"...disdain for Christianity within the Hollywood film industry."

Hollywood and LGBTUVWXYZ in the case of Jason Alexander.

 

Hollywood is a cesspool.

 

From the article:

The plot follows the lives of two unsuccessful filmmakers (Funny or Die regulars Barnett and Tanner Thomason), who set out to make a film about Christianity on the premise that “faith-based” films are “extremely profitable and set out on a mission to make one of their own.”

Alexander, who is best known for his role as George Costanza in the hit 90’s sitcom Seinfeld, will play the role of Nicky Steele, “the eccentric head of a weight loss tea pyramid scheme and hero to Barnett’s character.”

Critics say the film will be a parody of the Christian film industry, honing in on the widespread disdain for Christianity within the Hollywood film industry.

The disdain here is not about Christianity per se, but about disdaining the Christian film industry. The film will satirize faith-based movies. It will be a parody of the Christian film industry.

Is Hollywood a cesspool of immorality? Yes.
Is Hollywood antagonistic towards Christians? Yes.
Is this movie going to disdain Christianity? (as the thread title states) Could be, but can't say for certain.

Take a look at some of these faith-based movies. Even Christians make fun of them. Generally speaking they are made on a shoestring budget, poorly acted, poorly directed, with laughable scripts, wooden AND stereotyped characters, and contain dialogue that you'd never hear in real life.

Go watch Left Behind, "starring" Kirk Cameron. You want to see bad film making, there it is. Or check out Time Changer with Gavin McLeod. Atrocious stuff.

Or how about Judgment (Apocalypse IV) with Corbin Bernsen and Mr. T. I haven't seen this one yet but it's on my Amazon Prime watch list. I've skipped over it at least a dozen times because I'm afraid to watch it for fear of laughing out loud.

 

ITL, go ahead and watch it so I don't have to, then critique it here. You needn't be so honest that you publicly confess you actually LOL'd. You can save that for your pastor. You can just tell us you were tempted. Or did you mean it hurts to laugh so hard?

 

Hollywood is Jews.​

 

Jason Alexander is Jewish

 

Jewish

 

...maybe that's the intent.

 

I tried to watch "Judgment" last night. I lasted about 35 minutes. The pain. Oh, the pain.

The movie is apparently the fourth in a series about the end times. We are about 2 years into the tribulation. The anti-Christ, a man named Franco Mackaloosa (and openly called "the messiah" or "your eminence") has brought about world peace, created a one world government, O.N.E., or One Nation Earth, instituted the mark for buying and selling, and is persecuting Christians. The World Leader of 8 billion people has a cramped, spartan office where he has hung a large portrait of himself on the wall behind his desk because that's what Evil Dictators do for interior design. He enjoys tapping on the side of his aquarium to scare the fish. (The bastard!)

Rather than execute the leader of the Christian underground, Hannah, by guillotine he's hatched a plot to put her on trial on world TV (yes, world TV, not national TV) to gin up his popularity and further denigrate Christians. She's to be tried for hate crimes against humanity. The entire trial has been scripted and the outcome predetermined. I guess they figured they should have a trial before the execution.

Corbin Bernsen (who played L.A. Law's smarmy pretty boy divorce attorney Arnie Becker in the 80's) is the defense lawyer, Mitch Somebody. I had unfounded high hopes he might add some gravitas to the movie. Turns out Mitch's dad was the pastor of The Living Word church in a previous movie. In one of the few competently made scenes in the movie, Bernsen goes through a range of emotional face-making as he longingly looks at the boarded up remains of his dad's old church. (BTW, Mitch has taken the mark of the beast.) I admit I had a teensy-weensy passing flash of interest in this sub plot development of conflict within Mitch.

Mr. T takes another stab at trying to be an actor and plays a Christian freedom fighter putting together a team of terrorists to free Hannah from going on trial. As usual, he barks his lines in a gruff manner and overdoes his two facial expressions. One of his fellow terrorists, er, freedom fighters, objects to his plan to use violence, stating "you're a believer now, time to start acting like one." <sigh>

As part of his plan to recruit people Mr T approaches a pair of starving street people, one of whom just asked the other, "if I only get one 6 put on my hand will they let me buy a pizza?" [See what I mean about bad dialogue?]

The set for the trial is laughable. Contemporary modern art style, all white molded plastic with a spectator gallery ringing the perimeter one floor above the courtroom. That's so the spectators can rain boos and throw things down at the participants.

