Tag: Hollywood

Hidden Blessing in the Hollywood Shutdown

Hollywood sets have gone dark.

A central reason for the recent Screen Actors Guild-American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA) strike is that actors, writers, and other entertainment artists are super nervous about Artificial Intelligence (AI) making them and their jobs obsolete.

When the strike was first announced, current president of SAG-AFTRA Fran Drescher was at the mike to address the press.

Drescher, the former lead actress of the 1990s hit TV sitcom “The Nanny,” heads the union that boasts a membership of over 160,000 film and television actors.

Interestingly, the writers union had gone on strike a couple of months back. But now that SAG-AFTRA has also taken to the picket line, the situation in Hollywood is looking pretty bleak.

The last time both unions were on strike simultaneously was over sixty years ago, when none other than then-actor (who ultimately turned President of the United States) Ronald Reagan was wearing the union president’s hat.

Like every other aspect of our lives, things presently appear to be out of whack.

The brand of Hollywood itself is in tatters, in large part because of the cultural and political agendas that permeate every nook and cranny of the town.

What has particularly outraged the public, though, are the productions that have been coming from major studios, chock-full of vile and inappropriate imagery, content, and messaging aimed straight at our kids and teens.

Could the Hollywood shutdown created by the two entertainment unions be a blessing in disguise?

A lot of consumers of entertainment fare are viewing it this way, as if maybe a wrench in the works was exactly what was needed to stop the madness.

Striking actors and writers have reason to be concerned about the capability of AI models to supplant human beings in the manufacture of entertainment products.

Creative types are also increasingly astonished at the sheer capabilities of generative AI models, which can digitally produce what would typically have been created by human beings, but in a faster and less expensive way.

AI ingests the works and images of human artists as part of its training data. The technology can then alter and/or mash-up content, allowing entertainment companies to avoid compensating the people who originally created the works or were even the subjects of images used.

Additionally, other creative types such as musicians and visual artists are carefully watching the entertainment biz battle, as are all those who work in an array of fields that will no doubt be affected by AI’s implementation.

We are already witnessing the technological replacement of human beings in a host of industries. Still, the entertainment business has a unique opportunity to do something helpful for society at large.

The manner in which Hollywood resolves the two strikes could set the marker, not only for the entertainment industry but for other businesses as well.

Digitally created trailers and scenes featuring what appear to be well known actors have popped up all over the internet. The virtual phenom is posing legal and ethical concerns that the unions are obliged to address.

At a recent press conference, Drescher warned, “If we don’t stand tall right now, we are all going to be in trouble. We are all going to be in jeopardy of being replaced by machines.”

SAG-AFTRA chief negotiator Duncan Crabtree-Ireland indicated during a press conference that a proposal by the studios would put background performers at a terrible disadvantage.

“They propose that our background performers should be able to be scanned, get paid for one day’s pay, and their company should own that scan of their image, their likeness, and should be able to use it for the rest of eternity,” Crabtree-Ireland said.

The Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), which represents major studios including Walt Disney and Netflix, issued a statement suggesting that the claim made by SAG-AFTRA leadership is untrue.

An AMPTP spokesperson told ZDNET that the use of digital replicas would be restricted to the specific motion picture for which the actor is employed, and that any additional use would require the actor’s permission.

“Any other use requires the background actor’s consent and bargaining for the use, subject to a minimum payment,” the spokesperson stated.

This strike over AI is just the opening scene.

Sit yourself down and get ready for a real-life epic drama.

Only this time you’re not going to be able to say, “Don’t worry. It’s only a movie.”

AI Is Set to Take Over Hollywood

Generative AI is a type of Artificial Intelligence technology that has the capacity to almost instantly produce text, images, audio, and video.

Understandably, the entertainment community is in an uproar over the prospect of AI wiping out a huge chunk of the longstanding industry.

While a segment of Hollywood is actually enthused about the idea that AI might free creators from some of the typically tiresome tasks and also help to avoid the hefty price tag that frequently accompanies big budget projects, others are scared to pieces.

It’s fairly easy to convince a portion of the entertainment community that AI is an overall plus. Use of the technology has become common practice within the biz.

The late Carrie Fisher was digitally cast via AI (with permission from her daughter) in the film “The Rise of Skywalker.”

