I didn't want to resurrect the Trump thread, but I thought Heretic/Chris asked an interesting question in the last post there.

Quoted from Heretic On an SS-related note -- The Reagan era coincided with the hands-down peak of the Hollywood action film -- John Rambo, Robocop, John McClane, Riggs and Murtaugh, John Matrix, Harry Callahan, probably some more guys named John... Is the Trump era gonna mean a whole new slew of all-American tough guy Hollywood heroes, or what?

I myself love those movies. And, Aliens, of course which had a female hero!!!!  I'd like to see more films like that. I HATE these modern action films. So, the question I guess is, did the mood of the people crave those films more during the Reagan era? I don't know. Will Trump affect what movies will be made now?

Thoughts?

:)

I think not. Reagan had landslide wins because he reflected the majority of the culture at that time. I don't think he established or generated the culture. He was a product of it.

Trump didn't even win the popular vote and the results are even more dismal when you consider that he was crushed if you dissect the vote among younger demographic groups - key marketing groups.

I do think Reagan helped bring back the hero genre in that it became acceptable again to believe in America and the American ideal. The Vietnam War and Watergate ushered in a decade of skepticism about these things. The pendulum always swings, and it did in the 80s.

I'm not sure a similar thing is in play now. I doubt you'll see a flood of patriotic movies...the people that make movies don't like patriotism. But you could see more movies that focus on issues of the blue collar class. We saw that in the late 70s and early 80s with movies on steel workers and fading industrial towns. Not sure how that would play out today and still feel original.

Pia could be on to something, where perhaps films will take a more optimistic approach to these problems, and show that there can still be greatness in the national character, and there can still be great achievements that come from American strength.

Quoted from leitskev I doubt you'll see a flood of patriotic movies...the people that make movies don't like patriotism.

http://gawker.com/sonys-embarrassing-powerpoints-are-even-worst-than-thei-1666403941

This whole thing's good for a laugh, but check out the slides on Captain Phillips and White House Down in particular. Hilarious.

Interesting link, Chris, thanks. My guess is they want to avoid American centrism here strictly for marketing reasons. Because China and the overall international market are now huge. I actually don't think it was ideological in this case. What do you think?

Very sad to read that Sony thing. I guess it is true that it's really all about making money.

The part of avoiding American centrism is probably part of the fact that a lot of people around the world, don't like the US. Not even young Americans seem to. Not all of course, but I think that's something that has changed. At least IMO.

It's also true that the International market has grown a lot. Look how many billions of more people can watch movies instantly now. Movies has to have a much broader appeal than they used to.

Studios are definitely marketing hard to China, going so far as shooting extra content for wide-release films exclusively for Chinese audiences ("exclusively" as in American audiences won't even see said content in the American versions). The approach seems to be paying off as well. The Transformers films in particular have made tons of money in China.

As for the original post, I don't think presidents have a direct effect. They do however influence the culture, which does and always has affected the kinds of films that are made. Personally, I'm hoping Trump is a boon to comedy (beyond SNL, that is). I'm just about completely numb to action movies now. The best ones have already been made anyway.

I believe presidents have 0 affect on the movie biz. If a word must be placed on the industry, cyclical seems to be appropriate.

Quoted from Grandma Bear Very sad to read that Sony thing. I guess it is true that it's really all about making money. When has making money never had anything to do with anything? The part of avoiding American centrism is probably part of the fact that a lot of people around the world, don't like the US. Probably has to do with Jealousy. Not even young Americans seem to. Not all of course, but I think that's something that has changed. At least IMO. Good thing Americans don't let "young people" make the majority of the critical decisions. Imagine what an emotional disaster that would be. It's also true that the International market has grown a lot. Look how many billions of more people can watch movies instantly now. Movies has to have a much broader appeal than they used to. Why? Just make a movie with a good story. You're not going to make a movie that appeals to everyone, pick a genre and excel within it. Hard enough to do that.

