Liam Neeson’s Dixie Chick Moment
A few days ago, my wife saw an ad for Liam Neeson’s latest flick, Taken 3, another in a series featuring him as Bryan Mills, ex-intelligence operative who’s a one-man killing machine, against a boodle of bad guys. This latest outing is likely another of the formulaic, gratuitously violent shoot-em-ups for which he has become famous in his senior years. So my wife says to me, “You know, I like him; maybe we ought to go see that movie.” Well, Liam, the already slim chance of that happening just became nonexistent upon my reading your expletive-laced anti-gun comments when being asked about the French terror killings during a promotional tour press conference.
At this gulfnews.com webpage, you can see Neeson posing in front of a wall-sized backdrop for his flick. The aging actor is depicted on the poster with a grimly determined visage and a black (gasp!) semi-automatic firmly in hand, ready to blast away. With that as a backdrop, the vintage vigilante hip-shot a full load of liberal hyperbole at the gun-owning American audience that has made his movies so successful:
“There’s too many [expletive] guns out there,” he continued. “Especially in America. I think the population is like, 320 million? There’s over 300 million guns. Privately owned, in America. I think it’s a [expletive] disgrace. Every week now we’re picking up a newspaper and seeing, ‘Yet another few kids have been killed in schools.’”
AWR Hawkins, writing at Breitbart.com, notes the hopeless Hollywood hypocrisy:
Lost in the tirade was the fact that the discussion began with a focus on the attacks on Charlie Hebdo – attacks which took place in France, a country rich in gun control, yet one in which gun laws were impotent to spoil the plans of dedicated and well-trained attackers.
Asked if he saw duplicity in fervently pushing gun control while making a living with a gun in his hand, Neeson said:
“A character like Bryan Mills going out with guns and taking revenge: it’s fantasy. It’s in the movies, you know? I think it can give people a great release from stresses in life and all the rest of it, you know what I mean? It doesn’t mean [the viewers] are all going to go out and go, “Yeah, let’s get a gun!”
No, Liam, it doesn’t mean that, but it probably does mean that a significant number of your usual fans are not going to be going to your latest movie. I rather suspect that until now, few of them were aware of your typical limousine-liberal views. And though you may hold your fans in complete contempt, as so many entertainers do, those fans, clinging to their guns, may just have sufficient cranial capacity to realize that your politically correct “Fine for me but not for thee”contempt should not be compensated. Oh, and my wife doesn’t like you anymore, Liam.
Can you say Dixie Chick, Bubba?
Crossposted at American Thinker
Category: None
But the Dixie Chicks are so relevant in Music today….. Good Luck, Boyo. Just lost another customer.
Wasn’t planning on seeing it anyway. Reviews so far saying it stinks on ice.
Liam Neeson… Pssht. All I need to remember is the comments are made by a guy who pretends to be someone he’s not, and uses fake guns while doing it.
Fuck that guy.
I always thought he was a turd.
The only movie he made worth a shit was Krull.
The fact that the is Taken 3 shows that Bryan Mills is quite possibly the worst father and husband ever
Note to CCW community. If you see Liam Neeson getting jacked up by some young democrats trying to turn their lives around, STAND DOWN. Call 911 and wait. And wait.
Not likely that’ll happen. Pretty sure his bodyguards are packing.
Unfortunately, the jackwagon’s bodyguards are armed.
Let’s do some quick mat for Liam; shall we? 300 million guns? Ok, let’s be generous and say that there is 40,000 gun deaths by criminals each year (suicide doesn’t really count since the person could choose many methods). So, take the 40,000 number and divide it by your 300 million number and tell me what the percentage is.
I guess we had better ban alcohol, because the number of people that drink is at least 50 million in thos country and they could all be driving drunk and kill someone!!! Maybe ban cars along with the alcohol?
Your DOCTOR is more likely to kill you than your guns are — and you pay him for the priviledge!