The prosecutor, the defense attorney, and the judge have brought their scripts and set them out in front of them on their tables. They consult the scripts, turning pages as they go along. I guess this is a visual cue to us dumb moviegoers which shows everyone in this sham trial is on the same page. Naturally, this coordinated page turning of papers by the judge and opposing lawyers does not look suspicious at all to the billions of people viewing on TV.

In her opening statement the prosecutor brings along a canoe paddle and uses it as a prop to show how the whole world is rowing in unison towards a better future since His Eminence brought world peace but that Christians want to destroy the paddle and go back to the old ways.

Just then a man wielding a knife bursts into the courtroom and tries to attack Hannah. Of course he is stopped by security just in the nick of time. [The trial of the millennium and a guy with a knife gets through security?]

Mitch gets up in court to give the defense's opening statement. He starts to go off script which prompts the judge to call for a recess. In judge's chambers Mitch explains he's going to shift the focus of the trial from Hannah to Jesus Himself! He's going to put God on trial! Coincidentally, the anti-Christ is also in the room and he agrees to this plan.

At this point my hand snapped up the remote and I exited the movie.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

Anything with a Christian message is better than what they do.

 

A ham-fisted, incompetently presented Christian message can be an embarrassment.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL

 

The problem is that it has taken those films to be made over the years to build up interest in financing those kinds of films. If they did not exist there would be none at all. We cannot go from nothing to the very best all in one swift move.

 

I visited Papette, Tahiti, and toured the town. When commenting of some of the trouble there my touring guide said that the Polynesian people are normally very sweet and they got their evil ways by watching American movies. My thoughts were that God is going to hold Hollywood very much accountable for the evil they instigated on planet Earth.

 

This is not an insignificant point, but there are aspects that evade real scrutiny, probably because articles about this tend to be from a skewed ethnic Jewish perspective. So, for example, their communist aspirations are conspicuously downplayed, their love for America amplified.

Also, since Hollywood Jews can acceptably openly embrace many religions or none, Christianity and, for the most part, more orthodox Judaism being blatant exceptions, Hollywood has been able to progressively express and promote all manner of immorality and antichrist sentiment to the detriment of American society.

 

No doubt your suffering would have been rewarded had you, like a good Christian, endured to the end. However, I cannot criticize you for abandoning the test. Thanks for trying. But, of all places to encounter it legitimately, I was hoping for a generous sprinkling of the infamous Mr. T "Fool!" That probably would have made it for me, but then I'm easily entertained.

BTW, I've been reliably informed by those competent to judge that some of the 2nd trilogy Star Wars films had a weak plot and horrible dialog woodenly acted, saved only by their action sequences and special effects (and musical score?). Quite frankly, though I can't claim to have much taste, I think the first few were lame, cliché—I'm just able to summon sufficient tolerance under certain conditions. And... All things are possible for those who suspend disbelief!

 

Yes. Here's how they do it.

1. Some actor or actress takes up a cause because a friend/relative/child/parent of theirs has suffered a perceived injustice.

2. Via public relations, social media, interviews, etc. this person promotes their cause.

3. Eventually it becomes a topic for a motion picture.

4. A script is written that features sympathetic characters fighting the perceived injustice.

5. The movie gets made. A bunch of movie critics are wined and dined and positive reviews follow.

6. A new "normalcy" for this cause has been inflicted on the American people. Whatever the deviancy or issue or cause was, it is fast becoming "normal".

I'm thinking of movies like Brokeback Mountain, Philadelphia, The Crying Game, Boys Don't Cry, Call Me By Your Name, etc. etc. and even politically slanted movies pushing a particular agenda like An Inconvenient Truth, 9/11, The Day After Tomorrow, Supersize Me, JFK, etc. etc.

Look for pedophilia and polygamy to be causes that Hollywood will attempt to normalize next.

 

Yes, and it would be a mistake to underestimate the even more insidious influence of TV shows similarly directed and controlled, as this is really where they gain the initial foothold, have more time to do so, and reach the youngest audiences unattended.

But since the advent of the Internet, this assessment is likely somewhat behind the times. That is, how much influence is being exerted by what platform, with what content, and on whom, may be harder to assess. For certain, pornography has mushroomed (and in viler forms), but so have other, less destructive entertainment options. I would like to state it more positively but feel that infamous Mr. T epithet would begin echoing in my head if I did.

 

It's just as significant as if Muslims, or Hindu, or Wikki, or Marxists, or any other SINGLE ethnic/religious entity had total control of such mass media. You're naïve. You got a problem with pointing out fields/disciplines/specialties where Jews Dominate? You're naïve if you do. They are a very powerful influential element in our society.

[add]

Lol, disregard, I totally misread the post. You're NOT naïve.