SkipCaptcha, Automoderated users, edit
541
edits
Changes
→Debatable Whether Liberal
|R
|R
|Quentin Tarantino's own version of the Django character (there's a scene where the original Italian Django makes a cameo and Tarantino's version speaks to him, another tribute by Tarantino to the Spaghetti-Western genre that has always been his source of inspiration). As is common for Tarantino's movies, graphic violence with practical effects and the constant use of the word nig*er are the norm also here, but this time there is one revisionist take on the author of the book ''[[The Three Musketeers]]'', in which German former dentist and now bounty hunter Dr. Schultz tells the racist slave owner Calvin Candie that [[Alexandre Dumas]], the author of ''The Three Musketeers'', of which Candie is a reader, is black and said in a way like he was not even French. This, of course, is widely known to be false, and it takes very little to debunk this gigantic lie. There's also the ridiculously exaggerated reaction of terrorized people when they see a black man on a horse coming into town; this is surprisingly unrealistic for a Tarantino movie. However, the reason this film is in this section is because the protagonist Django, when discussing with Schultz the plan to take Django's wife from Candie's plantation pretending to be in the business of slave mandingos, he mentions that there's no worse dishonor than being a black slave owner, and this is a more unique than rare time in which really and historically existed black slave owners in America (just like black [[Confederates]]) are mentioned in a liberal Hollywood film.
|Quentin Tarantino's own version of the Django character (there's a scene where the original Italian Django makes a cameo and Tarantino's version speaks to him, another tribute by Tarantino to the Spaghetti-Western genre that has always been his source of inspiration). As is common for Tarantino's movies, graphic violence with practical effects and the constant use of the word nig*er are the norm also here, but this time there is one revisionist take on the author of the book ''[[The Three Musketeers]]'', in which German former dentist and now bounty hunter Dr. Schultz tells the racist slave owner Calvin Candie that [[Alexandre Dumas]], the author of ''The Three Musketeers'', of which Candie is a reader, is black and said in a way like he was not even French. This, of course, is widely known to be false, and it takes very little to debunk this gigantic lie. There's also the ridiculously exaggerated reaction of terrorized people when they see a black man on a horse coming into town; this is surprisingly unrealistic for a Tarantino movie. However, the reason this film is in this section is because the protagonist Django, when discussing with Schultz the plan to take Django's wife from Candie's plantation pretending to be in the business of slave mandingos, he mentions that there's no worse dishonor than being a black slave owner, and this is a more unique than rare time in which really and historically existed black slave owners in America (just like black [[Confederates]]) are mentioned in a liberal Hollywood film.
|$
|-
|-
|''The Crow''
|''The Crow''
On the other hand, the film is even darker than the original novel. Originally, Quasimodo's vicious punishment at the hands of the Parisians during the Feast of Fools ceremony was not corporal punishment; in the Disney film, it was done at the Parisians' whim, just for the sake of it. In addition, Frollo himself was also made significantly more villainous in the movie compared to in the book despite being separated from the archdeacon role, removing most of his redeemable traits in the book (case in point, in the film, Frollo was responsible for killing Quasimodo's mother and nearly killed Quasimodo himself as a baby until being made to raise him as penance by the archdeacon, and was depicted as an abusive father figure overall, as well as depicted as sadistic, in contrast to the original novel, where he willingly took in Quasimodo when he was in fact abandoned by his mom and was depicted as a fairly good father figure, at least until Esmerelda entered the picture). The film also removed some Christian concepts to heighten Frollo's villainy (for example, in the film, Quasimodo is named as an insult for his deformed appearance, whereas in the book he is named after Quasimodo Tuesday). It's also debatable whether it's pro-Christian overall, since while the Archdeacon himself was a positive influence, most of the other Christian characters, without even counting Frollo, were depicted in a very negative light. The director's commentary also implied that they may have included blasphemous material by depicting Frollo in a crucifix pose as he descends into Hell during the Hellfire visuals.<ref>DVD Commentary: "Here's some more of our ham-fisted symbolism--Frollo falls down in the shape of a crucifix!"</ref> The film, however, shows a clear case of divine punishment in animation, represented by the death of Frollo, literally seeing the Devil in the face, before falling to his horrible death into the "fiery pit". Also pretty ironic, considering that his last words a few instants before his death were "And he shall smite the wicked, and plunge them into the fiery pit!", when he was going to kill Esmeralda and Quasimodo with his sword.
On the other hand, the film is even darker than the original novel. Originally, Quasimodo's vicious punishment at the hands of the Parisians during the Feast of Fools ceremony was not corporal punishment; in the Disney film, it was done at the Parisians' whim, just for the sake of it. In addition, Frollo himself was also made significantly more villainous in the movie compared to in the book despite being separated from the archdeacon role, removing most of his redeemable traits in the book (case in point, in the film, Frollo was responsible for killing Quasimodo's mother and nearly killed Quasimodo himself as a baby until being made to raise him as penance by the archdeacon, and was depicted as an abusive father figure overall, as well as depicted as sadistic, in contrast to the original novel, where he willingly took in Quasimodo when he was in fact abandoned by his mom and was depicted as a fairly good father figure, at least until Esmerelda entered the picture). The film also removed some Christian concepts to heighten Frollo's villainy (for example, in the film, Quasimodo is named as an insult for his deformed appearance, whereas in the book he is named after Quasimodo Tuesday). It's also debatable whether it's pro-Christian overall, since while the Archdeacon himself was a positive influence, most of the other Christian characters, without even counting Frollo, were depicted in a very negative light. The director's commentary also implied that they may have included blasphemous material by depicting Frollo in a crucifix pose as he descends into Hell during the Hellfire visuals.<ref>DVD Commentary: "Here's some more of our ham-fisted symbolism--Frollo falls down in the shape of a crucifix!"</ref> The film, however, shows a clear case of divine punishment in animation, represented by the death of Frollo, literally seeing the Devil in the face, before falling to his horrible death into the "fiery pit". Also pretty ironic, considering that his last words a few instants before his death were "And he shall smite the wicked, and plunge them into the fiery pit!", when he was going to kill Esmeralda and Quasimodo with his sword.
To make the film even darker, a gypsy genocide plot is introduced, and Paris is also the victim of arson late into the film. The song 'Hellfire' was also notorious for making explicit references to lust. Not necessarily a bad thing, it can be considered courageous, original, surprising, and artistically entertaining, especially for families with kids who aren't "snowflakes". However, this is in stark contrast to most other Disney film adaptations, which have a history of toning down the original works (as in ''[[The Jungle Book]]'', where Disney advised the writers to ignore the book specifically because its contents were unsuitable for children). However, on the other hand, other films from the Walt's era were more dark with particular horror and dramatic elements than their original counterparts and source materials, like ''[[Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs]]'', ''[[Pinocchio]]'' (with evil and sadistic Stromboli unlike his novel countepart Mangiafuoco, the demonic and sa distici Coachman and all the cursed Pleasure Island with the impressive children turning into donkeys scene, and the terrifying whale Monstro), all the ''[[Night on Bald Mountain]]'' segment in ''[[Fantasia]]'' (with Chernabog and even harpies showing bare breasts, though for a few seconds), ''[[Dumbo]]'' (with its Pink Elephants on Parade allucination caused by accidental consumption of alcohol), ''[[Bambi]]'' (for the (in)famous scene of the death of Bambi's mother), ''[[Sleeping Beauty]]'' and ''[[101 Dalmatians]]'', this latter two specifically for their villains' scenes (Maleficent and Cruella De Vil). The Gypsies were also depicted in a more positive light, to the extent that they, at times, were considered preferable to Christianity, despite Gypsies essentially being pagans. Hints at race swapping were also included in the film, as Esmerelda was made into an ethnic gypsy in the movie, when in the original book, she was actually a blonde Parisienne and the daughter of an anchoress who was abducted by the gypsies and made into their own.
