The Hollywood Ten--Bob A. Feldman

Ballad of John Garfield--Bob A. Feldman

Did Hollywood Movie Producers Collaborate With Franco's Fascist Regime In Spain Historically?

In the 1950's and 1960's, some Hollywood movie producers apparently collaborated with the fascist regime in Spain of then-Spanish dictator Franco. As Neal M. Rosendorf recalled, for example, in his 2014 book, Franco Sells Spain To America: Hollywood, Tourism and Public Relations as Postwar Spanish Soft Power:

"...United Artists [UA]...had been...cultivating friendly relations with the Franco regime through its distribution operation in Spain. The company's representative in the country was George Ornstein, the son-in-law of UA co-founder and majority shareholder Mary Pickford...In the 1960s, he would be awarded both the Order of Civil Merit and Spain's highest civilian honor, the Order of Isabelle the Catholic, for his work in promoting U.S. film production in Spain...."

According to the same book:

"The first of the massive UA...productions was Robert Rossen's Alexander the Great...Robert Rossen flew to Spain in the winter of 1955, and UA trumpeted the start of filming in a full-page Variety advertisement that stressed the Spanish location shooting..."

Besides Robert Rossen, another Hollywood movie producer who apparently collaborated with Spain's fascist Franco regime in the 1950's was Stanley Kramer. As the Franco Sells Spain To America book also observed:

"The Pride and the Passion, produced and directed by Stanley Kramer, was of importance to the Franco regime...

"Stanley Kramer was one of Hollywood's most noted liberals--Kramer's modus operandi provided a template for the long-term Spanish-based production efforts of Samuel Bronston that commenced a couple of years later.

"From the time that Kramer first proposed his project to the Franco regime in September 1955 the Spanish authorities were supportive...In October 1955, Kramer met with Minister of Information and Tourism Gabriel Arias Salgado, to whom he laid out his plan...Kramer went on to meet with Francisco Franco himself, in which he `explained in detail the project and the effort needed to realize this grand production'...The Spanish government quickly granted filming permission to The Pride and the Passion enterprise...The dictatorship kept close tabs on the developing script...In response to the Franco regime's demands, producer-director Kramer would order the necessary script changes..."

According to the same book, "the most important figure in the development of `Hollywood in Madrid' and the political and economic benefits that accrued to the Franco dictatorship, was film producer Samuel Bronston, who established a full-blown American studio in Spain." As the Franco Sells Spain To America recalled:

"From the late 1950's through the early 1970's, Bronston forged and maintained a uniquely intimate relationship with the Franco regime. Indeed, the Bronston-Franco partnership marks the closes ongoing political collaboration to date between a Hollywood film production operation and a foreign government...

"Bronston...established his studio with the close collaboration of the Franco regime. The Spanish government facilitated the producer's efforts at every turn with monetary aaid, materiel, logistics and special legal arrangements and concessions. The regime's estimation of Bronston's singular value was marked by its presentation to him of the Order of Isabelle the Catholic...High-ranking regime figures moonlighted as fixers, consultants and scriptwriters in the Bronston organization, including at least one serving Spanish ambassador to the U.S. And when international creditors...came after Bronston..., the Spanish government would for almost a decade provide him with cover and a safe haven...

"...Bronston, backed by the fortune of Pierre du Pont III, produced among other films...El Cid (1961)..., as well as King of Kings, The Fall of the Roman Empire, and several other epics...Bronston also made, gratis, a series of propaganda films for the Spanish government that were screened  both domestically in Spain and internationally, including in the U.S.."

The same book also observed:

.Spain had a dictatorship that was very open to collaborating with American producers, provided they toed the line set down by the government...In early 1966 MGM, fresh from filming most of Doctor Zhivago in Spain, was quietly but firmly warned that the MIT [Ministry of Information and Tourism] was offended by a planned epic about Francisco Pizarro and the conquest of the Incas, The Royal Hunt of the Sun...MGM took the hint and halted production..."

`Marilyn Monroe's Mysterious Death' folk song lyrica

An historical topical folk song from 2016 that revisits and raises some questions about the mysterious death  in California of 1950's Hollywood movie star Marilyn Monroe in August 1962.
(lyrics)
(chorus)
Two days before her press conference
Marilyn Monroe was dead
And her notebook diary disappeared
With the star of Hollywood.

(verses)
They called her "Marilyn Monroe"
And she planned to hold a press conference
To talk about being used
By the Attorney General and the President
To complain about the false words
Which each said to get her into bed
And to reveal what she knew of C.I.A. plots
To kill a Cuban government head. (chorus)

She had thought that "Mr. President"
Would make her the new First Lady
But the White House stopped accepting her calls
When it became too politically risky
And after being passed to the Justice Department
She wrote in her notebook diary
Of her bedroom conversations about covert
C.I.A. activity. (chorus)

No matter how big a movie star
Or how large are the crowds you attract
If you mix in their power game of politics
It can get dangerous to be near the top
They'll exploit your popularity
And spend nights with you secretly
But they'll dump your body quickly
When it threatens "The Company." (chorus)

`The Hollywood Ten' protest folk song

`Ballad of John Garfield' protest folk song

Did Hollywood's Steven Spielberg Falsify U.S. History In His `Lincoln' Movie?

Besides ignoring the historical role that African-American abolitionist activists like Frederick Douglass played in pressuring the Republican Lincoln Administration and the U.S. Congress to finally prohibit legalized slavery in the United States in 1865, the version of U.S. Civil War history presented in Hollywood Director Steven Spielberg’s “Lincoln” movie seems to ignore some of the historical information about Abraham Lincoln's political views, the 13th Amendment and U.S. Cvil War history that readers can find in books like W.E. Du Bois’s Black Reconstruction in America 1860-1880. For example, according to Du Bois’s Black Reconstruction book:

“In January, 1865, [Confederate] General [Robert E.] Lee sent his celebrated statement to Andrew Hunter:

“`We should not expect slaves to fight for prospective freedom when they can secure it at once by going to the enemy, in whose service they will incur no greater risk than in ours. The reasons that induce me to recommend the employment of Negro troops at all render the effect of the measures I have suggested upon slavery immaterial, and in my opinion the best means of securing the efficiency and fidelity of this auxiliary force would be to accompany the measure with a well-digested plan of gradual and general emancipation. As that will be the result of the continuance of the war, and will certainly occur if the enemy succeeds, it seems to me most advisable to do it at once, and thereby obtain all the benefits that will accrue to our cause.’…

“As late as April, 1865, President Lincoln said to General Butler:

“`But what shall we do with the Negroes after they are free?...I can hardly believe that the South and North can live in peace unless we get rid of the Negroes. Certainly they cannot, if we don’t get rid of the Negroes whom we have armed and disciplined and who have fought with us, to the amount, I believe, of some 150,000 men. I believe that it would be better to export them all to some fertile country with a good climate, which they could have to themselves. You have been a staunch friend of the race from the time you first advised me to enlist them at New Orleans. You have had a great deal of experience in moving bodies of men by water—your movement up the James was a magnificent one. Now we shall have no use for our very large navy. What then are our difficulties in sending the blacks away?.. I wish you would examine the question and give me your views upon it and go into the figures as you did before in some degree so as to show whether the Negroes can be exported.’ …

“…December 14, 1863, Ashley of Ohio had introduced into the House an amendment prohibiting slavery, and Wilson of Iowa introduced a similar amendment. Both were referred, but not discussed until five months after their introduction. Four other similar amendments were introduced in the House during the season.

“In the Senate, January 11, 1864, Henderson of Missouri introduced an amendment to abolish slavery, which was referred. A few days later, Charles Sumner submitted a joint resolution against slavery. The committee preferred Henderson’s resolution. The Border State men were especially opposed and Garrett Davis of Kentucky made long and fiery speeches and offered eight amendments. Senator Powell of Kentucky also offered various amendments.

“A proposed Thirteenth Amendment finally passed the Senate on April 8…by a vote of 36-6. It was considered in the House the last day of May. On June 15, it was approved by a vote of 95-66, but this was less than the necessary two-thirds majority.

“Meantime, Lincoln had been reelected…Maryland had abolished slavery, and there was a movement for abolition throughout the Border States. At the second session of the 38th Congress, the President urged the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment. On January 31, 1865, Ashley called the proposed Thirteenth Amendment for reconsideration. Eleven Democrats deserted their leader and enabled the resolution to pass, on January 31, 1865.

“Blaine said: `When the announcement was made, the Speaker became powerless to preserve order. The members upon the Republican side sprang upon their seats cheering, shouting, and waving hands, hats, and canes, while the spectators upon the floor and in the galleries joined heartily in the demonstrations. Upon the restoration of order, Mr. Ingersoll of Illinois rose and said, “Mr. Speaker, in honor of this immortal and sublime event, I move that this House do now adjourn.” This amendment was signed by the President and submitted to the states. On December 18, 1865, it was declared adopted by the Secretary of State…”

  And according to Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States book:

“…It was only as the war grew more bitter, the casualties mounted, desperation to win heightened, and the criticism of the abolitionists threatened to unravel the tattered coalition behind Lincoln that he began to act against slavery…Emancipation petitions poured into Congress in 1861 and 1862…By the summer of 1864, 400,000 signatures asking legislation to end slavery had been gathered and sent to Congress, something unprecedented in the history of the country. That April, the Senate had adopted the Thirteenth Amendment, declaring an end to slavery and in January 1865, the House of Representatives followed…

“The Confederacy was desperate in the latter part of the war, and some of its leaders suggested the slaves, more and more an obstacle to their cause, be enlisted, used, and freed…By early 1865, the pressure had mounted, and in March President Davis of the Confederacy signed a `Negro Soldier Law’ authorizing the enlistment of slaves as soldiers, to be freed by consent of their owners and their state governments. But before it had any significant effect, the war was over…”

  In his Legends, Lies: Cherished Myths of American History book, Richard Shenkman also asserted that “Just a month before the collapse of his government Jefferson Davis authorized one of his diplomats in Europe to inform Britain and France that the Confederacy was willing to emancipate the South’s slaves in exchange for official recognition as an independent country.”

Hollywood's CIA Connection

The ultra-rich Hollywood movie and tv studio executives of Wall Street's U.S. media conglomerates have apparently been collaborating with the U.S. government's Central Intelligence Agency [C.I.A.] in recent years. As Texas Christian University Professor Tricia Jenkins recently observed in The CIA in Hollywood: How The Agency Shapes Films and Television:

"...The Central Intelligence Agency...did not hire Chase Brandon as its first entertainment industry liaison officer until 1996...The Agency has...sharped the content of numerous film and television works, including JAG (1995-2005), Enemy of the State (1998), In The Company of Spies (1999), The Agency (2001-2003), Alias (2001-2006), 24 (2001-2010), Bad Company (2002), The Sum of All Fears (2002), The Recruit (2003), Covert Affairs (2010- ), and Argo (in production). CIA administrators have also met with studio heads and theatrical agents in order to influence their ideas about the Agency more broadly, and its retired officers have likewise contributed to numerous films, including Sneakers (1992), Meet the Parents (2000), Syriana (2005), The Good Shepherd (2006), Rendition (2007), Charlie Wilson's War (2007), Salt (2010), and Red (2010)...

"...Few people know that the CIA has been actively engaged in shaping the content of film and television...Much of what we know about Langley has been deliberately placed in the public domain by the Agency itself, since it realizes the importance of controlling its public image..."