…is a horrible bag denoting buying stuff that you don’t need which is bad for the climate, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is Jo Nova, with a post on a big windfarm that can only operate half the year.
Doubleshot below the fold, check out American Greatness, with a post on Biden’s nonbinary lunatic nuclear waste guru charged with stealing from another airport.
Read: If All You See… »
There’s a couple problems with making these films. First, those highbrow films aren’t really that good. They’re no better than lots of independent films that end up going right to streaming. Although, some of those low budget indies are actually good. They’re just missing that certain something (sometimes it’s money, sometimes experience, maybe something else) that makes them great. Second, they tend to be subjects that only attract a small number of people who are interested, and, only a portion of them will show up. Third, there aren’t all that many truly great films being made.
Take 2000. You had a sort of artsy film like “Oh, Brother, Where Art Thou?” A damned good film in “Remember The Titans”. And then blockbusters, like Gladiator, X-Men, and Castaway. There were more than plenty to get people to the theaters. Nowadays, there aren’t many of those really good movies nor blockbusters
Highbrow Films Aimed at Winning Oscars Are Losing Audiences
A year ago, Hollywood watched in despair as Oscar-oriented films like “Licorice Pizza” and “Nightmare Alley” flatlined at the box office. The day seemed to have finally arrived when prestige films were no longer viable in theaters and streaming had forever altered cinema.
But studios held out hope, deciding that November 2022 would give a more accurate reading of the marketplace. By then, the coronavirus would not be such a complicating factor. This fall would be a “last stand,” as some put it, a chance to show that more than superheroes and sequels could succeed.
One after another, films for grown-ups have failed to find an audience big enough to justify their cost. “Armageddon Time” cost roughly $30 million to make and market and collected $1.9 million at the North American box office. “Tár” cost at least $35 million, including marketing; ticket sales total $5.3 million. Universal spent around $55 million to make and market “She Said,” which also took in $5.3 million. “Devotion” cost well over $100 million and has generated $14 million in ticket sales.
What is going on?
The problem is not quality; reviews have been exceptional. Rather, “people have grown comfortable watching these movies at home,” said David A. Gross, a film consultant who publishes a newsletter on box office numbers.
The NY Times article actually avoids the main problem: they are mostly not making films that people really care about. Even small ones for limited audiences. And they tend to over-add their messages to them, so, they are no longer fun. Godzilla is one of the greatest monster movies of all time, and it was certainly a message about the dangers of nuclear weapons testing. It was subtle, using a platform of “damn, that was a fun and great movie.” Nowadays they’re as subtle as a punch to the nads.
This is about more than money. Hollywood sees the shift as an affront to its identity. Film power players have long clung to the fantasy that the cultural world revolves around them, as if it were 1940. But that delusion is hard to sustain when their lone measuring stick — bodies in seats — reveals that the masses can’t be bothered to come watch the films that they prize most. Hollywood equates this with cultural irrelevancy.
Without the really great films, you won’t be able to do the artsy films. How many are willing to pay to see a lot of what are supposed to be blockbusters? I think people are tired of the constant superhero films. That’s about all we get. That’s not to say there aren’t some really good ones. There are. A goodly chunk seem to be on streaming. But, many of those do not have that certain something to make them memorable. Something you’d watch again and again. That you’d buy on DVD or download. Those which are supposed to be blockbusters, such as Black Adam, just aren’t that good. John Nolte makes a good point
The pattern of failure here is not just woketardery. If you look at the stunning failure of Lady Ghostbusters, Bros., In the Heights, and Woke Side Story, and the underperformance of Wakanda Forever, what you have here is one box office failure after another (I could name a dozen more) that is selling itself as a story about identity rather than character. (snip)
The world didn’t spend $5 billion to see Johnny Depp prance around as a pirate in one excellent, one okay, and three pretty bad movies because he’s white. The attraction was Captain Jack Sparrow, one of the most enjoyable characters created in the last 20 years.
There’s many an actor or actress that seem more like themselves than diving into a character. If you saw a Peter Sellers film, you saw him fall into a character. If you see Dwayne Johnson, it’s just “The Rock being The Rock”, as one review for Jungle Cruise mentioned. Ryan Reynolds is going the same way.
Ask 10 different specialty film executives to explain the box office, and you will get 10 different answers. There have been too many dramas in theaters lately, resulting in cannibalization; there have been too few, leaving audiences to look for options on streaming services. Everyone has been busy watching the World Cup on television. No, it’s television dramas like “The Crown” that have undercut these films.
Too many dramas with Woke, with Race, with Sexual Orientation, ones that patronize the audience, that are written in a way that people just lose the flow of the movie. The few horror in theaters, seem to be retreads. Or just bad. Halloween Ends? Terrible. Where’s the great science fiction? Yes, streaming is affecting the box office. With streaming, they can often do longer shows, rather than several multi-hour movies, and delve deep. Without streaming, would something like Amazon’s “Forever War” done well in the theaters? Probably so.
Others continue to advocate patience. Gross pointed out that “The Fabelmans” will roll into more theaters over the next month, hoping to capitalize on awards buzz — it is a front-runner for the 2023 best picture Oscar — and the end-of-year holidays. Damien Chazelle’s “Babylon,” a drug-and-sex-induced fever dream about early Hollywood, is scheduled for wide release Dec. 23.
“I think movies are going to come back,” Spielberg recently told The New York Times. “I really do.”
Does anyone even know what Babylon is about, if they’ve seen the commercials? I don’t. If I have to get on the ‘net to look it up, your advertising is a fail, so, why would I go? And it sounds rather dumb. A film-maker doing an indulgence film. And will probably crash and burn. I love films. I can look up and see a shelf with dozens of DVDs. And a cabinet with maybe a hundred more. And another which has more, along with a bunch of VHS tapes. And a box in the attic with lots more VHS. I used to go to the actual theater 5-10 times a year. There’s nothing these days that would get me in there. There’s a few released for streaming that would if they were theater only releases. Not that many, though.
Just make better movies. Look at the latest Top Gun. Simply meant to entertain. Was the original Friday the 13th a great film? No. It was good. It was damned fun. Entertaining. Something people could watch many times. That’s what’s being missed. It doesn’t matter if the reviewers and a small number of people think a movie has “quality.” It matters if the money paying audience wants to see, goes to see it, enjoys themselves, and tells their friends to see it.
Read: Hollywood Seems Surprised That Highbrow Films Meant To Win Oscars Don’t Do Well »
Let’s be honest: most of these firms, and most companies, are not really doing all that much, maybe slightly more than lip service, trying to please the Cult of Climastrology and Warmist politicians. Hence why the Warmists came up with the term “greenwashing”. Not sure why Warmists are complaining, because most of them do little to nothing in their own lives
Wall Street’s Biggest Names Are Backing Off Their Climate Commitments
Shortly before COP26, last year’s United Nations climate conference in Glasgow, financial institutions were rushing to announce their climate commitments. The conference’s leadership and Mark Carney, a special envoy appointed by the United Nations to push private finance to invest in climate solutions, announced the creation of the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net-Zero, or GFANZ.
The initiative’s goal was to increase the number of financial institutions committed to net-zero principles — essentially a promise that the work done by these institutions (investing, lending money, managing major assets like pension funds) would not cause an overall increase in the world’s carbon emissions. During the conference, Carney announced that the coalition had grown to 450 firms responsible for $130 trillion in assets, a pot of wealth equivalent to more than five times the gross domestic product of the United States. (snip)
But just a year later, many Wall Street firms are backtracking. In September, the Financial Times reported that several banks, including Bank of America and JP Morgan, were concerned about accidentally running afoul of United Nations climate rules and being held legally liable for their commitments, leading them to consider pulling out of GFANZ. Blackrock and Vanguard, the world’s largest asset managers, then confirmed in October that their net zero commitments would not preclude them from investing in fossil fuels, despite concerns that new fossil fuel investment is incompatible with timely decarbonization. (Asset managers steward money on behalf of major investors like sovereign wealth funds, insurers, and pension funds.) And finally, earlier this week, Vanguard officially announced that it is resigning from the Net Zero Asset Managers initiative, a sector-specific alliance under the GFANZ umbrella.
It’s a long piece, but, let’s face it, so many of these companies are realizing this is all just very silly, and with economy issues around the world it is time to focus on doing business properly, not pandering to the climate nuts. Most consumers couldn’t care less about any pledges. They’re tired of spending money for nothing, and still having the climate cult giving them hell. The people who run these companies are not dummies, and aren’t seeing a return for those pledges. Is this a big crack? Or just an aberration? Time will tell.
