Why Movie Stars are Liberal
by Burt PrelutskyOne of the reasons that movies today are so devoid of compelling characters and engrossing plots is that the folks who make them are, more often than not, too young and too isolated from humanity. That’s not to say that writers and directors in their 20s and 30s can’t be talented, but, as a rule, what they have are a passel of petty grievances (the studios, their agents, the deals, other people’s success, etc.); what they lack is wisdom. They simply haven’t lived long enough or suffered enough major losses — friends, parents, spouses, children — to have developed a grown-up’s philosophy.
Perhaps that also helps to explain why nearly all of them are liberals. When all that one hears all day long is left-wing claptrap — and especially when future employment demands acquiescence to the prevailing tenets — it’s easy to understand the half-baked inanities these wienies so arrogantly espouse. They speak of tolerance as if it’s something they copyrighted, but they despise everyone who isn’t in lockstep with them. Although they make their living with words, when it comes to debating the opposition, they rely on a mantra of “racist,” “fascist,” “bigot” and “homophobe.”
This isolation from large segments of the population, relying strictly on other members of the industry for one’s social and intellectual life, might also explain why even major stars subscribe to the blathering of someone like Barack Obama, who carries on very much like a movie star.
It occurred to me that even without make-up, stars don’t seem to age at the same rate as the rest of us. It’s not all thanks to Botox and plastic surgery, hairpieces and stomach stapling. When you’re a movie star, as rich as Midas, as pampered as Madame Pompadour, you are spared all the day-to-day travails that wear down the rest of us. Stars have drivers, managers, secretaries, gofers and nannies, to take care of all their needs — everything from picking up his dry cleaning to raising the kids.
A tragedy in a star’s life is getting a smaller trailer than the female lead. A hardship in that world is having to get up early in the morning so that some guy who had to wake up even earlier can chauffeur him to the studio, where someone else will dress him and apply his makeup, so that a third person can then guide him safely around the scenery and tell him how to say his lines.
Except that he may have less time for golf and vacations, it’s a lot like being the president. One main difference is that the star has to pay for his own bodyguards, while the rest of us have to pay for the president’s.
Living that sort of privileged life, even Methuselah, on his deathbed, wouldn’t have looked a day over 450.
Warren Beatty once said that at some point in his life, every man should experience being a motion picture star. His message was that such fortunate individuals never have to pursue women because women pursue them. He’s right, of course. The odd thing is that movie stars don’t have to look like young Mr. Beatty or Brad Pitt to be chick magnets. I have known a lot of actors, a great many of whom looked more like me than they did like George Clooney, but even they had to beat off women with a stick; although, truth be told, they generally left the stick in the closet or out in the tool shed.
It took me a long time to figure out the attraction. I finally decided that women spend a good deal of their time fantasizing and, so, when they are with a professional actor, it seems only natural to fantasize they are co-starring in a movie, even if it’s X-rated.
I suspect that an additional bonus is that any guilt they might otherwise have experienced over having sex with a perfect, or perhaps I should say, an imperfect stranger, is easily dispelled by the notion that it was only a movie after all, and that, like every ditsy actress who’s ever done a tacky nude scene, she, too, was merely doing it for her art!
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
144 Comments
It would be interesting to see data on their daddy issues.
Ummm…..
Could also be that they are mindless drones who thrive on being told how smart they are…who surround themselves with mindless drones who tell them how smart they are…ad in finitum.
Bret, you state, "They simply haven’t lived long enough or suffered enough major losses — friends, parents, spouses, children — to have developed a grown-up’s philosophy."
I agree, but only to a point. Certainly I would venture that an actor in a given time period would have experienced the same number of losses (on average) as the rest of us. However, the difference between actors and the rest of us is how they respond to those events. We both go on living, but doing what?
Actors, especially film actors, I think live in a time warp during their careers. It's like time is frozen, they live others' lives, not their own, and therefore the maturation process is stunted, similar to when I was told as a youngster not to smoke because "it'll stunt your growth." Especially true for the greater method actors, who (coincidentally??) have the greatest liberal flame (Sean Penn anyone?)
There's a term that's used little nowadays, but I think is appropriate and sums up what movie stars do. It's called "play-acting," and maybe that's a fundamental reason why actors are liberals. We conservatives work for a living. Actors play for their living.
Cheers, Frank
" They speak of tolerance as if it’s something they copyrighted, but they despise everyone who isn’t in lockstep with them."
…….Which makes Hollyweird Leftists "A-list" Hypocrites, Phonies and Liars……but, we knew that…….
………….."is easily dispelled by the notion that it was only a movie after all, and that, like every ditsy actress who’s ever done a tacky nude scene, she, too, was merely doing it for her art!"
Funny line.
It makes me think of Pamela Anderson.
Everything about liberalism is about arrested development. Hollywood celebrities are just the most in-your-face examples of this. But I think academia is very similar in that many liberal college students never leave school and stew and fester in the same environment as college professors. There's no much room for growth when you never allow yourself the opportunity to leave the safety of a familiar environment and venture into the real world.
