Controversial Films: The Temptation to Apply Media Heat

Just weeks before “Colors” was due to hit the theaters last spring, a local official saw an early screening of the drama about warring street gangs. He made a bold prediction: There’d “be blood in the streets” if the film was shown here. Many community groups, led by the Guardian Angels, demanded the film be pulled from release.

The film was shown--with only isolated instances of violence--but not before pressure groups sparked a huge media brawl, accusing the film makers of everything from irresponsibility to immorality.

Sound familiar?

The same battle is raging over Martin Scorsese’s upcoming “The Last Temptation of Christ,” which stands accused, sight unseen, of similar offenses.

Everybody talks about the power of cinema, but in today’s Information-Overload society, power also comes from instant access to the media. And nobody uses that access with more savvy force than today’s pressure groups, which need only a clever picket sign, an embossed letterhead and a shrewd publicist to muscle their way onto the 6 o’clock news.

When Italian-Americans beefed about “The Godfather,” studio folk went way out of their way to avoid any mention of the Mafia.

When Chinese-Americans protested against “Year of the Dragon,” its studio slapped on an apologetic disclaimer (“This film does not intend to demean or ignore the many positive features of Asian-American communities . . . “).

When black Olympic athletes at the Games in Los Angeles threatened to boycott a showing of “Gone With the Wind,” the screening was abruptly canceled.

As for “Last Temptation of Christ,” you’ve heard the charges--many evangelical leaders have blasted the movie as sacrilegious, blasphemous and anti-Christian.

Now even conservative columnist Patrick Buchanan--an expert in both media manipulation and media bashing--has joined the fray, also without viewing the film. “Even sight unseen,” he wrote the other day, “the movie represents an act of cinematic vandalism against the beliefs that Christians hold sacred.”

But Buchanan doesn’t just raise religious objections. He is-- voila-- outraged that other pressure groups have been so successful in intimidating Hollywood in the past!

“We live in an age in which the ridicule of blacks is forbidden, in which anti-Semitism is punishable by political death but in which Christian-bashing is a popular indoor sport,” Buchanan wrote. “Hollywood is assaulting the Christian community in a way it would never dare assault the black, Jewish or gay communities.”

(Wrong. When Orion Pictures released “Colors,” it was repeatedly accused by black community leaders of fostering negative black stereotypes.)

When protests began to swell, “Temptation’s” distributor, Universal Pictures, wisely switched to a full-court media press, launching a full-page ad campaign in local trades and newspapers. Eager to shift the debate toward friendly turf--namely the First Amendment--the studio said it “stands behind the principle of freedom of expression and hopes the American public will give the film a fair chance.”

Fat chance.

This passive freedom-of-speech strategy isn’t much of a match for protesters schooled in the art of the 20-second sound bite. (The Rev. Al Sharpton, the New York media militant best known for grabbing headlines in the case of alleged rape victim Twana Brawley, is known in the local tabloids as “Jive at Five.”)

In fact, the anti-”Temptation” crusaders are so attuned to media pressure points that evangelical activist Larry Poland sent a consciousness-raising letter to 500 loyalists, proposing economic boycott strategies and encouraging followers to contact key Universal executives, the shareholders of its parent MCA Inc. and media outlets.

Obviously many protesters would like to keep “Temptation” out of the theaters entirely, but that begs the question--where do you draw the line?

Maybe “Temptation” will offend many devout Christians. Perhaps “Betrayed,” a provocative upcoming movie about Jew-and-black-hating white supremacists (directed by Costa-Gavras and starring Debra Winger), will outrage those minorities--and others. But in a free society, who gets to decide which movies should be locked in the closet?

Would today’s pressure groups prefer that we adopt the kind of freedom of expression practiced in South Africa? Police there seized all prints of “Cry Freedom,” asserting that the film about black activist Steve Biko “endangers the safety of the public” and contained “propagandistic elements” likely to encourage unrest.

No doubt many films do offend, disturb or enrage various sensibilities. A disabled persons’ rights group has picketed theaters--and demanded that Orion pull its new George Romero horror film, “Monkey Shines,” asserting that the picture presents “vicious stereotypes” of disabled persons.

But who deserves veto power over artistic expression?

To combat today’s media-savvy pressure groups, you need to beat them at their own games:

Rule No. 1: The Best Defense Is a Good Offense. Take the case of Spike Lee, the mouthy young black film maker. When his film “School Daze” hit the theaters earlier this year, black leaders claimed it presented derogatory stereotypes about black fraternities. Lee blasted back: “As far as I’m concerned you can make your own movies and your own records if you don’t like mine, you ignorant, handkerchief-head-wearing, chicken-and-biscuit-eating Negroes.”

Rule No. 2: Screen the Movie. There’s no way your film could possibly be as incendiary as protesters have led people to believe. Many people may be surprised by how tame it is. Let them speak to reporters. Treat your film as if it were a suspect on trial for murder--don’t let your opponents sway the moviegoing jury without you bringing in character witnesses to make your case. In fact, Universal’s biggest mistake may have been not screening “Temptation” to liberal clergymen before the film’s more radical detractors went public.

Rule No. 3: If You Can’t Beat ‘em, Join ‘em. Properly channeled, controversy can work in your favor. During the glory days of exploitation pictures, wily producers like Kroger Babb and William Castle used to hire people to picket their films. Did the much-publicized fears of gang violence hurt “Colors”? Recalling that Rex Reed labeled “Pink Flamingoes” a “disgusting disgrace,” director John Waters impishly said, “I like to think that Rex knew that would help the picture.”

So how should Universal handle “Last Temptation”? Here’s our ad campaign: Take out two pages in the leading publications. On the right page, in bold black type, run a list of quotes from its angry detractors:

“BLASPHEMOUS! SACRILEGIOUS! A HORRIFYING ATTACK ON CHRISTIANITY!”

On the left, a page of glowing raves from the usual suspects:

“TWO THUMBS UP! BOLD AND BEATIFIC! 10+: CHRIST AS YOU’VE NEVER SEEN HIM BEFORE!”

At the top of the page, above the fray, simply say:

“‘The Last Temptation of Christ.’ You Decide.”