Last modified on 9 September 2019, at 15:56

Talk:Essay:Worst Liberal Movies

Return to "Essay:Worst Liberal Movies" page.

I am removing Scarface because it is a remake of a 1932 classic (which had the same plot, and definitely wasn't "liberal"), it in no way "glorifies" gangsterism and drug abuse since at the end of the film it shows the consequences of Tony Montanna's life of crime and drugs (He loses his wife, his best friend and his sister as a result of his reckless ways) and finally, the film is a classic. Even if it is liberal its still one of the most critically acclaimed films of all time and definitely doesn't belong on a list of movies that are the "worst". And as for Ferris Bueller's day off, I'm deleting that one whether you like it or not.

And as for Ferris Bueller's day off, I'm deleting that one whether you like it or not. Really? Well I am reverting and blocking you - whether you like it or not. Come back with a better, more collaborative, attitude next time. MaxFletcher 17:36, 4 September 2011 (EDT)

The name of this article should be changed to "Most overtly liberal movies" since several of the mentioned films are very well made and thus good movies. --AlexanderSz 19:55, 5 December 2011 (EST)

Back to the Future and Mrs. Doubtfire are also on this, I am going to remove them both because they are very successful films and have become classics, and definitely do not belong on a list of movies considered the worst.--GrantN (talk) 14:36, 29 April 2017 (EDT)

questionable entries

can a new category for movies that are questionably liberal be added. "The Social Network" is not overtly liberal. In the protagonist in a negative light, showing how Facebook ruins his life (his best friend sues him, he seems depressed, etc). It depicts everyone involved as jerks. It is questionably liberal because some liberals like the mean spirited Zuckerberg. Also, V for Vendetta is a libertarian movie. It is anti big government (and I would say anti communism). However it is anti religion, so again, questionably liberal --AlexanderSz 19:55, 5 December 2011 (EST)

If you're going to include a classic film like "Monty Python's Meaning of Life" then you had best rename the article to "liberal movies", as most of these movies are actually brilliant films and are by no means "the worst". But then again the "Best Conservative Movies" list has some dreadful films on it like "Space Jam" and "The Room". This site seems to have a very liberal definition of the term "liberal", and an even more liberal definition of the words "worst" and "best". --Danielspence 09:42, 13 April 2012 (EST)

Disagreements about a few of the entries in each list is to be expected.--Andy Schlafly 19:25, 13 April 2012 (EDT)
If entries do not reflect the general opinion of Conervapedia users then why aren't they removed? No justification for the inclusion of "The Meaning of Life" has been given. It's inclusion on the list is very dubious. This list previously included classic films such as "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" and "Scarface", which I removed without being reinstated afterwards. Why not remove "The Meaning Of Life"?

--Danielspence 21:13, 14 April 2012 (EST)

Regarding V for Vendetta, actually, most of the film was left-wing. The original comic may have been libertarian (showing the negative consequences of both totalitarianism and anarchy), but the actual film promoted full out anarchy without covering the negatives. Also, technically, it was supposed to be anti-Nazi, as the Norsefire party was meant to emulate Nazi Germany (which even the left hates). And I have read that there was more pro-communist messages in the film anyways, though I might have to dig it out. Actually, I think the Wachowski Brothers, or at least Larry/Lana Wachowski, were self-confessed Marxists. Pokeria1 23:31, 10 December 2013 (EST)
I removed the Frozen entry, namely because the reason for it being included was simply because of what an obscure pastor and a blog post stated. I'm against the gay agenda, and I personally wouldn't be surprised if Disney churned it out now, but really, John Nolte of Breitbart, who is not only conservative, but in his own words, is very good at spotting Hollywood leftist agendas from a hundred yards away, had viewed Frozen and could not pick up on any agendas in the film, certainly not the homosexual agenda. At best, the only "gay" it pushed was making people smile, what "gay" originally meant before the homosexuals hijacked the term. Here's the article: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/03/13/Disneys-frozen-is-not-homosexual-propaganda. Pokeria1 12:39, 11 April 2014 (EDT)

The Life of Brian

I will not stand for this film's inclusion on this list, it should be deleted immediately. Perhaps you should actually watch the film for yourself before making silly assumptions about it. BRIAN IS NOT JESUS! He is not portrayed as a Christ-like figure, the Pythons have made it very clear in interviews and documentaries that the film was not made to mock Jesus, or his followers; it simply makes fun of people who don't think for themselves and rely on what other people say, much like the critics of the film, who blasted the film as "blasphemous" on the basis of what other people who hadn't seen the film said. The fact that we are debating this in 2012 is absolutely ludicrous. I could name many other films that were a lot more blasphemous that aren't on this list. The fact that it is on a list of "worst movies" is even more insulting; Even if you were offended by the movie, you can't deny the great wit and satire that is found in this film. The reference to it being "anti-semetic" is just plain untrue.--Danielspence 15:30, 29 August 2012 (EST)

Bestiality in Avatar?

If I recall correctly, in The Lord of the Rings, the human protagonist Aragorn has a "creepy" romance with an Elvish woman. While I am in favour of Avatar's inclusion on this list, I find that particular criticism a bit bizarre. --Danielspence 15:18, 4 October 2012 (EDT)

I know this is an old topic, but I digress... At least with Lord of the Rings, the Elves were extremely similar enough to humans to pass as such (only difference being that elves had pointy ears). Avatar's situation, however, has him striking a romance with an alien that clearly doesn't even look remotely human (probably the closest thing to them being human being that they were bipeds), so you can probably see why that would be considered bestiality. Pokeria1 19:00, 21 January 2014 (EST)

Jackass???

Why is Jackass: The Movie a liberal movie? Its completely unpolitical.--JoeyJ 15:10, 1 January 2014 (EST)

You can remove it if you like. But everything has a political slant or effect, even if a slight one. If a movie leads people away from the Bible or conservative values, for example, then it does have a political effect.--Andy Schlafly 16:45, 1 January 2014 (EST)
But Jackass has no political effect and it does not lead people away from the Bible.--JoeyJ 08:04, 2 January 2014 (EST)

Elysium is in a league of its own and deserves its own page.

