Why do conservatives hate Hollywood?

[Maxwell]

Nix is a forum treasure.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Shame that Hollywood is dominated today by vapid bourgeois liberals (not to mention the literal Pentagon propaganda that is most action films) instead of the good old days when half of them were card-carrying Communists.

The "communists" of the 1950s were bored bourgeois liberals trying to be edgy. Much like you, actually.

[fartboy]

Well have you seen the way conservatives are portrayed in movies? How about why does Hollywood hate conservatives?

[pbrower2a]

Well have you seen the way conservatives are portrayed in movies? How about why does Hollywood hate conservatives?

It has hated fascists since 1933, and people are using the word conservative as a euphemism for fascist.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

Well have you seen the way conservatives are portrayed in movies? How about why does Hollywood hate conservatives?

It has hated fascists since 1933, and people are using the word conservative as a euphemism for fascist.

By portraying fascists as conservatives, they are "hating" ("hating" is a bit too strong of a term) Conservatives.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Because Reagan umm... uh.... never mind.

[pbrower2a]

Well have you seen the way conservatives are portrayed in movies? How about why does Hollywood hate conservatives?

It has hated fascists since 1933, and people are using the word conservative as a euphemism for fascist.

By portraying fascists as conservatives, they are "hating" ("hating" is a bit too strong of a term) Conservatives.

In some countries, the conservatives (usually traditional elites, tycoons, and financiers) often found fascism attractive for destroying the civil liberties of peasants and industrial workers - most obviously the right to strike, the cornerstone of all effectiveness of labor unions.

Hollywood studios knew who bought the movie tickets. The big landowners and the tycoons didn't fill the movie theaters.   

[tallguy23]

They see Hollywood as being against "family values". It's easy to blame mass media for society's problems instead of looking within your own household and community.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Another thing to keep in mind is that, regardless of individual ideologies, most of the people in Hollywood care first and foremost about making money.  If they have proved one thing time and again, it is that they will make a movie about anything as long as enough people will buy tickets for it (or something relatively similar).  You want mindless slasher movies?  Done.  You want high-end oscar bait from October to December and some psuedo-Oscar bait in the first half of the year?  You got it!  You want supernatural romance that idealizes abusive relationships and is targeted at tweens?  Whatever sells tickets!  You want a special effects orgy in the format of a comic book movie?  Why not?  It isn't like they won't make right-wing movies if said movies make money (ex: Passion of the Christ).  If people want to see Michael Moore's movies, but they don't want to see Atlas Shrugged, that's the simply the free market speaking

[dead0man]

It isn't like they won't make right-wing movies if said movies make money (ex: Passion of the Christ).

Horrible example.  "they" didn't want to fund PotC which is why Mel funded the entire thing himself (and made a ...ahem....killing).  The movie made a lot of money.  There hasn't been a bunch of knock offs by "they" since then either.



(and to squash the assumptions....I'm not a fan of Mel and have never seen PotC)

[Mr. Morden]

How has Naso not posted in this thread yet?

[pbrower2a]

They see Hollywood as being against "family values". It's easy to blame mass media for society's problems instead of looking within your own household and community.

The paradox is that in the 1930s and 1940s the Hollywood studios endorsed traditional family values and mainstream religion so that the studios would not release movies that offended potential audiences. The studio owners and bosses, then largely Jewish, recognized that they could shape attitudes toward religion in general. Those Jewish studio owners and bosses went to the moralizers of the day and asked for the Hays code that prohibited the movie studios from doing what those studios' owners wanted prohibited. They treated all mainstream religion sympathetically, promoting a "take care of your own and leave the rest alone" attitude.  Ridicule of religion of any kind would encourage antipathy toward Jews as emanated from German cinema at the time. Of course the Hays code kept the Jew-baiting bilge of Hitlerland out of America as well as excessively-racy, gratuitously violent, or anti-religious material out of the theaters. It was good for business.

 

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

It isn't like they won't make right-wing movies if said movies make money (ex: Passion of the Christ).

Horrible example.  "they" didn't want to fund PotC which is why Mel funded the entire thing himself (and made a ...ahem....killing).  The movie made a lot of money.  There hasn't been a bunch of knock offs by "they" since then either.



(and to squash the assumptions....I'm not a fan of Mel and have never seen PotC)

Fine, let's use Forrest Gump as an example then.

[Goldwater]

It isn't like they won't make right-wing movies if said movies make money (ex: Passion of the Christ).

Horrible example.  "they" didn't want to fund PotC which is why Mel funded the entire thing himself (and made a ...ahem....killing).  The movie made a lot of money.  There hasn't been a bunch of knock offs by "they" since then either.



(and to squash the assumptions....I'm not a fan of Mel and have never seen PotC)

Fine, let's use Forrest Gump as an example then.

Forrest Gump is right wing? It's always seemed pretty apolitical to me...

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

It isn't like they won't make right-wing movies if said movies make money (ex: Passion of the Christ).

Horrible example.  "they" didn't want to fund PotC which is why Mel funded the entire thing himself (and made a ...ahem....killing).  The movie made a lot of money.  There hasn't been a bunch of knock offs by "they" since then either.



(and to squash the assumptions....I'm not a fan of Mel and have never seen PotC)

Fine, let's use Forrest Gump as an example then.

Forrest Gump is right wing? It's always seemed pretty apolitical to me...

Yeah, it is a pretty right-wing film (although that's never taken away from my enjoyment of it).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrest_Gump#Political_interpretations

[Goldwater]

It isn't like they won't make right-wing movies if said movies make money (ex: Passion of the Christ).

Horrible example.  "they" didn't want to fund PotC which is why Mel funded the entire thing himself (and made a ...ahem....killing).  The movie made a lot of money.  There hasn't been a bunch of knock offs by "they" since then either.



(and to squash the assumptions....I'm not a fan of Mel and have never seen PotC)

Fine, let's use Forrest Gump as an example then.

Forrest Gump is right wing? It's always seemed pretty apolitical to me...

Yeah, it is a pretty right-wing film (although that's never taken away from my enjoyment of it).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forrest_Gump#Political_interpretations

Interesting. I guess I've just never really analyzed it in a political context.

[dead0man]

It isn't like they won't make right-wing movies if said movies make money (ex: Passion of the Christ).

Horrible example.  "they" didn't want to fund PotC which is why Mel funded the entire thing himself (and made a ...ahem....killing).  The movie made a lot of money.  There hasn't been a bunch of knock offs by "they" since then either.



(and to squash the assumptions....I'm not a fan of Mel and have never seen PotC)

Fine, let's use Forrest Gump as an example then.

The 20 year old film that mocks dying for your country?  Weird.  Red Dawn would be a better example.

But I agree with your original point, Hollywood cares first and foremost about dollars.  But they also (generally) don't like conservatives* and tend not to make movies for them....which is fine.



*though probably not as much as conservatives in Hollywood would lead you to believe...it's not like Eastwood or Carey are starving (but both look like they could put on a few pounds).

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

It isn't like they won't make right-wing movies if said movies make money (ex: Passion of the Christ).

Horrible example.  "they" didn't want to fund PotC which is why Mel funded the entire thing himself (and made a ...ahem....killing).  The movie made a lot of money.  There hasn't been a bunch of knock offs by "they" since then either.



(and to squash the assumptions....I'm not a fan of Mel and have never seen PotC)

Fine, let's use Forrest Gump as an example then.

The 20 year old film that mocks dying for your country?  Weird.  Red Dawn would be a better example.

But I agree with your original point, Hollywood cares first and foremost about dollars.  But they also (generally) don't like conservatives* and tend not to make movies for them....which is fine.



*though probably not as much as conservatives in Hollywood would lead you to believe...it's not like Eastwood or Carey are starving (but both look like they could put on a few pounds).

I don't think it mocks dying for your country (there are comedic scenes set during Vietnam, but it isn't like the film insults veterans or anything like that).  Beyond which military service is pretty respected by both liberals and conservatives, and Forrest Gump does take a pretty conservative view of the 60s and counter-culture.  Btw, Robert Downey Jr. is a conservative Republican and I don't think it has kept him from making a ton of money.  Eastwood looks the way he does b/c of his age, not difficulties finding work.  I agree that Hollywood generally doesn't "like" conservatives, but (not saying you disagreed) their only concern is usually "can I make money working with you."

[Mordecai]

As has been mentioned, it's a combination of victim complex, fear-mongering of cultural liberalism and "well I didn't want to be your friend anyway!" coping mechanism for rejection.

[Oswald Acted Alone, You Kook]

Because Hollywood has been overwhelmed with Marxists that want to destroy the traditional values that this country had.

[justfollowingtheelections]

Hollywood, whatever that means, is America's biggest business.  Studios are not to promote certain beliefs, they're out to make money, and we're talking about big money here.

Actors, directors and other artists are often left-leaning, but they're only playing the Hollywood game.

Conservatives that hate Hollywood are simply very insecure people who are uncertain of their own beliefs and if they're not constantly being reassured that their beliefs are correct, they reject what they hear.

[Skill and Chance]

As others have hinted, Hollywood leans left in its personal life, but the actual product it puts out is remarkably spread across the spectrum.  Let's look at ideology (or lack thereof) in the top 10 grossing movies of all time.  Not adjusting for inflation will give more weight to recent pictures:

1. Avatar: unambiguously left, very environmentalist
2. Titanic: unambiguously left
3. Marvel's Avengers: right, celebrates extreme wealth, defense spending, etc.
4. The Dark Knight: Very right
5. Star Wars Episode I: leans right, celebrates traditional religion and international intervention, condemns bureaucracy
6. Star Wars: leans right, government is a force for evil, also has devoutly religious people in a very unexpected setting
7. The Dark Knight Rises: Very right
8. Shrek 2: seems entirely non-ideological
9. E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial: mostly non-ideological
10. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire: unambiguously right, as others have pointed out

So that's 4 movies with right wing themes + 2 movies that seem to lean right against 2 movies with left wing themes.

[MaxQue]

I'm not sure than opposing the system is right-wing. It can be a very left-wing position, too.

[Skill and Chance]

I'm not sure than opposing the system is right-wing. It can be a very left-wing position, too.

I assume you're talking about Hunger Games and Star Wars?  But it goes beyond that.  In the Hunger Games because the rural poor are shown as better off supporting themselves by hunting, small business, etc. and in Star Wars because the protagonists are out to preserve and later revive traditional religion against a government that oppresses it severely.  Although SW is more ambiguous because there are some explicit digs at Bush in Episode III for example.  But still the overall thesis of SW is religious freedom and the overthrow of an increasingly tyrannical government. 

[World politics is up Schmitt creek]

That seems like an odd element of the setting of The Hunger Games to focus on when the entire premise of the franchise involves staggering wealth inequality presented as a monstrous evil.