Here is an interesting article from http://www.debbieschlussel.com/ reviewing some of the movies that came out over the past weekend. This follows this post some of the movies from last week and THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to chosing good movies to watch yourself!

“The Hunger Games”: Long, Boring, Unoriginal, Feminist Snuff Film Marketed to Kids

By Debbie Schlussel
In seven years as a movie critic, I’ve learned a few undeniable truths of the box office. One of them is: don’t believe the hype. You’ll always get burned. Another: there is little originality. Everything is either derivative or flat-out ripped off from something else. And so it goes with “The Hunger Games,” the much overhyped, overrated, and totally ripped-off movie that debuts in theaters, today. Sadly, this disgustingly violent and mostly soulless and unentertaining movie is marketed to kids, as the natural evolution from popular “Young Adult” lit. And it logs in at a slow-paced, sluggish two-and-a-half hours of undue self-importance.

In 2007, I reviewed “The Condemned,” a WWE-produced movie about 10 killers dropped on an island for a live reality-show game. The object was to be the one remaining survivor and would be rewarded with freedom and fame. Only one could live and the rest would have to die, mostly from being targeted by the others for death. I panned this sick “killing porn” movie, as did most critics. But, now, the same critics are gushing over a rehash of virtually the exact same plot in the long, slow, and extremely boring, “The Hunger Games.” The only difference is that, in “The Condemned,” the master of the game is a billionaire TV producer. In “The Hunger Games,” the master of the game is the President of a new fictional country, residing with his fellow elitist rich people in the “Capitol.” Both are typical lefty Hollywood constructs of capitalist creeps, who have no regard for human life, creating televised reality shows involving torture and death of “the little people” a/k/a “the 99 percent.”









It’s amazing how typically left-wing movie critics will gush over something as “high brow” when it is dressed up with Donald Sutherland (the President), Woody Harrelson, Elisabeth Banks, and young up-and-coming stars and wrapped in the phony label of “social commentary,” when it’s really just a repeat of the WWE product starring Stone Cold Steve Austin. (A reader of this site, “Ghostwriter,” notes that the storyline of “The Hunger Games” also sounds like a rip-off of “Battle Royale,” a Japanese movie about a bunch of teenagers that were taken to an island and forced to kill each other under the “Battle Royale Act.” You have to wonder if “Hunger Games” author Suzanne Collins saw either of these movies. I wouldn’t bet against that, as plagiarism is rewarded in America, and she’s rolling in cash from these books and now as executive producer of the movie.) I understand that the movie follows the first “Hunger Games” book very closely.
The thing is, “The Condemned” was rated “R” and meant only for adults. “The Hunger Games” is marketed to young teens with a PG-13 rating. But it is just as violent. That it isn’t an “R” movie is appalling. It deserves it . . . unless you think a close-up scene of one boy smashing another boy to death, with repeated bloody hits of a rock to his head, is good for kids. Sadly, so many “parents” in America are sperm and womb/egg donors who just want to be friends with their kids. And they will send their kids to see this, even take them there. Anyone who allows their kids–even teens–to see a snuff film, as this definitely is, should be tried for child abuse. At the very least, they are pimping out their kids to Hollywood violence and killing porn.

And part of the violence in this crappy flick is of the phony feminist variety–that women can kick butt and beat men much bigger than them. It’s not believable. Sadly, the movie has already made millions in advanced ticket sales and Thursday Night Midnight showings, which will falsely lead Hollywood to believe that America wants to buy into the BS that a slim, athletic girl can beat muscular guys twice her size and outlast them in the wilderness while they are trying to kill her. Sorry, but America doesn’t want that kind of fantasy, no matter how much feminists wish to make it so. In this movie, the male love interest to Katniss Everdeen, the heroine of the movie, is a crybaby, very weak, and an effeminate wimp with frosted hair, whose life is saved several times by the more masculine chick. Several women’s studies professors have been quoted in articles hyping this chick-kicks-butt movie. That ain’t real life, hags.

The story is more anti-capitalist left-wing bull-crap. It is a dystopian future and what used to be America is now called Panem. It’s divided into twelve districts of different types of working-class poor: farmers, coal miners, electrical workers, etc. They are not allowed to hunt for food, and, instead, the kids, aged twelve and up, must put an extra ticket with their name into a lottery, each time they want more food. Once a year, two names are drawn from each district: a male and a female, who must fight to the death–killing each other to survive and win–in a televised reality show in the Capital, a place filled with very rich, gaudy people in bright, clown-like clothing, make-up, and hairstyles. It’s sort of a modern day man-versus-man in the coliseum minus the culture and history, in this case mixed with a little bit of the most unreal Gloria Steinem/Betty Friedan feminist BS fantasy imaginable. The weak, nonsensical story is that because there was a violent revolution and war, the Hunger Games, as the contest is called, are held to remind the different districts of the cost of war and revolution.

Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) is an expert bow-hunter from District 12 (the coal miner district). She illegally hunts animals to sell and to feed her family, which consists of her inept, mentally
weak mother and her sister, who has just turned 12. When the annual drawing of names for the Hunger Games occurs, Katniss’ young sister is chosen, and Katniss volunteers to take her place. She and a guy from District 12 (Josh Hutcherson) are the chosen two and make their way to the Capital, where the residents snobbishly examine them and watch the Hunger Games.
As I said, Katniss outlasts all the others, and it’s just not believable. And it’s neither exciting or interesting. Just warmed over. I didn’t like the killing porn the first time when I saw it as the WWE’s “The Condemned.”

I like it even less as the regurgitated, feminist version aimed at “young adults.”

But America is made up of a bunch of suckers and sheep, so many of them racing to see this movie, having bought online tickets months ago. They eagerly ingest and digest the swill served up to them, without thought or hesitation. The other night, actress Kristen Bell uttered the most airheaded and sad comment of all about the books from which the movie was made:

This is the piece of literature that in a hundred years we’ll look back on and it will be the best thing we’ve ever written.

Spoken like a true moron. But, then, as the popularity of this movie and the books behind it proves, we are a nation of morons.

FOUR MARXES PLUS A BIN LADEN PLUS FOUR BETTY FRIEDANS


Watch the trailer (which they won’t allow anyone to embed from YouTube).

Here is an interesting article from www.DebbieSchlussel.com about some of the problems of the Hunger Games. This follows this post about the Hunger Games as a reflection on society.  This follows this post about some of the music that was poplular during 2011. This follows THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to chosing good movies to watch yourself!

“The Hunger Games”: Hollywood Markets Sick “Twilight” Killing Spree w/ She-Man Heroine, Girlie-Men

By Debbie Schlussel
Later today, I’ll be attending a critics’ screening of “The Hunger Games,” the much ballyhooed silver screen version of the best-selling “Young Adult” book series. I put “Young Adult” in quotation marks because the books are about a sick, violent vision of the future in which young people are selected to kill each other once a month, with only one survivor. When you teach teens that the future is dark, that fantasy should be dark, they’ll act and think dark in real life. Makes the “Twilight” contest between two girlie-men over a sullen chick sound like child’s play, huh?


Some are saying this is the new “Twilight,” and the movie is expected to garner a $100 million-plus opening when the movie debuts at Midnight Thursday Night/Friday Morning. But, to me, this sounds like just a more violent remix of “Twilight.” I’ve written that the Twilight movies are just about a girl who is the man and two “men” who are the chicks fighting over her with their sensitive sides. This looks like more of the same, with a “valiant” she-man chick as the heroine and the two men, with girlie-sounding names, “Gale” and “Peeta,” as the male chicks fighting over her. Her name is even more manly than theirs: Katniss Everdeen. The actress playing her, Jennifer Lawrence, is, in many ways, far more masculine than the carefully waxed, manicured, moussed, and gelled “guys” who play her romantic suitors, Liam Hemsworth (Miley Cyrus’ boytoy) and Josh Hutcherson. But, hey, they are suitable arm candy, the role women once played in movies like this.
And Hollywood is working overtime to market this to guys. It’s sad. We’ve already conditioned young men and 20-somethings to be slacker boys living at home with the parents. Now, we’re conditioning them in movies, more and more, to assume the role of the gushing, shrieking girls to a woman far more masculine than they are in a violent setting. Awwww. How cute. What ever happened to the movies where the guy is the hero with two hot chicks fighting over him? It’s basically true to call it a passe trend. The roles have been reversed in so many hard-to-believe movies, I’ve lost count.
Check out how the movie is being marketed to lull men-in-development into girlie-mandom and submission:

For the producers behind “The Hunger Games,” a movie based on a young-adult novel about a teenage girl fighting for survival and struggling with a love triangle, the guys matter.




The movie doesn’t open until March 23, but soothsayers are already predicting an opening-weekend gross in excess of $100 million. Barclays Capital estimates that the movie will generate $275 million domestically, on par with the most recent installment of the “Twilight” series. The studio, Lionsgate, is hoping to launch a multibillion-dollar franchise. Expectations have already sent its stock price soaring.
To avoid falling short of such lofty predictions, Lionsgate has been picking its way through a minefield of gender issues: reeling in male moviegoers without alienating core female fans. But male audiences, long the driver of blockbuster openings, have proved increasingly fickle as they divide their attention with videogames and other diversions.
Set in a dystopian future, “The Hunger Games” centers on Katniss Everdeen, a 16-year-old girl who is called upon to fight 23 other teens to the death in a twisted annual survival competition that is televised to the nation of Panem. The quick pace, strong characters and blood sport of author Suzanne Collins’s trilogy helped attract a robust male readership. . . .
From the start, the books were aimed at a crossover audience. The publisher, Scholastic, considered dozens of cover designs, including portraits of Katniss, before settling on a more “iconic” image of a bird pendant that plays a role in the story, said Rachel Coun, Scholastic’s executive director of marketing. When the book was first released, young male readers were targeted with a promotional videogame online. . . .
Some guys could be turned off by the perception that female cult fandom has sprung up around the movie, reinforced by the boisterous crowds—predominately girls—that have gathered at malls where “Hunger Games” cast members have appeared on a promotional tour. The mall strategy is pure “Twilight.” . . .
Says Vincent Bruzzese, president of Ipsos MediaCT’s Motion Picture Group, which does market research for movie studios and filmmakers: “What they are doing is marketing the archetypal themes that are gender-neutral.” Mr. Bruzzese says young men will watch action heroines.

Uh-huh, heroes are no longer male onscreen. They are “gender neutral,” which is code for: they’re women. Far too many guys have already assumed the position of Lois Lane, Veronica, and Betty (not to mention, Jughead). I know: I’m dating myself with these references, as fans of these flicks probably never heard of any of these characters, none of whom is tough and unfeminine enough for them. And this movie won’t help things.
If you don’t think that Hollywood and pop culture are shaping American males and teaching them how not to be men, you haven’t been paying attention.
And as I always say, not a single matriarchy in history has succeeded. Not one has lasted.
We are fooling ourselves in programming the genders for one.
Stay tuned for my review of the movie on Friday. In the meantime, watch the trailer (which they won’t allow anyone to embed from YouTube).

Here is an interesting article from www.Vdare.com about the Hunger Games as a reflection on society. This follows this post about Cher's son. This follows this post about some of the music that was poplular during 2011. This follows THIS POST about some movies that have been released over the past few years that you might have missed! This all follows this post about guidelines to chosing good movies to watch yourself!

The Hunger Games: America’s Hideous Destiny?

By Paul Kersey

The Hunger Games, perhaps the most anticipated movie in the history of cinema, will be released Friday March 23. Continuing a trend started by J.K Rowling with her Harry Potter series, and seemingly perfected by Stephenie Meyer with her Twilight stories, author Suzanne Collins has crafted the Young Adult franchise that appears likely to top both the popularity of wizards, vampires and werewolves combined.
The Hunger Games, the first book in a post-apocalyptic trilogy, has been ravenously consumed by readers of all ages. It doesn’t have the supernatural elements of Rowling’s or Collins work. But it deals with subject matter much darker and sinister than any curse conjured by Lord Voldemort or torment caused by Bella choosing Edward over Jacob.
It’s never quite clear what happened to the United States of America in The Hunger Games. But what replaces the USA on the North American continent is Collins’ subject.
We learn of droughts, storms, fires, rising ocean levels, and a brutal war waged over the dwindling resources. Ostensibly, that’s a nod to global warming and climate change. Which appears to qualify Collins’ work as distinctly liberal.
But it’s not.
There’s no mention of religion or faith in The Hunger Games either—wouldn’t the survivors of these wars over finite resources need something to believe in? And that appears to come from the liberal playbook too.
But not really.
The country of Panem has risen out of the ruins of our American civilization. The decadent and hated city of Capitol—whose residents have all the luxuries of advanced science, medicine and technology, coupled with the stylings of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy on steroids—is situated in what was the Rocky Mountain region of the American West. In thrall to Capitol are twelve Districts, each tasked with supplying the Capitol with one peculiar resource.
Seventy-four years before The Hunger Games begins, a rebellion against the Capitol by the subjugated Districts broke out. Twelve of the Districts were eventually subdued by the Capitol’s superior military technology. (Nuclear weapons are hinted at). The thirteenth District was completely destroyed.
After the defeat of the Districts, the Treaty of Treason was imposed by the victorious Capitol. This results in the eponymous Hunger Games. As punishment for the insurrection, one male and one female child is picked from each District to compete in this yearly event. These 24 individuals—Collins dubs them “tributes”—fight to the death, all broadcast on television for the enjoyment of the Capitol’s citizens.
Hunger Games’ heroine is Katniss Everdeen, played by Jennifer Lawrence, one of the 8,000 residents of District 12. At the tender age of 16, she volunteers to take her beloved younger sister’s place as one of the two children selected to compete in the 74^th Hunger Games.
Ah, obviously another in a long-line of “butt-kicking” girl-power movies! A Sandra Fluke on the big screen! Katniss is just a younger version of Quentin Tarantino’s “The Bride” from the Kill Bill films!
But that’s not true either.
The residents of District 12 barely subsist on a diet of occasional bread. The residents of the Capitol enjoy opulent feasts at the push of a button. Hence the origins of the term “Hunger Games”.
Early in the book, the heroine Everdeen notes the brutal truth about what the Hunger Games symbolize:

Taking the kids from our districts, forcing them to kill one another while we watch—this is the Capitol’s way of remind us how totally we are at their mercy. How little chance we would stand of surviving another rebellion. Whatever words they use, the real message is clear, “Look how we take your children and sacrifice them and there’s nothing you can do. If you lift a finger, we will destroy every last one of you. Just as we did District Thirteen.”
To make it humiliating as well as torturous, the Capitol requires us to treat the Hunger Games as a festivity, a sporting event pitting every district against the others. The last tribute alive receives a life of ease back home, and their district will be showered with prizes, largely consisting of food.

