Films – Anthea Appel

It’s Still Wonderful

The other day I was thinking about the film It’s A Wonderful Life. It’s an old black & white film from the 1940’s starring Donna Reed and Jimmy Stewart. The film takes place in a small town, probably somewhere in one of those fly-over states. And because the climax of the movie takes place on Christmas Day, it’s usually shown on TV on Christmas Eve.

It’s a wholesome, family film with a simple and moral message: Everybody makes a difference in somebody else’s life.

But, there’s sad news: I may never see It’s A Wonderful Life on TV again. And I want to say something before it disappears.

Why will it disappear, you ask?

It seems that some feminists are pissed off about this film. They say it’s sexist. Apparently, they don’t like Donna Reed’s feminine, happily married, stay-at-home-mom character. And, not only is she a stay at home mom, but she has five kids. Wow! Nobody would ever think to have that many kids today. Don’t you know the carbon footprint of all those children are contributing to global warming? Hurry! we gotta depopulate the world to save the polar bears! I guess they didn’t get the memo that birth rates have dropped below replacement level. At least, in the West.

According to the Center for Disease Control the birth rate in the U.S. is the lowest it has been in 30 years. Of course, their explanation doesn’t include how feminists have brainwashed women into thinking they must put off marriage to join the work force and go to college. Feminists wrongly let women think they have all the time in the world to get married and have babies. When, in fact, women actually have a small window of time to find a husband and have babies. Her “sexual market value” and “peak fertility” is from the age of 18 up to 29. And each year past 29 years of age, her fertility and husband prospect begins to slowly decline until one day she wakes up at the age of 45 with no husband, no babies, and a dozen cats.

The feminists say the men in the movie are misogynists. You see, the town slut is shunned and ostracized. In the film, Stewart’s character feels sorry for the town slut. He gives her train fare to get out of town and maybe she can clean up her act and start over someplace else. Hey! That’s sexist! Being a slut is what sexual liberation looks like! After all, the feminists proclaim, “it’s my body” and “I can do what I like with it.” Unfortunately, good men don’t marry sluts. I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again: Promiscuity ruins a girls life. Studies have shown that the younger a girl starts having sex, and the number of men she screws, the less likelihood she will get married. Or, if she does get married, she won’t stay married (70% of divorces are initiated by the wife). Numerous sex partners ruins a woman’s chance of bonding with a man.

In the clip below, Jimmy Stewart is with his guardian angel, Clarence, who shows him what the world would be like if he was never born. And, of course, Donna Reed would never have met Jimmy Stewart and all she would have had in life was her career. The feminists ask: What’s wrong with being a librarian? A working woman can be fulfilled without a husband and a bunch of kids. I suppose so, if when laying in your death bed, and instead of being surrounded by loved ones, like children and grandchildren, you could always choke on your last breath and say “Well, at least, I kept the books in alphabetical order.”

Actually, I always envied the Donna Reed’s happy housewife character.

And, I always thought It’s A Wonderful Life was about Good versus Evil (Jimmy Stewart’s struggle against the mean and greedy Big Banker).

If the feminists don’t like this film it’s probably because they’re rooting for evil.

Nexx Banned

by Anthea

It turns out that Netflix was lying.

A few months ago I was blocked from posting film and TV reviews on Netflix. They informed me on my account that they were stopping reviews from the public because of “a lack of interest.” They also claimed that they stopped reviews in mid-July 2018. Well, here it is 6 months later, December, and I still see hundreds of reviews on recently released films posted all over Netflix.

The truth of the matter is: They didn’t like my politically incorrect criticism of the crappy films and Netflix specials that I unfortunately watched. I’m sure I got flagged from the SJWs. OK. Fine. Be honest. Don’t lie to me so that you can keep taking my money.

Well, they’re not getting my money no ‘mo. I cancelled my account.

If you’re smart you’d cancel your account too. Why would you want to support a bunch of people who produce degenerate TV series like their new show “Baby”?

A new Netflix series is being slammed by The National Center on Sexual Exploitation, which is accusing the series of promoting sex trafficking.

