Books

Average customer rating:

Intriguing look at Hollywood at its Worst
A Critic Who Isn't A Pompous Windbag? Amazing But True!
A Must For Movie Fans
I Beg to Differ
Learning how to dismiss - not love - movies

Schlock Value: Hollywood at Its Worst
Richard Roeper
Manufacturer: Amazon Remainders Account
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Film | Bargain Books | Stores | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Performing Arts | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

What Were They Thinking?: The 100 Dumbest Events in Television History
In the Can: The Greatest Career Missteps, Sophomore Slumps, What-Were-They-Thinking Decisions and Fire-Your Agent Moves in the History of the Movies
The Official Razzie Movie Guide: Enjoying the Best of Hollywoods Worst
Fiasco: A History of Hollywood's Iconic Flops
Ten Sure Signs a Movie Character is Doomed, and Other Surprising Movie Lists

ASIN: B000FILLF0

Book Description

A hilarious collection of essays, riffs, and lists that celebrate the insanity of Hollywood -- for anyone who loves the movies.

Richard Roeper, like the rest of us, adores the movies. In this uproarious, offbeat book, he gives us a whole new set of critical lenses for assessing the movies and the people and the industry that make them. With his characteristic acerbic wit, he weaves short essays with lists that work together to explain where Hollywood succeeds -- and where it so often frustrates, disappoints, and fails us. But while Roeper devotes most of the book to mockery and ridicule, this book is, in the end, a love letter to film.

Some of the essays and lists included in Schlock Value:

--Comical statistical breakdowns, including career batting averages of actors
--Reviews of Hollywood finances, including budgets, salaries, and ticket prices
--A proposed moratorium on pet projects, e.g., Kevin Costner's The Postman or John Travolta's Battlefield Earth
--The age differences between Woody Allen and his various leading ladies
--Actors appearing around the world in television commercials, including a list of the biggest stars that do overseas commercials -- and the products they push

Schlock Value is the perfect book for anyone who loves grumbling and complaining about the movies -- but still can't help spending their weekends and evenings in front of the screen.

Customer Reviews:

Intriguing look at Hollywood at its Worst.......2006-03-18

The interesting part about Richard Roeper is that he seems to me to be a critic that speaks his mind, even at his angriest. While Roger Ebert would call a bad movie, well, a bad movie, Roeper opens up his insult box and would, at the very least, call it a disgusting piece of garbage, or something along those lines. The fact is, the world needs more critics like Richard Roeper. His accuracy is amazing to the point that it's insanely funny. Though he does not make his political views known on the show (he doesn't hide them either), he lets it all fly in Schlock Value. He takes aim at everyone from Joel Siegel (on his positive review of Cat in the Hat), to idiot liberal-hater Ann Coulter, to Wireless Magazine's Earl Dittman. Roeper leaves no holds barred and points out the idiocy of some of Hollywood's worst. One of my favorite sections in the book is Roeper's attack on "Quote Sl*ts" like Earl Dittman, the completely braindead Shawn Edwards (Fox-TV), and Mark S. Allen. The only critic that he left out that I wish he would have taken down was Jeffrey Lyons of NBC-TV. Find me an awful movie and I will show you that the only people to give it good reviews are these critics. Roeper also takes aim at the complications of the Academy Awards, especially regarding the long speeches of the lesser winners ("All due respect to these people, but nobody knows who you are and nobody has seen your work and nobody knows anyone you're thanking."). Roeper ranges from career "batting averages" to "Most Disappointing Careers After Winning the Academy Award," a list that includes F. Murry Abraham, Cher, Whoopi Goldberg, and Cuba Gooding Jr. Roeper is insanely funny, yet he is insanely accurate. Nobody points out the obvious better than he does.

A Critic Who Isn't A Pompous Windbag? Amazing But True!.......2005-05-29

I have always liked Richard Roeper's column. He is a normal, reasonable, sensible guy who is also one of the most influential critics in the country. In general I don't pay much attention to most critics because they are more full of themselves than politicians on average, and have no more real-world knowledge or sense than anyone else I come across in a typical day. Roeper is different because he grew up from centrist Midwestern, roots, and doesn't hide from that history as if it was a skeleton in the closet.

This book is wonderful at pointing out the wretched excesses and self-centeredness of Hollywood and much of the critical world. I am particularly amused by the observations from Aspen, and never tire of Roeper exposing self-serving, hypocritical talking heads for the shallow hacks they are. Don't get me wrong, neither Roeper or I believe in censoring anyone's right to free speech, but we both believe that if a celebrity says something absolutely asinine, it deserves to be exposed as surely as if someone else said it.

I actually prefer Roeper's daily columns to his books, but I found this book an entertaining expose that was fun to read, and was not a bit self-serving. Best of all, Roeper is still a normal guy with a normal ego, and I can't tell you how wonderful I find that to be.

A Must For Movie Fans.......2005-05-23

I've been watching Roger Ebert's show since the early PBS days in the 70's. Have rarely missed a week. Agree or disagree with them, it is one of the only shows on TV with serious discussion about movies. So, I have been following Richard Roeper since he began on the show a few years ago. While I've watched him, I'll be honest, I've never read his column in the Sun Times.

While in a bookstore, I saw SCHLOCK VALUE on the shelf. After being plugged on the show for the past few months, I decided to pick it up and look at it. I immediately brought it to the checkout counter to buy.

