SkipCaptcha
30
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1,376:
Line 1,376: − + Line 1,424:
Line 1,424: − + Line 1,442:
Line 1,442: − + Line 1,490:
Line 1,490: − + Line 1,496:
Line 1,496: − + Line 2,243:
Line 2,243: − |- − |''I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry'' − |2007 − |PG-13 − |Portrayals an inside joke of [[same-sex marriage|same-sex "marriage"]] by having [[Adam Sandler]] and Kevin James pretend to be a homosexual couple in order to receive benefits. The villains of the movies are government ranking officials out to prove with they are really homosexual. However contains some scenes of girls in lingerie and Adam Sandler checking out some girls. The film took place prior to the 2011 enactment of the Marriage Equality Act, which claimed to "legalize" "marriage" for same-sex couples in the state. At the time the film was released, the state allowed for residents to file for unregistered cohabitation rights, and various municipal and county governments had offered domestic partnership registries. − |$120,059,556
Removed a film, too conservative
|2017
|2017
|PG (Should be PG-13 for multiple references to the dreaded S-word in profanity)
|PG (Should be PG-13 for multiple references to the dreaded S-word in profanity)
|Not only is this film clearly an infomercial for various smartphone applications and features thinly disguised as an unoriginal take on the "hero's journey" story archetype, but it appears to devalue human language: main teenager Alex can only win over his crush by communicating via text messages comprised exclusively of emojis, and a background teenager even says, "Words aren't cool". Openly homosexual writer and director Anthony "Tony" Leondis considers the movie a deeply personal project for him: the main character is a sentient emoji who is different from his friends with his ability to show multiple expressions, which reflects Leondis' laughable belief that he is an outcast when, in reality, Hollywood praises that sort of sinful sexuality. The film briefly glorifies [[Facebook]], the world's largest social network and a hotbed for narcissism and relationship destruction; gives minor lip service to feminism in the form of Jailbreak, a computer hacker girl emoji who refuses to be the princess emoji she was created to be; and has been unfavorably compared to ''Wreck-It Ralph'' and ''Inside Out'', two great conservative animations, plus the ambiguously conservative ''LEGO Movie''.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydvQB-4bBfQ</ref> Worst of all, TJ Miller, who voices the lead emoji, once said the film is a subtle protest against [[Donald Trump]] based on allegations that Trump wants to censor Hollywood and other liberally biased media.
|Not only is this film clearly an infomercial for various smartphone applications and features thinly disguised as an unoriginal take on the "hero's journey" story archetype, but it appears to devalue human language: the main teenager Alex can only win over his crush by communicating via text messages comprised exclusively of emojis, and a background teenager even says, "Words aren't cool". Openly homosexual writer and director Anthony "Tony" Leondis considers the movie a deeply personal project for him: the main character is a sentient emoji who is different from his friends with his ability to show multiple expressions, which reflects Leondis' laughable belief that he is an outcast when, in reality, Hollywood praises that sort of sinful sexuality. The film briefly glorifies [[Facebook]], the world's largest social network and a hotbed for narcissism and relationship destruction; gives minor lip service to feminism in the form of Jailbreak, a computer hacker girl emoji who refuses to be the princess emoji she was created to be; and has been unfavorably compared to ''Wreck-It Ralph'' and ''Inside Out'', two great conservative animations, plus the ambiguously conservative ''LEGO Movie''.<ref>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydvQB-4bBfQ</ref> Worst of all, TJ Miller, who voices the lead emoji, once said the film is a subtle protest against [[Donald Trump]] based on allegations that Trump wants to censor Hollywood and other liberally biased media.
|$25,650,000
|$25,650,000
|-
|-
|1996
|1996
|G
|G
|Released during liberal maniac [[Michael Eisner]]'s reign of terror at Disney, the film does everything in its power to persecute Christians. The original source material was not intended for children, yet the Disney film was marketed as such to young audiences. In some cases, the film actually manages to be even more darker than the original book by Victor Hugo: originally, Quasimodo's vicious punishment at the hands of the Parisians during the Feast of Fools ceremony was out of corporal punishment; while in the Disney film, it had been done at the whim of the Parisians just for the sake of it. To make the film even darker, a gypsy genocide plot is introduced, and Paris was also the victim of arson late into the film. This is a stark contrast to most other Disney film adaptations, which have a history of toning down the original works (as in ''The Jungle Book'', in which Disney advised the writers to ignore the book specifically because its contents were unsuitable for children). Even worse, the DVD commentary for the film boasted that they deliberately had the villain, Judge Claude Frollo, when symbolically falling to hell in "Hellfire", assuming the pose of the crucifix.<ref>DVD Commentary: "Here's some more of our ham-fisted symbolism--Frollo falls down in the shape of a crucifix!"</ref> Some mild language is present, too (namely the word "damnation" and "eternal damnation"). Worst of all, one of the male gargoyles falls in love with Djali, who is explicitly male, which means that liberals will subtly shoehorn the homosexual agenda into anything, even the gargoyles of Notre Dame. There is also a bit of forced diversity in the movie as well, as Esmerelda is altered to be a full Gypsy by birth (in the original book, she was in fact ethnically French, the daughter of a French anchoress, and had been abducted by gypsies and raised by them).
|Released during liberal maniac [[Michael Eisner]]'s reign of terror at Disney, the film does everything in its power to persecute Christians. The original source material was not intended for children, yet the Disney film was marketed as such to young audiences. In some cases, the film actually manages to be even darker than the original book by Victor Hugo: originally, Quasimodo's vicious punishment at the hands of the Parisians during the Feast of Fools ceremony was out of corporal punishment; while in the Disney film, it had been done at the whim of the Parisians just for the sake of it. To make the film even darker, a gypsy genocide plot is introduced, and Paris was also the victim of arson late into the film. This is a stark contrast to most other Disney film adaptations, which have a history of toning down the original works (as in ''The Jungle Book'', in which Disney advised the writers to ignore the book specifically because its contents were unsuitable for children). Even worse, the DVD commentary for the film boasted that they deliberately had the villain, Judge Claude Frollo, when symbolically falling to hell in "Hellfire", assuming the pose of the crucifix.<ref>DVD Commentary: "Here's some more of our ham-fisted symbolism--Frollo falls down in the shape of a crucifix!"</ref> Some mild language is present, too (namely the word "damnation" and "eternal damnation"). Worst of all, one of the male gargoyles falls in love with Djali, who is explicitly male, which means that liberals will subtly shoehorn the homosexual agenda into anything, even the gargoyles of Notre Dame. There is also a bit of forced diversity in the movie as well, as Esmerelda is altered to be a full Gypsy by birth (in the original book, she was in fact ethnically French, the daughter of a French anchoress, and had been abducted by gypsies and raised by them).
|$100,138,851
|$100,138,851
|-
|-
|2011
|2011
|PG
|PG
|A 9-year-old boy named Milo defies his mother, behaves in disorderly conduct, and is somewhat nihilistic. Family values are poked fun at. It also has a brief scene poking fun at the great conservative leader, [[Ronald Reagan]].
|A 9-year-old boy named Milo defies his mother, behaves in disorderly conduct, and is somewhat [[Nihilist|nihilistic]]. Family values are poked fun at. It also has a brief scene poking fun at the great conservative leader, [[Ronald Reagan]].
|$39 million
|$39 million
|-
|-
|2018
|2018
|G
|G
|The movie was a complete trashing of the popular British children's book series of the same name, promoting environmentalism by having the rightful owner of the farm, Thomas MacGregor, be vilified simply for trying to farm the vegetable garden that legally belonged to him, and the various farm animals being portrayed positively in interfering with his business, with one of their plans against MacGregor even going so far as to have Peter Rabbit murder him by exploiting a food allergy that he had and it being treated in a positive manner. It was such that even the liberal website [[TV Tropes]] grudgingly acknowledged under the articles "Unintentionally Sympathetic" and "Unintentionally Unsympathetic" that Thomas was closer to being in the right than Peter and his friends were.
|The movie was a complete trashing of the popular British children's book series of the same name, promoting environmentalism by having the rightful owner of the farm, Thomas MacGregor, be vilified simply for trying to farm the vegetable garden that legally belonged to him, and the various farm animals being portrayed positively in interfering with his business, with one of their plans against MacGregor even going so far as to have Peter Rabbit murder him by exploiting a food allergy that he had and it is treated in a positive manner. It was such that even the liberal website [[TV Tropes]] grudgingly acknowledged under the articles "Unintentionally Sympathetic" and "Unintentionally Unsympathetic" that Thomas was closer to being in the right than Peter and his friends were.
|$146,983,492
|$146,983,492
|-
|-
|1995
|1995
|G
|G
|This feminist story follows a highly fictionalized account of the life of [[Native American]] [[Pocahontas]] with an environmental message; and the Native American’s view against English settlers is a similar to Howard Zinn's revisionist history textbook ''A People's History of the United States'', which would entered public knowledge and provided to universities, colleges, and high schools across America two years later (see ''Good Will Hunting''). The titular character enters what is implied to be an unfaithful relationship with John Smith over fellow Native American Kokoum, and her decision is treated in a comparatively positive light; while the English settlers are vilified simply for establishing the early American colonies to find Jamestown, and John Ratcliffe in particular was demonized as having the motive of trying to establish a gold mine and being greedy, despite gold never being the motive for Ratcliffe, which could be interpreted as a dig against capitalism. Following the Best Picture nomination of ''Beauty and the Beast'' at the 64th Academy Awards and its subsequent loss in March 1992, then-studio chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg opted to produce another animated sweeping romantic epic in hopes of achieving a cinematic masterpiece status and replicating another Best Picture nomination, even if he intended to distort history and add both a love story and environmental themes. In fact, many people at Disney had high hopes for ''Pocahontas'', while deeming the concept of another film in production, ''The Lion King'' as experimental. To their surprise, ''The Lion King'' became one of the greatest animated motion pictures of all time, while ''Pocahontas'' received mixed critical reviews and below-than-expected box office receipts.
|This feminist story follows a highly fictionalized account of the life of [[Native American]] [[Pocahontas]] with an environmental message; and the Native American’s view against English settlers is similar to Howard Zinn's revisionist history textbook ''A People's History of the United States'', which would entered public knowledge and provided to universities, colleges, and high schools across America two years later (see ''Good Will Hunting''). The titular character enters what is implied to be an unfaithful relationship with John Smith over fellow Native American Kokoum, and her decision is treated in a comparatively positive light; while the English settlers are vilified simply for establishing the early American colonies to find Jamestown, and John Ratcliffe in particular was demonized as having the motive of trying to establish a gold mine and being greedy, despite gold never being the motive for Ratcliffe, which could be interpreted as a dig against capitalism. Following the Best Picture nomination of ''Beauty and the Beast'' at the 64th Academy Awards and its subsequent loss in March 1992, then-studio chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg opted to produce another animated sweeping romantic epic in hopes of achieving a cinematic masterpiece status and replicating another Best Picture nomination, even if he intended to distort history and add both a love story and environmental themes. In fact, many people at Disney had high hopes for ''Pocahontas'', while deeming the concept of another film in production, ''The Lion King'' as experimental. To their surprise, ''The Lion King'' became one of the greatest animated motion pictures of all time, while ''Pocahontas'' received mixed critical reviews and below-than-expected box office receipts.
|$141,579,773
|$141,579,773
|-
|-
|Futuristic totalitarians plan titular annual televised "games" as punishment on the descendants of failed revolutionaries from a past uprising. Although technically a message against totalitarianism and for individualism, Leftist actor Donald Sutherland, who played President Snow, implied that the struggles of the films' protagonists were supposed to be derived from the Occupy Wall Street movement, and the book's author also indicated that the events of the book were based on the George W. Bush administration.
|Futuristic totalitarians plan titular annual televised "games" as punishment on the descendants of failed revolutionaries from a past uprising. Although technically a message against totalitarianism and for individualism, Leftist actor Donald Sutherland, who played President Snow, implied that the struggles of the films' protagonists were supposed to be derived from the Occupy Wall Street movement, and the book's author also indicated that the events of the book were based on the George W. Bush administration.
|$406,267,858
|$406,267,858
|-
|-
|''Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull''
|''Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull''