I don't follow Bill O'Reilly or movie news that closely, so this is an honest question. Fox host Bill O'Reilly has taken up the cause of blasting Mark Cuban for his film, Redacted. He's gone so far as to call for a boycott.
Just curious, has he had much to say about Lions for Lambs? It seems he draws a paycheck from the guy who is ultimately distributing the film internationally, where it will do the most harm to America's image.
That tally surpasses the $35 million reportedly spent to make the film, which was distributed domestically by UA parent company Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Inc. and internationally by News Corp subsidiary 20th Century Fox.


"he draws a paycheck from the guy who is ultimately distributing the film internationally", Yes he has blasted this film but can't do much about it due to the very statement you made. Boycotting and internationally distrubuted film would only give it more exposure and the lefties of the world would go see it if it killed them in the process.
Posted by: Scrapiron | Saturday, December 01, 2007 at 11:25 PM
"he draws a paycheck from the guy who is ultimately distributing the film internationally", Yes he has blasted this film but can't do much about it due to the very statement you made. Boycotting an internationally distrubuted film would only give it more exposure and the lefties of the world would go see it if it killed them in the process.
Posted by: Scrapiron | Saturday, December 01, 2007 at 11:26 PM
he sold out a long time ago.
Posted by: LOL | Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 06:20 AM
Three dollar bills, more authentic than O'Reilly, they are.
Posted by: Yoda | Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 08:05 AM
Bill will do anything for a loofah. Its what he uses to relax after a long day of supporting the troops.
Posted by: BobInStamford | Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 10:18 AM
Where have you two bums(LOL and Boob) been? Couldn't find you on the OBL thread, or any of the other threads lately, my favorite one being when Murtha said, "The Surge is working".
And now you two want to say something about old Bill's credibility. What a couple of hypocrites!
Posted by: templar knight | Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 10:42 AM
I think you're off base on this. While I haven't seen either movie, and have no plans to do so in the future, the several reviews of both make it clear where Bill O is coming from. Redacted directly attacks the troops, depicting them as brutal animals. Lions, on the other hand, is a rather dry and boring polemical attack on the broader issue of the war itself.
Posted by: Terry | Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 11:04 AM
Bill doesn't "sell out". His list of movies against the USA includes Lions for Lambs. How many of us can tell the "guy" we get our paycheck from what he can do with money? Love to hear that one touted all over the boardroom in the coming days. Besides, although a corporation is an entity, it is not human and therefore can it be a "guy"?
Posted by: Sue | Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 12:23 PM
I'm with Terry on this one, too. Although I've seen neither movie, Redacted is nothing more than enemy propaganda, and, in fact, plays along the lines of what I have seen on some of the Islamist forums.
Posted by: templar knight | Sunday, December 02, 2007 at 01:50 PM