John Doyle unloads on Nolan’s 'Odyssey': ‘They turned ancient Greece into a rainbow nation’



There’s no doubt that Christopher Nolan’s "The Odyssey" took one of the foundational works of Western civilization and transformed it — but BlazeTV host John Doyle believes it was for the worse.

“Feeling very vindicated dude,” Doyle says, adding that he’s “never been a Chris Nolan fan.”

“Honestly, part of me almost wants to cope and say that Christopher Nolan is actually our guy. He’s going behind enemy lines. He’s a secret patriot. He’s actively trying to ruin any possibility of further adaptations with this kind of stuff,” he says.

But unfortunately, Doyle doesn’t think that’s possible, as it’s “one of the most in-your-face, on-the-nose subversions that has ever been made by Hollywood.”


The most obvious, Doyle says, is that they cast Lupita Nyong'o as Helen of Troy and Ellen Page, who now goes by “Elliot,” as a soldier.

“He made ancient Greece into this kind of rainbow nation,” he says, “where you’ve got white Greeks, black Greeks, Asian Greeks, you know, even Greeks on Homer-ian H-1B visas from the Greek city state of Kolkata looking you, the audience member, directly in the eye and saying we are Greeks from Ithaca, right?”

“It basically means nothing. It’s literally just driven by visual spectacle for third-world masses with practically every actual integral plot point being completely obliterated,” he continues.

“And in so far as there even is a message, they removed all male sexuality from it. They feminized it. Gave it a once over with therapy-speak SSRI nonsense. And yeah, they made it about overcoming trauma and about how war is freaking bad,” he adds.

Doyle calls it the “complete inversion” and “antithesis” to the original "Odyssey."

“It was supposed to be, you know, an epic poem meant to be spoken before a crowd using their imagination to paint the story for them, right? Paint the picture in their mind carried by the weight of the verses given and what it was imparted in meaning,” he explains.

“The adaptation, like modern garbage that tries to be carried entirely by the visual spectacle. It erases every thematic point in and every moral of the original. It just inserts the most boilerplate libtardism imaginable. War bad, therapy good, men bad, women good, ancient morality bad, progressivism good, freaking trauma,” he says, adding, “It's really, it’s not even worth the watch.”

Want more from John Doyle?

To enjoy more of the truth about America and join the fight to restore a country that has been betrayed by its own leaders, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Teddy Roosevelt's SECRET letter proves progressivism was always headed to THIS



On July 4, the $450 million Theodore Roosevelt Presidential Library opened its doors to the public — a public that, according to a letter in a library exhibit, Roosevelt felt was similar to cattle.

In the letter written to Charles Davenport at Cold Spring Harbor in his own hand, he explained that “society has no business permitting degenerates to reproduce their kind.”

Roosevelt wrote in the letter, “We have to refuse to apply human beings the same elementary knowledge every farmer applies to his own stock. And that’s madness.”


“The farmers who let all the increase come from the worst stock would be threatened as fit inmates for an asylum,” he added.

Roosevelt also wrote that the “inescapable duty of the good citizen of the right type is to leave his blood behind him in the world.”

“We have no business permitting the perpetuation of a citizen of the wrong type,” he said.

Like most progressives, Glenn points out that Roosevelt made it clear that he believed in “categories.”

“This fight is about categories,” he says. “It’s about, you know, the collective and not the individual in his own hand to the director of the Carnegie-funded scientific institute. This was not the fringe. This is the cutting edge. This is the settled science that you must pay attention to of the time.”

“Theodore Roosevelt believed in the science and in the expert and in the government strong enough and clever enough to act upon what the experts knew. That’s progressivism all in one letter,” he explains.

“Now, was he great with the national parks? Yeah, he was great on national parks. Was he great on the individual and the man in the arena? Yeah, he was brave. He was funny. He read a book every day. A book every day. He took a bullet in Milwaukee and finished the speech. He set aside 230 million acres. That’s not the argument,” he continues.

“The argument is what he thought the American government was for,” he adds.

Glenn explains that Roosevelt also believed that “property is subject to the community’s right to regulate its use” and that government officials were the “stewards of the public welfare” rather than “servants of the law.”

“In a speech he called a 'Charter for Democracy,' he proposed when a court strikes down a progressive statute, the people should be able to vote to overturn the court. Former president of the United States in 1912 proposing a popular recall of judicial decisions. That’s not constitutional. That’s not how it works,” Glenn says.

“Theodore Roosevelt is exactly what we’re seeing. He’s just dressed up in prettier clothes. He’s not a despicable man where Woodrow Wilson is just a despicable man,” he says, adding, “And I don’t think he actually saw what was coming.”

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis, and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Jesus in the temple (of progressivism): What I learned watching Portlanders debate a street preacher



Recently, I stopped to grab a pizza slice in the Hawthorne district of Portland. This is a trendy neighborhood, full of vintage shops, vinyl record stores, hipster cafes. The vibe is very liberal progressive.

As I approached the pizza place, I heard someone talking over a loudspeaker. I assumed there was a protest going on. Or a Pride event.

A green-haired woman said: 'Are you sure God is a He?'

But then I saw what it was: A street preacher was proselytizing and holding a big sign that read, "SINNERS REPENT! OR BURN IN HELL!"

Potty mouths repent!

I’d never seen one of these guys in the wild. Not in Portland. I’ve seen them on YouTube, where they often get into fights with people. Or sometimes, they get attacked.

As I got closer, I could read the large sign and its long list of hell-bound sinners:

  • Perverts
  • Fornicators
  • Homosexuals
  • Adulterers
  • Potty mouths
  • Drunkards
  • Thieves
  • Liars
  • Used car salesmen (yes, this was on the list)

The street preacher was a skinny, youngish guy (30?) with a trendy mustache. He wore a cap that said in big letters, "OBEY GOD."

He was standing on the corner, just outside my pizzeria. At the moment I went inside, he was being yelled at by a short, angry, gray-haired man (50?). I didn’t hear what was being said. I went inside.

Once I had my slice, I sat by the window so I could further observe the adventures of the street preacher and his sign.

By then, the short, angry guy had left. What had he been yelling about? He was probably outraged that a street preacher would dare come plant himself in the middle of the liberal Hawthorne district. And it was June! It was still Pride Month!

We need to have a dialogue

Once the short, angry guy was gone, things calmed down. But other people continued to stop and gawk at the street preacher or engage him in conversation.

For a while, a young woman (25?) was questioning him. She wasn’t yelling, but she seemed pretty worked up.

The street preacher listened to her and seemed to consider what she was saying. I was surprised by how intelligent he looked. Also, he was a reasonably good-looking guy. He wasn’t the pot-bellied, crew-cut fanatic one might expect.

Does God exist?

By the time I finished my pizza slice, a new crowd of people had formed around the street preacher. I went outside and joined the group. I wanted to hear what people were saying.

A middle-aged man wearing cargo shorts and Teva sandals was asking the street preacher questions: If there’s a God, why are there wars? Why is there poverty and disease? And how could God send anyone to burn in hell for eternity? Doesn’t God forgive? Doesn’t He love everyone equally?

To me, these questions sounded like what a 14-year-old would ask. Which made me wonder to myself: “Is everyone in Portland 14?”

RELATED: What was the 'alt-right'? 'Whitepill' clears up the media hysteria

Passage Publishing; Washington Post/Getty Images

What would Jesus do?

Another bystander joined in. He said that Christ didn’t go around denouncing people for their sexual preference. How could the street preacher carry a sign criticizing any people? Jesus would never do that.

The street preacher’s reply was something like: “The true God is a rigorous God. A righteous God. A God who does not tolerate sin. A God who does not excuse liars and perverts. God wants us to be godly. He wants us to live godly lives.”

A green-haired woman said: “Are you sure God is a He?”

The street preacher said: “God is our heavenly Father. He knows what is best for us. It is not our place to negotiate with Him. It is our place to obey Him.”