To make the film even darker, a gypsy genocide plot is introduced, and Paris is also the victim of arson late into the film. The song 'Hellfire' was also notorious for making explicit references to lust. Not necessarily a bad thing, it can be considered courageous, original, surprising, and artistically entertaining, especially for families with kids who aren't "snowflakes". However, this is in stark contrast to most other Disney film adaptations, which have a history of toning down the original works (as in ''[[The Jungle Book]]'', where Disney advised the writers to ignore the book specifically because its contents were unsuitable for children). However, on the other hand, other films from the Walt's era were more dark with particular horror and dramatic elements than their original counterparts and source materials, like ''[[Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs]]'', ''[[Pinocchio]]'' (with evil and sadistic Stromboli unlike his novel countepart Mangiafuoco, the demonic and sa distici Coachman and all the cursed Pleasure Island with the impressive children turning into donkeys scene, and the terrifying whale Monstro), all the ''[[Night on Bald Mountain]]'' segment in ''[[Fantasia]]'' (with Chernabog and even harpies showing bare breasts, though for a few seconds), ''[[Dumbo]]'' (with its Pink Elephants on Parade allucination caused by accidental consumption of alcohol), ''[[Bambi]]'' (for the (in)famous scene of the death of Bambi's mother), ''[[Sleeping Beauty]]'' and ''[[101 Dalmatians]]'', this latter two specifically for their villains' scenes (Maleficent and Cruella De Vil). The Gypsies were also depicted in a more positive light, to the extent that they, at times, were considered preferable to Christianity, despite Gypsies essentially being pagans. The film also hints at race swapping: Esmerelda is made into an ethnic gypsy, whereas in the original book she is a blonde Parisienne and the daughter of an anchoress who is abducted by the gypsies and made one of their own.
Worst of all, one of the male gargoyles falls in love with Djali, who is male according to some descriptions (voiced, however, by a female voice-actress and fans mostly refer to it as a female goat, and probably the gargoyle confused Djali with a female goat, assumption supported by his known clear stupidity), which may have meant that liberals will subtly shoehorn the homosexual agenda into anything, even the gargoyles of Notre Dame (and also comes across as extremely hypocritical and blasphemous due to homosexuality being tolerated even less by God than Frollo's lust for Esmerelda, based on God explicitly referring to the concept as an abomination in Leviticus as well as his destroying Sodom and Gomorrah largely because of the practice of homosexuality). However, this should be taken with a grain of salt, because the DVD audio commentary Kirk Wise (co-director), Gary Trousdale (co-director), and Don Hahn (producer) suggest that it's possible that the three gargoyles exist purely in Quasimodo's mind and are in fact split-off portions of his own personality created to deal with his loneliness. This doesn't explain, however, their scenes when Quasimodo is absent, how animals (especially Esmeralda's goat) can see them alive, the damage thev do to Frollo's soldiers in the climax, and their constant change of positions when they stop animating themselves.<ref>'''Gary Trousdale:''' We've always operated under the assumption that the gargoyles were kind of figments of Quasimodo's imagination. They didn't really move around, or did they? You know...
Worst of all, one of the male gargoyles falls in love with Djali, who is male according to some descriptions (voiced, however, by a female voice-actress and fans mostly refer to it as a female goat, and probably the gargoyle confused Djali with a female goat, assumption supported by his known clear stupidity), which may have meant that liberals will subtly shoehorn the homosexual agenda into anything, even the gargoyles of Notre Dame (and also comes across as extremely hypocritical and blasphemous due to homosexuality being tolerated even less by God than Frollo's lust for Esmerelda, based on God explicitly referring to the concept as an abomination in Leviticus as well as his destroying Sodom and Gomorrah largely because of the practice of homosexuality). However, this should be taken with a grain of salt, because the DVD audio commentary Kirk Wise (co-director), Gary Trousdale (co-director), and Don Hahn (producer) suggest that it's possible that the three gargoyles exist purely in Quasimodo's mind and are in fact split-off portions of his own personality created to deal with his loneliness. This doesn't explain, however, their scenes when Quasimodo is absent, how animals (especially Esmeralda's goat) can see them alive, the damage thev do to Frollo's soldiers in the climax, and their constant change of positions when they stop animating themselves.<ref>'''Gary Trousdale:''' We've always operated under the assumption that the gargoyles were kind of figments of Quasimodo's imagination. They didn't really move around, or did they? You know...
