Professional critics never cease to amaze me at how unprofessional they are, giving Dan Bradley's Red Dawn a mere 12% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes; 12% is not a grade but a declaration of war and, for Red Dawn, a badge of honor that liberal critics are so united in being against this film. Is it fair of me to accuse all the critics who have panned the film as doing so because they support socialism and are liberal? Yes. The media in America is liberal (and Red Dawn makes the same point) and liberal media outlets hire liberal film reviewers. It's not what they say that shows they are liberal, rather, what they fail to say in their attacks on the film demonstrating the unwarranted attacks against it. If a critic gave the film like a 40% approval rating (which is still an "F" grading,) they would base that on lousy special effects, poor acting, directing, cinematography, or the lack of coherence in the script, etc., yet the typical comments are, "A ridiculous remake; it may be updated but it's not any smarter," because, essentially, that's what liberals think of concepts such as patriotism, duty, sacrifice, courage.
So, can I demonstrate the film is done well?
Of course I can, because it is.
For example, in the trailer above, at 0:31 seconds, the camera focuses on a snow globe of the Seattle skyline and the "snow" rises from heavy pounding in the distance (an example of chaos theory); where else have we recently seen snow globes employed? House At the End Of the Street, a decidedly anti-socialist film. At the start of it, we see a house "underwater," referring to home mortgages "underwater" from the economic recession; for Red Dawn, it's the bursting of the American isolated bubble of comfortable capitalist success a prosperous city like Seattle symbolizes (please see Everything Is a Secret: House At the End Of the Street for more). Unlike the 1984 version when the communist invasion starts while the heroes are in class at school, the 2012 version launches the invasion when the heroes are asleep in their homes: symbolically, being so concerned with our own problems (being in the home), we are "asleep" to the external forces invading our basic rights (the communities where we live and realize our inherent civil rights by freedom of movement as well as the private ownership of where we live as opposed to the state ownership of where we live).
This is a brief clip after the invasion has started:
I would think liberals would particularly hate this scene, because it visually demonstrates the "impact" we should be seeking out with liberals and the "vehicle" of socialism. The two opposing roads Jed and the North Koreans drive on can be seen as the direct "paths" (the roads) liberals want us to go on instead of the road conservatives want to take; while Matt wants Jed to steer away from the on-coming "crash" Jed is ready to fully "engage" (the impact of the two cars hitting). We saw an impact scene similar to this in The Dark Knight Rises when a bus is used to stop the vehicle carrying the bomb throughout the city; the bus was used because it's part of President Obama's agenda to raise gas prices so high that Americans have to forgo their privately owned vehicles and take public transportation (the bus) so the state has greater control over citizens (and we see the citizens of the city being "bused" on school buses).
Why does Jed have problems getting the truck started?
symbolizes the 2008-10 auto bailout that conservatives should have been more forceful about in clashing with socialists on what to do. See why liberals would hate this film so much? It's meant to invigorate conservatives against the liberal take-over and that's the last thing liberals want.
What about Matt?
Jed's younger, reckless brother certainly reminds me of another reckless American: Alex Hopper (Taylor Kitsch) from Battleship, and, if you will recall, Battleship--like Red Dawn--is about war with North Korea. Matt being like a "wild cowboy" and risking others is a sign of immaturity and the consequences of the "me generation," but he outgrows it. This is not only a positive role model for this generation, but encouragement for older generations that the youth will rise up to the occasion and take leadership to take back the country.
One, last, item that liberals really really really hate: where is President Obama during all this?
The film opens with a montage of Obama and Clinton verbally condemning North Korea,... and not doing anything about it. So the film recognizes the real-world president, and then he's not seen ever again and the army doesn't come to help the Wolverines, Marines come out of retirement on their own to help (meaning that the president fails in ordering the military to come to the aid of Americans in distress; as we discussed with Taken 2, the best art is prophetic, and Red Dawn knew that Obama would fail to aid Americans in an invasion just as he failed to aid the Americans in the Benghazi attack). So much for the Commander In Chief. Instead of condemning a fine film, liberals should complain to their president about his terrible policies allowing communism to spread and his despicable public image.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner
So, can I demonstrate the film is done well?
Of course I can, because it is.
One of the first lessons of film criticism I learned to ask was: "Why is this film being made now?" The first version of Red Dawn from 1984 might have been a response to the media circus of American school girl Samantha Smith's visit to the USSR: the ten year-old sent a letter to the Soviet leader asking him if there was going to be a nuclear war and he invited her to come visit during which she told Americans the Soviets are just like us and want peace, hence, why Red Dawn of 1984 shows the heroes during school and the end of one education (formal, in-school) and the start of another, hands-on education in warfare (battling a dangerous ideology): high school students aren't as easily duped as a ten-year old. Red Dawn, in 1984, was a war cry to Generation X to learn the lessons of communism's inherent evils so there would not be a communist take-over in America like what we are seeing today because each generation has to learn its own lessons and make its own decisions. Why did film makers in 1984 know they needed to teach Generation X? Because the core of communism is that it be spread throughout the whole world, the whole world becomes communist for at least two reasons: one, a socialist state cannot compete with a strong capitalist state and the rich in a capitalist state will know the communist state wants to overthrow them, so the rich will take actions to destroy the communist state (not to mention that citizens under communism will start realizing life is better under communism and start defecting or over-throw the government). So why is it being made today? Liberals will deny that Obama's administration is implementing socialism, however, those of us who voted against him know that at best he's dumb and at worst he's dangerous, and liberals know he's implementing socialism but they think conservatives are dumb enough to be duped. So of the two-fold reason why Red Dawn has been re-made today, the first part is to validate the fears and anxieties of Americans against communism being brought into this country and encourage us to stay strong in spite of the liberal media lying to us that Obama is not a communist and that we are all alone in our fears. The second reason the film has been made will be discussed below. |
This is a brief clip after the invasion has started:
I would think liberals would particularly hate this scene, because it visually demonstrates the "impact" we should be seeking out with liberals and the "vehicle" of socialism. The two opposing roads Jed and the North Koreans drive on can be seen as the direct "paths" (the roads) liberals want us to go on instead of the road conservatives want to take; while Matt wants Jed to steer away from the on-coming "crash" Jed is ready to fully "engage" (the impact of the two cars hitting). We saw an impact scene similar to this in The Dark Knight Rises when a bus is used to stop the vehicle carrying the bomb throughout the city; the bus was used because it's part of President Obama's agenda to raise gas prices so high that Americans have to forgo their privately owned vehicles and take public transportation (the bus) so the state has greater control over citizens (and we see the citizens of the city being "bused" on school buses).
Why does Jed have problems getting the truck started?
symbolizes the 2008-10 auto bailout that conservatives should have been more forceful about in clashing with socialists on what to do. See why liberals would hate this film so much? It's meant to invigorate conservatives against the liberal take-over and that's the last thing liberals want.
What about Matt?
Jed's younger, reckless brother certainly reminds me of another reckless American: Alex Hopper (Taylor Kitsch) from Battleship, and, if you will recall, Battleship--like Red Dawn--is about war with North Korea. Matt being like a "wild cowboy" and risking others is a sign of immaturity and the consequences of the "me generation," but he outgrows it. This is not only a positive role model for this generation, but encouragement for older generations that the youth will rise up to the occasion and take leadership to take back the country.
One, last, item that liberals really really really hate: where is President Obama during all this?
The film opens with a montage of Obama and Clinton verbally condemning North Korea,... and not doing anything about it. So the film recognizes the real-world president, and then he's not seen ever again and the army doesn't come to help the Wolverines, Marines come out of retirement on their own to help (meaning that the president fails in ordering the military to come to the aid of Americans in distress; as we discussed with Taken 2, the best art is prophetic, and Red Dawn knew that Obama would fail to aid Americans in an invasion just as he failed to aid the Americans in the Benghazi attack). So much for the Commander In Chief. Instead of condemning a fine film, liberals should complain to their president about his terrible policies allowing communism to spread and his despicable public image.
Eat Your Art Out,
The Fine Art Diner
0 comments:
Post a Comment