Classic liberal beliefs

That quieted the nonbelievers for a moment. But then other people chimed in. They espoused the classic liberal belief that “tolerance” and “acceptance” were always best. Who are we to judge?

But the street preacher stuck with his “rigorous” God idea. God had given us simple instructions. It was up to us to follow them. If you think you have a better plan than God ... if you think you know better than God ... well, good luck with that!

So who won the debate?

I don’t think anyone changed their minds during these discussions. But it was interesting to watch. People were respectful of each other at least. That was nice to see.

The main thing I took away from the debate was how poised the street preacher was. He was deep in enemy territory. But he never lost his cool. And he had clear and succinct responses to every question.

It was the Hawthorne atheists who couldn’t really articulate a coherent position. The best they could come up with was: “If God exists, why are people sad?”

Nor could the onlookers match the street preacher’s moral conviction. They were relativists. They couldn’t say what was “bad” or “good.” Anything could be “good,” if that’s what you were “into.”

Which worked fine in nonbinary, morally ambiguous Portland. But it wasn’t going to win an argument with this street preacher. Not today. Not even with the entire Hawthorne district backing you. This guy was taking on all comers. And he was not backing down.

New Film Asks If America Can Survive Without Virtue

A new documentary asks whether the republic can survive if it loses the very thing the Founders believed made self-governance possible? That is, virtue.

'Supergirl' Milly Alcock's most fearsome foe? Christian dads



The star of the upcoming "Supergirl" movie says she has one major weakness — and it isn't Kryptonite.

It's the online trolls.

'I'm actively trying not to engage — although how could you not?'

Super grrrl

In a recent Variety interview, Australian actress Milly Alcock talked about dealing with fan backlash — specifically reaction to comments she made about working on "Game of Thrones" prequel "House of the Dragon."

Speaking to "Vanity Fair" in March, the 26-year-old said the role "definitely made me aware that simply existing as a woman in that space is something that people comment on," before adding, "We have become very comfortable having this weird ownership of women's bodies. I can't really stop them. I can only be myself."

Now Alcock says any fans who took this as some kind of feminist male-bashing are way off base.

“I didn’t even say ‘men’ — I said ‘people'! And they got so angry. I was like, ‘You’re proving my point. You’re proving my point!’”

While Alcock said she struggles not to let her haters get to her, she admitted that the "pain" of such interactions allow her to connect with her superhero character, who also has to navigate a dangerous world filled with evildoers.

RELATED: BOX OFFICE KRYPTONITE: 'Supergirl' star flames fans ahead of premiere

Frazer Harrison/WireImage

Christian dads

For Alcock, what makes "online forums" especially dangerous is the "unhealthy relationship" they encourage users to have with celebrities.

Especially worrisome are the posters who — like most supervillains — disguise themselves.

"[P]eople whose profiles have no photo, who are burner accounts. Or someone's name and then 'Dad of four, Christian,' which is hilarious to me. But I mean, whose opinion do you really care about? If you're pissing the right kind of people off, you're doing OK."

RELATED: 'Supergirl' star expects backlash because fans have 'weird ownership of women's bodies' — the responses are hilarious

Jeff Spicer/Getty Images

Child of the internet

Although Alcock's theory is that all comic-book movie characters let their fans down, it seems more likely that her later admission that she spends too much time online is the actual culprit.

While being described as a child of the internet who finds it really hard to put down her phone, Alcock said it was "because sometimes people reinforce beliefs that you have about yourself, and you're like, 'Now someone’s said it! It's true!' And you've got to remind yourself that it's not."

"Sitting at a café and watching people and reading alone — just being a participant in real life — has been helpful,” she told the outlet.

She chalked this behavior up to her age, despite having had major acting roles her entire adult life.

"I'm Gen Z! Yeah, I grew up online, so I'm actively trying not to engage — although how could you not?"

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Artemis II pilot Victor Glover tells schoolkids to put teamwork over race



Artemis II pilot Victor Glover is showing kids that progressive ideology and groupthink are not pathways to success.

Despite the media's persistent interest in the color of his skin, the 50-year-old NASA astronaut prefers to keep the focus on his crew's historic April 6 spaceflight, which marks the farthest distance humans have ever traveled from Earth.

'I think one of the reasons we were as successful as we [were] is we spent a lot of time thinking about us and not me individually.'

This was once again evident Friday, when the team of four sat down for a "CBS Mornings" town hall, taking questions from children from nearby science-focused school M.S. 255 Salk School of Science.

No DEI in 'team'

"How did it feel to be the first person of color to fly to or around the moon?" an 11-year-old girl named Ameya asked, 10 minutes into the discussion.

Glover replied with a smile, "I will tell you one of the things about swinging for the fence and trying to hit a home run when the game is on the line is if you think about that, that can add pressure and make you not go up there and and play your best game."

The astronaut said instead he "focused a lot on working with this team and trying to be a good teammate," before stressing the importance of being a team member, and not focusing on individual attributes.

"I think one of the reasons we were as successful as we [were] is we spent a lot of time thinking about us and not me individually."

Glover continued, "I would answer this by maybe just making a visual lesson here that I spent a lot of time thinking about this patch and this patch," he said while pointing to his NASA patch and then the United States flag, "and not this patch," pointing to his own name.

"And now we get to be here and we get to talk about it, though."

RELATED: 'I wanted to thank God in public': Fighting tears, Victor Glover gives legendary speech on return to Earth

-

'Human history'

Glover has been fielding such questions since the mission was announced. Just three days before the launch, a journalist asked Glover what being the "first black man" to travel to the moon meant to him.

Glover dismissed the notion, saying he hoped society would be "pushing the other direction" so that one day "we don't have to talk about these firsts."

"This is the human history," he emphasized. "It's about human history. It's the story of humanity, not black history, not women's history, but that it becomes human history."

RELATED: Victor Glover reminded us what an American is

Todd Owyoung/NBC/Getty Images

Glory to God

Glover has also been known to put his Christianity before ethnic identity.

Glover has used his time in the spotlight to talk about his faith. Just before circumnavigating the moon, Glover shared what he called the "most important mysteries of the world" in a live radio transmission.

"Christ said in response to 'what was the greatest command' that it was to love God with all that you are. And he, also being a great teacher, said the second is equal to it, and that is to love your neighbor as yourself."

Upon returning to Earth, he made his priorities even clearer: "When this started ... I wanted to thank God in public, and I want to thank God again."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Pregnant woman reveals method to make her unborn son gay — and progressive moms cheer



A very disturbing TikTok video has gone viral after a pregnant woman recorded herself playing ABBA songs to make her unborn son gay — while thousands of mothers cheered her on in the comments and across social media.

The video shows her blasting the lyrics “Gimme, gimme, gimme a man after midnight” next to her stomach.

BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey is shocked to read the comments, which include things like, “My son is 4 and exclusively listens to Sabrina Carpenter. Hopes are very high for him being gay.”

“My son just officially came out a few months ago,” reads another comment with a cheering emoji.


Another one reads, “My son was born to ‘Dancing Queen.’ I have high hopes for him.”

“This is disgusting that you are thinking about your child’s sexuality,” Stuckey says.

“It’s a horrible thing to wish on someone. It is. Now, I’m a Christian, and I believe that homosexuality is a sin, OK. But I also think that it’s bad for society to encourage this kind of thing,” she continues.

“We should be encouraging our boys to be strong and to be brave and to be protectors and to be fighters and to rein their masculine energy into good things. Yes, and you can call that old-fashioned, but it’s true,” she adds.

Stuckey likens these mothers’ hopes for gay sons to “conversion therapy” and calls it “very, very grotesque.”

“I talk about this concept of what I call ‘toxic mommy culture’ in my book, ‘You’re Not Enough (and That’s Okay)’ — when moms make their feelings and their validation and their social image the highest priority and they project that onto their kids and they use their children as props to perform this, like, progressivism on social media for likes, affirmation, cultural approval,” Stuckey says.