In another instance, in order to make it seem as if 80-year-old actor Harrison Ford were still in his thirties, Disney-owned Lucasfilm used images of Ford’s face, taken from the “Indiana Jones” films of the 1980s, and blended them into the fifth Indiana Jones film, “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny.”

During an interview with late-night host Stephen Colbert in which he talked about his AI-restored on-screen image, Ford said, “It’s fantastic.”

Actor James Earl Jones, who is now 92 years old, authorized an AI version of his famous voice, which he had supplied for the Darth Vader character in the “Star Wars” franchise series, so that the character could continue on.

Reportedly, a digital version of the late actor Christopher Reeve will be included in a cameo appearance in the upcoming movie “The Flash.”

AI technology is routinely being used to alter mouth movements, so as to more accurately sync words in dubbed films of a different language. It is also regularly being used to create cinematic music and soundscapes.

Paul Schrader, screenwriter of “Taxi Driver” and director of “American Gigolo,” did a Facebook post about something that he called a “dirty little secret composers know.”

“AI is already scoring filmed entertainment and has been for some time,” Schrader wrote.

Lately the actors and writers unions have been forced to confront the dark side of AI, and they don’t like what they see coming.

Generative AI is one of the main reasons the Writers Guild of America (WGA) has been on strike for weeks and the Screen Actors Guild‐American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (SAG-AFTRA), of which this author is a member, has been threatening to strike as well.

Both unions are seeking to limit the use of AI in the industry.

Digital doppelgangers in fake movie trailers have been popping up, making entertainment content without the assistance of Hollywood creatives.

AI-generated trailers, which have appeared on the Internet for what seems to be director Wes Anderson’s films, typically include well known actors such as Bill Murray and Scarlett Johansson. The trailers implement Anderson’s characteristic style, and they feature fake adaptations of popular franchises such as “Star Wars,” “Harry Potter,” and “The Lord of the Rings.”

A video of Ryan Reynolds selling Teslas was recently shared on Twitter but has since been removed. Reynolds’s production company responded with another AI-generated video, with Twitter owner Elon Musk endorsing gin made by a Reynolds-owned company. This video has also been removed.

A-listers, including Tom Cruise and Keanu Reeves, have actually been the victims of unauthorized AI-generated deep fake videos.

Then there’s the world of voice actors, which has also been shaken in a major way. So-called voice cloning is easily conjured up by AI technology.

The reality is AI technology is capable of improving itself. The phenomenon is known as “emergence.” In the not-too-distant future, entertainment content will be created by simply giving prompts to AI technology without actors, writers, directors, or cameras having to be involved.

This means that an individual with minimal resources but with access to AI can create professional looking videos that feature famous actors and characters, minus their personal consent or involvement.

Actors already have a degree of legal protection, through existing prohibitions, from unauthorized use of their names, images, and/or likenesses.

However, things start getting really murky when it comes to AI technology’s training data. The rights of the previous performances of individual actors being used for the purposes of AI training will likely be an issue in union negotiations.

Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, SAG-AFTRA’s chief negotiator, has spoken out about maintaining control over the AI-created lookalikes of actors and the issue of fairness when it comes to using personas.

“The performer’s name, likeness, voice, persona – those are the performer’s stock and trade,” Crabtree-Ireland said. “It’s really not fair for companies to attempt to take advantage of that and not fairly compensate performers when they’re using their persona in that way.”

Writers in turn possess intellectual property rights to their works. But under the present law they will have a difficult burden to prove.

In order to protect their rights in court, they must prove that the AI work is either a reproduction of their own work or a derivative of it.

In the real world, AI will likely be trained with a multitude of scripts, making this burden of proof all but impossible.

In Schrader’s opinion, “The WGA position on AI is a fascinating conundrum. The guild doesn’t fear AI as much as it fears not getting paid.”

Notwithstanding the dangers that the technology poses, the director predicts that AI “will become a force in film entertainment.”

Both SAG-AFTRA and the WGA want reasonable safeguards before AI capabilities proliferate within the industry.

“Family Ties” actress, computer science graduate, and former SAG board member Justine Bateman is unequivocally against the use of AI tech for entertainment content.

“I think AI has no place in Hollywood at all. To me, tech should solve problems that humans have,” Bateman said, adding that its use will “have an incredibly bad effect — disastrous effect on the entertainment business.”

The actress views the use of AI as a backward looking “automatic imitation” through which creativity will be stifled.

“What’s the next genre in film? What’s the next genre in music? You’re never going to see anything like that if we’re all using AI,” Bateman said.

She stated that she didn’t “want to live in that world,” echoing the sentiments of many actors, writers, directors, and musicians.

FYI: The above written article was created by means of the author’s un-Artificial Intelligence.

The Devil in Hollywood

There has been a troubling increase within our culture in the use of demonic imagery and ritualistic ceremonies.

Most strikingly, the entertainment industry, with the help of its media accomplices, has been weaving satanic messaging, symbolism and the like into musical compositions, performances and videos.

However, never have things been as explicit and wicked in their presentation as we have seen of late.

It is insidiously corrosive to a society, and likewise dangerous to an individual that dares take such a destructive path.

Here are a few Left Coast examples:

Rapper and singer Lil Nas X was involved in the co-creation of a pair of sneakers that had a drop of human blood in the soles of the shoes. The sneakers were decorated with a pentagram and contained a scripture citation that read, “And he said to them, ‘I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven.’” (Luke 10:18)

Singer Demi Lovato released an album that had a horribly profane title. Its cover showed Lovato posed on a cross and dressed in offensive and debasing clothing.

Appearing together at the recent Grammy Awards show, pop singers Sam Smith and Kim Petras performed what turned out to be a Luciferian tribute. Smith played the lead character, complete with fiery flames and demonic overtones.

On their part, the corporate media was generally seen giving nods of approval to Smith for his reprehensible presentation. CBS responded to a tweet from the singer, which had included a photo of Smith donning horns during a dry run for the awards show.

“This is going to be SPECIAL,” Smith tweeted, tacking on a devil emoji.

CBS replied, “….You can say that again. We are ready to worship!”

Senator Ted Cruz characterized Smith’s Grammy segment perfectly, when he tweeted, “This… is… evil.”

We are seeing a twisted sort of glee being exhibited by elites in the entertainment business and establishment media. Looking at this from a historical and spiritual perspective can provide insight into what’s behind it all.

It seems that the left has been enamored with the diabolical for centuries. Motivations have been mixed. Some look for a way to garner attention. Others just seem to be fascinated with evil itself, and with evil’s chief celebrity, Satan.

For folks like this, the devil is looked upon as a rebel.

Now in books, movies and music, characters that play the rebel can appear intriguing, independent and sometimes even heroic. But here’s the ugly little secret. This is what the devil is expert in – appearing to be something that he isn’t. After all, he’s the Master of Deception.

Radical writer and philosopher William Godwin, Mary Shelley’s father, presented the devil as an admirable rebel against God.

French anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon embraced Satan as a symbol of liberty.

Russian writer Mikhail Bakunin described the devil as an “eternal rebel.”

Theosophical Society founder Helena Petrovna Blavatsky published a journal called “Lucifer.”

American activist Moses Harman named his periodical “Lucifer the Lightbearer.”

Saul Alinsky, in an epigraph on the introductory page to his book “Rules for Radicals,” expressed that Lucifer was the “first radical” who “rebelled against the establishment.”

Dr. Paul Kengor, a professor of political science at Grove City College, pointed out that “long before Karl Marx was writing about the hell of communism, he was writing about hell.”

Several years before he wrote the infamous “Communist Manifesto,” Marx penned demonic poetry and prose. His family was originally Jewish, but his father left Judaism and converted to Protestantism, and had all of his children baptized in the Christian faith. Notwithstanding his religious background, in his twenties Marx became a staunch atheist.

Many leftists leaders of today have a deep antipathy toward traditional religions, and just like their inauthentic rebel hero they seek to destroy them. Communism is a proven way to achieve this unholy goal.

From legendary evangelist Billy Graham came the following statement: “Has it ever occurred to you that the Devil is a religious leader and millions are worshipping at his shrine today? … The name of this present-day religion is Communism… The Devil is their god, Marx their prophet, Lenin their saint and Malenkov their high priest.”

The devil is real, and he’s on a seek-and-destroy mission.

What does he want to destroy? Your soul, and the souls of everyone around you.

Bob Dylan put it to song in his inimitable “Gotta Serve Somebody.”

Well, it may be the Devil or it may be the Lord

But you’re gonna have to serve somebody.

Sam Smith and his liberal buddies in the entertainment and media industries should give Dylan’s tune a listen. It will serve their souls well.

Big Trouble in Little Hollywood

Over the past year, the gap between Hollywood and its customers has widened to a degree that should send shivers down the spines of every entertainment exec.

The industry has routinely used a fairly reliable gauge to measure the size of this gap. It’s called profit.

Sadly, 2022 was a disaster for the once-golden city. Media companies saw the loss of half a trillion dollars in equity.

A town that for a century had been recognized as the entertainment capital of the world has seemingly been reduced to a shadow of its former self.

How could this have happened?

In my opinion, somewhere along the road a decision was made to have entertainment take a bow so that a one-sided agenda could take center stage.

“Especially this past year, ideology has become more important than art,” Quentin Tarantino recently told the host of HBO’s “Reel Time with Bill Maher.” “It’s like ideology trumps art. Ideology trumps individual effort. Ideology trumps good.”

From the youngest of age, our primal need makes itself known with the simplest of words: Tell me a story.

It’s universal. Human beings crave stories, ones with characters, plots, and themes that reflect life’s truths. This is how Hollywood initially came to be. And how it grew to be an industry like no other, all entwined within our minds, hearts and imaginations.

We were happy when Hollywood profited. It meant more entertainment fare would be forthcoming, maybe even greater than that already experienced.

It’s hard to believe the once-great ocean of entertainment that existed steadily devolved into a digital stream of woke stories.

Evidently, the public doesn’t have the appetite for what the industry has been serving up of late. There are definite consequences when audiences’ wishes are ignored.

Movie theater attendees are now a fraction of what they used to be. Despite the solid successes of Tom Cruise’s “Top Gun: Maverick” and James Cameron’s “Avatar: The Way of Water,” the 2022 multiplexes saw their audiences essentially cut in half, when compared to four years ago.

Of course, movie theater companies experienced record losses in their share prices. AMC’s value dropped almost 80 percent, and Cineworld, owner of Regal, headed for bankruptcy court.

Likely hampered by projects that were saturated with woke ideology, Disney experienced its worst yearly stock-drop since 1974. Disney is the largest, most influential and sole media company that is listed in the Dow Jones Industrial Average, and it saw its shares drop a whopping 44 percent? Unbelievable.

The board of directors suddenly terminated CEO Bob Chapek and brought back former CEO Bob Iger, ostensibly to rescue the Mouse House.

Warner Bros., Discovery and Lionsgate also saw their stock prices take a plunge of over 60 percent.

With regard to television, traditional broadcast and cable TV (aka linear television) saw a significant ratings dip. Similar to what happened earlier to the music business, Hollywood executives discovered that streaming media does not yet provide sufficient revenue to offset the losses incurred in linear television and theatrical film releases.

However, a bright spot appeared on an otherwise dismal media landscape. “Yellowstone,” which is a modern perspective on the classic Western, garnered a huge audience hungry for retro-drama. Consequently, the series is continuing to enjoy stellar ratings.

Another media company that actually saw its investment value rise is the sports entertainment powerhouse WWE, which ended 2022 with a gain of 38 percent. It could be that this increase has to do with the moral sensibilities of a huge segment of viewers that find the clear distinctions between heroes and villains quite appealing.

The studios spent money galore on streaming content in 2022, and the cash layout just never panned out. Executive chairman James Dolan of AMC Networks explained Hollywood’s quandary in a memo that he recently wrote.

“It was our belief that cord-cutting losses would be offset by gains in streaming. This has not been the case. We are primarily a content company and the mechanisms for the monetization of content are in disarray,” he stated.

The AMC executive pointed out a reality that most of Hollywood is facing in 2023 and warned of “a large-scale layoff as well as cuts to every operating area.”

Netflix was first out of the gate to layoff employees, following a substantial loss of subscribers. Other major entertainment companies have also announced or have already started their layoffs, hiring freezes, and/or cost-cutting measures, including Disney, Warner Brothers, Paramount and CBS.

Warner chief David Zaslav actually stunned the entertainment world last summer, when he decided to shelve and write off the costs of “Batgirl,” a funded and completed film that was in post-production and had been approved by previous leadership at the company.

At an investor conference in November of 2022, he noted that in the past few months, things had gotten “a lot worse.”

The road that Hollywood will take going forward is yet to be mapped.

With a hope and a prayer, it will be one where entertainment takes center stage once again.

