On the curious popularity of my post on Sam Elliott's political views

Nearly two and a half years ago I noted with approval how difficult it was to find out actor Sam Elliott's political views.  Little did I know that this would end up being one of the most-viewed posts in this blog's nine-year existence.  Google "sam elliott politics" and you'll see my two previous posts on the actor right at the top of the results.  Not bad for a blog that has for the most part been dormant for a couple of years.

I must admit that the response caught me by surprise.  Most of the comments tended to follow one or both of these themes:

• How dare you suggest that the free-speech rights of Hollywood actors should be suppressed!
• The free-speech rights of Christian leaders should be suppressed.

The first theme showed me that these readers had misunderstood my point.  The second theme was a reflexive response that, I suppose, was reasonable in light of the first misunderstanding.

Multiple misinterpretations later, I decided it was time to give it one more try.  I shall attempt to lay out my view as a logical sequence of statements.  Please make sure you understand each statement as I meant it before proceeding to the next.

1. Of course entertainers enjoy the same free-speech rights that every American is supposed to have.
2. I do not get upset when entertainers exercise this right, even when I disagree with the view being expressed (which is most of the time).
3. [Pay careful attention to this one, because it is the foundation of the point I was trying to make] Our culture grants far more weight to the political opinions of entertainers than those opinions would receive on their own merits.
4. [This one is important as well] Most entertainers are fully aware of the preceding point, and make every attempt to use their celebrity to influence political outcomes.  "Support this policy, not because I've appealed to your mind with a series of persuasive arguments, but because you like my acting/singing/whatever."
5. Politicians are all too happy to exploit entertainers' willingness to leverage their celebrity, and thus we're treated to the spectacle of entertainers headlining political rallies (which is fine) or being invited to give testimony to starry-eyed congressfolks on some bill that's being debated (which is silly, unless the entertainer actually is an acknowledged authority on the topic of debate).
6. [And here we finally get to Sam Elliott] So many entertainers follow this course that it's surprising (and in my opinion refreshing) to come across one who declines to play the game.
7. We say that "all [people] are created equal," but the reality is that in our celebrity-obsessed culture, the political opinions of entertainers are somehow "more equal" than yours or mine.

I suspect that my detractors in the May 2012 post are less likely to be bothered by this final statement,  but only because they tend to agree with the stated opinions of the vast majority of entertainers.  After all, it's great to get some major-league assistance from folks who believe as we do.

Okay, I'm ready for some to shift the attention away from entertainers to some other disliked demographic group again.  Whatever. 

Whether or not you agree with my seven statements above or not, please understand that I was trying to make a cultural observation, not a political one.

Ministry of Propaganda ramps up for Obama’s reelection campaign

Hollywood, currently serving as the Ministry of Propaganda for the Obama administration, is wasting no time putting together a movie celebrating the assassination of Osama bin Laden. 

Although it appears the movie will focus on the heroics of SEAL Team Six, I’m certain that directors Kathryn Bigelow and Mark Boal will make sure we won’t miss the fact that it happened on Obama’s watch (even if his involvement amounted to nothing more than approving the operation)*.

Oh, and the projected release date for the Osama movie is – wait for it – October, 2012.  Coincidence, I’m sure.

If you doubt that this is a joint enterprise of Hollywood and the White House, consider the following, which merited a raised eyebrow from lefty NYT columnist Maureen Dowd:

It was clear that the White House had outsourced the job of manning up the president’s image to Hollywood when Boal got welcomed to the upper echelons of the White House and the Pentagon and showed up recently — to the surprise of some military officers — at a C.I.A. ceremony celebrating the hero Seals.

 

Via Townhall

* By the way, I’m still waiting for the big-budget Hollywood movie celebrating the capture of Saddam Hussein.

If we’ve lost the Fruit-of-the-Loom grapes, then we’ve lost America

On July 16 Politico wrote about the DNC/Hollywood axis, and about how our movie dollars are going straight into Obama’s reelection coffers (well, they didn’t put it in those words exactly, but still).  People who are tremendously famous – not because they’re particularly smart, but because they can string memorized words, emotions and facial expressions together in a way that is pleasing to the general public – are, once again, cranking up the money machine for those dedicated to pushing our country even further into the Abyss (again, not Politico’s words – you have to learn to read between the lines).

Politico’s Mackenzie Weinger presents many of the usual suspects – Tom Hanks, Rita Wilson, George Clooney, Michael Douglas, Sharon Stone, Michael Keaton, Alec Baldwin, Will Ferrell, Jennifer Garner, Gwyneth Paltrow, yada yada yada… but then she ends with a shocker:  “Wayne Wilderson, the actor who portrays the grapes in Fruit of the Loom commercials.”

I knew things were bad for the republic, but never in my wildest dreams did I suspect that we had lost the grapes. 

The GOP candidates are, I suspect, scrambling to determine how to get them back.

Is Sam Elliott a Democrat or a Republican? None of your business.

A lot of people are curious about the political views of actor Sam Elliott.  I know this because a post from December 2009 brings many of these people to this blog.  In fact, many of the top search engine queries bringing people to C-Pol are variations on this question.

That finally got me wondering as well: Is Sam Elliott a Democrat or a Republican?

Research shows that political affiliation in Hollywood leans absurdly Democrat.  But, Google searches on Sam Elliott himself turn up… nothing.

The fact of the matter is that Elliott seems to think that his political leanings are nobody’s business but his own.

How refreshing.  Would that more in Hollywood felt this way.

Despite my criticism of Mr. Elliott in that December 2009 post, I love his acting, and I think that just about any movie he’s in (not counting the one cited in the blog post)  is improved by his presence.

That’s actually the point: actors should be famous for their acting, not their political activity.




UPDATE, 23 October 2013
[Tim throws his hands up in surrender] You know, I consider myself to be a pretty good communicator, but judging from the comments on this post, and despite my repeated attempts to set the record straight, I don't think I've gotten my point across. This has frustrated me to the point that I've decided to revive the blog and try again in a new post.  You can read it here.

Government-authored spyware – what a great idea!

No, it’s not happening yet (that I know of), but the RIAA and MPAA are pushing hard to establish the legal precedent of government surveillance of average citizens’ private in-home activities.

Tom’s Guide reports:

Big Brother is watching you. Actually, it's the RIAA and the MPAA, especially if you're parked on a BitTorrent client. The Electronic Frontier Foundation reports that both organizations--along with a few others--want to take the file-monitoring process a huge step further by infiltrating consumer PCs and deleting the infringing content off their hard drives. How? Through "anti-infringement" spyware developed and enforced by the government.

This is no joke.

"There are several technologies and methods that can be used by network administrators and providers...these include [consumer] tools for managing copyright infringement from the home (based on tools used to protect consumers from viruses and malware)," reads a caption in a joint comment (pdf) filed by the MPAA and RIAA.

The joint comment goes on to suggest other means of copyright enforcement including a mandatory scan on all internet connections to interdict transfers of illegal content, physical searches at all borders of personal media players, laptops, and USB sticks. There's even an indication that the parties want to enforce international bullying to force other countries to put similar policies in place.

A couple of observations are in order.

First, the only reason  the RIAA and MPAA could even dream of getting the federal government to do something like this is that they know the fedgov recognizes no meaningful limits on its power.  Industries take advantage of this fact all of the time – using the government as a bludgeon against one’s competitors has become a time-honored tradition in this country – but the RIAA/MPAA proposal goes beyond what we normally see. 

Many people who will complain that this is an unconstitutional invasion of privacy and a denial of due process will, the next day, demand that the government provide health care, jobless benefits, welfare, etc.  We can’t have it both ways.  Either the federal government is bound by the U.S. Constitution, or it isn’t.

Second, is there any real difference between government-authored spyware on our computers and government-installed surveillance cameras in our homes?  Both would have the same official purpose – crime prevention.  I wonder if RIAA and MPAA executives would consent to government video surveillance of their mansions, “just in case” they decided to do something illegal.

Sam Elliot: It’s our duty to reward filmmakers who actively seek to attack our faith

Actor Sam Elliot just knows who is to blame for the fact that the film adaptations of Philip Pullman’s His Dark Materials trilogy will likely never go beyond the first part, The Golden Compass.  Catholic News Agency reports:

Actor Sam Elliot has blamed the Catholic Church for stopping sequels from being made to the Golden Compass movie based on the first book of Philip Pullman’s atheistic trilogy His Dark Materials. The film, starring Nicole Kidman, Daniel Craig and Eva Green, grossed more than $380 million worldwide after its Christmas 2007 release, but took in only $85 million in the U.S. According to the Internet Movie Database, the film had a budget of $180 million.
The 65-year-old Elliot, who played a Texan “aeronaut” in the film, charged that a Catholic-led campaign against the movie stopped its sequels from being made.