|1999
|1999
|PG
|PG
|This animation espouses anti-war themes and also brief but strong anti-hunting sentiments. Firearms in general are shown in a negative light, with the phrase "guns kill" being repeated a total of three times. The titular giant is called a "big gun that walks." From a conservative viewpoint, he is a poor metaphor for a real gun; unlike a law-abiding citizen who is a gun owner, the giant has no choice in his actions because he is a war machine programmed with the inability to use his weapons for good, but only to use them thoughtlessly and senselessly. The story involves him learning to hide his weapons and "not be a gun". The conclusion is that, in order to protect the public from an incoming missile, he must fly into it and kill himself rather than use his guns against it. As it is explained, "It's bad to kill, but it isn't bad to die." In addition, despite being set during the Cold War, it largely downplays the Soviet menace that was occurring during that time, as the main antagonist, Kent Mansley, is a government agent (implied to be part of the NSA) investigating the titular Iron Giant who at one point while launching a tirade against Hogarth Hughes alludes to the possibility that the Communists may have been responsible for the Giant's creation as a means to destroy America and that they must destroy it before "it destroys us" and is treated negatively for it. Also features some foul language.
|This animation espouses anti-war themes and also brief but strong anti-hunting sentiments. Firearms in general are shown in a negative light, with the phrase "guns kill" being repeated a total of three times. The titular giant is called a "big gun that walks." From a conservative viewpoint, he is a poor metaphor for a real gun; unlike a law-abiding citizen who is a gun owner, the giant has no choice in his actions because he is a war machine programmed with the inability to use his weapons for good, but only to use them thoughtlessly and senselessly. The story follows him as he learns to hide his weapons and "not be a gun." The conclusion is that, in order to protect the public from an incoming missile, he must fly into it and kill himself rather than use his guns against it. As it is explained, "It's bad to kill, but it isn't bad to die." In addition, despite being set during the Cold War, it largely downplays the Soviet menace that was occurring during that time, as the main antagonist, Kent Mansley, is a government agent (implied to be part of the NSA) investigating the titular Iron Giant who at one point while launching a tirade against Hogarth Hughes alludes to the possibility that the Communists may have been responsible for the Giant's creation as a means to destroy America and that they must destroy it before "it destroys us" and is treated negatively for it. Also features some foul language.
That all being said, however, despite the definite anti-gun and anti-hunting themes, the film does portray the military in a fairly positive light, as General Rogarth was shown to be even-headed and only willing to use military force if confronted with evidence requiring for it, also making clear that he was not happy about bringing out an implied large military force for what was apparently a hoax, and while the military does try to attack the Iron Giant late into the film, it was only because they had been manipulated into doing so by Kent Mansley by the latter lying about the giant killing Hogarth Hughes, and only when confronted with evidence that Hogarth had in fact been alive did the military stand down. In addition, when Hogarth left to investigate evidence of a "martian" taking out an antenna, he saluted a photograph of his father, who was implied to have died during World War II. Also features a positive portrayal of the American icon Superman. There's also an anti-materialist message, as well as an implicitly Christian one, as Hogarth talks to the Giant about how humans and other forms of life possess souls that live on even after their mortal bodies die.
That all being said, however, despite the definite anti-gun and anti-hunting themes, the film does portray the military in a fairly positive light, as General Rogarth was shown to be even-headed and only willing to use military force if confronted with evidence requiring for it, also making clear that he was not happy about bringing out an implied large military force for what was apparently a hoax, and while the military does try to attack the Iron Giant late into the film, it was only because they had been manipulated into doing so by Kent Mansley by the latter lying about the giant killing Hogarth Hughes, and only when confronted with evidence that Hogarth had in fact been alive did the military stand down. In addition, when Hogarth left to investigate evidence of a "Martian" taking out an antenna, he saluted a photograph of his father, who was implied to have died during World War II. Also features a positive portrayal of the American icon Superman. It also conveys an anti-materialist message and an implicitly Christian one, as Hogarth tells the Giant that humans and other forms of life have souls that live on even after their mortal bodies die.