What a great book!

Among the topics covered in the book, an analysis of the top "movie stars" and what percentage of bad films they make, a look at the faulty obsession with box office grosses, the Oscars, the Golden Globes and why they shouldn't be taken seriously, bloopers in films, how critical blurbs work (the quotes in movie ads), a behind the scenes look at the Ebert and Roeper show (including a sample schedule of screenings for the week), politics and film stars, and (in the best section of the book) a description of Lost films, films that never played theatres, playing on video or never released in any way.

The only problems with the book, at times, it seems a little disorganized. He bounces around from one topic to the next, even in the same chapter. Plus, a couple times he repeats himself, saying the same thing in different chapters. And, most of all, it is too short. The book is 210 pages, but it is the size of a TV Guide. I read it in one night. I wish the Lost Films section was an entire book on its own.

The book is a lot of fun. Roeper is more movie fan than film scholar and his writing shows that. He loves what he does.

Now, I'm going to have to read his columns more.

I Beg to Differ.......2005-03-11

The first reviewer takes film far too seriously. Modern cinema is most decidedly not "our greatest art form." Sheesh! Most of what comes out of Hollywood these days is mindless pap. That's not to say that a lot of it is not entertaining. Even some of the stupid stuff entertains some Friday nights after a long week's work. There are still even a few great films out there, and Roeper acknowledges this.

Guess what, critics are supposed to be critical, not sycophantic. I enjoyed the sarcastic wit of this book a lot more than I enjoyed some of the movies I've seen.

Learning how to dismiss - not love - movies.......2005-02-09

Richard Roeper is the worst thing to happen to movies since the corporate take-over of the studios in the 1980's. He cares far more about celebrities, his own image, and behind the scenes gossip than he does for any film. Whereas a good critic would find ways to help people love movies (or any artform) more, Roeper almost never does this, choosing instead to focus on the most negative elements of many of the films he writes about. Even the descriptions above, by the publisher, highlight this fact: he writes about "Reviews of Hollywood finance." (Rather than encouraging people to care more about the story than the budget.)
"Actors who appear in television commercials." Does Roeper want us to focus on who does commercials, or focus on each movie, and decide whether its story is told well or not? Citing two unsuccessful films, Roeper proposes a "moratorium on pet projects." But Roeper wants to oversimplify films so he can snarkily make his point, when he ignores the reality that many, many successful (i.e., well-told) films are "pet projects." Mel Gibson's The Passion of the Christ, or Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ are two strong (and very different) examples. But Roeper just wants to dumb everything down (including the movies and movie audience) for his jokey complaints. I do believe that this very shallow man loves movies, but he uses a tremendous amount of power and energy encouraging and teaching people to utterly dismiss entire movies because of one or two irrelevant elements. A quick example: When the film "Chicago" was in theatres, Roeper nearly bent himself double complaining fiercely about the fact that the movie wasn't filmed in Chicago - EVEN THOUGH THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHAT IS ON THE SCREEN. I heard him being interviewed on a radio show, and the host was scoffing at "Chicago," saying that he wouldn't go see a musical. Rather than stepping into the role of film critic and defending the film as sexy and fun (Roeper gave a thumbs up to it), Roeper merely complained about the location of the shoot again, and never said another word about it. Disgraceful. This book is NOT, "a love letter to film." It is a course in learning how to diminish and dismiss film, our greatest artform.

Average customer rating:

More than movie reviews!
He's been watching too many movies...
New Eyes
Scheer's Genius

Hollywood Values
Steven C. Scheer
Manufacturer: 1st Books Library
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Movies | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

Guides & Reviews | Movies | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

History & Criticism | Movies | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Performing Arts | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books
ASIN: 0759671141

Book Description

Tagline: We watch the same movies, but we don?t see the same movies. Hollywood Values makes a heroic effort to show that Hollywood bashing doesn?t have it right. Good things are coming out of Hollywood. This book proves it.

Customer Reviews:

More than movie reviews!.......2002-05-07

Having heard Steven C. Scheer talk about books and movies on a number of occasions in the last 22 years, I wasn't surprised to find his Hollywood Values an absolutely delightful appreciation of good movies produced by Hollywood in the last couple of decades. This wonderfully readable book covers movies in four categories designated by such charming titles as "Hollywood Goes to School," "Hollywood Falls in Love," "Hollywood Fights for Justice," and Hollywood Makes a Difference." The variety of movies under each of these categories gives us splendid insights into teaching, loving, fighting for justice, and just making a difference in the world.

Scheer writes with gentle erudition and always from the heart. No one who has actually read and understood this book can possibly accuse him of any kind of unseemly agenda. Scheer's position is simple: in spite of its tarnished reputation these days, Hollywood is still putting out such fine movies as Dead Poets Society and Patch Adams, The Age of Innocence and American Beauty, The Verdict and Erin Brockovich, or Amadeus and The Color Purple.

Scheer's interpretation of each movie pays careful and loving attention to the details in each movie, thereby letting each movie speak for itself. The values present in the movies covered (and there are more than mentioned above) emerge nicely. The movies discussed cover a variety of values not necessarily in agreement with one another. Scheer does an excellent job in revealing what they are and why they are important.

Read this book, you will find it delightful as well as insightful. I give it an A+!

He's been watching too many movies..........2002-04-05

I must respectfully disagree with the premise of this book. Hollywood does not put out what America wants to see. Ever since the late 1960's, their has been a radical shift in Hollywood from putting out "what America wants to see" to "what certain political types in Hollywood want to promote". Only a man with a political agenda could possibly think otherwise. Texas A&M University did a study a few years back demonstrating that 'g' movies far outperformed 'r' movies but were't getting made as often. The reason? Hollywood had a definite agenda to promote, and does it through the movies. Hollywood is extremely liberal politically,(see:Bill Clinton) but it does subscribe to one conservative principle: supply creates its own demand. The KNOW if they supply leftist, anti-Christian, anti-moral movies, they will create a demand for them. the proof is in the pudding, as Texas A&M proved. This book is just an apologetic attempt to divert serious people from the truth. Better to read Michael Medved.

New Eyes.......2002-02-02

Fail to see the forest for the trees? Well, you came to the right place. By reading Steven C. Scheer's Hollywood Values I am watching every movie I have ever seen again. And the new movies I am watching, I am watching with new eyes. After reading Hollywood Values I have a new-found ability to understand the hidden meanings in movies, and I am no longer caught up with what's merely obvious or what society tells me might be offensive. Thanks to Steven C. Scheer's brilliant explanation of the right way to watch and enjoy movies, I have what I might call a second chance to watch all the classics all over again and not miss the things I seem to have missed before. Hollywood Values is a very enjoyable and enlightening book to read.

Candice Lee Sundstrolm

Scheer's Genius.......2002-01-26

One of the great pleasures in my life is reading books by smart, well-read, reflective people. There's something invigorating about entering a discussion that has been going on for centuries, and sometimes one can even encounter something like wisdom. This is one of the chief pleasures of Steven C. Scheer's HOLLYWOOD VALUES, whose title alludes to certain complaints that have been leveled against Hollywood in recent years (Michael Medved makes an appearance in Scheer's Preface). Scheer points out that, whatever else it might be up to, the Hollywood industry is making plenty of movies that reflect traditional American values along with the kinds of values held dear by many postmoderns among us: freedom of speech, creativity in the face of deadening repetition, the importance of the spirit of the law that gives the letter of the law its meaning and strength.

Scheer stands in a conspicuously advantageous position to speak about what such values can mean. In his Introduction he describes how his interest in being an "English major" goes back to the Budapest of his childhood when he watched, at the age of eight or nine, a screening of Olivier's HAMLET, with subtitles, at a local theater. Several years later he was forced out of his homeland by the Hungarian Revolution, and he lived in a refugee camp, made his way to the United States, learned English, worked construction, became a citizen, and went on to earn a PhD from the Johns Hopkins University. Scheer has carefully read his experience and experienced his reading, and he brings both to bear, with a remarkable lightness of touch, on the movies he loves.

Scheer's reading is prodigious. He brings into the conversation such voices as those of Vergil, Melville, Tolstoy, Freud, Emerson, Neruda, Shakespeare, Blake, Hemingway, Dickinson, Horace, Boethius, Roland Barthes, Edith Wharton, and the Book of Timothy. While his main focus is on the movies, he integrates these other voices into his discussions with a prose style at once accessible, learned, and playful. His movie interpretations are enlivened, it seems to me, with a conviction that our culture needs both tradition on the move and a drive toward innovation, experimentation, and play, without which we are liable to fall victim to what Scheer calls "unthinking thinking," that is, automatic, stultifying, reactive patterns of thought. Among Scheer's discussions that I find particularly invigorating are those of CITY OF ANGELS, NUTS, AMADEUS, and FARGO.

The book's bio note points out that Scheer taught literature for many years at a small liberal arts college. Back in the early eighties, I was fortunate to be one of his students, and I can vouch for the liveliness of his teaching -- creative, insightful, enthusastic, genuine. It's good to see HOLLYWOOD VALUES in print not only for the ideas it puts into circulation, but also for the sheer fun (pun intended) and sheer brilliance of the writing.

Hollywood Vs America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values

Average customer rating:

Oh Now I have heard everything.....
still the best book on what the media is doing to the American mind
It's not science, but it's good criticism!
liberals vs. real america
The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

Hollywood Vs America: Popular Culture and the War on Traditional Values
Michael Medved
Manufacturer: Harpercollins
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Movies | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

Ethics & Morality | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Foreign Languages | Reference | Subjects | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Performing Arts | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books
Similar Items:

Saving Childhood: Protecting Our Children from the National Assault on Innocence
Right Turns: From Liberal Activist to Conservative Champion in 35 Unconventional Lessons
The ACLU vs. America: Exposing the Agenda to Redefine Moral Values
Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business
Warp Speed: America in the Age of the Mixed Media Culture

ASIN: 006016882X

Book Description

Why does our popular culture seem so consistently hostile to the values that most Americans hold dear? Why does the entertainment industry attack religion, glorify brutality, undermine the family, and deride patriotism?

In this explosive book, one of the nation's best known film critics examines how Hollywood has broken faith with its public, creating movies, television, and popular music that exacerbate every serious social problem we face, from teenage pregnancies to violence in the streets.

