By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The independently financed film “The Apprentice,” a Donald Trump origin story, has been largely ignored by Hollywood despite positive reviews and its timely relevance. Stars Jeremy Strong and Sebastian Stan, who play Roy Cohn and Trump respectively, have criticized their colleagues for shunning the film, citing concerns about free speech and the industry’s selective engagement with political issues. This silence contrasts sharply with Hollywood’s vocal opposition to Trump during previous elections, suggesting a potential shift in the industry’s approach to political activism or a recognition of its diminishing influence. The film’s reception reflects a broader trend of Hollywood’s reduced political engagement since Trump’s election, leaving some to question whether this is a temporary lull or a more permanent change.
Read the original article here
Hollywood’s sudden silence on Trump is a multifaceted issue, not easily explained by a single factor. It’s not simply that the election is over, although that certainly contributes to a sense of exhaustion and a decreased urgency to constantly denounce him. The overwhelming feeling is one of profound disappointment and weariness; many feel they’ve already tried everything, and their efforts have been in vain.
The sheer scale of Trump’s victory, and the implications for the country’s future, has left many feeling a sense of powerlessness. It’s a feeling of defeat, coupled with the understanding that any further criticisms might feel like futile yelling into the void. The energy previously expended on criticizing Trump has been redirected into self-preservation, family, and coping with the reality of a potentially disastrous second term.
Fear is another significant factor. Trump’s history of retaliation against his perceived enemies is well documented, and the lack of accountability he faces only exacerbates this concern. Hollywood figures, like many others, are acutely aware of Trump’s capacity and willingness to wield power against his adversaries, and the potential professional and personal consequences are a strong disincentive to speak out. This fear isn’t entirely unfounded; Trump’s rhetoric has created an environment where outspoken criticism is perceived as a dangerous act.
The role of money and power dynamics also influences Hollywood’s muted response. Many within the industry recognize that the most powerful figures in Hollywood are also heavily invested in the status quo, and aligning themselves with Trump, regardless of personal beliefs, may be seen as a pragmatic way to protect their interests. There is a perceived understanding that openly criticizing Trump could lead to backlash from his supporters, impacting box office success and overall profitability. This self-preservation instinct, sadly, trumps any moral opposition.
Furthermore, the media landscape itself plays a role in this silence. The media’s willingness to amplify Trump’s message and shield him from scrutiny has created an echo chamber, making it difficult for dissenting voices to break through. In such an environment, the impact of Hollywood criticism might be minimized, and the risks amplified. This, coupled with a general sense of media fatigue, where the public seems less receptive to political commentary, leads to a cost-benefit analysis where silence often appears to be the safest option.
Beyond pragmatic concerns, there’s also a deep sense of disillusionment. The fact that Trump’s win indicates a significant portion of the population accepts his views has shocked and disappointed many. The sense that “we’ve tried everything” and ultimately failed leads to a collective sigh of resignation, with many feeling that speaking out would accomplish little, except perhaps increase personal risk. It’s a quiet despair, a feeling of helplessness in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds.
The “I told you so” feeling is not only unproductive but also a difficult position to maintain when facing the stark reality of a Trump presidency. The weight of this responsibility, coupled with a lack of a clear path to resistance, leads many to a temporary silence. It’s not necessarily a surrender, but rather a strategic regrouping, a moment of breath before engaging again.
Ultimately, the silence surrounding Trump in Hollywood is not a unified stance, but a collection of individual decisions driven by a combination of fear, fatigue, pragmatic self-interest, and profound disappointment. While the absence of vocal opposition is alarming, it is also a reflection of the broader societal challenges presented by a deeply divided political landscape. The silence, therefore, is not a simple matter of cowardice or indifference, but a complex interaction of factors that ultimately illustrates the deep fractures within our political and societal structures.