The series, Baby, which begins streaming Friday, is described as exploring “the unseen lives of Roman high schoolers. Loosely inspired by a true story, the series follows a group of Parioli teenagers as they defy society in their search for identity and independence against the backdrop of forbidden love, family pressures, and shared secrets.”

But the organization says the show “portrays a group of teenagers entering into prostitution as a glamorized ‘coming-of-age’ story” and notes that in the real-life scandal that Baby is based on, “the mother of one of the teenagers was arrested for sex trafficking.”

“Despite being at ground zero of the #MeToo movement, Netflix appears to have gone completely tone-deaf on the realities of sexual exploitation,” said Dawn Hawkins, executive director of the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. “Despite the outcry from survivors of sex trafficking, subject matter experts, and social service providers, Netflix promotes sex trafficking by insisting on streaming Baby. Clearly, Netflix is prioritizing profits over victims of abuse.”

In January, the Center along with a group of “survivors of sex trafficking and/or subject matter experts” sent a letter to Netflix executives expressing their “deep concern” regarding the Italian drama.

Why is the lack of morals always promoted as a “search for identity and independence”? They make it sound so desirable. I can just see a bunch of impressionable teenage girls watching a show like this and then think it’s cool to be a thot. I got news for them: Promiscuity ruins a girls life. Studies have shown that the younger a girl starts having sex, and the number of men she screws, the less likelihood she will get married. Or, if she does get married, she won’t stay married. Numerous sex partners ruins a woman’s chance of bonding with a man. Maybe that’s what the social engineers of our society want. A lot of lonely unmarried women regretting their lives.

The entertainment industry has always been the perfect place to mold our culture.

Nexxed

by Anthea

The other day I wanted to post a film review on Netflix but I was blocked. The explanation was that Netflix would no longer allow the public to post reviews on their website due to a lack of interest. The actual wording was:

“You can no longer post reviews on Netflix.

Netflix customers were able to leave reviews on Netflix.com until mid-2018, when reviews were removed due to declining use.

To learn how Netflix suggests TV shows and movies we think you’ll love, visit our Ratings & Recommendations article.”

This is nonsense. The truth is many of the reviews were getting hostile towards the “social justice warrior” and “political correct” content that are in most films and TV shows. I’ve read many of these pissed-off reviews and I posted a few myself.

But that’s a no-no. You have to love the progressive, liberal narrative or you’re goin’ to be censored.

I did a Google search to see if I can find any news on why Netflix removed their review section. My guess was right: Negative reviews = “trolls.”

The use of “review bombing” by trolls in search of new battlefields for their cultural warfare is also a problem. That’s what happened to comedian Amy Schumer’s Netflix special last year — just before the company switched from stars to a simpler thumb up/down system — while recent releases like The Last Jedi show similarly suspicious trends.

Earlier this year, Rotten Tomatoes censored all audience reviews for the film “Black Panther.”

“Now, targeting another Disney film with a notably diverse cast, the group launched the Facebook event “Give Black Panther A Rotten Audience Score on Rotten Tomatoes,” which drew only a few thousand members. But then the review-aggregation site, perhaps trying to get ahead of criticism this time around, issued a statement, according to the Hollywood Reporter.

We at Rotten Tomatoes are proud to have become a platform for passionate fans to debate and discuss entertainment and we take that responsibility seriously,” the site said Thursday in a statement. “While we respect our fans’ diverse opinions, we do not condone hate speech. Our team of security, network and social experts continue to closely monitor our platforms and any users who engage in such activities will be blocked from our site and their comments removed as quickly as possible.”

The Facebook group has since been deactivated.

“Last Jedi” garnered a 91 percent “fresh” rating among professional critics but only a 48 percent audience score— an unprecedented disparity for Star Wars films. It’s impossible to know whether the purported attack had an effect. Writer-director Rian Johnson’s “Jedi” did endure critiques about plotting, character arcs and perceived deviations from franchise tradition.

Professional critics don’t know everything, or even have particularly good taste. The old saying the customer is always right is still true. Movie goers don’t have to like what the critics like. I’m not a Star Wars fan, and the “Last Jedi” did suck, and I didn’t see “Black Panther.”

