To say “Am I Racist?” wasn’t designed to win over Hollywood would be putting it very mildly. Produced by the Daily Wire and fronted by conservative commentator Matt Walsh, the documentary takes a “Borat”-style comedic blowtorch to progressive ideas about systemic racism and diversity training programs. When the film opened in more than 1,500 theaters in September, many mainstream critics simply ignored it, and it received little coverage in traditional media outlets.
Yet in a climate of intense political polarization, “Am I Racist?” managed to strike a chord. Even as many on the left dismissed it as offensive and unfunny, the movie opened in the top five at the box office and went on to earn more than $12 million, making it the highest-grossing documentary of 2024.
The picture’s success was hardly an isolated blip. In recent years, filmmakers catering to conservative audiences have been finding new ways to bypass Hollywood and connect directly with viewers they feel the mainstream has overlooked. Angel Studios’ “Sound of Freedom,” a faith-based thriller centered on sex trafficking in Colombia, cracked the top 10 at the U.S. box office in 2023, grossing $250 million worldwide to become one of the most successful independent films of all time.
More recently, the presidential biopic “Reagan” became a sleeper hit last year, pulling in $30 million — nearly doubling the box office of “The Apprentice,” a scathing drama about the rise of Donald Trump that struggled to find a large audience despite months of buzz and festival screenings. (To be fair, the Dinesh D’Souza documentary “Vindicating Trump” also fizzled, grossing just $1.3 million, suggesting that Trump fatigue may have been a factor.)
Advertisement
Penelope Ann Miller and Dennis Quaid as Nancy and Ronald Reagan in the sleeper hit “Reagan.”
(Ron Batzdorff / Rawhide Pictures)
Mark Joseph, the producer of “Reagan,” sees the success of movies like his as a wake-up call for the traditionally liberal-leaning industry. “Why set out to intentionally leave half the country behind? It makes no sense,” Joseph told The Times via email. The film’s earnest approach to the 40th president, played by Dennis Quaid, garnered little love from critics — “Reagan” earned an 18% rating on Rotten Tomatoes — but its release leaned on alternative marketing strategies, including promotion on podcasts hosted by Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson and Megyn Kelly. “The fundamental question we have to ask ourselves is: Are we making movies for each other or for the audience?” Joseph said.
The Daily Wire has emerged as one of the most ambitious players in this space. Founded in 2015 by right-wing commentator Ben Shapiro and producer Jeremy Boreing, the company expanded into film in 2021 with “Run Hide Fight,” a school-shooting thriller that found an audience through the company’s direct-to-subscriber platform, Daily Wire+.
Since then, the Daily Wire has released projects like “What Is a Woman?,” a documentary challenging progressive views on transgender identity, and “Lady Ballers,” a satirical comedy about sports and gender. Its upcoming fantasy series, “The Pendragon Cycle,” signals its ambitions to expand into new territory, with a focus on epic storytelling rather than overtly political themes.
Advertisement
With Trump preparing to begin his second term as president, the cultural and political winds appear to be shifting in the direction of content that appeals to conservative audiences. At the same time, traditional studios and streamers are already exploring ways to tack toward those right-leaning viewers — or at least avoid alienating them. (Despite Trump’s impending return to office, political speechifying was conspicuously absent at the recent Golden Globes.)
The Times spoke with Boreing, Daily Wire’s co-chief executive and the director of “Lady Ballers” and “The Pendragon Cycle,” about what he sees ahead for the conservative film movement and how Hollywood might respond. The interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.
“Am I Racist?” became the highest-grossing documentary of 2024 despite being largely ignored by traditional media outlets. What do you think drove its success?
We would have liked some reviews. For one thing, you can’t overstate the power of the Daily Wire machine to market to an underserved audience. We spent millions on [marketing] and leveraged our own promotional channels, which are worth many millions more. We’re the best in the world at talking to our exact audience online. Conservatives have rightly observed that there’s very little of this kind of content for them. If there is a political documentary, it’s almost certainly going to be the other side that puts it forward.
A scene from “Am I Racist?,” the top-performing documentary at the box office in 2024.
(Daily Wire)
Advertisement
People also root for us. They see us taking on forces arrayed against half the country on their own turf, not just putting something on our streaming platform but releasing it in theaters. A lot of people came to see “Am I Racist?” not expecting much but glad that somebody was taking that position. And the film was good. Matt Walsh is an enormous talent. A decade ago, the left had great comedians who could do that kind of work, but victory made them weak. Those muscles atrophied, leaving a huge opportunity for someone like Matt.
When the Daily Wire first decided to enter the entertainment business, what was the driving idea behind that move? How did you see films advancing your mission?
Ben Shapiro and I met on a movie deal, so creating culture was always a part of our vision for the Daily Wire. But we didn’t have a clear road map. We were all L.A. guys from the Andrew Breitbart school of “politics is downstream from culture.” At the time, I was running Friends of Abe, which was an open-secret group of around 2,800 Hollywood conservatives. In 2020, we realized we’d already built much of the infrastructure in terms of production savvy, high-level marketing and an SVOD [subscription video on demand] platform for our podcasts. What we hadn’t done was produce films.
From a philosophical point of view, I’ve always pointed to the fact that Barack Obama couldn’t have been elected in 2008 as a Democrat if he supported gay marriage, and by 2012, he couldn’t have been reelected if he opposed it. Such a radical shift in values wasn’t achieved politically — it happened culturally, largely due to the success of “Will & Grace.” Culture has the power to set the Overton window [range of acceptable discourse] for politics, and we’ve always wanted to be creators, not just critics, of culture.
Advertisement
Some of your projects, like “The Pendragon Cycle,” don’t outwardly appear to be political. Where does politics fit into the vision you’ve laid out?
Politics is a consideration but not the most important one. We’re not afraid to be political. We own our biases very openly. “Lady Ballers” is a comedy, but it’s a very opinionated comedy because I wrote and produced it. But other projects, like “Terror on the Prairie,” “Shut In” or “The Pendragon Cycle,” the biggest bet we’ve ever taken — they’re notable for what they don’t say rather than for what they do. They’re not values-first films.
Daily Wire’s other productions include “Lady Ballers,” pictured.
(Daily Wire)
Obviously, we wouldn’t make content that our audience would oppose on some philosophical grounds. But conservative audiences, like anyone else, don’t just watch things based on philosophy. They don’t want films that spit in the face of their philosophy in the third act, but mostly, they just want to be entertained. That’s what we’re trying to deliver.
Advertisement
Faith-based movies have long been a staple for conservative audiences, but the Daily Wire is carving out a different niche. How do you decide which stories to tell, and what makes something feel like the right fit for your brand and audience?
I would say part of the defining philosophy of the Daily Wire is that we’re not cynical. We try not to make cynical plays. When we do, they always bite us — which, as a religious person, I take as God reminding us, “Hey, remember how you decided not to be cynical?” In our entertainment business, we don’t want to make movies that people want to want to watch; we want to make movies they actually want to watch. We’ve never approached our entertainment as a nonprofit. We’re not saying, “Don’t you want this kind of movie to exist for someone else?” We’re asking, “What do you actually want to see?” If it’s something we’d like to see, that’s usually the most important factor in choosing a project.
How do you see the landscape changing for conservative films under another Trump presidency? Do you see traditional studios and streamers trying harder to compete for these audiences?
I think there are enormous opportunities for companies like the Daily Wire because our audience now feels, for the first time in a long time, like maybe the country isn’t doomed, that history isn’t completely arrayed against them. The Daily Wire has always taken an optimistic position, unlike many conservative media companies. We’ve always said our goal was to fight the left, yes, but also to build the future. Most organizations fighting the left lean toward despair, while most future-building is done by the left. The Daily Wire walks the line between both. The next chapter is ours to write.
Do I think Hollywood studios might try to compete for that audience again? I hope so. I’ve said many times, the best success for the Daily Wire isn’t becoming Disney — it’s for Disney to become Disney again. I’d count it the victory of a lifetime, for the country, my values and our business, if Disney went back to serving the entire audience, not just a faction. Competing for their dollars forces them to be competitive, and we’ve done that.
Advertisement
I do think things will change. The business and our strategy will have to evolve. I’m not trying to plan with Matt Walsh the “next anti-woke documentary.” Woke-ism isn’t gone, but it’s on the ropes. I don’t think that’s where the appetite will be in 24 months. We have to keep surveying the landscape, thinking about the best opportunities to represent our audience and create content they actually want to see.
The Tiger Is the Tank. Or rather, the type of German tank that gives the film its international title—just in case anyone might confuse this war story with an adventure movie involving wild animals. The tank itself is the film’s container, much as The Boat was in the legendary 1981 film it openly seeks to emulate in more than one respect, or as the more recent tank was in the Israeli film Lebanon (2009). Yes, much of Dennis Gansel’s movie unfolds inside a tank called Tiger, but what it is ultimately trying to tell goes well beyond its cramped metal walls.
This large-scale Prime Video war production has been described by many as the platform’s answer to Netflix’s success with All Quiet on the Western Front, the highly decorated German film released in 2022. In practice, it is a very different proposition. Despite the fanfare surrounding its release—Amazon even gave it a theatrical run a few months ago, something it rarely does—the film made a far more modest impact. Watching it, the reasons become clear. This is a darker, stranger movie, one that flirts as much with horror as with monotony, and that positions itself less as a traditional war film than as an ethical and philosophical meditation on warfare.
The first section—an intense and technically impressive combat sequence—takes place during what would later be known as the Battle of the Dnieper, which unfolded over several months in 1943 on the Eastern Front, as Soviet forces pushed back the Nazi advance. Der Tiger is the type of tank carrying a compact platoon—played by David Schütter, Laurence Rupp, Leonard Kunz, Sebastian Urzendowsky, and Yoran Leicher—that miraculously survives the aerial destruction of a bridge over the river.
Soon afterward—or so it seems—the group is assigned a mission that, at least in its initial setup, recalls Saving Private Ryan. Lieutenant Gerkens (Schütter) is ordered to rescue Colonel Von Harnenburg, stranded behind enemy lines. From there, the film becomes a journey through an infernal landscape of ruined cities, corpses, forests, and fog—a setting that, thanks to the way it is shot, feels more fantastical than realistic.
That choice is no accident. As the journey begins to echo Apocalypse Now, it becomes clear that the film is less interested in conventional suspense—mines on the road, the threat of ambush—than in the strangeness of its situations and environments. When the tank plunges into the water and briefly operates like a submarine, one may reasonably wonder whether such technology actually existed in the 1940s, or whether the film has deliberately drifted into a more extravagant, symbolic territory.
This is the kind of film whose ending is likely to inspire more frustration than affection. Though heavily foreshadowed, it is the sort of conclusion that tends to irritate audiences: cryptic, somewhat open-ended, and more suggestive than explicit. That makes sense, given that the film is less concerned with depicting the daily mechanics of war than with grappling with its aftermath—ethical, moral, psychological, and physical.
Advertisement
In its own way, The Tank functions as a kind of mea culpa. The platoon becomes a microcosm of a nation that “followed orders” and committed—or allowed to be committed—horrific acts in its name. The flashbacks scattered throughout the film make this point unmistakably clear. The problem is that, while these ideas may sound compelling when summarized in a few sentences (or in a review), the film never manages to turn them into something fully alive—narratively, visually, or dramatically.
Only in brief moments—largely thanks to Gerkens’s perpetually worried, anguished expression—do those ideas achieve genuine cinematic weight. They are not enough, however, to sustain a two-hour runtime that increasingly feels repetitive and inert. Unlike the films by Steven Spielberg, Wolfgang Petersen, Francis Ford Coppola, and others it so clearly references, The Tank remains closer to a concept than to a drama, more an intriguing reflection than a truly effective film.
Will Smith and his company Treyball Studios Management Inc. are being sued by an electric violinist who is claiming wrongful termination, retaliation and sexual harassment — allegations denied by the actor-rapper-producer in a statement from his attorney.
Brian King Joseph alleges in a lawsuit filed earlier this week that Smith hired him to perform on the 2025 Based on a True Story tour, then fired him before the tour began in earnest in Europe and the U.K.
Joseph, who finished third in Season 13 of “America’s Got Talent,” went onto Instagram in the days before filing his lawsuit and posted a Dec. 27 video saying that he had been hired for “a major, major tour with somebody who is huge in the industry” but “some things happened” that he couldn’t discuss because it was a legal matter.
Electric violinist Brian King Joseph, seen performing at an awards show last October, is suing for wrongful termination, retaliation and sexual harassment.