So, I'd like to mention how stupidly liberal Elysium is. In fact, it's so horribly liberal it's conservative. I just have to rant because I've had one of the most horrible times of my life watching that movie.

Spoilers obviously

  • See the people living on Earth only seem to be criminals or employed by the wealthy. The wealthy live happily because they are not overpopulating in their domain. In fact, it seems the wealthy can make themselves younger again, and suffer no death where they live, because they've learned to properly balance their consumption, population levels, laws, all the while not aging, etc.
  • Scientifically speaking, when the main character enters a "radiation vent" or whatever, he gets radiated by an error in the machine he's stuck in. Thing is, radiation doesn't just "come and go" the way the movie plays it. It's either there in which he was radiated the moment he entered that section, or he was faking it to begin with. And why exactly are they radiating the cargo? It's in a wooden crate meaning the radiation would seep in.
  • Criminals illegally break into the border and it seems there are virtually no defense systems whatsoever to prevent this from happening. This seems stupid, because it would obviously need defenses from meteors and comets. Their only "defense" is an evil homeless guy with a bazooka that can shoot space ships from Earth.
  • The evil plan didn't make sense. They put "the key" to Elysium in a guy's head to modify Elysium to serve another rich person, but the only way it can work is if they kill the person who has the key. How exactly did he get the key in his head from Earth, and how did the poor people steal it?
  • The rich seem to only not want to share "free healthcare" because of one reason: they're mean. The rich are portrayed as soulless monsters who have nothing better to do than be mean. It doesn't seem to explain a logical reason for why they're not sharing this health system which perfectly heals all wounds at seemingly no cost.
  • The only person who seems to have a job without relying on wealthy people is some old lady who owns pigs in a cart. The rest are criminals because they themselves are incapable of supporting one another through real work and independent job creation.
  • The "health pods" cured a guy who died from a head on collision from a grenade and turned elderly young. But they cant fix the main character? The brain of one guy literally exploded and he's still curable.
  • At the end of the movie, the robots are programmed to identify everyone as a citizen of Elysium. The wealthy have pale looks on their faces. For some odd reason, the robots export the healthcare pods away from Elysium, as well as bringing in more people to Elysium. What makes the people there pale isn't the fact that they "can't be mean anymore" as some liberals might assume, but because they can no longer guarantee their own survival on the resources they've earned. And once it's gone, it'll be gone for good. They'll soon reach a mountainous population, unable to feed themselves due to a loss of resources at the colossal level of immigration and unaging pods and a constantly high birthrate.
  • What bothers me the most about Elysium isn't the fact that this movie is the political opinion of a British guy about the US, or even how stupidly bias the movie was. What bothered me the most was the critical acclaim the movie got. I feel that if I made a movie about how demonic creatures are entering a holy land of peace: The evil liberdemons who want nothing more than to take all of our wealth, happiness, and means of defending ourselves for their personal interest and kill whomever they feel like, while the main character sacrifices himself to produce a powerful border-barrier that eliminates the ability for soulless liber-demons to cross... I'd be called a bigot. The reviews for Elysium seem to be nothing but positive, with people saying, "it makes you think," "behind all the action is a moral," and all this other crap. Why is this movie held in such high esteem? It does its best to portray anyone conservative as evil while liberals are portrayed as victims and innocents.

Of all things the disgusting experience I had watching that movie has made me more conservative than ever in my life. Patriotic

Gonna have to agree with you in this one. Not only it attacks capitalism but it promotes Open Borders. and the Irony is that Neil Blomkamp was surprised with the correlation. ZackG (talk)

Renaming section

Would it be a good idea to rename the Anti-Religious section to Anti-Christian? I say this because the comment for Cloud Atlas in that section begins, "Supports the idea of reincarnation and features anti-Christian undertones." Some non-Christian religions support the idea of reincarnation, and I would think most non-religious liberals don't, except the new-age hippy types. It seems that films which are anti-Christian but not secular should be included in the section, but the section heading doesn't reflect that. ConsMovies 11:43, 9 January 2015 (EST)

PRothan's removals

I know little about these movies, as I watch very few, but it seems that PRothan is removing an awful lot of entries, especially for a new member. Are we sure that there removals are appropriate? --David B (talk) 14:07, 12 May 2016 (EDT)

PRothan removed Edward Scissorhands from this web page. Edward Scissorhands was pretty much endorsed by Christiananswers.net with a 4 out of 5 stars rating.[1]. Christiananswers.net is a Bible believing Christian website. My guess is that PRothan may be doing a lot of helpful pruning from this web page.Conservative (talk) 15:03, 12 May 2016 (EDT)
Okay, good! I hate to be cynical, but when someone creates and account and begins removing large amounts of text, I get suspicious. Glad to hear it then, and thanks for the second opinion! --David B (talk) 18:44, 12 May 2016 (EDT)

The Princess and the Frog

I don't really know why The Princess and the Frog is on here. If anything, it promotes conservative values. The main character has been taught the value of hard work by her father and is working hard to save enough money to start her own business, and the prince, who starts the movie as an amoral hedonist who just wants everything given to him, gradually learns the value of sacrifice and caring for other people. It's true that one of the characters who helps them is a "blind voodoo lady", and not Christian, but she's no less Christian than all the fairy godmothers in all the old Disney movies. If no one objects, I'm going to remove this entry. --Whizkid (talk) 18:45, 31 May 2016 (EDT)

I agree with Whizkid. (BTW, I also thought Brave was pretty good. I don't see how it's anti-conservative. PatriotMongoose (talk) 00:08, 16 September 2017 (EDT)

Ah, let's see, there's the fact that it promoted feminism to such an extent that even when Merida was actually given the choice regarding her grooms hand in marriage, she still pitched a fit, and mostly didn't even want to get married because it would have interfered with her archery skills (not to mention didn't even end with marriage anyways), the women were depicted as the "wise" ones while the father is depicted as a bumbling idiot. Oh, and Merida even attempted to outright drug her mom to have her see things her way (sure, she didn't plan on turning her into a bear, but she definitely didn't plan anything good for her mom beforehand anyway). There's definitely a whole lot of liberal stuff in there, far more than truly conservative stuff. Yes, it may have its following. So does Star Trek, and that's pretty blatantly a liberal franchise regardless of whether conservatives are fans of it or not. Pokeria1 (talk) 07:54, 16 September 2017 (EDT)

I don't know about that. Merida was only a teenager. Besides, it's not like you are required to support the orders of your parents in marrying someone according to the Bible to the point where you are ordered whom to marry. What they said was that she would marry whomever she loved. Forcing someone to marry someone that they probably wouldn't even love would be a bad idea. While it may have been done in biblical and even medieval times, it no means justifies it as good or resisting arranged marriages as bad.

