Some right-wingers are making a low-budget anti-choice movie titled Roe v. Wade, which features the usual looney-tunes suspects, like Milo Yiannopoulos and Tomi Lahren and Jon Voight and Corbin Bernsen, and if you follow the link you’ll find lots of clues that this is going to be a flaming shitshow. But one simple point is a truly damning indictment.
Conservative actors Stephen Baldwin and Kevin Sorbo were initially cast as Supreme Court justices but left upon receiving the script. “That’s where it started as far as not sending out full scripts to actors, because they backed out and then it was a mad rush to find people to be the Supreme Court justices, and when they got on set they had no idea what they were doing. They didn’t get their lines until they got on set. They were kept in the dark,” according to a crew member.
The script is so bad that Kevin Sorbo and Stephen Baldwin refused a pay day? Holy crap. I’ve seen some of their previous movies, and I have a hard time imagining a movie that’s even worse.
Apropos of perhaps nothing, Kevin Sorbo didn’t really ring any bells (albeit he apparently was in God’s Not Dead), but Stephen Baldwin did ring a (tiny) bell: He was Michael McManus in The Usual Suspects (“Who is Keyser Söze?”).
I am strongly confident that Milo Yiannopoulos, at least, is either indifferent to abortion, or in favor of it, and only took the role to troll feminists.
Because of course he would.
Linked post:
Did I write “to troll feminists”? That should have been “to troll everyone“.
Of course he would.
Sorbo’s primary claim to fame was the title character in the campy 90s fantasy series “Hercules: The Legendary Journeys” and the ho-hum sci-fi series “Andromeda.” At some point, he had a come-to-Jesus moment and has been making crappy Christian movies (as if there were any other kinds) ever since.
I highly recommended listening to “God Awful Movies” a weekly podcast that humorously reviews these blights upon cinema.
Actors ,treat them like mushrooms ,keep them in the dark and feed them BS .
@blf #1: Yes, Stephen Baldwin had a mainstream acting career at one time. But take a look at his IMDB now. “A Walk with Grace”, “Church People”, “The UnMiracle” (also starring Kevin Sorbo!), “The Apostle Peter: Redemption”, “God’s Club”, etc., etc.
I will always love that the Hercules spin-off, Xena: Warrior Princess, was a better and more successful show than the one that spawned it, and that its star, Lucy Lawless, is an awesome person.
Standards for conservatives continue to slide, whether it’s ethical, moral, intellectual, etc. So much for the meritocracy, so much for family values, so much for educational achievement….
Seconding #3 Akira,
GAM is awesome. Got hooked on them recently and I am powering through all the old episodes. Just laughed myself sore at their review of Kevin Sorbo’s role in Revelation Road 3: The Black Rider.
KSorbs has fallen far since the Hercules and Andromeda days. If he’s turned this down, its BAD.
Milo Yiannopoulos and Tomi Lahren and Jon Voight and Corbin Bernsen
Doesn’t seem to pass the Bechdel Test, which is odd, considering the subject.
The God Awful Movies crew, besides covering more than a few movies which starred Kevin Sorbo and Stephen Baldwin, also took down the movie Vaxxed. So here’s hoping that they’ll give this upcoming wreck the thrashing that it deserves.
The really amusing thing is the approached actors who don’t act much who obviously disagree with their politics in hopes that they were desperate for work to get some bigger names. Mara Wilson and Heather Matarazzo are two I know about.
NelC Never heard of the Bechdel Test, looked it up and… that bar is low already, and half of all movies do not pass?
The world is an evil place.
@Owlmirror, 2
Why be confident about something when you can just look it up? Of course Yiannopoulos is a forced birther. Has been for ages. Sanitizing his politics by pretending everything is one big troll denies him his agency. Let him own his hate, however playfully packaged it is with all the bog-standard contrarian bells, baubles, and whistles. That he’s dull and buffoonish about it doesn’t mean it lacks sincerity.
It became very clear about half way through Andromeda when the religious aspects were being troweled on like stucco that there would be nothing worth much gained in watching further.
The is no way they can make a story out Roe v Wade that would be successful seeing as how they are not on the side of freedom in this day, it has to be full of too many lies and distortions to be believable.
I know Jon Voight is nuts, but not Corbin Bernsen. I thought he was kind of okay, where do I go wrong?
gijoel, you’re probably remembering the Bernsen of 25 years ago. These days his primary work seems to be Christian schlock.
unclefrogy @14: Yes, it became very clear when Sorbo was given increased creative control of the show and simultaneously became a Born-Again Christian. Even if it weren’t obvious from the affect it had on the scripts, the fact that the other original cast members started jumping ship was a big tip off.
How can a movie continue to be funded and filmed when the director quits on the first day of filming along with other cast and crew? I either do not understand movie making or religion.
“Andromedal” itself was a pretty good concept: a lone starship and its misfit crew trying to restablish a civilization upon a post-apocalyptic galaxy. However, in the latter seasons, my reaction became more “WTF” than anything else.
I hate this because the time really is right for a film that shows the emotion and pathos of faith and truly produces a good film that happens to have a Christian message instead of the persecution complex garbage that they’re making these days or the “this is a B movie but we’re going to rake in a bunch of money by making it a bible movie” (cough Samson cough). There are stories of the impact of religion on a person’s life that could make a genuinely moving film, why aren’t people making them? I’m sick of the Newsboys of Christian movies, give me the Sufjan Stevens.
@20
they do not make anything even close to what you ask for because it would have to be the same message enclosed in the bible the story of christs live and death
it would have to include the sentimental the was quoted by Marcus Ranum in another post. Matthew 25:40
there could be a very inspiring movie made about say Daniel Berrigan a Jesuit or some other christian preachers they did make one about a chrietian minster who got himself gunned down trying to follow the christian god.
the main reason they do not make such movies probably has to do with where they get the money to produce them. all they can make is something that will support power or to put it in their frame they can only support things that are bound to the world they can not see beyond themselves. I also suspect that from the effort they put into the crap they turn out that there must be more than a little of “The Producers” in the whole set up
uncle frogy
Persecution sells, particularly to religion built upon a persecution narrative.
EDIT: …particularly to a religion…
no13, snuffcurry, I agree about Milo Y. The same goes for most Trumpists, fundamentalist Christians etc – they make us laugh in their delusions and obvious “clownishness” but they are dangerous nevertheless.
About the propagandistic B- (and B S) movie from the right: I am sure, even if it is total crap some will lap it up anyway. That is the great thing about propaganda: repeat stuff often enough, something will stick. E.g., I admire the audacity of Dinesh D`Souza who wrote the book “The Big Lie: Exposing the Nazi roots of the American left”. Fun! I am sure this will in the end affect many people, even some of the left. Why? Because it is not the first time that the (religious) right used those tactics. And, boy, were they effective!
The (religious) right was extremely successful shifting the left away from causes like protecting the environment/biosphere and women`s rights issues, especially concerning contraceptives. In fact, they drove them like a flock of geese. How? By conflating concerns for the environment and for universal women`s reproductive rights with the inhumane idea of eugenics (and related pseudo-science, totalitarianism).
Many well-intended, good-hearted leftists honestly belief that they are doing the right thing when they warn against “eugenicists” and people who “believe” in so called “overpopulation” (which is a bad and unfortunate word).
They throw people like me in a bag with racist, white supremacists and real frigging eugenicists – just because I care for the environment (in general, not only in terms of its capacity for “food production for humanity”) and for female equality and rights, including the essential(!) reproductive rights which give women agency and sovereignty over their “biology”. Sorry, but I do think both are valid issues.
Maybe most people in this forum will also condemn me for that, thinking that secretly I just have to be a bad faith actor, a racist, white supremacist etc.
If there is one group of people I do dislike and have a bias against, than it is the Super Rich, the Wealthy Few. The Wealth Gap is the biggest socio-economic problem of our time. “Getting rid” (not in a brutal manner…) of those rich “overlords” would be a splendid thing. I am not anti-poor (quite the opposite! I am proudly of working class “stock”) and I do understand and condemn the very real hate and disregard for the poor (of all “races”!) that was ruling the elites of the past (like Malthus) and that led to atrocious results.
Eugenicist or Social Darwinist figures like Malthus or even the founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, have nothing to do with my concerns about the environment (including Climate Change) nor the liberty and agency of women over their own bodies.
Conflating eugenicists of the past with the issue of giving out free contraceptives in poor countries or worrying about the impact of human population from an ecological perspective is pure propaganda. A “Totschlagargument” as the Germans say (meaning an argument that is so loaded and so loathed by a majority of the general public that any discussion instantly ceases.)
For women`s rights activists in the so called “global south” that means in real life that there are less resources to draw upon. The attitude of the left who “smells” racism behind their efforts meant that there are very few donations for e.g. free contraceptives and sexual education in the “global South”! Lots of poor women who would like to have access to contraceptives are denied that right (yes, I consider it a human right!). The left ignores all this (after all that stinks of eugenics, doesn´t it?); the media has other topics to cover, e.g. Trump getting it on with “porn stars”.
In the meantime, the fundamentalist religious right and the Catholic Church continue to spread their “worldview” in the “global South”, claiming that contraceptives are unhealthy, yes, dangerous or make women ugly and promiscuous etc. Oh, and THEY are well funded! THEY are allowed to “meddle” with other people`s lives without being called a “racist” or “eugenicist”! They are, as usual – the “good guys” because they “believe”. Me, who wants women`s rights to thrive and wants good life quality for ALL people on this planet and a clean, healthy environment for humans AND other species – I am the monster and should shut up!
Short reminder of my general opinion on population: I think it does contribute to the destruction of and overuse of habitats, increases the impact/pressure on (the ever scarcer) wildlife/biodiversity. Also, even poor people pollute and use resources which can locally have a massive impact.
I am well aware that 1.) Europe has a huge population density. 2.) (most importantly) the West (Global North, especially the USA) are obscene polluters, over-consumers and meat eaters.
Our “ecological footprint” dwarfs the impact of poor countries even if they have huge populations! Also, us exploiting or using poorer countries (e.g.) as our “workbench” contributes hugely to their environmental calamities.
Capitalism is the biggest killer of the environment. The richer a person is, the more it consumes, wastes and therefore destroys. Getting rid of consumerism and the “Ponzi Scheme” of an ever growing economy is the main issue and the main solution.
However, even in the poorest areas in the world people rightfully demand a higher standard of living. Not only thanks to TV and Internet people dream of and aspires to a “Western” lifestyle – a lifestyle of abundance and waste. Poor people in general and people in the “Global South” are humans like the rest of us! They too want to live their one life with a bit of “fun”, which equals for lots of people buying rubbishy goods and “fashion” articles for one season only, owning a car and driving it even for small distances, flying to holidays around the world, eating meat, wasting food, buying plastic wrapped goods for “convenience” …
The West has to curb our extremely unsustainable lifestyle. Capitalism, which so far is the main obstacle for big scale use of solar power and other “renewables” (their “cost” is too high), has to be curbed as well.
Which includes an end to the exploitation of the “global south” and cancelling of the debt of this countries (and no more weapon sales to dictators).
Additionally, people all over the world should be informed about contraceptives and have easy, even free, access to them. Sexual education and the breaking of traditional/religious taboos and gender roles (empowerment and equality for women) are crucial as well, all over the world. Empowerment of women – at the moment, this is but an empty phrase. But it cannot be sidelined any longer and has to be funded, including free contraceptives (without the slanderous accusation of “eugenics”).
The reality is quite different: Even in the US fundamentalist Christians are attacking the access to contraceptives and sexual education! And the Supreme Court will be stocked with judges that follow their agenda.
Conclusion: Propaganda and misinformation works splendidly and the (religious) right is really good at it. Therefore, I cannot laugh at that stupid movie about “Roe v Wade”. “Fake news” for everyone!
P.s.: The disregard for environmental issues contributes to the inertia about Climate Change. In a wider sense, the left even buys into the idea that science itself is dangerous – after all it has that “whiff” of eugenics and other dubious methods about it. Charles Murray`s infamous book “The bell curve” is a main cause of that. (I heard leftist youtube videos and podcasts saying that science is overrated and often bullshit anyway…)
trivia Steve here (yours truly):
Lucy Lawless of Xena fame recently resurfaced as Ruby, in Bruce Campbell’s return in Ash vs Evil Dead, showing stark contrast to her role as Xena.
Andromeda was a Roddenberry follow-on to his Star Trek legacy. Conceptually the survivors of a collapsed “Federation” (ie star trek’s federation). The writing really went nowhere and generated zero excitement, only dangling mysteries.
Everyone of the genre still talks of how amazing Xena, being originally conceived as only a recurring character in the Hercules:… show, became a separate series that occasionally had Hercules as a guest appearance, flipping it all over 180. Personally, a lot had to due with the relationship between Xena and Gabrielle (Gaby), being all subtext and innuendo. [just me, i guess]
After Hercules:… I was always disappointed at the direction Sorbo headed. yuk
sorry for the botched </i> flags @25
Sorry for the long rant. I was a tad off topic… – I got triggered by a video I watched.
Short: I worry that the left is not seeing when they get manipulated by the (religious) right.
And the left cannot become anti-science, anti-environment, anti-women, anti-facts. That party already exists.
Tomi Lahren is thoroughly awful. But she is also pro-choice (that’s what got her fired from Glenn Beck’s “The Blaze”), so what the hell is she doing associating with this movie?
@28, daved
As I don’t follow her at all, I can’t say for sure, but is it possible she’s flipped on the issue to appeal more to her base?
@snuffcurry:
You’re right; I was lazy.
I think he does lack sincerity in his principles, but does in fact sincerely hate, or at least want to side with the haters. Figuring out how to show that would take a lot of effort, though. And I think I concede that in a sense, it doesn’t matter if he’s sincere: The fact that he parrots hate-rhetoric strengthens the haters, even if something else he says elsewhere is inconsistent with what he says in the posts you linked to.
Lahren in fact pissed off some of her fans over the weekend by arguing overturning Roe V. Wade would be a big mistake.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/tomi-lahren-pro-roe-v-wade_us_5b42396ce4b07b827cc1cb65
Lucy Lawless said in an interview that Xena and Gabrielle were definitely a couple as far as she was concerned.