Andrew Clavin’s Ep. 536 mocks Amy Coney Barrett’s appointment as a "babe activist" victory while blaming CNN and the NY Times for ignoring foster care failures, comparing media tunnel vision to a gorilla study. He praises Trump’s agenda-setting resilience against "fake news," like Brian Ross’s debunked claims, and defends border policies using Denmark’s ghetto laws as a warning. Hollywood critic Christian Toto argues stars like De Niro and Rogen risk backlash for alienating conservatives, citing Peter Fonda’s flop and Marvel’s untouchable dominance. The episode ends with a July 4th celebration of conservative consumer resistance—from boycotting NFL games to dismissing feminist critiques as irrelevant. [Automatically generated summary]
Today, I officially give my endorsement to Amy Comey Barrett to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court.
Only Barrett can serve a group that has never been represented on the high court before, attractive women.
That's right.
For too long, babes have been denied their rightful place in America's halls of power, while other groups like blacks, Hispanics, Jews, and women who couldn't get arrested in any self-respecting saloon have risen to positions of prominence.
This is not to say anything disparaging about the looks of such women as Sonia Sotomayor or Ellen Elena Kagan.
But let's face it, the term easy on the eyes doesn't exactly leap to mind, if you know what I mean.
But with the appointment of Amy Comey Barrett, every babe in America will finally be able to stand tall, which should help to show off their shapely figures and the flowing locks around their perfect facial features.
Little child babes who now have nothing to look forward to but a life of being treated better than everyone else because they look so amazing will finally be able to dream of something besides marrying a billionaire and having everything they ever wanted.
As babe activist Lola Vavoom told reporters, quote, it's about time a babe is appointed to the Supreme Court so she can do whatever it is they do while wearing a clingy yet feminine outfit like the one currently outlining my tone and crevaceous body, unquote.
Now, there may be some among you who say that judging an accomplished legal expert like Amy Comey Barrett strictly by her looks is sexist, insensitive, and demeaning toward women.
Dollar Shave Club Hooray!00:03:36
And all right, that's true.
But I feel that by selflessly making this sacrifice of my own personal morality and decency, I may help to bring a first-class smoking hot legal mind to the high bench and also get some cheap laughs.
And that, my friends, is why I'm here.
Trigger one, I'm Andrew Clavin, and this is the Andrew Clavin Show.
I'm the hunky-dunky.
Life is tickety boo.
And birds are wingy, also singing hunky-dunky.
Ship-shaped tipsy-topsy, the world is it bitty zing.
It's a wonderful day.
Hoorah, hooray!
It makes me want to sing.
Oh, hoorah, hooray.
Oh, hooray, hurrah.
That was a terrible thing to say.
It's all Rob's fault.
He laughs at these jokes.
He encourages me.
All right, we're going to talk to Christian Toto today, the incredibly right-wing, far-right.
Now everybody is alt-right.
Everybody who has ever believed in the Constitution is now alt-right.
He's an alt-right, far-right, fascist film critic, but he's going to be talking about the bad behavior in Hollywood.
We've got no mailbag tomorrow, so you've got to stick with your problems throughout the 4th of July.
Because we're off tomorrow.
That's right.
It is the 4th of July, and we will be celebrating our country.
However, I will continue to look exactly this good.
And the reason is I use the Dollar Shave Club.
I have been a subscriber to them since way beyond, before I started working here.
They are just absolutely terrific.
You sign up.
You don't have to go to the drugstore and open that cabinet.
It sets the alarm off and you get carried away and arrested.
And it's four days later and you get a stubble.
When you get home from the jail, you can have the Dollar Shave Club just waiting there because they send you a new razor every month.
Plus, they have everything you need to get ready in the bathroom, all kinds of stuff.
And Dollar Shave Club delivers everything you need to look, feel, and smell your best.
Shampoo, conditioner, body wash, toothpaste, hair gel, even a wipe that'll leave your backside feeling tingly clean.
I haven't used that, but I have used just about everything else, which I just love.
And here is a great way to try a bunch of Dollar Shave Club's products.
For just five bucks, you can get their daily essential starter set.
It comes with body cleanser, one wipe Charlie's, their world-famous shave butter, and their best razor, the Six Blade Executive, which I use.
It's got 172 blades on it.
You start shaving on Monday.
By Thursday, you are clean as you can possibly be.
Keep the blades coming for a few more bucks a month and add in shampoo, toothpaste, or anything else you need for the bathroom.
Check it all out at dollarshaveclub.com slash clavin.
Don't forget that because we want them to know that we sent you.
That's dollarshaveclub.com slash clavin.
And I know as you're thinking, you're thinking, God, you look great, but how do you spell clavin?
You should check our sponsors.
You'll love what you'll be saving.
But you must remember, there are no ease in clavens.
There's jobs and flowers, drinks and wine, and all the folks are raving.
But you have to spell it right.
There are no easy claven.
There's stamps and sheets and mattresses There's magazines and shavings But if you want the discount There's that you are craving There are no easy If you didn't know, you know now.
There's no E's in Claven.
I just make it look easy.
Directing Attention Matters00:15:05
You know, one of the things that is really gratifying as we come to July 4th is I really believe that the American people are beginning to write their own narrative.
They're beginning to not let this press direct their attention.
They're beginning to learn to direct their attention to the things that really matter no matter what the press says.
Yesterday we had this wonderful July 4th special with Jordan Peterson and both Ben, Ben actually brought this up, though it's in Jordan's book as well, is there's a study where they asked a number of students to watch a soccer match and count how many times one team, the white team, how many times they pass the ball.
And so everybody was focused on how many times they passed the ball and they all got the number right.
It was like 15 times or whatever.
But half of them missed the fact that a gorilla walked into the middle of the field, a guy dressed up as a gorilla during the game.
So they only saw what they were directed to see.
They didn't see what was actually happening.
The press uses that technique all the time by being, because they are all on one side, because all the networks, the New York Times, CNN, they're all on one side and they're all dedicated to pushing the Democrat line, the left-wing line.
They direct your eyes to one thing and that's what they expect you to feel about.
That's what they expect.
That's how they expect to set the agenda.
That's why the president should be talking about immigration right now instead of talking about the upcoming Russia summit or the fact that he's making progress with North Korea or what he's trying to do on trade.
No, no, no.
They are directing their cameras at crying babies at the border.
So that's what you should be thinking about.
That is how they set the narrative.
And of course, it's collaborative.
They point their cameras in that direction.
And then the activists come out and start making speeches.
And the Democrats say, oh, there's our new issue.
And they start making speeches.
And that is supposed to be the narrative of the country.
That's supposed to be where the attention goes in the country.
It's the same technique that is used by magicians.
I love slate of hand magician, right?
Because they can do amazing things while you're looking straight at them because all they do is just divert your attention for a single second.
And in that second, they pull off the trick.
Guys who play three-card Monty do the same thing.
I don't mind that because I know I'm being tricked.
But with the media, it's very, very different because it's a scam.
And the fact that the American people with Trump in the bully pulpit, with him using Twitter, even though he says things that sometimes are just obnoxious, he is able to set an agenda as well.
And we are able to choose what we do.
You know, ABC News online, not their TV station, ABC News had an article called A Fake News Story Exposes a Real Crisis.
And this is a constant, was it Evan Thomas?
I can't remember who it was who said, we got the facts wrong, but the narrative was right.
So this is what they're essentially saying.
This is Lauren Peel.
She says the Trump administration last year lost nearly 1,500 migrant children whom a government agency placed with U.S. sponsors.
Shocking news, but it wasn't true.
Now, you remember, if you listen to this podcast, we told you it wasn't true.
We told you that these people had just been placed with, you know, they'd been placed with relatives in America, but some of those relatives were here illegally and didn't answer the phone when people called to check on them.
That was all that was going on.
But she says, it wasn't true.
The news was fake, but it was enough to outrage politicians, stir up journalists, and make the public ask questions.
Chasing this misleading story, however, helped uncover a story that many found even more troubling, and this one was real.
And this is the children at the border being separated from their parents, which again is only what they're paying attention to because they're not paying attention to the 400,000 foster children who are separated from their parents forcibly in America.
They're not paying attention to our children because they want to pay attention to foreign children because they want the border open.
They want our border security not to be in place.
And it's really interesting.
And then they back this up with this incredible rhetoric, this incredible hysterical rhetoric.
And you have to remember, like I said yesterday, it's like the hitman in the mafia.
You only need a couple of people to deliver the hysterical rhetoric, and then everybody else can say, well, I don't agree with that, but, but.
And then you think, ah, well, they've moved the Overton window.
They've moved the window of acceptable speech.
Take a listen to Michael Moore.
And I know you all love Michael Moore, and you're probably already lined up outside the theater to get the tickets for his latest film.
But here is Michael Moore talking about you.
He's talking about us.
He's talking about the people who vote for Trump and what Trump is doing.
And this is the backup that the press has when they divert your attention to some crying babies, 2,000 crying babies.
I don't want the babies crying.
I want them treated well.
Still, there are a lot of crying babies and they choose which ones they're going to film.
And then they're backed up by rhetoric like this.
This is the beauty and the genius of Trump and why you have to step back for a second and admire him the way Patton admired Rommel.
That Trump, Trump, when he says he's going to do something, he's going to do it.
And he is relentless.
Even though he did what he did this week with the children in the cages, but he's still going to have the internment camps.
He's never going to give up on this, never going to give up on the wall.
They are never going to stop.
And we never act like that on any of the things that we say we believe in.
They are relentless.
They are to the core, and we are like, that's how we are.
And we have got to stop.
Yeah, they are so lovely.
They're so lovely.
They're like Judy Garland and Wizard of Oz.
You know, Shapiro was on Marr show.
I don't know if you saw that.
And Marr was talking.
Shapiro was great on the Russian stuff.
Marr actually couldn't believe that Ben didn't think that Trump was colluding with the Russians.
And Ben was pointing out all the great stuff that Trump has done in dealing with the Russians, despite his sometimes soft rhetoric.
But I couldn't believe that Maher was sitting there making the argument that the left was more civil.
All the incivility was coming from the right.
I mean, this is after 50 years of calling us racist, of calling men pigs.
And there's Michael Moore calling us MFs, right?
He's right there.
He's calling us MFs.
And then saying how wonderful and lovely they are.
They're singing over the rainbow.
I cannot believe the self-delusion.
And, you know, if they didn't have this rhetoric, if they didn't think we were racist, if they weren't pumped up with self-righteousness, they would have to do something else.
They would have to ask us why we believe the things that we believe.
Why do we believe it's good to have secure borders?
First of all, that we should be able to control our own borders, that we should be able to control our population, that immigration and illegal immigration are two separate subjects, two different subjects.
But if you look at what's happening in Europe now, it's really interesting.
You remember, I guess it was 2015, all these migrants come flowing across the borders and Angela Merkel, who somehow has become the leader of Europe, I guess because the German economy is so strong.
It's like Germany tried twice to destroy these people.
It finally did it.
They finally did it.
Angela Merkel says, we'll manage.
That's what she says.
We'll manage.
We'll take them all in.
We'll manage.
And she basically gets the EU to insist that everybody take their portion of Islamic immigrants, right?
People who are coming in, they're escaping.
They're escaping from, but they're not necessarily running to.
They're not coming to Europe because they're saying to themselves, you know what?
I want to be a European.
I want to be a modern Christian type of guy.
I want to join Christian Judeo society.
That's not what they're saying.
They're saying, get me out of here because these people are going to kill me or there's too much poverty here or whatever it is is chasing them over the border.
So they're not coming to get involved.
So they come flowing over and flowing over.
And what are the results?
What are the results of these open borders?
In Denmark, right?
This is Denmark.
It is one of the nicest countries on earth.
This is like wonderful, wonderful, you know, while we're singing songs.
It's like wonderful, wonderful Copenhagen, beautiful Gemini.
You know, this is like one of, listen to the laws they have.
They have a new set of laws.
They're called ghetto laws.
Denmark's government is introducing, this is from the New York Times, I think it used to be a newspaper.
Denmark's government is introducing a new set of laws to regulate life in 25 low-income and heavily Muslim enclaves that they call ghettos.
They call them ghettos.
They're saying that if families there do not willingly merge into the country's mainstream, they should be compelled to merge.
For decades, integrating immigrants has posed a thorny challenge to the Danish model, intended to serve a small, homogeneous population.
Leaders are focusing their ire on urban neighborhoods where immigrants, some of them placed there by the government, live in dense concentrations with high rates of unemployment and gang violence.
Starting at the age of one, now you're talking about separating children at the border here because their parents have to be deported and have to be imprisoned and we're not allowed to hold them in the prison with the children, right, after a certain period of time.
But now, in Denmark, starting at the age of one, ghetto children must be separated from their families for at least 25 hours a week, not including nap time, for mandatory instruction in Danish values, including the traditions of Christmas and Easter and the Danish language.
Non-compliance could result in a stoppage of welfare payments.
Other Danish citizens are free to choose whether to enroll children in preschool up to the age of six.
In his annual New Year's speech, Prime Minister Lars Loki Rassmussen warned that ghettos could reach out their tentacles onto the streets by spreading violence and that because of ghettos, quote, cracks have appeared on the map of Denmark.
Politicians who once used the word integration now call frankly for assimilation.
That tough approach is embodied in the ghetto package of 22 proposals presented by the government in early March.
Most have been agreed upon by a parliamentary majority and more will be subject to a vote in the fall.
I mean, that is a real crackdown.
How would you like it if they suddenly said, oh, you know what?
In Muslim neighborhoods, we're going to take children away and teach them about Christmas and teach them about Easter.
I mean, that would be un-American.
But at some point, at some point, if you have open borders, if you don't take care of the culture of your country, if you don't take care of the basic attitudes in your country, you're forced to these extremities.
Denmark, is Denmark some kind of fascist country?
Absolutely not.
It's the opposite.
And yet listen to what they're doing.
And when you have normal people, good people, open-hearted liberal people lining up, getting in line next to fascists, you did something wrong.
You put them in that position.
It's not them.
They don't want to be there.
They probably, I'm sure there are plenty of people in Denmark who feel bad about this, but they got to do what they got to do because Their open border system was destructive to their culture.
In Germany, Angela Merkel, who has been in power way too long and I think has done a terrible job.
I'm not there, but I just think she has made a lot of mistakes.
Here is, I believe this is also from the Times.
Angela Merkel, who staked her legacy on welcoming hundreds of thousands of migrants into Germany, agreed on Monday to build border camps for asylum seekers and to tighten the border with Austria in a political deal to save her government.
She's fighting for her political life, and so she has to backtrack on all this stuff.
And all these things, these taking tough stances on the border now, right, keeps you from having to violate your values later.
It's tough love, right?
If you teach your kids to behave when they're little, you don't have to do terrible things and oppress them when they're teenagers and should be having more freedom, right?
If you do the job that you're supposed to do, which is being a little tough when the kid is little and you want the kid to like you and you don't like to see the kid cry, but sometimes you have to say no and you have to, you know, be a little bit tougher.
So later on, the kid can control himself.
You got to do the same thing with your country.
You've got to control the borders, have a little tough love at the borders, enforce your laws so the laws mean something because when you don't enforce good laws, then all your laws become disrespected, right?
So you got to do all that stuff.
And the left, because they resort immediately to this rhetoric, it's racism.
You're all MFs, you're all bad guys, you're just relentless.
And we are singing somewhere over the rainbow.
We're so wonderful.
You know, because they have that rhetoric, they don't ask themselves, you know, maybe just ask, why do we think the things we think?
Look to Europe.
Look at what's happening.
Look at the things that happen.
The amazing thing, and this really is amazing, and you got to hand it to Trump on this stuff.
He stands up to them and he survives.
His approval ratings have actually risen in the two weeks since they started this.
It's really a month.
It's a month since they started this.
His approval ratings have gone up.
They are much higher.
They keep talking about how unpopular he is, but he's much more popular than Obama was at the same time.
And to me, it's delightful to watch the media fail.
I mean, it's delightful when your media is this corrupt, when it's this ideological, when it's this one-sided-sided, it's delightful to watch them fail.
Chuck Todd was whining about this.
We've got to look at this.
Chunk Todd is whining.
He's winning.
He's not popular, but he's winning.
He's winning because you guys stink.
The announced retirement of Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy this week helped make one political reality clear.
Despite his overall unpopularity, President Trump is winning.
And the Democrats right now are reeling.
The Supreme Court.
Mr. Trump is about to shape the court for a generation by choosing a possible tiebreaking conservative justice.
And he's already filled the lower courts with like-minded conservatives.
How about the Republican Party?
The president's approval rating among Republicans is around 90%.
Elected Republicans fear criticizing him, and the party has become a cult of personality, his.
How about fake news?
Mr. Trump has turned that phrase, which initially referred to the phony Russian-generated stories designed to support his campaign in 2016, into an applause line now to discredit responsible reporting showcasing his misdeeds.
How about credibility?
If reporters faithfully fact-check the president's serial misstatements, they risk being considered biased.
If they don't, the misstatements gain traction.
Either way, Mr. Trump wins.
The Mueller investigation.
The president has succeeded in convincing millions that the investigation is biased, despite trafficking only in innuendo and not providing evidence.
So much of that was untrue.
You know, the fake news thing was not started to talk about Russian stuff.
It was started by left-wing activists about the Pizzagate story, which may have been created by left-wing activists so they could start the fake news story.
It was started.
Cheryl Atkinson has come very close to proving, but she certainly has made it look suspicious, that it was started in order to get people, left-wingers like Snopes and Politicek and the Southern Poverty Law Center to get their claws into social media, which they have done.
It was a very successful trick used by the left.
It wasn't, and Trump just was clever enough to take it over.
And what is he talking about when he talks about press credibility?
You know, they just fired final, or at least they parted ways, I should say.
Brian Ross Abortion Claims00:06:41
ABC News has parted ways with Brian Ross.
And Brian Ross has made more mistakes.
He recently, I think it was in December, he claimed that Michael Flynn was going to testify that President Trump as a candidate ordered him to make contact with the Russians, which turned out to be untrue.
It was President Trump as president-elect asked him to make contact with the Russians, which was, of course, what presidents do.
You make contact with other countries.
And so Brian Ross was doing that.
In 2001, Ross claimed that the anthrax used in deadly attacks after 9-11 was coated with bentonite, a chemical compound found only in biological weapons made by Saddam Hussein.
In 2006, Ross claimed Pakistani officials had arrested Matur Reeman, an al-Qaeda explosives expert who kept an official list of terrorist recruits.
That was untrue.
In 2006, Ross relayed that then House Speaker Dennis Haster was under FBI investigation.
I mean, this guy has been getting it wrong forever, and so have a lot of Chuck Todd's colleagues, and they never pay the price.
The fact that he's, you know, I mean, who is that guy, Brian Anderson, who's now on MSNBC?
That guy was just making stuff up.
How has he still got a job?
How has he still got a job?
It's one thing to make mistakes.
It's one thing to, you know, it's another thing to lie.
I mean, the guy lies, and there he is still working away because they never pay the price.
And Chuck Todd is saying that somehow they are credible and Donald Trump is being unfair to them.
And of course, the judges, this thing with the judges, they're going nuts.
And the way they're reporting it is so absurd.
Everything is Roe v. Wade.
Are we going to lose our precious right to kill our children?
And remember, Roe v. Wade does not give you the right to an abortion.
What it does is it takes away the right of your state to make laws about it.
And if they think abortion is such a winner politically, why are they afraid of losing the states?
Why are they afraid of giving people the right to vote for the kinds of laws they want?
I mean, listen, CNN's legal guy, Jeffrey Toobin, listen to the hysteria with which he talks about the Trump Supreme Court pick.
I think sometimes we talk about Supreme Court too much in abstractions about dignity and who's qualified and who's not qualified.
Let's talk facts.
Let's talk about what America is going to be like that's different.
You are going to see 20 states pass laws banning abortion outright, just banning abortion, because they know that there are now going to be five votes on the Supreme Court to overturn Roe v. Wade.
And abortion will be illegal in a significant part of the United States in 18 months.
There is just no doubt about that.
And that's why these seats matter so much.
Because one of my favorite lines about the Supreme Court was by Justice Robert Jackson, who served on the court in the 1940s and 50s.
And he said, we are not final because we are infallible.
We are infallible because we are final.
Somebody has the last word, and here it's the Supreme Court, and Roe v. Wade is doomed.
It is gone because Donald Trump won the election.
You're a mean mad white man.
He is a mean man.
So there he is a legal expert.
I am not a legal expert.
I'm not a lawyer.
I am a barefoot teller of tales.
I am just a guy who makes up stories.
I am here to tell you, I bet Roe v. Wade survives a court with a new pick from Trump.
Let's say that Trump actually does a good job and picks a guy like Gorsuch or the lady I was talking about earlier who I think would be an excellent pick, makes a great pick.
That is going to mean that John Roberts becomes the swing vote instead of Anthony Kennedy.
