American Psycho Author Brett Easton Ellis: Critics Are Overpraising One Battle After Another Out of Ideological Sympathy; the Pro-Antifa Film Will Age Like Milk

One Battle After Another was received ecstatically by left-wing critics. Although it's reportedly a well-directed film, the ecstasy comes from the film "meeting the moment," rallying the left to take violent means to undo the Trump Revolution.

The film is explicitly in favor of left-wing terrorists blowing up and killing "right-wing" cartoon characters. I would say it's explicitly pro-Antifa, but the film is careful to never call the terrorists it glorifies "Antifa." But it's also clear that's who the terrorists are.

It's expected to be nominated, and win, just about every Oscar in every category at this year's Academy Awards. Partly because Hollywood just isn't making many worthy movies any more, partly because they can't stop virtue signalling for every Current Year cause, but mostly because they're left-wing psychopaths with a keen interest in encouraging violence against the right.

And so they'll virtue signal this pro-Antifa-Terrorist movie into a historic sweep of the Oscars.

Christian Toto wants to know if we'll get all the Oscar nominations if we produce a film that explicitly glorifies right-wing violence against left-wing government officials.

Here's a timely thought experiment.

What if director Paul Thomas Anderson dropped a far-Right movie into this year's awards season mix?

He then rewrites the actual One Battle After Another, flipping left to right and right to left, to see how the left might react to a movie celebrating right wing terrorists blowing up left wing government officials.

The project, dubbed "One Battle After Another," features alt-Right radicals battling it out with government officials during a Democrat administration.

The protesters ignite incendiary devices around a center where January 6 defendants are being held in solitary confinement, even those who merely entered the Capitol during the "insurrection." A few milled around outside the building that day, never joining the riot.

Some radicals in the film detonate bombs in government buildings, unsure if any people are still inside. They don't seem to care.

One radical kills a security officer in a heated moment, helping several J6 activists escape in the process. She's a heroic figure, sultry and uncompromising in her beliefs. A triumphant image of her firing a machine gun while very pregnant causes a stir.

Her beta male beau (Leonardo DiCaprio) can only hope to keep up with her revolutionary pluck.

By all accounts, the couple and their colleagues represent the film's complicated but unabashed heroes. If they ever regret their murderous ways, it isn't captured on screen.

Anderson's visceral filmmaking has never been better. Sean Penn delivers a blistering turn as a Democrat-appointed colonel who will stop at nothing to capture DiCaprio's on-screen daughter.

The storytelling is intense. The performances are all above reproach. It's alternately scary, humorous and ripped from today's headlines. Oh, and the film relentlessly paints Democratic officials as racist, hateful and, often, murderous in nature.

Would that film's Rotten Tomatoes score stand at 96 percent "fresh?" What if its release coincided with real-world violence that eerily reflected the film's messaging?

Doubtful, at best.

...

Critics are fawning over the film, suggesting the Best Picture race unofficially ended with its debut. Trade publications like Variety and The Hollywood Reporter are cranking out stories about the movie, pushing its awareness factor as far as it will go.

Variety cries that the film could "rule the cultural conversation," giving the term "wish-casting" an extreme close-up.

American Psycho author Brett Easton Ellis knows something about provocations in art, and says that this dismal movie will win all the awards -- but be forgotten as a "musty" relic of TDS leftism in a couple of years.

"If there was ever a movie to kind of do a deep-dive on, it would be One Battle After Another," the American Psycho and Less Than Zero author said in a recent episode of his podcast. "I just didn't really like it. It has nothing to do with any kind of ideological shit. I know there are a lot of people on the right who hate the movie and I guess that's kind of fair because I think the liberal, the very liberal entertainment press--I'm not painting them black or anything with that, it's just a fact--have severely overrated it."

Ellis went on to argue that the film will one day be considered "a kind of musty relic of the post-Kamala Harris era of, you know, that thing that everyone gathers around and pretends is so fantastic and so great when it really isn't, just to make a point."

...

"Overall, yeah, there's a liberal mustiness to this movie that already feels very dated by October 2025. Very dated," Ellis said, as heard here. "It just doesn't read the room. It reads a tiny corner of the room but it does not read what is going on in America. It thinks something else is going on."

Despite the leftist media's insistence on willing this pro-terrorism piece of shit into a hit, it's a certified flop, which even the left-wing Variety must concede after just a couple of weeks in theaters.

'One Battle After Another' Projected to Lose $100 Million Theatrically as 'Smashing Machine' and Others Also Struggle Due to Oversized Budgets

...

Even Paul Thomas Anderson's "One Battle After Another," led by Leonardo DiCaprio, struggled to break out despite being hailed as a generational masterpiece. Though the global haul of $140 million is impressive for a film that's original, R rated and nearly three hours long, "One Battle" requires roughly $300 million to break even. That's because Warner Bros. spent more than $130 million on production and $70 million on promotional efforts, and ticket sales are typically split 50-50 between studios and theater operators. Meanwhile DiCaprio typically gets first-dollar gross on his movies, meaning he gets a percentage of box office revenues before the studio recoups any costs.

"These prestige-type movies have failed to create a sense of FOMO among audiences," says Fandango's box office analyst Shawn Robbins. "They weren't event-ized enough."

Here's another explanation: If I wanted to watch hardcore pro-terrorist propaganda, I could see it for free just by turning on CNN and MSNBC.

Update:

7 Allan Ng of Film Threat pissed off a bunch of loser critics when he called out the politics of One Battle After Another. His response was great. "Why did you refuse to review or even watch 'Sound of Freedom?'"

Posted by: buzzion

In related woke Hollywood news: A Doctor Who writer declares the show "as dead as we've ever known it."

It has been "dead" before, but it was actually just mostly dead. The Doctor's adventures continued in books, and sales of DVDs and merch remained brisk even after the original series' cancellation.

Now, this writer pronounces Doctor Who dead-dead and incapable of being revived.

In the opinion of Doctor Who franchise writer Robert Shearman, the season-ending regeneration of the 15th Doctor into actress Billie Piper, who herself previously played fan favorite companion Rose Tyler, has effectively "put a full stop" on the series' long-running narrative.

Shearman, whose Who writing credits include a number of Big Finish's audio dramas, The Frozen Wastes novel, and the 2005 reboot episode Dalek, wherein he reintroduced the public to the titular metal terrors, offered his thoughts on the Time Lord's current state of suspension while being interviewed for Doctor Who Magazine #622, the publication's most recent issue.

Per transcripts of the interview provided separately by Radio Times' Morgan Cormack and Bleeding Cool's Adi Tantimedh, when asked about the aforementioned regeneration, the writer opined, "At the moment I'm in a 'pull' phase. It's weird because the show is probably as dead as we've ever known it."

"After 1989, we had, for years, a current Doctor. Now, everything that is ever going to be produced in Doctor Who terms is going to feel retrogressive. At least with the New Adventures [novels] and then the BBC Books, you thought, 'It's the current Doctor -- McCoy or McGann.'"

Drawing his thoughts to a close, Shearman ultimately declared, "No one's going to start writing Doctor Who books with a Billie Piper Doctor, because no one knows what that means.

Because the show was ending and Russell T. Davies wanted to tease some kind of cliffhanger, they filmed a bullshit post-credit ending featuring former companion Billie Piper suddenly becoming the new Doctor. No one believes this is a real casting decision, as Billie Piper hasn't signed on to do a show that no longer exists. And it wouldn't make any sense anyway.

The gay propagandist Russell T. Davies got made that the public rejected his all-gay all-the-time racebent woke Doctor and so he just burned the show down. If you don't appreciate nonstop gay and trans propaganda targeted at children, then you can't have Doctor Who.

Fine by me!

Meanwhile, the BBC's official position is that they just haven't made up their minds about the Disney-funded show.

And although concrete word on Doctor Who's future has yet to be given by either the BBC or the series' international distributor Disney, the fact that it remains in 'cancellation limbo' five years after its last season finale speaks volumes to just how far the iconic sci-fi series has fallen out of favor with the general public.

Bonus: Keira Knightly says, in so many words, "no, I'm not going to be bullied into your trantifa boycott, go f**k yourself, next question."

posted by Ace at 04:10 PM

| Access Comments