You Know, Because Hollywood’s Money Driven
Posted by Dirty Harry on Saturday, January 5th, 2008
Sundance programer Geoffrey Gilmore says that “Taking Chance is without question one of the most powerful and vital films ever made about Iraq — or, for that matter, the military — and yet its potency comes not from melodramatic or political statements but simply from its reality and execution.”
Don’t ask me to name an anti-Iraq film that someone, somewhere didn’t call “powerful” and “vital,” because even the awful Grace Is Gone was held up as something special by critics who knew better. After 16-and-counting hit jobs on our country, and worse, the military, the trust is gone. Long gone. Way gone. Gone, baby gone.
This one’s headed straight to HBO.
Filed in General |
gnon 05 Jan 2009 at 7:27 am 1I’d like to see someone make a list of (especially Disney-funded) movies that made less profit than “Prince Caspian”.
Because, y’know, it didn’t do well enough to warrant doing the next one. Even after Disney and Walden obligingly moved in from December to May so that it wouldn’t interfere with “The Water Horse.”
Looking forward to the next six movies in “The Water Horse” franchise. It’s worth losing Narnia just to get those.
Tar Heel Momon 05 Jan 2009 at 7:28 am 2Please read the article by Marine Maj. Strobl, about escorting Chance Phelps back home for burial in Wyoming. It’s one of the most moving pieces I have read about the enormous responsibility of performing this kind of escort:
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2004/04/taking_chance.html
I hold out hope that the movie will live up to Maj. Storbl’s account of his experience.
Tar Heel Momon 05 Jan 2009 at 7:29 am 3My bad - it’s LTC Strobl.
Morganon 05 Jan 2009 at 7:33 am 4“The trust is gone.”
That’s the same feeling I have about any Iraq war-themed film which comes out these days. You can just watch the trailers for these productions and know what’s going to be in them, so what’s the point of giving them a chance?
oLD gUYon 05 Jan 2009 at 8:10 am 5Just hit the “Not Interested” button at Netflix. Another small victory, thanks DH. gn, as the Narnia series continues it becomes more overtly Christian, so regardless of profit Hollywood has to do all it can to stop Walden from making these pictures. DH is right, money has nothing to do with it.
oLD gUYon 05 Jan 2009 at 8:11 am 6Are they still making the sequel to The Golden Compass? What was the profit on that?
GeronimoRumplestiltskinon 05 Jan 2009 at 8:14 am 7I find it hard to believe that one could make a “powerful and vital” film about the military when they have so little experience with it.
PerfectTommyon 05 Jan 2009 at 8:15 am 8“Most powerful and vital” film about Iraq is kind of like the most beautiful warthog.
Johnny Ed's Babyon 05 Jan 2009 at 8:22 am 9After Jan 20 all movies will show the military in a favorable light because they will be led by that great warrior and commander-in-chief Obama.
Suddenly water boarding will be a necessary tool to fight terrorism and Abu-Grahib messes will be the fault of the low level conservative officers that didn’t trust Obama as their leader. Gitmo will only hold the worst people in the world after Obama goes down there and personally picks out the innocents that were rounded up by Bush/Hitler/Cheney.
Obama will make the military to heights unknown in American history. Hollywood will turn Obama into a combination of Washington, Patton and John Wayne.
God help us.
gnon 05 Jan 2009 at 8:42 am 10oLD:
Walden appears to need the Narnia franchise, so here’s hoping. (I kind of lost respect for them after they pushed that “Ecoterrorism for Kids” movie whose name I forget). I don’t know the ins and outs of the kids’ contracts, etc, or what kind of window there is before it becomes impossible to make as planned.
Whether that’s good or not, I don’t know. Leaked script info suggested that they intended to stray even further away from the books. (DT as Battle Action Movie could hardly be anything but; but seriously - am I the only one in the world who finds all the Harry Potter movies exactly the same, with the same “Don’t tell the grown-ups our suspicions or the movie’s over” plot-driver?). As far as DT goes, the deal-breaker, the franchise-breaker, is the presence or absence of a certain line of dialogue at the very end. The director of “Amazing Grace” had me hopeful. The downplaying of Aslan and His authority at every opportunity by these scriptwriters did not.
