Andrew Breitbart: Mall Cop

Cow Towing to Other Countries

Archive for the ‘Male-Gigolo-in-Chief’ Category

An Observation

with 2 comments

Re: John Nolte’s yawn-inducing list of the Top 25 Christmas Films.  It’s a third unassailably canonical Golden-era shit that no one actually enjoys watching, a third treacly and/or poorly-aged family films, and a third various versions of A Christmas Carol.

But it’s biggest flaw?

No motherfucking Die Hard.  He’s probably just mad that Hans Gruber wasn’t a Muslim.


Written by dieblucasdie

December 14, 2009 at 12:59 am

Johnny’s First Watchmen Review

with 3 comments


I am completely baffled by Big Hollywood n00b Chris Yogerst’s new review of Watchmen. First, thanks to Male-Gigolo-in-Chief John Nolte’s shoddy editing,  BH already ran a dozen or so Watchmen pieces when the film first came out.  Sure, the DVD’s out now, but Yogerst’s piece doesn’t contain any of the hallmarks of a standard DVD review:  no mention of commentary or special features or what-have-you.

In fact, the review doesn’t have a lot of content at all.  It’s mostly Yogerst doing a mind-blowingly poor job of recapping the events of the movie.  Seriously, this thing is written at a 6th-grade level.

Yogerst sets the scene:

Edward Blake was the most corrupt superhero, with a past of heartless murder of women and children. Once he realized there was a plan in place to kill thousands of innocent people to save millions, he decided to right his past by alerting his fellow “watchmen.” This decision ultimately leads to his murder.

Yogerst’s take on the film’s ending:

In the end, the “watchmen” decide to let the plan continue, or else the end result will surely be a nuclear apocalypse. This decision was a tough one and was in no way one of self interest. Regardless, film still tries to leave us questioning our heroes on some level.

This book report is about Treasure Island.  The author is a man named Robert Louis Stevenson.  There is a pirate named Long John Silver who at first is good but then bad but then good again.  I hope I never get the black spot.  In conclusion, the book never says whether pirates are good or bad but at least Jim Hawkins makes it out OK.

Also, what the fuck is this guy talking about?  Rorschach and Nite Owl are too late to stop Veidt, and Nite Owl and Dr. Manhattan only make the decision not to reveal what he’s done and ruin the peace he’s brought.  They never aid him.  They never have an opportunity to stop him and decline to take it.

Then there’s this bit:

Most certainly a conservative’s favorite character will be Rorschach, whose actions are anything but soft on crime. He is programmed to fight evil, both foreign and domestic. Rorschach eventually sacrificed himself since he could not live with the decision to sacrifice thousands to save millions.

Also there’s the part where Rorschach is completely fucking insane.  And running around exacting brutal revenge on petty criminals didn’t do shit for the people of Lower Manhattan.

Watchmen never makes an endorsement or a repudiation of Veidt’s actions, or Rorschach’s.    Its only consistent position seems to be, “Hey, you know those people in the ruling class?  Fucking nutballs, the lot of them.  Sometimes they do the wrong thing for the right reasons.  Sometimes vice versa.  And sometimes they’re assholes for no reason.  I wouldn’t trust them if I were you.”

What’s Yobert’s response?  “BE ALL THAT YOU CAN BE MOTHERFUCKERS!”

Of course, anyone who believes the world has no heroes is looking through a polarized lens. There actually are people who fight for good and succeed. The USA hasn’t had a terrorist attack since 2001, and that is because we have our own heroes fighting for the greater good of the free world both here and abroad.

We don’t have one single hero, but rather hundreds of thousands of them. They are at every military base, fire station, police station, and every other institution that helps keep us safe every day. Without them, we would live in the dystopic world that occurs in the film once “watchmen” are outlawed.

What the fuck?  What in the name of Audie Murphy does this have to do with a goddamn thing?

Written by dieblucasdie

August 9, 2009 at 3:08 pm

What If I’m… The Bad Guy?

with 3 comments


Can someone associated with Big Hollywood tell me what Male-Gigolo-in-Chief John Nolte’s recent absence/hiatus was about?  Immediately prior to that, he was writing reviews so even-handed and straightforward that I couldn’t have covered them here if I wanted to.  Since he’s been back, he’s been acting a bit crazy, frothing at the mouth over Night at the Museum‘s pernicious liberalism, obsessing over that shitty Goode Family show, and, of course, lauding Miley Cyrus’ bapitism-by-fire.  Did he get, like, sent to a re-education camp?  Did he start smoking whatever (clearly good shit) Breitbart smokes?

One of y’all is probably going to tell me he had a kid or a death in the family and I’m going to feel like a jackass.

Anyway, I bring this up because Deuce continues his descent into madness this evening, repping hard for the Twilight series:

“Twilight” is all about the self-restraint of both appetite and passion. Also playing an important thematic role is the importance of self-sacrifice, loyalty and family. It’s awfully hard not to like a film aimed at teens that’s so unapologetically earnest and well-intended. In this cinematic age of nihilism, moral relativism and hyper-sexualization of young girls, ”Twilight” should be hailed as the work of iconoclasts.

In fairness, Nolte claims not to be familiar with the source material, but dude.  That series is probably the most prurient thing I’ve ever read that doesn’t have actual sex in it.  It’s especially funny that Nolte would hold it up as a good portrayal of innocent/wholesome/traditional female sexuality, since in this case the male is the gatekeeper, and the middle two books are pretty much entirely about Bella trying to trick Edward into boning her.

And while the books do espouse a submissive female role, it’s not the traditional Patriarchy-approved one.  It’s a weird, idiosyncratic one, that is more Mormonism-meets-Gor than Ladies Home Journal.  It’s basically a 2,000-page study in the sexual hangups of one, Stephenie Meyer, and anyone who tries to make it larger than that does so at his peril.

Written by dieblucasdie

June 2, 2009 at 2:00 am

They Just Don’t Make Martyrs Like They Used To

with 3 comments

Time was, professing the divinity of Christ would get you beheaded, boiled in oil, drowned, crucified, raped, torn apart by lions, fingernails pulled out one-by-one.  

What’s today’s Circus of Nero, according to Big Hollywood Male-Gigolo-in-Chief John Nolte?  


Celebrity Enforcer E! Takes Their Shot at Those Who ‘Love Them Some Jesus’

ENFORCER.  E! Entertainment News is up to  some serious Mafia-style shit, apparently.  I mean, fuck.  If today’s Christians are so wussy that a little criticism from a cable network devoted solely to up-to-the-second Brangelina news, quasi-celebrity reality shows, and Girls Gone Wild commercials has them up-in-arms, then it’s time for another flood or brutal pagan dictator or some shit to toughen us up.  

This isn’t about religion or celebrity oversharing, this is about the culture war – this is about a promise ring that “bath[es] us in the virgin-white dazzle of all that metal.” Because in celebrity-dom, that virgin-white dazzle is like throwing Holy Water on a Vampire.

Miley’s a target-rich environment for celebrity enforcers because she’s openly opposed to the spread of Gomorrah and therefore a threat who must be marginalized through ridicule at every opportunity. Now, Miley’s a big star and no cool kid or cheerleader can bring her down all on their own. But the plan’s bigger and more sophisticated than that.

One possible outcome is that someday, like all of us, Miley slips up in a way that allows the left to gang up and attempt to destroy her as a moral hypocrite. Call it the Miss California Playbook. But worse case, through their ridicule of Miley, the celebrity enforcers have sent an unmistakable warning to any up-and-comers who might have considered being true to who they really are and following in Miley’s moral footsteps.

Yes, I can think of no one in our culture more marginalized than tween millionaire and head-of-a-media-empire Miley fucking Cyrus.  Clearly the random blogger on E!’s website is the wielder-of-Hollywood-influence in this picture., and Miley is the poor, downtrodden waif.  Hollywood hates her for being Christian?  What?  The time she’s stirred the most controversy was when she did something her parent company deemed contrary to her Christian image.

Because that’s what it is, an image.  A marketing campaign.  This is so obvious I shouldn’t have to be pointing it out.  The reason the Jonas Brothers’ promise rings are treated like a joke is because there’s no way those dudes are going to remain virgins until marriage, if they even still are now.  Or that they’ll even really attempt to.  The Nick Jonas/Miley Cyrus chaste-Disney-couple relationship wasn’t believable the first time, and it ain’t believable now.

The marketing campaign has obviously worked, though.  Back in the day, a man like John Nolte would’ve been calling for us all to burn: Miley Cyruses, James Spaders, Miss Californias, and Perez Hiltons alike.  But here he is, a grown fucking man who takes Christianity seriously, writing apologias for this girl:


This is what American religious life has been reduced to: taking sides in E! vs. Miley.  God should’ve torched us all long ago.

Written by dieblucasdie

May 28, 2009 at 5:21 pm

Can I Get a “What What” for False Equivalencies?

leave a comment »


The Male-Gigolo-in-Chief actually graces us with his presence today, confronting anti-Catholicism in Angels & Demons.  SPOILERS ahead, as if anyone is actually planning on watching that shitty movie.

People whose opinions I respect have defended A&D as not being anti-Catholic. This is probably due to the end of the film which delivers a trumped up moment of warmth and reconciliation between Tom Hanks’ Robert Langdon character and the Church in the form of a new Pope.  From my perch, this moment is a subtle but devious cherry on top of a blisteringly unfair and wholly dishonest attack on the Church.

Serial adulterer Martin Luther King, Jr.

Serial adulterer Martin Luther King, Jr.

Serial adulterer Martin Luther King, Jr.

One way to dishonestly destroy someone or something is to repeat only the negative about that someone or something. DreamWorks has just announced a new film about the life of Martin Luther King, Jr. and were it to focus solely on King’s extra-marital affairs no one would argue that the movie was anything other than a propaganda tool produced with the goal in mind of assassinating his character.