Michael Medved powerfully argues that the entertainment business follows its own dark obsessions, rather than giving the public what it wants: In fact, the audience for feature films and network television has demonstrated its profound disillusionment in recent years, with disastrous consequences for many entertainment companies. Meanwhile, overwhelming numbers of our fellow citizens complain about the wretched quality of our popular culture--describing the offerings of the mass media as the worst ever. Medved asserts that Hollywood ignores--and assaults--the values of ordinary American families, pursuing a self-destructive and alienated ideological agenda that is harmful to the nation at large and to the industry's own interests.

In hard-hitting chapters on "The Attack on Religion," "The Addiction to Violence," "Promoting Promiscuity," "The Infatuation with Foul Language," "Kids Know Best," "Motivations for Madness," and other subjects, Medved outlines the underlying themes that turn up again and again in our popular culture. He also offers conclusive evidence of the frightening real-world impact of these messages on our society and our children.

Finally, Medved shows where and how Hollywood took a disastrous wrong turn toward its current crisis, and he outlines promising efforts both in and outside the industry to restore a measure of sanity and restraint to our media of mass entertainment.

Sure to elicit strong response, whether it takes the form of cheers of support or howls of enraged dissent, Hollywood vs. America confronts head-on one of the most significant issues of our times.

Customer Reviews:

Oh Now I have heard everything............2007-06-16

If Michael Medved (and other conservatives) had their way. We would be watching the 700 Club on all Tv stations. The Sound of Music would be made into all these new versions, and almost all so-called "Family Films" would be rated by the smallest number of people who said that they have our best intentions at heart.

Where in the world do these people get these ideas? I have no idea. But I will tell you this. There is much to complain about Hollywood, but at the end of the day, I prefer the world of the movie studios and film making, rather then the world of dumb politics that this book is full of. Then again, this is what Washington DC is also.

still the best book on what the media is doing to the American mind.......2007-04-15

"Although the quality of craftsmanship in today's motion pictures is hugely variable, their underlying attitudes are not." (p. xx). The year this book was published, movie attendance had plunged to "its lowest level ever in terms of percentage of our population." (p. xviii). Similar results applied for movie rentals.

Thus Medved sets the stage for his detailed presentation of the relentlessly anti-American attitudes of movies and TV, and the fact that these products are not selling, and the fact that the producers of them don't care! Foreign sales of American movies are increasing, where these movies feed the anti-American sentiment being fostered by so many other elements around the world. Hollywood now gets over half its income from foreign sales.

A friend warned Medved that if he published this book, "you're going to become the most hated man in Hollywood." (p. 17). Luckily for us, Medved refused to be intimidated.

Movies have not gotten any better in the years since this book was published. Medved claims that the movies are out of touch with Americans, but there are a great many Americans whom the movies are not out of touch with: the academics, the news industry people, the schoolteachers, the Islamists, the Reconquistadores, and the like. The movies are part of the attempt to "transform" America into something very different. If you want to know what this transformation is and how it works, read While America Sleeps: How Islam, Immigration and Indoctrination Are Destroying America From Within. It will keep you awake at night, but you need to know it.

It's not science, but it's good criticism!.......2007-03-03

Having done my own research on film content, which just happened to include a survey of 1991 releases (which constitute many of the examples used in this book), it was perhaps inevitable that I would eventually read this book.
As a social scientist, I noted numerous parts of the book that contained inaccuracies, exaggerations, and reasoning that was far from air-tight. However, at the same time, I was impressed that, although these elements could (and should) be tightened and corrected, I find most of Medved's arguments to be laudable and generally defensible. Certainly there are many persons who should read this book and evaluate their media consumption habits!
Some of the biggest shortcomings of the book include:
1. Frequent presumptions that general box-office patterns are to be attributed primarily to specific elements of film content (even though other parts of the book are more careful and sophisticated about such things), [**NOTE** new passage added a month after original review:] Since I originally posted my 4 star rating, I have discovered evidence that flatly contradicts one of Medved's claims!!! The nature of this error is so serious that it would cause me to lower my rating from 4 stars down to 3 stars, but Amazon provides no option to allow me to do that. The flaw is Medved's claim that box office dropped dramatically between 1965 and 1966, due to the new permissiveness that was allowed in film with the Valenti-revisions of the the production code and the addition of the SMA ("suggested for mature audience") label. Having looked at the box office figures, I now see no basis whatsoever for Medved's claim! There was a decline, yes, just as there had been and would continue to be for many years before and afterward. There is no way to attribute one year out of that to a shift in the production code, as Medved does. Therefore, this must be considered another case where his claims are exaggerated and overstated, despite my aesthetic and moral basis for agreeing with many of his arguments, and my general support for the kind of criticism that Medved attempts (and the industry's need to consider it). [end of added passage]
2. Poor proofreading, some errors, and a number of passages that are exaggerated. (The proofreading suggests that the book used an early word processor to produce, the errors that I caught are generally minor and don't tend to negate the points he's trying to make, the exaggerations tend to occur when Medved is clearly exhibiting an emotional involvement in the topic.)
These are perhaps regrettable weaknesses, but can be overlooked.
3. Some errors of reasoning can be found in various parts of the book, but again, while these are regrettable in that they will cause some readers to be unconvinced, Medved's failure to make all his arguments logically air-tight doesn't mean that most of the core ideas he relates are unsound. On the contrary, having come to his book years after doing my own research and arrived at *some* very similar conclusions, I know where he's coming from and the kinds of patterns and relationships he's trying to describe, in language that is accessible and convincing to general readers.

