Tag Archives: review

National Review’s Nordlinger: Conservatives ‘Far Too Timid, Delicate, and Forgiving’ About Media Bias

At National Review Online’s The Corner on Tuesday, NR senior editor Jay Nordlinger was spurred by the David Weigel controversy and the open-mic press pounding on Sarah Palin’s California college speech to suggest conservatives aren’t loud or persistent enough about protesting bias against the Right:  I think many of my conservative colleagues are far too gingerly when it comes to liberal media bias. Far too timid, delicate, and forgiving. For a long time, complaining about media bias has been seen as uncouth. It’s something we all need to learn to live with, like death, taxes, and mosquitoes. Don’t be uncool by bitching about it, man…. Conservatives should be frank and bold when it comes to the media, as to everything else. And if others say you’re tiresome or whiny or uncool…well, so be it. Did you sign up for conservatism to be cool? One more thing, before I go: I have a friend who’s an old-school political reporter, practically a dinosaur. He stresses the principle, “No cheering in the pressbox” — a statement taken from sports journalism, obviously. No cheering in the pressbox? The guys I have in mind — mainstream-media reporters all — don’t so much cheer as turn cartwheels while blowing on vuvuzelas. And they are cartwheeling and blowing for the Democratic party. Obviously, we agree, like Willie Horton proclaimed from prison “Obviously, I’m for Dukakis.” Nordlinger compared it to a column by former New York Times executive editor Abe Rosenthal about anti-Semitism, that people were too polite when they should be making accusations.  Every now and then, the curtain is pulled back on the mainstream media — and we see how these guys talk and act when they’re at their most authentic. This is important. Liberal media bias is maybe something we all have to live with, but that doesn’t mean it’s something to ignore, be blasé about, or excuse. I’m grateful to both Walter Cronkite and Barbara Walters for something: They admitted, yes, the media are liberal, and a good thing, too. It has to be that way, they said. For — and this is Walters talking — journalism involves the “human condition,” and liberals care about the human condition. Unlike conservatives, who of course couldn’t give a rat’s a** about the human condition. Here are two Cronkite gems we found that illustrate Nordlinger’s point: that journalists are only liberals because they have been sensitized, granted an emotional intelligence by exposure to the “meaner side of life,” unlike those Republicans. “I think they [most reporters] are on the humane side, and that would appear to many to be on the liberal side. A lot of newspaper people — and to a lesser degree today, the TV people — come up through the ranks, through the police-reporting side, and they see the problems of their fellow man, beginning with their low salaries — which newspaper people used to have anyway — and right on through their domestic quarrels, their living conditions. The meaner side of life is made visible to most young reporters. I think it affects their sentimental feeling toward their fellow man and that is interpreted by some less-sensitive people as being liberal.” — Cronkite to Time magazine’s Richard Zoglin in an interview published in the magazine’s November 3, 2003 edition. “I believe that most of us reporters are liberal, but not because we consciously have chosen that particular color in the political spectrum. More likely it is because most of us served our journalistic apprenticeships as reporters covering the seamier side of our cities – the crimes, the tenement fires, the homeless and the hungry, the underclothed and undereducated. We reached our intellectual adulthood with daily close-ups of the inequality in a nation that was founded on the commitment to equality for all. So we are inclined to side with the powerless rather than the powerful. If that is what makes us liberals, so be it, just as long as in reporting the news we adhere to the first ideals of good journalism – that news reports must be fair, accurate and unbiased.” — Cronkite in his debut as a syndicated columnist, August 6, 2003. If you don’t follow Nordlinger’s “Impromptus” columns , you should give them a try.  [Hat tip: Blue & White Soul Food]

View post:
National Review’s Nordlinger: Conservatives ‘Far Too Timid, Delicate, and Forgiving’ About Media Bias

Barnicle Pans Kirk Apology: Maybe Mark Should Use Mike’s

I blog often about Mike Barnicle, and while referring to him as a former Boston Globe columnist, am not in the habit of mentioning his ignominious departure from the Globe under a cloud of plagiarism.  But Barnicle today forces my hand . . . Mark Kirk has gotten himself into a mess of trouble.  The Republican candidate for US Senate from Illinois has been caught out misrepresenting his record of service both in the military and as a school teacher . Morning Joe today aired a clip of Kirk’s apology, and Mike Barnicle found it wanting. In truth, Kirk’s statement was was not an exemplar of the genre. But of all people to criticize its lack of authenticity . . . Mike Barnicle?  Might Mike be happier if Kirk were to use the lame language Barnicle himself offered up when confronted with the evidence of his unattributed borrowing from the works of others? Here was Barnicle this morning . . .  MIKE BARNICLE: I find it continually surprising over the past five or six years, how these politicians, with their embroiderments, become so tediously the same in their apologies and explanations. Here’s how the American Journalism Review reported  Barnicle’s apology the time: Barnicle refused to go quietly, arguing his case on every media outlet from Don Imus’ radio show to NBC’s “Today.” “You can accuse me of sloppiness and I plead guilty,” he said. “Intellectual laziness. I plead guilty. Plagiarism. No.” It does have a certain ring.  A classic non-apology apology.  Maybe Kirk should give it a go–giving full credit to its original author, of course. At least Mark would, presumably, get Mike off his back.

Excerpt from:
Barnicle Pans Kirk Apology: Maybe Mark Should Use Mike’s

Can Anyone Explain What the Hell Despicable Me Is?

So there’s this movie called Despicable Me coming out. There are some commercials making the rounds on TV, and a few posters have popped up here and there. It appears to be animated and in 3D, and Steve Carell’s involvement is noted. I think Universal is the studio, but I can’t be sure. In fact, beyond the aforementioned citations, I can’t be sure of anything with this one. Am I the only one completely in the dark about this movie? If so, why? And if not, can you please explain it, starting with the title?

Continued here:
Can Anyone Explain What the Hell Despicable Me Is?

Last Surviving Rebel Without a Cause Cast Member Dies at 75

Corey Allen, who became the last surviving principal cast member of Rebel Without a Cause after Dennis Hopper’s death a month ago, died Sunday of natural causes. Allen played Buzz Gunderson in the 1955 classic, winding up on the losing end of that chicken race against James Dean’s Jim Stark. Allen later went on to direct TV, winning an Emmy in 1983 for an episode of Hill Street Blues . He was 75 years old — and would have turned 76 today. RIP. [ PopEater ]

Originally posted here:
Last Surviving Rebel Without a Cause Cast Member Dies at 75

REVIEW: Despite Pedigree, Love Ranch Succumbs to Tired, Hookerific Cliches

Playing the madam at the center of Love Ranch , Helen Mirren seems acutely aware of the novelty of a freshly minted grande dame picking up her skirts and heading straight for the sex worker’s equivalent of Disneyland. As Grace Bontempo (a pan-lingual take on Mrs. Goodtime) she runs the Love Ranch, one of Reno’s legal prostitution outposts, with a self-consciousness unbecoming of one who could convincingly pull off royal blood. The spectacle of Mirren tricked out in mid-70’s pimp wear — ahead of her time, she even brandishes a cane — has a certain charm, but novelty alone can’t keep Love Ranch ‘s tiresome tropes and plodding storyline from dragging the film down through the Nevada dust.

Originally posted here:
REVIEW: Despite Pedigree, Love Ranch Succumbs to Tired, Hookerific Cliches

REVIEW: Oliver Stone’s Suck-Up Safari Dooms South of the Border

An extended belly-bump of a documentary, South of the Border is Oliver Stone’s feel-good take on the new South American politics. A vanity project by proxy, Stone attempts to restore (in the case of Hugo Chávez) and establish the reputations of the new guard of South American leadership, a superfriends conglomerate that rejects the imperial interests of the United States. Though he lavishes praise on his subjects for being hyper-masculine and free-thinking, Stone is downright girlish in his devotion, scoffing at charges made against the leaders rather than examining them. The plethora of Fox News-based inanity makes such elisions pretty easy: Obviously the haters — notably a pair of anchors who can’t tell the difference between cocoa and coca — are nuts, right?

See the article here:
REVIEW: Oliver Stone’s Suck-Up Safari Dooms South of the Border

REVIEW: Perverse Dogtooth Wins With Sickness and Slickness

I know of a 100-year-old woman who still thought of her 69-year-old son as her “boy”; when she died last year he mourned the loss of his status as somebody’s child. Such feelings endure naturally enough: Most of us are born into a familial or relational structure that shapes — along with just about everything else — how we identify ourselves. The trick is in the balance — the difference, say, between “You’ll always be my little boy” and ” You’ll always be my little boy. ” Some parents struggle to keep absolute power from corrupting their best intentions, as Cyrus ‘s creepily co-dependent mother and son pointed out, to comic effect. The limning of those boundaries is often played for laughs; the alternative is very dark indeed. Swap those laughs for a kind of mordant horror and you get Dogtooth , a brightly lit nightmare of patriarchy run amok.

See the article here:
REVIEW: Perverse Dogtooth Wins With Sickness and Slickness

Jimmy Kimmel Goes DIY After Power Outage

You didn’t see any clips from Jimmy Kimmel Live in Late Night Highlights because a power outage shut down the control room, broadcast transmission center and tape operations area just one hour before the show was scheduled to tape. That was bad news for guest Seth Rogen — who was set to premiere the trailer for The Green Hornet — but good news for Steve Jobs, since Kimmel decided to tape the entire broadcast on his Macbook Pro webcam. And it worked! The fruit of Kimmel’s labor will air tonight at his regularly scheduled time. [ USA Today ]

More:
Jimmy Kimmel Goes DIY After Power Outage

REVIEW: Robotic Tom Cruise Weighs Down Knight and Day

Tom Cruise is no longer cool, a truth he just can’t face — if he could, he’d be cooler. In the opening moments of Knight and Day, Cruise strides through an airport in a uniform of coolness that may as well have been assembled from a checklist: Distinctive Persol sunglasses, an obviously cashmere V-neck sweater layered over a surely-not-Hanes T-shirt, a Baracuta jacket — I’m only checking off the brand names the same way he and his costume department must have. The ringtone on his character’s phone is “Louie, Louie.” And he actually does some of his own stunts, just to show he can. Cruise really may be the hardest-working man in show business right now, but on him (in direct contrast to James Brown), all that sweat just isn’t cool. Once coolness leaves you, how do you get it back?

See the rest here:
REVIEW: Robotic Tom Cruise Weighs Down Knight and Day

REVIEW: Toy Story 3 Brings Series to Brilliant, Bittersweet Close

The problem with sequels isn’t always, necessarily, that they’re worse than the movies they’re piggybacking onto. Some — The Godfather, Part II, The Empire Strikes Back — actually improve on their predecessors. The worst thing about sequels is the air of desperation about them, which often starts gathering long before they’re actually released. Particularly in this economic climate, everyone in Hollywood wants a hit, so the marketing machines for big summer sequels kick in early and hard. As a way of protecting ourselves from disappointment or, worse yet, heartbreak, moviegoers tend to respond with a mix of anticipation and suspicion. Which is why, in the past few months, plenty of us have been asking, “Do we really need a Toy Story 3?”

Excerpt from:
REVIEW: Toy Story 3 Brings Series to Brilliant, Bittersweet Close