I'm not so sure.
I mean, I can't predict the future, obviously, neither can he, but I'm not so sure John Roberts is going to take down Roe v. Wade.
John Roberts is a big guy for precedent.
There's such a thing as, what do they call it, stere-deceases or something, which basically means the precedent is so much a part of American society that withdrawing the precedent would actually be more harmful even than doing the good.
But listen to the way, listen to the way he talked about this.
All he wants are the results.
He doesn't care about the law.
That's CNN's legal expert.
He's not caring about the law.
He just wants the results.
I just want to go back in time a little bit and take a look at Antonin Scalia talking to Piers Morgan.
And Piers Morgan cannot get this through his head that the law matters.
What matters about the Supreme Court is the law.
And Antonin Scalia describes it to him.
He's talking about Roe v. Wade.
The founding fathers were never going to have any reason at that time to consider a woman's right to keep a baby or to have an abortion.
It wouldn't have even entered their minds, would it?
I don't know why.
Why wouldn't it?
Because at the time it was just...
They didn't have wives and daughters that they cared about?
They didn't.
They did, but it was not an issue that they would ever consider framing in a constitution.
I don't know.
But when women began to take charge in the last century of their lives and their rights and so on and began to fight for these, everybody believed that was the right thing to do, didn't they?
I mean, why would you be instinctively against that?
My view is, regardless of whether you think prohibiting abortion is good or whether you think prohibiting abortion is bad, regardless of how you come out on that, my only point is the Constitution does not say anything about it.
It leaves it up to democratic choice.
Some states prohibited it, some states didn't.
What Roe versus Wade said was that no state can prohibit it.
That is simply not in the Constitution.
It was one of those many things, most things in the world, left to democratic choice.
See, this is, we were talking about watching the soccer game and missing the gorilla.
The gorilla is the Constitution.
What the press wants is they want you to be looking at the issues all the time, which results we get here, which results we get there.
But the gorilla is the Constitution.
Keep your eye on the Constitution.
What Scalia was saying there, that is the high-minded argument, not the argument that, oh, you know, the founders didn't have wives and sisters, so they didn't know anything about abortion.
The Constitution is changeable.
We can change it by democratic process.
It is not for five unelected judges to make decrees from the bench.
That is not what they're supposed to do.
The left don't mind it when it goes their way, but if it started to go the other way, they'd get very, very upset.
Keep your eye on the gorilla.
The gorilla is the Constitution.
Don't let them distract you.
And so far, I think we're doing that.
I think we are winning.
I think we go into July 4th at a high.
Just remember, just remember, these are not difficult times.
These are good times during which the left is angry.
This is really different, right?
These are not troubled times.
These are great times during which the left is angry.
Something About These Movies00:15:18
All right, let's talk about some Hollywood.
We'll stay on.
But while you're listening to this excellent interview with Christian Toto, you should be subscribing so you can watch everything live streamed right off thedailywire.com.
It's a lousy 10 bucks a month for 10 bucks.
You get me, you get Ben.
All right, you get Knowles, so we'll make it nine bucks.
But you get me, Ben Knowles, you get Matt Walsh and his globes, his ridiculous globes, his stupid globes that he's so proud of.
And you get, you also can be in the mailbag and answer all your questions and solve all your problems for a lousy hundred bucks.
You get the whole year and you're going to need this, folks.
It's the leftist tears tumbler.
It is filling up like crazy by magic.
Christian Toto is an award-winning journalist, film critic, and podcaster.
I really like the guy because he really knows movies.
Too many people on the right pronounce on movies, but don't really understand them.
Christian does.
I don't always agree with him, but that's all right.
I just, you know, take him outside and we slap him around.
But like, you know, no, but he's, he really knows what he's talking about.
He's the founder of Hollywoodintoto.com and the host of the weekly Hollywood in Toto podcast, which offers a right-of-center perspective on entertainment news.
You can find him on Twitter at Hollywood in Toto.
T-O-T-O.
Here is Christian Toto.
Hey, Christian, it's good to see you again.
Oh, thanks for having me.
That's always a pleasure.
You know, it just seems to me that Hollywood is getting crazier and crazier.
Let's put the movies aside for a minute.
Just off screen, these guys are losing their stuff in a big way.
I mean, let's start with Robert De Niro just spewing.
Do we have to?
Well, just as a jumping off point, what is going on?
I mean, it's not just De Niro, is it?
It's kind of Hollywood-wide almost.
You know, I cling to Chris Pratt because he's the one Hollywood star who is positive and upbeat and kind and sweet in all of his social media work.
And I'm thinking he could be kicking nuns off camera.
I don't know.
But when it comes to when he's reaching out to the fans, he's just upbeat and positive.
And there are so few people like that, it makes him stand out.
You know, De Niro has been on this, I'm going to punch Trump in the nose tour for a while.
And it's just getting worse.
And, you know, if you're De Niro, no one ever pushes back at him.
No one ever says, Hey, Mr. De Niro, maybe you're being a little bit impolite.
Maybe the presidency should have some respect.
So he gets this constant wave of more press, more adulation.
And I'm sure his friends are loving every minute of it.
So he can go in the Tony Awards telecast and drop an obscenity and then draw a standing ovation.
I mean, it's this, it's not just happening in a vacuum.
It's the support he's getting from the media and his fellow stars.
Yeah.