As for drug her mom, I don't even think Merida knew that magic dessert did other than help change things. Besides, Merida WAS willing to actually go along with one of the arranged marriages in order to fix things but her own mother decided to give her a break and let her pick whom she wanted to marry. At first, the clan leaders were angry but then their sons all said that they actually agreed with the queen that arranged marriages were bad and that this "You should get to decide whom you marry for yourself." idea was a good one. PatriotMongoose (talk) 19:43, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

Also, your argument of the men being depicted as idiots, while generally true, falls apart with the triplet brothers. They actually helped Merida and her mother out of a couple of jams and were quite crucial in helping at times. PatriotMongoose (talk) 19:45, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

Do you think maybe it should be written to say "that in general the men are depicted as idiots" instead? --GrantN (talk) 21:03, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

Apparently, you hadn't noticed that there were three people competing for her hand in marriage, and that her mom actually DID allow her to choose between them. That was a whole lot more than Jasmine and Aurora got, anyway. And as far as the cake, when it alters her mom's state of mind, that essentially means she planned on drugging her. Either way, this acts as a better explanation than I can muster: http://www.breitbart.com/big-hollywood/2012/06/22/brave-movie-review/#comment-565161710 Though, fine, generally depicted as stupid. Pokeria1 (talk) 21:53, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

Just remembered that this topic was about The Princess and the Frog. Well, for my two cents, I really don't have much of a comment one way or another (I don't think Louisiana Voodoo would have made the film particularly conservative, especially when it was practiced by both good and bad people), but on the other hand, though I'll admit I haven't seen the film at all, I'm not sure how it had anti-war stuff in it (if anything, Tiana looked up to her dad, an implied World War I veteran). As far as Tiana's feminism, to be fair to her, since her dad was dead, I'm not sure her trying to run a business was indicative of feminism since, being the oldest of the family, she kind of needs to work in order to provide for her family. Besides, I'd argue that Belle from Beauty and the Beast (the animated version, not the live action remake) came across as a LOT more feminist than Tiana did DESPITE not holding a job at all. Lastly, you have to admit, it's the first feature-length Disney film to not only show a traditional wedding, but treat it in a positive manner as well (before this one, the closest we got to marriage being treated in a positive light or even shown at all is in Aladdin and the King of Thieves and possibly Mulan II), so that's actually a pretty good conservative message ESPECIALLY considering the anti-traditional marriage messaging that was pushed by various Disney films since Beauty and the Beast in 1991). Of course, whether it does get moved is ultimately up to Andy Schlafly (and he might need to state exactly WHERE some of the liberal stuff is at, particularly the anti-war bit.). Pokeria1 (talk) 17:23, 11 December 2017 (EST)

Just adding some thoughts.

I believe that the movie That's Way I Am should be added to this list. It seems OK at first, but it completely goes backwards off tracks from the main plot to shoehorn in the Homosexual Agenda, and shows the only Christian, right-wing characters as backwards bigots who have raised bullies. Ultimately it promotes censorship and immorality. Please respond with your thoughts.ILOVEJESUS2 (talk) 20:58, 9 September 2016 (EDT)

I have never heard of the movie, but if it is clearly a liberal movie, feel free to add it. I recommend adding sources, though. --1990'sguy (talk) 21:51, 9 September 2016 (EDT)

"Spare Parts" should not be here.

In my opinion, the film "Spare Parts" should not be here. It shows a conservative moral of a hard-working underdog, underfunded team facing problems beating well-funded college professional teams.

Be bold.RobS#NeverHillary 13:16, 23 September 2016 (EDT)

Should we really have a debatable if liberal section?

Should we really have a list of those films that are debatable if liberal, which is the same list as those on the debatable of conservative? There are some really great and popular films, on that list such as Back to The Future, Jaws, Mrs. Doubtfire, Scarface, Star Wars, which are all beloved classics, (some of them were recently removed from the other list those). But don’t think we should have a duplicate list, on two different pages. It is like saying when it’s on the greatest conservative films list these films are the best except for a couple flaws, but to also have it here it like saying, these films are the worst except for a couple of good aspects. Every film has it good aspect and bad aspects, no film is perfect. Also some of these films on this list are not here because there debatable if conservative or liberal. Such as Grease it is listed here because it’s debatable or not if it has enough conservative aspects to be conservative such as it says “Some conservative messages and no feminism or other political correctness; mocks public school and even television during the 1950s. Followed in 1982 by a much panned sequel (Grease 2).” That should not appear on a list that debatable if liberal. (Unless you are talking about its panned sequel, but that is whole different movie, and should appear separately). I suggest we remove that part of the list, or at least make some changes. --GrantN (talk) 18:38, 21 February 2017 (EST)

