Actors/Producers/Directors of negative "Mormon" shows...

[NeedleinA]

Just curious...

There are from time to time, TV shows/movies that portray things/stereotypes/inaccuracies about members of the church. How do you feel about the actors/producers/directors of such "negative" shows? Just doing their "acting" job? Indifferent? Do you see them as neutral parties? Is an actor considered less invested than the actual producer?

Admittedly I don't keep up on a lot of shows, but I was aware of a "Mormon Polygamy" show from a couple years ago. I just found out that one of the actors I liked was the Executive Producer of the show, Tom Hanks. Admittedly, right or wrong I no longer hold him in such high esteem. 

Your thoughts?

Edited April 25, 2016 by NeedleinA

[tesuji]

One perspective is that artists (directors, authors, painters, etc) are merely telling a story or depicting something. With TV, their main goal is to entertain, to present something interesting, to cause you to feel something. And actors are just playing the roles that are written for them. The whole enterprise is value-neutral. It's just art.

 

However, I don't buy this. I strongly feel that artists must also always consider the consequence of their productions. Everyone is responsible for the consequences of their actions, even more so if the actions are intentional and not accidental actions. Artists do not get a "pass" because they are in some way special.

 

My frank opinion is that much of the media industry (movies, songs, books) is effectively the church of Satan. It preaches a worldview that is against the gospel. The Book of Mormon says there are two churches only, and that which does not lead to Christ is of the devil.

 

Tom Hanks - I've heard statements from him in the past against the church. I think in most cases, people who are against the church do it because they don't understand what the church and gospel are. They just read some headlines about gay marriage or something and come to false conclusions.

 

There are some people who love darkness more than light. They are enemies to God. But most people are not so much evil as wicked. There's a difference. We all have a percentage of good and evil in us. Wicked, however, means you are disobedient to God.

 

I can't judge Hank's soul, just pray that he chooses good over evil, and lives according to the degree of light he has rather than fight against it.

Edited April 25, 2016 by tesuji

[Guest]

1 hour ago, NeedleinA said:

Tom Hanks

He's an openly proclaimed, card-carrying Mormon hater. Makes me sad, because I used to like him, too.

[zil]

38 minutes ago, tesuji said:

However, I don't buy this.

(For the purposes of this post, tv+ means all forms of media, and Hollywood+ means all the participants in the generation of said media.)

You don't / shouldn't buy it because Hollywood+ have proven it false over and over.  They use their (extensive) money and influence for more than just tv+ - and I don't just mean the indirect (or even direct) social / political / religious / etc. content of tv+.  They fund, promote, participate in unrelated (to tv+ / Hollywood+) ventures.  Some support the cause of righteousness (as best they know it), some support wickedness (whether they know / acknowledge said wickedness).  What's left for the rest of us is to decide whether we think supporting their tv+ endeavors will also support some other activity we ought not support.

The same could be said for pretty much anyone in any endeavor - businesses, politicians, non-profits, etc., etc.

(If nobody doesn't like Sara Lee, I'm nobody.)

Edited April 25, 2016 by zil

[tesuji]

9 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

He's an openly proclaimed, card-carrying Mormon hater. Makes me sad, because I used to like him, too.

I still enjoy his work. I guess I don't care what his personal views are, unless he makes movies that are specifically anti-Mormon.

Bridge of Spies and Captain Phillips were both excellent.

I wonder why he hates Mormons. Maybe he's had some bad experiences? This case is the one I can most forgive. My brother in law was poorly treated by Mormons growing up. I can't fault him for not liking the church. This kind of thing makes me crazy frustrated. (Luckily, he realized later that individual members' actions do not equal the church or the gospel.)

Edited April 25, 2016 by tesuji

[NeedleinA]

1 minute ago, Eowyn said:

He's an openly proclaimed, card-carrying Mormon hater. Makes me sad, because I used to like him, too.

Why am I the last one to realize this, ugh!

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Eowyn said:

He's an openly proclaimed, card-carrying Mormon hater. Makes me sad, because I used to like him, too.

Does this have to do with remarks he made (and later retracted, I believe) regarding Mormons who supported Proposition 8 in California?  Or is there more?

[NeuroTypical]

The TV Show House M.D. has a mormon character (Cole) apparently portrayed pretty favorably, with maybe a little depth.  Apparently (my wife was describing the episode), Cole bet House that Cole could remain calm in the face of House making fun of him.  House started accusing Joseph Smith of pedophilia and whatnot, and Cole punched him in the head.  Which earned House's respect, apparently.

[Vort]

2 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

I just found out that one of the actors I liked was the Executive Producer of the show, Tom Hanks. Admittedly, right or wrong I no longer hold him in such high esteem.

I hopped off the Tom Hanks bandwagon long ago for this very reason -- his involvement in what I see as anti-Mormon propaganda. It disgusts me. I do not know that there is a more talented actor in Hollywood than Tom Hanks, and I understand he is a friendly and even principled individual. Doesn't matter much. His anti-Mormonism cinches the deal for me.

Besides, I thought Big was one of the most insidiously immoral movies I have ever had the misfortune to watch, an almost perfect example of a heaping, aromatic, tasty plate of fresh dog poop. And people gobbled it right on down. A twelve-year-old boy entering into an extended sexual relationship with an adult woman? Hilarious!

[NeedleinA]

2 minutes ago, Vort said:

perfect example of a heaping, aromatic, tasty plate of fresh dog poop. And people gobbled it right on down.

I just about spewed my lunch all over my monitor from laughing... thanks!

[tesuji]

40 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

I just about spewed my lunch all over my monitor from laughing... thanks!

LOL. Yeah, this is exactly how I see the Oscars ceremony every year: Someone walks out in a tux carrying a big platter heaped with steaming fresh manure. Everyone cheers, "Wonderful! Give it a Oscar!"

[NightSG]

2 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

The TV Show House M.D. has a mormon character (Cole) apparently portrayed pretty favorably, with maybe a little depth.  Apparently (my wife was describing the episode), Cole bet House that Cole could remain calm in the face of House making fun of him.  House started accusing Joseph Smith of pedophilia and whatnot, and Cole punched him in the head.  Which earned House's respect, apparently.

You have to understand the House character; he targets whatever character weakness he finds, (especially hypocrisy - I haven't seen the episode in question, but I may have to track it down to see if there was some perceived hypocrisy leading up to the incident) but when he's prodding for weakness and finds strength instead, he usually backs off.  Notice that there have been several other religions targeted by his ridicule, but he generally respects those who truly and consistently follow their beliefs.

[NightSG]

3 hours ago, tesuji said:

However, I don't buy this. I strongly feel that artists must also always consider the consequence of their productions. Everyone is responsible for the consequences of their actions, even more so if the actions are intentional and not accidental actions. Artists do not get a "pass" because they are in some way special.

To an extent.  A struggling actor may not have much in the way of other skills to get by on, and will take whatever is offered.  An established, in-demand actor, OTOH, is definitely capable of choosing what they will be associated with.

[Ironhold]

As a reviewer, if a Hanks film is the only number playing that week I'll see it and give it a fair review.

As a person, I have no desire to ever see another Hanks project in my life. What's more, there's a part of me that would love to one day come into possession of the broadcast rights for "Bosom Buddies" so that I could broadcast it every day of the week just to spite him. 

[David13]

Almost all of 'Hollywood' and tv is nothing but inane trash, or downright immoral, anti Christian, anti American, pro perverse garbage.  Or left wing, socialist propaganda, etc.

Or maybe no story line but endless chase scenes along with computer graphics of explosions and other nonsense sensationalism.

I had I don't know how many cable channels and I only ever watched two channels, Sportsman and Outdoor.  Which is gun shows and hunting.  And just watching hunting can get boring before long.  Going hunting, that's a different story, but it too can be boring sometimes.

So a year ago I got rid of the cable, like I have done for a number of times for years previously.

It was not entertainment at all for me.  Except for Gold Fever, which is real gold prospecting, not the fake junk they have on NatGeo.

Films, bah, garbage about 99% of it.  And I could care less how many "awards" the garbage has "won", it's still garbage.

dc

[NightSG]

8 hours ago, David13 said:

Almost all of 'Hollywood' and tv is nothing but inane trash, or downright immoral, anti Christian, anti American, pro perverse garbage.  Or left wing, socialist propaganda, etc.

Somebody go get PrisonChaplain.  This deserves an amen of the sort that only Pentecostals and Southern Baptists can really get right.

[Blackmarch]

16 hours ago, NeedleinA said:

Just curious...

There are from time to time, TV shows/movies that portray things/stereotypes/inaccuracies about members of the church. How do you feel about the actors/producers/directors of such "negative" shows? Just doing their "acting" job? Indifferent? Do you see them as neutral parties? Is an actor considered less invested than the actual producer?

Admittedly I don't keep up on a lot of shows, but I was aware of a "Mormon Polygamy" show from a couple years ago. I just found out that one of the actors I liked was the Executive Producer of the show, Tom Hanks. Admittedly, right or wrong I no longer hold him in such high esteem. 

Your thoughts?

I don't know everything, but I would not want their karma.

Also there's an old saying or something about being warned of meeting the person you idolize, the car you've always wanted, or whatever thing you've put up on a pedestal.

Edited April 26, 2016 by Blackmarch

[Guest MormonGator]

1 hour ago, Blackmarch said:

I don't know everything, but I would not want their karma.

Also there's an old saying or something about being warned of meeting the person you idolize, the car you've always wanted, or whatever thing you've put up on a pedestal.

That saying is 100% true. It's important to remember that our idols are also human and will do things we don't agree with. 

[LeSellers]

18 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

That saying is 100% true. It's important to remember that our idols are also human and will do things we don't agree with. 

Is that like, "No man is a hero to his valet"?

Lehi

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, LeSellers said:

Is that like, "No man is a hero to his valet"?

Lehi

Yes, it's that because the valet/butler is with you a great deal of time and will see you at your best and worst. 

I actually think it's more like "A good prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich." If I look at anyones past, I can make you out to be a  scumbag. People will focus on the bad things you've done and ignore the good. In fact, they will over emphasize your mistakes. So if I wanted to, I could take your mistakes, blow them totally out of proportion and make you look terrible. 
 

[unixknight]

Yeah I don't see any evidence that Tom Hanks is a virulent Mormon hater.  I looked it up on mormonmatters and it struck me as being pretty benign, in the scheme of things, and he did make an effort to backtrack it some.  Is there more?  If not, then there's nothing to see here, folks. 

Generally speaking, I'm divided on how to react when famous people put their stupidity on display, regardless of the subject.  It seems like when people have a really impressive talent, somewhere there's a huge character flaw that balances it.  Some of the greatest artists of all time were also believers in some pretty stupid things.  What I find troubling is just how much credibility our culture gives to celebrities for no reason other than the fact that they're celebrities.  In what way does being an Oscar-winning actor qualify someone to speak intelligently on a subject like the Economy or U.S. Foreign Policy?  Sure, they might have studied it and know something, but that's entirely separate from their career.  Why do I give a fig about what Tom Hanks thinks of the Church in the first place?

Sadly, there is an answer, isn't there?  It's because people listen to celebrities precisely because of the illusion of credibility.  This is made worse when celebrities take on a persona of knowledgeability, like John Stewart or Stephen Colbert, who are entertainers, not news anchormen.  So then we have to deal with all the little parrots who think they know something because they heard it from an interview with their celebrity of choice, or watch the Daily Show regularly.

Edited April 27, 2016 by unixknight

[tesuji]

Celebrity provides a bully pulpit, which I imagine is tempting to take advantage of. But, yes, I hope they get informed before they start pontificating on a subject.

Unfortunately, I often see the bully pulpit (and the power of the media in general) being used to preach the philosophies of the world, which these days are too often the opposite of the gospel of Christ.

[Guest MormonGator]

34 minutes ago, unixknight said:

Generally speaking, I'm divided on how to react when famous people put their stupidity on display, regardless of the subject.  

I am as well. While I don't pay attention to movies, I pay huge attention to music. When Henry Rollins or Jello Biafra spout off about politics or religion, I am torn. On one hand I have huge respect for them musically. On the other hand I simply don't care about their political views, even though they have the right to say what they please. 

[unixknight]

Generally I just prefer not to know.  I don't like watching what would otherwise be a great performance while distracted by knowing a performer's politics.

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, unixknight said:

Generally I just prefer not to know.  I don't like watching what would otherwise be a great performance while distracted by knowing a performer's politics.

Yup, same here. But when they stop a concert and start preaching it's impossible to now know. Oddly, the few vocal conservatives in punk and metal usually don't stop the concert to spout off. Dave Mustaine from Megadeth would say something here or there, but it wasn't like Eddie Vedder or anything.