In May 2018, Netflix hired Barak Obama and his wife, Michele, to produce content for Netflix’s streaming service. Obama claims he doesn’t intend to fight against conservatives, but pursue ideas he pushed during his administration. In other words, his own bias, and leftist agenda. Netflix’s conservative customers weren’t happy. Many protested and cancelled their subscription.

“More political crap from Netflix,”
[another] Twitter user wrote. “Many will cancel their subscriptions. Hope it was worth it.”

I’m sure Netflix couldn’t care less.

Hollywood and the Media have always been used as a tool for social engineering. And they are willing to put their SJW-agenda over profits. Hollywood doesn’t care they’ve ruined your favorite childhood film or comic book character. They’re on a mission to control and manipulate your mind, and if you don’t like it, tough titties.

Based On A Story By…WTF?

by Anthea

Hollywood loves to turn books into movies. I supposed that’s a good idea since most people don’t like to read. Well, that’s what Steve Jobs said in a New York Times article. He said, “Forty percent of the people in the U.S. read one book or less last year” (Whatever year that was. It was an old article). Oh, really? I know people who haven’t read a book in years.

But it’s usually the best-sellers that get made into movies. So, ironically, somebody must have been reading those books to turn them into best-sellers.

I think book-reading is an acquired hobby that you pick up as a kid, providing you have a parent or a mentor that encourages reading. I was a big book reader as a kid. When I was nine-years-old and living in a suburban neighborhood in Missouri there used to be this book-mobile that would park on a corner down the street. I was such a precocious child that I would read books that were above my age range. I remember one time I wanted to take out The Call of The Wild by Jack London. The librarian said, “Oh, no. That book is too old for you.” So, she handed me a few books that she felt were more suited for a 4th grader. I was offended. The books were in big print, too easy to read, too short. I insisted on Call of the Wild and I took it home to read. Yes, it did have big words I didn’t understand. But, nothing that a dictionary couldn’t handle.

The old saying “the book is better than the movie” is usually true. Maybe it’s because the movie studios like to change the entire plot, or a good percentage of the original story. They see a premise, or a theme, within the storyline that they like, buy the copyrights, and write a screenplay they feel will be easier to tell to the movie-going public. Or, maybe it’s because they have a political or social agenda they want to propagandize. For example, in the 1951 film The Day The Earth Stood Still we see at the end of the film Klaatu giving a New World Order speech where he pushes (or, threatens) globalism to an audience of scientists.

There was also a scene where Klaatu references the United Nation. And if the conspiracy theories are right, the UN with its Agenda 21 & 30, would probably welcome Klaatu’s planet as a member of the Council of Foreign Relations. Or, Klaatu can attack the Earth with robots. There’s nothing better than an alien invasion to bring Earth together to embrace the New World Order.

A globalist agenda is not in the original short story. Did you know TDTESS was based on a short story? Yes, it was: “Farewell to the Master” by Harry Bates, published in 1940.

Well, the original story is nothing like the movie.

The story begins after Klaatu has arrived in a space ship and lands on the front lawn of the White House. By his side is a eight-foot tall green-colored robot named Gnut (the movie changed the robot’s name to Gort). The first words out of the space man’s mouth is “I’m Klaatu and this is Gnut.” Klaatu is immediately shot dead and buried in a nearby mausoleum. The robot stands frozen in place. It doesn’t blow anything up, it doesn’t attack anyone, or shoot laser beams from its eyes. There is no Mrs Benson or a little boy Klaatu befriends. The protagonist of the story is a newspaper reporter. Late one night, he discovers that the robot is sneaking back into the ship. The reporter confronts Gnut and together they go to the mausoleum to retrieve a recording of Klaatu’s voice. Then the robot attempts to clone Klaatu from the recording. Well, that never made any sense to me. Wouldn’t it be better to clone from a sample of the corpse’s DNA instead of a machine? Anyway, the clone dies as soon as it’s created. At the end of the story the robot reveals he’s the master and the living being of Klaatu is the servant.