Of course, the film’s horrible domestic box office take had nothing to do with the fact that the movie was based on the first novel of a trilogy that goes out of its way to deride the faith of Christians in general, and Catholics in particular.
The Golden Compass is the most benign book in the trilogy, and the film adaptation was cleaned up even more. However, it would be hard to cleanse the remaining books sufficiently:

According to CinemaBlend.com, the first book of the His Dark Materials trilogy is the most mild “by far” and the movie had most of its anti-religion references stripped.
“That kind of sanitization would have been impossible when adapting later books,” the movie website continued, noting that the series “quite literally” becomes a story about homosexual angels trying to kill God.

So, Mr. Elliot, tell us more about how the Catholics managed to scuttle what promised to be a beloved film series.

UPDATE: So, is Sam Elliot a Democrat or a Republican?

Hey, Hollywood! Time to walk the talk!

Writing for Big Hollywood, blogger Iowahawk pokes fun at movie stars whose lifestyles belie their claims to be concerned about the environment:

A Go-Green Guide for the Hollywood Community

More than ten years after the Kyoto accords, our planet continues to careen helplessly toward certain environmental destruction. The skies are choked with pollutants. Adorable helpless polar bears plunge through thinning ice caps. Ben Affleck still can’t find a decent comeback project.

The signs are ominous, but it’s not too late to do something. As a member of the entertainment community, you are uniquely qualified to save our planet from coming climate disaster. But it will take more than raising awareness — it will take action. Have your personal assistant add these 10 to-dos to your Blackberry, and let’s get the Earth on the road to recovery!

1. Reduce Water Consumption. One single dripping faucet or flushed bidet may not seem to be much of an environmental threat, but those numbers really add up when you’re hosting an NRDC fundraiser for Laurie David and all 10 of your bathrooms are in use. When possible, encourage guests to pee in the pool, and remind them that “if it’s yellow, let it mellow.” Unless you’re serving asparagus canapes.

2. “Green Begins At Home.” Whether you live in East Hampton or Topanga Canyon, there are dozens of little things you can do around your compound to reduce your carbon footprint. For instance, tell your groundskeeping crew to plant a tree. Save your leftover foie gras to grow your own homemade organic Botox. Turn off your energy wasting security cameras between 1 AM and 7 AM. If you own a vanity cattle ranch in Montana, email the trail boss and tell him/her to add Beano to your herd’s feed to reduce ozone-depleting methane emissions.

3. Upgrade To a New Gulfstream G550. Next time you take off for Cannes or Sundance or that big Environmental Defense Fund gala, stop and think how much fuel that clunky old G450 is using. Not only does the new G550 have real burled walnut and 10.8% better fuel efficiency, it has smoother ride — meaning 20% fewer annoying turbulence-related Cristal and cocaine spills. And with a maximum cruising speed of Mach 0.885 you’ll never be late for the red carpet at the Palm d’Or!

4. Crush a Third World Economic Development Movement. One of the most pressing threats facing our environment is rising income in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. A generation ago these proud little dark people were happily frolicking in the rain forest, foraging for organic foods amid the wonders of nature. Today, corrupted by wealth, they are demanding environmentally hazardous consumer goods like cars and air conditioning and malaria medicine. You can do your part to stop this dangerous consumerism trend by supporting environmentally progressive leaders like Hugo Chavez and Robert Mugabe, and their programs for sustainable low-impact ecolabor camps.

The remaining suggestions are well worth the read.


(Cross-posted at The Global Warming Heretic)

Reports of Narnia's demise are exaggerated: Dawn Treader is back!

The LA Times' Entertainment News & Buzz blog brings us the good news that 20th Century Fox has rescued the third Narnia movie, Voyage of the Dawn Treader, from potential oblivion:

Twentieth Century Fox has agreed to co-finance the third movie in the “Chronicles of Narnia” series, pending approval of the final script and shooting budget. If all goes as planned, Fox and Walden Media, which controls the movie rights to C.S. Lewis’ classic children's books, hope to be begin production on "The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" by late summer so it will be ready for holiday 2010 release.

First, however, Fox and Walden have to hire a screenwriter to do another pass on the script that was last rewritten by Richard LaGravenese, whose credits include "Freedom Writers" and "The Horse Whisperer." The movie companies are looking to make the film for about $140 million. Michael Apted, who made "Amazing Grace" and the 1999 Bond flick "The World Is Not Enough," is on board to direct.

Fox is taking a financial gamble that Disney was unwilling to wage despite helping bankroll the first two films in the "Narnia" family franchise. Walden, owned by entrepreneur Phil Anschutz, was forced to seek a new financial partner on “Dawn Treader” after Disney balked at the cost and opted out.

Fox was the most likely partner because the studio already markets and distributes Walden movies under its Fox Walden label.

NarniaFans.com's Paul Martin adds that "[t]he goal is to get back to the magical aspects present in the first “Narnia” pic but mostly absent from “Prince Caspian.”"

Lucy and Edmund's real-world counterparts are growing quickly, so here's to hoping that there are no further delays.

For those unfamiliar with the story, the book opens with this wonderful line:

There was a boy called Eustace Clarence Scrubb, and he almost deserved it.

I'm looking forward to seeing how they portray Eustace in the movie version.


(Image credit: HarperCollins)

Breitbart takes on the leftist culture of Hollywood

Andrew Breitbart, whose internet credits include the Drudge Report and the Breitbart.com news service, launched a new group blog today called Big Hollywood. Here's how he introduced it in a January 5 Washington Times column (highlighting added):

A million stories to tell

On Tuesday, I launch Big Hollywood (bighollywood.breitbart.com), a big group blog that will feature hundreds of the big minds from the fields of politics, journalism, entertainment and culture.

Big Hollywood is not a "celebrity" gabfest or a gossip outpost - it is a continuous politics and culture posting board for those who think something has gone drastically wrong and that Hollywood should return to its patriotic roots.

Big Hollywood's modest objective: to change the entertainment industry. To make Hollywood something we can believe in - again. In order to give millions of Americans hope.

Until conservatives, libertarians and Republicans - who will be the lion's share of Big Hollywood's contributors - recognize that (pop) culture is the big prize and that politics is secondary, there will be no victory in this important battle.

Hollywood is no longer an American industry. And it took a prolonged war in which the studios and most of the stars didn't show up to fight for America to draw attention to this hard truth.

[...]

Hope and change we can believe in!

Breitbart makes an intriguing argument, and I think he's got a good point: once conservatives lost the culture, it became harder and harder to win elections. What do we expect, when today's youth have lived their entire lives hearing pop icons malign so much of what conservatives believe?

Conservatives need to win back the culture, and the best place to start is at the heart of the evil empire: Big Hollywood.

(Thanks to: Weekly Standard and NRO)

Disney abandons "Dawn Treader"

Not sure why, but Disney doesn't consider a near-sure-thing $500 million box office a good enough reason to stay with the Narnia franchise. Hollywood Reporter, December 24:

"The Chronicles of Narnia: The Voyage of the Dawn Treader" will have to sail without Disney.

While declining to elaborate, Disney and Walden Media confirmed Tuesday that for budgetary and logistical reasons the Burbank-based studio is not exercising its option to co-produce and co-finance the next "Narnia" movie with Walden.

The third entry in the series, based on the classic books by C.S. Lewis, was in preproduction and set for a spring shoot for a planned May 2010 release.

Happily, Walden isn't giving up on the project, but it isn't easy finding a new partner with deep pockets.

Interestingly, the Hollywood Reporter commits a logic error that I've seen more than once before. They are attributing Disney's skittishness to a perceived decline of audience interest in the fantasy genre as a whole (and children's fantasy in particular). They cite as evidence the fact that Prince Caspian didn't do as well as The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, and that Pullman's The Golden Compass bombed completely.

The reality is that Prince Caspian simply wasn't as good as the first Narnia movie (and IMO took some unnecessary liberties with the book version of the story). As for The Golden Compass, what else do you expect from a movie based on a book trilogy that goes out of its way to insult the deeply-held beliefs of a vast portion of its supposed target audience? It would be tragically ironic if the dismal failure of an anti-Christian movie ended up killing off a Christian-friendly franchise that had broad public appeal.

No... if Walden -- or any other studio -- makes a truly good movie in the fantasy genre, the public will reward them.