One of my New Years Resolutions: Watch the Entire Steven Seagal Filmography

One of my New Years resolutions is to watch every entry in the Steven Seagal filmography, which is quite extensive, that I can get my hands on. I will do this in appreciation of Seagal being one of the few vocal conservatives who is willing to swim against the stream on Putin and Russia and realizes that they are not the bad guys in the Ukraine situation. The Ukraine situation is very complicated because of a lot of historical baggage and animosity, and requires a lot of nuance, but what it most certainly isn’t is the simple morality tale of all good freedom loving Ukrainians vs all bad Russians and their evil authoritarian leader, Putin, which is how the Western press and interventionist “conservatives” have characterized it.

Advertisements

25 thoughts on “One of my New Years Resolutions: Watch the Entire Steven Seagal Filmography

  1. Pingback: Daniel Cormier to Train with Steven Seagal for Jon Jones Fight | Conservative Heritage Times

  2. weavercht

    I wish more could break out of their “good vs. evil” mindset. Most conflicts are complicated, and nearly any side is a mix of good and evil.

    Purity only exists in Platonic ideals.

    I’m sure even a demon like George Soros has some good in him.

    Like

    Reply
  3. Kirt Higdon

    I’m not sure that being pro-Putin equates to being conservative, little as that term means these days. I’ve see most of Seagal’s films and like most of them. I like him somewhat less, both as a person and an actor. He comes across as excessively self-righteous in his films and egocentric in his personal life, the latter a common enough failing among artists. He has previously had a reputation for being a left-wing outlier among action stars, in real or alleged contrast to such as Willis, Stallone, Schwartzenegger, and Norris. No matter. I’ve always thought that an actor’s political views were irrelevant to whether or not I like his work. Judging someone entirely by their political views (or even primarily unless they are in fact a politician) is the very essence of the totalitarian leftist PC mentality.

    Like

    Reply
  4. weavercht

    “He comes across as excessively self-righteous in his films”

    Yes. And he seems to act like he’s anti-Western at times, pro-Asia/counterculture. His speech is a sort of “cool” drawl.

    “Willis, Stallone, Schwartzenegger, and Norris”

    Stallone? I disagree there. I’m no film expert by far though.

    ” Judging someone entirely by their political views (or even primarily unless they are in fact a politician) is the very essence of the totalitarian leftist PC mentality.”

    I don’t think that’s what Red’s doing here. Anyway, I’ve seen some Seagal movies I’ve liked, but I wouldn’t say he’s the best actor.

    There is value is praising a movie if it promotes your own Culture War, though dishonesty isn’t needed. What I mean is if the acting is poor, it should be said to be poor.

    If the “Left” does something though, it could be advantageous to copy the successful. Knee-jerk anti-Left isn’t the ideal. The ideal is decide independently one’s goal and what works to achieve said goal, regardless of what the “Left” does.

    Like

    Reply
  5. Kirt Higdon

    Actually that is what Red is doing. He’s not pushing Seagal’s movies because they aid an anti-leftist side in the culture wars. In fact some of Seagal’s movies are quite leftist. Red’s saying that he wants to see all of Seagal’s movies because Seagal has politically correct (to Red) views on Putin. Then Red goes on in another post to say he will root for Cormier in the UFC championship fight today because Cormier took Seagal on as one of his trainers. So Cormier gets to be politically correct by proxy because of Seagal’s opinion of Putin. This is every bit as silly as any leftist PC.

    Like

    Reply
  6. weavercht

    Promoting Seagal’s work isn’t a bad thing. Red’s not declaring Seagal is the greatest actor. That is an important difference. Red is not being dishonest.

    When I wrote:

    “Willis, Stallone, Schwartzenegger, and Norris”

    Stallone? I disagree there. I’m no film expert by far though.

    I’d misread your post somehow. I guess I was hurried.

    I thought you said they were pompous and “left-wing” as defined here.

    Stallone would of course be someone this site might like. Willis and Schwartzenegger are known jerks. Norris is more complicated.

    Like

    Reply
  7. weavercht

    Anyway, it’s most important I think the cultural impact a movie has itself, as a separate entity itself.

    Dishonesty is not necessary, but I personally am only interested in movies that have a positive or at least neutral impact on an audience. Norris films tend to have a negative impact from my vantage, though Norris’s target audience is conservative. Now Norris is writing at WND, so maybe he’s changed as his audience has changed? I don’t read him, so I wouldn’t know.

    You want participants to take part in a virtuous culture. “Virtue is contagious, as is vice” (paraphrasing). The quality of the acting is secondary.

    Seagal’s work has some virtue some vice, but promoting his work could influence conservative Americans into backing Seagal’s current foreign policy views, which are outside his movies. That’s what Red is attempting to do, and I don’t see that as immoral.

    Like

    Reply
  8. hawthornecht

    Stallone and Norris were, knowingly or not, active in various PATCON scams (MIAs, and Stallone turning the script to Rambo III over to neocons and assorted other criminals.) Schwartzenegger is a very loyal man, who picked important scripts in their time–Willis has a much different career arch (television) that had him stumble into the Die Hard movie as an underdog.

    Segal is much like Van Damme in that they both forgot it was fake, and they tended to talk out of school and that got them into trouble with actual tough guys.

    Like

    Reply
  9. redphillips Post author

    Kirt, I understand your point, but I embrace celebrities that even come close to us on issues because they are so rare in the sea of leftism that is Hollywood and American pop culture.

    Also, you are too serious. You don’t seem to realize that sometimes I write stuff that is deliberately over the top for effect.

    Like

    Reply
  10. hawthornecht

    Rocky 4 pits the US of A champion as the proletarian against the Technological Dominance of Russia. Traditionalism (Reagan) against the Technocrats (Soviet Scientific Socialism) a reverse meme of the Putin-Dugin position against the Technocratic (and godless) West.

    Keeping in mind, the US had legal abortion, legal divorce, and on and on, while the Soviet had remained pro-natal since the latter days of Stalin, it is quite a bit of stretch, but Stallone was there to sell it and I suspect he had “help” with such a script.

    Like

    Reply
  11. weavercht

    It’s important to teach truth, but we just live in such a joke of a society. What would remain if we removed every movie that was an absurd lie/absurd propaganda?

    Maybe you should write a movie list of what you find virtuous, as well as truthful if that’s important to you. Ah, I just say that as a suggestion for a future activity, not as any sort of challenge…

    Like

    Reply
  12. hawthornecht

    Weaver;

    When Apollo (!) Creed (!) dies at the hands of the Aryan Superman, we get a retelling to ridiculous proportions of the decent man, Max Schmeling against the low life, Joe Louis–men who remained “friends” of sorts through out the circus around them.

    Then we get the Mediterranean, who had grown soft off on money, going luddite and defeating technology.

    It’s truly a sign of how absurd the society is that, hey, it was good enough for a movie.

    I’ll perhaps play with a list of American movies that are both propaganda and art–Americans (and Germans) cannot really escape such a reality.

    Like

    Reply
      1. hawthornecht

        Just to remind, the Greek Gods (Tradition) defeated the Titans (technology) in one of those epic battles…still I prefer the story of the Hobbit, and so forth. The question one asks then is where does any action film fit in? Where does Rockey 4 fit in? Rocky 5, he fights an HIV infected person, right?

        Like

      2. hawthornecht

        Red Dawn
        Conan The Barbarian
        The Terminator
        Braveheart
        Rushmore/The Royal Tanebaums
        Young Guns
        Any Sam Peckinpah
        The Outlaw Josey Wales
        Death Wish I
        Apocalypse Now-Extended version with the French colonial family scene
        They Live
        Shenandoah

        Tis a good start as it regards general consumption films.

        Liked by 1 person

      3. weavercht

        hawthorne,

        Thanks! I’ve got a partial list somewhere. Zulu is a classic that comes to mind. Ygg has a huge movie list, with commentary, at his site, you prob know of that though.

        Like

  13. redphillips Post author

    I loved Rocky III and think it was the best in the series. I was a youngish teen at the time and that is when iconic movies like that make the most impression on you, and I didn’t hurt that the theme song was all over the radio. I liked Rocky IV at the time, and didn’t really think deeply about it, but I do remember at the time thinking that the Soviet crowd shifting to cheering for Rocky was a bit corny.

    Like

    Reply
  14. Kirt Higdon

    Question for Red – If being pro-Putin means that someone in Hollywood is on our side, are we extending the welcome mat to Oliver Stone, who is making a movie exposing the US sponsored coup in Ukraine? This will be more beneficial to Putin than the endorsement of Steven Seagal. And don’t get me wrong, I’m glad Stone is doing this. What’s more, he has some very good movies to his credit. He was the script writer for the original Conan the Barbarian, one of my favorites. But he is still pretty much a hard-core leftist; I’m sure this is how he sees himself. So do we kid ourselves that he is some kind of paleo traditionalist? Do we force baptize him as such against his will? Or do we admit that on some issues we are in agreement with the hard left, while on others we remain opposed?

    Like

    Reply
    1. Savrola

      Oliver Stone’s draft of Conan was rejected. Milius scripted it.

      Stone seems to a bit of an anti-Globalist..he was friends with Chavez and Chavez had a lot of Nationalistic leanings.

      I would trust Stone over a poseur like Steven Seagal any day.

      Like

      Reply
  15. Kirt Higdon

    Milius rewrote Stone’s script, but much of it was retained and Stone continued to receive writing credit along with Milius. Milius allegedly described Stone’s original as “a total drug-fueled fever dream” and much of the final product has exactly that feel to it. I’d mention specifically the scene where Conan #%*^s the witch, who turns into first a monster, then a fireball, and the scene of the raid on Thulsa Doom’s cannibal orgy chamber, possibly my all time favorite scene of any movie.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s