BY BRIDGET JOHNSON
Wednesday, November 24, 2004 12:01 a.m. EST
Since Nov. 2, I've had an icky feeling in the pit of my stomach. As an
ardent Bush backer, my queasiness has nothing to do with the glorious
election results, but is prompted by a murder that occurred the same
day in Amsterdam.
Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh's short film "Submission," about the
treatment of women in Islam, written by female Dutch parliamentarian
and former Muslim Aayan Hirsi Ali, had aired in August on Dutch TV.
Van Gogh was riding his bike near his home when a Muslim terrorist
shot him, slashed his throat, and pinned to his body a note
threatening Ms. Ali. This appears to be an organized effort, not the
act of a lone nut; Dutch authorities are holding 13 suspects in the
case.
After the slaying, I watched "Submission" (available online at
ifilm.com) and my mind is still boggled that 11 minutes decrying
violence against women incites such violence. There've been many films
over the years that have taken potshots at Catholics, but I don't
remember any of us slaughtering filmmakers over the offense. You
didn't see the National Rifle Association order a hit on Michael Moore
over "Bowling for Columbine."
One would think that in the name of artistic freedom, the creative
community would take a stand against filmmakers being sent into hiding
à la Salman Rushdie, or left bleeding in the street. Yet we've heard
nary a peep from Hollywood about the van Gogh slaying. Indeed
Hollywood has long walked on eggshells regarding the topic of Islamic
fundamentalism. The film version of Tom Clancy's "The Sum of All
Fears" changed Palestinian terrorists to neo-Nazis out of a desire to
avoid offending Arabs or Muslims. The war on terror is a Tinsel Town
taboo, even though a Hollywood Reporter poll showed that roughly
two-thirds of filmgoers surveyed would pay to see a film on the topic.
In a recent conversation with a struggling liberal screenwriter, I
brought up the Clancy film as an example of Hollywood shying away from
what really affects filmgoers--namely, the al Qaeda threat vs. the
neo-Nazi threat. He vehemently defended the script switch. "It's an
easy target," he said of Arab terrorism, repeating this like a parrot,
then adding, "It's a cheap shot." How many American moviegoers would
think that scripting Arab terrorists as the enemy in a fiction film is
a "cheap shot"? In fact, it's realism; it's what touches lives
world-wide. It's this disconnect with filmgoers that has left the
Hollywood box office bleeding by the side of the road.
President Bush wasn't the only one to receive a mandate on Election
Day. Voters showed that they don't give a hoot about celebrity
endorsements. The dollar democracy of the box office has shown for
years that those same Americans are tired of the old shtick. Hollywood
hasn't paid attention to its chronic illness, and now even
once-powerhouse Miramax, under the tutelage of uber-liberal Harvey
Weinstein, has been handing out pink slips. Purse strings are pulling
even tighter across town as studios can't continue to stomach the same
flops.
But there is an exciting undercurrent flowing through Hollywood,
buoyed not only by the election but the campaign that highlighted
divisions so oft pointed to by the left. It's something the general
public can't see yet, but will when the talents of the conservative
filmmaking movement in Hollywood--writers, producers, directors and
actors--begin to make it past the distribution hurdle and to the
cineplex.
We saw a sneak peek during the campaign: a funny commercial for the
Club for Growth, denoting Kerry's flip-flops with a groom who keeps
changing his mind at the altar and a bomb-squad specialist who can't
pick which wire to cut. The producer was David Zucker, a
self-described "Sept. 12 Republican," who made such classics as
"Airplane!" and "The Naked Gun." Meanwhile, loudmouthed liberal
celebrities were crucified in the Trey Parker/Matt Stone comedy "Team
America: World Police."
A liberal friend asked me what conservative filmmaking was,
envisioning staid, G-rated pictures. The movement is better described
as rebellion from the Hollywood status quo, the dream of being able to
make a feature film whose political content won't be altered to make
the Republicans evil, in which politically incorrect yet pertinent
material won't end up on the cutting-room floor. It's about having
faith in filmgoers that they'll eagerly support pictures to which they
can relate. It's about creating content for movie houses in the red
states as well as the blue.
A month before the election, the Liberty Film Festival in West
Hollywood generated a palpable excitement among conservatives in the
industry and those lining up to catch a glimpse of the flicks. The
diverse and hip crowd joined producers Stephen K. Bannon ("In the Face
of Evil"), Lionel Chetwynd ("Celsius 41.11"), Doug Urbanski ("The
Contender"), Mr. Zucker and others.