And he's not, I mean, I saw Seth Rogan the other day was on TV basically saying that he had dissed Paul Ryan in front of his children.
Is that the idea?
Here's the thing.
If you don't want to take your picture with Paul Ryan because you differ politically, it's petty, but I get it.
I could see it maybe.
I wouldn't be rushing out to get Maxine Waters and I have a selfie.
But when his teen kids are there, and you're going to A, refuse the photo and then dress down their daddy in front of them.
Now, these are teenagers.
They're not like two and three-year-olds, but it's still their father.
They didn't choose his political choices.
That is just gross to me.
And I've got kids and, you know, my kids are younger than that.
But if they were of a certain age and I was, you know, insulted directly in front of them, I would feel terrible.
They would feel terrible.
And this cool, hey, I just met Seth Rogan, took a picture with him moment, turned into this, oh, he's a jerk and he was mean to my dad.
Yeah.
Yeah.
I mean, does this, you got to feel like this has to hurt business somehow.
I mean, or am I wrong?
Am I just, is that too hopeful?
Is this hurting business?
I mean, I guess De Niro is kind of past his prime, but he could still be playing the commissioner, as they say in Hollywood.
You know, at some point, you stop playing the hero, you start playing the commissioner of police.
But like, but does this hurt him at all?
I think it's hurting the brand, the general brand.
I think what you have now in Hollywood is there are certain brands that are impenetrable.
The Marvel movies, for example, certain horror movies, certain rebooted properties.
They're kind of Teflon at this point.
But if a De Niro puts out a movie where he's the main attraction, I guarantee it's going to make less money today than it would have maybe two or three or four years ago.
So I do think it will have an effect.
It can be subtle.
It can be more pronounced.
Peter Fonda has a new movie out.
They did very poorly over the weekend.
Was it based on what he said?
Possibly.
It was a little film with not a lot of attention.
So it's hard to directly, but this is, you know, these stars don't realize that there's another star who's younger and better looking right behind them.
And they could dazzle us just like they can.
And if they're insulting us, we will respond.
And I think the more and more conservatives are saying, hey, we can just not do this and get angry.
We cannot go see their movies.
And it does have an impact.
There does seem to be a point where these guys forget that we pay for their lifestyle, that they actually, this doesn't just rain down on them.
It's our money they're spending.
You know, you talk about some franchises being bulletproof.
But one of the things we've seen over the last several months is we've seen the NFL, possibly the biggest, most bulletproof franchise in history, taking a bullet.
I mean, they really did blow it and they're losing business because of it.
We've seen Starbucks, which you would have thought was going to be, you know, what was the onion headline?
Starbucks builds a Starbucks in another Starbucks.
You know, that's suddenly they're suffering too.
And we saw Solo, maybe the first Star Wars movie to lose money.
Is that right?
Yeah, and it's amazing.
The solo thing is interesting because I think the film itself wasn't bad at all.
It wasn't political at all.
But I think the fallout from The Last Jedi, which is both a mediocre movie and a very kind of socially just movie, I think that really kind of it broke the bond that people had with the franchise.
It did for me.
I'd line up for anything Star Wars, but after I saw The Last Jedi and I thought about it, I mean, the storytelling was inept and the virtue signaling stopped the movie cold.
And all of a sudden, Star Wars didn't seem so magical to me anymore.
So I agree.
I think that we as a culture, we can turn on a dime these days.
And I don't think in the past, we weren't as flexible as that.
But I think that now we've got a million things to take up our time.
If we're not watching Sunday NFL football, we're on YouTube.
We're at, you know, watching Netflix.
There's lots of ways we can entertain ourselves and we can kind of turn on a dime.
And I think that should scare people.
I think that, you know, people are getting tired of being insulted, I think.
And it was interesting.
I noticed I didn't go to see Ocean's Eight.
I mean, I kind of, I liked the first film and then I was kind of done.
But Ocean's Eight, all girl, you know, ocean picture, the ocean pictures of the big con and so on.
And when it got kind of mediocre reviews, I mean, it didn't get bad reviews.
It basically said there's nothing original.
One of the, was it one of the women in the movie who started to say this is the problem of white men reviewing our movie?
Is that?
Yeah, it was Minnie Kaling, who's one of the co-stars there.
And then she made a weird kind of detour into, you know, Meryl Streep and male critics hurting her career or not enjoying her films.
I mean, the critics couldn't love Meryl Streep or her movies anymore.
I mean, what a horrible example.
But the bottom line is it's a con man movie or a con women movie.
You got to have great costumes.
You got to have a couple of twists and turns.
You got to have some cracker jack dialogue.
That doesn't mean man-women, there's no divide there.
If it's good, we enjoy it.
If it isn't, we don't.
It was a mediocre movie, not a bad movie.
I called it out for that very reason.
And it wasn't even political.
It wasn't even that ghostbuster sort of social justice.
It just was okay.
And it's okay to have an okay movie, but lashing at a critics for your okay movie, well, it's not okay.
It does sort of, it does sort of bring up the question.
There has been this thing in Hollywood going on where women are saying, well, we're not getting paid as much as men.
And my question always is, are you as valuable a property as a man is?
I mean, if a man is in a movie, he's going to bring in a certain amount.
If a woman's in a movie, is she going to bring in the same amount?
I mean, that is, I assume, the calculation there.
And how easy are you to replace?
