According to the AP, “Lions for Lambs” fared poorly in its opening weekend, making only $6.7 million, despite having been directed by Robert Redford, and co-staring big names like Redford, Tom Cruise, and Meryl Streep. I haven’t seen it, but the AP said the drama features “three [interlocking] stories in the war on terror.”
Apparently, the movie approaches the subject from a progressive point of view, which makes the right deliriously happy, now that the film didn’t do well. One far-right blogger bragged:
Memo to Hollywood…we don’t hate America as much as you do. Want to make some money? Make a movie where Americans are the good guys and the terrorists are the bad guys. It’s not like there’s a shortage of stories that fit the bill.
The message is clear enough, for anyone who wants a piece of it; Americans are tired of limousine liberals making their moral judgments for them…. This is particularly true since the limousine liberals in question don’t seem to have any morals themselves; All that’s needed to confirm that has to the latest tabloids.
There were many more, but you get the idea.
At the risk of raining on the right's parade, maybe the movie didn't do well because it's not very good? Perhaps politics had nothing to do with it? Just a thought.