One film, by Brain-Terminal.com's Evan Maloney, "Brainwashing 101,"
highlighted attempts to stifle free speech on college campuses. After
the film, an immigrant in the audience who identified himself as Boris
angrily proclaimed, "This is just like Soviet Union!"
Another film, "Relentless," exposed Yasser Arafat's doublespeak in
favor of the destruction of Israel and chillingly showed children on a
Palestinian TV show expressing their desire to be suicide bombers,
urged on by the host--who blew herself up in Jerusalem a week before
the screening.
Movie after movie showed filmmakers on the edge, taking risks, telling
truths that needed to be told. But Mr. van Gogh paid the ultimate
price to make his film, and the ensuing silence of a community
purportedly so interested in free speech is maddening. Agree with the
man or not, what warranted his violent death?
Giving Hollywood the benefit of the doubt, I did one more search to
find industry response to the van Gogh murder. I found the blog of
novelist and screenwriter Roger L. Simon, who confirmed that I wasn't
the only one who'd been wondering: "It's stunning how silent the
American artistic community, Hollywood in particular, has been about
the murder of Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh in Amsterdam," he wrote.
"Do they even know what happened to one of their own? Have they even
heard of him? Do they care someone was killed for making a film which
protested violent abuse against women? Are they even interested?"
Earlier this year, I was shopping a script that included Arab
terrorist characters in addition to good Arab characters. Companies
were interested, but after the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, a wave of
scripts were returned to me the next week. Confused, I narrowed the
potential culprit down to a small Geneva Conventions joke by one brash
character, and I changed it before sending it out again. The response
was noticeably warmer, but I still encountered some trepidation over
the War on Terror theme.
When I began meeting and networking with other conservative
filmmakers, I put the lines back in the script. I'm not changing it
again. Nor will I compromise my story. It would look pretty silly for
European neo-Nazis to be traipsing around the Pakistani border,
anyway.
Ms. Johnson is a journalist and screenwriter in Southern California.
Hey, Gary!!!!!
What's black and white and red all over?!
The Southern States that elected Bush!!!!
HO HO HO HO!!!!
It's a fricking miracle from God, Gary!
I don't have to deal with any more fricking
idiotic bullshit for SIX WHOLE MONTHS now!
SIX MONTHS! God-DAMN, man!!!! I actually
got four straight months of relatively pleasant work
and adventure in my last gig in Portland, and now I get
SIX
FREAKING
MONTHS!!!!!
Where I don't have fight ignorant morons,
try to decipher what their fucking games or motives are,
or get stuck in their inconsiderate, selfish tom- fuckery!
YESSSSS!!!
FUCK YEAH!
It's a FUCKING MIRACLE FROM GOD!
That's odd. When I removed all of the superfluous words from your
sentence, there was nothing left.
>Easy one.
The only thing I've ever questioned was that little reading
comprehension problem you have.
--
Lady Chatterly
"Oh, hep me. Lady Chatterly's trying to flame me. aaaaah." --
Starshine Moonbeam
Yes, but it's okay, I laid in a pretty good stock of cipro last month!
Plus, I don't have to deal with moronic, game-playing children
for SIX FREAKING MONTHS, perhaps even longer!
And check out your standard of living,
it's dropping even faster than your testicles, Gar!
http://quotes.ino.com/chart/?s=NYBOT_DXY0&v=i
Nice, another new low, 81.74,
gold breaks 453 and silver breaks 7.72.
I LIKE IT!
I shore hope y'all got yoreself a backup plan, sonny!
Heh heh heh.
Hey, Gary!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Who is the only man that can save you now?!
Gary, let me clue you in on a secret.....
You see that $600 billion trade deficit lately?
Well, a lot of that is oil.
In fact, our major relatively inelastic import is oil.
And the plurality of that is from Canada.
So.... as the dollar drops....
China's dollar drops in tandem.....
keeping our trade deficit with them intact.
And as the dollar drops.... oil prices rise.....
so the deficit actually..... doesn't change much.
So.... like.... the dollar is going lower and lower,
and your lifestyle is getting more and more expensive,
but there's no change in the underlying cause.....
Can you dig this, CandyMan?
Can you.. like... do some linear extrapolation, daddy-o?!
Nice, Cdn$ broke .85 like a knife through butter, man.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=CADUSD=X&t=1d
Here's a percentage shot, Kurt, just for you.
If you've got a spare $10K floating around,
you might want to think about an Everbank Renminbi account, soon.
http://www.everbank.com/main.asp?affid=eb
If the Chinese float their currency, you might
pick up quickie 10% gain. The rate of change
in the Cdn$ and Euro are moving into dangerous
territory. If the Chinese are going to float,
they might want to hurry it up a bit.