Now, for some of the positive features of the book:
1. Medved succeeds in refuting the claim that Hollywood product is simply "giving the public what it wants and demands."
2. Medved succeeds in pointing to some of the patterns in which questionable content has come to pervade most mass media products, even when unnecessary for the effectiveness of the work and when it offends some or most of its potential audience.
3. Medved demonstrates an understanding of some of the debates in aesthetics and criticism, and does a very good job questioning the nature of contemporary criticism, and pointing to some ways in which it (and film critics) falls short and risks becoming totally irrelevant.
4. Medved's exploration of the motivations underlying contemporary standards for film production, film criticisms, and industry awards is probably one of the better ones that has appeared in a widely-available forum in recent years.
5. Medved's introduction and conclusion sections should probably be required reading for anyone who wishes to judge the nature of this book. He is careful to draw a distinction between judgements about artistic merits and a moral evaluation of film content. He also tends to avoid simplistic fallacies that so often pervade this sort of writing, and he also concisely addresses the topic of film censorship that is frequently brought in to cloud the issue of film content. His discussion at no time can be simplified to the advocacy of censorship (as all industry defenders and apologists keep trying to do) and he insightfully cuts through many of the fallacies used by industry apologists in their public statements on these issues.
6. Medved's understanding of the harmful effects of violent (and immoral) media is adequate, and I was impressed that he actually hired a consultant to interpret data at at least one point during the writing of the book, rather than claim expertise of his own in data analysis. I believe that Medved did as capable a job as he could, but he is no social scientist. The results, however, hold up surprisingly well to scrutiny, despite various fallacies that creep into some of his more elaborate efforts to explore and evaluate patterns and trends.
7. Medved's suggestions for filmmakers are good ones! He describes well such issues as the different perceptions of critics when compared to general audiences, includes useful information to suggest differences between the artistic/industry communities and the broader public at large, examines various motivations (historical, political, artistic/personal etc.) that shape film products in ways that are often unappreciated by industry outsiders.

All in all, this book was surprisingly good. It isn't flawless, and there are times when Medved's emotions are not held completely in check, but he usually manages to avoid the sorts of errors that are otherwise pervasive about this sort of subject, and even when he makes mistakes in reasoning and in reporting the data/observations about the media, these mistakes fortunately tend not to contradict the merit of most of his arguments. While most popular authors on this subject may may one or more bold claims and then run with them, Medved is fortunately much more careful. Therefore, when he does stumble, not much of the load he was carrying gets spilled. Unfortunately, the current edition has a Rush Limbaugh blurb on its front cover. This should be removed, even though Medved is apparently not a conservative commentator, because Medved is also correct when he states in this book that the issue of media content is not simply a conservative/liberal political issue. It instead concerns anyone who has a sense of ethics that shouldn't be needlessly contradicted by questionable filmmaking choices and the sort poor aesthetic standards that are common today.

liberals vs. real america.......2005-05-06

Michael Medved is a great man. He almost gets it right in this
book, but he doesn't go quite far enough. He is far too easy
on the liberals who took over the entertainment industry and
have used it ever since as a weapon against normal america.

There is no question that the american entertainment industry
(film and television) is out to destroy, religion, the family,
patrotism, trust in our leaders and support for our troops.
While at the same time, the industry promotes socialism, crime,
secular humanism, sexual deveintism and drug use.

There is also no question about the number of people that the
film industry has destroyed. Medved is very good at chronicaling
the destroyed lives they have caused. And how they turned the
country against our troops during the vietnam war. He is also
good at showing cause and effect. Liberals teach children to
have sex which causes them to get pregenant which the liberals
then solve by getting them to murder babies. Those involved are
so tramatized by the experience that they fall into the trap
of illegal drugs prepared for them by the liberals. Its all
part of one larger effort to destroy america.

Medved misunderstand how this situation came to be. He misses
how criminal gangs (so-called labour unions) run by communists
used violence to intimidate the hollywood studios into hiring
degenerate criminals and firing anyone with morality who stood
in their way. Louis Mayer made good family films at MGM that
were very popular. Yet he was fired at the peak of his
popularity and MGM started to turn out endless hate america
movies by communists like Stanley Kramer. Popular stars were
let go and replaced with moral degenerates and drug addicts.
Great moral epics like the Sands of Iwo Jima and Hondo were
replaced by films about drug dealers or bikers or human rats
infesting our cities.

This was not done for profit. The movies long ago lost their
mass audience and it didn't bother these people a bit. They
need only to reach people one or twice over a few years to
spread the disease of communist ideas.

Michael Medved also doesn't go far enough in seeking a cure
to the problem. I think the start is for communities to stop
putting up with immorality. We need laws and judges that will
shut those making obsene works down. Where we should start is
by reforming the academy awards. Membership in the acadamy
should require good moral character and love of America and
freedom. The Academy also needs to start to look like America.
It wasn't America that gave the top award last year to a film
about sending poor women out to fight for the amusement of
others and then murdering her because she was sick. The people
who cast those votes need to be sent to france or somewhere else
outside america.

Medved has always been on the side of right. No better example
can be seen than in how he treated "the last temptation" and
"the passion". In the case of "the last temptation", all
hollywood was cheering for anti-christian hate film that nobody
wanted to see anyway. Then in the case of "the passion" all
the same hollywood liberals were angry and disguested that
such a film could be made or released. Medved was on the
side of right in both cases against the liberals.

