Earlier this week, Iranian-backed forces launched a drone attack that killed three US soldiers at the Tower 22 outpost in the sovereign nation of Jordan. Fears of a wider regional war breaking out have never been higher.

Tower 22 is a logistical safe zone within walking distance of Syria used to support the al-Tanf airbase, which is illegally situated in US-occupied Syrian territory. The al-Tanf facility, which Jewish foreign policy makers established during Operation Inherent Resolve to prevent Syrian access to the Damascus-Baghdad highway, is a permanent source of regional mischief.

Multiple intelligence services, local Arab tribesmen, and former paramilitary operatives employed by the CIA at al-Tanf have accused the base of being a covert training and provisions center for both ISIS and Al-Qaeda. Fighters are given weapons, then dispatched to wreak havoc against Russian, Syrian and Iranian troops and civilians throughout Homs and Deir ez-Zor, as well as in nearby Iraqi territory.

For this reason, the al-Tanf base and its surrounding 34 mile “deconfliction zone� has for years been targeted by a myriad of actors, including the Russian air force.

The decision from Iraqi militia members to hit al-Tanf on the less defended Jordanian side was likely intended to draw blood in revenge for the US assassination of Popular Mobilization Unit leader Mushtaq Jawad Kazim al-Jawari, who was murdered in a reckless broad daylight drone attack in front of the Iraqi government’s Interior Ministry building in early January. Joe Biden may have feigned shock and outrage in public, but it is unlikely that Washington was too surprised by the response they received for this action. Foreign policy analysts have concluded that American troop deployments in these conflict zones are intended to be provocative and soldiers are deliberately exposed to danger as “tripwires� to justify deeper US engagement on behalf of Israel.

Israel Is Being Defeated

Washington has exhausted almost every feasible course of action to allow Israel a freehand without any red lines against the Palestinians. Since the start of the Jewish nation’s invasion of Gaza, the US has dispatched its navy to the Eastern Mediterranean to deter Hezbollah on Israel’s northern border, on top of sending 2,000 Special Forces soldiers and massive arms transfers (including taking desperately needed artillery shells from the collapsing Ukrainian military) to aid Benjamin Netanyahu’s rampage.

Since October 7th, the US has been relentlessly assassinating anti-Israel leaders in Iraq and Syria and bombing facilities used by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps with impunity. Both Britain and the United States have launched a military campaign against the Houthis in Yemen, Operation Prosperity Guardian, to safeguard Israeli economic interests in the Red Sea at everybody else’s expense. The US and its British vassal state have functioned as Israel’s lawyer before international bodies, shielding the Jewish state from meaningful diplomatic consequences for its systematic atrocities against women and children.

What new escalatory options does the Biden administration even have? So far, none of the aforementioned actions have succeeded in deterring Israel’s regional opponents, whose sole demand is that Tel Aviv stop the slaughter.

Broadly speaking, Israel’s war in Gaza is failing. Casualties are mounting, public anger is growing over Netanyahu’s ineptitude, and after 117 days of war, not a single strategic objective has been met.

Politically and morally, the proud inhumanity of Jewish leaders has caused global anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist sentiment to surge to record highs. Israeli forces have stalled in the mission of releasing any hostages outside of diplomatic channels, which is a personal embarrassment for Netanyahu. Israeli media has been reporting on stories of IDF soldiers actually killing their own people with poison gas during chemical warfare attacks against militants in Hamas tunnels. In a separate anecdote, three Jewish hostages waving white flags were executed in cold blood by IDF soldiers, who confused them for Palestinian civilians from a distance.

The full scope of manpower attrition in the Israeli military is a known-unknown. Following the propaganda strategy of Zelensky’s Ukraine, IDF military censors have placed an unprecedented gag on reporting casualties they have suffered so far in the war. This has demoralized Israelis who want to publicly acknowledge the dead soldiers in their families as heroes, especially since the Netanyahu government is in practice failing to contain loudening whispers of historically unprecedented losses. To get a general idea of Israeli losses in the war, an investigation by Haaretz from December found that over 10,500 IDF soldiers were admitted for battlefield wounds in hospitals. Fatalities are speculated to be in the thousands.

