lntoIerant

About

Imma' hipster fruitcake that has been slowly turning into a nazi in recent years. Black Lives Matter protests and media coverage of them back with Ferguson was probably the tipping point for me and it's only gotten worse. I took the political compass test and got these results but I should probably take it again since I'm becoming more socially conservative and not just economically. But whatever, these tests should be taken with a grain of salt anyways. Bottom line is that Hollywood's SJW agenda is getting over the top and I'll call it out in reviews for ya' so you don't waste your time.

“The Last Boy Scout (1991)”

Summary
Review Date
Reviewed Item
"“The Last Boy Scout (1991)”"
Author Rating
2 1star1star

The Last Boy Scout is a super raunchy, gory, and incoherent buddy cop movie by the same guy that did Top Gun. There surprisingly isn’t a lot of the, “white guys walk like this, while black guys walk like this,” humor and the race of the cops doesn’t seem to play huge role in the plot or dialogue. Don’t worry though, there is some Hollywood bull crap for sure. 

One of the first scenes we see in this film is Damon Wayans character in bed with a white super model. This is shortly followed by his character being a proper female chauvinist and saving another white woman from being harassed by a fellow white football player. This was definitely the most unbelievable scene in the movie (for comparison, there’s a scene where a guy falls into the blades of helicopter – much more realistic). Hollywood wants us to believe that a washed up, drug addicted NFL quarterback comes to the safety of a prostitute! But finally, the movie gets rational and we see this character in a seedy Los Angeles strip club where his girlfriend works (Halle Berry).   

Bruce Willis’ character is a disgusting, depressed, lowlife that once cared about morals and values. Throughout the film we see him berate his wife and daughter, drink constantly, and only care about himself. However, with the encouragement of his new black friend, he slowly regains his righteousness and saves the day. Thank God for drug addicted hoodrats! 

 

Besides the egregious scenes in the beginning, there isn’t too much leftism in the movie. One of the villains appears to be gay, but they don’t make a point of it or shove it in your face.  The main antagonists are of course an evil white rich men, what’s new? The movie itself is definitely not for children though, as there is nudity, vulgar language, and violence throughout the entire film. If you like 90’s action movies, but don’t want to rewatch Die Hard, this is a decent movie you should watch for free (just start it 20 minutes in to avoid the beginning scenes).

Sharing is caring:
Share on FacebookEmail this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on RedditShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponDigg thisPin on Pinterest

“Days of Thunder (1990)”

Summary
Review Date
Reviewed Item
"“Days of Thunder (1990)”"
Author Rating
3 1star1star1star

Days of Thunder is an action/drama by Tony Scott (same guy that did Top Gun) starring Tom Cruise and Nicole Kidman. It is pretty much a less exciting Top Gun, but about NASCAR. If you are a fan of NASCAR though, it will probably be more enjoyable. 

Overall, it was still refreshing to watch a ‘normal’ Hollywood movie with almost no liberal agenda. The most Hollywood part of it all was the premise that one of the best NASCAR drivers was a random guy from Los Angeles. Other than that, there is no affirmative action, no overwhelming feminism, and the acting is pretty decent. I also learned quite a bit about NASCAR and ended up watching the Daytona 500 a few weeks later. 

Fun fact: John C. Reilly stars in this movie as a mechanic. He later starred in Talladega Nights, a parody of Days Of Thunder. Both movies even mentions using the ‘sling shot’  method to win races. Check this movie out for a good ol’ American film about one of America’s favorite past-times.  

 

Sharing is caring:
Share on FacebookEmail this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on RedditShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponDigg thisPin on Pinterest

“Coneheads (1993)”

Summary
Review Date
Reviewed Item
"“Coneheads (1993)”"
Author Rating
3 1star1star1star

Even in 1993 Hollywood was pushing diversity and immigration in America. I watched this movie once when I was a kid and laughed at the silly antics and childish slapstick humor. What I didn’t realize was how the antagonist of the movie is an evil conservative bureaucrat set out to deport all illegal immigrants. Throughout the entire movie, the director Steve Barron negatively depicts the antagonist trying his hardest to enforce the law. In one scene we see him yelling at a boat of migrants, telling them they cannot come into the U.S. (ironically he says something which most Americans would agree with today, “We appreciate your situation, but we have problems of our own”). In another, he is pitching a violent idea of how to keep once deported Mexicans from reentering the country. It is unfortunate to rewatch these movies and discover we were being brainwashed for so long.

 

However, what I think the director and producer were not aware of is the hidden message within. In the end, we see the Coneheads go back to their native planet, which is inhabited by a grotesque, violent, and very odd culture. In the very same move in which Hollywood is trying desperately to show how wonderful all people from all cultures are, they simultaneously show that the illegal immigrant Coneheads come from a dystopian and barbaric land. Even the immigration officer is taken to the planet and immediately stripped down, chained up, and humiliated. Shortly thereafter, the entire Conehead nation returns to Earth to conquer it. The moral of the story? We really do need immigration officers to prevent an entirely foreign culture from infiltrating and dominating and ours. 

With all of that said, it is still a silly and fun movie to watch with the family. The father cares deeply for his wife, is a provider for the household, and is protective of his daughter. He even practices his own prejudice and does not want his child dating a foreigner (for good reason, Chris Farley’s character is an obese loser). Just be sure your children are old enough to know that the bad guy in the film might not be such a bad  guy in the real world. 

Sharing is caring:
Share on FacebookEmail this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on RedditShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponDigg thisPin on Pinterest

‘The Ballad of Buster Scruggs’

Summary
Review Date
Reviewed Item
"‘The Ballad of Buster Scruggs’"
Author Rating
4 1star1star1star1star

The Ballad of Buster Scruggs was surprisingly non-political. It is a dark humor film by the Coen brothers that depicts several short stories set in the ‘Wild West.’ There is some silliness, gore, and drama throughout the entire movie, but very little political correctness.

For instance, there are a few scenes with warrior American Indians, and refreshingly enough they behave how you’d imagine warrior Indians would behave! There is a story involving a timid woman heading west in need of men’s help (these characters also openly admit their belief in God and it wasn’t satirical). Plus, there are no handicapped-hispanic-transgender protagonists, there are no head strong women beating up hardened cow boys, and there is no black on white revenge porn that was so prominent in Django Unchained.

If you like Coen Brothers films and have over 2 hours to kill, this Netflix movie is worth it! It truly feels like you’re peering into what life may have been like in the Old West.  You’ll laugh, you’ll cry, but most importantly you won’t be triggered by the PC b******t!

Sharing is caring:
Share on FacebookEmail this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on RedditShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponDigg thisPin on Pinterest

‘Annihilation’ is a female ghost busters that made less sense

Summary
Review Date
Reviewed Item
"‘Annihilation’ is a female ghost busters that made less sense"
Author Rating
3 1star1star1star

‘Annihilation’ starring Natalie Portman had me excited, as it is the same writer and director that did ‘Ex Machina,’ an amazing film. Unfortunately ‘Annihilation’ did not meet these expectations.

Disregarding the poor scientific explanations (like a character turning into a plant because her DNA refracted like light through a prism, or a dying character’s voice transporting into a zombie bear’s vocal chords via the same refractions…WTF?), the entire premise was based on nonsensical feminism. The biggest government secret in the history of the world is immediately revealed to Portman’s character, solely because her husband was involved. The person who reveals this top secret information is the on site Psychologist (another female). These two team up with two other females, a paramedic and a scientist of some sort. The second line out of the paramedic’s mouth is her hitting on Portman’s character, because lesbians.

The reason they created this team of four females was because the previous groups were comprised of men (all of which never returned).  Obviously the most rational decision is to give untrained, random women top secret government information, hand them each an automatic weapon, and send them into an unknown and highly dangerous area.

The movie luckily has some redeeming qualities, for instance, the only person that used the machine gun correctly was Portman’s character, who they explain was in the Army. The females also mostly behave like untrained women would behave if they were dropped into an unknown forest full of monsters.

In reality, I think the movie was most likely a metaphor for what people want in life, as they mention each woman is ‘broken’ in some way, looking for something.  But this doesn’t excuse the ridiculous scenario of sending four untrained, non-government affiliated females into a highly dangerous and untrodden territory, just because they’re women.

Sharing is caring:
Share on FacebookEmail this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on RedditShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponDigg thisPin on Pinterest

‘Darkest Hour’ was pretty great except for one annoying scene

Summary
Review Date
Reviewed Item
"‘Darkest Hour’ was pretty great except for one annoying scene"
Author Rating
4 1star1star1star1star

Darkest Hour is what you’d expect, a long and wordy biopic. If you’re a World War II history buff, you’ll probably love the attention to detail and incredible Winston Churchill speeches performed by Gary Oldman. However, there is one scene that almost ruined the entire movie. Winston Churchill decides to ride the train to get a feel for how the blue collar layman feels about Hitler and the war. A bit on the contrived side already, but digestible. Of course, there is a man of African decent on the train, sitting amongst white people. He’s even sitting next to a white woman and giving his input and joining in the camaraderie of the train car.

This might not seem egregious at first glance, but for a move that is set on being so historically accurate, this really pulls you out of the movie. Segregation laws were not enacted in the United Kingdom until the ‘Race Relations Act of 1965.’ While it may have been possible that a black man was on a train full of white people in 1940, it is highly doubtful. And even more unbelievable is his interaction with the other people and ability to speak up and be treated as an equal. In a movie where they probably got an expert for every tiny prop, down to the napkins they use at meals, it is jarring when this scene begins. This scene never actually took place in reality, I think they just needed a black person in the credits after ‘Dunkirk’ was chastised for not being diverse enough.

See Darkest Hour but just skip past the subway scene, it doesn’t add to the movie and it is obvious feel good Hollywood b******t.

 

 

Sharing is caring:
Share on FacebookEmail this to someoneTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on RedditShare on TumblrShare on StumbleUponDigg thisPin on Pinterest