Australian actor Kodi Smit-McPhee responded to actor Sam Elliott’s hilarious comments on award-losing film “The Power of The Dog.”
Elliott, 77, recently annoyed liberals by voicing his opinion of the film, in which Smit-McPhee, 25, leads. He said the film was a “piece of sh*t,” and that the cast were “running around in chaps and no shirts. There’s all these allusions of homosexuality throughout the f**king movie,” when asked for his opinion on Marc Maron’s “WTF” podcast.
Smit-McPhee told Variety that he had “nothing” to say about Elliott’s comments, but he totally did. Smit-McPhee, who has 34 acting credits to Elliott’s 105, said, “because I’m a mature being and I’m passionate about what I do, and I don’t really give energy to anything outside of that,” before adding, “Good luck to him.”
Kodi Smit-McPhee’s response to Sam Elliott’s criticism of #ThePowerOfTheDog? “Nothing. ‘Cause I’m a mature being and I’m passionate about what I do. And I don’t really give energy to anything outside of that.” https://t.co/Ga9t3fqQgc pic.twitter.com/csAaXI25N0
— Variety (@Variety) March 8, 2022
Smit-McPhee’s comments appeared to be provided as straight-forwardly as possible, but still read as fairly passive aggressive. Actually, they were totally bitchy.
Then again, why are we surprised? Smit-McPhee’s co-star in the boring film, Benedict Cumberbatch, clapped back at Elliott in the most cringe way possible.
Cumberbatch said Elliott’s review was a sign of “toxic masculinity.” (Insert eye-roll here). What’s better is how he chose to define “toxic masculinity.”
“I think we are to teach our sons to be feminists, if we’re to teach equality, if we’re to understand what poisons the well in men, [and] creates toxic masculinity, we need to understand and look at the hood of characters like Phil Burbank to see what their struggle is and why that’s there in the first place because otherwise it will just keep repeating itself,” Cumberbatch said, according to Consequence Film.
(Insert another massive eye-roll here).
Who is Benedict Cumberbatch to define toxic masculinity? These Hollywood liberals seem to feel like they have all the power when it comes to defining what a modern or “real man” is because they control entertainment media, and therefore, our minds.
Hollywood has done a superb job misrepresenting “toxic masculinity,” leading to the prevalence of bitchy comments in place of blunt-force honesty, like the ones provided by Cumberbatch and Smit-McPhee. (RELATED: Tim McGraw Says Sam Elliott Told Him He ‘Didn’t Learn A F**king Thing’ By Working Together On ‘1883’)
“Toxic masculinity” should be defined as any man who physically abuses a woman, child, or animal, or who emotionally abuses any living thing. A toxic man cannot physically, emotionally and financially provide for his family, or chooses not to.
A toxic man is one who is afraid to use force when it is essential for survival and safety, and toxic men make passive-aggressive comments in place of speaking their truth. Let’s be honest, what’s more toxic: making a passive aggressive, bitchy comment or manning-up and providing your potentially unpopular yet honest opinion? Even if it leads to a fight?
I am not advocating for these three men to fight. That would be unfair. Cumberbatch and Smit-McPhee are basically apocalypse food to a man like Elliot.
What I want is for men, women and children to understand that when it comes to the masculinity of the western genre, Elliot is correct — “The Power of the Dog” was completely unrealistic and did not represent real men or cowboys.
And I need people to understand that Cumberbatch is dead wrong in his assessment of toxic masculinity. We don’t need to teach our sons to be feminists. We need to teach them to be men.