"When has making money never had anything to do with anything?"

I know, but it is disappointing and off-putting when it's so blatantly done.

It is kind of interesting to try to anticipate the trends. You had movies that were a reaction the rise of the cold war in the 50s, movies that were a response to Vietnam, and then Nixon, movies where the pendulum swung back. What's the next trend?

Quoted from leitskev What's the next trend?

Maybe with the rise of hard right people across Europe and the US, maybe Hollywood will pump out films along those lines? Both pro and con.

I think maybe the tug of war is more between an optimistic view of the hero and a pessimistic one. I'm avoiding the term anti-hero because I think that can fall under either. I think the optimistic view believes there can be heroes, that heroes can be good guys/gals that make a difference. The original Mad Max kind of was a transition between the heroic hero and the cynical view of the hero, maybe a noirish view where the film maker doesn't believe in a hero. What was that surprise superhero hit from a year ago? Where the superhero is a wise ass seeking revenge against the guy who transformed him? That was a very unheroic type hero.

So I think maybe the pendulum is soon to swing to the cynical hero? I'm not enough of a student of film to make a good guess, pretty much everyone else here knows more than me. Maybe Rick will chime in.

I do think that in a few years you'll start to see the stable of Leftie films that have been missing the last 8 years: about the homeless, about corrupt government, about greed(well, we see movies about greed, but they are always period pieces set in a Republican admin).

Quoted from leitskev It is kind of interesting to try to anticipate the trends. You had movies that were a reaction the rise of the cold war in the 50s, movies that were a response to Vietnam, and then Nixon, movies where the pendulum swung back. What's the next trend?

"Ah, yes indeed, Tattoo. If only I had a crystal ball to predict what Hollywood trend is around the corner. Then one can make millions." -- Mr. Roarke

Quoted from Grandma Bear Maybe with the rise of hard right people across Europe and the US, maybe Hollywood will pump out films along those lines? Both pro and con.

I believe that here is where your thinking is flawed. There is the illusion of not only the hard right, (a tug of war between the Liberal Left and then the Far Right also lusting for power,) but realistically, how CONSERVATISM represents what's truly important to the individual and how a person, by nature, is certainly designed to live. Remember, the true minority on this planet is you -- the individual. You represent you. You represent your interests. You represent yourself. Outside of your family, don't think supporting some other "group" will ultimately look after you, the individual -- ain't gonna happen.

Historically, both the left and right periodically "hijack" the conscientious. They rouse the public into surrendering both individual freedoms and $ (taxes, etc) for their own raw power, in exchange for the promise that their "group" will somehow improve the lives they will govern. They never create prosperity, and they never will. Unless they get out of the damn way, which they never seem to do. They simply take. But, we do need to live under a functioning government, just a limited one, so don't get me wrong there.

Just the U.S. alone has over 500,000 sworn-in members or "Government officials" throughout all tiers, and that doesn't include appointees. Why in the hell would 300 million people need over a half a million to tell them how to live? And to think, we pay for them to do that, and quite handsomely. Do you need that in your daily life? Hell no.

Example: You want Freedom from oppression (govt, religious, etc,) freedom to own property, freedom to speak without fear of censorship, one wants to safely live under the rule of law, honor legal Citizenship, freedom from tyranny (you want to bow to a king or queen -- how about the Hussein families of the world, the Castros?) You willing to live under another human beings reign? I sure don't. You're willing to give this stuff up? I certainly hope not. You're not handing my liberties over without a fight.

We don't leave our "checkbooks" on our front stoop so that just anyone can come by and decide how one's money is spent. Our front door is not open to just anyone who happens to stroll-by and decide to set up shop -- legally in a country or not.

So, to your statement about the rise of the right... I don't care about the current group on the right or the group on the left and certainly not whatever their motives to remain in power happen to currently be this day. I care about limiting the power of these disingenuous people, and before it's too late.