Getting back to the movie: There’s something I have to get off my chest about Gort the robot. Have you noticed that Gort has “Josh Brolin-arms?” (Or, better-known-as stubby arms out-of-proportion to the body)? The robot is obviously “a man in a monster suit” played by the extremely tall Lock Martin. Martin donned the suit anytime there were scenes when the robot was moving. But in the scenes when the robot wasn’t moving they substituted the actor with a fiberglass model. Whoever built it made the arms too short. Shame on you. Didn’t you pay attention in your anatomy art classes?

Another well-known sci-fi movie based on a short story is The Thing. I’m talking about the 1951 version. It was produced by one of my favorite film directors, Howard Hawks. Hawks is best known for his romantic and comedy classics starring Humphrey Bogart and Cary Grant. Horror films just didn’t seem to be a genre you’d expect from Hawks, which is probably why he produced and not directed the film. But still The Thing had Hawk’s quirky humor, his same fast-talking-wise-cracking characters you’d see in his romantic comedies like Bringing Up Baby or His Girl Friday.

But the The Thing was scary. But it’s nothing like the short story it’s based on: Who Goes There? by John W. Campbell. The only theme in the book Hollywood kept in the movie was: a flying saucer is found in the South Pole, its alien occupant is encased in a block of ice and brought to a military installation, escapes, and kills people. When the military scientists discover that the Thing is made up of plant matter–or as one of the character says, “A giant carrot”–they’re now able to kill the creature by cooking it with a blast of high voltage. But in the book, the alien is more complicated. It’s described as some kind of a predatory life form who absorbs other life forms, thus mimicking its victims appearance. This strikes paranoia in the hearts of the men in the military base. One by one, they try to determine who of their colleagues is human or alien.

The Thing that Man fears most is everywhere and everyone

Well, I guess Hawks and friends thought the mimic idea was too far over the heads of the 1950s movie-going public. Yup, like a killer plant humanoid was a better idea. However, the 1982 re-make by John Carpenter does stay faithful to the John Campbell’s short story. So, if you get a chance, check out Carpenter’s The Thing. It’s scary as hell.

Read a book! It’s better than the movie.

No Harm Done

by Anthea

insideld01-2

Whenever my sister and I watch a movie together we play a game. We don’t even have to take our eyes off the screen to play this game. The game is: I try and guess the next move the protaganist will make, or what the twist is, or who’s the murderer, or what’s the next conflict. I’m usually right 98% of the time. And my sister will laugh and say something like “You should go work in Hollywood.”

My answer is, “Yeah. Because I have all their formulas down pact.” Who was it that said everything ever written boils down to seven plots?

I’ve noticed that anytime I see an animal in a movie—whether it’s a cat, dog, horse, or whatever—it dies. This is a guarantee. It’s bad enough that I have to worry that “no animal was harmed in the making of this motion picture,” but the worse part is, they first endear the animal to you (like someone’s dole-eyed pet), and then they kill it. They don’t really kill it, the ‘character’ that the animal plays gets killed. This is especially true if the film is a thriller: the killer lurks in the woods, the dog barks, chases after the bad guy, and then the doggy death yelp.

How many times have I seen this in movies? Answer: almost every time I see an animal in a film. It must be a screenwriter’s 101 formula for setting up the tension. Sometimes I wonder if it’s not some kind of “symbolic” blood sacrifice to some Luciferian Hollywood god. Let me compile a list of a few films:

The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo
Baadanook
Secret Window
Dead Calm
Splice
Inside Llewyn Davis
The Autopsy of Jane Doe
The Revenant
My Cousin Rachel
The Shape of Water
The Cure For Wellness

Forget the list. There’s too many to name, and I’m not sure about the Coen Brothers’ Inside Llewyn Davis because the cat’s body disappears after we assume it was hit by a car. It’s still a disturbing scene. And, remember the scene in the 1979 film Alien when the crew was evacuating the ship? At the last minute, Ripley hears the cat, Jones, meow over the intercom. Suddenly, she remembers to run back to get the cat. Someone in the audience yelled out, “Forget the cat!” A few people laughed, but I was relieved Ripley rescued the cat and they both escaped together.

So, there’s a few happy endings for animals in films.

