Making a list, checking it twice…
Posted: February 17, 2009 Filed under: Internets, Politics, TV/Movies 6 CommentsTo laugh or to cry: from the Top Ten Conservative Movies of The Last 25 Years…
5. 300 (2007): During the Bush years, Hollywood neglected the heroism of American soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan — but it did release this action film about martial honor, unflinching courage, and the oft-ignored truth that freedom isn’t free. Beneath a layer of egregious non-history — including goblin-like creatures that belong in a fantasy epic — is a stylized story about the ancient battle of Thermopylae and the Spartan defense of the West’s fledgling institutions. It contrasts a small band of Spartans, motivated by their convictions and a commitment to the law, with a Persian horde that is driven forward by whips. In the words recorded by the real-life Herodotus: “Law is their master, which they fear more than your men[, Xerxes,] fear you.”
…
20. Gattaca (1997): In this science-fiction drama, Vincent (Ethan Hawke) can’t become an astronaut because he’s genetically unenhanced. So he purchases the identity of a disabled athlete (Jude Law), with calamitous results. The movie is a cautionary tale about the progressive fantasy of a eugenically correct world — the road to which is paved by the abortion of Down babies, research into human cloning, and “transhumanist” dreams of fabricating a “post-human species.” Biotechnology is a force for good, but without adherence to the ideal of universal human equality, it opens the door to the soft tyranny of Gattaca and, ultimately, the dystopian nightmare of Brave New World.
The list also includes the likes of Ghostbusters, Groundhog Day, Lord of the Rings, and The Dark Knight. Personally, I think this list shows how fucking stupid much of the supposed “intelligentsia” of the conservative movement is. They so desperately want to be “kewl”. It’s sad really.
Also: 300? Come on.
(via)
Blurred Productions 
Not too surprisingly, I think Jonah Goldberg’s entries are the most inexplicable. Even after reading his entries, I can’t even pretend to understand how what he wrote justifies “Groundhog Day” and “A Simple Plan” as conservative movies. “Groundhog Day” shows that happiness comes from making the most of life for yourself and others… and… that’s conservative? “A Simple Plan” is about money, corruption, and the mistrust that can grow between good people… and… that’s conservative? What?
Look – Every conservative wants a batpod.
Personally, I find the inclusion of 300 on anybody’s list of good films – conservative or nor – to be inexplicable.
But I also agree with Tito about Jonah.
What a foolio.
It’s hilarious how badly some of those reviews miss the point.
Fucking “Brazil” is on there!?!? Have these reviewers actually watched these movies? It really seems like they are grasping at straws. I wonder how Terry Gilliam would react to being labeled a conservative film maker.
As for the inclusion of Ghostbusters, I think this is an illustration of how anyone can read whatever they want into a text. Harold Ramis a conservative, I doubt it somehow.
If I were to apply my liberal bias to it, it is most categorically NOT a conservative movie. Let me show you how:
1. Doctors Venkman, Stantz and Spengler are booted out of the university (much like Dr. Pretorius in the Bride of Frankenstein, another subversive movie in conservative clothes) because of their research into an area which the university considers “popular tripe.” I mean seriously, parapsychology is a conservative, establishment science? I know the Reagans had an astrologer, but still…
2. The movies heroes are scientists. I think no more needs to be said there.
3. While they do go off to capitalize on the “indespensible defense science of the next decade” and make quite a bit of money doing so –and get into a scuffle with a stuffy EPA agent — a liberal reading would be that these young professionals get so invested in capitalizing on their idea that they succeed because of hard, almost workaholic effort and brains. How is this conservative? They weren’t born into money, didn’t strike oil and also, none of them married a beer-heiress to get there. Sweat of the brow is a working class value, and we don’t need no tax cuts, thanks.
4.The crash commercialism that the Ghostbusters engage in could be seen as an indictment of the 80s “me generation,” whose greed, and blind self interest personified the Reagan years, and showed the true, ugly nature of Republican values. But then again, conservatives never did have a strong grasp of subtle satire. When they attempt it, we get “An American Carol.”
I could go on, but I think I’ve said enough. Nice try conservatives, but you really should watch and listen more, instead of just pretending opinion and fact are one. Maybe that’s how it works in the fairytale world of Bush-Apology-Land, but here in the real world, that sort of analysis doesn’t quite cut it.
Oh and, to add to that, Ray Stantz, “the heart of the Ghostbusters” doesn’t believe in God, though he is knowlegeble about the Bible.
AAAAAANNNNNNDDDD… Though the film deals with an apocalyptic confrontation between a godlike being, its demonic minions, and contains numerous parallels to the Book of Revelations, ain’t no Jesus showing up on Judgment Day in the Ghostbusters.
Suck it, John J. Miller.