Read: Bummer: Wall Street Firms Backing Out Of Their Climate (scam) Commitments »
There once was a time when members of Congress jealously guarded their Constitutionally granted power, namely, the ones who make the laws, and it is up to the Executive Branch to enforce those laws. Not make them. Not interpret them how they want. Now they just want to be celebrities and avoid doing their job. And here’s them doing it again
More than 70 lawmakers send letter calling on Biden to grant rail workers seven sick days
More than 70 House and Senate members sent a letter to President Biden on Friday to urge him to do everything he can to guarantee rail workers have seven days of paid sick leave.
The lawmakers thanked Biden for his role in negotiating an agreement between freight rail carriers and unionized rail workers to avoid a strike that could have happened Friday, which could have paralyzed supply chains and significantly harmed the national economy.
They said while the agreement is much better than the initial proposals that the rail industry put out, it does not include any paid sick days for the workers who have difficult and dangerous jobs and who “have risked their lives during the pandemic to keep our economy moving.” (snip)
The lawmakers said Biden should expand on an executive order from former President Obama that established paid sick leave for federal contractors but not including rail workers. They also said Labor Secretary Marty Walsh has the authority to set mandatory occupational safety and health standards for businesses affecting interstate commerce under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.
They couldn’t get legislation through, so, they want the Executive Branch to use squishy language to require the sick days. I actually think they should have more than 1 day. Perhaps they could have compromised and gone for 3? Regardless, it’s the job of Congress, and, if they cannot get it through, well, try again or move on, not attempt to backdoor it. Do your damned jobs.
As for celebs
Best line "Our politicians treat us like viewers tuning into the latest episode of a TV drama series called “Incompetence,”" https://t.co/tLcNrhKqjN
— William Teach2 ??????? #refuseresist (@WTeach2) December 9, 2022
Read: 70 Dems Do Not Understand Their Job, Tell Biden To Give Rail Workers 7 Sick Days »
Trackback URL
He really is doing all he can to neuter the U.S. military, eh?
The Pentagon Marches Off to Climate War.
The war in Ukraine is draining U.S. arms stockpiles while geopolitical risks grow. Yet the Biden Administration is worried about—you can’t make this up—the climate impact of U.S. weapons and wants to impose costly green mandates on federal contractors.
A little-noticed rule-making proposed by the Department of Defense, NASA and the General Services Administration last month would require federal contractors to disclose and reduce their CO2 emissions as well as climate financial risks. The rule would cover 5,766 contractors that have received at least $7.5 million from the feds in the prior year.
For example, weapons manufacturers would have to quantify and disclose the amount of CO2 generated from their own facilities; manufacturers that produce steel, computer chips and motors used in their weapons; propellants and fuel; and even munition storage areas. It’s unclear if CO2 emissions will influence procurement decisions.
Large contractors would also have to publish an annual climate disclosure and develop “science-based targets” to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in alignment with the goals of the 2015 Paris agreement. That means contractors will have to aim to zero out emissions and possibly require their contractors to do so.
Will Lockheed Martin and Raytheon Technologies have to redesign weapons systems and aircraft to be powered by lithium-ion batteries? China mines and processes the critical minerals used in batteries and other green technologies that will be required to meet these “science-based targets.”
The proposed rule would also apply to non-defense contractors, including pharmaceutical, shipping and tech companies, though it curiously exempts universities, nonprofit research institutions and state and local governments.
What this will do is increase the cost of everything made and provided to the military, as well as slowing down procurement, all for an imaginary problem. China, Iran, Russia, North Korea, etc, must be loving this, as it makes our military less and less competitive.
Read: Brandon Puts Strict Climate Cult Mandates On Pentagon »
…are evil fossil fueled vehicles causing carbon pollution to create mold on sidewalks, you might just be a Warmist
The blog of the day is The Other McCain, with a post on a headless woman in a hopeless city.
I’m not making up the thing on mold, though most of the articles focus on mold in homes.
Read: If All You See… »
Surprisingly, the NY Times doesn’t seem to connect the dots on all these Republican losses in what should have been easily winnable races
Turnout by Republicans Was Great. It’s Just That Many of Them Didn’t Vote for Republicans.
After yet another disappointing showing for Republicans in Georgia’s Senate runoff on Tuesday, some conservatives — like Sean Hannity, Newt Gingrich and Kevin McCarthy — have begun to point to a surprising culprit: a failure to take advantage of early voting.