|$5,732,614
|$5,732,614
|-
|-
|1975
|1975
|PG
|PG
|Anti-environmentalism film, the heroes are police chief Brody, WWII vet Quint, and Marine Biologist Hooper, who team up to take on a monstrous, man-eating great white shark. However, there is a part where (despite the warning) the Mayor keeps the beaches open for the sake of money, which some may say is an anti-capitalist statement. Notable for being one of the first summer blockbusters. It was followed by three sequels in 1978, 1983 and 1987.
|Anti-environmentalism film; the heroes are police chief Brody, WWII vet Quint, and Marine Biologist Hooper, who team up to take on a monstrous, man-eating great white shark. However, at one point (despite the warning), the Mayor keeps the beaches open for the sake of money, which some may see as an anti-capitalist statement. It is notable as one of the first summer blockbusters. It was followed by three sequels in 1978, 1983 and 1987.
|$260,000,000<ref>http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=jaws.htm</ref>
|$260,000,000<ref>http://www.boxofficemojo.com/movies/?id=jaws.htm</ref>
|-
|-
|2024
|2024
|PG
|PG
|This prequel to 2019's ''The Lion King'' remake shows Mufasa's origin story, as Rafiki tells this to Simba's daughter Kiara. Mufasa is an orphaned lion cub who befriends another cub named Taka, who later becomes Scar. When a white lion named Kiros attacks their home, the brothers flee and make a journey towards a promised land called Milele, which would later be called the Pride Lands.
|This prequel to 2019's ''The Lion King'' remake shows Mufasa's origin story, as Rafiki tells this to Simba's daughter Kiara. Mufasa is an orphaned lion cub who befriends another cub named Taka, who later becomes Scar. When a white lion named Kiros attacks their home, the brothers flee and journey to a promised land called Milele, which later becomes the Pride Lands.
On one hand, it does show a hint of feminism throughout the movie. Lionesses in real life are known to do most of the hunting for the pride, but the movie seems to hold them in higher favor than the males. Taka's father, Obasi, even gives his son terrible advice on how to be a king, such as being lazy and lying to his subjects.
On the one hand, the movie hints at feminism throughout. In real life, lionesses do most of the hunting for the pride, but the movie seems to favor them more than the males. Taka's father, Obasi, even gives his son terrible advice on how to be a king, such as being lazy and lying to his subjects.
On the other hand, the movie does portray family and friendship rather positively. Mufasa and Taka bond as brothers, and Taka's mother, Eshe, comes to care for Mufasa like another son. In the present, Simba is shown to be a good father to Kiara, telling her to be brave while he checks on Nala, who is giving birth to her second cub.
On the other hand, the movie portrays family and friendship more positively. Mufasa and Taka bond as brothers, and Taka's mother, Eshe, comes to care for Mufasa like another son. In the present, Simba is shown to be a good father to Kiara, telling her to be brave while he checks on Nala, who is giving birth to her second cub.
|$254,567,693
|$254,567,693
|
|-
|''Mulan''
|''Mulan''
|1998
|1998
|The film has Liberals changing history to suit their feminist agenda, similar to what they did in Pocahontas, as well as some historical revisionism (In the film, the Huns are at war with China, even though this never happened; although that said, the name of the villain, Shan Yu, hints at them being Xiongnu). However, the central theme of [[Filial piety]] from the work it was based on, [[The Ballad of Mulan]], is still present ultimately, as the main reason Mulan joined the military was that her father suffered a severe injury that made him unfit for combat, and the film is pro-Military.
|The film has Liberals changing history to suit their feminist agenda, similar to what they did in Pocahontas, as well as some historical revisionism (In the film, the Huns are at war with China, even though this never happened; although that said, the name of the villain, Shan Yu, hints at them being Xiongnu). However, the central theme of [[Filial piety]] from the work it was based on, [[The Ballad of Mulan]], is still present ultimately, as the main reason Mulan joined the military was that her father suffered a severe injury that made him unfit for combat, and the film is pro-Military.
|$120,620,254
|$120,620,254
|-
|-
|''Monty Python's Life of Brian''
|''Monty Python's Life of Brian''
|A man is born on the same day as Christ Jesus and is mistaken for the Messiah. As a result, the film contains constant anti-Christianity sacrilege. However, the reason it is here is because the film in one scene questions how a man can have babies, which resulted in [[cancel culture]] from the liberal elite over 40 years after this movie was released.