It doesn't matter whether the movies are popular or not, that doesn't put them above scrutiny. While certain movies may be seen as beloved classics, like Star Wars, that doesn't mean that the creators didn't deliberately put liberal elements in them (and George Lucas absolutely did make the Ewoks analogous to the Vietcong, he's said so more than once). As Ben Shapiro says in this video "By all means, enjoy television. I do! But remember, the people making Television don't merely want to entertain you, they want to influence you. They want you to think like they think." The same is true for movie makers. You need only look at things the movie makers have said about their creations. Shobson20 (talk) 09:48, 22 December 2018 (EST)
Heck, not just the Ewoks. If the 1973 development notes and How Star Wars Conquered the Universe is to be believed, he even based the Rebel Alliance itself on the Vietcong and North Vietnamese army. And don't get me started on Beauty and the Beast, where it's made very clear from Jeffrey Katzenberg and especially Linda Woolverton and Don Hahn that the film was trying to push the feminist agenda. And yes, if any movie has writers deliberately trying to implement liberal values, we DO have to note it. Pokeria1 (talk) 10:19, 22 December 2018 (EST)
A lot of these things are not self-evident to a lot of people and they go over their heads. For example, George Lucas's intentions in Return of the Jedi were definitely out of touch with the time. It was released in 1983, when everyone's mind was on the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and how Americans were behind the scenes helping the rebels (who unfortunately became the Taliban). Realistically, the Battle of Endor is more analogous to that than what George Lucas intended since what he intended was based on a biased, inaccurate liberal interpretation of the Vietnam War. The thing is though that many, if not most people apply "Death of The Author" when interpreting these movies which often results in them not seeing the liberal elements in them (except they don't do the same for the rare movies made by conservative creators with a conservative motive behind them). Shobson20 (talk) 10:40, 22 December 2018 (EST)
Well, to be fair, Osama bin Laden's group was independent of our funding if the 9/11 Commission Report is to be believed. Besides, apparently Lucas' boasting about the Ewoks' inspiration at the very least was common-knowledge enough even back then that Richard Nixon explicitly referenced that in his book No More Vietnams in 1985. And as far as "death of the author", I want to believe that, but unfortunately, I'm not sure if such can be applied in this case, especially not after the Prequel Trilogy where Lucas didn't even attempt to hide his leftist sympathies in the movie (and besides, I've already seen how death of the author is a failed concept after Hideo Kojima had two guys gushing over Che Guevara in Peace Walker despite them not being the types, either in that game or, heck, prior game appearances from them, ever indicating they were the type to worship such garbage (oh, and one of them was idolized as basically being George Washington by one of his sons in one of the prior games, and said son certainly idolized the latter.). Pokeria1 (talk) 11:20, 22 December 2018 (EST)
The thing is, a lot of people who make the movies have some of the right ideas, but apply them to the wrong people. I already mentioned how the Empire from Star Wars was more realistically analogous to the Soviet Union, but also Palpatine from the prequel trilogy was more analogous to how Hitler came to power by slowly chipping away at German Democracy and consolidating power. Also, think about how much more Barack Obama consolidated power with his executive orders (which liberals who protested the Patriot Act ignored). And then there's Metal Gear Solid and the "patriots." There really are people like that, except it's the Deep State and the Media-Entertainment Complex, not the Military-Industrial complex as Kojima asserts. Ironically, the Big Boss antagonist from the original Metal Gear and Metal Gear 2 was actually more like the REAL Che Guevara. Shobson20 (talk) 11:58, 22 December 2018 (EST)
Yeah, I'm still not too sure about that. Lucas did imply that the Old Republic was analogous to Robespierre's France, after all (I believe his exact words were to the effect of "Why did France after they got rid of the king and that whole system turn around and give it to Napoleon?", and that was during the 2005 Cannes Film Festival), and that was closer to how Nazi Germany was like (and he also said in an interview with Charlie Rose that he thought Soviet film production had more "artistic freedom", as in, the same film production stuff that if you get on the leader's bad side you get shot, even if you did what he asked, heck, even if he actually LIKES your works as Shteyman learned the hard way, if The Death of Stalin is to be believed, is somehow better than the Hollywood system which, while having risks of losing money if you fail, at least doesn't land you with a bullet in your head). Not to mention, Palpatine's rise to power isn't even close to being similar to Nazi Germany. Maybe if the Republic had been forced to pay reparations during a prior war that they lost, and Palpatine had a ragtag bunch of militant homosexual socialists basically beating up bystanders to vote for him instead of communists, and basically being about as unstable as Kylo Ren, then I'd see more similarities, but as it is, it really doesn't look even slightly similar. Also, the Expanded Universe, the old one anyways, actually mentioned that the Corporate Sector Authority was largely given free reign by the Empire, the latter expanding its territory and even was largely hands off with it being implied that actually benefitted the galactic economy, and don't get me started on the immunity spheres (none of which Nazi Germany would have allowed, let alone the Soviets. In fact, if you were to suggest such concepts to the higher ups, whether Stalin or Lenin or Khrushchev, or anyone like that, they'd probably order for you to be hauled to the gulags at best and at worst shot on sight.). If anything, the Rebels boycotting the CSA comes closer to what the Soviets would have done. And besides, apparently Lucas also insisted that Saw Gerrera be based on Che Guevara, and if the official book Star Wars and History is to be believed, Mao Zedong's concept of a People's War also formed the basis of the Rebel Alliance (and Mao was even WORSE than Stalin and the Soviets regarding carnage, let alone Hitler and the Nazis).
As far as Big Boss, yeah, having looked through the MSX2 games, he really didn't come across as being like Che at all. Unlike Che, who literally had to be muzzled by Khrushchev to stop him from causing nuclear war by nuking America during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Big Boss didn't seem to even try to launch nukes. Build them, sure, but most of the world did that. Heck, Snake wasn't even sent in to stop Metal Gear in MG2 unlike the first game or later games, he was sent in to basically rescue an abducted researcher and his alternate fuel formula. And then MGS1 just retcons the whole "Third Zero" thing anyways, basically killing off any bad elements of Big Boss afterward. And besides, Big Boss had a perfect opportunity to emulate his "idol" in the second ending of Peace Walker with ZEKE and Paz's hijacking of it to basically give her the goahead to launch a nuke on the Eastern Seaboard and frame MSF, just as Che intended to do with the CMC, yet he didn't. If anything, he risked his life to stop her. If any Metal Gear character came closer to acting like Che Guevara, it was Colonel Volgin, who actually DID attempt to cause World War III and even went as far as to actually launch a nuke to do so (not to mention was pretty much a sadistic bullying coward like Che, though that being said, even HE had more honor and courage than the real Che, who died begging like a dog), or ironically enough, Hot Coldman, who also attempted to start a nuclear war. And don't get me started on how Miller was even LESS likely to be a Che fanboy than Big Boss was, and yet he somehow came across as being even more of one than him at the same time. Besides, regarding the Patriots, Kojima basically made it clear they represented America and that we were the bad guys, in his Grand Game Plan, and then we get into his condemnation of Guantanamo Bay in Ground Zeroes. Pokeria1 (talk) 12:23, 22 December 2018 (EST)
This is a typical example of people who are in serious denial about how there are in fact liberal elements in classic entertainment. Also, people who know REAL history and don't understand liberal Hollywood's extremely distorted view of history could easily miss what the filmmakers are attempting to make their movies analogous to, since it's actually not like what they really were. For example, Kojima, like so many liberals who wear those stupid Che t-shirts, has a very wrong idea of who Che Guevara really was. What Big Boss and Miller are hero-worshiping is that false strawman, not the real Che. The Hollywood liberals who advocate Socialism make Socialism look like what they think it is, but people who actually know what it really is don't see the parallel. For example, I grew up knowing what the Soviet Union and China were actually like, so I didn't get the fact that Star Trek's Federation depicts what Gene Roddenberry thought they were. The thing that I found the most bothersome was how the future was secularized under the idea of "we've outgrown such primitive superstitions." It wasn't until finding resources like Conservapedia that I learned just how off-the-rails these people are. Most laymen don't understand the overall leftist philosophy and how it has affected so many people throughout history. I think Dinesh D'souza needs to make a documentary explaining the influence of leftist ideology on Hollywood. He should call it "Commiewood" or something. I think this essay needs to have some of this kind of information in the intro explaining why this essay exists.Shobson20 (talk) 13:21, 22 December 2018 (EST)
Yeah, that video you linked reminds me, we REALLY need to update the links on that site so that at the very least, there's a backup copy to thwart claims that we use nonexistent links. Too bad the search area of Archive.org is screwy right now, getting to a 404 error if I try to type any links in, so we actually can't do it right now (and believe me, I actually tried doing that. I don't get it, it's been screwy with intermittent periods of working since I think October).
And honestly, regarding Kojima, considering that's the same guy who not only mentioned the Katyn Forest Massacre and accurately pinned the blame on the Soviets, but also mentioned that America even before the Cuban Missile Crisis' conclusion was already planning to get rid of the Turkey silos anyway due to being rendered obsolete by nuclear subs in Metal Gear Solid 3 (which is information that's not likely to be taught at school, especially not the leftist-dominated schools), I'm doubtful he's got a "wrong idea" of what Che's like, since that would imply he was merely ignorant of the real Che. If anything, its more likely that he knows what Che's truly like, yet is DELIBERATELY pushing a false image of Che on the masses, which is even worse (almost Walter Duranty-levels worse). If he truly had been ignorant, he'd probably push the USSR as being the best thing since sliced bread like most leftists, or at least better than America (especially in MGS3). And to be fair, Roddenberry did base the Federation more on the United Nations than on the USSR and/or China, not that it really mattered since the UN was still garbage and a Trojan Horse Marxist organization from the get go, even with its more positive spin among the masses especially back then. And maybe most current Hollywood leftists are a bit ignorant about what actual socialism is like, but based on some stuff the Rebels did in various EU stuff like, I don't know, slaughtering the Imperial Palace staff in Children of the Jedi and doing a show trial for a Grand Admiral after Endor, not to mention boycotting the Corporate Sector Authority, I'd argue that Lucas at least does have some idea of what communism/socialism is actually like [he certainly was knowledgeable enough about Karl Marx to quote him if Skywalking is of any indication]. Heck, he even seemed to be fully aware of the Vietcong being a terrorist group if this clip from James Cameron's History of Sci-Fi on AMC is of any indication.
I also agree that D'Souza really needs to do a "Commiewood"-type film exposing the leftist dreck in that industry right now, maybe also something similar with the educational system. Of course, he probably should also do a film that exposes the true nature of the French Revolution, since that's what both the USSR and Nazi Germany tie back to directly, heck, democracy itself (since democracy and socialism are one and the same, joined at the hip since the French Revolution).
Also agree that it needs some measure of an introduction to explain why this essay is necessary. You can always ask NorthWest for help creating the intro, he was largely responsible for a similar introduction on Essay: Worst Liberal TV Shows where he tied it to the Rural Purge. Pokeria1 (talk) 13:57, 22 December 2018 (EST)
Strange thing about Peace Walker though. The Russian character Vladimir Zadornov is depicted as a bad guy, and yet, despite the fact that the Soviets were in fact backing the Nicaraguan Sandanistas, the Sandanistas in the game turn against Zadornov. Very strange indeed. Shobson20 (talk) 14:10, 22 December 2018 (EST)
My understanding of liberals in the entertainment industry was that they always had good intentions but bad ideas. What you just said about Kojima sounds like he only has bad intentions all around. But what motive would a game designer have to deliberately promote a false narrative that he knows is false yet lies about it? I know that politicians do that to get elected, but game designers? Shobson20 (talk) 14:24, 22 December 2018 (EST)
Yeah, and then Ground Zeroes just has them going back to being Soviet bloc anyways based on a comment made by Miller in the briefing files for that game, making their heel-face-turn pointless (as far as Zadornov, he may have been a villain, but the game largely treated Coldman, the CIA station chief, as even worse, even having Zadornov declare "I should have killed you when I had the chance" as well as genuinely horrified at this after Coldman started Peace Walker's false data transmission, despite that being exactly what Zadornov wanted him to do in the first place, that, and depicting America in the worst light imaginable, even by Metal Gear standards, and that series isn't exactly pro-America by any stretch [only games that come close to being pro-American by any means are Snake Eater and Portable Ops].). And as far as Kojima, yeah, he pretty much did have bad intentions all around. I heard part of the reason he created MGS2 was to act as his commentary about the Japanese Textbook controversy, with Snake's comment about showing the past in all its sordid forms in the ending implying he supported showing Japanese war crimes (put that way, I actually don't blame the Japanese at all for whitewashing their history, because if Kojima's of any indication, the ones who do want to expose the dark elements of history in Japan also tend to hate America alongside Japan as well and, well, any government or national sovereignty, not have any good aims for exposing bad elements of history.), and he admitted that MGS2's themes were about postmodernism (even though such was pretty much discredited). As far as what motive, probably the same motive that had Sartre claim that the USSR was full of freedom of expression or that Che Guevara is the most complete being of the century despite his obviously knowing full well such weren't the case, or heck, what motivated Walter Cronkite or Walter Duranty to lie about the Tet Offensive and the Soviet persecutions in the thirties, respectively, to push his left wing agenda on everyone regardless and hope he gets new followers. And I don't know about entertainment industry liberals having good intentions. Based on what George Lucas said in that AMC interview with James Cameron that I linked to, he apparently was aware at the time that the Vietcong were in fact a terror group, yet STILL supported them and made them out to be heroes in his films. Pokeria1 (talk) 15:57, 22 December 2018 (EST)
BTW, since you indicated you are a gamer, think you can help out with Essay:Greatest Conservative Video Games and/or Essay:Worst Liberal Video Games and add in some entries and/or expand/move around already existing entries? Pokeria1 (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2018 (EST)
I've already made several edits to the Video Games essay pages. By the way, there is a real life equivalent to the "Patriots'" "GW" system, it's called the "trust and safety councils" that govern websites like Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. I wanted to point out how Kojima's "Patriots" were an example of liberal projection. I think you can at least take solace in the fact that Kojima has been fired from Konami. If all you said is true, then Lucas and Kojima are some very evil people, and lots of fawning fanboys are putting their blinders on. Shobson20 (talk) 16:28, 23 December 2018 (EST)

Also I have decided to remove some movies that were on the section, for instance as I said before Labyrinth is only debatable if its pro-family, it in no way is anti-family, as for Grease its should only be on the debatable for conservative list because it contains some conservative ideas, but not a lot, and in no way is it liberal. I also removed Zulu and Blood Freak, because they too do not belong on this list. Also, I moved "Chicken Run" back to the worst liberal section, because even though, it has a feminist villain, it also has a feminist heroic leader, so in a way, it neutralizes it. Also, I moved Jurassic World to debatable. --GrantN (talk) 16:58, 22 March 2017 (EDT)

Hunchback of Notre Dame

Except for the thing about the Gargoyle and Djali (not to mention Frollo hitting on Esme a little too much for a G-rated film), I actually think your claims are false. The Archdeacon is good and saved Quasi from Frollo and saved Esme by letting her claim sanctuary and tried to save both Esme and Quasi later, only to be stopped by Frollo and his men. Frollo is basically a self-righteous Pharisee. As for Esme, despite being looked down by Frollo's government, she is very noble in that, unlike liberals, she doesn't feel she is owed anything other than decency (she says "I ask for nothing, I can get by, but I know that there are others less lucky than I."). As for Captain Pheobus, he risks execution by his leader Frollo for disobeying a tyrannical order to burn the innocent alive. Also, Quasi doesn't even kill Frollo (he could have dropped him when he was hanging onto his cloak and Quasi was already in danger of falling and had learned that Frollo was responsible for his mother's death, yet he hung on and Frollo ended up doing himself in. Hardly a liberal movie. PatriotMongoose (talk) 00:21, 16 September 2017 (EDT)

Not really. Yes, the Archdeacon was depicted in a good light, so in that sense, it promotes Christianity a bit more than, say, Beauty and the Beast (which depicts pretty much all the Christians in a very bad light in the village, while Belle, who is implied a few times to be an atheist or at the very least an agnostic, being depicted as a moral figure.). However, it isn't by much, as even ignoring Frollo (and I wouldn't even say he's THAT bad, anyway: Maleficent from the original Sleeping Beauty was a whole lot worse), Christianity as a whole is depicted in a very bad light (don't forget the whole Parisian mob scene with the Feast of Fools, or how the parishman, NOT Frollo, but another parishioner of Notre Dame, was pretty cold to Quasimodo. And I might as well add that the whole scene with the Parisian people was if anything even WORSE in the Disney film than in the book, where the latter was simply them dealing corporate punishment, while in the former, they just did it out of sadism.). And let's not forget that it was also controversially received and the Catholic Church actually had some irritation at the film for how it was depicted. Besides, it definitely can't qualify as a conservative film when they have one of the gargoyles explicitly lusting after Djali (both of whom are male) and being treated positively for it. The Castlevania animated series on Netflix right now does a FAR better job promoting Christianity than Hunchback did. Pokeria1 (talk) 08:01, 16 September 2017 (EDT)

Possible movie to add

Based on this Breitbart review, we should consider adding Mother! to this essay. As someone not very familiar with this movie, I won't do it myself. --1990'sguy (talk) 23:40, 19 September 2017 (EDT)

While I agree that the live action one was a gay propaganda film, Gaston is by no means conservative or admirable. He may be good but he's flat out arrogant. Because he does not get his way, he was going to try and threaten to throw Belle's father in the loony bin as blackmail to force Belle to marry him. The Beast, near the end, was willing to let her go because he loved her, even though her leaving could mean the last petal would fall before the spell would be broken. PatriotMongoose (talk) 00:29, 6 October 2017 (EDT)

I'm going to be blunt here, several on here are only on here for perceived anti-military, anti-capitalist, pro-feminist, anti-hunter, supporting evolution, etc, themes. If we applied the inconsistent logic here, we'd have to list a lot of otherwise conservative films as being liberal just because of that. I honestly think we're doing what we accuse the Leftists of: going so far that some things are viewed as "microagressions". PatriotMongoose (talk) 00:41, 6 October 2017 (EDT)

I'm not saying some shouldn't be on here but others have no business being listed here. PatriotMongoose (talk) 00:41, 6 October 2017 (EDT)

Look, Mongoose, a lot of the films you're mentioning have those liberal themes present in a very blatant manner. It's not "perceived", especially not when the actual creators of the films make it extremely clear that it is meant to be that. And as far as Gaston, another editor mentioned him being conservative and hard-working. I really can't speak regarding what Gaston's politics are (and personally, regardless of politics, I consider anyone who does something like threatening a man they knew to be innocent into the insane asylum to force that man's daughter's hand in marriage to be scum), but I do know that Beauty and the Beast has a definite pro-feminist theme, considering even Linda Woolverton made it explicitly clear it was meant to push the feminist agenda (as if the fact that the overall story strongly demonized the concept of marriage via Belle hating the concept, not just marrying Gaston, but even the possibility of being a wife, or how the only three girls who have any interest in marriage are depicted as dumb blondes wasn't blatant enough). And it also doesn't help that it actually promoted premarital relations and even infidelity in a positive light in the form of Lumiere. Oh, and another thing, Belle was actually acting just as arrogant if not even moreso in the original film. And I don't think it's a coincidence that Belle, who doesn't even imply that she believes in God at all, is considered by the story to be a grand moral figure, while the other villagers, who based on the lyrics are devoted Christians, are depicted as idiotic monsters. And Star Wars, George Lucas made it very clear that it was meant to promote the Vietcong, not to mention the Prequel Trilogy outright demonized the concept of even having a military, and the Jedi even promoted moral relativism twice. Besides, that's why we have a "debatable whether liberal" section. Pokeria1 (talk) 08:09, 6 October 2017 (EDT)

I am wondering, should we also have a conservative movie section? PatriotMongoose (talk) 19:45, 11 October 2017 (EDT)

We technically already have that section, it's called "Debatable whether Liberal." Pokeria1 (talk) 19:58, 11 October 2017 (EDT)

Also, if you are going to cite that it promotes feminism because the director or so-and-so on set said so, then could we at least ask for citations or something? I didn't even know that Beauty and the Beast was MEANT to push feminism. Information like that might be helpful to people. PatriotMongoose (talk) 21:33, 11 October 2017 (EDT)

BTW, I thought of adding the movie "The Big Green" to the list of leans liberal. The reason being is that one of the characters makes some comment about "Reaganomics" being responsible for the bad local economy and also one of the soccer players was an anchor baby and one of the coaches, who was a sheriff, was able to eventually get him and his illegal mother a way to stay. PatriotMongoose (talk) 21:33, 11 October 2017 (EDT)

Okay, next time you try to add in a post, try not to delete a prior post when adding it in, please? Anyways, I'll definitely make sure I supply any citations for that when I have the opportunity. Pokeria1 (talk) 22:07, 11 October 2017 (EDT)

I've noticed an interesting trend. Almost all of the ones rated conservative are at least two decades old while loads of the ones on here as liberal are less than two decades old and loads are a decade old or less. It seems that we're running out of new conservative films. PatriotMongoose (talk) 02:38, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

Well, that's what we're gonna get with Hollywood choosing their leftist politics over, you know, actually trying to tell a good story. Still... there's still some films made today that are definitely conservative. Pokeria1 (talk) 07:12, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

About Mulan

I think it was the Xuans or something, not the Huns. It may have just been pronounced that way because the X may be pronounced like an H in Chinese or something. Also, it's debatable that it's liberal because Mulan does all of that to save her father's life. He wouldn't have made it due to his older age. She was at least doing some honor to her father by risking her life to protect him from going off to a war she didn't think he'd live through. Also, she did risk her neck to save her country despite being looked down upon for being a woman. (That's actually counter Leftist in a way because the Leftist whine about being discriminated against and support policies that hurt their country. Mulan, on the other hand, had no guarantee that she would get honored for what she did. In fact, she knew quite well she could be executed for pretending to be a fictional brother of hers. Also, the character Mulan is a Chinese legend. On the other hand, the ancestor worship was a form of paganism, but, on the other hand, probably was historically accurate. PatriotMongoose (talk) 19:30, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

Most of that (save for maybe the Xuans) was already mentioned when I moved Mulan to the Debatable whether Liberal section. I also noted that it was actually very pro-Military as a Conservative point. Pokeria1 (talk) 21:55, 13 October 2017 (EDT)

Das Boot? Anti-American?

Whoever posted Das Boot on this page obviously didn't see the same movie I saw. Das Boot is, literally, the greatest war film ever made, and it is not anti-American, or pro-American, or pro-Nazi. If anything, it is anti-war, but being anti-war is not exclusive to the Liberal camp. I'm opposed to war, and I'm a former soldier, but I'm for American victory, but not for war for the sake of war. Liberals are not anti-war, but anti-American victory.

Das Boot is about a bunch of Germans who have to get into a steel tube that can submerge underwater, and have to survive a voyage in 1942, and by this year of the war it really sucks being aboard a German submarine because the Allies are getting much better at defending their convoys. It starts out with the sailors and officers at a party getting completely drunk, which is important, because these guys know the hell that awaits them. These guys are about to go aboard the next day aboard a machine where, for the next several weeks they have to live in very tight, confined spaces, for most of them not seeing the sun so it bleaches out their skin for lack of Vitamin D. The film vividly captures this in all it's disgusting glory, from the scene where they have to eradicate the crabs that stowed-away (and not the sea-going crabs), to the scene where the officers are picking out the mold that has appeared on their bread so they can eat!

There is one dedicated Nazi aboard, and he's from Mexico, but he only has one scene where he talks about believing in the Nazi cause, and it's promptly followed by the captain ordering the song "It's a Long Way to Tipperary" to be played aboard the ship. This is not interpreted as hyperbolic patriotism under the belief they'll end up shopping in Piccadilly when the war is over, but a way to let off some steam and even to admire their enemies. The captain even criticizes the regime a bit, wondering where the air cover they're supposed to get from Hermann Goering. Where are their fleets screening the North Sea?

We get into the tedium of operating the sub, with a couple of incidents where the captain is frustrated that he can't engage enemy fleets to support other sub attacks because they're just too damn far away. They can hear them, but the sub only moves at roughly 10 knots on a good day if they're not submerged, even slower when they are because they're usually on batteries. When they do initially engage, they are chased away by a destroyer, and this is one of the few WWII sub films I know of where the sub doesn't retaliate against the destroyers because fighting destroyers is extremely difficult even if everything is going well for you because destroyers move and turn very fast. When they do manage to sink a ship, they're shocked to learn that the convoy didn't send anyone out to help these poor guys, and in a tragic scene, the sub has to back away from survivors who are trying to swim to them, and they can't take them on because to do so would be detrimental to them; too many guys aboard could affect if they can even submerge, affect their food stores, and other issues, so they have to let them drown.

