you, the entire “on his knees” and after the battle representations rests on the disputed de la Pena description of the battle, but it is an interesting spin on a subject drowning in almost hagiographical portrayal.

…while not a documentary, the movie and the director (Johnnie Lee Hancock) deserve kudos for the respect they showed in making the film more true to the period, the terrain, and the time of year (Feb-Mar), as well as showing the principle characters in a more accurate, if less worshipful light…it only takes a little more effort to make an accurate historical drama instead of the standard Hollywood approximation of events (as in the John Wayne 1960 version)….

…any recent bio of Crockett (I recommend Wm. Davis’s Three Roads to the Alamo) hit Crockett even harder as a bit of a man caught up in his own image than the movie does…and, frankly, nobody really knows what happened on the 6th of March 1836…not really….

…had the movie shown folks escaping ’round the back of the chapel to be speared by lancers, and some of ‘em actually getting away, it would’ve been even more accurate…and would’ve been even more loudly boo’d as chipping away at the legends surrounding the defense and the defenders….

…now…I’m writing this about 40 miles south of the actual, factual, real, tourists-visit-daily Alamo, and revere what we know and some of what we don’t about that battle…but I don’t think that the movie does anything to besmerch the defenders, Texas or the country….

…I’m quite fond of the movie, and see the fact that it tanked at the box office — even here in the San Antonio area — as testament that we don’t teach history to our kids anymore, that we don’t teach American history properly anymore, and that — rather than busting the mythos of the Alamo Heroes and their effort — the movie was just too damned American for modern audiences, taught now from childhood to consider their homeland a force for evil in the world….

…doubt about the rightness of ones actions is standard fare in Hollywood today…look at the American half of Eastwood’s Iwo Jima films…look at any film showing Americans in conflict with anyone today or in the past…”OOOO…I might get killed…OOOO…I might have to kill someone”….

…doubt, after all, is the first and most reliable tool of the Devil….

Puritan1648 on January 19, 2009 at 4:03 PM

…I’d suggest the two latter Matrix films as lefty political dreck…the first film is one of those movies, like Back To The Future, which suffers from its sequels….

…they even included Cornell West in a throwaway cameo…probably because V. I. Lenin was unavailable for filming…and Naom Chomsky is probably in the flick as an uncredited extra…wouldn’t bet against it….

…after the second sequel came out, some movie-moron deadhead (how do you get those cushy jobs?) compared the Matrix series to the Lord Of The Rings series…he judged that the LOTR was racist, portraying the few darker-skinned actors as bad guys…while Matrix showed ‘em as heroes, and even showed lesbians being plucky and self-sacrificial…blah-blah-puke-blah….

…added to that, the sequels were absolutely dreadful…confused, trashy, and self-satisfied….

Puritan1648 on January 19, 2009 at 4:10 PM

The message of “There Will Be Blood” was clear: ambitious businessmen (especially in the oil business) are pure evil; religious people are manipulative and wicked also.

mgk321 on January 19, 2009 at 4:12 PM

…and, personal favorite feel-good lefty crap, both as a couple of movies and a play: Inherit The Wind.

…and, don’t forget Good Night And Good Luck, plucky Edward R. Murrow versus the perpetually evil Joe McCarthy (according to the recieved wisdom of our age)…in case, after 570+ postings, somebody’s forgotten it….

Puritan1648 on January 19, 2009 at 4:18 PM

WALL-E was awesome. One of the top three childrens movies evah! As a conservative I have no problem with the messages in this film. Don’t make a mess of the planet and don’t be fat lazy hypnotized slobs.

I especially love the whole silent film beginning.

birdhurd on January 18, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Amen, birdhurd. I was expecting something much more ham-handed than the general message of not ruining the planet and the social and physical dangers of a slothful life interacting with technology rather than individuals.

Yeah, I know. Pot, meet kettle.

L.N. Smithee on January 19, 2009 at 4:25 PM

Puritan 1648 wrote:

…I’d suggest the two latter Matrix films as lefty political dreck…the first film is one of those movies, like Back To The Future, which suffers from its sequels….

BTTF wasn’t supposed to have a sequel. On the DVD commentary, co-writer Bob Gale said that he and writer-director Robert Zemeckis didn’t even know the movie would be a hit until the first test audiences went bananas for it.

After BTTF‘s boffo opening weekend, and the subsequent release of Teen Wolf briefly made Michael J. Fox the biggest movie star on the planet, Zemeckis and Gale knew they had to come up with a sequel. IMHO, Part II was fair and Part III was great, but nothing matches up to the original.

