Thursday, November 15, 2007

More on those Hollywood wizards and their knack for reading their audience:

Hollywood misreads response to War On Terror

Critics say the films' failure shows just how badly Hollywood has misread Americans' response to the war on terror, confusing "the public's war-weariness with their own carefully cultivated rage", as Jonah Goldberg, in the Houston Chronicle, put it.

"Hollywood and the left generally have misread this political discontent thinking there's a mandate for their trite Vietnam-era nostalgia for mass protest and Joan Baez specifying," he wrote.

"But few Americans are eager to spend their money to listen to the Jane Fonda set say, 'I told you so!' for two hours."


My personal fave:
Directors say war films make up for poor reporting

Brilliant! I know that if you are like me, you want to get your news by paying ten bucks to sit in a movie theatre and munch your popcorn while you get "real reporting" from people who are supposed to be paid to entertain you. No wonder these flicks are doing boffo biz.

"There is a very big difference between the Vietnam war, where we saw the pictures, and the Iraq war, where we don't," De Palma told Reuters at the Venice Film Festival, where "Redacted" premiered and where he won the best director award.


No pictures? What fucking rock have you been hiding under, Mr. DePalma?

Iraq Combat

or if you prefer (and I am sure many will):

Abu Ghraib

Haditha

No comments: