How Donald Trump Will War With Hollywood While Swiping All Its Tricks

by

A protagonist’s appeal is closely tied to the strength of their opposition, according to Robert McKee. Interestingly, Donald Trump, despite not having formal training in screenwriting, seems to grasp this principle, as well as several others from Hollywood storytelling.

Unlike any past national leader, the new president has heavily utilized the tools of contemporary showbiz, consistently portraying Hollywood as the antagonist since day one. However, despite his ongoing efforts to merge behind-the-scenes politics and movie-set advisement, Trump’s return to the White House could forge a more intricate bond with the entertainment sector than with most industries. This relationship could potentially put the industry’s well-being in both financial and legislative jeopardy.

Regardless of your opinion on him, using techniques from Hollywood is a new skill added to Trump’s political arsenal. Unlike Ronald Reagan, who was actually from Hollywood, Reagan occasionally employed strategies refined in this industry, such as the art of delivering speeches from the Oval Office and being a prime-time performer during the network television era. However, Reagan frequently rose above its manipulations, favoring statesmanship over spectacle. Trump, on the other hand, seems to be fond of every TV trick he encounters.

His abilities as a presenter on reality TV shows are widely praised. During his first term at the White House, he often turned confusion into an advantage, keeping viewers intrigued by wondering what his next move would be. I’m not here to gain popularity, but to increase viewership instead.

However, Trump’s tactics in Hollywood go beyond just the simple trickery you see. In truth, these strategies are deeply ingrained in his methods, making them seem almost ordinary at times, which can cause us to overlook them.

The way he cheated death on that Butler, PA field mirrored John Wick’s constant evasion of danger. He employed the excessive style characteristic of modern blockbusters, boasting extravagantly to make a bigger impact than Paul Atreides riding a sandworm. His seemingly endless introduction of controversial Cabinet members throughout a week in November was reminiscent of a reality TV premiere episode; it felt like another contestant was joining the competition in Alan Cumming’s Scottish castle every few hours! (This format will likely be modified and reversed as many of these choices are inevitably eliminated in the following months, with the Front Man deciding who should leave the green tracksuit-wearing group.)

Last week, Trump appointed Jon Voight, Mel Gibson, and Sylvester Stallone as special representatives to revive Hollywood business from foreign lands, a move that can be seen as an ingenious marketing tactic rather than the whims of a man stuck in the 80s. Contrary to popular belief, the potential complications these actors might cause, if their mission is indeed to make business tougher overseas, are not beneficial for the industry, which is struggling with dwindling foreign box office earnings. Trump’s choice of these aged action heroes seems designed to capitalize on our nostalgia for the rebellious hero, elevating the stars of Rambo, Train, and Lethal Weapon to lead roles in a fresh take on American history, reinterpreting it as another chapter in the Expendables saga.

The announcement arrived during a speech delivered by Rambo himself at Mar-a-Lago, following the election. Speaking to a crowd at a Trump gala, he stated, “When George Washington safeguarded his nation, he had no inkling that he would transform the world. Without him, one can only speculate what the world might have been like.” He then seriously asserted, “We’ve got another George Washington.” (Yes, he actually said this.) Prepare for excitement as Barney Ross summons Rambo, Lee Christmas, and the entire team out of retirement for a final mission. We’ll keep tuning in until they exhaust all sequels.

Indeed, creating content so engaging that not even the fiercest critics could resist interacting with it is one of his major accomplishments. Trump can be likened to a political version of the Netflix algorithm.

OR

One significant achievement for him has been the ability to produce content so captivating that not even his harshest critics could ignore it. In essence, Trump mirrors the functioning of a Netflix algorithm in the realm of elected officials.

Additionally, McKee follows a strategy of developing antagonists to deepen our engagement with the hero’s character, as he transforms ordinary individuals like network news presenters and global leaders into adversaries.

As a supporter, I’d say it seems plausible that Trump might develop a certain admiration for Hollywood, given his keen interest in their narratives. But ironically, some of the very stars in this industry become his fiercest critics. The constant barbs directed at figures like Angelina Jolie, Jay-Z, Robert De Niro, and many others are relentless, much like a supercharged Triumph the Insult Comic Dog after being bitten by a radioactive spider. (He’s yet to take aim at Timothée Chalamet.)

A significant part of Trump’s disdain for Hollywood is indeed a performance, another adversary to feature in his Sorkin-style narrative. Yet, some of it is sincere, fueled by his resentment towards not receiving Emmys for The Apprentice – he claims the TV Academy has fixed the awards, as he often states. His ongoing dispute with Debra Messing also contributes to this feeling. It’s worth noting that Trump has had long-standing connections with Mark Burnett, NBC, and Fox News, making him an ally of some of the world’s most influential media brands. The fact that numerous celebrities campaigned against him during the past six months likely intensified his animosity.

What consequences might arise as Trump assumes office, considering an industry that’s not heavily dependent on federal aid? Surprisingly, quite a bit.

What impact could be expected when Trump becomes president, given an industry that doesn’t rely much on federal subsidies? It appears there’s more than we might initially think.

A top priority is limiting websites that host pirated content. For years, the Motion Picture Association has been advocating for the Stop Online Piracy Act, a strict law aimed at blocking entire websites containing any copyrighted material, no matter how small. However, this bill faced strong opposition from various First Amendment organizations who joined forces to prevent its passage.

In other words: Limit unauthorized content websites is a priority, and for years the Motion Picture Association has been pushing for the Stop Online Piracy Act, a law that would block entire sites with any copyrighted material, even in small amounts. This bill was criticized by numerous First Amendment groups who teamed up to stop it.

In recent months, the Motion Picture Association (MPA) has renewed these initiatives – as evident by Charles Rivkin’s speech about them at CinemaCon in April. It’s possible that Trump and the Republican Congress, who seem more interested in outdoing progressives than safeguarding free speech, could become involved. This development doesn’t appear to be a mere coincidence, given that the MPA swiftly congratulated Trump and the Republican Congressional majority immediately following the elections. Their statement read, “We are eager to collaborate with them on numerous significant issues pertaining to the film, TV, and streaming industry.” Notably, their message echoed a popular Republican argument about job creation.

In Los Angeles, celebrities such as Jamie Lee Curtis were expressing concern about Trump’s election, fearing a potential return to a more limiting era, which some described as draconian. LeBron James also told his daughter, “Promise to protect you with everything I have…we don’t need their help.” Meanwhile, in Washington D.C., the Motion Picture Association (MPA), representing its seven studios, was attempting to emulate the strategic maneuvers of Mark Zuckerberg.

The National Association of Broadcasters has a personal stake in maintaining a relationship with Donald Trump. Over the past summer, this professional organization spent more on lobbying than ever before as it engages in multiple conflicts, one of which is resisting the increasing demand to eliminate the loophole that exempts terrestrial radio from paying performers royalties. If successful, this push would favor companies like iHeartMedia, Audacy, and other large radio conglomerates (at the expense of artists), a potential reason for Trump’s support and why NAB released a statement following November 5 congratulating President-elect Trump and the newly elected and returning members of Congress.

200,000 entertainment workers in Southern California, along with the region itself, now find themselves needing Trump’s federal assistance amidst their crisis due to wildfires. A potential relief package could potentially be passed by March, but Congressional Republicans have hinted at attaching certain conditions before passing it. Representative Mike Johnson stated last week that there are factors to consider regarding the level of aid and whether there are conditions attached to it. New York Democratic Congressman Dan Goldman warned that the GOP will face accountability if partisanship delays disaster aid.

Previously, I’ve found myself at odds with California Governor Gavin Newsom regarding financial assistance, particularly when it comes to water management. Trump proposed redirecting water from Northern California towards the central part of the state, an idea I strongly disagreed with due to environmental concerns. In fact, these differences led to a lawsuit filed against the Trump administration over this contentious issue.

It seems more like Trump’s planned trip to the wildfire site later this week is not so much an expression of sympathy as a firm intervention, reminiscent of a stern parent checking up on their child. “If I don’t see progress, there will be repercussions.

In this scenario, unintended consequences might occur too, such as China limiting the number of Hollywood movies that can be screened in their vast market, due to the Trump tariffs imposed on Chinese goods.

During his first term in the White House, it was difficult to demonstrate that Trump’s criticism of a celebrity would lead to box office decline. However, this time around, the impact will likely be just as significant, if not more so. One reason for this is that he received approximately 22% more votes in this election. But it’s not just about the increased vote count; it’s where those additional votes came from. This time around, Trump attracted a substantial number of Latino voters (an estimated 42% voted for him). The movie industry heavily relies on the Latino audience, as they watch more films per capita than any other group – at a rate that is 50% higher than white Americans – and yet, the box office revenue continues to decline. Essentially, Trump’s influence over American entertainment consumers is increasing just as the film industry’s grip on them is becoming weaker.

Trump often takes action against media outlets or corporations that displease him. For example, he filed a lawsuit against CBS over their editing of an interview with Kamala Harris, and sued ABC for how George Stephanopoulos described his trial (which was later settled for $15 million). Similarly, there are reports that he tried to prevent the merger between AT&T and CNN’s parent company Time Warner.

On its initial day, the administration plans to make a powerful start by orchestrating intense immigration raids in Chicago. These actions are strategically timed to resonate strongly with Americans who have grown up watching shows like Miami Vice and Children of Men. This dramatic event will serve as the first in a series of instances designed to press the boundaries set by Hollywood, in more than one aspect.

Read More

2025-01-20 15:26