Glenn Beck: The liberal media hates "Spider-Man"- Page 3

[brightasyellow]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 3:56pm

I have to be honest - Beck's praise for this show makes me want to see it even less (if that were possible). People are allowed to voice their opinion, including Beck. But the fact that I've never heard him voice a theater opinion before (despite saying that he's been going to the theater for 30 years) and that he forced political rhetoric on the show makes me doubtful.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 4:13pm

madbrian, I don't answer your stupid questions because they make no sense. What does it matter what my opinion is? The point is that Glenn Beck is talking about a Broadway show and what he saw in it. You should just be happy that he's telling people to go to the theater. But no, you liberals want to smack down anything that you don't agree with. I assume you want the theater all to yourself. Conservatives can't participate in theater events.

[ErikJ972]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 4:43pm

"But no, you liberals want to smack down anything that you don't agree with. I assume you want the theater all to yourself. Conservatives can't participate in theater events."

Lol it's nonsensical hyperbole like this that makes it hard to take Goth (and Beck) seriously.

[Scarywarhol]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 4:56pm

To be fair, there is a heavy assumption hanging over this board as to what everyone's political beliefs are, and what they should be on a theatre site. It thankfully doesn't come out very often, but it's pretty uniform and pretty ugly.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 4:57pm

Fine, we'll take the conservative media approach:

Conservatives can't participate in theater events.

Why can't they, goth? I thought you liked the theatre. Or are you no longer a conservative? Broadway has obviously brainwashed you with their gay agenda and recruited you as a liberal. Hand over your gun and face the wall. Just kidding! First and Fourth Amendments!

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 5:13pm

I agree, scarywarhol.

Updated On: 1/13/11 at 05:13 PM

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 5:17pm

A liberal pundit might make entirely different assertions that are crazy, or s/he might not, but what Beck says is non-sensical. Sporkgoddess, it's just like when your wanna-be buttboy (whom you wisely rejected), HDThoreau wrote that the Chorus Line revival wasn't a huge hit because liberals found it didn't reaffirm their beliefs of the '70s. He wrote that without seeing it, but he knew it was "wonderful." See? That's the kind of crazy stuff people here react to.

[Spotlightjb]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 5:18pm

A few weeks ago, Beck (while playing with some marionettes on his television show, naturally) mentioned that Moulin Rouge was one of his family's favorite movies. That happened.

[musikman]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 5:21pm

“One reason ‘Spider-Man’ is being panned,” he began, upon which he assumed a French accent, “‘Well, it’s not, well this isn’t theater! It’s music by Bono! Who is Bono? Of course he does a lot of charity which I like, I think he was down in Haiti, but he’s still rock!’”

Returning to his normal voice, Mr. Beck added, “And then you have, it’s a comic book character, and too much action and flying around and they’re trying to cheapen the theater by spending 50 million dollars. So you have all the snotty stuff that regular Americans won’t understand.”



Goth, if that is not offensive to you, as a theatergoer, I don't know what is. Regardless of whether you like Beck or not, he is demeaning the art of theater/your opinions - calling everything else snobbish, or as conservatives like to say "elitist" - not to mention calling a large portion of our society idiots, or incapable of understanding what he calls "snotty theater." That to me is appalling.

Updated On: 1/13/11 at 05:21 PM

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 5:29pm

FindingNamo: Okay, that's fair.

musikman: A lot of people on this board do that, though (obviously with different shows). Not that I'm defending what Beck said, I think it's ridiculous.

Updated On: 1/13/11 at 05:29 PM

[musikman]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 5:50pm

Spork: Yes I know many on this board will say the same thing, but we don't have a national radio show that is heard by millions of people. I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that most avid theatergoers - the ones he refers to as snobby - don't listen to him on a regular basis. Rather, it's the "regular Americans" as he calls them, that usually listens to him. So in that sense, he just called a huge majority of his listening basis stupid.

[SporkGoddess]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 6:00pm

You have a very good point there.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 6:51pm

He also liked Lincoln Center's South Pacific revival and Michael Buble. And he's made a dozen or so novels by various thriller writers into New York Times bestsellers, some of them #1 bestsellers.

Like Oprah, he gets people to read books and see and hear things.

[darquegk]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 7:08pm

Of course conservatives can participate in and enjoy theater. Kelsey Grammer is an outspoken conservative, and though some disagree with his political views or personal life scandals, no one can deny that theater is an important part of his career, and that he is well-respected in the theater.

Your argument is thus a straw man, since it is clearly created simply to be oppositional and is not supported by facts. I happen to hold many libertarian views myself, so I'm not attacking you on the grounds of disagreeing with your political perspective. I'm disagreeing with you because your are attempting to put up an "us and them" mentality of partisan interests in the world of the arts.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 7:24pm

Nicely done, darquegk!

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 7:35pm

He went backstage and met Bono and the actors? GROSS.
Glenn goes backstage

Updated On: 1/13/11 at 07:35 PM

[adamgreer]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 7:44pm

I don't think he met with any of the actors, at least not according to the article. I suspect most of them wanted absolutely nothing to do with him. I sure wouldn't.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 1/13/11 at 7:48pm

^ Okay good, my bad. You could not even pay me to be in the same room as that man.

[groucho797]

Posted: 1/14/11 at 10:49am

Well, I was going to launch this big diatribe to respond to goth's rant - then realized I have better things to do (like wash my hair). I've sworn off "hate politics" for this millenium. Goth, bash whoever you want; it just doesn't matter, nor does it produce anything of quality. If that's what keeps you warm in the winter, go for it. It doesn't, however, convince.

Never try to teach a pig, etc. etc. I'm done with this thread, thank you. Updated On: 1/14/11 at 10:49 AM

[Moneyspider]

Posted: 1/14/11 at 10:57am

My main concern is that when Marvel editorial wanted to end Spiderman's marriage to Mary Jane in the comics to return Peter Parker to his roots, they strove to do it in a way that wouldn't offend conservatives. So instead of a divorce, he agrees to a deal with the devil. I'm no conservative, but it strikes me that bartering with Satan would rank as worse than divorce among them too.

[darquegk]

Posted: 1/14/11 at 11:51am

To the best of my knowledge, the ending of Parker's marriage by a deal with the devil was not a choice made for political reasons. The marriage had become inconvenient to the writers, not to the two characters. A divorce between two people who have for the past several years (several here actually meaning nearly fifty now, though time hasn't passed at that rate in the comics) had a relatively good relationship might have been hard to justify for the characters themselves, given how iconic Peter Parker and Mary Jane Watson/Watson-Parker had been. So rather than deal with the brunt of creating a failing relationship and a divorce subplot, the writers had the Devil retcon Mary Jane back out of Peter's life.

It's hard to consider that they made that choice to avoid offending or alienating someone, considering that most people considered it the worst plotline in several decades, since the "Which Spider-Man is the clone, and which one is Peter Parker" debacle that stretched from the mid-Seventies onward.