Funny Guy David Zucker’s Serious Warning

Humor is David Zucker’s specialty.

Not the lazy blue variety that passes for comedy these days, but the laugh out loud kind that makes your sides hurt, your eyes water and the world disappear.

The mega-successful film director, producer and screenwriter is best known for the legendary spoof flick “Airplane!” and the side-splitting “Naked Gun” and “Scary Movie” franchises.

He happens to be one of our culture’s current reigning experts on all things funny, and he’s sounding an alarm bell for all to hear.

Lucky for us he has joined the ranks of other comedy greats who have issued similar warnings: Dennis Miller, Jerry Seinfeld, Dave Chappelle, Chris Rock, Gilbert Gottfried, Mel Brooks, Adam Carolla, Steve Harvey and John Cleese.

The giants of humor are all saying pretty much the same thing; that Tinseltown’s head honchos and their like-minded fellow residents of the New Woke Hollywood are virtually strangling comedians, comedy writers and comedy itself.

Zucker was recently featured in a video posted by PragerU, where he shared some reflections on his trademark comedy.

He doesn’t think the jokes that propelled his films to the top could be delivered today. Too many folks now fail to understand the nature of comedy.

Unlike most audiences of the past, many of today’s joke consumers are so easily offended that it has risen to the level of ridiculous.

If everything is offensive, then nothing is funny.

New Woke Hollywood is decimating the comedic arts, along with the writers and performers that bring laughter to our lives.

As Zucker stated, “They’re destroying comedy because of nine percent of the people who don’t have a sense of humor.”

He used a real-life Hollywood example to illustrate the point. In a pitching session that he and his writing partner did for a James Bond/Mission: Impossible-style parody, he was stunned by the reaction of an executive just to some of the project’s dialogue.

“One female executive said, ‘This joke is getting pretty risqué here.’ It was a mild joke about the lead female character. Because she had come up through the police department and through the FBI…she needed a breast reduction to fit into the kevlar vest,” Zucker said.

“It was pure oatmeal, so mild,” he said. “Not one of our funniest things, but this was too much. I thought, ‘If this was the criteria for it, we’re in big trouble.’”

In speaking of the past, he said, “We went where the laughs were…We never worried about any of this stuff with the Naked Gun or Scary Movie films.”

Zucker honed his comedic skills in the 1980s and 90s with movies like “The Kentucky Fried Movie” (1977), “Airplane!” (1980), “Top Secret” (1984), “Ruthless People” (1986), “The Naked Gun” (1988), “The Naked Gun 2½: The Smell of Fear” (1991) and BASEketball” (1998).

He added his 21st Century contributions “Scary Movie 3” in 2003 and its sequel “Scary Movie 4” in 2006.

Many of the films that he was involved with are now classics and continue to attract appreciative audiences and younger movie fans.

He is often asked whether his most iconic film could be made today.

“When we do screenings of ‘Airplane!’ we get the question if we could do ‘Airplane!’ today,” he said. “The first thing I could think of was, ‘Sure, just without the jokes.’”

According to Zucker, although in the current comedy climate freedom may be taking a hit, the future actually looks bright.

“Comedy is in trouble, of course, but I think it’s going to come back,” he said. “There’s a pendulum, and the pendulum will swing back. I’d like to see comedy filmmakers do comedies without fear.”

Zucker has gone against the grain in liberal Hollywood. He has even worked on political ads for the GOP and directed a political parody film at the expense of Michael Moore, titled “An American Carol” (2008).

Charmingly, he is a huge fan of Davy Crockett. He once made a cameo appearance dressed as Crockett in “The Naked Gun 2½.” As a matter of fact, one of his dream projects is a Crockett biopic. He also hosted a “Davy Crockett Rifle Frolic” at his ranch back in the 1990s. And he decided to write some additional verses to the celebrated song “The Ballad of Davy Crockett.”

Regarding his faith, he was asked by the BBC some years ago whether he believes in God.

His answer was exquisite.

“Oh yeah, I believe in God,” he replied. “I think there’s much more evidence that there is a God than that there isn’t. I don’t believe that Mother Teresa and Hitler go to the same place. I believe in justice, maybe not in this life, but there has to be justice.”

In addition to justice, no doubt there’s laughter too.

As C.S. Lewis put it, “Joy is the serious business of Heaven.”