I mean, that's how capitalism works.
If you're easy to replace, you make less money than if you're not.
Did something like the Oceans Eight film, does that hurt that argument at all?
Does it hurt the equal pay argument at all?
Well, you know, I think that the gender situation in Hollywood is complicated.
And often women do get the short end of the stick because they don't have as many positions of power behind the scenes.
You look at the number of female to male directors, it's a big disparity.
So I think there are legitimate beefs to be had there.
But when you have these kind of arguments, all of a sudden, oh my goodness, this is you're playing about white male critics.
Well, it kind of deflates your other arguments.
So your valid arguments don't get enough attention and respect because you're making silly arguments over here.
Yeah.
So I think that's part of the problem they face.
You know, I did notice that David Lynch came out and he said, Lynch is not any political genius, but he came out and said that he said he voted for Bernie, but he thought that Donald Trump could be one of the greatest presidents ever.
Is that is it pushing it to think that's a sign that maybe a little bit of air is breaking through?
Or is that just David Lynch being crazy?
That's just David Lynch being David Lynch.
I mean, I almost think he said it to be provocative.
And I joked on Twitter, I said his apology slash retraction will be coming any moment now.
But yeah, I listen for every one comment.
There's other comments that dwarf that.
And there's a comedian, comedian slash actor, Kamal Nanjiani from Silicon Valley.
He was also in the very good movie, The Big Sick.
I mean, he's just constantly playing the Nazi card on Twitter again and again and again.
And he's the kind of guy who will make a small movie and then go on the publicity circuit and say, hey, come see my movie.
And by the way, half the people in the country are racist and Nazis.
Like, what kind of pitch is that?
It's the worst marketing in the world.
It's funny because Silicon Valley is one of the most conservative shows ever.
I mean, it's just an absolute celebration of capitalism.
All right, so enough politics.
Let's talk about movies.
First of all, is anything good out there that I should see?
Because I haven't seen anything in a while.
You know, there's a movie that's really divisive right now.
It's called Hereditary.
It's a horror film.
And I've got some issues with the ending, and I really don't think I've been able to kind of mentally tease it through, but it felt so fresh and raw and powerful that I loved it.
And, you know, with horror movies, it's the creaking doors and the ghosts and the goblins.
Like we know every tick of the genre, but this felt like it was all new with a first-time director.
So I think for that reason alone, you should see it.
And then I thought The Incredibles 2 was very solid.
I didn't think it was as good as the first film.
What film could be?
It had a little bit of, you know, female empowerment sort of underlined and italicized.
But other than that, it's very enjoyable.
That's why the Pixar brand is so rock solid that parents know they're going to have a good time when they take the kids there.
So and even the mediocre Pixar movies are light years better than most films.
You know, it's funny though, you mentioned the, is it hereditary or heredity?
I think it's hereditary.
You know, it's kind of been a golden age for these small original horror films, starting with, I guess, It Follows and The Witch and the Baba, Duk, or whatever it was.
You know, it really has been a moment for these films to kind of rise up while they're getting swallowed by all the Marvel movies.
It's really been kind of interesting for some reason that this new approach to horror is catching on.
Yeah, you know, horror can be very cyclical in popularity.
It just ebbs and flows.
And it's hard to discern why.
But I think the fact that the technology is so much cheaper for filmmakers and I think studios just say, hey, I can roll the dice with an artist on a horror movie.
If it bites me, I'm going to lose a couple million as opposed to 30, 40, 50, 60 million.
So maybe they're letting the horror people just, you know, let their voices out.
I think that often makes the best art.
But you're right, that we've been lucky.
And there's been a lot of good, low-profile horror movies.
And we also haven't seen that glut of really bad 80s slasher movies.
And I know people are nostalgic about them.
And I am too, a little bit, but they weren't that good.
I couldn't stand them.
I really didn't.
I used to call them one-by-one movies.
I just couldn't, I couldn't stand them.
You know, we have this long-standing argument here at the Daily Wire over comic book movies.
My position, you know, talking about Marvel, DC, whatever.
And my position has just been that I don't mind one of them or two of them a year, but they just have so glutted the market that I can't, and they all seem the same to me.
Do you see any change in that?
Is that basically what's going to be going on going forward?
You know, if you can release a Black Panther to Bafo box office and then the Avengers comes out two months later and the box office gets even bigger, there's no end in sight.
Having said that, I thought Black Panther was very good.
I thought Avengers was terrific.
I'm seeing Ant-Man and the Wasp this week.
I can't wait to see it.
So I'm not burned out yet.
There's something about these movies.
I think they're very high quality.
I think the actors are top-notch.
I think they mostly avoid political arguments.
I think Disney's very shrewd about that in the brand management.
And maybe it's the, you know, we don't have a lot of white hat versus black hat anymore in our storytelling.
It's the anti-hero.
It's the Walter Whites.
It's the villains that are a little bit heroic and that's enough for us.
But the good guys in the superhero movies are good guys and they fight the bad guys.
And it's a very morally strong presentation.
And maybe that's part of the success.
There's a lot of reasons behind it.
And also every one of us grew up reading these comic books.
I did.
And I think seeing them on the big screen in such a spectacular fashion, it's the escapism that we need.
Fair enough.
Wow, the summer movies are coming.
What are you looking forward to?
You know, I feel like the big guns have fired already.
I've actually missed Jurassic World.
I need to catch up that I was on vacation.
I'm hard-pressed to find something that I'm super excited about.
You know, the first Ant-Man I thought was engaging and fun, and Paul Rudd was perfectly cast.
So that one will be enjoyable.
Other than that, you know, I think that they often front load the season where a lot of the highly anticipated popcorn movies come out already.
So we've seen a lot of them hit the theaters.
So I don't know.
And nothing is really kind of on my radar that I'm super enthused about.
What about the picture with The Rock that's coming out on my birthday, the one about the skyscraper?
The diehard rebrand.
Is that what it is?
You know, it's funny.
I love Dwayne Johnson, and I think he's as charming as can be.
But when Arnold Schwarzenegger was at the top of his game, he paired himself off with the best directors, the James Camerons, the Ivan Reitmans, and that kept him really high and kept his star power really strong.
Dwayne Johnson, his radar isn't as good in that way.
So, you know, the movie looks like a cheesy knockoff like Rampage Room of a couple of weeks ago.
So, you know, it may be escapism, it may be fun, but I really want him to use his clout to pick better movies, work with better directors, better screenwriters, because it's very, you know, he's the biggest star right now, but it can go away really quickly.
Just ask Jim Carrey.
Yeah, and he, and he's also a better actor than Schwarzenegger ever was.
I mean, that show he does on HBO.
He's quite good.
Yeah.
Yeah.
He's shockingly good, lighthearted, you know, and he does comedy very well, not just the action stuff, but there's something about him when he throws a punch.
Amanda On Benevolent Sexism00:03:53
You got to get out of the way.
It's amazing.
All right, Kristen Toto, it's good to talk to you.
Where can we find you to find your stuff?
Well, I'm at hollywoodintoto.com.
I've got a weekly podcast you can find on iTunes at all the major outlets and on Twitter at HollywoodIntoto.
Great.
Well, come on back and we'll talk movies again.
Thanks so much.
Thanks a lot.
All right.
our pre-July 4th sexual follies.
All right.
Here's a story from Amanda Presto, one of my favorite writers on the Daily Wire, Amanda Presta Giacomo.
See, I'm reading it off the page because I can never get it right.
I always call her Amanda Presto.
But study reveals what women are.
We have a lot of good writers, but Amanda is one of the best for sure.
Study reveals what women are hardwired to find attractive.
Feminists are going to hate it.
Turns out women are hardwired to be much more attracted to male protectors who espouse so-called benevolent sexism than men who treat them as equals.
Get this, guys.
Listen to this.
All right.
Best part, this is true even for hardcore feminists, scientists found.
According to a new study from University of Kent and Iowa State University's scientists, which was published on Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, women overwhelmingly preferred chivalrous men who viewed women as needing protecting.
Researchers classify this apparently patronizing behavior as benevolent sexism, BS.
It is BS calling it sexism, but that's what they call it.
Or well-meaning sexism.
The researchers suggest that women are hardwired to overlook the harmful consequences of BS.
This is so stupid because BS mates are perceived as willing to invest, protect, provide, and commit, reads the study's abstract.
As noted by the Daily Mail, the research was collected from five study groups full of women, with the largest group comprising 233 women and the smallest 104.
The females were asked to view scenarios of interactions from men, which included men who were kind, but in what is considered a sexist way, and men who treated the women as equals and didn't offer any special treatment.
Guess what?
They liked the women who protected them better.
Women find, this is them speaking, not me, because I find the whole idea that this is sexist to protect women as opposed to normal and right and good and true.
I find it ridiculous, but just quoting them, women find benevolent sexist men attractive, not because they are ignorant of the harmful effects that we made up, but despite being aware of them.
This suggests that the desirable aspects of benevolent attitudes and behaviors are sufficient to overcome the perceived negative effects.
And it gets even worse for feminists, says Amanda, who promote sameness instead of equality for the sexists.
They like protective men as well.
You know, the only thing I want to say about this is that it takes so much work, so much research and work to establish what we already know to be true because the left is constantly lying.
And so if you're a guy, I have spent my entire life in a feminist environment, which I have completely ignored.
I've completely ignored their opinions.
I've completely ignored what they want.
If they've yelled at me, I've let them yell at me.
I just go on doing what I have opened doors for women when women have actually stopped and scolded me for it.
And I've told them it was my choice to open the door.
They didn't have to walk through it if they didn't want to.
I have lived my life ignoring feminists completely.
I suggest you do exactly the same.
Do not listen to the women on television because they're not the women you're going to go out with.
They're not the women who are going to make your home.
They are not the women who are going to mother your children.
Find those women who are normal women and you will be very happy.
Just ignore them because the only power they have is you paying attention to them.
All right.
Have a wonderful, wonderful 4th of July.
Remember what I said.
These are not trouble times.
These are great times during which the left is angry.
So get your leftist tears tumbler ready.
Start the barbecue and have a wonderful time.
And we will see you here on Thursday.
Ignore The Women On TV00:00:35
I'm Andrew Clavin.
This is The Andrew Klavan Show.
Executive producer, Jeremy Boring.
Senior producer, Jonathan Hay.
Our supervising producer is Mathis Glover.
And our technical producer is Austin Stevens.
Edited by Emily Jai.
Audio is mixed by Mike Cormina.
Hair and makeup is by Jessua Alvera.
The Andrew Clavin Show is a Daily Wire forward publishing production.