On the Palestinian side, almost all of the casualties inflicted by Israel are militarily insignificant. At least 90% of the Palestinians killed by Israel are helpless civilians, with 40%, or 10,000, being children. This was previously unheard of in the history of warfare and an unambiguous crime against humanity under international law. By comparison, in World War II, where the Allies utilized area bombing of civilians as policy in instances such as Dresden, the ratio of civilian casualties never rose above 50%. Massacring the women, children and elderly of Gaza is a, poorly kept, secret objective in this war.

One of the most sociologically unique aspects of the United States is the everlasting prominence of Evangelical, or Born-Again, Christians. The group is known for its literal interpretation of the Bible, espousal of Whig individualism on both spiritual and economic matters, and their rabid Zionist posture on foreign policy matters, often rationalized through end-of-the-world prophecies and a largely one-way devotion to the interests of modern day Jews and the Jewish state.

The heyday of Evangelicals appears to be behind them, but they remain the largest Christian sect in all of America (24%), only being narrowly edged out in 2022 by those who checked the generic no religion box. The main institution where their influence can be seen is the Republican Party, where they form an important constituency and play the role of zealous activists.

But Christian Zionist dominance and the contemporary religious right are relatively new. Prior to the Second World War, Evangelicals were a small, poorly received sect operating on the fringes of the American Protestant landscape. Despite lacking theology respected among rival Protestants of their time and being widely perceived as con artists and gladhanders, Evangelicals were able to triumph over their competitors and critics to become contenders for the title of America’s church.

Dwight Eisenhower’s “Judeo-Christian� Nation

In 1952, Allied General Dwight Eisenhower won a landslide victory over Democrat Adlai Stevenson on a platform promising to halt the expansion of the Soviet Union and the spread of its ideas.

Jews had traditionally been most influential within the Democratic party, but Ike was different. He was able to distinguish himself from old money WASP oriented Republican primary challengers by forming politically and financially profitable alliances with prominent Jewish figures who would later play important roles in his two administrations, such as political power broker Jacob Javits, Standard Oil oligarch Jacob Blaustein (a known Democrat), Maxwell Rabb (Eisenhower’s top advisor), and Simon Sobeloff (the Solicitor General who played a central role in overturning segregated schools in the Brown v. Board case, as well as protecting Jews during the “red scare�). These contacts, established over promises to advance the interests of American Jewry and support the recently created state of Israel, gave Eisenhower a formidable edge in press coverage and big business support during the ‘52 trouncing of Stevenson.

Mobilizing the American people in support of new foreign interventions (such as the Korean War) so soon after a massive war was a top priority for the Eisenhower administration. The problem for policy makers at the time was that America did not have a cogent state ideology capable of sustaining the planned global democracy crusade. The Eisenhower government was acutely aware of this vulnerability, since the American state, through structures such as the Dickstein Committee (later the House Un-American Activities), spent much of the first half of the 20th century desperately trying to contain what they perceived as domestic threats: communists, socialists, isolationists, nativists, and even an incident where a German immigrant held a Third Reich-style mass rally in Madison Square Garden.

The vacuum created by the lack of an official, well-articulated counter to communism during the Great Depression was filled by the rise of anti-Jewish and anti-establishment populism, which thrived in both urban and heartland America thanks to figures such as Henry Ford, Gerald LK Smith, the America First movement, Huey Long, Father Charles C. Coughlin, and even an explicitly Fascist shirt movement led by William Dudley Pelley. Many of these figures looked to Mussolini and Hitler for answers, which horrified the FDR administration and spurred it into frenzied political crackdowns. A number of these anti-communist dissidents and populist firebrands even put aside their religious differences to promote the broadly secular, socialistic and nationalist Share Our Wealth movement (led by Long, Smith and Coughlin), which then transformed into a campaign against FDR’s plan to enter World War II. These powerful orators and skilled organizers found many supporters through easily understood and intuitive arguments emphasizing the lack of an American interest in a new European conflict, while also making the case that the US government’s support for the Soviet Union against Germany and Italy was evidence that Washington was compromised by Judeo-communist sympathizers and spies. Pre-war anti-communism in America was rife with authoritarian, collectivist, anti-interventionist, anti-Jewish and at times racialist ideas that figures such as Eisenhower and Javits saw as national security threats.

For Eisenhower the values and discourse of Long, Coughlin, Smith and so on were unacceptable and anti-American, not to mention frightening to his Jewish associates. Eisenhower, with strong input from representatives of organized Jewry, would go on to author a new response to the Soviet Union’s promise of heaven on earth, one that championed a vision of a racially egalitarian, individualistic, militarily aggressive, and most importantly, Jewish-friendly but loudly Christian United States.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was the first president to refer to America as a “Judeo-Christian� nation, at times in a defensive tone when responding to “anti-Semitic� critics, but the strange and ahistorical portmanteau only became common parlance during the Eisenhower years.

A month before his inauguration in December 1952, Eisenhower outlined the worldview America would take into the Cold War:

“And this is how they [the Founding Fathers] explained those: “we hold that all men are endowed by their Creator…” not by the accident of their birth, not by the color of their skins or by anything else, but “all men are endowed by their Creator”. In other words, our form of government has no sense unless it is founded in a deeply felt religious faith, and I don’t care what it is. Of course, it is the Judeo-Christian concept, but it must be a religion with all men being created equal.â€�

The main barrier for implementing this doctrine was that Americans were not particularly religious. In 1945, only around 65% of Americans self-identified with a church denomination, a figure that’s lower than present-day religiosity.

The Russia-Ukraine war is almost two years old with no apparent diplomatic solution in sight.

There is a consensus among analysts on all sides that Moscow is going into 2024 with a decisive advantage in the conflict. Russian planners have set aside 6% of their GDP towards war production to give themselves a massive material edge over the NATO-backed Ukraine forces, which has brought record low unemployment and a booming economy as Vladimir Putin’s re-election bid approaches.

On the civilian front, Russia’s oil and gas economy has thrived under financial attacks from the liberal G7 and its international economic institutions by successfully pivoting towards new export markets in developing countries. The most absurd development in the counter-intuitive blossoming of Russia’s energy sector can be seen in Western European nations exploiting loopholes in their own sanctions program so that they can continue to purchase Russian liquified natural gas at historically unprecedented rates.

On the Ukrainian side, the news is comparatively grim. Kiev is slowly losing ground, running out of artillery shells, and has been unable to mount any successful counter-attacks. Russian forces neutralized Ukraine’s ability to produce weapons and munitions early on, leading to dependence on NATO weapon’s transfers to continue prosecuting the war that have been lagging as of late. Aiding the Ukraine is encountering controversy throughout Eastern Europe, as seen in the NATO stalwart of Poland, where truckers are physically blocking the Ukrainian border in protest. As of the time of this writing, large and expensive Ukraine aid packages are being blocked by the moustache-twirling villains in the liberal democratic stage play — Viktor Orban in Hungary and the US Republicans in Congress — but this is most likely political cover for the fact that meeting Ukraine’s armament needs would require NATO nations to transition towards military economies, which US and EU leaders are reluctant to commit to.

Adding to this dilemma is the Ukrainian state’s difficulty conscripting military aged men. Approximately 50% (4.5 million) of potential recruits are hiding from the draft, leading to a manpower crisis the Rada is trying to solve by conscripting prisoners and implementing Soviet-style punitive measures for hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian men who escaped the country.

Chief among these pressing concerns is the mounting, arguably ethnic, tensions between Ukraine’s military and its government.

Jews are only 0.3% of the Ukrainian population, yet today’s Ukraine has the most Jewish government since the early Bolshevik era. Aside from Volodymyr Zelensky, Ukraine’s Jewish wartime regime is being led by Prime Minister Denys Shmyhal, Adriy Yermak and the criminal Serhiy Shefir. Until last fall, Ukraine had a Jewish defense minister, Oleksii Reznikov, who Zelensky — apparently distrusting ethnic Ukrainians with sensitive decision-making in their own war effort — replaced with a Tatar Muslim.

The ramifications of this disconnect between the Jewish government and its Gentile armed forces was put on grisly display in Bakhmut, where civilian authorities showed immense contempt for the lives of young Ukrainian men.

After Russian forces successfully surrounded Bakhmut, Ukrainian commander-in-chief Valerii Zaluzhnyi began to plead with Zelensky to stop throwing away the lives of soldiers for a strategically insignificant objective. Zelensky responded by going around Zaluzhnyi and ordering the Ukrainians to attack, leading to enormous casualties without any results.

Last November, the frustrated General Zaluzhnyi told The Economist that the war was stuck in a stalemate and his men were being sent to die by the thousands in impossible offensives. According to reporting from Seymour Hersh, Zaluzhnyi has even made attempts to circumvent the delusional maximalist war aims of the Zelensky regime and negotiate for peace with his Russian counterparts.

Rather than consider his top general’s advice, Zelensky has attempted to sully his reputation (Zaluzhnyi is far more popular than Zelensky) by roping the Ukrainian patriot into a politicized investigation established on the pretense of rooting out alleged traitors that aided Russian forces early in the war. For now, Zaluzhnyi is only a witness in the case, but his supporters believe that this could change any second and that the goal is to extort him into subservience.

The widening divisions in Kiev don’t end there. Earlier this month, Zelensky and his junta have been desperately trying to combat a challenge from Oleksiy Arestovych, one of the few white Gentiles in the president’s inner circle, who is now campaigning for office against him on a platform of ending the war. Arestovych has been forced into exile to the United States due to fears of being arrested or assassinated by Zelensky’s henchmen.

In an explosive interview with Unherd, Arestovych confirmed that Ukrainian forces have suffered at least 200,000 deaths, a grisly fact Zelensky and his backers in Brussels and Washington have sought to keep secret. He followed this up with a declaration, which the Kremlin recently corroborated, that the unimaginable intensification of this war was caused by the decision made by Zelensky and his US/British sponsors to sabotage the Spring 2022 Istanbul process.

After the Russian military secured the Donbass and was repelled from Kiev, Arestovych states that he successfully negotiated a relatively favorable peace deal with Putin’s government through international mediators in Turkey. As the ink dried on the agreement and Arestovych opened a bottle of Champagne, images of the alleged April 2022 Bucha atrocity suddenly began to circulate throughout global media. Zelensky capitalized on this, using Bucha as an excuse to unilaterally veto the peace accords and suspend all communication with Russia.

The New York Times has just reported that the Pentagon launched a third round of airstrikes against the Houthis in Northern Yemen. Analysts appear to be in consensus that this will not deter them, nor is it possible to limit their capacity to undermine commerce to Israel in the Red Sea without on-the-ground engagement in Yemen.

The United States has been at war with the pro-Iran Houthi rebels since 2015, when the Obama administration cobbled together a coalition of Gulf monarchies to invade Yemen and prop up the local puppet regime banished to the country’s south. The purpose of this was largely to protect Israeli interests in the region, as Washington predicted (in hindsight, accurately) that a Houthi government in Sanaa would wreak havoc on the Jewish state.

The war intensified under Donald Trump. The Pentagon outfitted the Saudi-UAE effort with $100 billion dollars in modern weaponry, as well as logistical support and diplomatic cover for the horrific embargo on the port of Hodeidah. Hundreds of thousands of innocent people, a high number of them children, died in a man-made famine during this blockade.

It wasn’t enough to break the Houthis. As the Ottomans, British, and most recently the Saudis have learned, Yemen is a furnace that melts armies.

In Northern Yemen, the Houthis served the Saudis the most embarrassing defeat any nation has endured in the 21st century. Through their resourcefulness and sheer will power, the Houthis neutralized the massive Saudi edge. A few years into the war, the Gulf State’s mercenary forces pretty much gave up on combating the rebels and decided instead to take out their frustration on Yemen’s civilians.

The final blow to the Saudis came in September 2019, when the Houthis began Operation Victory From God. Houthi forces lured the Saudi military into a massive ambush, killing 500 coalition soldiers and capturing thousands more.

As the Houthis paraded scores of captured enemy soldiers and vehicles, they shocked the world again with a massive drone attack in the Saudi heartland, wrecking two oil refineries and triggering the largest sudden spike in global energy prices in history. The plucky Houthis forced Riyadh to its knees, and soon after to the negotiating table.

Fast forward to 2024. The United States and Britain have, without legal permission from their own governments, effectively entered the Israel-Palestine conflict through the initiation of Operation Prosperity Guardian. So far, the campaign has been firing $2 million dollar Tomahawk missiles at the buzzing flies pestering Israeli economic interests at sea, without any tangible results.

The Houthi ruling council have made their demands clear: they are only interested in attacking ships destined for Israeli ports or owned by Israelis in accordance with international law that compels nations to intervene against acts of genocide. They have vowed to stop when the killing of Gazans ends and humanitarian relief is allowed to reach the suffering Palestinians.

Ships traveling from China to Europe have so far had no issues sailing through the Red Sea. Their secret is to not involve themselves on the side of Israel. There are reports in US media of Houthis hitting random cargo vessels, but this should be taken with a grain of salt. The government in Northern Yemen has provided advanced warning that agents of the UAE were targeting non-Israeli vessels from parts of Yemen the rebels do not control in hopes of dragging the international community into the fray.

There are straight-forward solutions to the Houthi problem, especially now that major companies are too afraid to travel through these waters as long as the dispute lingers. One is to ditch the Israeli maniacs and let the Houthis have at them in exchange for guarantees that non-Israeli ships will be given free passage.

The other is to pressure the Israelis to negotiate a two-state solution with the Palestinians and let the children of Gaza have food and medical aid — Yemen’s demand. Houthis have done their part in respecting the terms of the 2022 negotiated ceasefire with the Saudis. They are reasonable actors as long as you deal with them politically, threats and violence have consistently failed.

Sadly, these are not viable options for America’s ruling Jewish elite. Washington would rather make a scene that disrupts global commerce over attempting to restrain Bibi and Ben Gvir. The limited and highly avoidable conflict with the Houthis is instead being used to call for a direct American attack on Iran, as a writer named Elliot Cohen recently suggested in The Atlantic. Dragging America into a wider regional war against the anti-Zionist Axis of Resistance (Iran, Houthis, Hezbollah, PMU in Iraq, and Syria) is a stated objective of many Jewish foreign policy leaders in the West, as well as the Benjamin Netanyahu government.

This puts the Biden administration in a no-win situation. Prosecuting a new Middle East war in an election year, even one limited to boots on the ground in Yemen, will basically guarantee the Democrats are voted out of power. Aside from the established perils of sending troops into mountains to fight Houthis, US forces stepping into the trap would weaken the deterrent to Hezbollah and other regional actors, which will put Israel’s existence at risk and force the US and UK to commit far more than expected.

Once a decision is made to escalate and mobilize a full American intervention in the Near East every geopolitical simmering pot the Washington empire is desperately trying to keep the lid on — Ukraine, Taiwan, and even some surprises like a new Korean war — will explode. This would spell the end of the liberal world order.

In the age of Marvel, turbo charged self-aware irony, and shoehorned diversity in film, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to find something interesting to watch.

By and large, movie lists are seldom worth publishing, but I’ve been told that I have a novel taste in cinema.

Several of these are foreign, some deal with very dark themes, others are wholesome tear jerkers. More than a few require paying close attention to enjoy, while others may make you question my intelligence. A large portion of these film are not ideological and may offend those with more delicate sensibilities.

Here are 50 films I’ve enjoyed that you may have never heard of. They are in no particular order.

Brother (1997) — This Russian gangster film deals with the country’s wild and turbulent 90s. Danila, fresh out of serving in the Chechen war, travels to St. Petersburg to work for his hitman brother. The film is rich with both subtle and overt themes.

Brother II (2000) — Danila goes to Chicago to rescue an old army buddy who plays for the NHL but is being extorted by local criminals. The film is much more light-hearted and action-oriented, but at the same time, the most accurate portrayal of race relations in urban America I’ve ever seen.

Death Wish III (1985) — This is one of many terrible sequels made to the original vigilante masterpiece, Death Wish. The movie has stink lines coming out of the can, but it’s so bad it’s hilariously good.

Ohm Krüger/Uncle Krüger (1941) — This is a Third Reich biopic about Paul Kruger, a Boer freedom fighter who led his people to war against the British Empire. The film portrays the battle between the Boers and the greedy plutocrat Cecil Rhodes who discovers gold in their lands, ultimately leading to failed attempts at diplomacy by Kruger and war. This is one of the only movies I am aware of that shows the vicious internment of Boer women and children in concentration camps during the 2nd Anglo-Boer war.

Kolberg (1945) — This was the last film made in the Third Reich, with Joseph Goebbels himself as executive producer, and considered its best. The film portrays the heroic defense by Prussian forces of a fort being besieged by Napoleon.

Factotum (2005) — An adaptation of Charles Bukowski’s novel about a drunk womanizing aspiring writer floating through the gutters of a grittier and more interesting Los Angeles that doesn’t exist anymore.

Rounders (1998) — A film starring Matt Damon and Ed Norton about two New York City underground Poker players. Movies about gamblers are a dime a dozen, but this one stands out for its counter-intuitive lesson.

The Rum Diary (2011) — This adaptation of Hunter S. Thompson’s novel was panned by critics. I have the opposite opinion. I hated Fearing and Loathing in Las Vegas, yet I enjoyed this quirky film.

The Iron Giant (1999) –- One of the best US-made animated films in the last 50 years, and one of the last before everything was Pixarized. Great for kids, but a lot for adults to think about too.

Three Days of the Condor (1975) — A Robert Redford spy thriller set in New York. Redford plays a CIA agent who writes phony novels for the agency as a form of cultural influence until he becomes a target himself after coming across high level corruption.

Cross of Iron (1977) — A British film starring James Coburn following a unit of Wehrmacht soldiers in Eastern Europe. The film is one of the best portrayals of at times obnoxious internal male dynamics I’ve encountered.

Nine Queens (2000) — This is an Argentinian film about two con artists in a long-gone white working class Buenos Aires full of amusing characters. A memorable surprise ending.

Pusher I to III (1996-2005)– A Danish gangster trilogy by director Nicolas Refn, featuring the brilliant Mads Mikkelsen. The first film is a low budget art film, but is still the second best of the three. Pusher II was my favorite, but III should not be missed either.

Good Time (2017) — This movie is special to me because it is set in Queens, where I’m from. Robert Pattinson is the older brother of a mentally handicapped man who is arrested and sent to Rikers Island, where he is viciously abused by blacks. Pattinson must quickly get the money needed to bond him out and save his life. The characters are accurate and familiar, and so is the sense of urgency.

Martyrs (2008) — This French film is an extreme horror film about a cult that tortures people to death in order to capture the power of an innocent death. This is not mere torture-porn, the film will leave you thinking about the meaning of life, death and the spirit.

I Stand Alone (1998) – Another French movie, this time by the often groundbreaking Gaspar Noe. The film captures the disenfranchisement of working class white Frenchmen.

Vortex (2021) – Another Noe movie, this time dealing with an elderly couple who are declining in old age. The film uses a revolutionary split-screen technique to bring its disturbing message of what inevitably awaits us.

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986) – Henry and Otis are not charming, interesting, or psychologically deep. They aren’t sexy, geniuses, or victims of an uncaring society. They are what most serial killers have always been: bored, nihilistic and impulsive paraphiliacs.

Ted K (2021) —A movie told from the perspective of Ted Kacynski, aka the Unabomber. I went into this with low expectations, but I enjoyed it quite a bit. The pacing is very good.

Carlos (2010) – An epic biographical picture about 1970s militant Carlos the Jackal and his work, which primarily consisted of attacking Israeli interests around the world.

The Baader Meinhof Complex (2008) — A German movie chronicling the wild rise of the Red Army Faction. In the 1970s, any kook with a gun and an idea could found a revolutionary group.

Go (1999) – A youth odyssey that irons out and improves on the terrible aspects of the eras movie making style seen in films like Run Lola Run. 90s nostalgics will enjoy this world before phones and the internet, where young people got in trouble instead.

Founder (2016) – A movie starring Michael Keaton portraying the surprisingly dark background story of McDonalds. Pay attention to the not-so-subtle ethnic, racial and social politics in this criminally underrated movie.

Steve Jobs (2015) – Not to be confused with the other Steve Jobs biopic, the mediocre Ashton Kutcher Jobs (2013). Due to being released so close to Jobs, this innovative film remains overlooked and underappreciated.

Ils/Them (2006) — A French horror movie set in Romania where a couple’s home is besieged.

Hoffa (1992) — An overlooked biopic of Teamster leader Jimmy Hoffa, who is masterfully played by Jack Nicholson. There is something special about the atmosphere of this movie that is hard to put your finger on.

Death To Smoochy (2002) – This movie, starring Ed Norton and Robin Williams, was a box office bomb. With good reason, it’s pretty bad. But it makes me laugh.

3:10 to Yuma (2007) – An admirable remake of the original Western. It brings together Christian Bale, Russell Crowe and Ben Foster, fans of cowboy movies can’t miss this.