Connect with us

Entertainment and Sports

Why liberal critics hated Amazon’s Jack Ryan (and why you’ll probably love it)

Published

on

Why liberal critics hated Amazons Jack Ryan and why youll probably love it

No spoilers ahead. We’re going to talk about Amazon’s Jack Ryan television show from a general perspective.

With a modest 72% on Rotten Tomatoes, it’s clear that most critics enjoyed the 8-episode streaming series based on the late Tom Clancy’s beloved leading man. Even many politically progressive critics couldn’t get past the strong quality, great acting, and compelling storyline. Others, however, chose to politicize it and pass judgment based on one overarching message.

There’s just too much patriotism and not enough “blame America” for these political progressives to appreciate it. For example:

Jack Ryan Is a Patriotic Nightmare

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2018/08/jack-ryan-amazon-tv-show-review-tom-clancy-john-krasinskiIt seems that in order to get a portrait of a Syrian woman grappling with personal and political crises, one must also slog through the narrative of an unimpressive American man. If you guess that the show hinges on Jack Ryan rescuing her from her evil terrorist husband, well—spoiler alert!—you would be right. And that says basically everything you need to know: this is a propulsive, enthusiastic, confident action-thriller that makes a glossy, gooey narrative of American generosity and valor. It lauds Jack Ryan—a true American hero who unfailingly escalates every situation and lacks even basic collaborative skills—while neglecting to even attempt to challenge the narrative of noble American involvement and intervention abroad. Both its protagonist and its plot are based on the foundational, unquestioned notion that American-military might—the best-funded killing infrastructure in human history—is helping to save the world.

What are the sins that made some liberal critics cringe? To answer that, let’s get an idea for what they would have like to have seen. Based on the negative reviews I’ve read, there were a few themes that recurred, changes that they would have preferred. The biggest one was the way the American government was depicted.

In the eyes of these critics, a spy story can’t be good unless the scenario involves evil American overlords. They want the bad guys to turn out being pawns of the military industrial complex, proxies for the CIA, or good guys driven to do bad things because of American greed.

The other major flaw, as progressive critics saw it, was that radical Islamic terrorism was just that… radical Islamic terrorism. The story had young Muslim men being radicalized in jail, Islamic militants who were rapists and murderers, girls being taken as brides, and terrorist plots that centered simply around promoting Islam rather than feeding a starving village or avenging a filthy act if violence perpetrated by westerners.

In other words, the story stayed within a plausible modern storyline rather than romanticizing the plight of an oppressed people, as many progressives see things.

The saddest part about these reviews is they neglected to notice aspects of the story that balanced it against the two perceived flaws. The good guys weren’t immaculate. There was an awkward scene of anti-Muslim racism by a key character, a couple of government officials who were motivated by power more than justice, and a good guy willing to look away from human sex trade in order to get help catching the terrorists.

On the other side, there were admirable Muslims among the bad guys and a couple of good guys who were Muslims. Some of the kindest acts in the series were performed by Muslims, and arguably the second and third smartest characters in the series were terrorists.

This show has its share of problems, but ideological expressions were not among them. Don’t let liberal critics dragging down the ratings prevent you from watching a thoroughly enjoyable and completely binge-worthy show. I’ve been a fan of Amazon Originals since watching Bosch and this show adds to their growing resume of great productions.

Star John Krasinksi is my favorite Jack Ryan yet. That’s hard to say as a Harrison Ford fan, but he brings an emotional depth to the character that Ford simply didn’t have time to do. Ford’s two movies were pure action flicks while this 8 episode season gave Krasinski and the writers enough time to give him flesh.

The main supporting characters were also perfectly cast to offer Krasinski sharp dialogue. Abbie Cornish was more than a love interest as Cathy Mueller, offering an appropriate foil as a doctor to Ryan’s CIA officer angst. John Hoogenakker is the stereotypical elite military operative who somehow breaks the stereotype despite the script. Lastly, Wendell Pierce took his character to a higher level as the broken but not beaten James Greer.

Above all else, this is a spy thriller. Some critics seem to have forgotten that point and instead wished for a more cerebral spy melodrama or something. Don’t let them keep your from this show. If you like excellent action supported by a smart story and wrapped in an American flag, Jack Ryan is worth a watch.

Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Entertainment and Sports

Interview with Christopher Shaw

Published

on

Interview with Christopher Shaw

I was given the opportunity to interview Christopher Shaw. He is the director of the upcoming movie, Church PeopleChurch People is “romantic comedy satire” about a celebrity youth pastor caught up in the marketing machine of his mega church. In the interview, Christopher discusses the redemptive story arc involving what is a sad reality within churches today.

But the journey leading up to this movie was no cakewalk. Christopher’s start came from making Youtube videos. He then built a network of Christian comedians on Facebook, most notably the relationship between he and Thor Ramsay, the writer and star of Church People. They finally began their working relationship at the 168 Film Festival back in 2010. During this festival, they produced the short Skip Listening in a short period of time, the entire process taking no more than 18 days. Skip Listening won accolades at the festival and so the two have continued working together ever since.

As a Director, Christopher appreciates a high quality film. This was his critique of faith based movies, however he emphasized his optimism for how much the category has improved over the years. Passion of the Christ, he says was a breakthrough in closing this disparity. Since then, a number of faith-based films have proven to be remarkable returns on investment. As I pointed out in the interview, Christian comedy, remains rather untapped in its potential, which is a reason I sought to interview someone behind Church People.

Because this interview was for Startup Christ Presents, one of the goals of the interview is to tap their entrepreneurial wisdom. Christopher was not lacking for advice to give. The theme of the advice can be summarized by saying unless God is saying otherwise, start making content. Technology has increased the ease of entrance with film and distribution of content.

These are some of the highlights from the interview. You can watch, or rather listen, on youtube, and if you feel so inclined, subscribe to Christianity Visualized, a new channel I am working on. More to come on that later.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

No, Symeon Star-Eyes is not the Night King

Published

on

No Symeon Star-Eyes is not the Night King

A week ago, HBO dropped the long awaited and highly anticipated Game of Thrones final season trailer. This take may be late take, but oft times, I believe in letting the hot takes simmer down so the voices who aren’t seeking quick views for their lackluster analysis stand out. Now a lot of fan accounts on Youtube have boasted finding all these “easter eggs” in the trailer that just are not there. Particularly a lot of people are being misled by the theory that the legendary Symeon Star-Eyed is the Night King. The theory has the vote of confidence from Cosmo and its readers.

This theory existed on Reddit long before the trailer dropped. It goes so far to suggest that Symeon Star-Eyes was perhaps a Stark, but definitely from the North because the “North would want their own hero amongst the greatest heroes in Westeros history.” There is no evidence to suggest why Brandon the Builder, Breaker, Shipwright, and Burner aren’t sufficient legends. Knighthood is tied to the Seven, so it is unlikely he was from the North… But I need to slow myself down. The Game of Thrones trailer featured a star-eyed Night King reigniting this theory.

image

The seven pointed star is symbolic of the Faith of the Seven, the religion of the Andals, which would make, according to this theory, the Night King an Andal in origin. The belief that the Night King is the Andal Symeon Star-Eyes, a fabled knight from the Age of Heroes, is self defeating. Let’s first address the proposed evidence.

“There was a knight once who couldn’t see,” Bran said stubbornly, as Ser Rodrik went on below. “Old Nan told me about him. He had a long staff with blades at both ends and he could spin it in his hands and chop two men at once.”

“Symeon Star-Eyes,” Luwin said as he marked numbers in a book. “When he lost his eyes, he put star sapphires in the empty sockets, or so the singers claim. Bran, that is only a story, like the tales of Florian the Fool. A fable from the Age of Heroes.”

AGOT Bran VII 

Now, it’s important to note that White Walkers, which are referred to as Others, have not directly appeared in the books. In the lore, the Others are always depicted as having blue eyes, like when the when the 13th Lord Commander of the Night’s Watch (allegedly) had sex with one.

“A woman was his downfall; a woman glimpsed from atop the Wall, with skin as white as the moon and eyes like blue stars. Fearing nothing, he chased her and caught her and loved her, though her skin was cold as ice, and when he gave his seed to her he gave his soul as well. He brought her back to the Nightfort and proclaimed her a queen and himself her king, and with strange sorceries he bound his Sworn Brothers to his will.”

AGOT Bran IV

That man was known as the Night’s King, which is a far more plausible than Symeon Star-Eyes for being the Night King. This of course would only be true if the Night King was not an original amongst the Others. For this is generations after the Others were defeated, hence why there is a Night’s Watch. The idea that the Others have changed leadership is a major supposition not supported by either canon material or even the show who depict neither a queen nor power struggle which would likely still remain if an Other form of Symeon Star-Eyes usurped power to declare himself Night King.

And that is the less obvious reason why this fan theory is the Fake News of Game of Thrones theories. The most pressingly clear reason is that there were no Andals during the Long Night. The Andal Invasion did not occur until well into the Age of Heroes. The argument I’ve seen in response to this pressingly obvious fact is that history in Game of Thrones is unreliable. George RR Martin is intentional about using non-reliable narrators as well as writing a history of Westeros that is entirely contingent upon the interpretation of its multiple writers. Therefore the exact timing of the arrival of the Andals is subject to debate. This is all true. However, there is nothing to suggest that the Andals invaded during the Dawn Age. The Age of Heroes began after peace was made with the Children of the Forrest, as explained in the show in season one.

The First Men, who are the other predominant race in Westeros have the Others embedded in their culture, while the Andals generally believe the Others to be no more real than grumpkins and snarks. By the time the Andals arrived in Westeros, we are well into the Age of Heroes. Let’s go into more detail. When the Andals arrived they carved runes of seven pointed stars and brought their faith with them. Their invasion was repelled by the Stark Kings of Winter. Thus, the North remained primarily First Men and worshiped the old gods. House Stark remembers the Others, hence Winter is Coming. The Arryns of the Vale were established towards the very beginning of this time, for the Vale is the nearest landing spot. House Arryn is one of the oldest and purest of the Andal houses, until the current storyline. The Long Night is not in their culture. Lann the Clever had already taken Casterly Rock and established House Lannister. House Lannister bares a maternal lineage to Lann the Clever, a First Man, and has taken on an Andal line. There are FOUR Lannister POV characters. None of them reference their ancestors fighting Others. As you can see, the Andal houses did not experience the Long Night, meaning they Others invaded long before they arrived. So once again, how can Symeon Star-Eyes be the Night King.

Explanation

There are two reasons why the Night King’s, and by extension all Others’ eyes would be shaped as a seven-pointed star. The first is that a dragon must have three heads and a star must have seven points. This is to say that HBO is blowing smoke up people’s asses. The second is that the Children of the Forrest created an abomination to the old gods, whom they worship along with the First Men. This abomination bore resemblance to the faith of the seven, much like how the god Baal resembles numerous other false gods. As for me, I believe the former because the show-runners are not that intricate.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report Needs Your Help

Continue Reading

Conspiracy Theory

Sci-Fi short film offers terrifying future of authoritarianism after 2nd Amendment repeal

Published

on

Sci-Fi short film offers terrifying future of authoritarianism after 2nd Amendment repeal

Warning: Adult language and some adult content.

The folks over at Dust have mastered the art of the short science fiction film. Their take on an authoritarian future is no exception and strikes a little too close to home for conservatives.

Imagine if nanotechnology became so advanced that it could do nearly anything to a person even at the genetic level. New hair color? No problem. Longer life? Done. Special “powers”? Sure.

What if the government could track our incapacitate anyone remotely thanks to this nanotechnology? In the scenario detailed in this short film, the government has decided to repeal the 2nd Amendment since there’s apparently no need for an armed citizenry in such a society.

For the rest, you’ll just have to watch the video. It’s 14 minutes yet terrifying nonetheless.

The combination of advancing technologies and authoritarianism in Washington DC could make for a truly horrifying future if we’re not careful. When they say something is being done to improve the collective, be skeptical.

Will you help revive the American Conservative Movement?

 


NOQ Report editors use ExpressVPN

Continue Reading

Facebook

Trending

Copyright © 2019 NOQ Report