Then they have orders to go through the Straits of Gibraltar, which is heavily defended, in order to be able to operate in the Mediterranean. Getting those orders is rough on morale, because everyone knows it's practically a suicide mission. When they make the attempt, we get one of the most horrendously riveting scenes in all filmdom; the depth-charging scene, which lasts several freakin' minutes. If you've never seen this before, you're wondering when this is going to end! This is intentional because the film's screenplay was written by a former German sub-commander, and he wanted you to know what it was like for these guys. They bottom out, and are so far deep it's amazing they weren't crushed by the water pressure. Are they going to survive? Are they ever going to get the sub to surface again? They have to put the crew on O2 and get most of them to sleep in order that they do not use up their remaining O2. When they do surface, you just don't care that they're Germans, but just Men who are trying to survive!!

And that's what real war is like. Once, I was stupid enough to ask my grandfather, who survived Guadalcanal and Okinawa, what the worst thing to happen to America was, and I thought he'd say the 60's or something, and he said WWII. When I said, "Why? We won," he looked at me as if I said something stupid, and he replied, "Son, you win a war like you win an earthquake." When you're in it, you've got ONE thing on your mind - survival. Sure, you want to succeed at missions, because, like the captain of the sub in Das Boot, you want that success to contribute to victory in the hope that the war will end! Nobody wants to die, and for those who end up dying on the battlefield we hope that their deaths were not in vain. But, sometimes, in real war, they are, because sometimes it doesn't matter if you succeed at your mission or not, as in the case of Das Boot at the end. We can admire an enemy's valour and still be patriots.

xXx: Return of Xander Cage

My father watched this film and he believes that it depicts the american military as bad. I seriously believe that the movie is indeed some liberal crap. ZackG (talk)

Star Wars: The Last Jedi

I would recommend including Star Wars: The Last Jedi to the list. Whilst it was well received by film critics, It only got a 46% audience satisfaction. A suspected major reason for this is fans being disillusioned by the massive inclusion of SJW propaganda in the franchise. This caused fans to boycott Solo, and as a result Solo was a box office flop. --RWRW (talk) 09:47, 21 July 2018 (EDT)

Well, Star Wars as a whole definitely is debatable regarding its politics (the Prequel Trilogy and Return of the Jedi definitely came closer to being left-wing in its outlook at least), but yeah, it pushed left-wing elements to a far greater extent, so we probably should note that bit. Pokeria1 (talk) 09:50, 21 July 2018 (EDT)
I included a small bit about The Last Jedi in the essay. I think it is a shame that this has happened. I used to love Star Wars when it was all about plot, but now it is all about pushing the SJW agenda. This really is a low point in the Star Wars franchise and there is talk about boycotting episode 9 which should be interesting.--RWRW (talk) 21:25, 21 July 2018 (EDT)

Call Me by Your Name

If Call Me by Your Name depicts "pedophilia", then so does Dirty Dancing (1987), in which the ages of the two lovers is exactly the same. FredJ (talk) 17:58, 18 September 2018 (EDT)

The Terminator movies

The first movie was fairly neutral, but Terminator 2 had some anti-war Propaganda. Genisys and Dark Fate really push Feminism. Shobson20 (talk) 18:33, 25 July 2019 (EDT)

Made a suggestion to add two movies as possibly liberal

There was definitely a more feminist agenda in Incredibles 2, and likely, though, unlike Incredibles 2, I haven't seen it and can only rely on heresay, but have heard it from MANY sources, that Toy Story 4 did as well. Plus Toy Story 4, like Finding Dory, had another covert lesbian couple in the background, though unlike Finding Dory, Disney didn't even TRY to deny it this time. Also, some may wonder if Forky, a spork, and who has a rainbow painted on his feet, is supposed to be a covert reference to transgenderism.

PatriotMongoose (talk) 15:11, 17 August 2019 (EDT)

Wait, you mean Disney's actually CONFIRMED, directly, that the two ladies were a lesbian couple? Could you give a source? Pokeria1 (talk) 16:17, 17 August 2019 (EDT)

I cannot say they confirmed it, rather they didn't try and deny it. For instance, I now believe there was a lesbian couple in Finding Dory. However, when asked about it, Disney basically neither confirmed or denied, but told the Guardian "They can be whatever you want them to be": https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/jun/09/finding-dory-lesbian-couple-disney-gay-characters

However, when some LGBT groups praised the lesbian couple snuck into Toy Story 4, in much the way that they did in Finding Dory where you almost had to be looking for it to find it, Disney did NOT bother to try and deny the claims in any way this time: https://www.gaytimes.co.uk/culture/123834/toy-story-4-has-a-small-but-important-moment-of-lgbtq-representation/

The Gay Times article that mentioned the Lesbian Couple in Finding Dory says that Disney and Ellen Degeneres denied it as a certain thing. However, as far as I can find, I can find nothing from Disney denying the allegations this time around.

Furthermore, though there is nothing other than circumstantial evidence on this, as the character is clearly identified as a "he" here, one must wonder if the character Forky, who is actually a spork (which I heard is a transgender symbol) and who also has a rainbow (a known LGBT symbol on his foot) is also a subtle reference to transgenderism.

PatriotMongoose (talk) 14:54, 26 August 2019 (EDT)

First, Toy Story 4 is racist, now it promotes TRANSGENDERISM?! I give up. BernieandTrumpFan (talk)

I don't think it's racist. However, some sources are saying it's feminist. PatriotMongoose (talk)

South Park Movie

I'm removing this one from the list. Any objections?

Just out of curiosity, how come it's being removed? --The Autistic Patriot (talk) 13:03, 9 September 2019 (EDT)

The South Park creators are libertarians. They recently came out as "Republicans." In attempting to create and release this movie, they faced liberal censorship. The MPAA was worried people might be offended. I think the better question to ask would be, "Why was it put here in the first place?" ---BernieandTrumpFan

Oh, okay. I almost forgot about them having been libertarian. --The Autistic Patriot (talk) 16:56, 9 September 2019 (EDT)

Angry Birds 2 is liberal

New American, a conservative source, has stated that they push "climate change" and are even partnering with the UN to push the climate agenda. https://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/33297-angry-birds-movie-2-global-warming-propaganda-for-tots PatriotMongoose (talk) 15:25, 9 September 2019 (EDT)