By Jason Apuzzo. Our recent post about MGM’s forthcoming remake of Red Dawn (see here) has gotten quite a bit of attention around the internet.
First of all, we want to thank Patrick Goldstein of The LA Times who just did an entire piece today on our reaction to Red Dawn. We especially want to thank Patrick for his kind words about LFM:
“… Libertas Film Magazine, a newly revived version of the blog that set the standard for smart conservative film writing and in its first weeks of new life has already easily surpassed Andrew Breitbart’s Big Hollywood, if for no other reason than that Apuzzo and his film-loving cohorts (including the always provocative Govindini Murty, who recently weighed in with a stirring defense of “Sex & the City 2″) don’t spend all their waking hours simply bashing all the usual lefty Hollywood suspects.”
That’s very kind of Patrick, and we want to thank him for stating, in just a few words, what we feel makes us unique.
Also, since our initial post, we’ve spoken to an executive at MGM about the new Red Dawn, and he provided us with some exciting details about the film. Additionally, he confirmed a few basic points about the film: 1) the negative cost for the film is actually around $42 million; 2) Red Dawn as yet has no release date due to the complex situation at MGM; 3) Connor Cruise appears in the film, but is not actually the film’s main star. However, the great news is that the film is apparently going to be as hardcore as it seems, and based on what we’ve already been told conservatives will be electrified by this film.
We’ll have a lot more to report about Red Dawn down the line.
Posted on June 10, 2010 at 11:32am.
Hmmm, careful those who cheer the faint praise from my opponent as their tongue may in fact be just as forked. Hopefully not, but hey, I’ve been fooled before. Hopefully it is just Goldstein looking for another way to take a shot at Big Hollywood since he’s well aware of Nolte’s previous connection with Libertas and doesn’t lead Libertas to writing to achieve the praise of the Patrick Goldstein’s of the world. Based on the veiled shot at Big Hollywood’s purpose in your opening salvo, one has to wonder.
It’s sad that a liberal like Goldstein doesn’t understand markets though, as Big Hollywood is a completely different market than Libertas and they simply do not conflict. I wouldn’t say one is better or worse than the other since one is almost exclusively focused on pointing out the parts of Hollywood that are hell bent on attacking conservatives while the other is almost exclusively focused on highlighting any film that is determined to promote conservative values. Of course, their is overlap in their functions (Big Hollywood extolling the virtues of Justified, V, The Middle, Iron Man 2, etc… and Libertas criticizing the critics of SATC2) but for the most part, each scene sticks to its own niche.
Congratulations – that is a great LA Times piece. It is highly deserved. I would rather have films to enjoy any day than just complain about everything Hollywood does. Why doesn’t anyone else in the conservative media talk about these films? Libertas is the only one who does this. Keep up the great work you guys.
Terrific coverage from the LA Times. I’ve been reading Libertas for a while – both old and new versions – and I have never seen you compromise your message – no matter who praises you. You cover the conservative/libertarian/pro-American films out there better than anyone. Don’t know what the commenter above is worried about. The focus here should be on talking about these films and giving these filmmakers a chance when they actually do something good.
Hi Jason, So delighted to see you getting some great media recognition for the fine work you are doing with the new version of Libertas. I look forward to reading it every day and no matter who is writing all of the posts have been interesting to me. Your writing absolutely sparkles! Keep up the good work!
I just started reading your site and I’m very impressed. Please keep up with the good work. I too love film but hate the politics and the ever increasing illiteracy of today’s movies. I also love mindless entertainment. Unfortunately that also seems to be in short supply. Current examples of true movie making craftsmanship is becoming harder and harder to find.
I’m also not impressed with this Red Dawn’s version of a villain. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not a fan of the Chinese government and consider it a threat to our country. But not creditably as a literal invasion threat. The original Red Dawn just glossed over a reason for invasion but at least during it’s time of release, in 1984, an invasion from the then Soviet Union and it’s Cuban puppet was creditable. I suppose We’ll just have to see how this version actually handles it.
The real threat, the real villain comes from the other side of the world and that’s Islamic terrorism. Also a literal Islamic Terrorist 5th column that’s growing in our country. Except for the now canceled 24 it’s virtually not handled at all by Hollywood! (The exceptions and kudos for Oliver Stone’s World Trade Center and Paul Greengrass for United 93 which both covered the events of 9/11 but did not address directly WHO caused the events.) And then 24 only mildly implied that some of the terrorists were from Middle Eastern countries. (Perhaps they’ll grow a pair and actually address it in a possible 24 Movie)
That said and just because you happen to be of Middle Eastern descent no more makes you a terrorist than being of Germanic descent makes you a Nazi or Hispanic descent make you an illegal alien. I’m also as sure as night follows day that if it was Christians or Neo-Nazi’s that had flown planes into buildings on September 11th there been tons of movies and they’d have no problems naming names. Well! Duh!………..That’s Hollywood!
I digress and perhaps I’m taking it all too literally. Perhaps this is just a polished up Right Wing commentary on our current President. Without actually reading the script and/or seeing the movie, I’ll give the makers of this new Red Dawn credit for perhaps a clever, yet ham handed commentary on the state of our current union.
We’ll See!
Thanks, John. We appreciate the kind word, and keep coming back.
I think you just became Goldstein’s John McCain. Remember how McCain was held up by the left as the ‘good Republican’ against George W. Bush until the second he ran for president himself, when he suddenly became *exactly the same* as President Bush?
That analogy only makes sense if you assume that I do what I do to please people on the Left. I don’t.
I never said you did.
jic – maybe this site is just actually better. Why is it that if Libertas gets some praise in the so-called “liberal media” it now must be the equivalent of John McCain? That is just crazy.
No, I just don’t particularly trust Patrick Goldstein’s motivations in this case. He’s shown in the past that he’ll use *any* opportunity to attack Big Hollywood.
I think I need to clarify something. My reference to John McCain was only supposed to refer to how the left used him. I wasn’t comparing Libertas to John McCain himself.
No worries, Joshua. Thanks for commenting and keep coming back.
Not to pick a dog in any fight, but saying Big Hollywood would rather kick the proverbial Obama/lefty can around than actually discuss film is hardly earth-shattering. I’m not sure Breitbart would even find it to be insulting. He shouldn’t because it’s true.
Please let there be Rich and Friedman characters in the film who suck up to the chicoms to disasterous ends