Many New York City theaters didn’t show the film “Reagan” — about Ronald Reagan, the 40th president of the United States and conservative icon who won re-election in a 1984 …
I’m refusing to watch it because it sounds like it was somewhat biased, which not only makes for a deceptive film, but a one-dimensional one. It’s the same reason I’m not watching The Apprentice (2024), everyone involved in that film seems to think that Trump is at best a bad person. (Although TBF Karsten Runquist claimed in his review that it humanizes both Roy Kohn and Trump, FWIW)
The guy who plays Cohn crushes it. It’s worth the ticket price to watch him.
Reagan is biased as a movie. That said watching how he worked with both sides and inspired people is true. It reminds you that our system can work and how south things have went.
The scene with tip really strike a chord. They were rivals but they liked each other as people. They were friends. That’s the politics we need again
Oh no liberals didn’t like a movie! Cry me a river!
Hold on a sec, let me see if I’m translating this correctly.
Liberals hate this movie. Critics hate this movie. Therefore, critics are all liberals.
Do I have that thought process about right? Do you think that there might be any other reason that a movie critic–people who have a professional obligation to watch and critique films–might not like this film? Or is the only possible reason that they didn’t like it–despite whatever they wrote–is because they’re politically liberal?
What you’re saying is on par with claiming that the only people that didn’t like Battlefield Earth are people that hate Scientology.
Why would I care if critics hate something? Are you someone that needs to be told what to like?
I am making no such claim. I’m saying I enjoyed the movie. I don’t need a critic to tell me to like or dislike something. I’m an adult. I can make up my own mind.
…Because it’s expensive to go see a movie in the theaters, and going to see something that’s probably going to suck is a waste of time too?
I pirated ‘Borderlands’, and I still got ripped off. Knowing that ‘Borderlands’ was only a slightly bigger pile of shit than ‘Reagan’, why would I want to waste the time and kill the braincells to figure out that the critics were right about Reagan, too?
There’s damn near universal consensus that it was a trash movie. When you look at a wider swath of reviews, you see that it’s still trash, with the outlets most likely to give it a favorable review are things like “Epoch Times”, and “Gospel Coalition”.
It’s nakedly hagiographic, so of course a random conservative lemmy mod is going to defend it. De gustibus some disputandum, eh?
I’m refusing to watch it because it sounds like it was somewhat biased, which not only makes for a deceptive film, but a one-dimensional one. It’s the same reason I’m not watching The Apprentice (2024), everyone involved in that film seems to think that Trump is at best a bad person. (Although TBF Karsten Runquist claimed in his review that it humanizes both Roy Kohn and Trump, FWIW)
The guy who plays Cohn crushes it. It’s worth the ticket price to watch him.
Reagan is biased as a movie. That said watching how he worked with both sides and inspired people is true. It reminds you that our system can work and how south things have went.
The scene with tip really strike a chord. They were rivals but they liked each other as people. They were friends. That’s the politics we need again
The problem with using Jeremy Strong to pitch this movie as one to watch is IDK why I’d watch him in this role instead of just rewatching Succession.
I haven’t watched succession but he is amazing in this roll. People that knew Cohn said it’s uncanny.
The movie was eh. Very biased and some seems made up but Cohn steals the show
Oh no liberals didn’t like a movie! Cry me a river!
I don’t care what critics think. I enjoyed the movie. Form your own opinion and don’t expect others to think for you.
While most of the movie was just eh, the take aways were worth the price of admission.
Hold on a sec, let me see if I’m translating this correctly.
Liberals hate this movie. Critics hate this movie. Therefore, critics are all liberals.
Do I have that thought process about right? Do you think that there might be any other reason that a movie critic–people who have a professional obligation to watch and critique films–might not like this film? Or is the only possible reason that they didn’t like it–despite whatever they wrote–is because they’re politically liberal?
What you’re saying is on par with claiming that the only people that didn’t like Battlefield Earth are people that hate Scientology.
Why would I care if critics hate something? Are you someone that needs to be told what to like?
I am making no such claim. I’m saying I enjoyed the movie. I don’t need a critic to tell me to like or dislike something. I’m an adult. I can make up my own mind.
Why would you care if liberals hate it? Are you someone who needs to be told what to like?
…Because it’s expensive to go see a movie in the theaters, and going to see something that’s probably going to suck is a waste of time too?
I pirated ‘Borderlands’, and I still got ripped off. Knowing that ‘Borderlands’ was only a slightly bigger pile of shit than ‘Reagan’, why would I want to waste the time and kill the braincells to figure out that the critics were right about Reagan, too?
I enjoyed Reagan. I think it was well the 5 dollars.
Had no interest in borderlands. It looked like garbage.