Connect with us

Entertainment

Inside the rise of the conservative movie industry behind 'Reagan,' 'Am I Racist?'

Published

on

Inside the rise of the conservative movie industry behind 'Reagan,' 'Am I Racist?'

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 in the movie "Reagan."

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 man reading a book in the movie "Am I Racist."

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.

Men in pink basketball uniforms in a locker room in the movie "Lady Ballers."

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.

Movie Reviews

‘Evil Dead Burn’ Movie Review – Spotlight Report

Published

on

‘Evil Dead Burn’ Movie Review – Spotlight Report

Sam Raimi‘s Evil Dead films and TV series are a fine example of creativity within constraints, playfulness, self-awareness and outright slapstick comedy. The Evil Dead series after Raimi is very, very different. Starting with 2013’s Evil Dead by Fede Álvarez, followed by Evil Dead Rise by Lee Cronin, the new series takes itself more seriously and emphasises pure horror, violence and gore. Some have considered this praiseworthy as it avoids being a mere retread of the old films, but the reception has been mixed.

In Sébastien Vanicek’s Evil Dead Burn, Alice (Souheila Yacoub) loses her abusive husband (George Pullar) to a motor accident. When she goes home to stay with his family, the consequences of the work of their dead grandfather researching the Necronomicon and the Deadites manifest in terrible ways. One by one, the family are turned into the Evil Dead.

Horror is a genre that depends on you relating to the protagonists so you care what happens to them. In the case of Evil Dead Burn, Yacoub does a decent job with the character she’s given, but the gonzo horror elements manifest so early in the film that she may as well be collateral damage in the onslaught, especially as the film’s early point of view is that of her brother-in-law (Hunter Doohan).

Advertisement

Fans of gory violence will get their money’s worth here, but there’s not a lot going on besides that. The film is a descent into madness and carnage that is so resolutely unpleasant that, after some of the early kills, it becomes numbing. It’s hard to gather what the tone is supposed to be, with lots of callbacks to the early films’ style by setting up inevitable kills with Chekhov’s weed trimmer, Chekhov’s fork and every other potentially dangerous prop the camera lingers on. The family are all deeply unpleasant at some level and so their deaths register as meaningless. Yes, the film has the obligatory something to say about how our tendency to ignore domestic abuse creates demons that destroy families, but then absolutely panders to bloodlust by absolutely revelling in some of the most extreme violence imaginable between family members (and a pet). To say this is not a film for the sensitive is to understate things considerably. This is a film that absolutely earns its content guidance warnings.

Is there any comedy? Some, but it feels out of place given the absolute brutality inflicted on the cast. While most of the other films were self-aware about setting up a ludicrously grisly end for a villain as a payoff, in Evil Dead Burn,the kills have very little flair. It’s also hard to know what the rules for getting rid of a Deadite are, as some of them are still upright and chatty after losing most of the contents of their skull and some are dispatched by the repeated application of a blunt object to the head. Towards the end, a McGuffin is added to make the kills final, but before that, who knows?

Should you watch Evil Dead Burn,? It certainly gets vocal reactions from audiences in a cinema, and if you’re a gorehound you’ll be in for a ride. If you’re a horror fan, it’s certainly a horror film, but violent instead of scary. If you’re just a fan of cinema who likes good films whether or not they’re horror films, then this will be an alienating watch. In Evil Dead Rise the decay of the family was more than background noise and factored into the circumstances of the individual deaths, but not here. It has slight pretences of being a film with Themes and Ideas, but in the end it just feels like an excuse to serve up limbs being mutilated, skulls being crushed and any number of stabbings, slicings and gougings rendered with psychopathic visual fidelity. If that’s what you’re after, that’s what it’s got.

Continue Reading

Entertainment

‘Children of Blood and Bone’ author won’t see film after feud with star Amandla Stenberg

Published

on

‘Children of Blood and Bone’ author won’t see film after feud with star Amandla Stenberg

Tomi Adeyemi, the author of the bestselling fantasy “Children of Blood and Bone,” isn’t planning to see the forthcoming film adaptation — even though she co-wrote it.

Over the weekend, the Nigerian American author posted a video on TikTok addressing fans who have been asking her the same question, “Why don’t you post about the adaptation of your first film adaptation anymore?”

“There is a reason I will not post anything about the adaptation of my work,” the author wrote in what appear to be screenshots of a group chat. “I have not seen the film, and I will not watch it.”

The adaptation of the first installment of Adeyemi’s “Legacy of Orïsha” fantasy trilogy is slated to hit theaters in January 2027. Gina Prince-Bythewood — who wrote and directed “Love & Basketball” and helmed “The Woman King” — is directing. The film stars Amandla Stenberg, Thuso Mbedu, Tosin Cole, Damson Idris, Cynthia Erivo, Lashana Lynch, Regina King, Idris Elba, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Viola Davis.

Alongside the screenshots of her comments in the group chat, she shared a February 2025 exchange with Stenberg that shows the author severing ties with the actor.

Advertisement

Adeyemi shared only her final message to Stenberg, which reads, “Do not ever use my name in an interview or video again. Do not text me. Do not call me.” That exchange is followed by a notification that she blocked Stenberg, who plays Princess Amari in the upcoming fantasy flick.

The message from Stenberg that preceded Adeyemi’s reply is not shown in full.

Stenberg, who played Rue in “Hunger Games,” Starr Carter in “The Hate U Give” and, recently, Verosha “Osha” Aniseya and Mae-ho “Mae” Aniseya in Disney’s “Star Wars” series “The Acolyte,” had been getting flack from readers of the series, who claimed colorism was an issue while casting the movie.

In February 2025, Stenberg posted a since-deleted nine-minute TikTok addressing the controversy and told followers that Adeyemi had given the actor her blessing when cast as the series’ princess.

“I am four months into training for ‘Children of Blood and Bone’ and I am getting my ass whooped,” Stenberg joked in the video, per BET.

Advertisement

“This year was mostly defined for me, honestly, by contending with what it felt like to receive racist death threats just for existing in the ‘Star Wars’ universe, and that was a really difficult thing for me to move through,” she continued. “But honestly, it feels so much more painful for me to feel like I’m at odds with my own community.”

Stenberg said that she considers her skin tone when navigating her career choices and would “never go after a role” she didn’t feel well suited for. “I know that colorism is an insidious system that relentlessly impacts every facet of entertainment.”

The actor continued that it was actually a meeting with the “Children of Blood and Bone” author that gave her the confidence to pursue the role.

“I had the opportunity to meet Tomi, the novelist, for the first time. … And she goes, ‘Amandla, I want you to know that when you were a little girl and you were cast as Rue in “The Hunger Games,” and people said that Rue’s death wouldn’t be as sad because you’re a Black girl — that inspired me to write this series so that Black girls like you and Black girls of all shades could have a story written about them,’” Stenberg said in the video. “We started crying, and I said to myself, ‘God wants me here.’”

Representatives for Stenberg, Adeyemi and Prince-Bythewood did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment.

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

‘Night Nurse’ Review: A Caretaker Explores Her Kink for Elder Abuse in the Year’s Strangest Erotic Thriller

Published

on

‘Night Nurse’ Review: A Caretaker Explores Her Kink for Elder Abuse in the Year’s Strangest Erotic Thriller

There are any number of erotic thrillers in which rich old men are robbed blind and/or left for dead, but Georgia Bernstein’s admirably bizarre “Night Nurse” might be the first movie of its kind where elder abuse is the source — and possible subject— of its erotic thrills. If there are others, I’m not sure I want to know.

But this woozy debut feature doesn’t rely on its audience being turned on by the relationship between a nubile caretaker and her dementia-addled patient. Their psychosexual bond, meanwhile, hinges on cold-calling vulnerable old people under the guise of a grandchild in financial distress. (“I’m in trouble, nana, send me $10,000 or I’ll be left to rot in jail!” That sort of thing). With its slim wisp of a premise stretched into a Strickland-esque dreamscape that substitutes kink for conflict, the film itself hardly seems convinced by its own wrinkled lust — all desperate kisses and non-touching poses of subservience. More important to Bernstein is what that lust reveals about her characters’ deepest needs, specifically how their need to care and be cared for can be as easily perverted as any other form of desire. 

The Five-Star Weekend series stars D'Arcy Carden as Brooke, Regina Hall as Dru-Ann, Chloë Sevigny as Tatum, Jennifer Garner as Hollis, Gemma Chan as Gigi, shown here posing for a photo

As moody and weightless as the noir-accented score that blows through the movie like a curlicue gust of wind in an old cartoon (credit to musicians Sam Clapp and Steven Jackson), “Night Nurse” lacks the pulse required for its stray feelings to come alive. Still, the film ambiently taps into the latent eroticism of teasing out the distance between how you see yourself and who you really are. Bernstein plays with that distance like a telephone cord wrapped around her fingers, and Eleni — played by the excellent newcomer Cemre Paksoy, powerfully helpless — only frays even more as the receiver is brought near the hook. “Everything I did before today wasn’t me,” the nurse tells co-worker Mona (Eleonore Hendricks) after starting a new job at an Illinois retirement home. “It was somebody else.” 

What she did before today remains unexplored (specifically, what she did to get herself fired from her last gig), but I’m guessing she’s probably changed less than she thought. There’s a faraway flicker in her eyes the moment she catches the vibe between Mona and Douglas (a ribald and elusive Bruce McKenzie), a white-haired seventysomething who shows early signs of dementia but still commands an undiminished sexual energy. “I’m not an invalid,” he coos as Mona bathes him in the tub, to which she replies, “yes, you are,” in a supplicant tone that hints at a rich history of power games between them. 

Later that same night, Douglas will force Eleni to call a stranger, pretend that she’s their granddaughter, and ask for money — he’ll wrap the phone cord around the nurse’s body as she talks and shove her against the wall as they kiss. She’s into it. So into it that he has to clarify the terms of his whole deal: “If you’re looking for a pogo stick, I’m really not your guy.” But Eleni isn’t looking for anything to bounce on. She just wants to be needed, and maybe to need someone in return. Someone who will see her for who she really is and allow her the fantasy of pretending she isn’t being herself when she cons vulnerable strangers out of their money — when she exploits how enthralled those strangers are by the care they have for their loved ones.

Advertisement

“Night Nurse” doesn’t belabor the psychology, as Bernstein prefers to express her story through heavy-lidded suggestion. Somnambulating from the moment it starts, the film moves through a series of beautifully arranged poses that stretch their latent meaning thin across the surface (Lidia Nikonova’s cinematography lacquers every shot with a seductive dreaminess). We see Douglas smoking in a lawn chair with Mona and Eleni curled around his feet. Eleni riding in the backseat of a convertible as the wind blows through her curls. The full staff of nurses — all of them under Douglas’ sway — stumbling around his condo in a state of zonked out bliss as they roll on the prescription drugs they’ve stolen from the residents. 

Once you’ve seen one shot of this movie, you’ve practically seen them all, at least until things escalate during a rushed and unsatisfying third act that forces Eleni into an honest confrontation with herself. People will do just about anything to feel needed — they’ll give whatever degree of care allows them to receive it in return. “Night Nurse” understands that desire, but remains far too numb to treat it. 

Grade: C+

The Independent Film Company will relase “Night Nurse” in theaters on Friday, July 10.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending