SUNDAY AM: The movie that George Clooney directed, starred in and overhauled the script for, Leatherheads, stumbled badly at the box office this weekend, making only $12.5 million from 1,769 theaters and finishing only No. 3. (Interestingly, the pic's studio, Universal, claimed it was No. 2, but every other Hollywood major had it as No. 3 behind Sony's 21 and Fox/Walden's Nim's Island.) The screwball comedy about the early days of football was seen in Hollywood as a referendum on Clooney's popularity at the box office. Because right now he is a big movie star but not a big box office star, and his hefty paydays in big studio projects like this definitely depend on the latter. (To be fair, few movie stars nowadays are reliably performing at the box office...)
Instead, Sony's 21 casino caper fended off tough competition from three newcomers in the marketplace to score its second straight win as the #1 movie in North America. It earned a $15.1 million weekend, down only 37% from its opening last weekend, for a new cume of $46.5 million.
Family fare Nim's Island, starring Abigail Breslin and Jodie Foster for Fox/Walden, junped into 2nd place with $13.3 million thanks to strong Saturday kiddie matinees and a wide theater count of 3,513.
Another studio newcomer in release, horror pic The Ruins from DreamWorks /Paramount earned $7.8 million this weekend from 2,812 venues for 5th place behind #4 Horton Hears A Hoo!, the Dr. Seuss pic from Fox, which took in $9.1 million for the weekend finishing with a giant cume of $131M.
But Hollywood was aghast that Clooney couldn't open his movie. (As one studio mogul said to me, "He's no Will Smith.") The ability of superstars to generate domestic gross by putting North American moviegoers into theater seats is why studios hire them in the first place. Now Leatherheads is the latest of his non-ensemble big studio movies released wide to open $16 million domestic (Michael Clayton, Intolerable Cruelty, Solaris, Three Kings, Out Of Sight, The Peacemaker, One Fine Day...) and a few times not even half that. 
True, Clooney has received much critical acclaim for his smaller movies in limited release like Good Night and Good Luck and Syriana. But he doesn't get hefty paydays for those. In this case, he has only himself to blame for the lackluster financial performance of this latest movie. In addition to directing and starring, Clooney also did a major overhaul of the script to transform Leatherheads into a screwball comedy. [But a Writers Guild arbitration over screen credits went 2-to-1 against Clooney, who's still furious about it. See my previous story here.] And yet that's why the comedy seemed weak to top critics who gave it only 36% positive reviews. According to Rotten Tomatoes, "despite a good premise and strong cast, this pro football romcom is half screwball and half fumble."
After coming in at a cost of $60 million, the Universal pic was nurtured by a smart marketing campaign that combined football, romance, comedy and nostalgia. Clooney also won studio kudos for hyping the hell out of the movie, eking out every ounce of PR possible. The comedy had been tracking well with older men and older women, and strong with young males and teens. Universal had been hopeful for high teens and with luck even $20 million. But it was not to be.
The rest of the Top 10 were holdovers.
(FYI: Comments on this website are monitored. If you left a comment and it didn't post immediately, it's likely that NF is away from the computer. Please be patient.)
I could never understand the “Clooney is a movie star” assertion. Just saying it doesn’t make it so. Hollywood’s fawning over him is sickening. His smugness is unbelieveable. I cannot sit in a theater and watch him in a movie. His persona in films seems to be misogynist. When he held a press conference to rage against the press after Princess Diana’s death - My GOD! The guy’s arrogance is breathtaking. Who does he think he is? He’s a goddam TV actor. This is why Hollywood is so fucked. When you’ve got TV actors thinking they are auteurs, we’re fucked. This probably explains why his movies make no money. Why would the average Joe spend 10 bucks to see this arrogant actor when he may lose his job at the factory tomorrow? Sorry to rant, but Clooney has been bugging me for a while. Note to Hollywood, you want butts in the seats? Raise the standards back up. If you keep to this road, you’ll be trying to tell us next year that this years winner of Survivor should win an Oscar for best actor. Jebus Christ. I gotta go lie down now.
Comment by mla28 — April 4, 2008 @ 10:54 pm
Of course he can’t open movie even through he is a perceived as a movie star and well known, he just like Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie neither can open a movie on name alone, unless its mainstream movie, this movie just is not for the masses
Comment by jackofalltrades — April 4, 2008 @ 11:30 pm
Look, I love Clooney and he’s made some great movies. But you know why they’re great? Because they’re not commercial (Oceans trilogy being the exception, of course.)
If Uni wanted a hit football movie with George, they should’ve made it modern. Look at today’s demographics. Not saying what makes money is always great (quite the opposite), but Clooney doesn’t go for the popcorn films.
Leatherheads was too “strange,” a comment I’ve heard from family and friends. Renee Zellweger isn’t a star either.
Good Night and Good Luck, Michael Clayton, Syriana, Oh Brother Where Art Thou: some of the best films of the past decade. But George needs to go make some more Danny Ocean movies to keep his paycheck.
Comment by 40yearoldstitzer — April 4, 2008 @ 11:30 pm
Hey mla28,
Guess what. Life isn’t a fairy tale. Actors get to have press conferences and presidents who can’t put a sentence together get to rape the country for trillions of our children’s tax money. I listen to Cloony talking about Di over that hillbilly telling us he’s got the economy under control any day. But I don’t get the Oscars reference. This year’s winners were very deserving. It’s not like Scary movie 4 was recognized as a actual film. And survivor is a TV show. It doesn’t qualify for an Oscar. Get a clue.
Comment by Anonymous — April 5, 2008 @ 3:41 am
Clooney doesn’t open movies unless they are high concept and big ensemble casts.
GQ magazine just ran a story on that at the end of last year detailing all of his failures (and they have been many) even a bunch of the $100 million (international) movies were failures since the budgets were well over that number.
I like him as an actor, but if I was a studio head, I sure wouldn’t invest a ton of money in a film expecting him to open it up gangbusters.
Comment by manny — April 5, 2008 @ 3:47 am
I think George Clooney is talented. I thought he did a great job in Michael Clayton.
His career is mostly media hype that wasn’t justified by a hit movie that he can call his own. All of his hits are ensembles, counting Batman and Robin. That’s not a really good track record.
To me, him and Brad Pitt are the same, as far as boxoffice clout is concerned, in that they don’t have it, but are highly rated by the media and tabloids (Brad Pitt is worse though, and that’s probably why he hooked up with Angelina).
I’m not saying he is not talented. But clearly the public isn’t paying to see his movies. Media is mostly responsible for his A-list reputation and salary. He probably have a really good agent because he was able to con the studios of their money.
Comment by Cyntia — April 5, 2008 @ 4:29 am
George Clooney is Hollywood’s movie star, he’s not the audience’s movie star. He’s spent the past ten years cultivating the media while doing nothing really for the audience outside of the Ocean’s # movies.
Plus there are the incidents of smugness and arrogance, that the media let’s slip, but audience doesn’t forget, like his Princess Di press conference, or his rather nasty joke about Charlton Heston’s Alzheimer’s. And then saying that Heston deserved it for being president of the NRA, forgetting Heston’s often overlooked civil rights work. The media quickly forgave him, because it was the politically correct thing to do, but the audience saw Clooney cruelly picking on an old man with a distinguished career dying of a terminal illness.
Hollywood has forgotten that in order to be a good box office draw a “star” needs the goodwill of the audience. Clooney’s career is built on the goodwill of the media, and hoping that they could spin success for him. But the media’s power to spin just isn’t what it used to be.
Comment by Furious D — April 5, 2008 @ 5:05 am
Um, wait a minute. Brad Pitt can’t open a movie? He busted his ass pr wise for Babel and that movie in which he was a supporting player has earned well over 137 million dollars with no budget.
The Assassination of Jesse James opened in 5 art movie plexis!!!!!! Why? Because Warners pimped the shit out of Michael Clayton instead when James was a far superior film in every way. Why? Pitt took his shingle to Paramount. Whaaa, whaaaa He left me. Sound familiar? And as far as Jolie is concerned The Good Shepherd wasn’t her film it was Matt Damon’s. It’s grossed close to 100 million. Beowulf the same thing, wasn’t her film but the studio put her out there in both of those films as the headliner when she wasn’t. Beowulf has grossed 197 million and that doesn’t count DVD receipts. If you’re talking about AMH, well that’s a different animal. American’s do not go to anything even remotely associated w/911. Paramount f’d up the release date on that one by putting in out in June. To date that movie has grossed over 36 million w/boxoffice and DVD rentals w/the DVD rentals being the majority of revenue. Jolie over the past three years has only picked supporting roles. She’s got Wanted coming out in June which looks like it will be huge and The Changeling w/Eastwood. Her first real starring role in 4 yrs. Her movies do better then Clooney’s. lol
George Clooney the last movie star as he and his people like to ram down our throats can’t outside of Oceans do those types of numbers on his own. He’s off putting to a large group of people. George the big movie star who got an Oscar nomination couldn’t bring in ANY Oscar viewership the past three yrs in a row. Face it, the general public just isn’t that into him. heh
Comment by Hold Up — April 5, 2008 @ 5:11 am
Why release a football movie in April? That’s a big problem with this.
Comment by Eric — April 5, 2008 @ 5:32 am
The Ocean’s movies STUNK! George Clooney is a monotone, a talentless f$#&! And his political rants just reveal more about his lack of character and egotistical need for attention.
ps I like the way the Bushhater posted as anonymous. Gutless wonders, all of them.
Comment by ricardo maxwell — April 5, 2008 @ 5:32 am
I forgot to add that many Americans these days refuse to support ANY anti-American left wing Michael Moore types. Look at the film industry and the newspaper business (eg., the NYT).
Comment by ricardo maxwell — April 5, 2008 @ 5:35 am
When will these celebrities learn to shut their mouths and just do their jobs? This guy’s political stances turns people off.
When I am at work I can’t just start running my pie hole about all my political beliefs. If I did I would be fired. It has no place in my work environment. Why don’t actors understand this? Whether it’s Clooney or the Dixie Chicks, they just don’t understand that what they do is a job and airing out your beliefs is bad for business and your career. If you want to run your mouth than be prepared for poor CD and box office sales and don’t complain.
I take no objection to what he believes. He is free to to think what he wants. But do it on the job and you are going to piss your customers off. It won’t be long before ole’ George throws a for sale sign up on his mansion in Italy if he keeps sit up.
Comment by Pete — April 5, 2008 @ 5:37 am
I don’t jump up and down when I see Clooney’s name, but I don’t think “Leatherheads” was properly marketed or researched to see if an audience would care about a football comedy from the 1930s (?).
In other words, regardless of the star, this movie appears to be fumbling.
Comment by John — April 5, 2008 @ 5:38 am
Hmmmm…. You gotta nurture your brand. Clooney hasn’t. To most movie goers he’s a political preacher man. That is not a good brand for the 50% his preaching pisses off, and for 50% of the rest who want entertainment not sermons in their screw ball comedies.
Too many don’t trust Clooney’s brand to deliver what they are buying for a movie ticket. Pity that actions have consequences, but they do, and for a lot of people they hear”Clooney” and the Dixie Chicks springs to mind. Whatever happened to them anyway? Do they still open movies… or whatever?
Comment by Roxie — April 5, 2008 @ 5:43 am
George Clueless - please, you couldn’t pay me to go see one of his bombs. I can’t stand him, when I have, by accident, seen him try to act, it was stiff and uninspiring. When I see he is in a movie, I pass right by.
Hollywood just gets weaker by the day. I am not interested in their politics and views of the world. I just want to be entertained when I go to see a movie, not lectured to. I want to see actors who view their careers as acting and don’t pretend their wealth and limited education gives them credibility in science, economics, foreign affairs, etc.
Comment by Rigel — April 5, 2008 @ 5:43 am
George Clooney..bad actor…worked a bit on the small screen….needs help to draw a crowd for a movie….proves Hollywood is in a dreamworld of their own.
Comment by Eugene Boyanton — April 5, 2008 @ 5:47 am
I saw the movie. I liked it. I’ve never seen much of a correlation between what critics say and the movie itself.
Comment by Surelock Homes — April 5, 2008 @ 5:50 am
well well only 20 years to determine one thing. One thing… hmmm what’s that one thing… TALENT. He’s got just enough to fool a ton of you. But, thank goodness, not enough to fool most/enough of you. He’s so average.
Comment by Chris — April 5, 2008 @ 5:50 am
I have to wonder why “anonymous” would use a movie review comment box to ooze his/her boring venom over the president when the subject is a charismatic albiet unlikeable actor. I dont expect my presidents to be glib, nor do I expect them to be slick and easygoing in front of a camera. I expect my actors do be. I don’t expect my actors to be calling press conferences to vent about world events or foreign policy, I expect my presidents to. So “anonyous”, hillybilly or not, the president is doing his job just fine thank you, it’s Clooney who isn’t and you should get your head out of your ass and smell the coffee.
Comment by the porjectionist — April 5, 2008 @ 5:56 am
ditto…well written as I could not agree more.
AGD
Comment by AGD — April 5, 2008 @ 6:01 am
Hey anonymous you do not make sense! Nor do you know what you say! “Our childrens tax money”? What….the money our children will need when the next democrat raises taxes?
Comment by Tollhouse — April 5, 2008 @ 6:02 am
You cannot denegrate, alienate and ridicule 50% of the paying audience because they have conservative values, and expect them to PAY to watch your performance. Thats a FACT jack !!!
Comment by Roy Stanforth — April 5, 2008 @ 6:11 am
Well, statistics (albeit incomplete) speak for themselves:
Tom Cruise $6.2 billion
Will Smith $4.9 billion
Johnny Depp $4.7 billion
Brad Pitt $4.2 billion
Ben Stiller $3.6 billion
George Clooney $2.8 billion
source: the-numbers.com
Comment by Stat Man — April 5, 2008 @ 6:21 am
Could it be that many Americans, like me, find the only way to show the man we don’t condone his political views is by not attending his movies? I personally know many people who feel this way.
Comment by LK — April 5, 2008 @ 6:22 am
Clooney a movie star??? Only in the mind of the Hollywood hothouse. They need to get outside of their bubble more often and see what the real America thinks. I am sick of elites in Hollywood thinking they are the deciders for the rest of us.
Comment by Peaches — April 5, 2008 @ 6:24 am
hey anonymous -
mla28 gave his two cents. What I laugh at is it only takes you two sentences to wig out on the president.
I thought this was about George Clooney or this snoozer “Leatherheads” that he starred in. Whatever you think of Clooney is meaningless (that is for everybody). However, your inability to stick to the subject matter (or more directly) aim for the president makes you a giant pussy.
I bet you couldn’t go on a Betty Crocker website blogging about cake recipes for two seconds wthout blaming the president for the price of vanilla extract spiraling out of control. Probably tell everyone it has to do with some fetilizer embargo on some developing nation that our “nazi in chief” has it in for.
Clooney is a bore and is chock full of himself. Just like 99% of Hollywood. And mla28 is right on with the ridiculous rants regarding Clooney. Hey, you like him. Fair enough. Then why don’t you stick to the subject matter at hand and leave the president “playa hating” to the politcal blogs?
and as far as me getting off topic - chicken or the egg - you douche
Comment by kdizzle — April 5, 2008 @ 6:27 am
The problem is for these clooney types is that they lose 40% of their potential audience whenever they take a public side of a controversal political issue like gun control, abortion, global warming, affirmative action etc. or support a political figure (mostly Liberal left leaning types). MAinstream media props them up because their views support their agenda as well. Now they’re all going down the tubes, the media and the superficial so called stars. People who have mediocre abilities and and perform poorly at the box office need every soul they can possibly find to buy tickets to their projects. Their arrogance is such because they’re celebrities they think their views on public matters is more important than those who may think the opposite of them. Thusly they bite off their nose to spite their face and their stupidity and arrogance is starting to show big time….Enough to diminish their results by 40% less than it could’ve been….
Comment by Richard — April 5, 2008 @ 6:29 am
It’s always a delight to see the work of a self-annointed priest from the propaganda office of Hollywood, the left-wing Vatican, fail miserably.
Comment by Ge0ffrey — April 5, 2008 @ 6:31 am
Well, statistics (albeit incomplete) speak for themselves:
WORLD-WIDE BOX OFFICE GROSS
Tom Cruise $6.2 billion
Will Smith $4.9 billion
Johnny Depp $4.7 billion
Brad Pitt $4.2 billion
Ben Stiller $3.6 billion
George Clooney $2.8 billion
source: the-numbers.com
Comment by Stat Man — April 5, 2008 @ 6:32 am
So now we’re equating the general public’s taste with quality in movies?
Yes, his big numbers are for the Ocean’s series. First they’re not original but remakes. Second, they’re crap. American Idol gets big numbers. Transformers gets big numbers. Anybody seeing a pattern here? Please, let’s at least try to call a turd…. well, a turd.
Comment by gottasayit — April 5, 2008 @ 6:35 am
The problem with Clooney is he is not very consistent. One bad movie, then one good movie and then back to one bad movie again. In my opinion the best movie Clooney has done so far is one in which he wasn’t even the star - “Good night and good luck”. Many of his other films that he has either acted in or directed pale by comparison. While Clooney certainly has the looks to be a movie star, that is not enough. You have to have something more to have a lifelong career in the movies. Many stars of today do not have that missing element whereas stars of yesteryear had it by the bushel.
Comment by John S. — April 5, 2008 @ 6:37 am
Well I have read a lot of the comments and agree with most of them. The one thing that is missing that I think affects his box office numbers is his outspoken political remarks about the administration and other political causes that alienate parts of the movie going public. If you look back to the great stars of the past and some of the stars of today like Clint Eastwood, Will Smith , Harrison Ford, etc I think you get the picture, The one thing they have in common other than talent and box office draw is they keep there political beliefs to themselves and not on there sleeves.
Comment by cycleman10 — April 5, 2008 @ 6:38 am
It’s great to see so many here proving my theory about no talent actors spouting politics and hurting what little career they may have. Too bad the George Clooney’s of this world make as much as they do. It would be great to see him as a janitor in some Beverly Hills hotel and Michael Moore as a garbageman (oh wait… he already is)!
Comment by ricardo maxwell — April 5, 2008 @ 6:39 am
political freaks,hollywood haters, etc -
why do you keep visiting this site
it’s an industry site
if you loathe the industry, don’t come here of your own accord
there are ample places online where you can properly vent your hate and irrational “thoughts.”
the discourse here always spins way out of the productive, civil arena into cuckoo-ville when the Bushies descend with their one-note fixations.
Comment by A. — April 5, 2008 @ 6:44 am
Did it ever occur to anyone that MAYBE a lot of regular folks have had it with Clooneys knee jerk anti-American crap?
Day and night you see this creep ranting about Bush.
Did he say ONE WORD when Van Gogh”s great grandson had his HEAD CUT OFF for his artistic expression ????
NO,,,,,,,,,,not one word. I puke when I see commments concerning Clonney”s “courage” in making a movie about some crap that happened 55 years ago with Sen McCarthy…….how about showing some REAL cajones and make a movie about the barbarians who want to kill folks for drawing a CARTOON!……..drop dead
Comment by Thomas Simms — April 5, 2008 @ 6:45 am
I think Hollywood people overestimate the impact of “stars” (or people who are known). As someone living in the heartland (Illinois), I can tell you that I choose movies based on the story more than the actors in it. True, if a well-known actor (like Clooney) is starring in a movie then it gets my attention, but if the story doesn’t sound good, then I’m certainly not going to waste my money or my time trekking out to the movie theater.
Who on earth wants to see a football story from the 30’s? I don’t care how much of the country you ride through on a train- it just doesn’t sound that interesting.
It was the same problem with Micheal Clayton. I still haven’t seen that movie because I don’t know what the hell it’s about. I may have liked it, I may not, but life’s too short to waste my time finding out, despite the great cast.
Comment by Lady from the Midwest — April 5, 2008 @ 6:46 am
George Clooney deserves his “movie star” status. I’ve never read a press release or heard from his agent,
but my family looks forward to every Clooney film (and they don’t all get a wide release!!! trying to find a theatre showing THE GOOD GERMAN was not easy!), and we feel that he is one of the few actors today with the combination of depth and wide appeal that harkens back to the Edward G. Robinsons or James Cagneys of the past. ANY movie with Clooney in it is worth seeing because he resonates class and quality. One can see some little-known Cagney or Robinson movie on TCM and appreciate it as a quality piece of work that still holds interest today, even though it may have stiffed in its original release. Clooney’s non-Ocean films may not have the box-office power of teen gross-out epics, but it’s a solid body of work and Clooney needs no apologies. I never watch television or read gossip magazines, so I wouldn’t know how the media is pushing or not pushing Mr. Clooney. The work is what matters, and Clooney ALWAYS delivers the goods as an actor and has great appeal as a star. Thanks, Mr. Clooney—keep up the quality work.
Comment by Django — April 5, 2008 @ 6:46 am
If Clooney were a female actor, he would’ve been relegated back to tv long ago and branded “over the hill.”
He “charms” studio chiefs into greenlights but audiences aren’t showing up.
Comment by double-standards — April 5, 2008 @ 6:50 am
I’m a conservative and don’t give a rat’s arse about his politics.
I like Clooney’s potential. He should have been the next Cary Grant. If he had been handled right he would have been a good physical comedian and a good leading man, as Grant was.
Comment by RalphSchmalph — April 5, 2008 @ 6:51 am
I was excited when I first saw the previews, but then realized it was some stupid comedy that did not look the list bit funny. A good movie about the early origins of football would be a great flick. I will have to say I can’t stand Renee Z. either, nor is she in the least bit funny. The cast, script, and timing all set this up to be nothing other than a failure.
Comment by footballfan — April 5, 2008 @ 7:04 am
Hollywood Loves Clooney because he hates the United States. You know, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. When Hollywood talks about loving this country it means it loves the opportunity to make money and the weather. But most people in Hollywood are ignorant of history or what this country even stands for. Clooney is college drop out. He is uneducated, like most entertainment people.
I’ve heard him speak plenty, unlike our President, he does a great job with public speaking. Also unlike our president, he is uneducated, hateful and ignorant about history. I, and many people I know, will never give a dime to anything he is connected to.
Comment by fourtunato — April 5, 2008 @ 7:05 am
Brad Pitt is finished, too. He seems to realize that. He never quite made it to Tom Hanks, Julia Roberts status.
Jolie is simply not a movie star - she’s a tabloid star. She is dull on screen and does that same phony, affected embarrassing Russian-like accent for every role. Her serious non-campy roles tank. Her niche role is playing a female bad ass in a supporting role - this has served her, but grows thin with audiences.
Fear paralyzes studios from taking chances on fresh talent, instead of throwing too much money at undeserving and over-hyped celebs/tabloid fixtures.
Agencies have become bottom-line corporations, rarely interested in nurturing new talent.
Comment by same old — April 5, 2008 @ 7:06 am
Not surprised that Leatherheads won’t be number 1 this weekend. It’s a rainy Saturday on the east coast and a perfect day to take the kids to a matinee in the afternoon so Jodi it is! Clooney’s doing exactly the same thing he did w/Section 8. He’s deciding to star in all the films he’s producing. Clooney’s like Ben Affleck you can only take him in very, very small dosages and even then he needs other people around him. Otherwise, he’s just plain annoying. All these people calling Clooney a big international star put the crack pipe down. He WANTS to be big international star and he’ll make sure Stan keeps tell everyone he already is. Numbers don’t lie. (thanks stat man) He’s a very small fish in a very big ocean (pun intended)compared to those other big boys on that list.
Comment by Leo — April 5, 2008 @ 7:08 am
The article says “So critical acclaim for his smaller movies in limited release like Good Night and Good Luck and Syriana may not be enough anymore.” Might not be enough? Might not be enough? Are you crazy? These two movies were Clooney’s proof that he is a whore for the left. Bingo…adios to over half the movie going public. George is handsome and fun to watch, but it’s still work for us to forget the stupid things the MAN says and focus on the CHARACTER…a lota work. Will Smith knows his job is to entertain and we flock to his movies and he gets paid nicely. These boneheads in Hollywood make the movies, but then forget that we decide where the money goes…sheesh…enough already.
Comment by Leif Jensen, Prescott, AZ — April 5, 2008 @ 7:09 am
Look if George Clooney is a good actor or not is not the point the point is just like many here have said, George (and many others) don’t understand that we want to see them act, or sing, or tell a joke, not go on and on about how they hate the war, or walmart, or big oil. nobody wants to see that when they just want have a good time and it’s costing them $10 or more to do it, don’t waste my money with your left wing dumbness. just make me laugh.
PS but like someone already said “1930’s football” whocares? do some reseach before you spend the studios money!
Comment by Jeff — April 5, 2008 @ 7:10 am
It’s nice to see another Clooney movie tank. Couldn’t happen to a finer jerk. When are the powers that be in Hollywood going to figure out a basic truth: When you’re politically “in-your-face” to half your audience, 50% or more of the audience is going to stay home, period. Not a very good business strategy. We vote with our dollars, everyday, with just cause.
I will never pay money to see films by Sean Penn, George Clooney, Tim Robbins, Danny Glover, and the like, and nor will anyone in my family. And it’s not because they’re radical liberal-socialists … there are many such radical liberal-socialists in Hollywood I’ll pay money to see … because they’re not in my face about it. They keep their dim-witted, puny views to themselves.
No, never, not one dollar of mine will ever be transferred from my wallet to theirs, so they can spit in my face, on my country, and monetarily support their mind-numbingly hostile organizations.
And, I’m not alone in this quasi-boycott of the hostile liberal-socialist left … in Hollywood, and elsewhere. Clooney is just one, lowly maggot; there are many others whose careers I’ve watched fall, or will fall, based soley on their “in-your-face” self-righteousness. Many of us out here love to watch these celebrities fall.
Comment by JohnnyPat — April 5, 2008 @ 7:13 am
Clooney’s bad movie, Client #9, OJ jailed, Paris Freed, Whoopi and the View, all distractions. While mainstream media creates illusions, the gov’t steps on our throats by opening our mail, suspending habeas corpus, stealing private lands, banning books like “America Deceived” from Amazon, conducting warrantless wiretaps and starting wars for a foriegn gov’t.
Write in Dr. Ron Paul and end this madness.
Final link (until Google Books bends to pressure and drops the title):
America Deceived (book)
Comment by Wallace M — April 5, 2008 @ 7:14 am
Also wanted to add that US box office numbers only make up 37% of to grand total. It’s not just about opening in America anymore. An actor has to be able to do both and more so overseas now. So, to try and put Clooney into that category is ridiculous. The only time he’s been able to open large overseas is when a guy named Brad is in the credits. Sorry, but true.
Comment by Leo — April 5, 2008 @ 7:14 am
Hollywood is desperate for more stars, so they are trying to fabricate one out of Clooney. He’s just not the total package. He shows little if any real romantic ability, and has always had too cocky of a demeanor. Not attractive, not enough vulnerability.
Comment by Melinda — April 5, 2008 @ 7:14 am
I miss the young Burt Reynolds…He was more handsome than Clooney but the main difference — Burt was funny.
Clooney mugs for the Camera and ssys some unfunny remarks and the interviewer almost falls on the floor laughing at what I don’t know…Robins Willimas is the same, he babbles some unfunny sounds and the “entertainment reporter” laughs and laughs at nothing…..Hollywood needs more Burt Reynolds, John Waynes, Eduardo Verastegui, Guy Williams, James Caviezel, Elvis–Handsome men who don’t go around acting like they are better looking than everyone else and think they are funnier than everyone else…They just seemed like regular guys who just happen to be magnificently beautiful to look at.
Comment by Patrice — April 5, 2008 @ 7:18 am
There are 2 distinct marketing campaigns: one of a bunch of grizzled guys looking all angry n’ such and that’s fine, it’s the “romance” poster featuring what looks like Christina Applegate and some guy who looks like Clooney but with the facial skin of a 3 week year old baby that looks like it’s had 12 layers of makeup applied to it - what is that all about? It looks (a) phony and (b) like they’re trying to make him look in his early 30’s. Anyways: ultra phony and subtle things like that do stretch whatever credibility NBCU has to reach an audience. Do they really think younger viewers care about this old guy?
NBCU needs to think hard about who their audience is - this could have been interesting on a shoestring budget led by a lesser known actor, but dropping $60M in production costs on a polarizing mouthpiece like Clooney is just plain stupid and methinks someone should lose their preferred parking spot for this one.
Clooney is a legend in his own mind - he needs better advice - i.e. less is more, you need to hide your socialist politics a little better - audiences don’t care about your politics.
Comment by Jimmy Pelton — April 5, 2008 @ 7:18 am
George is an obsequious snob living in the
Hollywood bubble.
Comment by sonya — April 5, 2008 @ 7:23 am
Clooney is at the top of my list of actors not to see. When will these idiots realize that 90% of the country is pro-American and don’t like to hear actors run it down. They vote by staying away, in droves.
Comment by Jim Corley — April 5, 2008 @ 7:24 am
Stat Man,
Read the thread. Cloony has done 2.8 million with other ensemble casts. Check those top names. They CARRIED the movie and DREW the audience with THEIR name.
Comment by The Ripper — April 5, 2008 @ 7:25 am
I’m sick of arrogance and hollywood actors who deem to lecture me on the wisdom of their political beliefs. They are actors and they need to shut up and act. At one time Hollywood made timeless movies with great stars who were talented and larger than life. It’s gone now, and we’re left with vapid intelligence and arrogant actors lecutring those they consider the unwashed. Pathetic. I won’t see a George Clooney vehicle, ever. Box office is the only thing Hollywood gets.
Comment by terri — April 5, 2008 @ 7:25 am
Clooney is a Brand, a Product, the same as Ford or IBM. The reason is that he represents his talent that has a worth to the public as does Lexus, or Re-Max Reality, therefore, any of his activities or attitudes enhance the Product or malign the Brand. The public wants to see Brands that they respect, and not pay hard-earned money to spend time with a Product that has offended them.
When the actor uses their Product to rail about a political, or Social event as Jane Fonda did/does, they create enemies that understand the only reason this person can insult them is because that they are given Face Time because they are a Product. The ONLY reason they are a Product is that people pay to view that Product. So why does the Movie Industry think that the public will pay to see a product that insults the public with their attitude.
The public is not dumb, some of these “Star Products” only have a High School education and have done nothing in life except to grab attention in a cause they have no qualification in talking about…
Simply put, when the Product or Brand presents their attitude, Political, Religious, or about Society, they often show their stupidity, and offend 50% of the public that will not pay to take abused from this person again. How far has Jane Fonda’s career gone? I will never pay to see anything she does, nor will my family! How many people has Clooney offended?
If you want to sell your Talent/Product, people will not pay if they have been insulted. Go ask the Dixie Chicks’.
Comment by Frank in NC — April 5, 2008 @ 7:27 am
The respondants are right as far as I am concerned. I will NOT support someone who pretends to know the answers to our country’s faults (amplified in Hollywood fashion) and foists their opinion and influence upon a population whose focus and intellect has already been damaged by the Media. I feel this way whether that person is George Clooney, Al Gore, Jerry Falwell, Rush Limbaugh or the person who rings the register at WalMart. The Media people who make movies, TV, News, Music et al will someday get this message…they should stick to their core business. If they want to espouse Politics, then put their money where their mouth is, quit their day job and run for office with all of the risks attendant, but until then, shut up and work.
Comment by Frank — April 5, 2008 @ 7:27 am
3:41, Doncha know everything is Bush’s fault.
Bravo for summing up the size of your little pea brain.
And next time, stay on subject.
Comment by marlee — April 5, 2008 @ 7:29 am
It’s about the MOVIE. Most of the movies made in the past several years SUCK. Contrary to popular belief Clooney isn’t all that talented. If Hollywood and Clooney types want to make money making movies, I suggest they try making some watchable movies instead of the crap they’ve been producing.
Comment by mom of 2 — April 5, 2008 @ 7:30 am
Few people watch or listen to the Hollywood elitists anymore. Get a clue. The big box office crowd are youngsters and teens on date night. They lost main stream America viewers long ago and it will be a long dry spell before they win them back again, if ever. There is life outside of Hollywood.
Comment by Will Kent — April 5, 2008 @ 7:34 am
While I agree HW is out of touch with the main stream I really don’t think people make the decision not to see someone’s movie because of their political and/or religious beliefs, unless the film they’re in is a propaganda storyline for those said beliefs.
People don’t go to George’s films because there is something about him that people just do not connect with. Tom Cruise with all his crazy is still the biggest international movie star there is. People connect to him. What’s going to be interesting is when Burn After Reading comes out. I’m not sure the public can withstand more Clooney mugging for the camera and talking about his man love for Brad Pitt. But my guess is, that’s exactly how the studio will play it. It’ll be a Clooney/Pitt film even though Brad’s a supporting player.
If the numbers are as low as they appear they’re going to be Clooney’s got to be shitting himself and at the same time he needs to seriously re-think the direction of Smoke House
Comment by Leo — April 5, 2008 @ 7:35 am
Hey anonymous (coward) April 5th @ 3:41am,
Even the 9-11 commission pegged Saddam as a threat given the UN not the US, did inventory WMD in 1991-1995.
And now recently withing the last two weks we learned that Saddam s intelligent services had a relationship with Al Quiada senior members…the problem is we just dont in what capacity.
We also dont know what happened to all the WMD inventoried by the UN.
But the point remains after allowing terrorist organizations (any of them) to run unchecked for decades and allowing other nations to fund and support them, WE GOT HIT. Saddam was known for financing Hezbollah terrorists in Israel, and his seemingly disregard for Iraqii lives that he hit with WMD himself…so it wasnt too much of stretch to say to this malcontent and threat Saddam (who was hooting at our sons and daughters who patrolled the no-fly zone), that if he continued to block UN inspectors we would come in and settle the matter. We also know know as of two months ago, that Saddam, thought we were bluffing, because how much of a pussy Clinton had been, and that the first Bush didnt seize the country. he was more worried about Iran, and his bluff to us, was intended to make the Iranians think twice about invading him, lest he have WMD.
So the reality is George Bush Jr (old stumble tooth), would have been impeachable if he left Saddam alone and Saddam later sold or support any terrorists that attacked us, thats a fact…because the POTUS constitutional duty is to defend US against all enemies foreign and domestic..leaving saddam unchecked would have been a real high crime against the people of this nation. So stop your liberal emotional drivel and GET WITH THE FACTS, dont ignore them, GET WITH THEM. The fact is Al Quiada wants Iraq, they are pouring a huge investmentinto getting it. Iran also wants Iraq they too are pouring a huge investment into getting it. Now both these scum bags have killed US boys and girls (our kids, fathers, mothers, and relatives)…and all libs can say is run…run away. I submit, you should all move to Jacgues Chirac’s France…its where all the cowards run.
Comment by Tom — April 5, 2008 @ 7:35 am
We’re sick of all the trashy gross-out films, too - Stiller, Apatow, etc.
Old-school charm needs a serious comeback, it’s just that Clooney doesn’t seem genuine about it, it’s a persona which is why he goes apeshit over any press he doesn’t control with an iron fist.
Comment by bring back quality — April 5, 2008 @ 7:38 am
hi i’m from Canada, just want to know why american movies cost so much to make. 60 million for one movie, holy cow, up here, that’s enough to make a hundred movies…good ones. hollywood suffers from too much money not enough heart and soul.
Clooney is cute funny and smart but when i hear he’s runs a casino on the side…i’m turned off.
hollywood is not a business, it’s a racket…was it ever a bunch of artsy fartsy people coming together to reflect on their own nature? a long time ago maybe.
what does ‘open big’ mean?
also, i think celebrities and the paparazzi eat from the same table, why are there so many food fights in LaLa land?
eat your food, don’t throw it. keep respect for each other. keep the drugs, spies and hydrogen peroxide out of hollywood.
i don’t like Britney Spears, however as a young child she was very talented, too bad those who guided her, guided her straight into the can and not into a long and properous career. hollywood eats it’s own.
sick and tired of hearing about celebrities with drug problems…i want to see them grow into mature happy well balanced individuals…not in rehab at the ripe old age of 23.
YUK! YUK! YUK!
in a kinda of way, this is good because Grassroots Theatre Festivals are cropping up everywhere because there’s nothing worthwhile to watch at the movies. We all want to see our own reflections on the screen, not the reflections of drug dealers, arms dealers or nefarious types who have money to bankroll a media blitz to blow the little artists out of the arena.
get chicks back onto the movie screens, not drugged up, bleached bimbos or twisted chicks…i mean decent, intelligent women of all shapes and colors…they will bring the audiences back into the movies houses. i would bet money on it.
Comment by sumwoman — April 5, 2008 @ 7:39 am
Comment by A.
“it’s an industry site”
Hey A. you’d think the industry would be interested in knowing why the movies fall flat with the viewing public. The people posting here are trying to give the industry a clue. It will be ignored because the industry is more partisan and political than these commenters could ever hope to be.
Comment by ba — April 5, 2008 @ 7:41 am
I don’t understand why one movie makes Clooney less than a star. How can a #2 movie be a flop? And if it isn’t top-rated, it is more likely due to the subject matter and stupid clips I’ve seen. And why does an actor’s politics make any difference to anyone?
But here is what is even more interesting - Adam Carolla has a romantic comedy out right now called ‘The Hammer.’ Only a limited release on the West Coast. It is getting reviews with critics and audience and doing better per screen than Drillbit.
Hollywood - release this movie!
Comment by MMM — April 5, 2008 @ 7:43 am
George Clooney — ignorant human, horrible actor!!
Comment by Rosanne — April 5, 2008 @ 7:46 am
To Hollywood:
Do not let the comments of an obnoxious LUNATIC MINORITY dictate the movies you make.
These right-wing loonies, who inexplicably keep trolling an industry site, do not speak to the preponderance of levelheaded audiences.
The issue is not the politics of a movie, or of a performer, or of “Hollywood” as the loons like to cartoonishly label the business.
The issue is simply doing quality scripts, taking a chance on unknown talent - actors, directors, etc. Male AND female. There’s so much sexism in the biz, but you are cutting out 50% of the population who can make hits, and who will pay money to see films.
Comment by go away, lunatic fringe — April 5, 2008 @ 7:48 am
Of course this movie sucks. Sports based movies have done poorly for years. When will the movers and shakers of Hollywood realize we only want movies about gay cowboys and Mr. Limpet
Comment by Steve Sparkenickle — April 5, 2008 @ 7:48 am
Regular guys just don’t buy the ultra liberal, fashionably thin, metrosexual Clooney as an early football era “leatherhead”. Sorry Hollywood, there are still regular Joe’s out here.
Comment by Steve — April 5, 2008 @ 7:50 am
I don’t know what the big attraction to George Clooney is. I think it’s the media who are in love with George. He’s not that good an actor and when he starts talking politics he’s even more nauseating.
Comment by Tracy — April 5, 2008 @ 7:52 am
Just for shits and giggles lets look at what Clooney’s produced.
Leatherheads-
Michael Clayton
Half Line of Timothy Berezin
A Scanner Darkly
Rumor Has It
Syriana
The Big Empty
Far From Heaven
Welcome to Collinwood
Insomnia
Rock Star
The Jacket
Criminal
I won’t even include the tv crap. Yeah, he’s brilliant. LMAO
Comment by Chocolate Souffle — April 5, 2008 @ 7:52 am
I found the movie to be hilarious. We need a good ole fashion comedy..this was it.
I think a lot of negative comments on Clooney is simply because he is one of those far left Hollywood liberals. Fair enough. But the movie was great!
Comment by Vince Hugh — April 5, 2008 @ 7:54 am
Hmmm… Movie about football from a pompus leftie. Gonna do well with the football crowd? Hmmm…
He should try some movie about some “metro” guy trying to “save the planet”. Like Leo did when he went to Vietnam (Thailand?) and trashed some beach in real life.
At the end of the day, somehow, someway this guy gets paid for the stinkers he makes. Strange days.
Comment by TehDude — April 5, 2008 @ 7:55 am
I dont like this guy!
When i watch a movie he is in, i see George Clooney..
i tired watching oceans but i couldnt get past George Cloony.
When you watch say, even the cheesy Rocky movies, you get into ROCKY…not Stallone,
OR watching any will smith movie you get into the character.
Clooney shows up on set..says the lines, and boom thinks he is a movie star..he is not.
This guy reminds me of another big TV star who left show, thinking he was a giant star..faded and came back to TV.
Clooney has never, and never will be a BIG star..
as for his political ranting…come on..the doods ego writes checks his fame cannot cash.
Americans, all have political views, but when we go to the movies we want to be entertained…simple..
we want to see america WIN the wars.
we want to see America WIN
you can trash our political leaders all you want but as a whole..leave the America bashing out of the movies.
Comment by Gino ngelone — April 5, 2008 @ 7:58 am
Clooney is ANOTHER of the undereducated/uneducated of Hollywood who try to tell the rest of us how we should think and live. These jerks forget that there are more folks in flyover country than there are in New York City or LA. WE determine who is going to be a box office draw and WE decide who won’t make it at the box office. It’s the sycophants in Hollywood who cannot say NO to a no-talent hack like Clooney. He is from my state (Kentucky) and other than the fawning media no one gives a crap about Clooney. In KY he rides on his aunt & Dad’s coattails.
Comment by Jules — April 5, 2008 @ 8:04 am
Liberalism Hollywood style has morphed into an obnoxious religion. And to top it off, parishoners like George Clooney insist on wearing their obnoxious religion on their sleeve.
Just look at what these nutjobs accuse conservatives of being like. Then you will see exactly who they are.
Comment by SteveH — April 5, 2008 @ 8:04 am
We’re not Clooney fans but politics has nothing to do with it.
All you right wingers can ever talk about is Iraq, Bush, politics. Actually, you don’t talk. You rant and spew illiterate hate, not intelligent criticism.
Get some balance and culture in your life [and fiber in your diet]
Btw, what’s so offensive about Clooney speaking out against genocide in Darfur? Granted, we’re sick of self-important celebs campaigning for Presidential candidates, but that goes for Repubs and Dems.
Comment by Cut the Drudge link — April 5, 2008 @ 8:09 am
A lot of these actors seem to have shit for brains when picking material to produce. Cruise’s produced the Mission’s, Vanilla Sky, The Last Samurai and Lions for Lambs but the rest are unforgettable.
Tom Hanks has been no better with his only big movie hit My Big Fat Greek Wedding , Polar Express Those things you do .He’s done better w/HBO and Band of Brothers and now John Adams.
Leo’s choices are worst with the Aviator being the only recognizable film.
Pitt on the other hand has done The Departed, Charlie and The Chocolate Factory, Time Travelers Wife, A Mighty Heart, The Assassination of Jesse James, God Grew Tired of Us, and is going to be doing World War Z, Pippa Lee, Undaunted Courage, etc. He seems to be the one who realizes you aren’t going to be in front of the camera for the rest of your life. His choices are varied and he only starred in one. Interesting.
Even Will Smith has had a few with Hitch, Pursuit of Happiness, I Robert
Comment by Looking Glass — April 5, 2008 @ 8:12 am
Star power can’t hide an unfunny, wanna-be screwball comedy. The marginally funny bits were all in the trailer. Why should I pay $15 to see this?
Must comment on this blog’s support for our idiot President, who plunged us into a costly, fruitless war to benefit his Big Oil patrons. Mission accomplished: $4 gas.
Yeah, I’m a Bush hater for good reasons. He’s done substantially more harm to America than Osama, but some deluded Republo-fascists still praise him. History will judge his monumental stupidities harshly, especially for the black hole of debt he’s created.
Comment by Mr Bumpaw — April 5, 2008 @ 8:14 am
“Lady from the Midwest” is right.
People see a movie if the story is good and the movie is well done, not because of an actor. It’s the rare actor who can pull in a crowd just because of who they are. Julia Roberts did it for a while.
It’s the age-old paradox - studios are looking to hedge their bets, they are trying to find a guarantee for their gamble, but there is no guarantee except quality
Comment by Quality — April 5, 2008 @ 8:18 am
Clooney is a puss, he couldn’t do a real days work!
He’s hollywoods stat, not mine! I don’t go to his movies or buy his dvd’s. If I see him on the news, I just turn it off.
Comment by spider — April 5, 2008 @ 8:25 am
I used to love George Clooney, but since he started running his mouth against the President, I can’t stand him. I will not watch him in anything.
Comment by Mary — April 5, 2008 @ 8:27 am
I think ole George is at his best when he’s doing comedy but to tell you the truth, I will not go see him because of his politics. In fact, it is rare that I ever go watch a movie at a theater or on TV for that matter because they either have a liberl message, their movies stink or I can’t see the character past their personal political rhetoric. I won’t add to their wealth when they think America is so bad. If these people in Hollywood want people to go see them, then they should stop with their political venom, be actors and do something about the quality of their movies.
Comment by Konnie — April 5, 2008 @ 8:27 am
Hey George, ER is still filming - give the producers a call.
Seriously, I will not watch ANYTHING with Clooney in it. I just don’t like him and his ridiculous acting and head jerking tic.
Glad to see on this site there are others with sense who see Clooney for exactly what he is: a non-acting, ignorant, wishes he were Cary Grant, Hollywood whore. I think it’s disgusting that he has an Oscar win under his belt for cowtowing to the Hollwood elite kook fringe and that oscar was his reward.
Comment by ab — April 5, 2008 @ 8:30 am
FOOTBALL FAN: I liked your comment “A good movie about the early origins of football would be a great flick.”
That’s encouraging because I’ve written that script…a great story about the early days of college football. I want to make it for $10 million as an independent film. Sure, I need some Hollywood stars, but we want to use unknown fresh talent also, shoot in the South (not South California).
If you know anyone with $10m laying around, let me know!
Comment by CRADLE PIX — April 5, 2008 @ 8:31 am
I will never attend another George Clooney film, primarily because of his over-the-top political beliefs. This guy, a few years back, did far more than just spout the typical Hollywood left wing drivel. He made horribly disparaging remarks about several individuals, including the president, attacking one for having a deadly disease. These uneducated Hollwood twits just don’t get it. People pay to watch them perform. Most of these “stars” are simply not that intelligent; we don’t care what their thoughts are on foreign affairs, the economy, tax policy, etc. Very few of them have the educational background to understand any of these issues on anything more than a surface-level basis. Take a look at the careers of those who have been politically outspoken in Hollywood; most of them are struggling. Compare them to people like Will Smith and some others, who continue to enjoy great box office appeal. The media won’t connect the dots, but a rational person can. Every anti-war film has bombed, the latest being “Stop-loss”. And everytime one of these flics bombs, the media tries to explain it away in the most ridiculous manner. Now we’re told that it’s just because people are tired of war. So go ahead Hollywood, make a movie about American heroes doing something good in Iraq, saing lives freeing a population from a tyrant, etc. Lets see some films about bravery in battle, like we did during WWII. Produce movies like this and you will find that people are not “tired of” the Iraq War. Their tired of fellow-Americans who openly cheer for us to lose that war, that’s what they’re tired of.
Comment by smartypants — April 5, 2008 @ 8:40 am
I like George Clooney. I like his talent, his wit and I like to be dazzled by his stunning good looks. Most of all I like the fact that he seems to live his day-to-day life with a strong sense of decency and cares about the way he treats his fellow man.
His politics, though, put me off. While he comes across as textured and complex, his politics come across as simplistic and knee jerk.
“Good Night and Good Luck” is a good example. Aesthetically, I found it to be a wonderful movie. It was compelling to look at. The black and white cinematography, the set design, the costumes, the acting. It was very well directed and a gem in many ways.
But it was not just the cinematography that was black and white. So was the dumbed down self-righteous perspective of its politics. (IMO)
I read recently where someone pointed out that in “The Way We Were,” Barbara Streisand’s character would have been handing out leaflets extolling Stalin.
Well, that is also true of the writers Hollywood cries about as having been blacklisted.
Why romanticize them? They were captivated by a totalitarian vision and were interested in spreading this vision. They idealized the Soviet Union and wanted that hell-hole to be replicated here. Why romanticize their stupidity.
Is there any question that there are writers now in Hollywood who are primarily interested in spreading their political agenda? Exhibit A — Aaron Sorkin.
Sorkin, imo, is illustrative of the kind of people those blacklisted writers were. Only they were trying to spread totalitarianism.
So why did Clooney choose to idealize and romanticize these types of people in Good Night and Good Luck?
Comment by alicia — April 5, 2008 @ 8:41 am
It’s so funny to see anyone scratching their head and wondering why Clooney can’t open a movie!! And it’s even funnier they reject the MOST OBVIOUS reason, so eloquently stated by the any of the posters here.
The anti-American, ultra-left-of-liberal verbiage coming out of Clooney the past few years has worn thin on the “average” movie goer, and that means, we just don’t go to his movies anymore. For anyone to deny his politics and arrogance has nothing to do with it is in denial. There’s really nothing too scientific about this one people.
Comment by This is funny... — April 5, 2008 @ 8:41 am
I believe many of us are plain sick of Hollywood and movies being produced. Nothing is very good. Couple that with stars who go on political rants and appear in anti American films. I for one, take it personal and do not wish to see them again, period.
I wasn’t aware Clooney made fun of Charlton Heston, that is so cruel!
Comment by Dylan — April 5, 2008 @ 8:45 am
LOL:
I have to laugh at the comment about “all us right wingers” who spill hate. The most hateful and venemous people I have every known have all ben liberals. Start with Michael Moore and work from there. The left cannot stand when anyone disagrees with it, which is why Democrats want to shut down talk radio. Free speech in irrelevant to the left when that speech happens to be conservative. History will show GWB to be a far better president than the way the current media treats him. Then again, the media never treats Republican presidents fairly. Reagan was crucified by the press every day he was in office; and he was indeed the best president during my lifetime. Go ahead with your stereotypes of “right wingers”. Most conservatives that I know are far more tolerant of opposing views than the liberal left.
Comment by smartypants — April 5, 2008 @ 8:47 am
i think the pomposity and arrogance that he displays is due to the fact that he seems to think that he’s the entire rat pack all rolled into one person. except the suave and debonair act he puts is just smarminess. the swagger is just arrogance and his “charm” is just a poor man’s dean martin impression.
oh, and his overbite is not the least bit attractive.
Comment by stephen — April 5, 2008 @ 8:48 am
next time have the film star George Kennedy.
Comment by jon — April 5, 2008 @ 8:50 am
“It’s an industry site.”
The “Industry” seems to be a bunch of Carnies with teeth.
Large parts of Hollywood are very similar to an overly fawning parent — they basically take pictures of themselves and with their far-reaching film projector, share their self-love with strangers.
Most of these strangers have lives, but a small minority of giddy fans lead these Carnies with teeth to believe they are overly significant.
Combine that with their backyard award ceremony (aka the Academay Awards) and you have a typical grandiose, self loving family picnic.
But sometimes the movies are indeed entertaining.
But NO COUNTRY over ATONEMENT? Seems the “Hollywood Carnies” are a wee bit threatened by British filmmaking.
Strange days indeed. But yes, sometimes entertaining!
Comment by Hanah Diamond — April 5, 2008 @ 8:53 am
I look at Clooney like Johnny Depp before the Pirate movies or ever Matt Damon before the Bourne movies. Interesting movies but not big box office.
All Clooney needs is a good detective or spy franchise and he will be fine. Clooney call Clancy. Don’t direct it.
Pitt never has open well in the US but that never matter because he always put butts in the seats internationally. See Troy. With the dollar these days, this maybe even more important.
Comment by interested .. — April 5, 2008 @ 8:57 am
Leatherheads is a bomb because Clooney’s fans have deserted him.
Earth to Clooney: Fans count. Start paying them the attention they deserve. Autographs when you’re being a pr whore don’t count.
Comment by Former Fan — April 5, 2008 @ 8:59 am
Bring back Burt Reynolds, hype him as much as Clooney, and watch Burt shoot right back to the top of the box office. In fact, keeping out of politics and keeping his political views to himself is one of the few smart things Burt has done over the years.
Comment by Chaz — April 5, 2008 @ 9:05 am
I am a red-blooded female who never understood the fawning over George Clooney. He has never so much as given me the ‘warmies’. He’s a smart-aleck actor and that’s it. Let his Hollywood friends ooh and ahh…..but the fact he can’t produce a No. 1 movie tells you what we, the poor masses, think of him.
Comment by meg marston — April 5, 2008 @ 9:06 am
I thought the film had a great look stylistically, but IT’S THE SCRIPT!!! This script went nowhere and left me feeling like I had made a bad investment in time. I was hoping the movie would turn the corner…it never did.
Comment by Jim — April 5, 2008 @ 9:07 am
The problem with movies today is out of the sixty thousand or so scripts written each year those that are selected for consideration, are selected by readers; people, who have in most cases never written or sold a script in their lives let alone made a movie. Hollywood executives don’t read and wouldn’t know a good story if it slapped them in the face. They have become so fixated on the visual they have forgotten the story. Their perception of the world is so convoluted by their limited interaction with real life they see the world via the shot.
Comment by Godonthewire — April 5, 2008 @ 9:07 am
The Most Over-Rated box office attraction isn’t George Clooney, it is Samuel L. Jackson. Here’s an actor who’s had mostly small to medium sized supporting roles in some major blockbusters to take all the credit and acclaim for himself for their success.
He’s not Eddie Murphy, he’s not Harrison Ford, he’s not Will Smith and he’s not Tom Hanks. The man cannot open a film on his own. Did you ever see the Man? Or Freedomland? No, no one else did either.
Mr. Jackson is one remarkable actor, but he’s not a draw. And he and his people should be ashamed of themselves for perpetrating that fallacy all across Hollywood, the press and in Guinness.
Eddie Murphy is the only true, proven, all-time box office draw as a lead star. Mr. Murphy recently surpassed Tom Hanks for the #1 slot.
http://www.boxofficemojo.com/people/?view=Actor&sort=sumgross&p=.htm
It is sickening no one will stand up to Jackson and his people.
Comment by Box Office Fan — April 5, 2008 @ 9:08 am
CLOONY IS A STAR AND A GOOD ACTOR.
NO ONE WANTS TO SEE A 1930′S ‘ROMANTIC’ COMEDY OUTSIDE OF FREE CABLE TV.
PUT HIM IN A MAINSTREAM MOVIE AND IT’S GOLD!
Comment by ME — April 5, 2008 @ 9:09 am
oh, yeah “smartypants,” you sound real tolerant and balanced
it is loonies like you who cannot stand anyone who disagrees with you, and who pull everything into the gutter
this site has plenty of healthy disagreement, but it is always civil and intelligent until you drudge maniacs descend like a plague of locusts
everyone who disagrees with your one-note ignorant rants is not a “liberal lefty”
you people need to stop watching cartoons
everything is not us or them, lefty liberal or conservative
unlike the mental ravings of a vocal minority, most people are a thoughtful blend
GET OFF THIS SITE. THIS IS A BUSINESS SITE. THERE ARE A GAZILLION SITES YOU CAN PLAGUE WITH YOUR “VENOMOUS” [LEARN TO SPELL IT CORRECTLY] IGNORANT RAVINGS ABOUT THE GREATNESS OF BUSH AND IRAQ. YOU CRAZIES CAN HAVE YOUR ILLEGAL LOSING WAR - BUT YOU SHOULD PAY FOR IT OUT OF YOUR TAXES, NOT OURS. YOU PAY FOR IT. YOU ARE DESTROYING THIS COUNTRY ON THE STAGGERING DEBT ALONE.
Comment by Nikki, get rid of the crazies — April 5, 2008 @ 9:10 am
Wow. Lots of right wingnuts on this site. I didn’t know we had such a great (p)resident, and that the first amendment didn’t apply to actors.
Comment by Bhall35 — April 5, 2008 @ 9:13 am
The “Industry?”
Seems like the “Industry” is really just a bunch of Carnies with teeth.
Clooney seems to be the Carnies hero. But step outside of the “Big Tent” and Clooney is Looney!
The Hollywood Industry is like an obnoxious, over-fawning parent: they take pictures of themselves and use a large film projector to share their distorted self love/self hate with strangers.
And sometimes the stuff is entertaining as hell! But how did “No Country” win over “Atonement?”
Which Hollywood Carnies became threatened by British filmmaking chops?
Hollywood movie makers seem to have become insecure, mean spirited, overly fawning Carnie parents.
George Clooney and the Academy Awards celebrate this craving for outside approval rather than self-approval.
Signed,
I am just jealous cuz Clooney is rich!
Comment by Sparky — April 5, 2008 @ 9:16 am
Putting aside any political differences…I don’t really mind Clooney as an actor. He is mediocre, but there are certainly few actors nowadays that are “great”.
BUT…because of his outspoken (and constant - does the guy EVER shut up?) rantings on BushAmericaConservatives, I have an instant dislike for him. Most of the time, I’m willing to put that aside if the movie that person is starring in appears to be decent. The problem is that Clooney has chosen to take his political views and MAKE movies wrapped around them. And THAT is why I (and so many other people) refuse to watch any of his movies. Too many of them have been either outright political message movies, or have had some hidden inuendos that sneak up on you. So at this point, I just refuse to see his movies, whether he’s kept his politics out of it or not.
This is more a product of Hollywood than the liberal Actors that exist within it. The production companies are supposed to be in the business of making money. Why would you make a movie…like the various anti-war movies that have all tanked (Stop-Loss being the latest)…when you KNOW it’s going to tank?
Because the powers-that-be in Hollywood all BELIEVE they have the right to force-feed their political agendas on the smelly masses. Period. And then they are stunned when we refuse to see their movies. But they makes themselves feel better by awarding each other Oscars on prime time TV to convince the country that apparently we’re so unenlightened we missed something when we decided the movie was a piece of crap.
When Hollywood takes the political (and Anti-American) garbage out of their movies, then I’ll start putting aside my political differences with them and maybe pay to see some movies. I don’t expect that to happen any time soon/ever.
Comment by Spaz2.3 — April 5, 2008 @ 9:19 am
It is astonishing how these right wing kooks always bring every single subject back to Iraq and the greatness of Bush.
Nikki could post a story about newborn puppies, drudge would link to it, and the cuckoos would swarm in and mouth off about newborn puppies being anti-American, and the greatness of Iraq.
Comment by Get back to the topic — April 5, 2008 @ 9:20 am
I like Clooney and I couldn’t care less about an actors politics. All I care about is being entertained by the movies they make. As far as Leatherheads goes it was one of the worst movies I have ever watched, truly terrible. The strange part it wasn’t even funny, didn’t even try to be funny.
Comment by Bob Robertson — April 5, 2008 @ 9:21 am
Pay no mind to these sour grapes regarding George Clooney.
They said the same things about Leo Gorcy.
Comment by artisbey — April 5, 2008 @ 9:23 am
Poor George Clooney. He has the face of a major movie star, but, sadly, the exaggerated vanity of a B-movie narcissist. Part of the problem is he’s not very smart. If he were, he would realize that movie-goers pay to see the films of actors they like. George doesn’t come off as likable. By constantly shooting off his ultra-liberal yap he has alienated 50 percent of potential movie fans. Now, when people see his name on the marquee, their first thought is “I wonder what’s playing across town.”
George is a media star who dabbles in film making. I guess you can’t have it all, Hollywood looks and brains. What a dope!
Comment by fred — April 5, 2008 @ 9:23 am
Pretty simple really. He’s not a movie star. People don’t care for him no matter how hard TIME magazine shoves him down America’s throat. Hollywood studios continue to prop him up because he is a Mao-sized poster boy for their beliefs. As we crewfolk say, he gets to “earn while he learns”.
I remember Leatherheads as a script a dozen or more years ago and it never got made. Even though Clooney was doing it, I still looked forward to it. When I saw the amazingly unfunny commercials on tv, well…
Comment by crewguy — April 5, 2008 @ 9:25 am
Another bomb for Clooney! He’s too concerned with looking “cool” for anyone to take him seriously.
Comment by Wilfred — April 5, 2008 @ 9:27 am
This article missed a big reason for Clooney’s box office poison. Clooney has single handedly alienated a good portion of the American audience with overt left wing political nonsense movies and media rants.
I go out of my way (just like a chunk of my friends) to avoid his movies.
If Clooney wants to be a politician fine. But I want an actor in my movies.
Comment by fly over country — April 5, 2008 @ 9:33 am
How the hell does a movie like this cost $60 million to make? Where are the expensive special effects shots? Movies like this should cost $20 million max.
Comment by Leo — April 5, 2008 @ 9:37 am
I won’t see any movies made by these liberal “idiots” but I do give Tim Robbins a pass. Shawshank was one of the best movies of all time.
Comment by bob — April 5, 2008 @ 9:40 am
Leatherheads has been kicking around for 15 yrs. And “interested” American boxoffice only makes up about 37% of receipts now totaled. The money is in overseas boxoffice and DVD rentals and purchase. People nowadays have full movie, surround sound/tv’s in their homes now. Plus, at this point there are no real up and coming actors that have excited the public. It’s too much of everything. Too many stupid tabloids, too many stupid celebrity gossip blogs, too much reporting on celebrities in the regular news. Add on the outrageous cost of taking a group of 4 let alone 2 to them movies these days just isn’t appealing to people.
Comment by Leo — April 5, 2008 @ 9:41 am
You can’t expect family oriented response to an actor who has made a career of trashing America. I would never pay to see Clooney to support his anti-American speech-making.
Comment by asiahs — April 5, 2008 @ 9:42 am
Clooney NEVER had a very large fan base. He was propped up by the publicity machine because of his political views. This is what happens when a supplier of services forces what they think the customer wants down their throats rather than listen to what they want. Same is true for big media, which are losing millions due to alienating millions of customers by their activist activities. Major liberal newspapers are going out of business, while their shareholders loss their investments. The media will have us believe it is due to 1) recession, 2) changing market place (internet), or just “other reasons. But tell me, wouldn’t the have made more money regardless if they had millions more customers that are silently boycotting them due to their unfair political bias? They are using shareholders money to finance their very narrow political agenda, at the expense of market share. Michel Jordan had it right, even though he is a big Democrat supporter personally, he was asked why he doesn’t get more publicly involved in politics. His very intelligent answer is “Republicans buy sneakers too”!!
Comment by John — April 5, 2008 @ 9:44 am
Why would I/anyone want to go see a family friendly nostalgia film by someone who trashes America?
Comment by asiahs — April 5, 2008 @ 9:45 am
People want to go to the movies as a form of escapism. As Hollywood actors, producers and directors become more embroiled in politics–both on screen and off–it becomes a turn-off to many people. I cannot look at George Clooney, Susan Sarandon, Sean Penn, et al anymore without thinking of their politics. As a result, I avoid them like the plague. I know I am not alone in this feeling. They can continue to live in their little bubble all they want, but I live in the real world.
And, for those who believe President Bush has created all the problems in the world, get a grip. Nobody in the media or on the left gave him any credit when the economy was humming along for most of the past seven years–even after we were told that the 9/11 attacks would cause a recession that would take years to turn around. Nobody gave him any credit when Saddam Hussein was ousted from Iraq in mere weeks, when we were told by the media that his army would be difficult to defeat. Few gave Bush any credit when millions of Iraqis held a purple finger in the air indicating that they had exercised their right to vote in a truly free election, which had not taken place in Iraq in decades. Nobody on the left has given Bush any credit for the absence of terrorist attacks on our soil, when we were told by the press that 9/11 was just the beginning. In short, the liberals in this country have not given our president credit for anything which has gone well over the past seven years, while blaming him for virtually anything and everything–real or perceived–that they feel has not gone well. Under Clinton, we were told everything was roses, peaches and cream. Heck, Billy Boy even ended recessions forever, or so he claimed. Of course, when he left office in the midst of one, the press ignored it and told GWB to “stop talking down the economy.” Now that’s all the media does is talk down the economy. We were not warned that there was an economic bubble brewing during the end of Clinton’s term, which subsequently popped wreaking havoc on pension plans and 401k’s across the country. Yet, the same press that failed to warn us of that catastrophe feels the need to warn us on a daily basis of coming doom now, despite the fact that we still have not had even one month of negative economic growth in years. The Clintonians were allowed to claim they had reached a budget “surplus,” when all they did was use fuzzy math, using the growth rate exhibited during the height of the dot-com exhuberance to project out years into the future. In truth, there was never a budget surplus; yet, the media never questioned it. Now liberals blame Bush for spending the “surplus” that never existed. When Bush attempted to start dialog on Social Security reform he was rebuffed by Democrats who claimed he was overstating the problem, that SS was fine. Let’s bet that, if a Democrat wins the White House, it will be mere months before the Dems are screaming about problems with SS, that we all need to pay more into it or get less out of it.
Sorry, but you “Bush-haters” are all wet. Our president is far from perfect, but he is not the root of all problems. If you want to know the source of your problems, look first within yourself. You’re more likely to see the answer there than in Washington, D.C.
Comment by smartypants — April 5, 2008 @ 9:48 am
I won’t pay to see any actor thats a blowhard about politics, when did Cloony become an expert on anything? Sorry you lost my ticket money when you opened your mouth Cloony telling people what to think and how to vote. Tanker
Comment by tanker — April 5, 2008 @ 9:50 am
don’t you people understand this movie is about 30’s football. also the heyday of college football’s rebirth. yale vs. harvard….bush went to yale. bush is evil.
Comment by anon2 — April 5, 2008 @ 9:51 am
“Wow. Lots of right wingnuts on this site. I didn’t know we had such a great (p)resident, and that the first amendment didn’t apply to actors.”
Funny, don’t I have a right to free speach too. I know only liberals what to reserve that right to themselves. Liberals are intollerent biggots, this election cycle has proved that. The Liberal campain and media had behaved terribly and racist! If a rebublican made similar statements as Obama, Clinton, Mathews, abc, cbs, cnn…they would have been thrown in jail! Only liberal are free to be racits because they “care”..what a joke and its now showing!
Comment by John — April 5, 2008 @ 9:52 am
This isn’t surprising. Clooney’s films are generally a bit too smart and sophisticated for the average movie goer. I havent seen Leatherheads, but why would anyone expect films like Good Night and Good Luck or Syriana to be box office draws? They are much closer to art films than popcorn films.
Comment by JD — April 5, 2008 @ 9:54 am
Just want to add my voice to the vast majority of folks here that hold a persons words against them.Clooney is on my list of “no support” with Jane Fonda,Sean Penn, Mike Moore.Shut up and sing,act ect. No one wants to hear your uninformed,uneducated opinions, for that we turn to the NYTimes.
Comment by Beardog — April 5, 2008 @ 9:59 am
George Clooney is not likeable by any standards, to most of America. He is consistently negative about America and cannot resist giving his OPINION and knocking others down that he doesn’t agree with. What actors fail to remember, is that just because they have media coverage, does not mean their OPINIONS are right - they just get coverage. A good actor is private - because an audience will not forget the public bashings actors give out when they see them on the screen. It’s distracting. I do not go to movies anymore, and especially have a long list of actors I will not support with my dollars. They can be against the war or Bush’s policies or anything else, it is the way they present their ideas that is so derogatory - it’s malicious and leaves no room for discussion. They’d make great dictators, not actors.
Comment by Judi — April 5, 2008 @ 10:05 am
Eddie Murphy “the only true, proven all-time box office draw.” That had to be Eddie Murphy, somebody related to Eddie Murphy or Eddie Murphy’s agent who wrote that. What about John Wayne, Clint Eastwood, Jack Nicholson, Tom Cruise, Tom Hanks, Denzel Washington, Harrison Ford, Burt Reynolds and Robert Redford in the modern era? And people like Mickey Rooney and Shirley Temple, who were huge many decades ago? Murphy had a great run from 1982-1989 when he could do no wrong, but he’s been very inconsistent since then.
Comment by chaz — April 5, 2008 @ 10:07 am
Leatherjeads sounds like a cool movie!…I love all sports movies and I dont care who acts in them as long as it has lots of sporting action scenes in it!…I dont know anything about the contents of the movie…but if it is a love story or goes off the footballing mark! I’ll hate it!…no matter who is acting in it.
Comment by A.D MILLS-MISSOURI — April 5, 2008 @ 10:07 am
George Clooney is someone that I’ve never considered a “big movie star”. Hollywood does. His arrogance is what turned me off from him leading back to his ER days. The media loves him, and always try to compare him to Cary Grant, and that was my next turn off. HE IS NO CARY GRANT! Or anything similar.
These actors today can’t hold a candle to the actors of the past. Jimmy Stewart, William Holden, John Wayne, etc. These were box office draws for many reasons. And they made good movies, and LOTS of them. They weren’t making the ridiculous salaries that Clooney, Julia Roberts etc are asking for today.
Today’s actors spit out a movie, collect their $20 million bucks, and go off to Italy and bask in the sun, and bash our country. Do us all a favor and stay there.
Yesterdays great stars are gone, and look what we are stuck with.
Comment by Susan I — April 5, 2008 @ 10:09 am
It doesn’t matter what side of the political spectrum they’re on, when actors decide to proselytize, they run the risk of alienating some portion of the paying public. This is just as true of George Clooney as was for Charlton Heston.
They should not be surprised nor hurt when the audience responds. It should be part of the calculation they make when offering their opinions in a public forum.
The other big problem is that it puts a permanent filter over their ability to create a character on screen that is pure and believable. The audience has to suspend an extra layer of disbelief.
I don’t believe Stanislavsky covered this in “Building a Character”. Perhaps he should have. Assuming the actor has read it.
Comment by Tom — April 5, 2008 @ 10:11 am
I only wish Hollywood had been as determined to make Michael Keaton a star as they are Clooney. Ben Affleck always seemed like another one shoved down our throats who never really registered with the public.
Comment by Chaz — April 5, 2008 @ 10:16 am
I liked the movie, but it is simple. IT IS APRIL. I really don’t want to see a FOOTBALL movie in April. When are the studios going to catch on to movie releases and tastes. This is like putting out a Christmas special on memorial day. And WHOA, how about realizing the buying public could care less about the OSCARS. So quit logjamming movies for Oscar contention and put the movies out with seasonal consideration. Last year’s a might heart came out with the summer fun stuff. Did not even feel like watching that then, maybe fall or a january release. The public will watch good movies anytime that is seasonally appropriate. There are some movies that trancend that, but a football movie in april, nawww. Idiots. Still I liked the movie and it will get in the dvd collection for fall viewing.
Comment by salsyse — April 5, 2008 @ 10:17 am
There are lots of ordinary, middle of the road, people like me who refuse to support America-bashing actors. It feels like treason to pay to see anything they earn money from. Hollywood cannot tell me how to think, no matter how many anti-American films they make.
Once in great while, a good movie comes along that dares to say something good about our country, our citizens, and our values, and has a decent story to it. Show us that, without any of the politically-tainted blowhard actors, and I’d pay to see it.
When actors are known more for their ugly politics than they are for their movies, they have declared that they have all the money they will ever need, and they don’t care whether you ever spend another dime on them. The studio that uses them declares the same thing.
Comment by not brainwashed — April 5, 2008 @ 10:17 am
I’ve never seen Clooney in anything and I plan to keep it that way. For some reason, he just isn’t appealing, but I can’t comment on his acting. I abhor his personality so I will never see anything he is in. Hope this helps.
Comment by Howard X Stern — April 5, 2008 @ 10:17 am
Is it just me, or does cLOONEY look like Michael Dukakis (tank picture) with that helmet on?
Comment by boosheeka — April 5, 2008 @ 10:20 am
This is what happens when people like Clooney become anti American, and bash the Pesident of the greatest and most free conutry in the world. No true proud American will pay money to support his cause of putting down the Religious war that we are fighting for the rest of the free world.
Comment by Ron Hicks — April 5, 2008 @ 10:27 am
I’m conservative. I don’t like Clooney. But, as I read the postings here, I wonder if there is an organized group that sits and writes all the anti left posts. It just seems that many of the posts sound similar. It is a shame that everyone can post anonymously.
Look, fair is fair. Haters on both sides are so adamant about their views that they will do anything!!
Comment by TV — April 5, 2008 @ 10:34 am
Clooney looks like he should have two bolts on either side of his neck from these movie stills and photo’s.
Comment by Fred M. — April 5, 2008 @ 10:46 am
Is Rush Limbaugh directly linking to this site? Just wondering.
Comment by Proud Liberal — April 5, 2008 @ 10:48 am
And another thing… every time Entertainment Tonight goes on and on about “gorgeous” George Clooney, I get sick and change the channel. He too thinks he’s gorgeous, and trust me, he’s not.
And the person who said that as soon as these stars have a lot of money in the bank, they start shooting off their mouth is correct. What do they know? As someone else said, most of Hollywood have maybe a high school education. They should try to be more of a role model type, than America hating crowd.
I for one watch TCM for classic movies, as they use to be made. For us. Not for them.
Comment by Susan I — April 5, 2008 @ 10:48 am
When I first read that Clooney was planning to make a period screwball comedy, I was really excited.
I’m enchanted by movies from the 30s and 40s. And since discovering them, have even come to prefer watching them to a lot of the contemporary stuff.
But once the trailers for “Leatherheads” started appearing, to me the chances for success looked bleak.
A football comedy without a physical acor/comedian? How is that a good idea?
And why would a move trailer of what appeared to be a bunch of middle aged guys rolling around in the mud be considered a good marketing campaign.
But all of that could have been overcome with a sharp script filled with snappy dialogue and most of all with really great casting.
John Krasinski was a good idea but putting in Renee Zellweger as the romantic interest was doomed to failure. At least from my perspective.
She’s a talented actress but she has a certain schtick and that schtick has become overly familiar and more than a little shop-worn.
Additionally, Zellweger comes with baggage. There is a segment of the audience that has become actively hostile to her. It’s the Claire Danes factor.
The baggage doesn’t seem to be as much of a factor in a genre other than romantic comedy, but when it is a rom com, Renee Zellweger’s presence grates and is no longer welcome. JMO.
Just speculation, of course, but I think it is because of the ungracious and unethical way Zellweger handled her marriage and subsequent annulment.
She appeared to be throwing the country and western guy who was unlucky enough to have been her victim/groom under the bus.
Again just speculation and really what do I know — nothing — but Zellweger seemed to be on the rebound from Jack White and not yet over him.
Chesney then happened upon the scene innocently strumming on his guitar. A lightbulb went off in Zellweger’s head and she worked her movie star mojo to catch him up into her little rebound psychodrama.
Oooweeee. Just wait until Jack White sees the press coverage of her wedding. Won’t he be sorry he let her go.
And that’s as far as I think Renee Zellweger thought it out. Just as far as the press coverage of the ceremony.
But then, uh oh, she was left with the reality of a legal marriage certificate. At least Eddie Murphy knew enough of make a faux marriage ceremony staged for purposes of something other than “happily ever after” also legally faux.
But Chesney’s purpose for Renee had ended with the ceremony. She no longer wanted him around.
So she threw him under the bus PR wise with her little annulment.
Not that she shouldn’t have had an annulment. People make mistakes. But the manner in which she went about it was so insensitive toward him and showed such a sense of entitlement on her part, it has permanently turned me against her.
And judging from her box office, I don’t seem to be the only one.
Comment by alicia — April 5, 2008 @ 10:51 am
Entertainment industry is properly named. If it is a good movie and entertaining we will pay to go. Though there are a couple of “stars” I will not pay to see no matter the vehicle. George isn’t one of them- should be maybe- but he is cute and funny- oh entertaining.
Comment by aggie — April 5, 2008 @ 10:54 am
Please note: The right-wingers only come in to comment when Drudge links to the article (as he did to this one.)
Notice that this crowd is nowhere to be found in any of the WGA, SAG/AFTRA, or Pellicano comment boards.
Comment by 40yearoldstitzer — April 5, 2008 @ 10:57 am
http://movies.nytimes.com/2008/04/04/movies/04leat.html
Would Bosley Crowther have …hated it?
FI-CORE, SCHMI-CORE!@
Poor, George. He and Will Smith are our only movie stars left. Everything else is “fake insouciance”.
I like that.
Abbe B.
Comment by Abbe Buck — April 5, 2008 @ 11:00 am
Real patriotic Americans Hate Bush you right wing morons. If you are not going to see a movie because a certain actor is in the movie, then you are not a movie fan so STFU. Clooney is not anti-American. Anyone who supports Bush hates America and our troops.
I do not agree with the beliefs of conservative actors, but if it is a good movie I will see it.
All you right wing nuts go back to watching Idol and Wheel of Fortune. Do not go to movies, I do not want to sit nest to some Bush Ball Licker.
Comment by navyvet50 — April 5, 2008 @ 11:01 am
Really…who is he, and why is he here? I guess if the media call someone a ‘’star” long enough, everyone buys it. I guess smug and arrogant qualify him for stardom.
Comment by ML — April 5, 2008 @ 11:01 am
The right wing ravings are definitely from an organized few.
Hey, “smartypants,” learn how to spell, learn grammar, pack up your incessant ignorant ramblings, and go stink up another website.
This is what happens when education is underfunded.
Comment by BB — April 5, 2008 @ 11:02 am
He cant act,but they will give the dude an Oscar to build up some more hype,but his stupid politics cant be helping him,you sell to everybody not just Liberals..When will Hollywood ever get that through their head?
If Hollywood adopted a separation of Politics and Movies they would increase their profit as much as 25%,but anyway, I don’t get Liberal spin when I order a Big Mac,so why should I get it before I see a fuggen movie?
Comment by Kelly — April 5, 2008 @ 11:04 am
Some of us, including my family, stay away from movies produced by or including the anti-American left. It’s a right, just like theirs to be ignored and lose millions.
Comment by CT — April 5, 2008 @ 11:06 am
I am one of the senior citizens who last night paid $5.50 to see George’s LEATHERHEADS in our small CA town near San Diego. It was worth $5.50. I was interested because, as one of the older folks, I like movies about the 20’s and 30’s and wanted to see how George handled the history of football and how he would use his boyhood friend’s name from Ohio in the movie. Both boys were from good Roman Catholic families and both are always conscious of their family background. That being said, I see George taking his father Nick’s FDR journalistic expressions in Cincinnati to another level, i.e. Hollywood and the world. Like his dad, back in the midwest, it appears from the posts here he is not being too successful outside the Hollywood mob. Honestly, George is the exact image of his dad in looks and political leaning and just as nice of a guy. There is a lot more to add about George, but I’ll stop before all either doze off or move the the next post.
G/S
Comment by Grant Shorten — April 5, 2008 @ 11:08 am
You guys are giving George an out by brining politics into this. The fact is that George can’t act and the dialogue in the ads I saw on TV was horrible. The ads are typically some of the best clips from a movie. The dialogue in the ads was atrocious so there was no way I was going to see this crap.
I saw a clip of Leatherheads on the Daily Show the other day and actually changed the channel even though the Daily Show is one of my favorite TV shows. George sucks as an actor and if it wasn’t for the connections he had in Hollywood before he became famous, he would be a nobody. Or maybe a gay porn star (but that’s about it).
Comment by chris — April 5, 2008 @ 11:12 am
I refuse to see a George Clooney movie and this is strictly based on his shoving his political views in my face. As with other responders, I want to be entertained by Hollywood, not lectured by them. As far a being a right-wing nut job. I would rather be that than a left winger with no nuts or no job.
Comment by Lives in L.A. — April 5, 2008 @ 11:14 am
George Clooney bashes George Bush because George is the dumbest president this country has ever had. Remember when George taunted the Iraq insurgents and challenged them to “Bring it On!” Well, they did - with a terrifying vengeance. And remember when he landed on the aircraft carrier with a big banner reading “Mission Accomplished!” Letting George Bush run our great country is like letting the retarded guy from “Slingblade” run our country. Bush is average at best, and all the people that so righteously stick up for him do so because they probably voted for him and are average at best themselves. George Clooney works for change in this once great country. Maybe his movies aren’t always the best but at least he tries to do something different. All the people who declare they will never see his movies because of his political views are the very people that we are trying to save our country from - the ignorant, the narrow-minded, the Moose-goosers.
Comment by Tigertimbo — April 5, 2008 @ 11:20 am
I don’t George Clooney movies or the GC Brand. Not because of politics but because his movies do not entertain. They all seem to be high minded and preachy, in a I’m better than you/elitist sort of way. He reminds me of those choir boys at pep rallies in high school… Wimpy, not to be taken serious. Full of themselves…I don’t need that after a week of work. I need an escape. By the way he is no movie star. He’s a media star… He’s no Cary Grant.
Comment by John G — April 5, 2008 @ 11:31 am
These are the most terrifying messages I’ve seen since 2002/2003 - I can’t believe these rabid righties haven’t slunk back into their holes in shame over what’s happened to our country in the last 7 years while they had carte blanche. I’m so depressed. No wonder the whole world thinks Americans are losers.
Comment by Monique — April 5, 2008 @ 11:44 am
You must remember that a “star” is a big ball of hot gas.
Clooney is definitely a star.
Comment by McCarroll — April 5, 2008 @ 11:44 am
Clooney cannot ACT. He has the same damn inflection in every scene.
Aside from that I am tired of his telling us what our political opinions should be.
Comment by independant thinker — April 5, 2008 @ 11:45 am
Comment by fly over country — April 5, 2008 @ 11:49 am
I will never watch a Cloony movie because he is a fake global warmer and a left wing jackass
Comment by Rich Bell — April 5, 2008 @ 11:49 am
“This is an industry site…”
Yes, and we know how thorough this particular industry has been at purging anyone from its ranks who disagrees with the party line, don’t we? Sorry — I just had to point that out. Oh my God, the walls have been breached and the barbarians are pouring in! Hide the cocaine!
Personally, I liked Clooney in “Intolerable Cruelty” and “O Brother, Where Art Thou?” Maybe he could put his political evangelism aside long enough to make another Coen Brothers film. I’d watch it.
Comment by Jim Hunt — April 5, 2008 @ 11:52 am
Clooney is pompous, arrogant, self-serving…the list goes on and on. I too wonder what the big deal is with him…he is simply not that good! Oh Brother was a wonderful movie but only because of the supporting actors. Sigh…when will someone start casting greats like Kenneth Branaugh…oh and one more thing, could not agree with you right wingers more…the best way to disagree with him is to stay away from his movies. No problem.
Comment by Lisa — April 5, 2008 @ 11:54 am
Want intelligent criticism? Here it is:
Why do people go to the movies? They go to be entertained, but more importantly, they go for ESCAPE. That means escape from their everyday worries about their children, their bills, their marriage . . . you get the idea. They want an escape from reality for just a couple of hours.
The story being told is part of that escape. So are the actors, the sets, the special effects, the music, and a myriad of other details that go into the making of the whole “movie experience”.
Any dichotomy detracts from the experience as a whole. For example, improperly using “Jaws” type tension music would detract from a tender love scene, as would dark lighting in a childrens’ movie.
So it also goes with the actors. As far as the movie-going public is concerned, the best experience comes when that actor is a blank canvas. That allows the character being portrayed a measure of believability.
When the movie-going public knows too much about the actor’s political views, (whether or not in agreement), that public invests those qualities in that character, rendering him less believable. This detracts from the movie experience as a whole.
Movie stars of past decades realized the value of a bit of mystery. Not only did it preserve their “blank canvas”, but it also contributed to that air of apartness from the public, otherwise known as stardom.
Just my humble opinion.
TX Conservative
Comment by TX WaterBird — April 5, 2008 @ 11:55 am
Sorry, I see Clooney as a liberal political hack, not as a hollywood actor.
Seems many other agree with me.
Comment by NoGutsNoGlory — April 5, 2008 @ 11:59 am
hes no freekin Gipper
Comment by markm — April 5, 2008 @ 12:02 pm
Actually George Clooney had a pretty large fanbase that included young teenagers and pensioners right up until 5 or 6 years ago.
It’s in recent months where his private life has been paraded under our noses, his dating choices have been questionable, every move seems like a pr stunt, his ignoral of fansites in the Esquire interview and his increasing arrogance that has turned off many long-time fans.
Everything he once stood for no longer applies and he now seems like the biggest Hollywood faker that ever existed.
Get a