The current state of things is a sight to see though. I have an online friend who is having a hard time reconciling his lifelong liberal beliefs and what I sees going on with his liberal colleagues. He doesn't get too political online, but I can see him struggling. He doesn't like the health care bill– he's admitted that much– and I think the vitriolic language of the far left is getting to him (at least a little bit). I don't know if we'll see a full-fledged conversion, but it does my heart good to see a middle-aged liberal start to question his own side.
Burt, it's good to see you back here!
Movie stars are liberal because they are undereducated, don't know any better, and feel guilty about their own wealth and fame. By appealing to socialist themes, and to the underdogs of society, they get to keep their street cred so the average persons will still identify with them so they can sell more movie tickets.
It's marketing of their "brand".
"Arrested Development," you said it much pithier than I did. Props to you, sir.
Frank
I agree, Burt, that movie stars are liberal in large part because they only hear liberal ideas. In fact, I think most of what divides us in this country is simply the type of media we choose to partake of.
When I visit my parents and some of my siblings, I get fed lots of NPR. I know where NPR is coming from, so when I hear a story with dubious information I just shelve that away as another example of silly liberal thinking. But my family members take it all in, and since they are not exposed to any other ideas, this becomes their frame of reference. It really is like we live on separate planets. Hence we have huge, irreconcilable divisions, like a huge chasm that can only be bridged by knowledge. But the knowledge is kept guarded under lock and key somewhere they don't know how to find and don't want to find (sorry for using so many metaphors, but they all seem to fit).
My parents and liberal siblings are really good people. I genuinely think that if they were put in a room and forced to learn all the information they are missing, and then forced to defend their previously held points of view, they would change their minds.
But they are not going to change their minds, not any time soon. Why? Because they are propagandized to hate conservatives. Oh, and conservatives are stupid too (so they've been told). Thus, their own media choices trap them from ever discovering that the world isn't how they see it. It's taken me a long time to realize that good people can become stuck in bad thinking. Why? Is it fear of being wrong? Is it the delight of feeling intellectually superior? Is it just laziness? It could be any and all of these reasons. The bottom line is, I think the mercy of God may be the only thing to save us from ourselves.
If you go back to when Ronald Reagan was an actor and you read about the apogee of his career you'll get a sense of how "liberal derangement syndrome" can set in. At that time you had communists infiltrating Hollywood via the directors, writers and actors guild unions (come to think of it, not much has changed). And so what happens is it takes a foothold early on. The difference between a Ronald Reagan who started out liberal but grew-up, as opposed to the many other left-leaning Hollywood insiders, is that they stay in a perpetual state of chld-hood. Conversely, If you look at a list of the conservative Hollywood actors of yesterday and today (Robert Duvall, Ernest Borgnine, Jon Voight, Dennis Hopper, James Stewart, Gergory Peck, Sylvestor Stallone, et al) you see one common denominator. These are people who lived real life experiences outside of the Hollywood bubble. Consequently, they were able to break away from the dogamtic left-wing ideaology and develop their own critcal thinking skills!
………"what they have are a passel of petty grievances (the studios, their agents, the deals, other people’s success, etc.); what they lack is wisdom. They simply haven’t lived long enough or suffered enough major losses — friends, parents, spouses, children — to have developed a grown-up’s philosophy"
Growing up It was refered to as" Paying your Dues "and the "School of Hard Knocks"
The "Me " generation never had to wait for anything and they grew up "Thinking They Were Special"
No losers,everyone gets an award
Working your way up in life is wrong to them
Case in Point…………."A Jr. Senator " with no skills at anything is now the "POTUS"
/spit
Movie stars are liberal because they spend their young adult lives, and often there entire lives, pursuing their passion instead of trying to establish themselves economically.
This means they want to build a world where one can do that, without the associated mid and long term risk.
They're liberal because they're smarter than everyone else.
To them, they think, "there can't be such moral clarity, and simplicity of the Constitution because I'M so smart! How can it be this simple if I'M so smart."
Amen. Nothing like age to make or break you. And surprise knowledge can enlighten you or it can make a bloody entrance.
You'd be amazed at how young the writers were in Hollywood's heyday. It's more than today's writers and directors swimming in a liberal sea; it's the shallowness of the entire culture. References to the history of our civilization, from the language of the old testament up to and including the language of Hemingway aren't in the baggage that the young and even the not so young carry around inside themselves nowadays. That wasn't the case as recently as the fifties. All killed off. What do the young have plastered on the walls of their skulls now? The complete history of rock 'n roll.
I appreciate the author wrestling with these matters, but I think the multi-generational inbred culture of hollywood exerting peer pressure toward normative beliefs is the major influence. As he acknowledges, of one has the wrong beliefs, they will have no career.
Also, one can't understand liberalism, a perversion of marxism, without understanding that there is an unspoken acknowledgement that their will be the masses and the elites. No 'marxist' elites under any circumstances see themselves lowered to the standard of living of the masses after the worker's revolution.
