The journey from there to here

I actually like George Clooney as an actor. Even though I haven't seen the movie "Good Night and Good Luck", I appreciate Clooney's bringing the compelling story to the big screen. While I have NO desire to see "Syriana", I can respect Clooney's asking hard questions about current events, even if I wholly disagree with his conclusions.

What I CAN'T accept is Clooney's condescension towards the American public. He appreciates being "out of touch", and rightly points out that Hattie McDaniel's Oscar came at a time when segregation was still the norm in America. By doing so, he makes the obvious implication that current leftist agendas are morally comparable, and that those of us who do not agree are backwards, unenlightened, and/or morally inferior. We are, in other words, too stupid to think for ourselves.

In a year that saw a larger ticket sale drop than anytime in the last 25 years (1980 being the year of "Xanadu" and "The Blue Lagoon"), it is interesting that Hollywood activists would choose such a self destructive career path. While it is not improper to ask that we as a society allow others to live their lives as they choose, it is wholly unacceptable to repeatedly attempt to indocrinate us into the belief that such lifestyle choices are moral, decent, or normal. And yet producers continue to do just that on a regular basis by implicitly stating that we are too stupid to make such decisions without their assistance/input.

George Clooney may not be a spokesperson for all of Hollywood. But if Hollywood doesn't want their image cast by the likes of Clooney, I would suggest that a roll of duct tape over his mouth might be in order. But I'm guessing by the applause and acclaim that he perpetually receives, Hollywood DOES want him as their spokesman. And I'm further guessing that such decisions will further affect their box office intake.

Industry analysts will point to the home theater system as the reason for the decline in movie attendance. And it might well be a part of it. But I suggest that a larger part is a viewing public who is sick of the continual insults to their intelligence.


Comments (Page 1)
5 Pages1 2 3  Last
on Mar 06, 2006
I for one am sick to death of entertainers thrusting their political agendas in my face. I resent it because it often is a turn off for me toward entertainers that I had previously enjoyed. Rosie O'Donell did it with Tom Sellek. Dave Letterman did it with Bill O'Reilly. Clooney does it with his politics and, like you said, condesencion.

Just because I like your acting or entertainment abilities doesn't mean I give a flip about what you think about politics. I think there are plenty of people who disregard a movie because they don't feel like supporting an actor who looks down their nose at you due to your political views.

I didn't even watch the Oscars. According to the ladies on The View, there must be something wrong with me. I kind of feel like there are so darn many awards shows now that the Oscars just don't seem that special anymore. That and I don't get all gah-gah over celebrities.
on Mar 06, 2006
Interesting. I didn't take it that Clooney was calling anyone "stupid." What he was saying, in my opinion, was "if you want to call me out of touch, that's fine, but I still stand by what I believe." He didn't call anyone any names--he only refuted the name he was called.
on Mar 06, 2006
I've never been able to muster any interest in a bunch of spoiled rich kids getting together & patting themselves on the back. Watching self-indulgence can be sport, I suppose, but that's about it for me.
on Mar 06, 2006
I didn't bother to watch. We watched an On-Demand National Geographic program with the kids, and then I played on my DS while Adrian and the boys watched the Zorro sequel.

I like Jon Stewart. He's a super funny guy. I just don't like him enough to sit through watching
a bunch of spoiled rich kids getting together & patting themselves on the back
on Mar 06, 2006
I like Jon Stewart. He's a super funny guy


I actually didnt' intend to watch it. My roommate had it on when I got home and I was drawn in because I found Stewart so amusing. I kept it on just for his bits!
on Mar 06, 2006
The academy specifically forbade the actors and sch from getting political this year. So, since they thought they were so much smarter than their handlers, and the American Public, they used subterfuge and innuendo.

yes, Gideon, they think that. But what is worse than being smart and knowing it, is being stupid and not knowing it.

Hello George Clooney.
on Mar 06, 2006
It's pretty obvious that the powers that be in hollywood were trying to make a statement this year. Gay cowboys, McCarthyism, Black/White issues, Israel assassinating people, Middle East subterfuge, yadda yadda.

They need to be punished by the consumer. People need to stop taking part in knee-jerk fashion and demand that entertainment return to being entertaining. I have no problem with movies with a message. There was no Schindler's List this year though, not by a damn sight. Just heavy-handed sermons. The fact they purposely ignored movies for high honers that took a different tone makes it all the more obvious.
on Mar 06, 2006
lol

Clooney's speech was a lot of fun. I knew you moral uprights would have a fun time with it. If you think George was calling you stupid, then maybe you really are.
on Mar 06, 2006
If you think George was calling you stupid, then maybe you really are.


"You're so vain. You probably think this song is about you."
on Mar 06, 2006
I appreciate Clooney's bringing the compelling story to the big screen. While I have NO desire to see "Syriana". - Gideon

Any particular reason why?

The film was great and in the same vein as Traffic - also quite good. I'm not certain what taste you have in film.

I like Jon Stewart, but not even his presence is enough to make me want to watch the self-congratulatory Oscar crowd.
on Mar 06, 2006
"You're so vain. You probably think this song is about you."


I'm so vain, I really think that song is about me.

Indeed.
on Mar 06, 2006
Meh...I didn't watch the Oscars but did read the write up about it today in USA Today.

Sounded pretty lame....though some of the dresses were nice.
on Mar 06, 2006
In a year that saw a larger ticket sale drop than anytime in the last 25 years (1980 being the year of "Xanadu" and "The Blue Lagoon"), it is interesting that Hollywood activists would choose such a self destructive career path. While it is not improper to ask that we as a society allow others to live their lives as they choose, it is wholly unacceptable to repeatedly attempt to indocrinate us into the belief that such lifestyle choices are moral, decent, or normal. And yet producers continue to do just that on a regular basis by implicitly stating that we are too stupid to make such decisions without their assistance/input.


I'd be very interested to see any evidence that suggests that Hollywood activism is in any way related to declining box office totals. None of the research on the topic (which is considerable) that I've seen points to this.



Link

Interesting. I didn't take it that Clooney was calling anyone "stupid." What he was saying, in my opinion, was "if you want to call me out of touch, that's fine, but I still stand by what I believe." He didn't call anyone any names--he only refuted the name he was called.


That's actually the way I took it too.

It seems it's ok for people who don't agree with him to call him and his crowd out as much as they want, but it's not ok for him to clarify his position a little.

So it's not ok for him to state what he believes. Yes, he's an actor, but he has every right to speak his mind in forums available to him, and attempt to advance his pet causes.

I really don't see that big of a difference between him using whatever resources are available to him and you or I using whatever resources are available to us.

We don't go around here telling each other "Who cares what you think about topic A, you're just a secretary., or an IT guy, etc."
on Mar 06, 2006
No one is saying he can't be a dick, davad. You seem to think there's something wrong with people recognizing it.

You can post your little polls, but the reason that people have shifted to home entertainment is because they are tired of gambling as much as you spend on a decent meal on a movie that is going to SUCK 80% of the time. The movies aren't that much more of a drain on our pocketbook than they were 25 years ago. You just don't get the same product you did then. The last time I took the family to the movies it cost me $45. Why do that when you can buy a movie you KNOW you will like for half that?

So, sure. If they want to take their industry and turn it into a preachy sack of know-it-alls who berate and preach to the people who pay for their million dollar vacation homes, of COURSE they have the right to do it. We, though, should have the right to tell them to shut the hell up and make a decent movie for a change.
on Mar 06, 2006
P.S. Sorry for using the 'd' word, but after pondering Clooney's recent interviews for about 5 minutes I couldn't come up with a word that hit closer to the phenomenon himself.
5 Pages1 2 3  Last