19 November, 2011

Quick Movie Review

Posted by Socrates in movie reviews, movies, Socrates at 2:52 pm | Permanent Link

null

“Carriers” (2009), starring Chris Pine and Piper Perabo.

This movie is about a modern-day Black Death, a deadly plague that kills most of the citizens in America. The movie focuses on a handful of young, White adults who are traveling across the Southwest trying to avoid the disease.

The movie was filmed largely in New Mexico, with additional footage filmed in Texas.

While not a perfect movie by any means, I liked it. It is basically a “survivalist” film, with lots of gloom and doom. It makes you wonder “what if…?”

I give this movie 8 1/2 points out of 10.


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 09/30/14 Quick Movie Review 100% similar
  3. 11/29/10 Quick Movie Review 100% similar
  4. 01/13/12 Quick Movie Review 100% similar
  5. 01/07/12 Quick Movie Review 99% similar
  6. 11/15/12 Quick Movie Review 95% similar
  7. 12 Responses to “Quick Movie Review”

    1. Tim McGreen Says:

      Wait a second….Where is the Nobel Prize-winning Black government scientist who has developed the vaccine that will save Humankind? Paging Morgan Freeman. Where you at, nigga?

      And where is the tough little Oriental chick who blows up mutant alien cannibals with her bazooka? Or the White blonde who’s foolin’ around with the hunky Mexican guy?

      What kind of a science fiction movie is this???

    2. ty grant Says:

      if it is a white movie with white intrests i will like it… Like white noise with alex keton or trans siberian withwoody harrloson… it these movies that relly insire me and give to others excluding to plot line a view of a normal society of similar races who are professionals and act unlike savagees…

    3. torrence Says:

      I gave this post a thumbs up simply because it had nothing to do with the Jews. Not bad for a Sunday morning. Great way to start the day.

      I don’t know about the movie and don’t really care, but if as Ty says it has some connection to white interests…….go for it.

      Since we are here talking about visual entertainment, I’ll direct readers to a film that moved me. It was recommended by a neighbor and his brother. Although not entirely accurate and way over-emphasizing ‘the Jewish question’, I think it’s a good, broad representation of the development of Hitler as political leader. I’ve watched the first three-quarters of the film many times -which for me is very unusual, and find it inspiring. It took a bit to get over the physically weak-looking appearance of the actor portraying Hitler, but this is compensated by the conviction and utter sincerity that is portrayed.

      The uploader of the film to You-Tube added to the film’s title to offset it’s slanderous message. He also intersperses a few Hitler quotes throughout the film which is a positive addition.

      You can find ‘Hitler: The Rise of Evil or Greatness?’ here:

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4j9NonWT9ew

    4. Sgt. Skull Says:

      I recommend this movie because it was (as I recall) totally bereft of any anti-white/multicult propaganda which is rare for a hymiewood movie these days. And it was a pretty enjoyable movie to boot.

      I think every movie has to have at least one friendly nigger, a nigger doctor, scientist, engineer, or a nigger who outwits and outfights any and all white people he encounters. The writers, producers and directors of this movie apparently didn’t get the memo.

      Oh well, they can always atone for their cultural Marxist sacrilege by making “Carriers 2” – where backward, rural white people are under siege by zombies and haven’t a clue as to how to protect themselves until spics and jigaboo supermen from the ghetto show up and save the day.

    5. ty grant Says:

      When I am finished with my latest art peice I will watch the film. It looks good… There is movie entitled Bram Stoker’s Dracula and the actor that plays Dracula is a great actor, a true stand alone in the profession of is craft. though his name escapes me, he would be a great Hitler…

    6. Phantom Says:

      I remember watching this movie last year. It is a so-so movie. To me it is just another survivalist movie and nothing special.

    7. Miller Says:

      Mogen Freeman is a Jew.

    8. Howdy Doody Says:

      Miller Says:
      20 November, 2011 at 7:38 pm

      Mogen Freeman is a Jew.

      Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

      This how a no talent African pos got so many roles etc.

    9. -jc Says:

      Y’all raciss: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w8n56EW_ywg

    10. Luke Says:

      Although Morgan Freeman’s character gets killed off-screen in the great Eastwood western The Unforgiven – Gene Hackman’s character ‘Curly Bill’ does put some good old fashioned ass-whipping on ‘Ned’ when he’s interrogating him in the jail scene.

      We all need to remember to pull that movie out now and then and watch Ned have his saddle sent home at least once every year.

      Maybe MLK Day would be a suitable occasion?

    11. Biff Baxter Says:

      Good. Just straight apocalyptic stuff on a low budget. As mentioned, no tag teams of white girls and kung-fu moon crickets on wires doing superstunts and saving the world with their incredible kompooter hackin’ skills.

    12. Dagon Says:

      I’ve seen a few films made since the 1960s that – like “Carriers” apparently – also buck the dominant “multi-cult” casting practices of our present age. Few of these films, though they may have dispensed with implicit shilling for race-replacement by highlighting a distinctly multi-hued cast, do not always portray their all-White protagonists in an especially great light making them ultimately little better than vast majority of mainstream films that toe the present “Hollyweird” casting line more assiduously.

      Having said all that, if “Carriers” and other films like it manage to tell a story of triumph over adversity of a particular cast of characters (or even noble failure) AND show a completely White cast at the same time then I doff my proverbial cap to them.

      As for how and why such occasional films that happily fulfill the two above-mentioned criteria get made, I think the actual reasons may be many or at least several-fold. First of all, I don’t think that the Culture of Critique that runs the film industry and most of the other main-line institutions in the West these days even after the Gramscian “long march” has come to fruition, STILL has the kind of unchallenged, untrammeled control they’d like which leaves space for a few movies with heterodoxical casting and/or messages and ideas to be made from time to time – even if such messages are rather thickly veiled or, which I believe is more usually the case, are honestly still laced with large doses of the scriptwriter’s, director’s, or producer’s own liberalism and upbringing/socialization. This last consideration is, once again, a product of the larger discourse that the filmmakers, like the rest of us, are immersed in every day even as heterodoxical thoughts do sometimes find a degree of expression even if they are either watered-down honestly or by choice in this way or are not followed to their logical conclusion.

      Another reason for such films might be that they are made by what Wilmot Robertson in “The Dispossessed Majority” categorizes as “Old Believers,” i.e. “honest liberals” who – foolishly – genuinely take the (actual anti-White and anti-Western) present-day discourse at its – ostensibly “tolerant” and “progressive” – word regarding race. They then operate on the assumption that “if race is a meaningless social construct and we’ve entered a post-racial world where people of different races are interchangeable, then it shouldn’t matter if the cast in my screenplay is all-White (or all-Black, or all Asian, all-Hispanic, etc.)” Sometimes such “Old Believers” are successfully and get their films, even if not blockbusters, made. “Carriers” may be one example of such a film though of course I, nor any of us, knows the particulars in this specific case.
      My point is that while we should indeed welcome such films when they appear one still shouldn’t automatically assume the film’s creators, backers or both are necessarily closet WNs or some kind of alternative rightist cinematic subversives. While I’m not suggesting that even a large minority of posters here have such assumptions when they see films like these there are a few who sometimes are a bit unrealistic in their hopes that a like-minded cadre of people similar to ourselves exists as a potent fifth column in the movie industry and the MSM where they sometimes create the odd pro-White portrayal.

      Another point I found interesting to note:
      Even if these films “pass the censor” as it were, notice that a most of these if not all still don’t become first – run widely distributed films. The powers-that-be are still very effective in condemning any pro-White movie, even one that is only implicitly so, to relative obscurity even if it still gets to be made.

      I probably won’t see “Carriers” myself as post-apocalyptic movies depress me even though I do not shy aware from preparing for contingencies in my own life. That, and there seems to be an over-abundance of movies of this genre today – usually involving zombies.

      Still, good for movies like “Carriers.” White it may not be my cup of tea I support its implicit Whiteness and apparent balanced and accurate portrayal of Indo-European pluck , intelligence, resourcefulness, and bravery in a crisis.

      It is indeed nice to see a film from time to time that doesn’t drag out all the now oh-so-predictable and – more to the point – totally obvious Frankfurt School stereo-types of dumb/dithering/cowardly/pathological/evil Whites and intelligent/saintly/resolute/sophisticated/valiant non-Whites.