Roman Polanski - he raped a young girl and fled from the country to avoid punishment.

Woody Allen, he is a pedophile that had relations with his daughter then married her.

As far as political folks, could not care less, I am more offended by the above two clowns, so much so I will not even watch their movies on HBO, let alone buy a ticket to one, or rent a DVD.

Great point. +1

There are some truly loathsome people in the arts, but for the most part I will still look at their stuff if it interests me. I agree about Woody Allen and RP being reprobates, but I don't boycott them. I respect anyone's decision to do differently, however.

absurd is right. Must be a great agency...not

"The industry" certainly tends toward the liberal side of the fence. But there is always an over-riding concern - $$$. If you have talent and can make people money, then you will get work. Doesn't matter if you are attila the hun.

Plenty of people use politics for an excuse as to why they don't make it in this town. It usually is due to lack of talent or effort. Yes, it is who you know. But you have to work to know people, and once you do, you have to have something that can make someone else money. If you don't, you're toast.

Mel Gibson not getting work has nothing to do with his politics. He has issues...

I don't think I would ever not see a film because of an actors political view. It is the one of the strongest medias that can and has influenced peoples ideas and thinking. Now, there are actors that I think don't get their due, but that's another thread.

I use politics for an excuse as to why I don't make it in my town. Ba$tards!

The most punk-rock thing you can do in L.A. is to “say ‘George Bush is f*****g awesome’ instead of talking about how lame it is that he’s fighting for oil.
— Trey Parker



absurd is right. Must be a great agency...not

the boss has a couple clios. but they give those things out to anybody.

"The industry" certainly tends toward the liberal side of the fence. But there is always an over-riding concern - $$$. If you have talent and can make people money, then you will get work. Doesn't matter if you are attila the hun.

reread my earlier post. hollywood is perfectly willing to flush millions on doomed liberal movies. obviously there is something other than money going on here. the guy who green lit "motorcycle diaries" can't have been stupid enough to think it would turn a profit. conservatives are cut no such slack. yes, gibson is nuts. and i can think of twenty people who are even bigger basket cases, with half the talent. sean penn is a good actor. and he is sexually attracted to dictators. hugo chavez was crushing demonstrators and shutting down newspapers while penn kissed his ass. and he will suffer absolutely no consequences.


Plenty of people use politics for an excuse as to why they don't make it in this town. It usually is due to lack of talent or effort. Yes, it is who you know. But you have to work to know people, and once you do, you have to have something that can make someone else money. If you don't, you're toast.

i've worked consistently for ten years. and i keep my mouth shut. i am surrounded by people wearing BUCK FUSH tshirts. people who brag about tagging SUVs. last year a producer tried to force me into volunteering to work off the clock on his NARAL related campaign. i got some funny looks because i was the only one in the break room not celebrating when reagan died. i'm getting sick of it.


i'm learning to work outside the system. have been on a few small independent projects run by right wingers like me. nothing's gone anywhere so far. but they're getting better.

geez, how old are you? I don't run into any of that crap...

39. too old to be a freelance artist. but that's what i am.


i work a lot in santa monica and venice. maybe that explains it.


have a job scheduled next month in burbank. maybe it will be different.

There is certainly some mindless, lemming-like PC type liberalism in Hollywood, but I've never seen a case where one's politics is a litmus test for employment. I think that you have a major chip on your shoulder regarding the lack of "fellow travelers" in your profession, I have no doubt that it's hard to find a Reagan lover in Venice.

My experience in Hollywood has been considerably different, most people avoid political views as a topic of conversation just as they do in any other professional or social situation. Little to gain and a lot to lose going down that road with a casual acquaintance or even someone you are becoming friends with.