The theory seems to be that Republicans are losing because early voting is giving Democrats a turnout edge. It follows a similar conversation after the midterm elections, when a chorus of conservatives said Republicans needed to start encouraging mail voting.
But as more data becomes available on turnout in this year’s election, it is quite clear that turnout was not the main problem facing Republicans.
In state after state, the final turnout data shows that registered Republicans turned out at a higher rate — and in some places a much higher rate — than registered Democrats, including in many of the states where Republicans were dealt some of their most embarrassing losses.
Instead, high-profile Republicans like Herschel Walker in Georgia or Blake Masters in Arizona lost because Republican-leaning voters decided to cast ballots for Democrats, even as they voted for Republican candidates for U.S. House or other down-ballot races in their states.
Kemp won the Governor’s race by 8 points over Abrams, while Walker lost the runoff by 2.8. So, so, so many polls showed Republicans with comfortable leads in certain races, yet, still lost. It can’t all be blamed on cheating by Democrats, can it?
Take Maricopa County in Arizona. It’s home to Phoenix and around 70% of the state’s voters. Some Republicans say — without any clear evidence — they faltered in Arizona because some Maricopa voters were unable to cast ballots at the polls on Election Day, but the final turnout data shows that 75% of registered Republicans turned out, compared with 69% of Democrats. That was enough to yield an electorate in which registered Republicans outnumbered Democrats by 9 percentage points. Yet Republicans like Masters and Kari Lake lost their races for Senate and governor.
Or consider Clark County in Nevada. There, 67% of Republicans voted, compared with 57% of Democrats, implying that Republicans probably outnumbered Democrats statewide. Yet the Democrat — Catherine Cortez Masto — prevailed in the Senate while Republicans won the governorship and also won the most votes for the House.
In the key Senate states mentioned in this article, Republican House candidates received more votes than Democratic ones. The final Times/Siena polls showed that voters in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona and Nevada preferred Republican control of the Senate.
It’s fair to say voters in these key states probably preferred Republican control of government, in no small part because more Republicans showed up to vote. They just didn’t find Republican candidates they wanted to support at the top of the ticket.
In other words, most of these are ones that Trump was pushing hard, making those candidates toxic, even if those candidates supported positions which those squishy Republicans, and #NeverTrump Republicans, supported, because these people are investing too much emotion into their choices, rather than thought. They’re forgetting that most politicians are really not the best of people. You wouldn’t trust them around your favorite stuff. Some of the candidates were not great, like Walker and Ozz. Some where. But, some Republican voters either flipped to vote Democrat, voted for someone else, or just left that part of the ballot blank. This will not end well if Trump wins the primaries. Again, this is not me being #NeverTrump, not Trump Derangement Syndrome, it’s about electability.
Read: Election Data Shows Lots Of Republicans Flipped For Certain Races »
Well, maybe stop picking places that aren’t necessarily the best spots for winter sports. But, hey, everything is climate cult related these days
Host city for 2030 Winter Olympics hasn’t yet been named. Why? It may not be cold enough.
Concern over warmer temperatures and vanishing snow in some of the world’s winter playgrounds has put the selection of a host city for the 2030 Winter Olympics on hold.
The International Olympic Committee said this week it no longer plans to target host selection during its 2023 meeting. Instead the committee will give its Future Host Commission for the Olympic Winter Games more time to address its challenges.
Sports competitions around the world are increasingly affected by warmer temperatures, the Olympics included. Winter and summer venues have struggled with warmer than normal temperatures that lead to a range of issues, including lack of snow, rain instead of snow, and heat waves.
The winter host commission gave the Olympic committee’s executive board a presentation Tuesday, prompting a “wider discussion on climate change” and sustainable winter sport. One proposal floated would require future Winter Olympic hosts to prove their average minimum temperatures in February over 10 years were below freezing at potential snow competition venues.
Well, of course the climate changes. It always has. We’re deep into a typical Holocene warm period. These moonbats think it is all the fault of humans, so, yeah, hey, let’s hold a competition where tens of thousands take fossil fueled trips to attend, watch, and compete.