The side of good is winning back America and the day will come
when the criminals are brought to justice. A day when we will
have entertainment for America again rather than filth and
disease for a handful of liberals. First it was the presidency
and the congress, next it will be the courts, after that comes
education and entertainment. America will be redeemed and
its institutions will begin to serve it again rather than a
bunch of weak liberal intellectuals.

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!.......2005-04-16

Let me sum up this 350-page rant in a few sentences.
1. There's a lot of crappy movies, television, and music getting made. (He's right about this. I actually agree with most of his opinions about specific films, shows, records, etc.)
2. Because of this, our jobs, our lives, our very civilization is in dire peril!
3. Therefore, we must put an end to all this making of bad movies, tv shows, and music!
Michael, I really do like your reviews. But grow up for heaven's sake! It's just entertainment.

The Moral Center: How We Can Reclaim Our Country from Die-Hard Extremists, Rogue Corporations, Hollywood Hacks, and Pretend Patriots

Average customer rating:

Dissapointing Traditional Liberalism
A new vision and strategy is needed
Not Compelling (2.5*s)
"A liberal with a new emphasis on old values."
Whose morals? Whose outrage? Whose solution?

The Moral Center: How We Can Reclaim Our Country from Die-Hard Extremists, Rogue Corporations, Hollywood Hacks, and Pretend Patriots
David Callahan
Manufacturer: Harcourt
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Ethics & Morality | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

Political | Philosophy | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Politics | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

General | Social Sciences | Nonfiction | Subjects | Books

All Deals | Blowout Books | Stores | Books

Nonfiction | Blowout Books | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

The Cheating Culture: Why More Americans Are Doing Wrong to Get Ahead
Jacked: How "Conservatives" Are Picking Your Pocket (Whether You Voted for Them or Not)
State of Denial: Bush at War, Part III
The Most Exclusive Club: A History Of The Modern United States Senate
American Fascists: The Christian Right and the War On America

ASIN: 0151011516

Book Description

Nothing’s the matter with Kansas: Americans voting their values are responding to a real moral crisis. And in this forceful follow-up to The Cheating Culture, David Callahan argues that the problems for most Americans are not abortion and gay marriage but rather issues that neither party is addressing—the selfishness that is careening out of control, the effect of our violent and consumerist culture on children, and our lack of a greater purpose. As Republicans veer into zealotry, liberals can find common ground with the moderate majority. But to alleviate the moral anxieties that drove GOP electoral victories they need a powerful new vision.

In The Moral Center, Callahan articulates that vision and offers an escape from the dead-end culture war. With insights garnered from in-depth research and interviews, he examines some of our most polarized conflicts and presents unexpected solutions that lay out a new road map to the American center.

Customer Reviews:

Dissapointing Traditional Liberalism.......2006-12-05

If you want a list of all of the traditional ways liberals want to spend money, go ahead and read this book. Callahan offers some well developed reasons for making these investments, but none are new or bold. And the jabs at the conservatives, Bush 43, and Regan, we've heard them all before. I didn't notice a mention of even one liberal program that didn't work, and that should be cut (I guess Callahan thinks we're batting 1000). This book fails because it doesn't offer anything but the same arguments from the extremes that has done nothing for America (except to let the religious fundamentalists take over).

The book's title might tempt that part of the electorate hoping to dethrone the religious fundamentalists into picking up the book. But Callahan's argument falls flat, leaving me with a picture of the sleek shark of fundamentalism with the little remora of liberalism hanging on for dear life.

From a technical perspective, the book had quite a few typographical errors, where the first letter of a word was wrong (town vs. down), as if it were dictated, and nobody proofread. That took it down from a "2" to a "1" in my rating.

The book cover, with it's red on the left, and blue on the right, signifies what it is: the old, tired "us versus them" with no new ideas. Another book with red on the TOP and blue on the bottom does have some bold ideas for real change in American politics. It's not what you think. It's written by a gay catholic philosopher (Andrew Sullivan). Although I'm politically in the center, I have read both books from the right and left that claim to have an idea for getting US politics out of the ditch. Sullivan's boldness holds promise, whereas Callahan's stale ideas fall flat.

A new vision and strategy is needed.......2006-11-06

THE MORAL CENTER: HOW WE CAN RECLAIM OUR COUNTRY FROM DIE-HARD EXTREMISTS, ROGUE CORPORATIONS, HOLLYWOOD HACKS, AND PRETEND PATRIOTS argues that underlying concerns such as eroding values, and the rise of greed, are the real problems neither party is addressing in political campaigns. A new vision and strategy is needed based on acknowledgment of this underlying erosion: one provided in THE MORAL CENTER, which argues for change in the face of polarized differences which paralyze both parties and reduce effective strategies.

Diane C. Donovan
California Bookwatch

Not Compelling (2.5*s).......2006-09-21

The title of this book is definitely overly ambitious. It is quite a stretch to claim that there is a moral center in the US. If anything, there is a lot of inflated, contradictory, hypocritical, cynical, and ignorant thought concerning a fundamental moral center. Actually most of the recent buzz in America concerning values is part of an immense propaganda campaign that panders to susceptible groups by constructing a specious and sinister social reality geared to manipulate behavior. The author makes a stab at detailing some of these contradictions, but does not really address the pairing of ignorance and propaganda that makes the continuation on the current course almost inevitable.