I know a lot of creative people and a fair number of "suits" in tinseltown and can tell you that Todd is correct. The overwhelming factor regarding employment is talent and producing profitable content. "Talent will out" is the motto of the industry. Your examples of loser films like "Lions and Lambs" is proof of my argument that there is a dearth of good scripts. (And frankly that film was a head-scratcher even though it was green-lighted as a vanity project for a very powerful producer. You may have a rare example of your theory on that one). If Bill O'Reilly wrote a great book, (an impossibility since he is talentless), someone would option the film rights for millions and it would probably be produced.

A large part of the economics of the film business is recognising who the potential audience is for a film. People in cities go to see movies in theatres, young more than old, and a hundred other small calculations. Believe me, it's not rocket science and even the smartest people with the most experience marketing films bat less than .500. Rambo films and other jingoistic "America is the greatest" type military films are pretty sure winners if made well and marketed right, they are slam-dunk green-lights in Hollywood and the industry would take every one they could get.

Someone absolutely did think that "Motorcycle Diaries" would make $$ and in fact it did. It was a very successful small-budget indy film that is still paying back as we speak in DVD/international/cable/etc.. It's probably a smash hit in Latin America and commie countries, hey, it's all about the Benjamins around here.;)

Sean Penn gets work because he is stupendously talented. He has been employed non-stop since he first auditioned in about 1980. It doesn't matter whether you agree with this or not, people like Clint Eastwood and every Oscar winning director under the sun want to work with him. His politics are a non-issue. He could stay home and smoke crack between films and no one would give a schit. He has made his share of friends and enemies in the industry, (not over politics but the much more common reason of "creative differences" which is code for a world of egotistical ass holes), but he will always work.

Todd is also correct that people rationalise their failure in a lot of creative ways here. I remember an acquaintence from college who came out here after a small role in a big film and then blamed his Germanic surname for his failure in "an industry controlled by Jews". :rolleyes: This is a much more common BS failure excuse than politics, and just as fatuous. It's true that there are a large number of Jewish people in the film industry, but the vast majority are smart, open-minded people with a sharp business sense. If this guy really had the goods, he would have made it. I used to ask him how so many non-Jewish actors made it under his theory. He had issues that probably came through in auditions, that and his lack of talent.

This is a bit of an essay, I know, but I had insomnia so there you have it. :)

Bottom line, actors are people that get paid to entertain us much in a same manner a Jester was brought before a king to make him laugh. They are for entertainment, how they became experts on anything other than acting is beyond me.

If Sean Penn or George Cloony has something to say about anything other than the movie they made I am not interested. I could care less what Bono has to say either. They are entertainers and nothing more their opinion means nothing.

Just make me laugh and stop talking.

I believe you just described the particularly loathsome Joe Eszterhas. Well, except for the talent part.


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1206372579.jpg







Tim

I can't believe no one said Mel Gibson in the 4 pages on ***** talkin!!!

I won't watch him anymore because I don't hate Jews. Plain and simple.

Won't listen to Micheal Jackson for the obvious reason.

I can't stomach knowing every time I watch their movies or listen to their song a dime goes in their pocket. It actually sickens me. :mad:

Huh, the only part of that that made any sense is the Lincoln quote. Try again, take your time, read what I wrote and try to respond in english

Doh :(...your right.

"Basng your beliefs solely on what you choose to accept of what you hear can distort one's vision and lead to trouble. I'm sure you'll agree that it pays to consider one's choices very carefully.."

Anyway, I think Speeder's subsequent post is pretty good, en?

You are better grammatically, but you still are off the reservation on replying to what I said, not really a cogent response.

Yeah, speeder makes some interesting points, but for his argument to hold any water, there would be a lot more, stupidly right, tilted jingoistic, pro-America stuff to balance out the anti-American, the government is the Devil stuff we have been getting. There may not be the scripts, but if that is what they want to make, people would be writing it, just so they could sell scripts. Either the writers are stupid and would rather write a script about a subject they support and not sell it, than write about one they loathe and get a nice new Bentley. They want to make money, but they also are motivated greatly by how they are perceived. It is the city of superficiality after all.

I still have to call BS