The Liberal Assassination Wet Dream Movie I Attended Last Night

Last night Jess and I went with my family to Shooter, a film starring Mark Wahlberg about a world class special ops sniper who gets called in to help plan against an assassination plot against the President only to get framed. It’s based on the book Point of Impact by Stephen Hunter.
As an action movie it was actually pretty good (if sort of predictable), and I would have enjoyed the film were I not constantly distracted by all the childish, ham-handed liberal digs at Republicans and conservatives in the movie. I’m told that Hunter’s original story is fairly a-political, and my uncle (an arch conservative if there ever was one) liked it, but the movie was a veritable cornucopia of left-wing digs at the right. For instance:

  • Danny Glover’s character, who is responsible for planning the assassination plot and framing Wahlberg’s character, guides his plots from a room with portraits of Republican presidents lining the wall. Ronald Reagan, Richard Nixon, Teddy Roosevelt, etc.
  • One of the good guys, when he’s not wearing the FBI’s suit-and-tie uniform, spends about half the movie walking around in a Che Guevera shirt. Good guys=socialist lovers.
  • The reason for the assassination plot turns out to be a mass grave of Ethiopians killed by American contractors at the behest of a Republican Senator from Montana who was facilitating the building of an oil pipeline through the area.
  • Said Republican Senator (played by Ned Beatty) at one point has a soliloquy about foolish Americans who “think that one person can make a difference” and how you often have to “kill that one person” to convince them otherwise.
  • Wahlberg’s character even turns out to be a 9/11 truther, at one point sitting down at his desk in his home, uttering the line “I wonder what lies they’re telling us today” and then picking up and perusing a published copy of the 9/11 commission report.

You’d think that Wahlberg’s character, the hero of the movie and a devoted (if alienated) military gun nut who lives in a secluded mountain cabin and hunts for his food, would be a right-wingish character. But he’s not. Instead he’s held up as a dupe. An American soldier who thinks he’s fighting the good fight when really he’s just fighting to murder innocent people in order to boost oil industry profits. And, at the end of the movie, Wahlberg’s character wipes out all the nasty Republican scum and then rides off into the sunset in a muscle car with the clear indication that he’s now some sort of vigilante out looking to murder other Republican scum.
You could almost hear the liberal Hollywood elite sighing with delight and satisfaction at that.
Are all these political overtones really necessary? Do American audiences enjoy them? Personally, I’m a little tired of all the “evil conservative Republican” conspiracies in the movies. I don’t think the bad guys always need to be Republican. I’m also a little tired of our government and our military almost always being portrayed as the bad guys in these films. Can’t we have a movie set in modern times where America and its military is a force for good in the world? Because our nation and our military is the foremost force for good and justice in the world, as imperfect as it is at times.
And you can’t tell me that all these silly moonbats we see protesting on these streets, and these wild-eyed liberal bomb throwers like Nancy Pelosi and Howard Dean, haven’t inspired a single movie script writer to put together a story about a left-wing plot to assassinate a President Bush-like character in order to stop a war like the war in the middle east. Just once I’d like to see a plot like that, but that movie isn’t going to be made.
Instead Hollywood will keep pounding the “evil Republicans in the pockets of the corporations” story line into the ground.

Related posts

Comments are closed.

Top