If they had intended to leave an opening for a sequel, Gale said, they would have never put Marty’s gf Jennifer Parker (Claudia Wells) in the DeLorean because of the plot problems it would cause. In parts II and III, Jennifer was nearly a non-factor; she was either knocked out or unconscious for two-thirds of II and all but the final scenes of III.

L.N. Smithee on January 19, 2009 at 4:42 PM

I’m surprised no one (other than me) has mentioned Zabriskie Point and Blow-Up, probably because nobody remembers these 60′s stinkers that paved the way for the rest of the pack.

Alouette on January 19, 2009 at 7:38 PM

I confess I haven’t read all the comments either, but one that really pissed me off was Falling Down, the post-cold-war tale with (again) Michael Douglas, as a laid-off defense worker, irrelevant but still dangerous, who finds a bag of guns, and when he gets tired of shooting at the world in general, goes (for no particular reason) after his wife and kid. Pure hatred of Reagan-era America. We expect this crap from Douglas (China Syndrome, American President), but Robert Duvall Should be ashamed. Ashamed!!

wkgdyw on January 19, 2009 at 8:07 PM

> I forgot, what do people think about Dave?
.
.
Dave‘ wasn’t a bad movie at all. Kevin Kline brought it to life. I thought it showed GHW Bush as having bigger stones than he really did, but the portrayal of Bush wasn’t the point at all.
.
The point of Dave was the ‘one good man can make a difference’ theme (the validity of which is about to be tested, starting tomorrow). It was easy to see this one as light comic fiction with some stupid parts, and nothing more.
.
Another movie I liked that most of my friends hated was ‘Clear and Present Danger.’ I thought it was very well directed and photographed, and the producers went to the trouble of hiring a decent screenwriter to reduce a 1000 page book to a comprehensible movie. My friends couldn’t get past the jar of jelly beans on the president’s desk.
.

wkgdyw on January 19, 2009 at 8:29 PM

BR’s VOTE:

The Queen

Blatant misuse of the tragedy of a young mother dying, i.e. the death of Princess Diana to verbally slap Tony Blair {a.k.a. “W’s ‘Lap Dog’” LOL}; – a well-acted movie and some good film angles etc. but it’s all just a lead-up to give a back-hand to those who HAD to carry out the tough decisions after Sept. 11th.

Branch Rickey on January 19, 2009 at 8:42 PM

and Hugh Grant in “Love, Actually”. Ruined both films for me.

Renwaa on January 18, 2009 at 12:05 PM

+1

You Have No Idea!

Branch Rickey on January 19, 2009 at 8:46 PM

I’m calling it now: At some point Hollywood will roll out an Obama movie and Will Smith will play Barack Hussein Obama. It’s going to be the biggest puff piece imaginable.Only question is how long will they be able to restrain themselves from making it.

gumble on January 18, 2009 at 12:06 PM

12:17 – 20 Jan 2009?

Branch Rickey on January 19, 2009 at 8:47 PM

“The English Patient” – just hear me out. I hate hate hate this movie. But here’s the problem with it: Main characters are English. Setting is WWII. When the story is finally fleshed out, it turns out that the main guy betrayed the English to the NAZIS!! So essentially the movie is saying, it doesn’t matter if that you are betraying your own country to the worst kinds of criminals in the world because you’re in LURVE!!!!! Talk about the exact opposite storyline to the one in “Casablanca.”

mjk on January 18, 2009 at 12:20 PM

Thought I was the only one with the ?Patient. What a load of crap!

Branch Rickey on January 19, 2009 at 9:14 PM

We watched it as a dorm and had a “teach-in” type lecture. It does not get more political than that.

dentalque on January 18, 2009 at 12:48 PM

or as annoying as that! Feel for ya dentalque!

Branch Rickey on January 19, 2009 at 10:02 PM

Reds: Overwrought, over acted piece of garbage. Incredibly long and bad. I believe it actually helped Reagan make his case of the Soviet Union as an evil empire. I don’t think that is what Beatty intended.

Finally, figured out what movie others were referencing. I was in my teens when that came out and went to see and laugh through it and pissed off my hippie aunt. She got over it that I am a conservative.

I vote this too. How many votes do we each get Ed? Aye Aye Capt.

Branch Rickey on January 19, 2009 at 10:35 PM

Anyone remember Soylent Green…Massive overpopulation and greedy rich industrialists ruin the planet. The elderly are encouraged to submit to euthanasia to reduce the population. Evil powerful corporation reuses human corpses in the food supply to dupe the poor starving masses into cannablism. The only redeeming characteristic of this movie is the performance by Charlton Heston.

sothinbelle on January 19, 2009 at 10:40 PM

Pretty much anything by Spike Lee.

scrubbiedude on January 19, 2009 at 10:40 PM

V for Vendetta movie was a bastardization and an immature Bush hate fest. Even Alan Moore who’s pretty lefty criticized the idiot film makers for making it into a story of American liberal values vs. American conservative values when it was supposed to be a study of anarchy vs. tyranny in Britain.