(Tommaso Boddi / Getty Images for Media Access Awards)
Advertisement
But, he said, “Getting fired or getting blamed or shamed or threatened or anything like that, simply for reporting sexual misconduct or safety threats at work, is not OK. And I know that there’s a lot of other people out there who have been afraid to speak up, and I understand. If that’s you, I see you. … More updates to come soon.”
In the lawsuit, filed Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court and reviewed by The Times, Joseph alleges that he and Smith struck up a professional relationship in November 2024, after which Joseph performed at two of Smith’s shows in San Diego and was invited to perform on several tracks for Smith’s “Based on a True Story” album, which was released March 28.
After the performances in San Diego, Joseph posted video of a show on Instagram with the caption, “What an honor to share the stage with such legends and a dream team of musicians. From playing in the streets to sharing my music on stages like this, this journey has been nothing short of magic — and this is just the beginning. Grateful beyond words for every single person who made this possible.”
While working on the album, the lawsuit alleges, “Smith and [Joseph] began spending additional time alone, with Smith even telling [Joseph] that ‘You and I have such a special connection, that I don’t have with anyone else,’ and other similar expressions indicating his closeness to [Joseph].”
Advertisement
Joseph soon joined Smith and crew for a performance in Las Vegas, the lawsuit says — on March 20 at the House of Blues at Mandalay Bay — with Smith’s team booking rooms for everyone involved. Joseph left his bag, which contained his room key, in a van that took performers to rehearsal, and then the bag went missing for a couple of hours after he requested someone get it for him, the suit says.
When Joseph returned to his room late that night, according to the complaint, he found evidence that someone had entered his room without his permission.
“The evidence included a handwritten note addressed to Plaintiff by name, which read ‘Brian, I’ll be back no later [sic] 5:30, just us (drawn heart), Stone F.,’” the document says. “Among the remaining belongings were wipes, a beer bottle, a red backpack, a bottle of HIV medication with another individual’s name, an earring, and hospital discharge paperwork belonging to a person unbeknownst to Plaintiff.”
Joseph worried that “an unknown individual would soon return to his room to engage in sexual acts” with him, the complaint says.
It adds that Joseph, “concerned for his safety and the safety of his fellow performers and crew,” alerted hotel security and representatives for Treyball and Smith, took pictures, requested a new room and reported the incident to police using a non-emergency line. Hotel security found no signs of forced entry, and Joseph flew home the next day.
Advertisement
Several days later, rather than being called on to join the next part of the tour, a Treyball representative told him the tour was “going in a different direction,” the lawsuit says, and that his services were no longer needed. The representative “redirected the blame for the termination onto [Joseph], replying, ‘I don’t know, you tell me, because everyone is telling me that what happened to you is a lie, nothing happened, and you made the whole thing up. So, tell me, why did you lie and make this up?’ [Joseph], shocked at the accusation, had nothing further to say,” as he believed the reports and evidence from Las Vegas spoke for themselves.
Joseph alleges in the lawsuit that as a result of events in Las Vegas and in the days immediately afterward, he suffered severe emotional distress, economic loss and harm to his reputation. He also alleges that the stress of losing the job caused his health to deteriorate and that he suffered PTSD and other mental illness after the termination.
“The facts strongly suggest that Defendant Willard Carroll Smith II was deliberately grooming and priming Mr. Joseph for further sexual exploitation,” the lawsuit alleges. “The sequence of events, Smith’s prior statements to Plaintiff, and the circumstances of the hotel intrusion all point to a pattern of predatory behavior rather than an isolated incident.”
The Times was unable to reach publicists or a lawyer for Will Smith because of the holiday. However, Smith attorney Allen B. Grodsky told Fox News on Thursday that “Mr. Joseph’s allegations concerning my client are false, baseless and reckless. They are categorically denied, and we will use all legal means available to address these claims and to ensure that the truth is brought to light.”
Joseph’s attorney, Jonathan J. Delshad, recently filed sexual assault civil suits against Tyler Perry on behalf of actors who say they were not hired for future work by the billionaire movie and TV producer after they rejected his alleged advances.
Advertisement
Joseph is seeking compensatory and punitive damages and payment of attorney fees in an amount to be determined at trial.
The Based on a True Story tour played 26 dates in Europe and the U.K. last summer. Nine of the acts were headlining gigs, while the rest were festivals.
By John E. Finley-Weaver in San DiegoJohn E. Finley-Weaver (SDJW photo)
My wife convinced me to watch a movie about ping pong. And, having acquiesced to her proposal, I dove face-first into a kettle of willful ignorance, knowing only that Some Guy Timothée Chalamet of Dune 1 and Dune 2 and A Complete Unknown (another of her suggestions) was the lead, and that what we were soon to watch might move me. Or, at the very least, that it might entertain me.
The movie did not disappoint.
In fact, Marty Supreme is the absolute best film about table tennis that I have ever seen. And I’ve seen all of one of them so far, although I am aware of and have seen a few clips of Robert Ben Garant’s Balls of Fury.
Advertisement
But, holy mackerel, Marty Supreme is not just a movie about some lanky goniff whose inner craving for focused dominance in one specific realm compels him to pursue a shiny, sportsball “X” trophy, culminating in a crowd-pleasing, applause roar of triumph . . . a n d . . . cut to the end credits, supplemented by a catchy, happy song . . . . “Honey, let’s get to the restroom, fast!”
Uh-uh. Nay. Marty Supreme is a lived-in world (like the Star Wars universe, but way different and way better) populated by tactile characters, each of whom has their own, inferred history and glob of yearnings. And they have warts. Lots of warts. Warts and all.
Marty Mauser, the Jewish protagonist of Marty Supreme, is a plucky ping pong imp and shoe salesman, in addition to being a nimble and loquacious malarkey artist. He is also a shockingly-gawdawful, verbal bastard person to his mother, played by Fran Drescher, who left her specific, discount Phyllis Diller voice in the dustbin of screen history where it belongs, much to the contentment of my sensitive ears.
Marty Mauser is even more a womanizer and a thief. And he is a delight. And, because boring, nice boys don’t have movies made about them, he does something for his ema that is chutzpahdik, illegal, vandalicious, unhistorical, and tear-inducingly sweet.
And again, dear Reader, I went into this movie knowing most of nothing about it. If you are like me, fear not: I shan’t disclose the plot.
Advertisement
Marty Mauser’s partners in life and “crime” are the facially-delicious Rachel, played by Odessa A’zion and best bud Wally, performed by Tyler Okonma, each complementarily savvy to Marty’s needs and wants.
The remainder of the film’s actors is a gathering of casting directorial genius: Kevin O’Leary, the that guy from some reality television show that I will never watch; Gwyneth Paltrow; director Abel Ferrara; Sandra Bernhard, my lukewarm, high school “bad girl” crush; Géza Röhrig, whose character is seven year’s fresh from a Nazi death camp and hauntingly beautiful; Koto Kawaguchi, the movie-world champion and legally-deaf Tommy-esque pinball wizard of ping pong and real-world champion of the game; Pico Iyer, Indo-Limey travel writer, meditator, and inveterate outsider; George Gerwin, a very retired basketball player; Ted Williams and his golden voice; Penn Jillette, agrarian and blasty; Isaac Mizrahi, obviously “out” in 1952; and David freaking Mamet.
Gush.
And great googly woogly. They all do their jobs so gosh darn well that I don’t notice them as actors acting.
And then, as I have done since I was a child, for science fiction books, for television, and for movies, I recast, in my mind’s eye, all of the characters and their associated journeys as different people. I made an all-Negro cast of the film. And it worked. No radical changes to the script were necessary. I did the same for a spunky, mid-West farm girl as the lead. That worked. I tried again, using a Colombian lesbian. That worked too.
Advertisement
I praise the cinematic vision of Director Josh Safdie. I praise the wide accessibility of the script he co-wrote with Ronald Bronstein: Thank you. The expected plot points, the tropes of moviedom, the “inevitable” happenings of standard movies never really happened. Marty Supreme zaggled and Zelig’d when I expected it to zig.
A lesser film would not have surprised me in most of its story structure, its scenes, or its character paths. A lesser film would have had me in my seat, either smugly prognosticating the next events, or non-thinkingly rapt for entire scenes. This film, this masterpiece of storytelling and visual and aural execution outsmarted me. It outsmarted my movie mind, and for that, I am grateful.
Marty Supreme is a very Brooklyn Jewy movie, but it sings from the standard Humanity of us all, to each of us. And that is movie making at its finest.
* Cinema buff John E. Finley-Weaver is a freelance writer based in San Diego.