The author looks at the areas of family, sex, media, crime, work, poverty, and patriotism with considerable overlap to locate moral discontinuities and concerns. The biggest disconnect in American thinking in these areas is the notion that morality can survive the zealous drive to turn all areas of life into profit-making centers. The laissez-faire, free-market capitalism that is the current rage absolutely has no conscience, crushing social bonds and moral considerations in its path. Extremist individualism scarcely acknowledges social connections, morality, or values. The author is unwilling to really confront the American version of corporate capitalism other than to mildly chide it.

The following examples of the author serve to show the power of profits to overwhelm a culture, while simultaneously hiding their true impact. Cultural conservatives bemoan the prevalence of sex in the media but prefer to blame cultural elitists (liberals), while failing to see the immense profits of huge media companies. To not be working or to be impoverished is viewed by conservatives as an absence of personal character - again a complete failure to understand power dynamics of capitalism, where the welfare of individuals, families, and communities is irrelevant. There are no concerns for family values. Patriotism was once a shared value for all citizens, now it has become profits for the wealthy and duty and loss of life for the average citizen. Except for a very few high profile cases, corporate crime goes largely unpunished, while petty street criminals and drug users get prison sentences. Any concerns with this disparity are quickly labeled as coddling of criminals.

The author, like so many recent commentators, seems to think that pointing out these contradictions in a book will gain some traction with the public. But if Americans were inclined to analyze the cynical use of values and personal responsibility that is a part of the examples above, the US would not now be in its current state. Corporate capitalism now so permeates our entire society that it is ridiculous to suggest that a little information infused into this hegemonic situation will reverse our course. The wealthy, the wannabes, and all of those who have been so propagandized as to totally believe that liberals are destroying their way of life seemed to have formed a significant majority that is unlikely to diminish in the near future. The author's suggestion that liberals be more receptive to the American Dream, or the supposed opportunity to become rich, simply reaffirms the values of the selfish society.

There has been quite a spate of books in the last few years that purport to discuss American values and then suggest that liberals must adopt or recapture the meaning of conservative rhetoric. How this is supposed to happen, no one addresses. Just how is it that the media, educational institutions, and churches will be transformed from being propagandists for corporations into purveyors of knowledge and information for the benefit of all people. They just ignore that huge hurdle. There seems to be the belief that there are substantial numbers of untainted people just waiting to reject the current direction of society. Well, what have they been waiting for? Read the book if you want a quick rehash of the values clash - that's about it.

"A liberal with a new emphasis on old values.".......2006-09-18

The author addresses a difficult theme, couched as it is in the entrenched rhetoric of today's politics, Conservative, Democrat, right and left. Yet at the heart of this argument is a call to return to the traditional values that are inclusive rather than exclusive. While the right champions a return to religion and family values, the left is mired in a definition that fails to bring them into the conversation. And at the heart of all is the free market, the cornerstone of personal liberty, the success of which depends upon the pursuit of self-interest. The question posed: are traditional values a match for unfettered capitalism?
Liberals have morphed into the ubiquitous "me generation" and social responsibility, although an intended consequence of the equation, is left languishing by the road in a rush of consumerism. The result is a proliferation of Care-Not's (as opposed to Cares), the Cares unable to make themselves heard, suffering a pervasive moral anxiety that has no apparent remedy.

Repeatedly offering a narrow interpretation of the problem, Democrats struggle to articulate a moral solution. As middle class insecurity grows with international competition, technology and corporations siphoning off the future, the economy must be dire for people to respond to this threat. At the same time, purchasing items at incredibly low prices has become pervasive, even though these prices are the result of global economics. We come to the premise of the book: Democrats or a new Third party can submit a moral agenda to restore America's values and politics. To this end, the following chapters address family, sex, media, crime, work, poverty and patriotism, establishing "a workable balance between freedom and responsibility."

The dynamic of the culture wars, tradition vs. modernism, misses the point in the current debate, where the real culprit is the free market. Any change in this culture that confronts the pertinent issues must be synonymous with real values for Americans, those we readily embrace, rather than the pandering of extreme ideologies. In essence, the author is asking us to put aside our differences, responding to the current divisiveness with an appreciation for the spirit of change for the better good. Neither party comes off well, the Democrats inarticulate, stuck in past decades of grandeur, the Republicans riding a wave of popularity with the marriage of evangelical fervor and a free market unhindered by social responsibility. A fine idea and well put, but not likely to be heard by either party in the current climate. Luan Gaines/ 2006.

Whose morals? Whose outrage? Whose solution?.......2006-09-09

From the very beginning, no one in America ever went wrong by questioning the morals of their fellow citizens or urging more virtue upon them.

This book continues that proud tradition.

Callahan is amazed that "In the 2000 election, 9 out of 10 of Kentucky's poorest counties voted for George W. Bush". Why are they poor? People are poor because they consistently make wrong choices in life, from dropping out of school to having babies to spending money on beer instead of books. Most significant, perhaps, is the willingness to settle disputes by punishment instead of help, understanding, sympathy or friendly persuasion.

There are two basic moral approaches to life: "Hit 'em or hug 'em". Conservatives generally favour "hit 'em", such as the War on Iraq. It's direct decisive action without a bunch of namby-pampy soft talk, friendly persuasion and appeals to a "brotherhood" of wimps. Conservatives want to "get things done" even if corners are cut. Liberals are generally the opposite.

Bush's torture policies, which he calls "tough but safe", are an example. Suppose it prevents an attack similar to the World Trade Center destruction? I've yet to hear any Liberal explain why an appeal to "brotherhood" is better, even at the cost of not stopping such an attack. But, if torture works even once, conservatives would enshrine it as a new amendment to the Constitution. Now, who's "morals" do we choose?

This reflects the fundamental problem in books such as this: "morals" are based either on idealism (e.g. religion) or a pragmatic "what works" in the real world. Callahan takes a Puritan/Liberal approach, which I believe is more effective in the long run. Pragmatic/Conservativism also has benefits; e.g. a negotiator who "lies" to end a potentially fatal hostage situation without anyone being hurt.

For example: In 1960, about 10 percent of college students "cheated". Today, about 70 percent do so. This is "age compression". A 20's-something cheater may ruin a career that otherwise may not have been ruined until their 50's. It eliminates cheaters faster from the pool of potential executives. That's bad? Ignored morals do eventually bite you in the butt.

Morals are important, and Callahan is like Elmer Gantry in his ability to list faults, follies, sins and outrages. But, judgment is also important. Bush is criticized about his torture policies, pre-emptive wars, terrorism, axis of evil, al Qaeda and weapons of mass destruction. Yet, everything from waging war to blocking stem cell research is supported by his born-again Christian morality. Bush is a very "moral" man.

Sometimes, even the best morals are not enough, as the worsening situation in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and elsewhere indicates. As an effete Eastern preppie with a thin coat of Texas desert varnish, it seems Bush never heard of the old Arizona saying, "Don't insult seven men if all you're carrying is a six shooter."

Despite its faults of generalities and inability to understand the future, this book will stir the outrage of moral readers. Conservatives are quite likely to respond, "So what?" and regard it as business as usual. Callahan's solution is to be more moral and ignore the changes in the world.

Elmer Gantry, Peter Singer or Jerry Falwell couldn't say it better. But, just as their basic "morals" are vividly different from each other, this book is likewise limited in its scope by its devotion to the past. That said, it is an excellent starter book on morals and the state of the union. Read it, and you'll want to read more, think more, and have more faith in a better future.

When Hollywood Says Yes How Can America Say No?

Average customer rating:

When Hollywood Says Yes How Can America Say No?
Gene Wolfenbarger
Manufacturer: New Leaf Press (AR)
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Family Relationships | Parenting & Families | Subjects | Books

General | Christianity | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

General | Religion & Spirituality | Subjects | Books

Look Inside Parenting Books | Trip | Specialty Stores | Books
Accessories:

philosophy hope in a jar daily moisturizer

ASIN: 0892213760

Average customer rating:

Image Makers: 60 Years of Hollywood
Rh Value Publishing
Manufacturer: Random House Value Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Actors & Actresses | Arts & Literature | Biographies & Memoirs | Subjects | Books

General | Foreign Languages | Reference | Subjects | Books

General | Performing Arts | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books
ASIN: 051754699X
Release Date: 1982-10-12

Average customer rating:

Bella Goes Hollywood (Star Sisterz)
Lana Perez
Manufacturer: Mirrorstone
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Paperback

General | Ages 9-12 | Children's Books | Subjects | Books

General | Literature | Children's Books | Subjects | Books

Ages 9-12 | Children's Books | 4-for-3 Books Store | Stores | Books

All 4-for-3 Deals | 4-for-3 Books Store | Stores | Books
Similar Items:

Bright Lights for Bella: Star Sisterz
Nova and the Charmed Three (Star Sisterz)
Carmen's Crystal Ball (Star Sisterz)
Rani and the Fashion Divas (Star Sisterz)
Yumi Talks the Talk (Star Sisterz)

ASIN: 0786940301
Release Date: 2006-12-12

Book Description

Bella Goes Hollywood is the eighth title in a new series of adventures written specifically for tween girls. This fun series follows a group of friends who receive mysterious messages and win charms as they grow in confidence. The stories emphasize fun, friendship and empowerment.

Average customer rating:

Excellent reference tool

Hollywood Musical
Rh Value Publishing
Manufacturer: Random House Value Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Movies | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

General | Foreign Languages | Reference | Subjects | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Performing Arts | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books
ASIN: 0517540444
Release Date: 1988-12-12

Customer Reviews:

Excellent reference tool.......2000-03-31

I really enjoyed this book--It is filled with pictures and information about pretty much every film-musical since 1927 through the 70s. The only downfall, of course, is that it only goes through 1980, and misses nearly 2 decades of film musicals. There is a very comprehensive index in the back--one for titles of films, one for actors/actresses, and one for others involved in the films.

Average customer rating:

Hollywood Trivia
Rh Value Publishing
Manufacturer: Random House Value Publishing
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

General | Movies | Entertainment | Subjects | Books

General | Arts & Photography | Subjects | Books

General | Foreign Languages | Reference | Subjects | Books

Average customer rating:

Hollywood Legends: Katharine Hepburn
Rh Value Publishing
Manufacturer: Crescent
ProductGroup: Book
Binding: Hardcover

Books:

Books