The murder rate is actually more like 11,000 per year.
I know, I was being incredibly generous with that figure, for the sake of argument.
Old Trooper, if you’re talking about murders only the number is far less. According to the FBI UCR there were 8,454 murders committed with firearms in 2013.
You’re dismissed, Liam. Take your bodyguards with you.
Isn’t the whole “They-Trained-Him-To-Be-A-Killer-And-Now-He’s-Waging-A-One-Man-War” plot getting a little tiresome? It seems like there are two variations of this theme:
1. The government trained him to be a killer and now the government wants him dead.
2. The government trained him to be a killer but now criminals/terrorists/evil corporations/rogue girl scouts/angry gerbils have threatened his family, and this time IT’S PERSONAL!!!
The best movie along either of those lines was “Man on Fire” The rest…. meh.
I am sick of watching one man kill an entire army with his bare hands, it is such a lameass story line and every actor on the planet is doing it. It’s like Band of Brothers where Dale Dye put them through a 10 day “Basic Training” and to hear them talk it was the real thing and they made it through…
Send them to Ft Wainwright for a couple years and have them yank an Ahkio sled around for a couple of years, then they will have something to crow about…
Well, if Basic was only ten days we would not be where we are as a military.
Die Hard was the start of this genre and it has continued on for two decades and then some…
They really need to get better bad guys, they spray an entire 200 rd magazine and don’t hit a guy standing right in front of them… No wonder they always lose…
The hell with it.
Especially this asswipe…
Yeah, that’s the thing I find only slightly less infuriating than Expendables/crappy Die Hard sequels one man slaughters. Where the producers create a Don Shipley-style course using retired military consultants, put the actors through it (they also did this in Saving Private Ryan and both Red Dawns) and then the actors talk like it’s the real thing.
Give the Senior Chief his due. His Extreme SEAL Experience is a hell of alot closer to the real thing than the puny courses that limp wristed actors are put through.
The difference between this and “Die Hard” is that John McClane (in the first one, anyway) was less “unstoppable killing-machine badass” and more “extremely lucky regular(ish) guy who knows how to shoot and is smart enough to not fight fair against guys who have him outnumbered and outgunned.” And that Bruce Willis openly favors the individual right to bear arms.
I enjoyed the first “Taken” and will probably still watch it, since I already own the DVD and Ras-al Qui-Gon won’t make another dime off of it. Same deal with “Rob Roy” and “The A-Team” (roll your eyes if you want, but the “A-Team” movie was pretty damn funny, mostly thanks to the South African dude who played Murdock). But I won’t see the new “Taken” sequel, nor will I get the second one on DVD.
Ol’ Liam and his armed bodyguards can kiss my Black Irish gun-owning American ass.
Yes, good point about “Die Hard.” The whole point of “Die Hard” was that he WASN’T a DeltaRangerMarineSEALSniperCIAassasinNinjaCommando, but rather just a streetwise Noo Yawk detective with an attitude.
Unfortunately even Die Hard went away from that theme with the sequels.
“It’s in the movies, you know? I think it can give people a great release from stresses in life and all the rest of it, you know what I mean? It doesn’t mean [the viewers] are all going to go out and go, “Yeah, let’s get a gun!”
Thanks Poetrooper. I endured his first outing of this movie, not being aware of his liberal gun mindset. Now I’ve watched his last movie ever. Make a shit load of money off of the popular, genre of the day type movie and then come off as an ass clown about the very premise of said movie. He needs to go back to biographies like “Rob Roy”. Or better yet, take his bundle of cash and go live in Great Britain again with his private security. It’s easy to be like him when you’re a limousine liberal, private transport, private security, etc, etc. We can do without him here.
““It’s in the movies, you know? I think it can give people a great release from stresses in life and all the rest of it, you know what I mean?”
Translation: “Liam gots to get PAID, Yo!”