Gravity’s Sweet Chariot

by Anthea

I enjoyed Alfonso Cuaron’s film Gravity. The special effects were amazing. Sandra Bullock gave a fantastic performance as Mission Specialist Dr. Ryan Stone. But, that ending bothered me. I mean, really now. A rookie astronaut who failed her Landing Simulator Training Test three times manages to land a space module—with instructions in Chinese, no less—in a daring and too prefect landing in a middle of a lake surrounded by a beautiful land mass. Even the weather was prefect.

Yeah, I know, Hollywood likes happy endings.

I walked out of the movie theatre loving the film, but in complete disbelief over the ending. Then it dawned on me. Bullock’s character Dr. Ryan died in space. At what precise moment in the film she died I’m not sure. Maybe it was during the scene where she ran out of oxygen and is struggling to get inside the International Space Station.

What are you talking about? We see her survive at the end of the film. Or, did she?

Remember the scene inside the ISS where she’s sitting in the Russian Soyuz space module and decides to commit suicide by carbon dioxide poisoning? And then the ghost of George Clooney’s dead character opens the air lock and sits down next to her? If you do remember the scene (watch the video below)….Clooney is not wearing an air tank. Why would he? He’s dead.

Well, Sandra Bullock’s character does the same thing: Not wear an air tank during a space walk. Twice, as a matter of fact. There is one scene where she goes outside (in space) to do repairs to the Russian module, and then there’s another scene where she is trying to maneuver the Russian module over to the Chinese space station but runs out of gas and is stuck several yards away. So, she goes outside with a fire extinguisher and hurls herself towards the air-lock of the Chinese craft. All without an air tank!

Now, I’m thinking to myself: Well, she is wearing a Russian space suit, so maybe they have some gadget in the suit that supplies oxygen to the astronaut that I’m not seeing. So, I Googled Russian space suits. Here is photo of the Orlan space suit that is used on space walks HERE. It is semi-rigid; has a solid body and helmet with flexible arms. But that’s not the suit Bullock is wearing. She is wearing the form-fitting cat suit version of the Sokol. It was first designed in 1973 and is still in use as of 2013. It is referred to as a rescue suit. It’s a pressurized suit that is meant to be worn inside the ship during launch and re-entry of the Soyuz, or in the case of an emergency, such as, a threat of depressurization inside the cabin. Instead of an air tank, hoses are attached to the abdomen of the suit to supply oxygen and ventilation. It is never worn on space walks. Read more info HERE. Watch the video below…where’s her air tank?

She doesn’t need an air tank, because she’s a ghost. She’s dead, too.

Yes, Hollywood does make technical and historical mistakes. But, considering how meticulous Cuaron was to recreate the ISS, inside and out, the view of Earth from space…as a matter of fact, even the NASA astronauts have commented on how accurate the director was with the interior of the ISS and the equipment used in space. So, why would he forget an air tank? Because he didn’t. He was giving you a hint.

In the conversation between Clooney and Bullocks characters, Clooney tells her to “let go.” Yeah, I know it’s beautiful up here. There’s no one here to hurt you. And, finally “It’s time to go home.” And then she wakes up from her dream and the rest of the film is her journey of accepting her death and crossing-over to the other side. Cuaron couldn’t have been more blatant. Unless, he ended the film with a vision of Ryan Stone’s dead daughter standing on the beach.

Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin’ for to carry me home.

“Under City” Exploring New York City’s Tunnels

by Anthea

This show originally aired on January 21, 2011:

My guest tonight is STEVEN DUNCAN. Mr. Duncan is an urban historian & photographer. “Under City” is a mini documentary made by Mr. Duncan and videographer Andrew Wonder about exploring NYC subway and train tunnels and climbing bridges. Their adventures were recently featured in the New York Times and on NPR. In Steve Duncan’s own words: “I try to peel back the layers of a city to see what’s underneath. From the tops of bridges to the depths of sewer tunnels, these explorations of the urban environment help me puzzle together the interconnected, multi-dimensional history and complexity of the great metropolises of the world.” www.undercity.org

Watch the film here:

UNDERCITY from Andrew Wonder on Vimeo.