On Matt Damon...by Andrew Klavan...

[billc]

A look at Matt Damon...

http://pjmedia.com/andrewklavan/2013/08/19/damonic/

Damon’s a good movie star. So’s Clooney. Both are talented, obviously bright guys. Damon, I’ve heard from people who should know, is an all-around decent bloke. I’ve never heard anything bad personally about Clooney.
But the political stuff they do — it’s just so ridiculous. Why is that? How is our culture failing or deceiving its creative class that such gentlemen as these should come to feel there is some virtue in creating art so in conflict with their lives and actions?

But why should an actor think it’s right to take a $20-million payday (or whatever) to make a $100-million movie touting socialism in the hopes of turning a profit in the free market? What sense does that make? Why should he try to sell us what he wouldn’t buy? I have no problem with the guy sending his kids to private schools — I did too. But then why go around singing the praises of corrupt teachers unions and a failed public system you wouldn’t use? Absurd. Good Will Hunting touts Howard Zinn’s dishonest anti-American history book — while its stars live off the fat of the land. Why does that feel to them like the right thing to do? Or making anti-war propaganda while our troops are actually in the field in harm’s way? WTF?

 

[Blindside]

Matt Damon also starred in the Bourne series, not exactly a liberal thought piece.

 

[elder999]

Matt Damon also starred in the Bourne series, not exactly a liberal thought piece.

And what do those movies have in common, besides Matt Damon? Elysium and Bourne.....oh, that's right.

Matt Damon got paid.

:lfao:

(Of course, Bill will point out that the Bourne movies are liberal for their apparent vilification of the CIA, but that's life....)

 

[billc]

Matt Damon also starred in the Bourne series, not exactly a liberal thought piece.

How is that...all three movies show the C.I.A. as the villian...the left hates the C.I.A. He was also in another movie that showed the C.I.A. as the bad guys, not to mention the Green Zone, another anti-American movie...

 

[Sukerkin]

Do you ever wonder what the world would be like if you had the power to make all your fantasies about what you hate come true, Bill?

Balance and moderation is always the key to health, whether it be in terms of quality of life or politics and religion.

Without a sense of balance a person is always going to feel unhappy and aggrieved because things aren't as they want them to be and that is not a good way to live your life (which is of uncertain length and could terminate unexpectedly).

 

[elder999]

withyou!pokerwith

How is that...all three movies show the C.I.A. as the villian...the left hates the C.I.A. He was also in another movie that showed the C.I.A. as the bad guys, not to mention the Green Zone, another anti-American movie...

Man,I'dlove to play poker with you! :lfao:

 

[oftheherd1]

Moderation is a good thing from my point of view. But truthfully, I am more conservative than liberal. That doesn't mean I have no liberal beliefs.

But ultra liberal to ultra conservative are points of perspective. If we get rid of people like some we have here on MT that are ultra liberal or ultra conservative, we would simply define new limits of ultra conservative or ultra liberal.

I have no problem reading the beliefs of people who don't agree with me. If I consider it too much BS, I can react or not. But I don't want to close my mind for fear of not being in a position for learning something new and maybe even finding agreement with an 'ultra's' proposal.

 

[billc]

Why is it you guys always attribute "hate," to things I point out. I don't hate anyone, really, even dumb hollywood guys like Damon. I like to point out the hypocrisy of one of the three institutions that drive the political debate on the left side of the issues, hollywood, education and journalism. Too many people just assume that what they see from these places are just the way things are and don't bother to question what comes out of them. Hate never plays a part in what I do...just curiosity, and astonishment, sometimes...

That you guys always use the word "hate," reflects on your perspective rather than mine...

which is of uncertain length and could terminate unexpectedly

Very true, but as a believer in an afterlife I may be surprised at what comes next...or it won't matter anyway..There is always hope when you believe...

Hmmm...you do realize that this is a place to discuss things along a political and cultural level...It doesn't really bear any on my actual hapiness, I just enjoy mixing up viewpoints and bringing enlightenment to those who live in darkness...:angel::angel:

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

A look at Matt Damon...

But why should an actor think it’s right to take a $20-million payday (or whatever) to make a $100-million movie touting socialism in the hopes of turning a profit in the free market? What sense does that make? Why should he try to sell us what he wouldn’t buy? I have no problem with the guy sending his kids to private schools — I did too. But then why go around singing the praises of corrupt teachers unions and a failed public system you wouldn’t use? Absurd. Good Will Hunting touts Howard Zinn’s dishonest anti-American history book — while its stars live off the fat of the land. Why does that feel to them like the right thing to do? Or making anti-war propaganda while our troops are actually in the field in harm’s way? WTF?

Sounds like whining to me.

Matt Damon is paid to make movies. People pay him because they think he's good at it. Since we have freedom of speech, screenwriters are free to write scripts that may have perspectives that differ from your or which may deviate from popular opinion. Matt Damon is offered/auditions for films because it is his job. If he makes movies that I don't care for, I don't watch them. I watch previews and I have a pretty good sense of what I will and will not like based on them. Rarely am I wrong. As of yet, I haven't seen any of Matt's movies. Not because of any issues with Matt, but because his movies don't appeal to me.

As for anti war propaganda, it has nothing to do with the sacrifice our troops make. Our elected officials send them out to fight in wars that many feel are questionable. One could actually make the case that the anti-war people are actually looking out for our troops. In any case, there have been plenty of movies made over the years that were out and out pro-war propaganda, which I personally consider a greater problem than anti war propaganda. In fact, I'm just fine with anti-war sentiments, so long as they aren't vilifying the troops that have been sent off to war.

 

[Sukerkin]

Why is it you guys always attribute "hate," to things I point out. I don't hate anyone, really, even dumb hollywood guys like Damon. I like to point out the hypocrisy of one of the three institutions that drive the political debate on the left side of the issues, hollywood, education and journalism. Too many people just assume that what they see from these places are just the way things are and don't bother to question what comes out of them. Hate never plays a part in what I do...just curiosity, and astonishment, sometimes...

That you guys always use the word "hate," reflects on your perspective rather than mine...



Very true, but as a believer in an afterlife I may be surprised at what comes next...or it won't matter anyway..There is always hope when you believe...

Hmmm...you do realize that this is a place to discuss things along a political and cultural level...It doesn't really bear any on my actual hapiness, I just enjoy mixing up viewpoints and bringing enlightenment to those who live in darkness...:angel::angel:

:chuckles at your last there: I still think what I posted about balance applies, Bill. How many years is it now that almost everyday you've posted up things vilifying a political perspective that you don't agree with, often with the slimmest of justifications? I'll take your word that that campaign is not driven by hate but it's certainly immoderate .

I am sure I've said before that it's not (only) that people disagree with what you say that sometimes leads them to be sharp with you, it's the kid-banging-a-biscuit-tin-with-a-spoon-for-three-hours effect :lol:. Repetition is not always better .

I actually like to talk politics sometimes and have done with some very conservative people here at MT. I used to get quite upset, when I was not so au fait with how blunt and fierce non-face-to-face chat can be, with the, to me, outrageous and unsupportable opinions I was hearing from Don and John (TF). But, over time, I learned to read past the harshness to the matters behind and I (I hope) earned a little bit of respect from them in that I was quite prepared to listen and discuss issues if there was a solid basis for them (rather than simple partisan bias).

To do that tho' it has to be a two-way street. It helped that I 'get' Don's sense of humour and admire John's commitment to honesty and along those avenues began to seek out common ground rather than just butt heads on the things we didn't agree on. In the end it can't just be saying one side is wrong all the time, for that's not really debate.

Don't know why I rambled on like that ... my apologies. I've just been to the dentists so I'll blame that .

 

[Steve]

Billc, I try not to use the term "hate" and am not sure whether I've done so in the past or not. But extremist rhetoric invites the same. The articles you post, which you freely admit are very one-sided, have created an impression of hate. The words in the articles range from negative to hateful, depending upon whether you are quoting a breitbart "correspondent" or a hate monger like Michelle Malkin or Ann Coulter.

So, while I agree with you that the term "hate" is a little extreme and may not represent all of your words, I also believe you should accept some measure of responsibility for the reputation you've worked hard to create.

 

[arnisador]

Don't know why I rambled on like that ... my apologies. I've just been to the dentists so I'll blame that .

??? When did you move away from England?

 

[Sukerkin]

:grins: Just because over here we don't think that Radioactive White glow-in-the-dark teeth are healthy is no reason to get snippy Mr. Murican :lol:.

 

[elder999]

Why is it you guys always attribute "hate," to things I point out. I don't hate anyone, really, even dumb hollywood guys like Damon. I like to point out the hypocrisy of one of the three institutions that drive the political debate on the left side of the issues, hollywood, education and journalism. Too many people just assume that what they see from these places are just the way things are and don't bother to question what comes out of them. Hate never plays a part in what I do...just curiosity, and astonishment, sometimes...

That you guys always use the word "hate," reflects on your perspective rather than mine...

"You guy always???"


I have never used the word "hate" in any reference to you.

 

[Blindside]

How is that...all three movies show the C.I.A. as the villian...the left hates the C.I.A. He was also in another movie that showed the C.I.A. as the bad guys, not to mention the Green Zone, another anti-American movie...

So if the left "hates" the CIA, the inverse is true that a conservative must like the CIA?

 

[granfire]

Moderation is a good thing from my point of view. But truthfully, I am more conservative than liberal. That doesn't mean I have no liberal beliefs.

But ultra liberal to ultra conservative are points of perspective. If we get rid of people like some we have here on MT that are ultra liberal or ultra conservative, we would simply define new limits of ultra conservative or ultra liberal.

I have no problem reading the beliefs of people who don't agree with me. If I consider it too much BS, I can react or not. But I don't want to close my mind for fear of not being in a position for learning something new and maybe even finding agreement with an 'ultra's' proposal.

Ultra liberal on MT? WHERE?!

 

[Steve]

So if the left "hates" the CIA, the inverse is true that a conservative must like the CIA?

Love. They love the CIA. To do less is Unpatriotic and means the terrorists win.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[billc]

Love...no...respect, yes. there are men and women working day and night in the CIA trying to keep our people safe. They are people no different than those who join the police, fire department, or the military and they risk their lives doing their jobs...and many times die and and never receive the acknowledgement of their sacrifice. Are there bad people in the CIA...of course. The same with all the other jobs out there. but Damon has made a career out of smearing all those people...from the luxury of the protection they provide....that's all...

 

[Tgace]

So movie producers have no political motivations in the movies they back? None at all?

Actors are not offered films, accept roles for films or try to get a role based on their political views? Never?

The critics are not blind to the politics in this latest film:

http://www.salon.com/2013/08/13/elysiums_politics_dont_add_up_partner/

But this is a larger failure, the failure of a kind of progressive-leaning bourgeois politics of class sympathy. It’s a perspective that is very alive to class, but a politics largely deaf to it. Liberal politics tells you we can solve the contradictions of capitalism simply by figuring out a way to include more people in the wealth that’s been generated. The main problems are moral (greedy mean people!) and distributional (which might explain why Blomkamp smuggles in some Malthusian themes of “overpopulation&#8221.

Radicals know it’s going to take much more fundamental restructuring of society, one which will require prolonged struggle ending with the defeat of the rulers. I welcome a popular culture containing more radical themes, but, in the final account, this is not the class struggle movie we are looking for.

 

[Steve]

In a free market, damon is getting paid what he's worth. The problem seems to be sour grapes.

Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk 2