The Anti-German Spillover--Of course, one of the problems with an American film industry churning out so many anti-Nazi movies is that the negative feelings for Nazis may spill over into a more generalized negative feeling about Germans in general. There seems to be some evidence to indicate that such a more generalized prejudicial spillover has already occurred in the movies. A couple of recent examples illustrate the point. For example, (1988) featured a villainous " . . . multinational group, led by a German named Hans Gruber (Alan Rickman) (who) . . . thinks he is superior to the riff-raff he has to associate with." Also, even more recently, Alan Parker's (Columbia Pictures-1994), while on the surface, a " . . . satire of health fanaticism in turn-of-the-century America . . . ", contained numerous negative references to the Germans.
Film critic Roger Ebert suggests that the motion picture (1992) portrays a picture of Hollywood that is consistent with that portrayed in this book, (i.e., that the " . . . industry . . . is run like an exclusive rich boys' school, where all the kids are spoiled and most of them have ended up here because nobody else could stand them . . . (and) in which the top executives of many industries are cut off from the real work of their employees and exist in a rarefied atmosphere of greedy competition with one another.") Paul Rosenfield also states that in " . . . a community as socially closed as Hollywood, insularity becomes a way of life. The club talks to each other--and only to each other, or so it sometimes seems." We have to keep in mind, of course, that this insular group of people is the same community that is producing and releasing films for viewing by a general audience and society that, unlike Hollywood, is very diverse indeed.
The Essential Vermeer Glossary of Art-Related Terms: Q - Z
This book serves to collect and furnish some of the available evidence which points toward the answers to two fundamental questions about the American motion picture industry: (1) Is the control exercised by the Hollywood control group reflected in the kinds and content of the motion pictures produced and released? and (2) Do American movies adequately reflect the nation's multi-cultural diversity or do they reflect a consistent pattern of bias in favor of those who control Hollywood and against those who do not control Hollywood? Because of the inherent difficulties in assembling an objective panel and reviewing enough movies that have been produced and released over a sufficient period of time to constitute an adequate sampling of negative and positive portrayals of various ethnic, religious, racial, gender, sexual preference and cultural groups in American motion pictures this report is based on a different approach and a less formal study of the above questions. Hopefully this effort will stimulate interest in this overall approach to the study of patterns of bias in motion picture content and lead to further studies using more formal methodologies.
Posts about African Canadian history written by Maureen Flynn-Burhoe
The bottom line is that women do not generally occupy top level studio executive positions in the U.S. film industry (see discussion in ), women do not get the same opportunities as men in other positions in the film industry, most of the scripts for the films produced and released generally do not provide the more desirable roles for women as for men, women are often portrayed in a stereotypical manner in such scripts and women do not get paid as much as men in the film industry for the same or similar work. Those observations are historically true for Hollywood and continue to be true today, no matter that many in Hollywood would attempt to confuse the reality by making statements to the effect that "things are improving for women". On the other hand, if it takes another 100 years to reach equality, there is still two or three more generations of women for Hollywood to exploit.
Short History of Croatian Art ..
Of course, we can easily tell how effective all of the NAACP effort has been because in the fall of 1992, magazine stated: " . . . at a time when blacks dominate every sphere of American pop culture--from Eddie Murphy at the box office to Bill Cosby on television to Michael Jackson in music--it is a stunning irony that there are no major black executives or agents in the motion picture industry." The magazine annual power list for 1992, included no black male or female studio executives or agents. The highest ranking black man on the list is Spike Lee at #80 and he is a writer/director. Recognizing, as this book does, that the real power in Hollywood is in the hands of the top major studio/distributor executives and the top talent agencies, it is not surprising to realize that no African-Americans are in such positions. The U.S. film industry, after all, continues to be a racist industry.