Of course, there are no elites in a purely communistic society, but that has not prevented every socialist government from having an elite cast that preys upon the efforts of the masses. Every star, producer, professor, and politician sees themselves as part of the elite. Its only the middle class that has to subsidize the poor.
Its an incredibly weird sort of indoctrination where the more ignorant one is, the smarter they think they are. I often let liberals in blogs know that they are not smart enought to know how ignorant they are.
I believe one of the ancient greeks expressed this same sentiment as a general rule of humanity-and only a liberal education fails to teach that.
There are plenty of elderly liberals–youth isn't a very strong reason. Also, many stars come from difficult childhoods and broken homes–they have faced heartbreak, fear and horror before they are 18.
Great, and funny read Burt! Pretty good description of a three year old, just replace parents for the hired help.
Heard on the set: "I don't get ulcers — I give them."
I don't like this article at all. What about Jimmy Stewart? He got into acting right after graduating from Architecture school. No one would call him a liberal. Dashiel Hammet was not only a top writer in Hollywood but a hard core communist. He served in the U.S. Army in both World Wars and was Pinkerton operative for a number of years.
It is more likely the studio bosses push people with their political beliefs. I can't imagine Jimmy Stewart getting a job nowadays. Just look at the flap ( else where on BigHollywood) about Ernest Borgnine and Broke back mountain.
What do the last two, perhaps even the last three, have to do with this post on why movie stars are liberal? Somewhere along the way, the writer drifted from telling us why he believes movie stars are liberal to why he believes women screw movie stars. Those are two different topics, buddy, and should have been two different blog posts.
Sounds like someone I know I think his name is Obama.
Never having to actually think for yourself, make financial decisions, or exert any real effort in the raising of children, gives most of these plastic people a free ride in life until, of course, they age, wind up destitute or scammed, and fade from our memories until one day we hear that they have died.
Even more reason to give some of the conservative actors credit for having substantive careers after only 5 or 10 years of fame. Wayne Rogers in real estate investing, Neil Cavuto, in business journalism, et al are just a few examples. I won't include the obvious politicians like Reagan or Ahhhnold (who both have/had great intelligence and real world savvy) because it is difficult to see where one career really finished and the other began. I can't come up one liberal doofus who's managed a successful second career. Any thoughts out there?
In the first line, Mr. Prelutsky says "One of the reasons that movies TODAY are so devoid …. " He was referring to now, not the past.
BTW, I agrew with you re: Stewart
Limousine liberals … never have to work a day in their life.
siredecoucy- '' I don't like this article all all'- neither did I.
auntiemadder- true that>>>>but you are supposed to like the article and go on with happy cheering to the unbelievably smart revelations there /s
It's the ultimate version of the kids' game, 'Let's Pretend', isn't it …..and getting paid 'big bucks' for the privelege. There are exceptions, of course, but most of these men and women haven't developed their minds much, and when they're asked their opinion about an issue, there isn't a script available with an 'answer' ready for them.
Back in the day, more of them had more experience of real life. So many these days have no concept of what it is like for average Americans.
This is so precise- till the late 1980- tees before the collapse of Soviet Union, the commie party bosses had separate stores with goodies for themselves, hospitals with doctors, medicine, not to mention apartments, villas, dachas, trips abroad. Even the lower level of the apparatchiks had special membership stores, the unwashed plebs were not allowed to enter.
Exactly, and that’s the real reason for the actor lib ways, not what the author of the article wants to present here as the reason- just because the actors were spoiled brats.
Being spoiled brat could make anything out of themselves, but not necessarily the outright socialists.
I have to respectfully disagree.One of the cool things about Pam was that she always knew exactly what the game was about and never pretended otherwise. She posed nude because people liked to look at her and it made her a hell of a lot of money.Anna Nicole Smith became a joke. Pam ran the joke. Plus, she got American citizenship.Yeah, she's gone nuts for PETA but I'll always have a crush on her from Baywatch. Just a thought.(Insert wistful sigh here)
One would think that with the difficulty in breaking into anything movie related – be it writing directing or acting, with the "best" persevering, Hollywood would be full of conservatives.
But then the older I get the more cynical I get – looking at some of these "stars" on the A List – they certainly don't have more talent than many B actors – how do they get to the top? It isn't looks – without naming names I have been watching a popular series on DvD from 10 years ago – one of the female characters everyone saw on TV is beautiful and yet got a small bit part on a current movie – and she is talented. And she has probably been in the industry a good 15 years – or more.
Is it politics that get some in and keeps others out?
The more I write this post and think about it the more confused I get
Certainly you have to have talent to stay in but what allows some talented people in while other talented people are locked out?
Always loved that term – it was Al Capp in his comic strip "Lil Abner" who first coined that term in the 1960s – in a thinly veiled cartoon character named Joanie Phoney – after I presume – Joan Baez…the first LL!
Hollywood is so full of liberals because thye're in their own little unique world. Hollywood is one of rare industries when someone can wake up so poor that money doesn't matter and go to bed that night so rich that money doesn't matter. Eventually you start to feel guilty about having so much, and while you don't want to do anything yourself, you figure the government should do it for you.
20 years ago Tom Hanks earned 3million for "Big". My father practiced medicine for 30 thirty years to save almost that amount to live on for retirement.
Has anyone noticed that Hollywood NEVER pays it's fair share in taxes? They only pay what their accountants can't shelter, writre-off, defer, or evade.
When you start out where 99.9% of the rest us would kill to end up, it skews your views.
So your excuse is that they should have no principles or morals whatsoever?
Plus, most of these people are already STARS and they still hold these beliefs. So that doesn't really square with what you said.
"If you're not a liberal in your twenties you have no heart, if you're not a conservative in your thirties you have no brain." – Winston Churchill
Kinda says it all.
Oh i get it lol the making out is just for art lol im sorry kissing someone is personal no matter what excuses they use. Makes me wonder about all those actors making out on tv
Or you could have just said they are liberal because they are dumb.
Speaking of "daddy issues", 0bama has the potential for more "daddy issues" than most people in Hollywood: A father who abandoned him, a step-father who abandoned him, a mother who abandoned, grandparents who raised him, a Communist child predator who mentored him.
And for some reason we accept him as a well-developed mature rational human with virtually no mental disabilities.
You take Pamela. I rather have Alison Krauss.
Hollywood is liberal for a number of reasons that come together more clearly in Hollywood than in other professions.
One reason is that in Hollywood you make your living with words (excepting the technical people). In every profession where words are important you find liberals whether it's acting, teaching, journalism, law or writing. People in these profession measure their success by their ability to persuade others. Life is making other people do what you want.
By comparison, people in professions where the relationship to reality is more direct, by which I mean people whose actions directly change the way things are – engineers, carpenters, scientists (experimental types more than theoreticians) are less liberal in their views. They tend to experience a sense of direct control over their environments that's somewhat lacking in the more "wordy" professions. Life is doing directly what you want.
You can see the difference in the movies of left directors vs those on the right. James Cameron hates humans, sees them was idiots needing to be led or as bad children who need to be spanked. ("Aliens", "Avatar").
Clint Eastwood is an individualist whose movies show individuals having control over their lives ("The Unforgiven", "Dirty Harry"). Eastwood's protagonists usually have few words but they make those words count.
Cameron panders to audiences, in particular elite liberal audiences. Eastwood makes movies that he would want to see himself. For Cameron the focus is on the effect his movies have on audiences, for Eastwood the focus is the movie itself.
Liberals tend to look for others to do the actual work of dealing with reality and use words as their means. On the right you see more of the attitude of doing it yourself.
Hollywood is the most dysfunctional group of people in the world. We are influenced so much by celebrities because of the media influence on us. So is it any wonder why we are so materially rich today and yet suffer such great spiritual poverty.
Hollywood stars are so out of touch with average Americans that they might as well be from a different planet.
Wow! when you put it that way, his election is an example of the dumbing down of America even though we are supposed to have a top notch education system.
I think they often feel guilty about their success–it is due only to being the benefactor of nicely arranged DNA. Take away the script and the well rehearsed ad libs and what are you left with but a nice looking shell.
With Hollywood celebrities, you really have to marvel at how they can sit in their ivory towers and still scrape the bottom of the barrel.
Freud, Nietzsche, Marx all had Daddy issues too.
Liberalism is the first level of genuine deeper thought. It's the level where you are brainstorming and coming up with all sorts of ideas. It's the fun part. The next level of true thought is the part where you realistically evaluate your own (and others') ideas to weigh their probable effectiveness. That's the hard part and the un-fun part. It's the part where you learn that most of your best ideas would never work no matter how awesome they might seem on paper.
Liberals like that first level, and since they've been told that they're real smart for having gotten that far, they seldom seek to go deeper, IMO. Hollywood stars probably like it because they feel like they're already doing really deep thought simply by being able to pretend to be someone else. That's just like the deep thought of coming up with ideas.
Your friend is one of the few that is trying to separate from the belief and observe the fruits of those beliefs which is nothing like they said it would be. This is a harsh reality those on the left are afraid to accept and when presented with the cold-hard evidence of such, they either lash out and stay the course or they slowly evolve away from hardcore leftism.
As someone who is surrounded by liberals at home, I can completely understand your situation. My relatives ONLY read the Washington Post and the New York Times (well, along with salon.com and huffpo), they ONLY listen to NPR on the radio and the only news they will watch is CNN, because it is "the only unbiased news network." So not only are they getting all of their information in the liberal echo chamber, they are convinced that they are oh, so much SMARTER than everybody else. Have you ever noticed how PRETENTIOUS people who listen to NPR are? And how snooty they sound when they point out that they listen to NPR?
Frankly, I am forced to listen to NPR when I'm in the car with these folks, and it puts me to sleep. Everyone trying to sound oh, so serious – they all talk in a monotone! Give me Rush and Sean any day!
And not just actors. Has anyone seen "Love Happens" with Jennifer Aniston? What a trite, immature faux wisdom piece. The writer-director and writer-producer are both 40, but my wife and I swore it had to be written by a 23-year old with a Psychology degree. It had more empty ideas and platitudes than any film I've seen in a long time. It's like I say, you can't write characters smarter than you, funnier than you, nor wiser than you (unless you steal!). LOL
ladykrystyna, ~ unfortunately- I had to delete what I really said- but what I said was- the author of this article is not truthful at all.
He does not speak of the fact, that the movie business is owned a big time by socialists, and the little brats are just the pawns in the big spiel. And why is the author not talking about that, one could only make a fare enough guess of his reasons.
Sure, the young rich actors could be spoiled brats, but is this the reason the Hollywood has gone full socialist steam?
At the end of the article he talks about women attracted to the rich guys in H-wood. What that has to do with anything, or with the subject of this article?
Burt, so glad to see you on Big Hollywood! Having met some "actors" in my day, my observation is that they are generally not as intelligent as most of the people I meet every day at work and on the street. Actors, by definition, spend their days pretending to be somebody they are not. I have noticed that a lot of them start BELIEVING that they are somebody they are not. If they play a doctor, for example, they start thinking they have some extra-special medical knowledge, when, in fact, they're pretty much idiots, and all the the medical terminology they have to learn for their roles has to be taught to them phonetically.
Recently I also had occasion to meet some young people who graduated from film school in the last 10 years. Most of them are NOT gainfully employed in the "film" industry. In fact, most of them don't have regular jobs at all. They do, however, collect a lot of unemployment, and are firm believers that unemployment should be unlimited; a means of financial support for them while they pursue their "craft." They are liberals, because they crave government support so they never have to grow up and get real jobs. Then successful actors remember when they were poor and couldn't get a gig and lived off unemployment. They too, believe the government should be supporting these poor starving artists. 'Cause the rich successful Hollywood people sure as heck aren't going to.
this is amazing to me, when people would go voting down an opinion which has been expressed many times on BH, just because some body placed the minus on the point.
Every body knows why the H-wood is what it is today.
Yet the author plays the game of blaming the actors for being socialists because they are little spoiled brats!
While even Mel Gibson should think twice what he does, or else- no job in H-wood!
And you want me to believe in this article?
4bee, do you usually read Burt's posts because they are supposed to be full of jokes. You know . . . funny.
"And why is the author not talking about that, one could only make a fare enough guess of his reasons."
WTH does that mean? He's basically saying all of Hollywood is bunch of liberals. Why does he have to write the article the way YOU want it written. It's his column, he can write what he wants. You are making assumptions and I can't even figure out WTF you are talking about. It's like your bitching just to bitch.
"Yet the author plays the game of blaming the actors for being socialists because they are little spoiled brats!"
And why can't he say that? You still haven't explained yourself? Are you defending actors saying that it's okay for them to stand up and say the stupid things they say, visit dictators, etc. because they need a job?
Are you an actress, btw, selling out your principles?
I mean, wtf is your deal?
Re women and actors, other famous people. It is as simple as female hypergamy. Women's hard wired desire for men with higher status, social domination of others, than themselves. That's hard-wired into all women, all the time. Most don't control it very well, because there are few social consequences anymore for doing so. [Note hypergamy is not exactly the same as exact social status of the man. Bad boy "fringe" guys by playing the dangerous/exciting card do far better than "boring" guys with higher social status. Jared Leto vs. Jon Cryer, to use hypotheticals.] Think the female equivalent to men's inbuilt attraction to T&A, which most men learn to control fairly early because for men, there **ARE** consequences now.
Good points on social distance and isolation. The loss of a lot of "Hollywood's middle class" and a bifurcation of guys barely making it, and superstars (Kathy Griffin forty years ago would have had a fairly middle class house in the Valley, instead of the mansion she had featured on an episode of "the Dog Whisperer") … has much to answer for.
I too have relatives of this frame of mind. Unfortunately, I choose not to "talk" when they are in town…which is seldom. Regardless, I do believe that, given the chance, they would be able to hear the TRUTH through the "truth." Redundant? Yes, but so is the propaganda that they breathe.
Great follow up post, katiebird.
God Speed.
Well, for one, I agree with Bees last statement, the starf**ker lines have nothing to do with the main thrust of this article (pun very much intended). For two, I think what she is referring to is the young rich punks in the H-wood business are just products of a very left-leaning system. You look at all of the actors who have come out of the conservative closet, they are all either established names in the biz, or too old to give a crap. If someone is outed, they are done. I can totally understand their position, if my very existence was hinging on my politics, I would be very silent about my politics. I work for a solar company , so you can imagine the political landscape. I don't talk about my politics because it could cost me dearly. Not a pretty position to be in.
Ive always wonderd why "dating" in Hollywood is so superfical fast paced and shallow. You certainly answerd the question as to why most of them "date" metrosexual douchbags who want in their pants. Immaturity
Ben Stein too…
While he also worked for the Nixon Administration, he too was a working stiff like most of us and could see the light.
I've worked in Hollywood and Burt's right. I don't see anything factually incorrect about this article. There may be a top-down situation with the studio heads, but trust me, most people working in Hollywood are not on a first name basis with the people in charge– other than their immediate bosses (the executive producer on the show I worked on wouldn't have known my name if his life depended on it).
Hollywood is an echo chamber that has festered for generations. The celebs are spoiled brats who make too much money and they know it. The point Burt was trying to make about Beatty and the women who are attracted to him is that these people don't have to work at anything when they get to a certain level. Money, women, adulation– it's right at their feet. And it creates a sense of entitlement that is pervasive in that world. I don't believe that the celebrities are pawns in anyone's game, it's a culture that's developed thanks to copious amounts of money and people who are willing to sell out to get it.
I had no heart.
Lol! That's what my husband says. But I know better. He was just a heck of a lot smarter than I was at that age.
That springs a thought for an "art tax" to be put on the movie, TV and music industries. This would be a tax on actors, personalities and musicians that make more than…. oh 250K a year. Such a tax would go to financial support of fledgling actors, personalities and musicians.
Here's what Burt said:
"Perhaps that also helps to explain why nearly all of them are liberals. When all that one hears all day long is left-wing claptrap — and especially when future employment demands acquiescence to the prevailing tenets — it’s easy to understand the half-baked inanities these wienies so arrogantly espouse. They speak of tolerance as if it’s something they copyrighted, but they despise everyone who isn’t in lockstep with them. Although they make their living with words, when it comes to debating the opposition, they rely on a mantra of “racist,” “fascist,” “bigot” and “homophobe.”
This isolation from large segments of the population, relying strictly on other members of the industry for one’s social and intellectual life, might also explain why even major stars subscribe to the blathering of someone like Barack Obama, who carries on very much like a movie star."
I don't see what's wrong with that – they go in as youths and they get indoctrinated just like kids do in college. Now I can see being silent about your politics. Keeping it on the down low. But I don't think that is what Burt is talking about? I mean, many young folks and folks my age in Hollywood spew the crap out loud all the time. And people like Cameron and Glover, etc. do it all the time and they're not youths either.
It's a combination of youth, indoctrination, and insulation. I don't see why that's enough to have anybody get their knickers in a twist like 4bee did. I just don't get what her complaint is.
Thank you SQT. Apparently you get what Burt's saying. I'm just not sure why anyone but a liberal (and I don't know 4bee's politics) would get their knickers in a twist.
Again, I understand being quiet about your politics. But many in Hollywood actively spew the crap so that's something totally different.
From Burt's website http://burtprelutsky.com. I like the caption below his photo: Looks harmless, doesn't he?
I think Hollywood is liberal because liberal really means "libertine". Actors and entertainment people I think have always been a bit more socially liberal than other people. It wasn't a profession that you wished your kids would get into (and for most sane parents it's the same today). And since being liberal means never having to take responsibility for yourself, it's obvious then why they are liberal – they get to do whatever they want with virtually zero consequence.
Just my take on it.
Obviously there are the exceptions to that and we know who they are. But they are the exceptions. They love their craft and they do it because of that. But they also have some morals and personal responsibility.
ladykrystyna asked: ''I mean, wtf is your deal?''
No, I am not an actress, God have mercy!
And I did not make any excuses for the commie actors singing glories to the dictators, where did you read that in my comment? I despise and loathe them more deeply than you ever could.
I have lived in a communist country and I do know how that works. The composers writing oratories to the Dear Lieder, the poets mastering golden lines to the immortal Communist party, to the Leader of the Whole Progressive Humankind- all of it had been done. Did they do it because they were spoiled brats, (even while some of them were)?
@ ladykrystyna
>>>cont.
Yes, really some of them did because they were threatened and scared, but not all of them, far from it. Many did for the same reason of having the worldly possessions, money, fame and closeness to power.
So, look for them, who hold the power and the monies, and who are able of giving the ladder to fame. Ask yourself, what it is they sell, and why do they do that? Do you think that there is huge difference in the power structures of H-wood? The same secret state, with the power of the true members, and they would always reward the ones, who are the best in the sales of their product. And the spoiled brats or not so spoiled brats are in for the reward, which could be huge. And who would talk about morals or principles after all is sold and done?
According to this article- the little lousy poets are the ones who hold the power, really?
And don’t you dare talking to me about excusing any of this; you don’t know sh-t.
Okay, sorry to get pissy. But I still don't understand your objection to the article. Yes, some young folks in Hollywood are spoiled brats. They get indoctrinated in the whole liberal meme, including entitlements. Are you saying that there are those in Hollywood that are high up in the Party (Communist that is), so to speak? I would probably agree. I don't think they are all that stupid. Many of them are useful idiots. The others are part of the scheme.
Sorry if there was a misunderstanding.
I think I see where you're going but I still think Burt has a valid point. The article was specifically about movie stars– not movie makers. Who's to say that Burt won't do a separate article on that topic alone?
The way I see it the actors and musicians who put their politics in the forefront are the mouthpieces– and typically not too bright ones at that. Maybe they've been cultivated but I actually doubt it. The people I met while living there were just very impressionable. Everything was about making money and staying ahead of the competition. There wasn't a lot of organized thought when it came to politics. If anything it was very reactionary in that they were trying to get the right kind of attention. Maybe they came to believe the swill they were spewing but they might also have been high and just saying what they thought people wanted to hear. The town just isn't that deep when you get right down to it.
And no, the poets aren't the ones who have the power. I think they delude themselves sometimes that they do. But mostly they're just trying not to be irrelevant.
Add in the fact that most of them are near illiterate and have very little education. This makes groupthink more attractive when you have nothing to base your own views on.
Movie stars, like adolescents, have to be "cool" and "hip" no matter what. Unfortunately, liberalism is what passes for "cool."
No_Big_Gov ~~
Thank you very much for understanding. All of it is very true. Out of the closet come only the ones who have survived by keeping their mouth shut.
The punks who become rich in the H-wood are the ones who are smart enough to figure it out, that they are working in a small communist country, which has powers, a very strong powers, combined with money, incredible amounts of money. To have some piece of that, the little ambitious punks have to kneel, they have to sell, whatever there needs to be sold. The presidents paid visits and kneeled at that power (sometimes behind the closed doors), and as recently as Dear Leader of today did. Did the little poet, actor, writer, sound master, painter or decorator came to H-wood to save his soul? If they did, they would go elsewhere No, they wanted to do their job, and if the fate would have so- to gain a fame and fortune. But there are rules on the way of having all that, and if you don’t obey, you are out. It is very simple. But, certainly- that’s not the little poets who set up the rules in that small commy country of H-wood. And mr. author of this article knows that quite well.
Ladycrystyna~
no, I am not saying the big H-wood rulers are the card carrying members of the comie- party. They don’t need that, that’s for the plebs – just to collect the fees for continues support to the party. But the commy money- bags have been there for more than 70 years, their children grew up there with the inheritance of the money and power and j o b s- carriers there. Do you remember the recent article of the Pink Code and other despicable traitor fools having a huge dinner in H-wood? Do you remember who was hosting that event? Hey, talk about money and power and who are the little punks going to kneel to.
Do you think that even the big commie stars like Penn, Stone, and Clooney really believe in the crap they have been selling? They laugh at that, all of them, all commies are deeply cynical, and they always have been cynical at the very core. That’s the nature of the beast. Nothing to do with the ‘’spoiled brat’’ business as the author wishes us to believe.
One thing that makes the idea of a free market unappealing to an entertainer is simply the nature of the industry. Most fields of work in this country are, for the most part, meritocratic. Movies and music on the other hand are anything but. If you're "in", you can sh!t outside a script or album and it will be worth miilions. On the other hand, if you're not "in", you can pour an entire liftime's worth of work into a beautiful piece of art and no even notices. Hollywood is a town where the labor has absolutely no bearing on its fruits. The scary thing is if we let these people control the rest of the economy, eventually all of America will be like the great rectum of the earth known as Los Angeles, where a dozen lucky snobs are walled off from millions of pathetic destitue souls who can only hope to be on the other side.
When Celebs "make it" that is when they have their familys. They don't have to worry if they are going to be able to make enough hours to keep the roof over their kids heads and put food on the table. They make more on one movie (even the lower grade celebs) or on one episode of t.v. then them most familys make in a year. If they had their family before they "made it" and had to really struggle to make ends meet, they MIGHT sing a different tune.
SQT _
i don't know if you have read the Russian author Michael Bulgakov :
''Master and Margarita''.
It is about ones selling the soul for survival or love, of ones ART, and about living/ or dying with the consequences.
About denying the truth and God, and betraying the Lord and oneself.
Bulgakov paid dearly for writing that novel.
Arts are a great field for the Devil to catch the innocent souls to damnation. h- wood knows that.
Well stated.
Age is only a number. Lefties are, by definition, people who refuse to grow up.
Show me an immature punk who never takes any responsibility for anything they do (they can be 15 or 50) and I'll show you a dem.
From another thread but worth repeating:
The point that unfortunately doesn't get discussed is how Hollywood and the DNC are so economically joined at the hip. They give excrement like Barbara Boxer and Nancy Pelosi big contributions in exchange for a slew of sleazy tax breaks that no industry, let alone entertainment, deserves. Of course, the lefties who chirp endlessly about Republican "tax cuts for the rich" (the phrase itself shows complete ignorance for how the US progressive income tax system THEY designed actually works) have absolutely no problem with this-classic leftist hypocrisy/projection. Indeed, most, if not all, left-wing advocacy works in a smiliar fashion.
In all likelihood, the celebs themselves probably haven't the slightest idea who or what they're speaking for or against but are just echoing what they've heard from the producers, agents, etc. who do all their thinking for them tell them to say.
