On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Every once in a while, Hollywood surprises with a truly insightful film on American politics. In case you're wondering, George Clooney's new movie, "The Ides of March," is not one of those surprises.
I saw the film earlier tonight, making the strategic choice to watch it alone (a friend of mine is married to a retired cop and repeatedly complains that his background makes it impossible for her to watch police films without him incessantly critiquing their accuracy -- I was convinced that the same would apply to seeing a political film with me, a suspicion my experience would bear out).
On its merits, the film is not great; it wastes a very talented cast on a story that develops too slowly and plot 'twists' that must have seemed considerably more inventive in the writers' room than they did on screen. Worse still, its overarching message -- if you can call it that -- is that success in politics requires nothing short of undiluted cynicism and back-stabbing.
What's most telling about the filmmakers, however, is their mutilated understanding of American politics. The Clooney character is proudly irreligious; was an Iraq War protester; is pro-choice and anti-death penalty; believes the U.S. bears moral culpability for the War on Terror; thinks that America can wash its hands of the Middle East by developing hydrogen power; plans to eliminate the internal combustion engine; wants compulsory national service in exchange for free college tuition; and utters one line (before a campaign audience, no less) that seems to imply that he's opposed to the very idea of people becoming wealthy. This is a movie for those who have long pined to know what it would be like if Dennis Kucinich bore a startling resemblance to Dr. Doug Ross from ER.
Far from being a nut job former mayor of Cleveland, however, Clooney plays a man who is supposedly the successful governor of the swing state of Pennsylvania, and who is a hair's breadth away from the Democratic presidential nomination. His little-seen opponent is a senator from Arkansas, who is supposed to be a reactionary Blue Dog (because he's a Christian), though the writers muddle this by saying at one point that he's a pro-choice, tax and spend liberal. Got that? In this parallel universe, the conservative democrat is somewhere to J. William Fulbright's left.
One can write this off as nothing more than sloppy research, I suppose -- though that's a damning enough criticism of a film that self-evidently wants to be seen as Serious. But in my experience in and around Tinseltown (and here Rob certainly has more data to draw on than I), this seems to be pretty emblematic of how the Hollywood left views the world: conservative Democrats are perceived to be ideologically dangerous. By the time you get to Republicans (no matter the degree of conservatism), it's as if you're discussing an alien race.
According to a Gallup poll released in August, only 21 percent of Americans define themselves as liberals. Yet "The Ides of March" proceeds as if they're the silent majority. Perhaps that's to be expected from Hollywood, but a question lingers: doesn't it seem as if the current occupant of the White House shares that belief?
- Comment (29)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (3)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Apr '11
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
The writer of this film supposedly worked on the Howard Dean presidential campaign in 2004 and on HRC's senate campaign in 2000. That might explain something.
May '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Troy Senik
By the time you get to Republicans (no matter the degree of conservatism), it's as if you're discussing an alien race.
As I read your post the question popped into my mind, when was the last movie with a Republican protagonist? If I'm just ignorant on the subject, I'd like to be set straight. Otherwise, is there a serious mental deficiency among Hollywood writers that prevents them from creating sympathetic characters who aren't like themselves?
May '11
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Mark Wilson
As I read your post the question popped into my mind, when was the last movie with a Republican protagonist? If I'm just ignorant on the subject, I'd like to be set straight. Otherwise, is there a serious mental deficiency among Hollywood writers that prevents them from creating sympathetic characters who aren't like themselves? · Oct 21 at 11:55pm
The last one I can recall is 1992's Bob Roberts -- I don't know if the main character/candidate's party affiliation is ever mentioned, but it's pretty clear as he has fairly center-right values and is supposed to be evil incarnate.
Nov '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Thanks for the heads up, Troy. I'll steer clear. Reading the post and your descriptions of the candidates, though, struck me as a somewhat apt description of the last Democratic primary; an ideologically deluded, self-absorbed, self righteous lefty narcissist who is opposed to the very idea of people becoming wealthy, and who looked good in a suit vs. a "pro-choice, tax-and-spend liberal". Unfortunately, Democrats nominated the ideologically deluded, self-absorbed, self righteous lefty narcissist who is opposed to the very idea of people becoming wealthy and, in an extraordinary wave of Republican missteps, economic devolution, and in-the-bag shilling and blatant omissions from the mainstream press, so did a majority of the electorate. Did I miss something? Cheers.
Jun '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Overheard in rural Pennsylvania: "...it's not surprising....Hollywood gets bitter, they cling to personal trainers or sports cars or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-conservative sentiment or anti-Christian sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."
Apr '11
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
I also want to say thanks Troy, especially as there was a small possibility I might have given some money to the producers of this lefty polemic, which I hate to do. I'd been watching for a review on Ricochet as I had been extremely suspicious - after all, it's a movie about presidential candidates featuring George Clooney; how can the Republicans not be the bad guys? But I had read a movie review praising the movie that mentioned there was nothing but Democrats in it. That nearly had me fooled since logically the bad guy would therefore have to be a Democrat right? Now the light goes on: the bad guy is a not-as-lefty Southern Democrat!
May '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Sometimes I find movies extremely embarrassing for what they expose about their leading man's (and/or writer's) personal fantasies and self-delusions.
As to your closing question, I think you're exactly right. Obama behaves and talks as if the Hollywood fantasy were reality and he the leading man.
He also seems confused and disoriented and infuriated by the fact that the ending is working out the way it's supposed to.
Edited on Oct 22, 2011 at 6:37amDec '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
TS: According to a Gallup poll released in August, only 21 percent of Americans define themselves as liberals. Yet "The Ides of March" proceeds as if they're the silent majority. Perhaps that's to be expected from Hollywood, but a question lingers: doesn't it seem as if the current occupant of the White House shares that belief?
WC: He either believes liberals make up the silent majority or he believes Americans are bitter, clinging, and evil. I think he's had enough exposure to real Americans who oppose him since becoming president to believe the latter. Given the totalitarian inclinations of the Left, this does not bode well for us. Non-liberals are always the obstacle to Utopia and must either be hurdled (cf administrative lawlessness) or demolished (cf metaphorical violence in MSM and actual mob violence forthcoming in OWS).
Sorry to be a downer after a string of pleasant posts. Cheers!
Mar '11
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Strikes me as kvetching about the fact that summers are hot and sugar is sweet.
Aug '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Try The Best Man, which seems like the film that The Ides of March is trying (and failing) to remake. The name of the party is never specified, but it's implied that there's a Democrat in the White House, so by process of elimination the primaries being portrayed must be Republican.
It's not a "conservative movie" by any stretch of the imagination, but it's a heck of a lot more nuanced than The Ides of March.
Jul '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
I assume everyone in Hollywood is gay in the absence of evidence to the contrary, and I'm not talking about the fake marriages that are always falling apart on the front pages of the tabloids (the only accurate source of news about that community). You might find the occasional gay who is an economic conservative, but they are social liberals by an overwhelming margin. Scratch someone of this stripe and you'll find the standard bundle of left-wing views, from anti-Americanism to the half-baked theories on parade at the OSW encampments. It is career suicide in Hollywood to depart from the consensus, and it is the rare writer, actor of director who dares . The blacklisting is of conservatives is far more effective than that extended to communists in the 1950s. You would think Hollywood would worry about the thumbs-down the domestic market gives its America-bashing movies, but it makes most of its profits these days on the international market which applauds viewpoint.
May '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
John Podhoretz had a more mixed review in TWS, he said that there was a twist to the evolution of the Clooney character that made him more positive at the denoument.
But the last Hollywood president movie I saw was "Swing Vote", and I am waiting for some version of "Of Thee I Sing" before I watch another one.
I fell a lot like Alexander Throttlebottom most of the time.
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Laser ~
If I recall correctly, that's the writer who penned "Farragut North," the play on which the film is based. He got a writing credit for the movie, but so did Clooney and another writer. I've never seen the stage show, but my understanding is that the movie was considerably different -- which hopefully means that it's the Hollywood folks, not the former Dean hand, who are evincing a misunderstanding of some pretty basic elements of electoral politics.
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Copper ~
You certainly make a good point, but let's remember that Obama ran as an ostensible centrist in 2008. The Clooney character is more like the fantasy candidate of liberals who think Obama is too accommodating (one reviewer made the comparison to Martin Sheen's Jed Bartlet from "The West Wing", who was the Bill Clinton the left wish they had -- although I personally think the Bartlet character was much more thoughtful and nuanced than Clooney's Mike Morris). Can you imagine Obama steamrolling through the 2008 elections if he said, as Morris does in the film, "I'm not a Christian ... my religion is called the Constitution of the United States."?
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
That's interesting, Duane. I have deep reserves of respect for John, but have no idea what he could be referring to there. The Clooney character is essentially static throughout the film (your opinion of him changes throughout, but because more information is disclosed, not because his behavior changes). In fact, the only 'evolution' in his character is that he becomes responsive to blackmail. That's in keeping with the jaundiced eye this film seems to have for the entire political process and those who work within it.
Jan '11
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
The purpose of fiction is to free the writer from having to stick to reality. You ask the audience to cross a bridge into a territory where the normal rules of skepticism and proof are set aside, temporarily. That can be wonderful and useful, of course, but when the writer wants to make a "political statement," he has to re-cross that bridge into reality.
Political fiction usually cheats. In the dark of the theater, an audience is willing to suspend their skepticism in exchange for being entertained. Sure, I'll believe that Richard Dreyfuss is Darth Cheney and snarls into his scotch, but only because it's fun ... not because I think it's true about Dick Cheney. Once the lights go up, and we're back in reality, you can't throw out those insults about Cheney and expect me to accept them quietly as the truth.
Jun '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
The last political movie I watched was The American President, no more. When it comes to political movies, my default position is to never pay to watch them unless I know well in advance that the movie is not a sucker punch. The Ides of March is a sucker punch.
As an aside, after watching The American President, I could not believe that any production could turn such a marvelous premise into such utter crap. It was Toni Morrison's Beloved all over again: Great idea crap execution.
May '10
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Misthiocracy
Try The Best Man, which seems like the film that The Ides of March is trying (and failing) to remake. The name of the party is never specified, but it's implied that there's a Democrat in the White House, so by process of elimination the primaries being portrayed must be Republican.
It's not a "conservative movie" by any stretch of the imagination, but it's a heck of a lot more nuanced than The Ides of March. · Oct 22 at 7:06am
So the answer is 1964? How sad for Hollywood..
Oct '11
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
My favorite part is when he agrees to make the two year service program mandatory and then states that he is pro-choice because he would never 'tell a woman what to do with her body'
To the film's credit, at least they did this as a democratic primary other than demonizing republicans in a general election.
Apr '11
Re: On the Political Illiteracy of Hollywood
Troy Senik: Laser ~
If I recall correctly, that's the writer who penned "Farragut North," the play on which the film is based. He got a writing credit for the movie, but so did Clooney and another writer. I've never seen the stage show, but my understanding is that the movie was considerably different -- which hopefully means that it's the Hollywood folks, not the former Dean hand, who are evincing a misunderstanding of some pretty basic elements of electoral politics. · Oct 22 at 8:27am
Yes, that would be Beau Willimon. He was interviewed recently on BBC radio. The interviewer was incredulous about the film's extreme cynicism, but Willimon insisted upon its veracity.