You know, if MLK had tortured and enslaved people, executed religious leaders, and massacred his enemies (just off the top of my head), this argument might hold more water.  Those things are all significantly worse than cheating on your wife. 

Rather than get sidetracked, let’s just stipulate each criticism is accurate (though they’re not). But it doesn’t matter, because… None of the enormous good the Church has done over the last 2,000 years is ever mentioned. So even if the filmmakers are right on “the facts,” they’re telling no less of a lie. Intentionally omitting all the good the Church has done intentionally creates a false impression no reasonable person would get if the film provided the full story.    

Nolte never elaborates on what exactly this “enormous good” has been.  I am wont to play Church-apologist among my LIBTARD friends, but come on,  2000 years?  There were entire centuries where the Church did not do a single thing right.  Inquisitions and crusades aside,  how big of an asshole do you have to be to side with Phillip II over Elizabeth, for instance?  Or Charles V over anyone?

Finally, to reaffirm his straw man really does exists, Howard tacks on a warm closing scene that portrays the Church as evolving into an institution more open and accepting of scientific truth.  

Some may have gotten the fuzzies from this moment, but the Church is already open and accepting of scientific truth and to say it could be what it already is… Well, let’s just say that if “Angels & Demons” was as clever at storytelling as it is at spreading lies, it might have been a watchable movie.

As Christian institutions go, the contemporary Catholic Church is on the pro-science end of the spectrum.  At least they’ve mostly kept out of the whole Creationism/ID game.  They’d rather not look like idiots again in another 200 years, so they’ve learned that “we have no position” is the best space for a religious organization to occupy with respect to scientific issues.  

Sadly, the Church’s embryo fetish has not allowed it to extend this good sense to its position on stem cell research.  But hey, you can’t win ’em all.   The Church is an ancient institution, and I, for one, am pleased with the current no-burning-people-at-the-stake policy.  Baby steps, people.


Written by dieblucasdie

May 19, 2009 at 5:45 pm

A Douchebags’ History of the United States

leave a comment »

1968-nixon-esquire-ltJohn Nolte actually graces us with his presence at Big Hollywood today (he hasn’t even been doing those lame TCM picks!), to tell us that JFK was a staunch conservative, Nixon was a hippie peacenik, The Pope won the Cold War, PSD doesn’t doesn’t exist, and that homeless people should fuck themselves:

If present-day Hollywood had their way here are five things you’d never know…

1. That JFK had way more in common with Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush than most of today’s Democrats

2. That Richard Nixon won the peace in Vietnam

3. That the Pope, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher might have had more to do with winning the Cold War than boozy, womanizing Democrats

4. That those who served in Vietnam and Iraq are not psychotics and victims

5. That most homeless are in fact not mystics and wise men

JFK was conservative for entering Vietnam!  Nixon was conservative for pulling out!  The troops there had an awesome time!  What!

4 and 5 are the most fair, though one must admit that the Vietnam thing cuts both ways; if we’d won as many engagements there as the movies depicted, there wouldn’t be a communist left on the planet.

Things really get awesome in the comments, though:

That the Catholic Church has done more to enable women’s liberty and security and rights than any other religion or government.

The Catholic schoolboy in me wants to spend a couple pages here quoting the ickier passages from Augustine and Aquinas, as well as the better feminist scholarly work on Marian adoration, but suffice to say, “LOL.”

That the Crusaders weren’t a bunch of whacked out, rabid Christians intent upon conquering the Muslim’s rightful homeland. There’s a reason it was called “The Holy Land”. Christ was born, lived, walked and died there six hundred years before Mohammed was even BORN. The Romans (pagans) had it when Christ died — Constantine converted to Christianity in the fourth century. Alexander the Great (a Pagan) had it before the Romans and the Jews before Alexander. The truth is Islam poured out of Arabia and CONQUERED the Holy Land by the sword. The Crusaders were just trying to take it back.

Liberal Hollywood takes sides in the Crusades?  When?  There was that Ridley Scott movie a few years back, but it hardly portrays the Muslims as awesome.

Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone. There was not second shooter. There was No Magic bullet

Uh, isn’t the Magic Bullet theory the one that says Oswald acted alone?

The CEOs of US companies, with few exceptions, are caring, charitable, law abiding, intelligent, honorable people dedicated to the best interests of society. They are the sort of people you could trust your children with in an emergency. They are like the ‘CEO’ of the Maersk Alabama – willing to sacrifice for their employees.

Climbing the corporate ladder is a long tough ordeal. If you make mistakes, the mistakes will take you down. If you screw people along the way, they will find a way to pay you back and take you down. Darwin seldom naps in corporate America and thus the cream rises.

Someone hasn’t been reading the papers!

I can’t wait until 40 years from now, when the future versions of people like Nolte are claiming that Barack Obama was really a closet conservative.

Written by dieblucasdie

April 21, 2009 at 1:19 am

And Now We Pause for an Arnold Schwarzenegger Moment

leave a comment »

Hey, we all have to have our little traditions.

Written by dieblucasdie

March 29, 2009 at 11:36 pm