Hollywood, and more currently, "the film industry," has been historically controlled by the left. Movies about racism, slavery, climate change, religious persecution, scientific manipulation without fact. They intentionally misrepresent or omit facts, etc. just to emotionally brainwash you. It's done slight of hand, through humor, erroneous sci-fi, corrupt cop drama, court-room drama, whatever charges and fuels hatred.

So ya, after a long winded rant (guess I was in the mood) why not see some more right-leaning (conservative) movies that celebrate the rights of the individual? I want to feel good about mankind. I want to be inspired by heroism, by acts of courage and bravery, and by the few standing up for Liberty by beating the odds and championing "good." And, of course, how about throw in some great storytelling about how great the human race has been and will certainly continue to be.

Quoted from TonyDionisio So ya, after a long winded rant (guess I was in the mood) why not see some more right-leaning (conservative) movies that celebrate the rights of the individual? I want to feel good about mankind. I want to be inspired by heroism, by acts of courage and bravery, and by the few standing up for Liberty by beating the odds and championing "good." And, of course, how about throw in some great storytelling about how great the human race has been and will certainly continue to be.

From my perspective, Mel Gibson, Clint Eastwood, John Milius, and (in a sillier vein) Antoine Fuqua have done fantastic work of this type in more recent years. (Hacksaw Ridge was a blast on opening night, for anyone who hasn't seen it -- in theatres is the time!). I totally agree that this is the kind of clear conservative vision that Hollywood should be getting behind more often.

Quoted from leitskev My guess is they want to avoid American centrism here strictly for marketing reasons. Because China and the overall international market are now huge. I actually don't think it was ideological in this case.

I admit I was half razzin' ya with that link. Personally I think it's almost always money. Hollywood was lots of the same people through the anti-establishment paranoia films of the 70s and the conservative resurgence of the 80s. I don't disagree that a lot of Hollywood people aren't patriotic types, but I think that ideology rarely affects what movies get made. I think marketability and likely returns affect what movies get made.

"Just the U.S. alone has over 500,000 sworn-in members or "Government officials" throughout all tiers, and that doesn't include appointees. Why in the hell would 300 million people need over a half a million to tell them how to live? And to think, we pay for them to do that, and quite handsomely. Do you need that in your daily life? Hell no."

That kind of common sense, sir, will make you very unpopular here!

Just teasing, everyone.

Chris: "Personally I think it's almost always money."

Depends. If they want to make money, they're more likely to show a hero doing heroic things. That includes patriotic things. If they want awards and critical acclaim, they burn the flag, so to speak. I mean let's be honest. The critics and the artistes and most of the creators despise the United States, patriotism, the flag, and of course the very concept of a corporation. If you're looking for an award, your Iraq War story has the rebels as the good gus and the Americans as the brutes. If you want to make money, you go more the other way.

Some of the movies actually do a pretty good job of showing both sides, and that's how it should be. But when it comes to awards, the movie makers know full well who is doing the voting.

Quoted from leitskev If you're looking for an award, your Iraq War story has the rebels as the good gus and the Americans as the brutes. If you want to make money, you go more the other way.

I'd agree to a certain extent. Lots of the "awards bait" topics -- slavery, war crimes, poverty, Native Americans and colonialism, etc. -- do tend away from straightforward heroes or outright pro-U.S. sentiment. Even more simply, maybe Oscar bait is typically depressing, so troubled heroes or anti-heroes make sense.

But, c'mon. Braveheart, The Hurt Locker, Gladiator, Forrest Gump, Unforgiven, Return of the King, Titanic, Schindler's List, Argo...these are hardly progressive or anti-conservative or anti-U.S.

I'll give you Crash, haha, but that movie was absolutely terrible. Dances with Wolves, American Beauty. Maybe 12 Years a Slave, though I didn't see it.

Anyway, I don't think it's quite so simple as brutish Americans.

Last Samurai? lol

US Presidents that most affect the movie biz:
George Washington
Thomas Jefferson
Abraham Lincoln
Andrew Jackson