“I just find this little thing that this mother is doing gross. ... Kids are always the unconsenting subjects of progressive social experiments,” she continues. “It’s not good.”

Want more from Allie Beth Stuckey?

To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

CHUBBY CHECKER: How Anne Hathaway made sure new 'Prada' sequel included models of 'all different shapes'



A movie about fashion models that joked about not eating to stay thin has completely reversed course for its sequel.

"The Devil Wears Prada 2" is the follow-up to the fangirl favorite from 2006, starring Meryl Streep and Anne Hathaway. This time around, however, Hathaway did not want the reality of the fashion industry to deter anyone from seeing her film.

'I just know that this movie is for everyone.'

Skeleton crew

The controversy started when Streep told fashion rag Harper's Bazaar that the models she saw in Milan during production were not only "beautiful and young," but also "alarmingly thin."

"I thought that all had been addressed years ago," Streep told the outlet. She added that Hathaway made the producers promise then and there that the models in the new movie would not be so thin.

"She made a beeline to the producers about it, securing promises that the models in the show that we were putting together for our film would not be so skeletal!"

"She's a stand-up girl," Streep stated.

Body doubled

This put the onus on Hathaway to explain herself to fawning activists during subsequent interviews. At the premiere in New York City, Hathaway told Variety that she had noticed "beautiful models on set," but "a lot of them were more traditionally model-sized."

"I thought the scene would be so much more enjoyable for the audience if we had just a wider range of bodies on display, because all different shapes are beautiful," Hathaway claimed.

The 43-year-old explained that she asked her producers if they thought the scene would be "stronger" if it had "a more inclusive approach to sizing."

At her behest, the producers allegedly made the changes within an hour.

RELATED: When your 'rich' neighbor can't afford furniture

Diet rights

In an interview with "Good Morning America" on Monday, Hathaway continued her campaign by saying she wanted to correct any "misinformation" about getting thin models fired "because of the size inclusivity."

"That just didn't happen. Nobody lost their jobs. In fact, it created more jobs," she claimed. "It was just about making sure that so many different body types saw themselves in a moment in the script."

Amid the hosts' gushing over her progressivism, Hathaway asked, "Isn't it better when you see so many different types of bodies up there with that?"

Original thin

"The Devil Wears Prada" had a $27.5 million opening in June 2006, eventually totaling over $326 million against a $35 million budget. The sequel seems football fields away from its original tone, however, which poked fun at the absurdity of models starving themselves.

One memorable scene included Emily Blunt's character telling Hathaway's about her lack of eating in order to stay thin.

"You look so thin," Hathaway's character says at an event.

"It's for Paris. I'm on this new diet," Blunt replies. "It's very effective. Well, I don't eat anything, and when I feel like I'm about to faint, I eat a cube of cheese. ... I'm just one stomach flu away from my goal weight."

RELATED: California doles out over $100M in taxpayer money to massive film studios

Size queens

In another red-carpet interview with Etalk, Hathaway again remarked that she relished the ability to utilize "a more inclusive approach to beauty standards" in the new film, repeating the term "traditionally sized."

The actress was met by yet another journalist eager to speak about the issue, revealing that she has been a "size inclusivity advocate for 15 years."

Hathaway boasted to the reporter that she "had seen that there were a lot of traditionally sized models in our movie, and I just know that this movie is for everyone."

Hathaway even spoke on behalf of her producers, saying they were "so embarrassed" when they realized there was a serious lack of body diversity on the movie set. Now moving the timeline to two hours, she said the producers quickly brought in more girls for the scene.

In what seemed like a borderline-forced happy-go-lucky attitude, the actress concluded that everyone feels "happier" when everybody feels "included."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Clarence Thomas: Celebrate America 250 By Doing Something To Save The Country

'[T]here are too few people who are willing to do what it takes to do the right thing; to sacrifice the popularity, flattery, comfort, and security that are the purchase price for principle.'

‘Just because you’re alive doesn’t mean you are intelligent’: Viral video shows teacher berating student for defending ICE agent who shot Renee Good



In the tumultuous wake of Renee Good’s death, a video from Minnesota’s Becker High School is going viral on social media.

The footage captures social studies teacher Dr. Heather Abrahamson heatedly arguing with a student about the fatal shooting of Good — the 37-year-old anti-ICE protester who struck ICE agent Jonathan Ross with her vehicle while deliberately impeding an immigration enforcement operation in Minneapolis on January 7.

On a recent episode of “Sara Gonzales Unfiltered,” Sara played the footage and discussed the radical politicization of our teachers’ unions and the leftist indoctrination of our youth with Teacher Freedom Alliance CEO Ryan Walters.

In the clip, Abrahamson insists that Officer Ross should have de-escalated the situation.

“Your job as a police officer is to de-escalate,” she spat, gesturing dramatically at the dissenting student, who fired back, “He had a split second.”

“Watch the video! He was not in danger,” Abrahamson retorted, ignoring the fact that footage from the incident captures Ross being propelled backward as Good’s vehicle makes contact with him and numerous reports that Ross suffered internal bleeding following the incident.

“Just because you’re yelling doesn’t mean you’re winning an argument,” the student said, refusing to bend.

“Just because you’re alive doesn’t mean you are intelligent,” Abrahamson clapped back.

The recording of this chaotic encounter, distributed by Libs of TikTok, has amassed nearly 4 million views on X and sparked intense debate over political indoctrination in classrooms.

“This is a very pervasive issue,” Sara says, displaying the following memo recently distributed by the National Education Association arguing for increased anti-ICE activism.

This kind of left-wing activism poisoning America’s classrooms, Walters says, is “a coordinated effort from the teachers’ unions.”

“‘Tell your students that the police are the enemy, that ICE is the enemy’ — and this is exactly what they're pushing into our schools,” he says. “It’s not a one-off. It’s not, well, you know, here’s some crazy left-wing socialist teacher. No, this is the teachers’ unions utilizing their foot soldiers to ... undermine this country through the classrooms.”

Sara brings up a recent Fox News article that exposed the NEA — the largest teachers’ union in the United States and the largest labor union overall in the country — for funneling millions in union funds during the 2024 fiscal year to various far-left and social justice-oriented groups and ballot initiatives.

“In a lot of these places, the teachers don’t have a choice. They have to join the union. They have to pay the fees,” Sara says. “I mean, it’s adding insult to injury that you’re essentially stealing from someone because they want to have the occupation as a teacher and then you’re using it to fund [left-wing] causes.”

Walters says that it’s paramount that we stop them.

“We have to defund them. Every teacher, you should opt out. Go to optouttoday.com. Get out of the union. Quit paying union fees to destroy this country. ... And every state should be passing legislation to rail back on the union’s power. There shouldn’t be teachers’ unions,” he says.

“What you have in the teachers’ union is this huge apparatus of power. They have a ton of money. They have a ton of resources. They are embedded in the Democrat Party. They are one of their biggest funders,” he continues.

Walters warns that if we fail to defeat teachers’ unions, the consequences are potentially massive: “They’re going to gear up all this before the congressional elections, just like they did for Kamala Harris when over $400 million went from the teachers’ union to her presidential campaign. Same thing’s going to happen in this election cycle.”

But the money is just the weapon — the real war is in our classrooms.

Teachers’ unions, Walters says, have been instrumental in brainwashing younger generations into becoming America-hating, die-hard Democrats.

“We didn’t just wake up one day ... [with] millions of kids that sit here and think we’re an evil, racist country. They think cops are bad guys. That didn’t just happen. It happened because of a coordinated attack,” he says.

The viral video of Dr. Abrahamson insulting a student’s intelligence because he refused to condemn an ICE agent he believes acted in self-defense is merely one thread in a vast tapestry of proof.

“We’ve got to turn this around 180 degrees in the other direction and go back to a patriotic education, love of country, love of American values. We’ve got to get back to that,” Walters urges.

To hear more of the conversation and see the viral video, watch the episode above.

Want more from Sara Gonzales?

To enjoy more of Sara's no-holds-barred takes on news and culture, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.