Insert bias in films -- deduct from the bottom line

As a Republican trying to break into Hollywood as a writer (Sisyphus rolling his rock up the mountain broke less of a sweat), I am always amazed when certain filmmakers insist on inserting their political bias or point of view into their product. More often, it is a liberal -- or, at least, an anti-Republican -- bias.

It is their film and sometimes even their money, so they have every right to do so. That said, I can never understand why they would take a chance on alienating a percentage of the viewing, and more important paying, public. While filmmaking is most certainly an art form, it is also a business with an immutable bottom line.

The latest movie to interject a hint of political bias is “The Manchurian Candidate,” a remake of the 1962 original starring Frank Sinatra. Scott Rudin, one of the producers, a talented filmmaker and an active Democrat and donor, has been quoted as saying, “ ‘The Manchurian Candidate’ is a very, very angry movie. It’s a movie that is honestly distressed about a lot of things going on in the country right now.”

In the movie, an evil corporation known as Manchurian Global is profiteering from America’s wars and America’s war dead, and is controlled in part by a sinister vice presidential candidate. Some of the filmmakers have acknowledged that the fictional company bears a striking resemblance to Halliburton, the energy and services company formerly run by Vice President Dick Cheney.

After three weekends out, “The Manchurian Candidate” has been a disappointment for Paramount at the box office. “It’s very frustrating,” Wayne Lewellen, head of distribution at Paramount, was reported as saying. “You think you’ve done everything right, and the audience doesn’t show up in the volumes that we’d anticipated.”

It seems to me that a question that Lewellen, and all who worry about the bottom line of a film, need to ask themselves is, “Will a political bias in our film keep away some segment of the paying public?”

Make no mistake, I very strongly believe that everyone in Hollywood has every right to express their political views, support a political candidate and raise money. Not only do I think they have that right, but I think we as a nation are better off because they do. Many times they are informed, have done their homework and enrich the debate.

As a writer, however, I’m still mystified that they would take a chance on hurting their films and driving away the paying public by inserting political messages or bashing the opposing party.

As someone who has been fortunate enough to work at the White House, the Pentagon, on presidential campaigns and in the private sector, I think I have at least a passing understanding of politics and business. As an author, novelist and syndicated columnist, I also think I have some understanding of the written word and the creative process. As a writer, I always want to give my product the best chance to succeed. If that blue moon finally does shine over Hollywood and someone does buy one of my scripts, I would do everything in my power to ensure that it contains no political viewpoint.

To me that seems logical, and yet film after film coming out of Hollywood inserts anywhere from one line to entire subplots criticizing Republicans or conservatives.

Why even take the chance? With so many vehicles out there to get out a political message, why pollute the entertainment process with partisan politics and potentially drive down the box-office for your film?

In a post-Sept. 11 world, life is stressful enough. Moviemakers should entertain and offer some element of escapism. If they want to get into politics, then they can run for office, take out ads or make documentaries.

*

Douglas MacKinnon was press secretary to former Sen. Bob Dole. He is also a former White House and Pentagon official and a novelist. He lives in Arlington, Va.