Donald Trump expressed his frustration and anger towards a new film called The Apprentice, which he believes is a malicious attempt to undermine his political movement. He criticized the individuals involved in the film and questioned the impact it could have on the upcoming election. However, history shows that politics and popular culture have often intertwined, with some filmmakers intentionally releasing their work close to election time to influence voters.
In a similar vein, the Guardian explored how films released during each election year of the 21st century have impacted politics. One example discussed was the film „The Contender“ from 2000, which focused on a female senator’s struggle for the vice presidency amid controversy.
The filmmaker, Rod Lurie, explained that his inspiration came from observing the challenges faced by women in politics and society. He aimed to shed light on the pervasive sexism that exists in Washington DC and among American voters. Despite speculation linking the film to Bill Clinton’s scandal, Lurie clarified that his primary motivation was to address gender inequality and discrimination.
Another notable example discussed was Michael Moore’s documentary „Fahrenheit 9/11“ from 2004, which criticized the Bush administration’s decision to invade Iraq. Moore faced backlash for his anti-war stance but remained committed to exposing what he believed was a grave mistake in foreign policy. The film received widespread attention and even prompted the White House to conduct research on its potential impact on voters.
During its opening weekend, it grossed $23.9 million in domestic box office revenue and eventually went on to make $119 million worldwide. This was during an election year, with Moore hoping for Bush’s defeat to Democratic challenger John Kerry. While it may have seemed like the film had no impact initially, Moore argues that over time, especially after its release on home video and cable television, Fahrenheit 9/11 did have a significant influence on the electorate, leading to shifts in national politics.
Moore reflects on the impact of the film, noting that it took time for the American people to come around and do the right thing. The documentary led to a change in public perception, as evidenced by the shift in political power in 2006 with Republicans being voted out. Moore also discusses the making of his subsequent documentary, Fahrenheit 11/9, which focused on the rise of Donald Trump to the presidency.
In 2008, Oliver Stone’s biopic W portrayed George W. Bush’s struggle to emerge from his father’s shadow and his path to the Iraq war. The film focused on the dynamics of the father-son relationship and the political influences that led to the Iraq war. Despite Stone’s political views, the screenplay writer, Stanley Weiser, aimed to present an objective portrayal of Bush, rather than focusing on activism.
While some may argue that movies can sway elections, Weiser believes that their impact is limited as the majority of voters do not base their decisions on films. However, he acknowledges that movies can influence younger audiences and make a difference, albeit not significantly in the grand scheme of things. „I had a desire to write a true story, delving into the behind-the-scenes of a major political event, when suddenly the idea of the Florida recount came to mind. It was 2005, several years after the recount had taken place, and initially, I wasn’t thinking about writing something to influence an election. It was simply an idea for a movie that I believed could be a thrilling film. However, as I began researching the actual recount in Florida, I realized what an incredible story it was.“
„The circumstances surrounding the recount were astonishing, and the way both sides fought for the presidency was utterly captivating. James Baker’s statement, ‚we’re in the middle of a street fight for the presidency of the United States,‘ really resonated with me. It truly was a street fight for the presidency, and I felt that this story was timeless and deserving of being immortalized in a film.“
„While some may believe that a film like this could sway an election, I see it more as a way to generate media attention, buzz, and interest during an election year. This motivation to get the film made was a driving force for us. We wanted the films, like ‚Recount‘ and ‚Game Change,‘ to be released in the spring rather than the fall to avoid any accusations of trying to influence the election.“
„In 2012, ‚Game Change‘ portrayed the rise of Sarah Palin as John McCain’s running mate in the 2008 election, foreshadowing a shift towards right-wing populism. The story was compelling, and we felt it was important to tell it. Similarly, in 2016, ‚All the Way‘ focused on Lyndon B Johnson’s first year as president after JFK’s assassination, highlighting the struggles for power and morality in a constitutional democracy like America.“
„Although these stories may have had some impact on the political landscape, our main goal was always to tell a captivating story rather than sway an election. We aimed to release the films at times that would not be perceived as attempts to influence the outcome, but rather as pieces of art that provoke thought and discussion.“ I was fully aware of this and was actively trying to help an American audience understand the significance and impact of this movement on American politics over the years. Das wäre toll.”
Abbasi fügt hinzu: „Ich glaube nicht, dass Filme im Allgemeinen Wahlen verändern – nicht in Indien, nicht im Iran, nicht in den USA, weil die Leute größere, andere sehr konkrete Sorgen haben, wie Dinge, die ihr tägliches Leben beeinflussen.
“Was ich erreichen möchte, ist nicht die Veränderung der Wahl. Ich möchte, wenn möglich, eine Veränderung des Denkens bei den Menschen erreichen, denn so gefährlich wie die Rhetorik, Menschen zu entfremden, indem man sagt, sie essen Katzen und Hunde und seien Vergewaltiger und so weiter, ist es genauso gefährlich, die andere Seite zu entfremden, so sehr, dass die Menschen das Gefühl haben, es sei legitim, auf sie zu schießen, verstehen Sie?”
Einige Beobachter haben vorgeschlagen, dass der Film möglicherweise Sympathie für Trump erwecken könnte, indem er ihn zu einer dreidimensionalen Figur macht, anstatt zu einem Cartoon-Bösewicht. „Die Leute sagen immer, oh, ihr humanisiert ihn zu sehr”, sagt Abbasi. “Ich denke, es gibt keine solche Sache wie zu sehr humanisieren.
“Wenn ich auf irgendeine Weise die Amerikaner dazu bringen kann zu erkennen, dass es nicht um Demokraten geht, es geht nicht um Republikaner, es geht nicht um das politische System, es geht um das gesamte Justizsystem, die gesamte Art und Weise, wie Sie Macht in diesem Land behalten und manipulieren, und dann gibt es die Geschichte dieses Mannes – Roy Cohn ist ein komplizierter Mann – fehlerhafte Menschen, aber immer noch Menschen. Wenn ich die Menschen dazu bringen kann, das zu erleben, dann ist es ihre Sache, wen sie wählen möchten.”
„