The new anti-war film "Stop-Loss" took in about $12 last weekend. I haven't seen it — as you know my weekends are jammed with massage therapy and community service. But I know it's a movie about a soldier whose service is involuntarily extended in a war that's unpopular among people who eat at Spago.
So whose fault is it for the film's failure? According to someone at Paramount, "It's a function of the marketplace not being ready to address this conflict in a dramatic way because the war itself is something that's unresolved yet."
Meaning: Paramount already thinks the war is lost. But because you don't, you're too dumb to enjoy the picture.
You gotta admire that gumption: It's the audiences fault when a picture doesn't connect.
Look, we don't need war movies to remind us that war is bad — we know that. Plus, mainstream media is already doing a bang-up job ramming home that idea, even to the point of ignoring good or encouraging news about the conflict.
But I guess what bothers me most about the flick is being lectured by people who are fundamentally more flawed than the rest of us. Really, is the act of stop-loss worse on a personal level than cheating on your wife and mother of your two kids with your saucy little co-star? I'd ask Ryan Philippe that, but I'm already over him. He's no Orlando Bloom.
And if you disagree with me, then you sir are worse than Hitler.