Wednesday, July 27, 2016

TRAILERS: Jason Bourne, American Pastoral, Ben-Hur, Sausage Party, Level Up, Split, Don't Breathe

So, how did Star Trek Beyond do after they revealed that Sulu was gay? Not good. Let's look at the numbers: in 2009, when Star Trek, the first in the series came out (with a new cast that had no TV following) $75.2 million, and Star Trek Into Darkness got $70.2 million (that doesn't seem right; I am pretty confident they were expecting $100 million and that it came in at $85, I could be wrong, but I think these numbers are too low) and Star Trek Beyond pulled in $59.3, the lowest of the three films. Why? It is possible that the loss of JJ Abrams directing had an effect on film-goers, but I think it was the publicized decision to make Sulu gay (in spite of them cutting out the gay kiss scene from the film). So, even with their low-expectations for opening, the film didn't even manage a full $60 million, and while it's not a bomb, it's certainly not a success. There are (at least) two reasons why liberals would want to sabotage Star Trek: first, the crew is predominantly white and male,not to mention the captain, James Kirk, is white and male and, traditionally, highly individualistic, meaning, worthy-of-the-wrath-of-liberals. So, as we saw in The Conjuring 2: the Enfield Poltergeist, white men have been demonized by the current political administration, not just nationally, but internationally as well. So that's the first reason liberals would want Star Trek to perform poorly; the second reason is that Star Trek is iconic, totally iconic, and the anthem of America's presence in space and, prior to 2008, commitment to space exploration. We've previously discussed how space films are like Westerns, and nothing says America like the old West (which is probably what the remake of The Magnificent Seven is going after; my mom pointed out that the villain in the original American re-make was a Mexican, so changing the Denzel Washington-Chris Pratt collaboration to an industrialist clearly signifies they were afraid of offending the Mexicans; this doesn't straight out mean it's going to be pro-socialist, but there are a lot of factors adding up on the liberal side of the tally sheet). So, in attacking traditional American icons, like The Lone Ranger, Marvel comic book heroes and The Legend Of Tarzan, liberals erode the history of identity for American culture, we are robbed of those qualities which those characters embody and represent: leadership, courage, morality and justice. This is exactly what liberals want.
Opening this weekend is Jason Bourne (Matt Damon); we haven't really discussed it. Prior to Ridley Scott's The Martian, Damon had become a box office bomb, so when it was announced he was doing another Bourne film (in spite of definitive statements that he wouldn't return to the Bourne character) it was obvious that he was re-visiting his last success and trying to capitalize on that once more (which, given what a socialist he is, is ironic, to say the least). And of course, Jeremy Renner and fans got screwed out of the follow-up to The Bourne Legacy which was excellent. Here is a compilation of the trailers/clips which have been released, and when it comes down to it, there are basically two lines I am concerned about going into the film:
The first is when asked what his purpose is in the city and he responds, "Business," and the second is, when he says he volunteered based on a lie that his father had been killed by terrorists. Knowing that liberals are using terrorism to re-direct attention back to issues like the environment and Black Lives Matter, that Jason Bourne appears to not be taking on terrorism, but blaming "business" and the basic structure of America for what happened (and I'm not saying he wasn't manipulated, but it's also the film makers creating the scenario to fit in their agenda, whatever that agenda may or may not be). I'm going to see it Friday and will get the post up asap. This first trailer will most likely be a pro-socialist film, however, it perfectly illustrates what is happening and what I have been writing that is happening:
The opening scene is very much small-town America: a mom-and-pop store with a post office, the American flag, a quiet day,... and now, a home-grown terrorist attack. We won't say Dakota Fanning's character has a perfect life, but growing up on a farm and having her needs supplied for is a nice, comfortable life. She still grows up to hate this country and her family. The film looks interesting, but it might be insufferable, but it highlights what is happening: the kids who were given such a good life are not revolting against it. A few weeks ago, I mentioned that I thought the remake of Ben-Hur was going to be pro-socialist; they have released the third trailer for the film:
This is actually quite serious.
At 0:36, Morgan Freeman's character says, "It will start a revolution that will free us all." This is basically being set up like The Hunger Games (the first film), and that's not such a big deal, but what is an enormous deal is the presence of Jesus in the film. Now, like Warcraft and Ghostbusters, it's possible that there are elements in the film which is going to sway the outcome, and I am keeping that in mind; what's at stake is Ben-Hur turning into Judas Iscariot and the filmmakers twisting Christianity into a political message rather than the religious and spiritual message Christ came to share; remember, Judas wanted Jesus to start a political revolution, and Judas was willing to betray Christ to start that revolution, thinking Jesus would use His powers to save Himself so He would be crowned king and Israel would be free of Rome; that's kind of how I am thinking this is going to go, and there is a serious consequence for it.
So, Sherlock Holmes 3 IS HAPPENING. Producers are set and the production schedule is getting worked out, rumored to begin this fall. RDJ and Jude Law are both returning, as is director/writer Guy Ritchie. On a different note, Thor 3: Ragnarok is in production (just ended like the first week) and it boasts Cate Blanchett and Jeff Goldblum in the film, as well as the return of Chris Hemsworth, Mark Ruffalo (who is said to be playing two roles in the film,...) and Tom Hiddleston who has said this is his last Marvel film,... oh, that is so sad :( . During Comi-Con, which happened this weekend, footage from both Spider Man Homecoming and Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2 was shown, but has not made its way online; if it goes up, I will be sure to post it.
If you will recall, in our discussion for Independence Day: Resurgence, the symbol used throughout the film for the help the humans received looked nearly identical to a symbol used for the devil in the film Devil's Due, and I laid out groundwork suggesting other films, both pro-capitalist and pro-socialist, which made the case that socialists were, indeed, invoking the devil to help them establish socialism in the country and world (no, it actually does NOT matter what you think about the existence of the devil or demons or any principality of the spiritual realm; what matters is that this is the vocabulary being employed by BOTH SIDES to demonstrate what the socialists are doing or at least willing to do). IF Ben-Hur is a pro-socialist film (and I am not saying that it is, I will go see it) but IF it is, it seems that the character of Judah Ben-Hur would be a Judas figure--willing to betray Christ and His Teachings (depending on how they are represented by these film makers)--for the revolution spoken of by Morgan Freeman's character to free them from the rule of Rome. But the attack on Christianity is going to have a full season of TV; spot the anti-Republican themes in this trailer:
Wow. Liberal propaganda certainly has a direct audience with a low intellect. Do you remember that film Noah? That film Noah with Russell Crowe? The Noah film where Noah ate moss and tried teaching his sons, and us the viewers, that those who hunted animals and ate meat did so because "They think it makes them stronger?"
Well, well, well,....
That's really all I am going to say about it, except this, I am going to say this: I told you so. I told you socialists were trying to get control over what we eat and if this trailer doesn't communicate that, I don't know what will. On a not-so-different-note, is Level Up:
When do we "level up" and have to do more than what we just did? Video games are a good example, but capitalism in general is also acceptable, because no matter how good a product/company/employee is, if they stay stagnant and don't "level up" what they are doing, they are going to lose their share of the market, just as Matt is going to lose Anna. Now, back to that discussion above about liberals and Satan,...:
Absolutely, this is totally an invocation of Hitchcock's Psycho, but there is a good reason for it. But we would have to do a post on Psycho, maybe I can get that done in October. BUT, this looks good. On another dark note: SALEM Season 3 is here, and if the trailer above for The Good Place put conservatives in hell, Season 3 of SALEM will show how liberals have made earth their hell:
"Our god, their devil, is alive and is here," says the man holding the snake; so, whether you call him "Satan," "Demon," "the Beast," or "the devil," it's all the same and it's all being attributed to the Left. So, what is being said about SALEM in the trailer, is what can actually be said about America today. Now, here is a bit of homework for you:
This is the trailer I want you to analyze and think about and I will post on it tomorrow, agreed :) ? The house symbolizes the soul, what does darkness symbolize? You can do this. Now, let's end on a lighter note, shall we?
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner