At a Republican fundraising dinner in Michigan on Thursday, conservative commentator Ben Stein complained that no one at the Oscars paid homage to the troops in Iraq, then suggested that such disrespect is why the box office is down. ”Stop spitting in the face of Americans and maybe we will go to the movies,” said the Ferris Bueller’s Day Off history teacher.
Setting aside the question of whether a tribute to the troops belonged at the Oscars, is he correct in suggesting that many moviegoers decide not to see certain films because they don’t like the stars’ liberal politics? If so, why are so few filmgoers supporting conservative Bruce Willis by going to see 16 Blocks? Or do Mos Def’s politics cancel out those of Willis? If moviegoers want only pro-Bush messages, why was V for Vendetta the No. 1 movie this weekend? Are moviegoers more liberal than Stein says they are, or do politics play no significant role when ticketbuyers vote at the multiplex?
Comments (1-30) of 42 Add your comment
Politics are not turning off moviegoers – $9.50 movie tickets are. TV commercials and twenty trailers are turning moviegoers are (although I can never get enough trailers). The fact that the movie will be on DVD in two months so they don’t have to go see in the theater (or after the first weekend the movie is basically gone anyway).
What a load. Although I am liberal, I don’t have a problem seeing conservative actors’ movies. Not that I’m going to see “16 Blocks,” but it’s not because Willis is conservative.
Film is an inherently political tool. Look how films like Red Scare: The Commies are Coming galvanized an entire nation to be afraid of the Russians.
I think however this is more conservative rhetoric aimed at an industry that Republicans can’t spin.
If America supported the war or so much as Ben Stein suggests then perhaps Bush would have an approval rating of more that what…5%???
Ben Stein should stick to what he knows…hocking cold medication and giving away his money.
If the poll at http://www.cnn.com/SHOWBIZ/ (scroll down) is any indication, celebrity opinion does virtually squat to influence John Q. Public.
Anyway, might make me not want to have a drink with folks like Ben Stein or Tim Robbins, but it doesn’t impact whether I’ll watch a movie of theirs. And, given how often the chance for drinks with celebrities comes around, it’s pretty much a non-issue.
I have to agree with Professor74. It’s a number of things. Ticket prices, the commericals before the movies, unruly/chatty audiences. And, in some part, the lack of really good quality movies. Why pay $8 or more for a movie that’s going to be on DVD in two months and I can rent on dollar night at the video store?
There may be different contributing factors why box office is down. But it all comes back to making good, watchable, entertaining movies. Hollywood loves to blame everything and everyone else when they stink up the screen. People go to the movies based on word of mouth. Not that I won’t go see Clooney or Robbins or Sarandan or Penn in a movie…but I am awfully sick of their arrogant, self important attitudes.. Like I really care what they think. Did they even graduate from college?
I think Ben Stein has lost his mind. How a particular actor/actress votes doesn’t influence my decision on wehter or not I will see their movie – it’s how much it costs to go and how interesting the story is to me. PERIOD. I also don’t think the Oscars is the place to be commenting on war – in relation to the troups, the deaths, or anything else for that matter. It is a night for the people in the movie industry to celebrate their achievements. A few years back the conservatives were all up in arms when MMoore made anti-Bush statements – they were the first to point out that it was inappropriate. Why should it be any different to mention the war in a positive light? It’s not the time or place.
With all due respect to Mr. Stein, it’s a “damned if you do…damned if you don’t” catch. If they say something at the Oscars, people fly all over it saying actors should, “Keep their politics to themselves.” If they don’t say anything it’s, “Why don’t you say something?” Dude. Perhaps it’s about the crappy remakes and the movie versions of terrible TV shows and how the plot of an average movie MUST be boiled down to a pitch any studio idiot can understand.
Oh, and the cell phones ringing, people talking, commercials (up to 20 minutes worth on some chain’s screens), and high ticket and popcorn prices might be doing more damage than anything any liberal or conservative celebrity can say. Or am I wrong?
I don’t think Ben Stein is off his rocker. Actors’ worth is based on popularity and box office receipts. So, when Tom Cruise and George Clooney continuously publicly state their opinions, it can affect movie goers’ decisions. Scientology anyone? Puhleese!!! If I wanted to hear their opinions, I vote them into office. It’s time for them to shut up, be eye candy and make good movies. They get paid enough.
I’m sure there are people out there that might let the actors personal beliefs dictate what films they see, but I’m pretty sure they are few and far between. I would never vote for a republican, but I don’t care what candidate an actor voted for as long as they give a good performance. I’m a country music fan, if I let their personal views dictate what I buy, the only thing I’d be listening to would be The Dixie Chicks. Granted, I respect the Dixie Chicks on a personal level more than most country singers, but that’s seperate from enjoying someones artistic ability.
A mention for the troops might have been nice, especially since Jarhead was released last year, it would have made a good tie in for that. But it’s just an awards show, I doubt our brave men and women in Iraq are to concerned about whether or not they got a shout out on some show they probably were too busy to watch anyway.
I agree with everyone who’s popped off here so far. There’s no appropriate place for a salute to the troops at the Oscars. (Besides, had the Academy decided to put together an homage to the troops, it would have been some cheesy montage.) I don’t let anyone’s politics get in the way of which movies I see (I didn’t even know that Bruce Willis was Republican), but I am mighty swayed by how good the movie looks by its own merits. Give me better flicks, and I’ll be happy to hit the theater. Keep throwing that garbage up there, and I’ll rest easy at home with Netflix.
Keep Politics Off The Big Screen
Popwatch Blog at Entertainment Weekly: “Are stars’ liberal politics turning off moviegoers?” I caught this discussion firing up over at Entertainment Weekly. Gary Susman asks the question based upon comments from Ben Stein at a Republican fundraising d…
The reason box office is down is because it is a pain in the booty to have to share your experience with the other people that are there. Just like what happened with pornography, movies will eventually ALL be sold direct to video. Movie execs should look at the evolution of similar industries that had this evolution previously…watch Boogie Nights!
Movie quality has nothing to do with it. Politics has nothing to do with it. Convience and comfort have EVERYTHING to do with it!!
One more thing…Notice that movies directed at the 13-17 year old audience are doing well. That is because teens looking to get out of the house and away from their parents are ones actually going to the movies.
“V for Vendetta” was #1 for several factors: the Wachovski’s, the comic angle (the comic is 20 years old, and skewers Thatcher’s PM rule, an idelogy which is feared by many nations with ties to Britan), Natalie Portman– it looks like an interesting movie. I actually want to see it more now than I did when it was being hyped.
Hollywood has always had its “vocal fringe”–some of the most popular stars in history have at one time or another been obnoxiously political. It has never detracted from their talent by their own actions (no one blacklisted themselves.)
I think, ultimately, a star’s personal politics do not effect the public’s movie watching decisions anywhere near to the degree as other factors (i.e. quality of the film, ticket prices, etc). But I do think that it has some effect when the star’s political stance is very extreme. Does anyone remember Jane Fonda? Her extremist politics certainly had an effect on her career. I know people that to this day still refuse to see one of her movies.
Yes, we needed another montage at the Oscars. They say stupid things like that at
republican fundraisers because THEIR presidents poll numbers are in the crapper. Hollywood is an easy target for them. The troops need armor, a coherent strategy, and their benefits not being cut. A salute by the Oscars won’t help.
Actors are always being criticized for using their fame to call attention to important issues. I see nothing wrong with it. There are many people who don’t pay much attention to politics or important issues. Sometimes it’s just important that someone is bringing these things to their attention.
Many people don’t watch or care about the Academy Awards (and many who used to care won’t be watching next year.) Aside from George Clooney’s happy-to-be-out-of-touch speech I didn’t get the feeling that things were so liberal at the oscars anyway.
Jebus, I hate this blog. Ben Stein was the econ teach in FBDO, not the history teacher.
Jane Fonda’s politics is not the reason she stopped making movies. She got tired of them and then husband Ted Turner asked her to stop. She had big hits in the late seventies-early eighties: China Syndrome, Nine to Five, On Golden Pond…
Sorry, but politics have nothing to do with why people aren’t going to the movies. There is two reasons: lack of interesting movies and cost of tickets. That is also the reason why there are so many sequels. When a movie does well at the box office, Hollywood wants to cash in so they do a sequel. Why should someone pay close to $10 for a film when they can catch it a few months later (or less) on DVD? The only movies people will see at the theatre (that are worth seeing) are the ones that are worth seeing for visual effects and sound (like Star Wars, Batman Begins, etc.)
Wait and see what happens this summer when the sequels and blockbusters pop up. The moviegoers will return in droves.
I don’t think anyone remembers that film is an art form. It’s an artist’s vision. Just like a painting, or a novel, etc… I would prefer to see movies with ANY stance at all because it shows there are still filmmakers out there who ARE artists. Hell, Batman Begins showed that a big movie can be smart and popular. It DID have a political side, but was still entertaining. I praise George Clooney, Steven Spielberg, Paul Haggis, Ang Lee, and anyone else who remembers that film is an artform. Too many of us sit around and don’t say anything. Do anything, and just plain don’t care. It’s nice to see someone is thinking about something. If you don’t like someone’s politics then go see Dukes of Hazzard. Most of Mid-America does anyway, I’m from there. Open your minds people (Ben Stein), and remember we all love movies, in any form. The theatre experience is one of the last communal activities we have. It will never go away. And if you think about it, I don’t think anyone really wants it to. And since no one said it at the Oscars(big deal), I’ll say it here. We’re praying for you troops.
The only person whos views has affected whether or not I will pay to see their work is Tom Cruise. Because of his personal life, I refuseto pay money to see him. I view none of his movies until they come out on basic cable. I wont even watch his stuff on HBO because I have to pay HBO to watch their stuff and I refuse to pay to watch him. He disgusts me that much.
Politics? Excuse me but Ben Stein needs to stop searching for Ferris Bueller and live in the real world. I could care less about someone else’s politics. I simply refuse to spend $10.75 (this is in NYC) to see a movie with fifty trailers and TV commercials, only to end up seeing a crappy film that’s either a pointless remake or a pointless sequel. Period.
I would love to comment on this issue, except that EW mysteriously won’t post my answer…
Yeah, I’m sure the box office slump is all about politics and has nothing to do with the deteriorating experience people have at theatres and the improvement in home theatres.
Just want to point out Ben Stein has nothing on EW, as the magazine mentioned the “0″ shout outs to the soldiers in last week’s Oscars recap issue. I am not accusing Ben Stein of flat out stealing that point from EW, but…
I beg to differ. I believe it is because of the liberal politics spewing forth in films. Just my opinion.
I’ll pay $9.50 to see an ENTERTAINING film but I won’t spend a dime to see that other crap, not even when it comes out as a rental.
Good for Ben Stein.
Ew should stop reveiwing movies and just list the politics of the actor, director and producer. That way you would be warned if there was going to be any liberal thought creeping into your movie. Is Cheaper by the Dozen3 out yet?
I definitely agree with the Tom Cruise comment. The problem is JJ Abrams directed M:I 3 and I love him. OK, back to topic. I almost never go to movies and I will admit that I can’t stand stars telling me what I should and should not do. I don’t care what their politics are and I want them to stop telling me about it. I mean if we let their opinions influence ours we’d all be jumping on couches, right? (Sorry, back to crazy Tom again). The politics of stars DOES affect my feelings about their movies since it affects how I feel about them. There has to be a REALLY big mitigating factor to cause me to see a movie that has a Tim Robbins or Susan Sarandon in it. And it has to be free.