“It is both a time of repentance and a time for thanks,” says the mayor of District 12 of the festivities that the Capitol mandates for all Districts before the start of the Hunger Games.
The world of Panem is brutish. Life seems devoid of all reason or hope. The Districts’ children are sacrificed in a ritual humiliation, satisfying the depraved urges of the maniacally surgically-enhanced Capitol residents. (Collins depicts skin piercing, augmentation, and plastic surgery gone to the Nth degree, with Capitol citizens having their skin bleached exotic colors, whiskers sewn on their faces, and other strange surgeries that seem straight from the fertile imaginations of current Bravo or E! producers).
Full disclosure: I don’t think that Collins has crafted a political book in a liberal vs. conservative sense.
Thus Glenn Beck’s The Blaze.com found it hard to label the book’s message as either anti-capitalist, anti-state—or just a critique of our current reality TV obsessed culture, which author Collins credits as the origin of The Hunger Games concept.
But what if the book is just a mirror of the United States circa 2012?
We are coerced to believe that global warming is the greatest threat to our future: Collins has made it the source of our civilization’s ultimate demise. A war on religion is being waged at every level of society: in the future, it doesn’t even exist. And, of course, “girl-power” is the motif of the day.
This weekend, tens of millions will flock to see a movie that is, at its basest level, just a story about 24 kids trying to kill one another. What does that say about us?
And what if it is something more?
Out of all the words written about The Hunger Games, I believe Counter Currents’ Gregory Hood has been able to distill the real message of Collins work:[Links added by VDARE.com]

[W]hile centrally produced and disseminated by a culturally destructive elite, a truly popular story can’t help but reflect deeply embedded archetypes or widely shared sentiments, even those that are suppressed or forbidden by the people themselves…
Rather than grim faced blonde Herrenvolk oppressing the colored masses of the Districts, Collins presents an exaggerated portrait of our own progressive elites. They are effeminate and hysterical physical weaklings with pointless lives. The complicated edifice of power reaches its zenith not in a black-garbed order of Übermenschen fanatically dedicated to an occult quest, but in a contemptible menagerie of spoiled sexual deviants that give themselves cat whiskers and brightly colored wigs to look “attractive”…
Rather than Nazis or even old school Communists, the oppressive Capitol society seems composed of liberal arts graduate students, part time workers at feminist bookstores in Portland, and a sprinkling of the wealthier members of Occupy Wall Street. Panem has somehow reversed Hegel’s master-slave relationship — the one who is unwilling to risk his life for honor has become the master.
Selectively controlled technology makes it possible. The Capitol’s media manipulation, genetically engineered creatures, warplanes, and hovercraft remind the reader of the current Hollywood Imperium’s unmanned drones. In contrast, Katniss is a poor and uneducated white huntress, precisely the kind of person sneered at nightly by the likes of Bill Maher or Jon Stewart Leibowitz. Hailing from the Appalachian coal country, she is from the one group that our own society despises beyond all others.
The Districts are contrasted with the Capitol because they produce actually useful products and necessities for life. Workers here are willing to risk their own lives in dangerous jobs to secure food for deeply loved families and friends. Meanwhile, those connected to the system can wallow in pointless luxury…
The name of the country itself says it all: the point of Panem is consumption—the pursuit of happiness, in its most degraded form. Rather than some departure from America, the Capitol is contemporary America taken to its logical conclusion. Neither market worshipping conservatives nor trendy lifestyle liberals should be comfortable with the results.
Gregory Hood, "The Hunger Games" , Counter-Currents Publishing, March 22, 2012

Those of us who consider the “National Question” the paramount issue of the day have—besides deciding whether or not there is an “America” left to defend—the problem of understanding how to pitch and market our message effectively.
The Hunger Games helps. Who in their right mind, reading The Hunger Games and then heading to the theater to see the film, would find any sympathy with the characters who reside in The Capitol—who indulge every degenerate fantasy at the expense of the hard work and sacrifices of the twelve (Red State) Districts’ citizens?
Collin’s book is a story of America’s potentially hideous destiny.
Paul Kersey[Email him] is the author of the blog SBPDL, and has published the books SBPDL Year One, Hollywood in Blackface and Captain America and Whiteness: The Dilemma of the Superhero.