May
6
2025

Now Do Marvel v. DC, Andrew

I think this is missing some important features of both franchises. But who cares, it's funny.

Mini review: The first 12 minutes of Andor season two were fantastic. But since then: way too many hushed conversations between coiffed and clad characters on well-designed sets.

I'll keep watching, though.

Also of note:

  • His latest stupid idea.

    Liz Wolfe comments on the news: Trump declares he will impose 100 percent tariffs on all foreign films.

    "Other nations have been stealing the…movie-making capability of the United States. I said to a couple of people, 'What do you think?' I have done some very strong research over the last week, and we are making very few movies now," [Trump] told reporters over the weekend. "Hollywood is being destroyed. Now you have a grossly incompetent governor that allowed that to happen, so I am not just blaming other nations, but other nations, a lot of them, have stolen our movie industry. If they are not willing to make a movie inside the United States, and we should have a tariff on movies that come in. And not only that, governments are actually giving big money. They are supporting them financially. So that is sort of a threat to our country in a sense."

    Stealing is an odd way of putting it. Did he just learn that other countries make movies too? And, yes, other countries will give special breaks to their film industries, in much the same way U.S. states already do: They vie for business, offering tax credits and other incentives to try to get movie production to their states. (This is why plenty of headlines have heralded Georgia, specifically Atlanta, as "Hollywood of the South.")

    And that's just for starters. As for "propaganda", I'm pretty sure there's plenty of it in domestically-produced movies too. And (as Liz notes) Trump has been dilly-dallying about enforcing the TikTok ban, arguably an impeachable offense. And TikTok is an actual foreign product. Liz comments, probably accurately:

    This leads me to suspect that he's not actually worried about propaganda, but is just experimenting with using "national security" justifications for all manner of big-government interventions—a time-honored American tradition, but not a good one. Regardless, it is not the government's job to shield us from ideas, even propagandistic ones.

  • As with so many other things… Dan McLaughlin reveals Trump Has Hollywood's Foreign Propaganda Problem Backwards (gifted link). He notes that Hollywood has been all-too-willing to dink its movies to avoid Chinese censorship. And:

    In short, China has leverage over our movie industry precisely because we have a trade surplus in exporting our films to China. That’s the exact opposite of the problem Trump claims to be fighting. If there’s good news to be had, it’s that American film revenues from China have been in sharp decline for several years now from their peak of a decade or so ago (and China is cracking down on them further in retaliation against Trump). But our problem isn’t too much buying from China — it’s too much selling to China.

    For the record, I've just watched one actual movie so far this year, The Electric State. Apparently filmed mostly in Georgia, some in California, with (according to IMDB) "additional photography" in France and Brazil. How big a tariff, Donald?

  • If only we could put a hefty tax on arrogance. Jonathan Turley writes on The Cost of Arrogance: NPR’s Undoing is a Cautionary Tale for the Media.

    NPR was ultimately undermined by its own arrogance. Editors and journalists did not have to worry about the fact that its shrinking audience was overwhelmingly white, liberal and affluent. Due to its support in Congress, it could make the vast majority of the country, which does not listen to its programming, help pay for its programming.

    It will now have to choose between sustaining its bias or expanding its audience. It certainly has every right to be a left-leaning outlet (as do right-leaning outlets), but it has to sustain itself in the marketplace. It is the same question that other media outlets must face as more Americans turn to new media. With polls showing the press at record lows in trust, media companies are increasingly writing for each other rather than most of the public.

    I note that Viking Pundit tried to listen to NPR and gave up in disgust after four minutes. I'm wondering if I could do that well.

  • Throw them a concrete life preserver, maybe. Jim Geraghty has some news. Good? Bad? Your call: The Obamas Aren't Going to Rescue the Democrats.

    Let’s begin with the full quote, in context. Former first lady Michelle Obama appeared on a podcast hosted by British entrepreneur and investor Steven Bartlett, discussing a wide variety of topics. At one point, she addressed her fears when her husband chose to run for president, and won:

    How do you raise kids in the White House? It’s dangerous. As the first black potential president, we knew there would be death threats. There were just all the — how would we afford it? Because it’s, it’s expensive to live in the White House! As many people don’t know, I mean, much is not covered. You’re paying for every food — every bit of food that you eat. You know, you’re not paying for housing and the staff in it, but everything, even travel if you’re not traveling with the president if your kids are coming on a Bright Star, which is the first lady’s plane — we had to pay for their travel to be on the plane. It is an expensive proposition, and you’re running for two years, and not earning an income. So, all of that was in my mind. How would we manage this?

    Jim's rebuttal is dead solid perfect:

    You know who else pays for “every bit of food” that their children eat? Just about every other family in the country.

  • I suspect Alinsky's "Rule #13" is involved. Bryan Caplan wonders how their minds work: Koch vs. Trump: A Puzzle of Leftist Demonology.

    Ten years ago, the Koch brothers were clearly the left’s most-hated “right-wing billionaires.” It’s not totally clear that Trump even ranked #3. Only in 2016 did Trump attain the top spot in leftist demonology. Even today, Charles Koch (brother David died in 2019) probably retains the #2 spot on the left’s list of Most Evil Billionaires. Which plausibly gives him the #3 spot on the left’s list of Most Evil Americans after Trump and Vance. And conceivably even the #3 spot on the left’s list of Most Evil Living Humans, though I guess Putin and Netanyahu now outrank him.

    Last Thursday, I saw Charles Koch win the Milton Friedman Prize for Advancing Liberty. Mid-ceremony, a well-camouflaged group of about fifteen leftist protestors crashed the party, waving signs like “Can’t take blood money to hell.” Which reminded me of a question I’ve long asked myself: What the hell is wrong with leftist demonology? How can Charles Koch and Donald Trump possibly be on the same list?!

    Bryan goes on to compare and contrast Trump and Koch. Trump fans will not like his observation #9:

    1. In starkest contrast, whatever you think about Trump’s ideas, he is obviously an absolute pig of a human being. To paraphrase Tolkien’s Treebeard, “There is no curse in Elvish, Entish, or the tongues of Men” to describe how loathsome the man is. The way he talks! The way he treats people! If a family of staunch Trump supporters contained a person who acted like Trump, he wouldn’t even be allowed to come to Thanksgiving. Unless, of course, he was rich and famous enough to implicitly bribe his family to endure his presence. (If you are reading this, Donald, I am only a messenger. Repent).

    (Alinsky's Rule #13: ""Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.")


Last Modified 2025-05-06 11:37 AM EDT