There’s nothing money-driven at all about Hollywood. These people HAVE their money. What they need now is to be respected by their peers and invited to all the right cocktail parties. And I’m sad to say, but that’s not going to change. We have lost the culture-war, and now we’re shut out. All we can do now is sit back and watch the downward spiral; pop out the popcorn and watch as the left and the islamicists turn on each other, their mutual enemy out of the picture. I knew it was pretty much over in America from the moment the choice became Obama or McCain (though I got flayed alive here for saying it).
There was a moment, after the Passion, FoxFaith, and all that, when Christianity briefly became something to be sought after. We soon discovered that (1) the money-market wasn’t worth it to them on a personal level, and (2, the sadder reality) Christians don’t deserve good literature or good movies. It’s heartbreaking, but it’s true. They want nonfiction “preach to the choir” self-help crap, juvenile Left Behind fiction, and phonies like Rick Warren. The sincerity of a “Fireproof”, the casual background Christianity of “Empire of Lies” are few and far between. You can just see the editors and movie producers at work here. If it’s not blatant in-your-face Christianity for the choir, it’s simply easier to cut out such casual faith to reach “a broader audience.” There’s the Christian ghetto which Limosine Liberals would never drive their publishing and movie-making vehicles into for fear the stench would stick to their cars.
Funny how things are never too far to the left to preclude reaching “a broader audience.”
Stephanieon 05 Jan 2009 at 8:45 am 11GN are you smoking something. Caspian did better than all 16 Iraq war films combined I would think. Can someone check? Now I know you have issues with Religion and you don’t really understand CS Lewis which is where your rage (which is apparent in teh subtext of your smarmy post) but at least a little perspective, a little honesty instead of a disingenuous rant GN would be a little dunno more appropriate but maybe I am asking you for too much? Hmmmm
Kiton 05 Jan 2009 at 9:03 am 12Stephanie,
Prince Caspian may have made more money than all 16 Iraq war movies, but you can admit, that ain’t exactly a great feat. Heck, a kid’s lemonade stand could do that.
It made $141,621,490 in U.S., $278,027,596 foreign, which brings it to 419,649,086. With an opening weekend gross of about $55 mil. It cost $200 mil. The domestic gross failed to outdo the cost. Not good.
It gets worse when we look at the first film:
Lion, Witch, Wardrobe cost $180 mil to make. It made $291,710,957 domestically, $453,300,315 foreign, which brings it to a total of $745,011,272. It made almost twice the amount of money Prince Caspian did.
Prince Caspian underperformed big time. This, however, should come as no shock considering it came out the same week (roughly) as Indiana Jones IV and Iron Man.
Kiton 05 Jan 2009 at 9:08 am 13Good news (sorta): They are making Dawn Treader
I put it as “sorta good news” because I hated Dawn Treader. Not because of any religious themes, I just found it boring and dull (of course, I was also in Junior High at the time). If it were not for my grandmother and Anthony Hopkins, I would never have picked up another C.S. Lewis book again.
Stephanieon 05 Jan 2009 at 9:13 am 14Kit you really didn’t get what I was trying to do….gn wasn’t really giving a crap about how much money Caspian made and that it irrelevant he was aiming his ire at what it meant, the whole story and the reasons why CS Lewis wrote it. You have to start paying attention to subtext.
Kiton 05 Jan 2009 at 9:19 am 15Stephanie,
“he was aiming his ire at what it meant, the whole story and the reasons why CS Lewis wrote it.”
I never saw that in his post. I saw him upset because he felt that Christians TODAY prefer the juvenile crap that Christian filmmakers often turn out. Fireproof, Passion (despite its flaws), and Narnia 1 are the exception. (I also feel they show that he was wrong)
I didn’t see anything anti-Lewis in his post.
PerfectTommyon 05 Jan 2009 at 9:22 am 16Kit -Give “Dawn Treader” another shot. Eustace, the new kid, is a wonderful awful character who has a great character arc, and there are some great episodes in the book. I’m just not sure the narrative drive in the book would work in a film.
They ought to find a way to bring down the budget and not the Christian elements.
gn - the kiddie eco-terror flick was “Hooters”…er…or was it “Hoot”. Not that I give a…you know.
Kiton 05 Jan 2009 at 9:32 am 17PerfectTommy,
I probably will give it another shot. After all, I was in Junior High/Middle schoo when I read it. There were other factors for my dislike as well. The fact that it was practically assigned due to both the A.R. program (hated it) and our limited school library and I wanted to read the X-Files novels (don’t ask).
A fews years later, my grandmother finally got me to sit down and watch the amazing film THE SHADOWLANDS about C.S. Lewis and Joy Gresham. I decided to give Lewis another shot so I read some of Mere Christianity and a book about C.S. Lewis and his wife. Then, before the first Narnia film came out, I read THE LION THE WITCH AND THE WARDROBE. I liked it, though I didn’t think it was as good as LOTR (I’m more of Tolkein person).
Kiton 05 Jan 2009 at 9:33 am 18PerfectTommy,
Here is the trailer for the film SHADOWLANDS, which reintroduced me to C.S. Lewis:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLKS0XGRYi8
Stephanieon 05 Jan 2009 at 9:34 am 19Then you missed gn’s meaning. And he was aiming the “juvenile crap” at all Christian film making….
PerfectTommyon 05 Jan 2009 at 9:55 am 20Thanks, Kit. I did see that version of “Shadowlands” and thought Winger in particular was quite good. Have you seen the original BBC adaptation? I believe they stuck a little closer to the true story. Here’s a link:
http://www.netflix.com/Movie/Shadowlands/70028013?mqso=80020215&partid=Shadowlands
I do think people tend to have a Tolkien or Lewis bent, and I lean toward Lewis. But obviously, we’re discussing two of the greatest writers of the last century.
I’ll be interested to see if Walden ever is able to make the planned “Screwtape Letters” adaptation.
Kiton 05 Jan 2009 at 10:01 am 21PerfectTommy,
What would be neat would be a mini-series about either C.S. Lewis’s life from World War 1 to Joy. Detailing his friendship to J.R.R. Tolkein. Or at least a film about the Inklings.
You are right, they are two of the greatest writers of the last century.
They had differences.
Lewis was Protestant, Tolkein was Catholic. Tolkein was against divorce, Lewis married a divorcee. Tolkein despised allegory, Lewis wrote Narnia.
gnon 05 Jan 2009 at 10:07 am 22(GN are you smoking something. Caspian did better than all 16 Iraq war films combined I would think.)
Y’think?
Maybe I should have made that point or something.
maatkareon 05 Jan 2009 at 10:10 am 23Interestingly, Disney has pulled out of financing the 3rd Narnia flick. I didn’t see Caspian and it’s been decades since I read the books, but it’ll be interesting to see if they can pull it off cheaper if they can;t find another big financier. And Hollywood actually had an amazingly profitable year, Iraq loser movies aside. Slightely fewer attendees, but higher ticket prices. I checked out 6 flicks over my holiday break; all the multiplexes I went to were doing humming business across the board, from family stuff to the artsy fartsy flicks. gn is right–a lot of Hollywood HAS its money, so it can risk the failure of a boutique/Oscar bait film or two or three, with a Marley, Dark Knight, or even Four Christmases to pick up the slack. Personally I don’t see an Obama-led surge of pro-America military movies. In the new Recession/Depression I forsee a lot of meet-cute romantic comedies and a steady flow of superhero flicks. One thing’s for sure–everything will start being done on the cheap, and big stars will take deals a la Jim Carey–small or no paychecks in exchange for chunks of the gross.
Ronsonicon 05 Jan 2009 at 10:10 am 24My recommendation for some grown-up CS Lewis is The Screwtape Letters. Yes, very Christian, but very, very funny in a dark and beautiful way.
That is actually the movie I’m waiting for. And I’m hoping that the derailing of the Narnia movie doesn’t screw this one up.
gnon 05 Jan 2009 at 10:15 am 25Steph, I seriously don’t know what your problem is.
It should have obvious to a belgian hamster that I’m a major C.S. Lewis, pissed as hell that Hollywood won’t make serious Christian movies, that they’re looking for any excuse to dump the Narnia franchise (one, don’t let it hurt Water Horse, two, release it between Iron Man and Indiana Jones).
I seriously get the feeling that my posts pass through the Bizarro-world before you read them. Prince Caspian underperformed because Disney wanted it to underperform: it was marketed pathetically, it was moved so it wouldn’t hurt Water Horse, it was moved to the worst possible weekend of the year. They failed to market it to churches, etc. like they did LWW.
And how the heck do you get from “Damn them, the scriptwriters downplayed the Christian themes at every chance” to “He’s attacking Christians.” I guess I’ll have to read the rest of the thread first. As usual, I suppose I’m an imposter, yadda yadda. In any case, internet arguing, Special Olympics, et al. Have fun. Seek help.
gnon 05 Jan 2009 at 10:19 am 26Kit: See if you can find the British version of Shadowlands with Joss Ackland. I found it to be much superior. It seemed that from C.S. Lewis’ bio to the British version (never saw the play) to the Hopkins thing, it strayed a little more away from the truth each time, and had less of Lewis’ life and personality. Lewis was the ultimate outdoorsman (sheesh, did they read anything of his?) and they portrayed him like some kind of 40’s equivalent of a computer geek.
Bill Brandton 05 Jan 2009 at 10:20 am 27If making pictures is about making money who are the losers who perpetually fund these turkeys?
Maryon 05 Jan 2009 at 10:36 am 28I, uh…I read a certain gossip website called Entertainment Lawyer. It’s the only one I read, I swear.
Anyway, for what it’s worth, he revealed a bunch of his blind items on New Year’s. One was about a B-list actor who visited wounded military without telling any one, and he spend several hours there even though he had an event that night. Turned out to be Kevin Bacon. Now I kinda wonder if doing this movie spurred him to do that?
Stephanieon 05 Jan 2009 at 10:45 am 29gn anyone who has been reading this site for a while knew Dawn Treader was greenlighted. Thats my problem. And I don’t think they got The Lion, The Witch and the Wadrobe wrong. Whats your problem with it? It followed the story almost down to teh letter. I read Caspian once and from what I remmeber the movie was not bad. It suffered because it was out teh same weekend as Indiana Jones etc. Pretty sure if it had come out in December it would have been better recieved and yes it probably did make more than all the anti American films combined. And as for Shadowlands, I liked the Hopkins version….
pandaxon 05 Jan 2009 at 10:53 am 30I’m gonna hold off on this one till I get more info on it. That means DH giving it the smell test. I have my doubts and Hollywood has no else to blame. So far just about every movie they’ve done on Iraq is anti-war or a Bush bashing so they can thank themselves for me keeping my dollars in my wallet for this one. I’ve debated Hollywood’s anti-war stance with some of our resident liberals (miles, lexington) who all claim Hollywood is just going were the money is. They always change the arguement when you point how come they keep making them after the first few bombed and how come they never tried a pro-Iraq film to see if it made money.
Glennon 05 Jan 2009 at 11:47 am 31Bitch bitch bitch. Moan moan moan.
Does anyone see the irony here? Over a million American patriots have sacrificed their lives so that YOU (yes, YOU) have the right to produce any damn movie you please.
Left-wing, anti-American zealots have the balls to put their time, their money, and their energy toward promoting their beliefs. I hate their ideology and their use of deceit, but I have to give them credit where it is due: instead of sitting back and complaining, they DO SOMETHING to get their viewpoint in front of other people. And making a movie is not easy or cheap for anyone - and that includes the left.
Has anyone here, except for Jack Marino, ever lifted a finger and actually made their own war movie? Let’s see a show of hands.
Has anyone else (outside of Jack, DH, and myself) ever invested the time, money, and energy required to produce or direct ANY feature-length movie, of ANY topic. Let’s see a show of hands.
Oh, I see. There are “reasons” why you, personally, “are unable to” actually do anything:
1. Family obligations prohibit this sort of committment.
2. Work obligations prohibit this sort of committment.
3. I don’t live near anyone who can help me make a movie, and gosh, it’s so much trouble to move.
4. I have significant funds to invest, but I choose not to put my resources into a filmmaking venture. My financial objective is grow my wealth, pass it on to my children - you know, keep it in the family. And how is funding a movie going to help me do that?
5. I’m an avid golfer. Or, I’d rather just sit back and watch cable. What game is on tonight?
The truth is that the money and yes, even the talent, to produce pro-American war movies exists today, and those movies can be made today - and if they are any good at all, YES, they will be distributed and they will be watched. But those movies aren’t being made, probably won’t ever be made, because conservatives don’t make movies. Conservatives invest their time in “home and family,” and their money under a “disiplined, focused set of financial goals” that do not include the arts.
So, if you want to complain, at least direct your complaints to where they are deserved.
Danielon 05 Jan 2009 at 12:09 pm 32I don’t see one comment that actually says anything about this particular film’s trailer. Did anyone watch it? … Anyone? … Bueller?
I highly suspect that “Taking Chance” is filled with sucker punch after sucker punch. However, taking that trailer on face value, it looks quite moving. The one gripe I have about it is that it fails to show context; it just shows a dead Marine being taken home. And, as Left-Libs love to remind us poor benighted conservatives, context is everything.
Like everyone else here, I’d like to see Hollywood taking a greater interest in the American military, and stop showing them as either baby-killers or dead for no reason. It does not do our cause any good, however, to just go for the stones whenever Hollywood puts forth a product.
Ericon 05 Jan 2009 at 12:12 pm 33Long time lurker, first time poster
Just watched the trailer..
It has potential but it drives me nuts when they get military honors wrong. Per the voiceover in the trailer:
“The remains are to travel feet first when being transported from one point to another.”
I can’t speak for transport by vehicle but when in an aircraft, the head is at the front of the aircraft and feet face the rear of the aircraft AT ALL TIMES. I know because it is one of my duties in the Air Force.
While the movie may be great and non-political (who knows), to get something like this wrong bothers me a ton.
Ericon 05 Jan 2009 at 12:12 pm 34here’s the trailer…sorry
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtmiLdzzgGE
Dappa10on 05 Jan 2009 at 12:47 pm 35I am very hopefull that this film lives up to the short film that it is based on. The voice over for the short film was by the great Robert Duvall.
I just watched the trailer and again I’m very hopefull.
gnon 05 Jan 2009 at 12:54 pm 36(gn anyone who has been reading this site for a while knew Dawn Treader was greenlighted. Thats my problem.)
I hate to break this to you, Steph, but it’s dead. Disney pulled out. That’s my problem. Without that context, I guess you simply had no idea what I was talking about. Sorry for the confusion.
(And I don’t think they got The Lion, The Witch and the Wadrobe wrong. Whats your problem with it?)
Um, none? (Possibly when they implied that Aslan only knew who Peter was because Mr. Beaver had told him, and similar snarks downplaying His power.)
(It followed the story almost down to teh letter. I read Caspian once and from what I remmeber the movie was not bad.)
Yes, and I enjoyed it. That was my point. The DVDs are flying off the shelves, though you’d never know it.
They downplayed Aslan’s role considerably. Frankly, I thought it worked; they were changing it from a Revelation-type story (Aslan appears, beats bad guys) to a more Acts-type story (what do we do without Aslan) but it was a fair change. But again with the little snarks: We lose small but theologically important lines like Aslan is bigger because Lucy is older, etc. They made major changes to the story apart from that, but none that I had any problem with, and I thought it worked, apart from still having no idea what to do with Aslan. It actually is very important to the larger story that Susan is so obnoxious and pseudo-grownup in PC and is the last one to see Aslan.
( It suffered because it was out teh same weekend as Indiana Jones etc. Pretty sure if it had come out in December it would have been better recieved)
Do tell. But it would have hurt another release, as Disney and Walden said at the time. (I think the Water Horse has now been beaten to death. I liked this movie. Now I will always remember it as the movie that killed Narnia.)
(And as for Shadowlands, I liked the Hopkins version….)
I liked his performance. One line stuck with me, where Joy said that in the 40’s one was either a fascist trying to conquer the world or a communist trying to save it, and he quipped, “I must have been otherwise engaged.” But for the most part, they cut out everything Lewis about Lewis - very little of Narnia or his apologetics, except for a running gag implying he was a mere gasbag recycling the same speeches over and over. He was more of a “generic ivory tower professor who’s never seen the real world” trope, which the BBC version didn’t do.
Growltigeron 05 Jan 2009 at 1:05 pm 37I don’t have the numbers, but I suspect bashing America brings in money in the European markets.
Kiton 05 Jan 2009 at 1:10 pm 38gn,
I will have a look at the Ackland version. I have only sent the Hopkins version.
mrpitheron 05 Jan 2009 at 1:52 pm 39Getting away from the DT thread, JEB said: After Jan 20 all movies will show the military in a favorable light because they will be led by that great warrior and commander-in-chief Obama.
Probably not, but there is something to this. I seem to recall that Ron Silver said something along these lines when Clinton was inaugurated. I’m too lazy to look it up right now, but during the ceremonies he apparently looked up to see the fighter planes flying over and thought to himself (or so he said later) that those are our planes now. Right. Bubba takes over from GWHB and all’s right with the world. Silver had a post-9-11 awakening, but my guess is that there are plenty of folks who would echo his thoughts come Jan. 20.
pandaxon 05 Jan 2009 at 2:18 pm 40glen
O.K. time to put your money were your mouth is. Why don’t you organize some kind of investment group. You ask conservatives for money to produce a pro-war Iraq movie. People can invest any amount they want from 1.00 to whatever. Once the fund gets big enough to get a movie a going start to assemble the script writers and other talent to get it going. If you start this I pledge to donate/invest in the project.
the bookkeeperon 05 Jan 2009 at 2:19 pm 41This is so off topic, I apologize, but I watched Fail Safe (1964) this weekend and a bigger load of shit I never saw. I know Jane is a communist asswipe but I never really realized Henry Fonda was as bad, or worse. Seems like he really got into that role - apologetic President, “oooohh, wahhh, it’s our fault, I’ll incinerate New York to make up for it, wahh…”.
Puleezze. Anyway. Sorry. First and last time I’d wasted a couple of hours with a Fonda. And, growing up as an air force dependent during the sixties and seventies, even I could see where hollywood took liberties with military protocol. Is there an alltime “CRAP” award?? I nominate this film in at least the top five.
Carolynon 05 Jan 2009 at 2:26 pm 42Folks, I just saw ‘Prince Caspian’ on DVD. And I have to put in my two cents about why it didn’t do as well as the first movie.
“Prince Caspian” is not a well made film. It is badly directed, confusing and talky. The first movie moved in a direct line that swept you along with it. The second movie lurched this way and that, with the result that the confusion broke your concentration and thus your involvement with the film. The first movie had the children evolve from unhappy children into wise rulers - they were better people at the end. Whereas the second movie had them essentially be the same characters from beginning to end. The first movie moved steadily and skillfully towards a climax - whereas the second lurched this way and that towards the end, clearly sacrificing moments that could have been climactic because the director lacked the skills to film them properly. Finally, Prince Caspian himself was without any special talents which would have justified my interest in him. I mean, Harry Potter can fly a broom and speak Parseltongue, Indiana Jones can crack a whip and shoot people who aim swords at him, etc. These characters DO something, they have a special skill that makes them unique. But now Prince Caspian. If he hadn’t had a crown, he wouldn’t have been anything special at all (except for that weird accent). IOW, he was a prince who wasn’t ‘princely’, if you get what I mean.
As I said, ‘Prince Caspian’ underperformed the first film because it wasn’t as well made.
My two cents.
Stephanieon 05 Jan 2009 at 2:55 pm 43I think sticking to December openings is a better idea than trying to ride the Summer blockbuster thingy. Somehow Narnia seems a better Christmas choice.
Tar Heel Momon 05 Jan 2009 at 2:56 pm 44I’m telling you, you’ve GOT to read this, the source material for Taking Chance, by Marine LTC Strobl (same link I posted upthread):
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2004/04/taking_chance.html
I don’t think there are going to be lots of sucker punches in this one. Just from watching the trailer, my impression is that it’s about the respect that LCPL Phelps received from ordinary Americans on his final journey. There may be a few digs in there that directly relate to the war but I’m thinking this is more a personal film than a political one.
Zundfolgeon 05 Jan 2009 at 3:30 pm 45I don’t trust Hollywood. I don’t trust HBO.
But based on watching the trailer and knowing the story they’re supposed to be telling, there’s a possibility that Taking Chance may be worth watching. If this story is done correctly and accurately it’ll probably end up being the most conservative film of the decade.
One of the ironies I see constantly is how Hollywood and the MSM show the deaths of our servicemen and women as a means of beating up on the military and trying to increase anti-war sentiment, but they end up honoring our military dead and reminding the rest of us of what their service and sacrifice means.
I live in Colorado Springs, and most of the local TV networks here are infested with leftist idiots (despite the community here being more conservative and pro-military than the rest of the country). They constantly shove the photos of our fallen soldiers in our faces … gleefully report death tolls and focus heavy attention on those returning soldiers that have trouble coming back to civilian life. But the end result (at least of the profiles of dead Ft Carson soldiers) is to harden the resolve of local people in their support for the war.
So even if the goal of the filmmakers on Taking Chance is to make another Grace is Gone, I think they may fail.
Glennon 05 Jan 2009 at 3:38 pm 46Pandax: My money is where my mouth is. I am spending >$150,000 of my own money (earned the old fashioned way, no wealthy relatives) to direct a documentary called Fatty. We will be in post 6/1/09. Because I have no traditional film background (no film school, moved to LA from Virginia two years ago) I am attempting to get one commercial success under my belt and make as many contacts as I can through this project.
www.fattythemovie.com
After this learning experience, I will be in a better position to raise money for two specs I work on at night. One is a political thriller, and the other is a dark comedy with a racial theme - both are as politically incorrect as DH himself.
I may be wasting my time and money. If you see me living in a cardboard box off Santa Monica Blvd, this will be the reason.
Over the past three years I have occassionally asked for interest in forming a coservative writers group in LA - read each other, get actors together for a table reading, etc.
No interest whatsoever.
kinlawon 05 Jan 2009 at 4:06 pm 47Well said Carolyn.
I could not have analyzed it as well as you just have, but Caspian just did not grab hold of me either, not like Narnia did (which was an awesome movie).
And I wanted to like it, wanted it to be good.
UncleSamWifeyon 05 Jan 2009 at 4:29 pm 48I haven’t had a chance to read the account of delievering a body to a family member.
But it is the doorbell ring we all brace each other for,and it is the thoughts that plague us.
I recieved a great card about ‘Hazardous Duty’ today and it stated it well…You seemingly have to prepare for your spouse’s death while preparing for the homecoming celebration,and do it with a smile on your face. You live your life not wanting that car to pull up to your house but you still pack care packages,and buy that person Christmas presents they’ll open 5 months later.
My husband and I have both time and time again given Hollywood the chance to portray our lives in reality for civilians,and they always disappoint (see MTV’s Stoploss and In the Valley of Elah.)
Someone needs to remake The Best Years of Our Lives—the infamous diner scene still brings me to tears and could easily be made relatable to our lives.
P.S.- If my husband and I do watch this…I’m sure he will nitpick the uniforms apart as Hollywood (even American Carol) gets the uniforms wrong…ALWAYS…haha.
Sharon Fergusonon 05 Jan 2009 at 4:30 pm 49Glenn - I dont now, nor do I EVER aspire to be involved in movies, beyond the general agreement to plunk down half my daughter’s college savings (so to speak) just to visit the theatre once or twice a year, grit my teeth against the extremely rude people who have never learned the difference between a public place and their own filthy living rooms. I dont even want to be an extra in a movie. While it looks like it would be a lot of fun, I dont want to go through any more effort than to support the movies I think are worth my while - so if its all right with you I am going to sidestep that post you direct at those who ARE involved. I bitch and complain because it has become increasingly harder to WANT to support movies of a certain bent because YES, there are a number of so-called “Christian films” who miss the clue entirely when it comes to actually telling a story without comparing it to a dogma they espouse. Since we are talking Tolkien vs Lewis here, all too many “Christian” writers/producers/creators want to use movies as allegory - and personally, I cant stand allegory. Which means I believe what Tolkien had to say about it (not complimentary.) A major reason why the Inklings got together was to discuss how fairy tales imparted deeper messages…I think the most succinct way of explaining it was what Emily Dickenson once said in a poem “tell the truth, but tell it slant.” THATS what fairy tales were for. And I could easily criticize how a lot of so-called Christian story-tellers try to be too clever by half in their desire to MAKE DARN sure their creation measures up to a particular dogma. Not doctrine…DOGMA. And I think THIS is the case because we no longer have any generations of people raised on ACTUAL fairy tales…just the watered down crap that Disney and revisionists have foisted on the public. Ever read the REAL fairytales? makes some of our modern horror stories look like Bambi…
Glennon 05 Jan 2009 at 6:22 pm 50Sharon,
The type of movie I have in mind would be written like The Patriot, Gettysburg, or We Were Soldiers - films that do not flinch about showing the horrors and distruction wrought by war, yet tell a story of duty and patriotism without being simplistic or corny.
My main point is that making a movie, any movie, requires tremendous sacrifice - regardless of contacts or who is putting up the money. There are thousands of talented leftists who devote their lives to film, even though many of them can be making more money for less aggrevation in some other industry (I’m talking about writers, below the line crew members, and most producers - not A-listers).
Our side seems to have a shortage of people willing to do what it takes to change Hollywood. This is a huge issue, and my fondest hope is that we can change it over the next few years.
Ohio Wolverine Momon 05 Jan 2009 at 6:25 pm 51Carolyn, my mom had never seen LWW, and she loved Caspian; I thought it was an okay time-filler, but not up to LWW…but that story chronicled the development of four children, so I think that helped. Great side-kicks in both.
Still enjoyed Caspian over most of the other drivel offered.
And I am still hopeful about Dawn Treader:
Disney Pulls Out of Third “Narnia” Film
29 December 2008 1:51 PM, PST |
Walt Disney Pictures and Walden Media have confirmed that for budgetary and logistical reasons the Burbank-based studio is not exercising its option to co-produce and co-finance “The Chronicles Of Narnia: The Voyage Of The Dawn Treader” with Walden. The Hollywood Reporter says the third installment was in preproduction and set for a spring shoot for a planned May 2010 release. The development puts the participation of the talent attached in doubt, adds the trade. Michael Apted was on board to direct a script by Steven Knight. The key players of the second installment, “Prince Caspian” — Ben Barnes, Georgie Henley, William Moseley and Anna Popplewell — were to return for the third film. Walden has a strong relationship with the C.S. Lewis estate and will shop “Treader” in hopes…
fingers crossed!
And I am working on a screenplay from Ohio; talking to my old network of contacts in MI and IL who have produced work…so I’m trying! I have Glen’s email and I will definitely keep him posted—he promised to read my draft!
DH—also known as our beloved John Nolte—-going to Mass tomorrow morning to pray for your continued success. You are a talented man and a generous soul, and I know you won’t need my prayers, but I offer them anyway, along with my heartfelt thanks….Big Hollywood will be big fun, but I will miss my friends here at DHP—will have to learn more about facebook and visits DHP friends there.
Belated Happy New Year, everyone—the adventure begins tomorrow!
Jeff Brokawon 05 Jan 2009 at 9:53 pm 52I really, really hope the film version of “Taking Chance” tells this story straight without embellishing it in any way. It sure doesn’t need any; the story is powerful and moving exactly as originally posted at blackfive.net, where I read it in 2004.
The fact that Kevin Bacon is in it seems like a good sign to me. I’ve never gotten any kind of anti-military vibe from him, and he played a JAG in “A Few Honest Men”, straight up. He seems like good people.
I think we owe it to the memory of Chance Phelps, and LTC Strobl, to give it a fair shot.
Lord Jiggyon 06 Jan 2009 at 8:40 am 53Kevin Bacon is one of the bravest actors we have around. I’d probably give the film a chance, based on his participation.
I liked Prince Caspian, for whatever it’s worth.