Read: IOC Holds Off On Naming 2030 Winter Olympics Site Due To ‘Climate Change’ »
Say, how many actual assault rifles, ones that are fully automatic, many of which are suppressed, are owned by the Executive Branch, excluding the Department of Defense? How many by the US Secret Service? Disarm them first
Biden speaks at vigil honoring victims of gun violence
President Joe Biden called again Wednesday for a ban on so-called assault weapons as he spoke at a vigil honoring victims of gun violence, an event taking place nearly 10 years since the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, that spurred a new generation of advocacy for tougher firearms restrictions.
“It’s just common sense. It’s simple common sense,” Biden said at the National Vigil for All Victims of Gun Violence, at St. Mark’s Episcopal Church. (snip)
“The idea we still allow semi-automatic weapons to be purchased is sick. Just sick,” Biden said on Thanksgiving. He mentioned then that he would start counting votes in Congress for such a ban, although the White House declined to answer Wednesday whether Biden has done so.
Huh. This was Biden on Thursday
https://twitter.com/SonofHas/status/1600892582225235970
So, yeah, call for a ban on scary looking rifles (after calling for a ban on all sem-autos at Thanksgiving), then release this guy
(Breitbart) Viktor Bout was arrested in 2010 and sentenced to 25 years in prison for arms trafficking, aiding terrorist organizations, and conspiring to kill Americans. A notorious arms dealer with a lengthy career of aiding international terrorists, Bout was arrested in a sting operation in which American DEA officials posed as potential buyers tied to the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), a Marxist terrorist organization. The DEA officials explicitly stated they wanted to weapons to kill Americans, to which Bout allegedly replied, “we have the same enemy.”
So, release a horrible arms dealer and call for gun control. Meanwhile, Biden left retired US Marine Paul Whelan behind in Russia.
Read: Brandon Is Super Sick Of Scary Looking Guns Being Sold »
I’m still hopeful that a court will tell Warmists “this court will be happy to process your claim once you’ve proven that all plaintiffs have made their lives carbon neutral and are practicing what they preach”. Anyhow, here’s Amnesty International, which notes on it’s about page
In 1961, British lawyer Peter Benenson was outraged when two Portuguese students were jailed just for raising a toast to freedom. He wrote an article in The Observer newspaper and launched a campaign that provoked an incredible response. Reprinted in newspapers across the world, his call to action sparked the idea that people everywhere can unite in solidarity for justice and freedom.
So, freedom and justice, while pushing to use government courts to force people to comply
Climate Crisis: International court should play key role in delivering climate justice
Amnesty International is backing a call for the International Court of Justice (ICJ) to issue an opinion on states’ responsibilities and obligations surrounding the climate crisis.
A group of 18 countries, led by Vanuatu, is formally presenting a resolution to the UN General Assembly on 9 December asking that the UN Court issue an advisory opinion on the rights and obligations of countries under international law in relation to climate change. The resolution is due to be voted on in coming weeks, with a majority required to pass it.
Marta Schaaf, Amnesty International’s Director of Climate, Economic and Social Justice, and Corporate Accountability Programme said:
“The initiative to request an International Court of Justice advisory opinion on state obligations regarding climate change will clarify and strengthen the international legal framework and foster the ambitious action required to match the urgency and gravity of the climate crisis. The past year has been wracked by extreme weather events made much more likely by climate change, and reports from the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and others show immediate action is imperative.
“A robust advisory opinion from the ICJ can guide this action. The court will not make new legislation but will examine existing international law, particularly environmental law and human rights law, in the light of the scientific consensus on the causes and consequences of climate change.
You know what this is really all about? Money. These small nations want lots of money given to them with no strings attached, all while relying on lots of fossil fuels to bring goods and tourists. There are 30 airports in Vanuatu. They just built another international one a few years ago, and spent a lot of money to upgrade a few others. Well, a lot of money from Australia and a few other nations, not really their own. Tourism accounts for about 40% of their GDP. That only happens with fossil fuels. Same with agricultural exports, which accounts for about 20% of GDP.
Read: Climate Cult Super Excited To Use International Court »
All posts here are my views. None represent my employer. If ye can prove me wrong, so be it. Ye can rant and rave at me, but be mostly polite to any other commentors. I will put up with quite a bit, but be mostly respectful to others.
NOTICE In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C., section 107, some material on this web site is provided without permission from the copyright owner, only for purposes of criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of federal copyright laws. These materials may not be distributed further, except for "fair use" non-profit educational purposes, without permission of the copyright owner.
Pirate's Cove by Pirate's Cove is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.