Brains on January 19, 2009 at 10:43 PM

another vote: Erin Brokovich

GLADIATOR. Come on. Gladiator kicked ass.

jimmy the notable on January 18, 2009 at 2:09 PM

sorry jimmy, I fell asleep faster in that then I did in Patch Adams. Speaking of which: Patch Adams….

Branch Rickey on January 19, 2009 at 10:46 PM

I’m calling it now: At some point Hollywood will roll out an Obama movie and Will Smith will play Barack Hussein Obama. It’s going to be the biggest puff piece imaginable.Only question is how long will they be able to restrain themselves from making it.

gumble on January 18, 2009 at 12:06 PM

Why Will Smith? I Am Legend was one of the most refreshingly conservative and optimistic movies in recent history.

Brains on January 19, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Here it is… the absolute WORSTEST movie EVAH… although it hasn’t been made:

Michael Douglas and Jane Fonda are the lead protagonists (nope, not China Syndrome). Michael’s character is gay, and beaten up by some nazi-republican-rednecks. His nurse in the hospital, Fonda, chases down the crooks by following the money in their big oil scheme to take over the US and enslave everyone who isn’t white and male, and between 21 and 50.

It is co-written by Al Gore and Robin Williams; directed by Michael Moore; released under Disney label, with the CEO of Pepsi doing the introductory footnote before the movie.

Oh, and there’s some enviro-warming twist, and some whale killing in it, too.

Wino on January 19, 2009 at 11:10 PM

Reality versus actuality in action, folks.

I bet there isn’t a movie out there that SOMEone here manages to find an offensive liberal/anti-republican ‘theme’ in..

Reaps on January 19, 2009 at 11:34 PM

V for Vendetta was a vile, vile movie. Don’t let the libertarian window dressing fool you, it was a witches brew of anarchy and a borderline pro Al Qaeda movie. “Sometimes blowing up a building can change the world!” as a tag line? Please. Satanic.
The Contender: Nauseating. Gary Oldman was sandbagged as the conservative in the film. He was upset that that they cut all his scenes that made him more than a two dimensional character.
The American President: No. Dreck, but not offensively so. A spoonful of screenwriting sugar can make me eat my spinach. Or something like that.
Munich. Morally inverted. I enjoyed seeing the PLO get offed even though Spielberg didn’t want me to, so there’s that.
The Constant Gardener Would be yes, but for the fact that the movie is a laugh a minute. I was laughing at every scene where Ralph Fiennes was crying. Which means I was laughing quite a lot.
Children of Men Bad, but had some redeeming value. Book was very good. Of course the Hollywood adaptation of the book would miss the point of the book: the suicidal tendency of the West.

Worst of these? V for Vendetta. By a mile.

shazbat on January 19, 2009 at 11:53 PM

I really surprised nobody mentioned WAR INC. The John Cussack movie. I would also say the movie about how kids become eco terrorists to save an owl.

Patricksp on January 18, 2009 at 7:15 PM

If anyone is like me they have never even heard of it. And, “that’s a good thing.” – Martha S.

Branch Rickey on January 20, 2009 at 12:04 AM

I haven’t seen the movie and it was probably already mentioned but how about The Happening, where trees take revenge on mankind by releasing deadly toxins to “fight back” or some such nonsense…

Ozprey on January 20, 2009 at 12:11 AM

where trees take revenge on mankind by releasing deadly toxins to “fight back” or some such nonsense…

Ozprey on January 20, 2009 at 12:11 AM

Didn’t they throw apples at Dorothy and the Scarecrow?

Wino on January 20, 2009 at 12:17 AM

V for Vendetta was awesome!The top 5 worst political movies of all time included The Day After Tomorrow, JFK, Nixon, Bowling for Columbine and Fahrenheit 911

Cr4sh Dummy on January 20, 2009 at 11:31 AM

V for Vendetta was awesome!

It was an immature conservative hate fest, portraying patriotic and religious people as tyrants. Are we talking about two different movies?

Brains on January 20, 2009 at 12:14 PM

Also, I can’t agree with V For Vendetta. Another dystopian theme, but its based upon a comic book

No no no. Look into the differences between the comic and the movie and Alan Moore’s reaction to it.

Brains on January 20, 2009 at 12:17 PM

Comment pages: 1 4 5 6 7