Woke Hollywood Passes on Pro-life Film despite Top Name Involvement

Kendrick brothers Alex, Stephen, and Shannon have been the creative forces behind many a faith-based box-office hit, including the successful “Facing the Giants,” “Fireproof,” “Courageous,” “Overcomer,” and “War Room.”

“War Room” was actually the No. 1 movie in the country on the second weekend of its release. It was also one of highest-grossing Christian films ever made.

The Kendrick brothers recently teamed up with actor Kirk Cameron to produce “Lifemark,” a movie that deals with some of the most central and poignant themes of our times – relationships, forgiveness, and the film’s primary focus, adoption.

Inspired by a true story, a movie such as this would typically have had Hollywood studio executives competing for the project.

It goes a long way to prove that these are anything but normal times.

Alex is one of the executive producers, as are Stephen and Shannon. But Alex has also co-written the film, and he has an acting part in it as well.

The adoption storyline is particularly meaningful for the Kendricks and Cameron.

Stephen Kendrick and his wife welcomed a daughter from China via adoption.

Cameron’s wife Chelsea was adopted by her parents, and four of Kirk and Chelsea’s six children were also adopted.

For those who haven’t yet noticed, contemporary Hollywood has given itself an extreme makeover in both form and substance.

All of this seems to have happened fairly quickly and also quite craftily. It went from “The Entertainment Capital of the World” to “The Woke Capital of the World,” with the end result being that the largest and most powerful entertainment companies are now haplessly out of touch with the beliefs, attitudes, and values of a large portion of their customer base.

Consequently, despite the viable track records of “Lifemark”’s filmmakers, both its star and its executive producer revealed that Hollywood studios, even those that had worked with the Kendrick brothers in the past, rejected the distribution of the film and did so because of the movie’s pro-life message.

Lead actor Cameron called the rebuff by Hollywood studios “good old-fashion cowardice.”

“Even the so-called faith divisions of studios would rather pass from tens of millions of dollars and support horror, violence, and drag queen movies than risk doing anything that celebrates life,”

Cameron said.

According to Alex, the studios stated that they were not releasing the film because they were “scared of the response,’”

Alex additionally revealed the following: “Several of the studios that have courted us in the past, and wanted us to go with them as distributors, they all turned down this film.”

The studios apparently wanted something else, anything else but this film.

Alex added, “We said, ‘Well, we cannot be ashamed or afraid to share the truth regarding this subject, to share a true story.’ It’s hard to argue with a true story.”

Still, the lack of independent thought displayed by a sizable number of Hollywood executives makes it seem as though they are impervious to the truth.

Fortunately, Fathom Events, a distribution company, was able to make a rational business decision and is going to arrange to have the film displayed in more than 1,400 theaters.

Alex acknowledges that the subject matter of “Lifemark” is a sensitive one.

“It’s become a political battleground in our country,” he remarked, adding, “We are acknowledging both sides, we’re acknowledging the difficult decision to choose to place your baby for adoption, but it is the better decision.”

“This whole path is not always easy. It is often difficult, but it is beautiful. And so this true story was a perfect example of showing how it could go…,” he said.

The movie project began with a telephone call.

While still in the process of wrapping up a previous film, the Kendricks received an unexpected call from Cameron, who had just watched what he described as “one of the most powerful and moving documentaries I’ve ever seen.”

The documentary was titled “I Lived on Parker Avenue,” and it dealt with the story upon which the “Lifemark” film is based.

The plotline centers around a teenage boy who is contacted by his birth mother, a woman who eighteen years prior had chosen adoption over abortion for her then-tiny son.

Alex believes that the movie can play a role in informing and educating people.

“We’re hopeful that churches, crisis pregnancy centers, ministries, all jump on this as a real-life tool to reach people… who are trying to determine ‘is this baby worth saving?’” Alex explained.

His objective in making and promoting this movie project is “to change the heart of the nation.”

To this end, the desire on the part of the filmmakers is for life itself to be ultimately viewed as “precious, beautiful, and worth protecting.”

“Lifemark” is set to make its mark in theaters nationwide on Sept. 9.

Hollywood in Major Uproar over Roe v. Wade Reversal

Following the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on June 24, 2022, to return to the states the power to determine the legality of abortion, Americans now find themselves in a post-Roe v. Wade world.

What’s it like? In a word, awesome. But not for everyone.