Eh, hearts are overrated.
No I haven't– though it sounds interesting.
When I was in Hollywood I didn't see a lot of artistic integrity first hand. From your profile I see that you're in San Fran (I live not too far from you actually) and I wonder if the artistic community you come from is more genuine than the one I'm familiar with.
It would be unfair of me to paint with a really broad brush when it comes to Hollywood, but my experience was not one of a genuine interest in art for the love of it. I was working on a television show that was billed as one of the first reality shows (which is part of the reason I don't care for them today). There wasn't a lot of artistry doing on there, that's for sure. In fact, the atmosphere was kind of predatory and the people I worked with showed a disturbing tendency to take advantage of the people we would profile for our stories. I viewed it as my personal crusade to shield the people interviewed (for on air clips) from the producers who were just looking for something salacious to work into the script.
From your comments I'd guess you're the real deal. Someone who isn't selling anything or trying to push an agenda. Someone who just takes pleasure in doing something you love. I wish I saw more of that in Hollywood, but the town seemed so much more jaded than that. I'm not sure how many of them are loving their jobs for the art as much as loving the perks that come with being famous.
SQT- Burt is not right. One does not need to be on the first name bases with the studio head in order to know, what the actual order of success and discipline of the village h-wood is, and what it requires for success.
Was the little poet holding the power of changing his lines? Did the little hungry actor change the lines written for them? Was Mario Puzzo having that power, to change anything at all?
And why do you think that the celebrities are not the pawns in anyones game? How do you think they became The Celebrities?
By playing the winning cards with the paying mashine, and of cource, they coul be ambitious themselves, why not? Beatty used to be one of the most influential man in h-wood at one time, or so we were told. But it didn't last long, did it? All what is left the women and money.
h-wood is a red square, and it works the way it has been established long time ago, just in different draperies.
LMAO. What more could I say? LMAO
ladykrystyna-
why are you questioning my posts? My opinion is immaterial. My posts could be voted down, could be deleted and erased.
Why don’t you question the substance of this article, and why was that article written for? What was the reason for that? Since when do you know of Burt Prelutsky being a conservative guy?
He himself if from h-wood, has worked for h-wood, and how did he get there?
By expressing the truth of the conservative thought? Really?
Now, because he have said some snappy things about the Dear Leader in some of his blogs as of late, it makes you to admire his ‘’ wit’’, which holds just the most shallow view in the matter. And you have been questioning my politics?
Isn't it Lear Jet liberals now, LauraAgain???!!! :- >
Do you mean Hollywood actor never had to work a day in their life? They have pitched their skills and the market has awarded them whatever the market felt they were worth… You might disagree with their politics, but to claim actors do not "work" or that somehow their riches are undeserved is a bit unfair, no?
SQT- yes, I live in SF for a long time now, but,
I have lived in a territory similar to the red village h-wood, I mean in the structure of it.
Let me tell you how it was working there, and I am quite sure, the same rules apply in the h-wood, just a different decoration set.
Let’s say, you are a painter. You have studied hard, you have sacrificed many things of your youth just to learn the craft, be faithful to what you have learned, having a dream of creating something beautiful.But the party has planned the big exhibition dedicated to the anniversary of the Great Leader, and you have been invited to participate with a painting, where the Leader would look like a Zeus, or some other god. You politely refuse, and it’s ok. Then the next time comes, and again, your work has not been presented, so the questions arise- do you have something against the Dear Leader? Then you would not have to wait till the next exhibition, when you already have been expelled from the Artists Association.
>>>cont>>>>>>
@SQT- to the conversation, I am cont >>>>>> the post above this one
>>>>>And if you don’t belong to that association, your membership has been cancelled, you are not able to buy the paints, the brushes and canvas etc. in the kiosk of the Artists Association. Since there are no private stores the artist could purchase art supplies, he becomes desperate. He needs to borrow from somebody, or he could ask his relatives from abroad to send some, but that again it is a risky business, because you could be labeled an enemy of the state for having such connections. Sure, you could be invited for a show abroad, but who would give you permission to leave the country? Moreso, if you are already being considered as being quite the enemy of the state. So- in the end, you have to paint the picture of the Dear Leader swimming in the pond with swans, with the little children clapping their hands with happiness. I know, it’s not as drastic in h-wood, but the model is still the same.
Fair enough
But of course, you can't rebut it.
Worse yet, when they are off-script or off-handler, craziness results. See Sean Penn's wishing for anal cancer on people and Tom Cruise's nutty rants.
I mean, wtf is your deal?
This exchange will probably shed some light on the question, ladykrystyna.
(The Biggs' server seems to be having trouble. If the link doesn't work, wait a few minutes, then try again.)
Movie stars are movie stars because they were lucky at one point in their careers. A lot of talented people are still waiting tables. The luck makes them feel guilty–kind of a survivor's guilt. The liberalism is a rationalization to ease the guilt.
You must be logged in to post a comment.