Didn’t see the first one or the second, don’t plan to see the third. The plots are repetitive and boring, the story goes nowhere and it’s not a ‘release’ to go see a movie with no purpose other than making a middle-aged so-so old fart actor look forgettable.
Liam Neeson is definitely not Bruce Willis.
Never saw one of his movies, and now never will. Where’s John Wayne when you need him?
I wonder how Bill Hillar will feel about this. The “Taken” franchise was based on his life, after all.
Taken franchise was always stupid and I can’t fathom why it’s so popular.
300+ million guns in America and gun deaths are so low says something indeed. That people complaining about gun violence in America need take remedial basic math.
I usually don’t care what the elite famous believe…until they opne thier mouths and try to be a spokesmen.
I find it hypocritical. These guys believe one thing…try to change the world with thier beliefs, and then star in movies that everyone loves but yet are counter to the actor’s beliefs. For instance ZombieLand. Guy searches for the last twinkie…pretty funny right? Until you find out Woody Harrleson is a die hard vegan and forces folks on his sets to be on his diet until the end of the shoot.
They know where thier money is and what the public likes. Thier beliefs are as bought and paid for as they are.
Jim Carrey did the same with the “Kick-Ass2” movie… made some sort of BS statement after Sandy Hook how he couldn’t support that level of violence.
Hypocrites…
I wonder, which accountant/agent told these morons that offending the half or more of their audience that actually has disposable income to spend in a theater, was a great idea?
Liam, GFY.
I despise Woody Harrelson, but “Zombieland” is the only zombie movie I ever liked. Why? Two of his lines:
“THANK GOD FOR REDNECKS!!!”
“GODDAMMIT, BILL FUCKIN’ MURRAY!!! I’m sorry, I don’t mean to gush. It’s just, I’m such a big fan–even your dramatic roles! I been watch in’ every one of your movies since, uh, at least since I was old enough to masturbate–not that there’s any connection between the two!”
But yeah, he’s still an asswipe.
Seriously, who the fuck is Liam Neeson other than just another shit-for-brained pampered candyassed touchie-feelie metrosexual snotnosed bedwetting Hollywierd Sparkle Pony that puts far more emphasis on how he appears than as to what he really is?
I think the term you’re looking for is ‘actor.’ 😉
Pretty sure that’s what he said, PN. Just took the long way ’round.
🙂
I wonder how old Liam feels about the vaunted “free” Canadian healthcare system. You know, the one that basically killed his wife.
Didn’t Stallone pull this same BS?
Or am I mistaken?
Here, in a nutshell, is the list of gun control organizations and actors. The actors are toward the bottom of the list.
http://www.opposingviews.com/i/celebrities/nra-releases-list-celebrities-organizations-support-gun-control
…and yes, Stallone is in there.
Stallone has had the most “kills” of any actor, right?
“Every week now we’re picking up a newspaper and seeing, ‘Yet another few kids have been killed in schools.’”
Yep. That’s what happens when one reads and re-reads the same newspaper every week. The news never changes. Try buying a new paper, Liam.
I really enjoy the way Hollywood makes these clowns geniuses. They wear clothes others have selected for them, they memorize words others have written for them, and they are told when to walk, run, play dead, laugh cry, and myriad other things in front of a camera. If they screw up, as they often do, they get to do it again and again and again until the director is happy. And, if they are lucky enough to star in a hit movie one day, they are suddenly experts on everything and their opinion matters. I wish these clowns would just STFU. Evey time they open their yaps, I have to strike a slew of movies I might otherwise have seen.
Every week now we’re picking up a newspaper and seeing, ‘Yet another few kids have been killed in schools.’”
Typical incorrect and uneducated response from a hypocrite who made a decent living playing a good guy with a gun opposing bad guys with guns….
Mass murder events affect around 1% of all firearm homicides, that means that it’s less than 90 people per year based on an FBI UCR of around 8800 firearm homicides in 2013.
Interestingly enough 45 people were mauled to death by dogs, so Liam is worried about something that’s only twice as likely to kill him as a dog.
Meanwhile falling will kill 2.5 times as many people as all firearm homicides did and 255 times as many as were victimized in a mass murder firearm event.
It’s interesting to me what people fear, as that fear is often based on nothing other than a “feeling” as opposed to statistical data, you are 10,000 times more likely to die from smoking or being a chubber than you are ever likely to die from being victimized in a mass murder event. But no one seems afraid of being a fat, smoker.
Once again proving factual evidence means nothing to most people, just their tender feelings (no matter how ridiculously incorrect) are what matters.
I completely agree with that, but at the same time, ‘statistical data’ rarely gives the complete story. These issues involve everything from crime trends to local (vs. national) politics to personal responsibility, etc. If we just go by ‘statistical data’, why such a focus on terrorists when, statistically, terrorists are far less of a lethal threat to Americans than car accidents, falling and unintentional poisoning incidents.
The (over)-reaction that happens after every mass shooting is a result of people being angry and wanting quick and easy results to nearly intractable problems that’ll take many years to solve. For example, the city in which I live has a high per capita gun homicide rate. But in reality, it isn’t a ‘city-wide’ problem, it’s a problem for one region in the city – roughly one percent of the city’s population exists in a region that has a homicide rate roughly 20x that of the remainder of the city. The people in that region clamor for change, and that drives the narrative. It’s also pretty understandable, I think, since if national-level homicide rates were 20x higher, then by the numbers, it’d dwarf things like car accidents, fallings, etc. More importantly, society and law enforcement would look pretty different with that many people being killed, I think.
The point is, yes, people are often governed by irrational fear and that’s something we need to have an open dialogue about in this country,.. but statistics alone can also give a false sense of reality when presented without context.
Since it is a crime I certainly do not advocate doing so, but there are several softwares out there which for minimal cost allow you to illegally duplicate movies (e.g. from Netflix, borrowed, etc.) and have a copy for as long as you want. If you’re gonna dislike these Hollywood shitweasels, hit ’em where it hurts. Every movie you dupe without paying for is worth how many tickets sold? As I said, I can’t advocate using DVDFab or any of the others, but if you lean in that direction…..
Now that Mr. Neeson has made his views known regarding being against personal firearm possession, I wouldn’t even watch his movies for free.
Problem is, he already got paid for his latest piece of celluloid shit.
NEXT movie, OTOH, either he takes a big hit, or they go with someone more “bankable” as it goes.
Then again, most of the Hollywood Halfwits assume we’re all idiots. The fact that people still pony up to see DeNiro, Damon, Stallone, et al, shoot-em-up then preach how bad we all are, tells me they’re closer to the truth than the public can be.
Taken (1) was an ok flick, but predictable. 2 was a sleeper, and I had no intentions of watching 3, but even less desire to see it now.
OK, OK… I’ll admit it. My wife and I always liked Liam Neeson. Saw all 3 of the Taken films. Liked the first 2, but this latest one was a bit ridiculous.
Besides growing up poor in Ireland and being a pretty tough guy (boxer) when young, we always thought that by Hollywood standards, he was a pretty low-key nice guy devoid of the usual scandals/affairs/bad behavior.
As a vet and gun owner, I am very disappointed to read of his anti-gun views. These views are naive, and anti-American, quite frankly. I now see him in a slightly different light, and am glad this was brought to my attention.
Here’s my take:
If he had said, “Hey, I don’t like guns, and I don’t personally own them” then I’m cool with that.
But noooooo…anyone who has a gun is a bad guy, and evil, etc.
They’ll never figure it out.
Liked Taken 1, Taken 2 was stupid, then the movie where he’s an Air Marshall and the bad guys turn out not to be the Muslim, but, wait for it, Iraq/Afghan Veterans. Ah yes, the crazy vet syndrome. Will never watch one of his movies again and his gun control view made it mandatory.