>http://nyobserver.com/index_go.html
>
>October 10th transom column:
>
>
> Oliver Stone and Christopher Hitchens Spar
> Over Hollywood's Efforts to be Relevant
>
> by Rebecca Traister, Elisabeth Franck and Ian Blecher
>
> On the morning of Saturday, Oct. 6,a group of filmmakers,
> Hollywood executives and writers left little doubt that the age
> of irony should not be laid to rest just yet.
>
> The panelists took part in a discussion called
>“Making Movies
> That Matter: The Role of Cinema in the National
>Debate” at
> Avery Fisher Hall. The debate which was sponsored
>by the
> New York Film Festival and HBO, could very well have worked as a
>segment of
> WWF Smackdown.
>
> Killer Films’ producer Christine Vachon, Lumumba director Raoul Peck,
>former
> Universal Studios chief Tom Pollock, New Line founder Bob Shaye,
>acid-tongued
> British journalist Christopher Hitchens, feminist scholar Bell Hooks,
>and leading
> Hollywood conspiracy theorist and director Oliver Stone needled and
>prodded each
> other as they wrestled with the question of what makes a movie
>political.
>
> Mr. Stone’s take seemed to be that a film was political if it was
>directed by—Oliver
> Stone! “I made a movie in which the President’s head gets blown off in
>the middle
> of Dealey Plaza, and it was entertaining because it was a thriller!”
>he said in a voice
> as loud as his pink socks.
>
> The sound of Mr. Stone patting himself on the back provoked a “Hey,
>now!”
> exclamation from Ms. Hooks. A few minutes later, she said that her
>idea of a
> political film was Neil LaBute’s 2000 comedy Nurse Betty, because the
>film had
> made her “laugh, and made [her] cry, and made us think about class,
>which few
> movies in this culture do.”
>
> Mr. Pollock, on the other hand, said that Babe, the 1995 movie about
>“one gallant
> pig” that he’d greenlighted, was political filmmaking because it
>advocated
> vegetarianism.
>
> Many of these comments prompted some theatrical eye-rolling from Mr.
>Hitchens,
> who alternated between clutching and sucking on an unlit cigarette.
>Mr. Hitchens is
> allowed to smoke when he appears on Politically Incorrect.
>
> Mr. Shaye used the opportunity to plug New Line’s upcoming $300
>million Lord of
> the Rings trilogy. “I just received a note that said, ‘What the world
>needs now is
> Hobbits!’” he claimed.
>
> Mr. Shaye then explained what was political about a series of movies
>featuring
> actors with pointy ears and characters with phallic names like Bilbo.
>Mr. Shaye said
> he was “fascinated to learn” that some readers consider the
>sought-after ring in
> J.R.R. Tolkien’s 1950’s trilogy to represent the quest to harness
>nuclear power
> during World War II. Thus, he explained, New Line had made a movie
>that
> incorporated politics, but by setting the pictures in Middle Earth,
>those politics had
> been made “palatable.”
>
> Christine Vachon, who has produced actual social commentaries such as
>Boys
> Don’t Cry and Happiness, argued that despite her political
>predilections, her first
> consideration has to be creating a salable project.
>
> “As far as producers go, you probably can’t get artsier or more
>independent than
> me,” she said. “But I need people to give me the money to get these
>films made.”
>
> Mr. Stone jumped into the conversation and began to complain about the
>
> skyrocketing costs of filmmaking. He said that he could no longer make
>Born on the
> Fourth of July for the $17 million it had cost in 1989, despite the
>fact that there’s
> been “no significant inflation” in the past 13 years.
>
> “We have a system that has gone bananas!” he exclaimed.
>
> Other members of the panel tried to join in the conversation, but the
>Wall Street
> director steamrollered over them.
>
> Ranting about the “kings and barons” who run the media, he pointed
>specifically to
> the Telecommunications Act that Congress passed “at midnight,”
>allowing movie
> moguls to own television stations.
>
> “Six people control the world!” Mr. Stone said. He mentioned Michael
>Eisner and
> Rupert Murdoch by name, but left the audience to guess the identity of
>the other
> four. It was this “new world order,” he said, that had incited “the
>revolt of Sept.
> 11.”
>
> Hey, now!
>
> The crowd started to boo, but stopped when Mr. Hitchens spoke up.
>“What
> happened on Sept. 11 was state-supported mass murder using human
>beings as
> missiles!” the Vanity Fair writer corrected.
>
> Meanwhile, Mr. Shaye was doing a slow burn over Mr. Stone’s “bananas”
>speech.
> He told the director he disagreed with his implication that studios
>were—sweet
> fancy Moses!—profiting at the expense of filmmakers.
>
> “The last guys who get paid are the studios who put up the money! If
>there is a
> tyranny, it is a tyranny of talent!” Mr. Shaye said. He added that
>directors now earn
> “way too much.”
>
> The audience, which had been booing almost indiscriminately throughout
>the
> discussion, now began to actually hiss—like Gollum.
>
> Mr. Stone scornfully leaned back in his chair and rolled his eyes.
>
> Mr. Hitchens capitalized on the silence to chastise the panelists for
>their collective
> navel-gazing. He said he wasn’t surprised that the panelists from the
>film industry
> were using this discussion about culture and the events of Sept. 11 to
>complain
> about “what a hard time they were having anyway.”
>
> “I don’t remember a time when rich people didn’t control the press
>and I’ll be
> damned if I come here and moan about what a hard time I have making
>ends
> meet,” Mr. Hitchens said.
>
> Mr. Stone didn’t seem to be listening, though. He was still trying to
>make his point.
> “Directors have been marginalized,” he said. Again he blamed “the new
>world
> order,” and said that the six guys who control the universe had teamed
>up with the
> banks and the World Trade Organization.
>
> “The Arabs have a point, whether they did it right or not. And they’re
>going to be
> joined by the people from Seattle and by the 10 percent who disagree
>with
> everything,” Mr. Stone said. More than 10 percent of the audience
>proceeded to
> boo Mr. Stone.
>
> Meanwhile, Mr. Hitchens’ remarks about the self-involvement of the
>panelists had
> worked Ms. Hooks into a lather, with a small L. “I appreciate
>Christopher’s wit,
> appreciate some of his points, but will not tolerate his disrespect!”
>she said.
>
> Mr. Hitchens’ eyes flashed. “How would you know?” he said. “I haven’t
>dissed
> you yet.”
>
> —Rebecca
Traister