Aug. 25, 2006
NEWS ANALYSIS: It’s Getting Harder to Divorce Screen, Public Personas
By Carla Meyer
Sacramento Bee
 |
Lindsay Lohan. (SHNS photo by Anthony G. Moore / photorazzi.com)
|
When Viacom chairman Sumner Redstone told The Wall Street Journal that
Viacom-owned Paramount Pictures would not renew its production deal with Tom
Cruise, it wasn't his mention of Cruise's "recent conduct" that shocked.
Nearly everyone can agree that Cruise is a quirky guy.
It was that Redstone made his comments to the media.
Stars always have acted up, and their agents, publicists and studios have
been just as quick to cover up. Studios, especially, usually handle even the
most mundane queries with a degree of caution that makes the Pentagon look
loose-lipped.
But over the past month, we have gained an almost unprecedented degree of
inside-Hollywood knowledge, from Mel Gibson's arrest to the angry (and
leaked) letter sent by a production-company executive to Lindsay Lohan
accusing her of disrupting production with her absences and tardiness. For
this, we can thank shareholders of media giants such as Viacom for insisting
on the bottom line, and the court of public opinion, a/k/a the Internet.
Redstone must have known he would make headlines and that his reasoning
would be easily understood by everyone who read his comments. Though
Internet chatter might not be able to sell a movie, as the so-so performance
of "Snakes on a Plane" attests, it certainly can hurt one.
 |
Tom Cruise. (SHNS photo by Graffiti Press / photorazzi.com)
|
The disappointing -- by Cruise-blockbuster standards, anyway -- box office
for "Mission: Impossible III," produced for Paramount by Cruise and business
partner Paula Wagner, had as much to do with online innuendo as it did with
actual couch-jumping. The vibes about Cruise entered the ether to such an
extent that even regular-Joe action fans smelled something fishy.
Redstone could address that fishiness directly because his commentary on
Cruise's behavior dovetailed with economics. (Wagner has countered
Redstone's remarks by saying she and Cruise walked away from Paramount and
have set up financing elsewhere.)
No matter what Cruise said about Brooke Shields or the number of public
piggyback rides he granted Katie Holmes, his behavior isn't in the same
league as Gibson's anti-Semitic outburst after his DUI arrest. And it is
Gibson's case that will truly test Hollywood's new policy of accountability.
Gibson hasn't yet released a project to test audience reaction, but his
behavior appears to have affected a few projects in the works.
ABC dropped plans for a Gibson-produced, Holocaust-themed miniseries soon
after the incident. His Mayan adventure saga "Apocalypto," which is being
released by Disney studios -- another arm of ABC's Walt Disney parent
company -- no longer has a set release date.
 |
Mel Gibson. (SHNS photo by Nicholas Tepper / photorazzi.com)
|
No matter how it affects business, the airing of celebrities' private
affairs in public marks an unwelcome trend for movie lovers. With the line
growing fuzzier between celebrity and actor, it's getting harder to divorce
screen and public personas. This shift became apparent earlier this summer,
when I told anyone who asked that "Mission: Impossible III" was a good film,
and got only skeptical looks in response.
Lohan's reputation, through rampant tabloid coverage of her every move, has
devolved from that of an immensely appealing young actress to someone more
famous for being famous, a la Paris Hilton. Gibson's future work most
certainly will be combed for controversial subtext, even by the most casual
movie fans.
It almost makes one yearn for the old days, when Louis B. Mayer and Jack
Warner controlled what did and did not get out, and the public believed that
Joan Crawford was an exemplary mother and that Spencer Tracy and Katharine
Hepburn were just good friends. It must have been so much easier to just sit
back and enjoy the show.
Carla Meyer can be reached at cmeyer@sacbee.com.
Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service, www.scrippsnews.com.