Folks are still in disagreement with one another, perhaps more intensely than ever before.

We can’t even seem to come to terms with the premise that – there is no constitutional right to abortion but there is a fundamental right to life. So demonstrably obvious and yet so seemingly elusive.

Alongside the tragedy of abortion itself is the fact that we have fallen woefully short in bridging this divide.

Hollywood isn’t helping.

Celebrities of the pro-choice persuasion are using over-the-top language while simultaneously attempting to virtue-signal to the max. It’s occurring largely through social media.

Here’s a small sampling.

– Barbara Streisand tossed a mean tweet at the Supreme Court, re-labeling the revered judicial institution as the “American Taliban.”

– Aisha Tyler called the Roe v. Wade ruling a “terrible tragedy” and seemingly took a page from fellow past-and-present leftists in designating it as “a dark day in American history.”

– Halle Berry let it be known in writing that she was “outraged” and used the vulgar version of animal excrement to express her opinion on the Supreme Court decision.

– Alyssa Milano posted that the ruling would have “deadly consequences” and would be “hardest on people of color.”

– Patricia Arquette called the High Court decision an “absolute disaster.”

– Elizabeth Banks characterized the ruling as “devastating news.”

– Taylor Swift shared that she is “absolutely terrified.”

The melodrama wasn’t confined to Hollywood stars. Entertainment industry labor and trade organizations raged against the ruling as well.

– SAG-AFTRA, the union that represents actors, announcers, broadcast journalists, and other media professionals, called the Roe v. Wade reversal “archaic and dangerous.” Issuing a statement, the union suggested that the Supreme Court’s ruling allows states to enact “draconian restrictions” on health care and that it will “destroy lives.”

Like other Hollywood organizations and companies, the union is providing money for employees to travel to the nearest location where they can obtain termination of pregnancy services, if they reside in states that have restrictions.

– The Directors Guild of America (DGA) “strongly condemned” the High Court’s ruling, calling it a “travesty.” In a statement, the DGA president opined that the ruling is putting “women’s lives at risk.”

The DGA also approved a new policy that provides financial assistance to DGA members who need to travel out of state in order to obtain abortion-related procedures.

– The Producers Guild of America, a nonprofit trade organization, issued a statement that characterized the Supreme Court decision as “deeply dangerous” and suggested that it would cause “untold harm.”

– Actors’ Equity Association, which represents actors and stage managers in live theater, called the ruling “a catastrophic step backwards for human rights.”

– The Board of Directors of the Writers Guild of America (WGA) West and the Council of the WGA East said in a joint statement that the decision will lead to “injury, death and the denial of basic human rights.”

– The American Guild of Musical Artists, which represents singers, dancers and staging staff in opera, ballet and concert dance, released a statement indicating that the “system is broken” and went so far as to urge that “the legitimacy of the Supreme Court must be reevaluated.”

– IATSE, the union that represents behind-the-scenes film and television workers, called the Supreme Court’s ruling “one of the worst contractions of freedoms in modern U.S. history.”

The fact of the matter is six jurists, who comprised the majority in the ruling, courageously upheld the law, despite the intimidation tactics of the left in protesting in front of justices’ homes and even the apparent assassination attempt against Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The coercive efforts began with the strategic leak of Justice Samuel Alito’s draft opinion in May 2022. The stalwart six stood firm, and the Supreme Court as an institution gained strength.

On a positive note, there are still a sizable number of prominent and influential Hollywood stars, who have fought the good fight in defense of our babies and their right to live.

Included in this brave bunch are Patricia Heaton, Kelsey Grammer, Mel Gibson, James Caviezel, Chuck Norris, Celine Dion, Jack Nicholson, Martin Sheen, Kirk Cameron, Candace Cameron Bure, Kanye West, and Justin Bieber.

In the initial Roe v. Wade ruling, Justice Byron White wrote in his dissent that the decision was an “exercise of raw judicial power.”

It was.

The majority in that fateful case actually created out of whole cloth a constitutional right to abortion that didn’t exist in American common law and wasn’t present anywhere in the text of the Constitution.

When the raging of the left is long forgotten, the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which has now thankfully resulted in the reversal of the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, will be recognized as the High Court ruling that rectified one of the most egregious injustices in our nation’s history.

There is a time for every purpose under heaven.

Now, after almost fifty years have passed, a time for healing has begun.