|A man is born on the same day as Christ Jesus and is mistaken for the Messiah. As a result, the film contains constant anti-Christianity sacrilege. However, the reason it is here is because the film in one scene questions how a man can have babies, which resulted in [[cancel culture]] from the liberal elite over 40 years after this movie was released.
|$19,398,164
|$19,398,164
|-
|''P.C.U.''
|''P.C.U.''
|1994
|1994
|$18,750,000
|$18,750,000
|-
|-
| ''[[Pollyanna (1960 film)|Pollyanna]]''
|''[[Pollyanna (1960 film)|Pollyanna]]''
| 1960
|1960
| G
|G
| One of [[Walt Disney]]’s live-action classics stars an orphaned girl who now lives with her wealthy aunt Polly Harrington who is the de facto leader of the town (Harrington) due to her massive wealth and influence over the Church. Pollyanna herself helps the miserable and depressed find happiness again wether it’s the “glad game” or doing simple stuff to make rainbows with crystals. It promotes the idea of small town Americana, and social values with going to Church, and praying before eating. It also shows the town getting together to hold a bazar (hosted by the Church) to raise money for a new orphanage. That being said, the film opens with a nude boy swinging on a rope into a water hole.
|One of [[Walt Disney]]’s live-action classics stars an orphaned girl who now lives with her wealthy aunt Polly Harrington who is the de facto leader of the town (Harrington) due to her massive wealth and influence over the Church. Pollyanna herself helps the miserable and depressed find happiness again wether it’s the “glad game” or doing simple stuff to make rainbows with crystals. It promotes the idea of small-town America and social values, like going to Church, and praying before eating. It also shows the town getting together to hold a bazar (hosted by the Church) to raise money for a new orphanage. That being said, the film opens with a nude boy swinging on a rope into a water hole.
|$3,750,000
|$3,750,000
|-
|-
|1995
|1995
|R
|R
|Disgraced fire fighter now becomes a laughingstock fire marshal uncovers a terrorist plot at a Hockey game plans to redeem himself and protect his children and the Vice President from said terrorists. However, they're not Islamic, which may have been because the film was trying to be politically correct.
|A disgraced firefighter now becomes a laughingstock fire marshal who uncovers a terrorist plot at a Hockey game and plans to redeem himself and protect his children and the Vice President from said terrorists. However, they're not Islamic, which may have been because the film was trying to be politically correct.
|$20,350,171
|$20,350,171
|-
|-
|1991
|1991
|R
|R
|The second film in the Terminator Franchise by Liberal director James Cameron. While it does have anti-war and anti-capitalist themes, and also dabbles in pro-feminist views via Sarah Connor's change in overall character, it is also pro-family. John Connor reconnects with his mother and the Terminator who serves as his protector becomes like a father to him, so much so that John cries when the Terminator chooses to sacrifice himself to ensure that Skynet would never be built.
|The second film in the Terminator franchise, directed by liberal James Cameron. While it has anti-war and anti-capitalist themes and dabbles in pro-feminist views through Sarah Connor's character arc, it is also pro-family. John Connor reconnects with his mother and the Terminator who serves as his protector becomes like a father to him, so much so that John cries when the Terminator chooses to sacrifice himself to ensure that Skynet would never be built.
|$523.7 million
|$523.7 million
|-
|-
|1997
|1997
|PG-13
|PG-13
|Every life has value, and the most powerful men give up their seats on lifeboats to women and children first, while the media and a young [[RINO]] are rightly criticized. The film broke the record in movie revenues before the environmentalist nightmare that was ''Avatar''. However, ''Titanic'' gives some hints at a pro-socialist view, and a key scene involving Rose being drawn in the nude could be evocative of pornography.
|Every life has value, and the most powerful men give up their seats on lifeboats to women and children first, while the media and a young [[RINO]] are rightly criticized. The film broke the movie revenue record before the environmentalist nightmare that was ''Avatar''. However, ''Titanic'' gives some hints at a pro-socialist view, and a key scene involving Rose being drawn in the nude could be evocative of pornography.
|$600,779,824
|$600,779,824
|-
|-