Because that’s what sells. That is, most people aren’t going to spend the time and the effort (compare circulations of US magazine with the Economist or USA Today with the Wall Street Journal) to read/listen to an actual expert when they can have Susan Sarandon rant about an issue for 30 seconds and then plug her latest “project”.
Yikes! I just now noticed that this is in Cafe Society. I could have sworn… Apologies for coming off like it was Great Debates. So, um, Reese Witherspoon’s dress was tasteful, I thought.
That’s exactly it, it has to do with the market, and how pretty Brad Pitt looks on TV, not the validity of the opinions.
If any of these stars want to come to the SDMB and debate us here they’re welcome to it, but they’re more interested in self-promotion than learning about Godwin’s rule, the meaning of ad hominem, or how to make a cite.
Agreed. Hollywood only seems to be liberal because the conservative brain trust behind the Republican party have deliberately pursued strategies designed to appeal to the “culture war/religious right” crowd and alienate most of the people in the entertainment industry. Hollywood, until fairly recently, always had a significant block of people who were conservative on economic and/or foreign policy issues who openly supported the Republicans. The only reason many don’t do this now is because the party has drifted too far to the right on social and cultural issues.
That belief, unfortunately, is still present. Except now it’s cleverly hidden under many layers of code words and qualifiers.
More evidence of a Joooooish plot!
Unfortunately, because Brad Pitt (and others) looks pretty on TV, the opinions expressed become valid. People then apply all these rather whacked out views (scientology, just for example) to all Californians, forgetting that these people are not only doing nothing more than self promotion, they’re not even Californian. That’s how we end up with governors with Austrian accents. Dammit.
Personally I get a kick out of these fatheads spouting their opinion as if were some universal truth the rest of the world needs to hear about. They always get caught flatfooted when confronted by someone who actually knows about the issues they just glossed over.
And it doesn’t go for just actors. I’m sick of musicians tell nations how to act. (yeah Bono I’m looking at you!!!) Since when did knowing how to put chords and lyrics together equate into being a super genius Know it all?
I watched Sir Paul McCartney, well actually more like his wife, try to debate the Premier of Newfoundland (Oh yeah Mr King where the hell is newFinland?!) on the Seal hunt. His arguments… baby pups are cute and shouldn’t be clubbed. When the facts that it has been illegal to hunt the pups in the last 16 years and that 90% of seals are shot and not clubbed were revealed his only answer was baby pups are cute and shouldn’t be clubbed. Oh and something about Red lobster sales would increase… I assume they are talking about the sea bug and not the restaurant chain.
But what do I know, I’m not an actor or a musician.
Are we talking about Hollywood celebrities or self-proclaimed talk radio pundits here?
Different sides of the same cloth.
Really, is there a difference these days?
The film project will probably do more good in the long run. If it actually changes public perceptions, and leads to more left-wing choices in the voting booth.
Giving money to relieve the sufferings of the poor through direct relief is like using morphine to treat cancer. There’s no reason you shouldn’t have the morphine – but it doesn’t really change anything, and it might lull you into ignoring the real problem until it’s too late.
And how many films have done this? If you look at the list of popular, great, influential films, virtually all are pastiche and formula. Medium Cool might have lit the pilot lights on a few social liberals, but I doubt your average man on the street could even identify the film much less extract a message from it.
I love film, but even the best of it is largely disposal entertainment that doesn’t effect any change…Dirty Rotten Scoundrels aside, of course. 
Stranger
Would someone like to tell me who is allowed to express their opinions in public, then? Apparently celebrities who do it are bad, but according to various posts in this thread, so too are musicians, members of the media and elected officials who used to be celebrities.
So, entertainers, commentators and politicians aren’t allowed to have opinions. As for people who are - I’ve heard positive support for SDMB Posters and Women From Ohio Who Use Susan Sarandon’s Microphone - a microphone which may or may not belong to Susan Sarandon.
Two questions:
- Is there anyone else who is allowed to publicly express their opinion?
- What should be done about Susan Sarandon’s questionable microphone ownership?
Wait a minute… You’ve lost me. Hollywood produces formulaic pictures at an Oklahoma Truckstop?
That’s the secret to their success.
Now I’ve let the cat out of the bag, and everyone is going to be making crap thrillers, creepy romantic comedies, and incomprehenisble sci-fi movies. Ah well, at least it’ll boost the economy of Oklahoma.
Stranger
Oh yeah, really courageous of Hollywood to make a movie dissing McCarthyism. Or pointing out that racism is a bad thing. Way to step way out on a limb there, guys.
Let’s see if Hollywood can make the following films:
[ul]
[li]A movie about Vietnam in which the peace movement is shown as responsible for the U.S. pulling out, told from the perspective of a South Vietnamese family that is wiped out when the North Vietnamese start executing people.[/li][li]A sympathetic, accurate rendition of Atlas Shrugged, in which collectivists are actually portrayed as being evil and/or weak.[/li][li]A heroic portrait of Ronald Reagan, or even a movie about Reagan as a young man, shown as sympathetically as the murdering bastard Che Guevera was portrayed in The Motorcycle Diaries.[/li][li]A movie version of The Gulag Archipelago. Although they might do this one some day, since commie-chic is starting to fall out of favor in Hollywood.[/li][/ul]
Let’s face it. Hollywood is an insular community in which the ‘daring’ filmmakers make movies that preach to the choir of their own peers, then they pat themselves on the back for taking on ‘hard’ issues. Please. You want to take on a hard issue? Make a movie showing how the welfare state has damaged society. Or even make one movie like that for every ten anti-capitalist, businessmen-are-evil, heroic-worker-standing-up-to-the-man movies.
This is the daring community that not only ignored Theo Van Gogh’s Submission, but didn’t even have the balls to put his picture on their Oscar Obituary montage last year, despite his being a member of the academy who was murdered for his craft. They’ll still make movies about a 50 year old blacklist, but when a director is actually murdered for expressing his art…silence.
[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
Let’s see if Hollywood can make the following films:
[ul]
[li]A movie about Vietnam in which the peace movement is shown as responsible for the U.S. pulling out, told from the perspective of a South Vietnamese family that is wiped out when the North Vietnamese start executing people.[/ul][/li][/quote]
Well, there is The Killing Fields. Not Viet Nam, but it demonstrated the effect of fair-weather American intervention in Southeast Asia.
[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
[ul][li]A heroic portrait of Ronald Reagan, or even a movie about Reagan as a young man, shown as sympathetically as the murdering bastard Che Guevera was portrayed in The Motorcycle Diaries.[/ul][/li][/quote]
To be fair, The Motorcycle Diaries was not a Hollywood picture–the financing and production was all foreign–and it only covered Guevera’s early years, not his later (quite viscious) activities. I doubt a credible biopic of Reagan could make him out to be heroic in any sense of the word; he was an actor and celebrity, plain and simple.
[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
[ul][li]A movie version of The Gulag Archipelago. Although they might do this one some day, since commie-chic is starting to fall out of favor in Hollywood.[/ul][/li][/quote]
I’d love to see this, or an adaptation of One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich. Such a great story. Have you seen The Inner Circle?
Stranger
There was this version made in 1970. I don’t know if it’s available on video or DVD.
You mean likethis?
Let’s check out the Best Picture winner of the past 30 years (complete with Coulteresque desription):
1976 Rocky (everyone can be a winner)
1977 Annie Hall (even geeks get the girl)
1978 Deer Hunter (being a POW sucks)
1979 Kramer vs. Kramer (Love doesn’t last for Baby Boomers)
1980 Ordinary People (Middle class families are dysfunctional)
1981 Chariots of Fire (everyone can be a winner)
1982 Gandhi (non-offensive bio-pic)
1983 Terms of endearment (growing older ain’t so bad)
1984 Amadeus (non-offensive bio-pic)
1985 Out of Africa (non-offensive bio-pic)
1986 Platoon (war is hell)
1987 The Last Emperor (non-offensve bio-pic)
1988 Rain Man (be there for your family)
1989 Driving Miss Daisy (the end of an era)
1990 Dances With Wolves (we did bad things to injuns)
1991 The Silence of the Lambs (even villains can be charming)
1992 Unforgiven (the end of an era)
1993 Schindler’s List (Nazis are bad)
1994 Forrest Gump (being a baby boomer was fun)
1995 Braveheart (Brits did bad things to Scots)
1996 The Enlish Patient (non-offensive set piece)
1997 Titanic (non-offensive set piece)
1998 Shakespear in Love (non offensive set piece and bio-pic)
1999 American Beauty (middle class families are dysfuntional… oh, and Humbert Learns)
2000 Gladiator (non offensive set piece)
2001 A beautiful Mind (non offensive bio-pic)
2002 Chicago (non-offensive set piece)
2003 The Return of the King (Lifetime achievment award)
2004 Million Dollar Baby (everyone can be a winner)
2005 Crash (we did bad things to blacks, and still do)
The list of Best Picture winners doesn’t show a single movie that dealt with contemporary social or political issues. The closest might be Deer Hunter and Platoon. But neither of these Vietnam movies actually dealt with the U.S. involvement in SE Asia. It’s interesting that the Oliver Stone movie that won an Oscar was Platoon, not Salvador.
All in all, when Hollywood has an office party and gives out employee of the month type awards, being edgy and controversial is not a trait that is encouraged.
I saw it, and it was quite good, and quite faithful to the book. I’ve read all three volumes of the Gulag Archipelago, (how many of you knew there was three volumes) but no matter how much I loved it, I can’t see it as a movie.
Anyhow, since Lillian Hellman died, I’m not sure how many Stalinists are left in Hollywood.