| Reel Power | |
|---|---|
First edition, worldwide |
|
| Author(s) | Matthew Alford |
| Country | United Kingdom |
| Publisher | Pluto Press |
| Pages | 218 (paperback) |
| ISBN | 9780745329826 (UK) |
Reel Power: Hollywood Cinema and American Supremacy is a 2010 book by Matthew Alford, which argues that cinematic output from Los Angeles routinely endorses the notion of American Exceptionalism and that even many of the most liberal films (such as Hotel Rwanda and Three Kings) provide surprisingly favourable mythology for the United States' government. Alford draws particular attention to the power of corporate moguls and the role of the Pentagon and CIA in the production of various films.
Critical and activist figures and organisations received Reel Power enthusiastically. George Galloway called it "a fantastic read" and "absolutely outstanding",[1] echoing dust-jacket endorsements from Carl Boggs, Jack Shaheen, Alison Edgley and Tony Benn. The UK based media analysis group Media Lens, in a contribution for Le Monde Diplomatique and on their website wrote that "Alford sets the charges for a controlled demolition of the myth that there is any kind of serious challenge to US foreign policy coming out of Hollywood. By the end of the book, not just Stallone, not just Schwarzenegger and Willis, but the entire edifice of liberal credibility has collapsed into its own footprint".[2] In the British Morning Star, James Walsh commented that the book "is an engaging look at the innards of the dream factory process" and that whilst the revelations of film-maker collusion with the Pentagon are not surprising "the details are fascinating" especially in relation to "films traditionally considered nuanced or critical of US foreign policy".[3]
In Lobster Magazine, Robin Ramsay observes that "If Alford isn’t quite describing the corporations and the state running joint psy-ops, it will do until joint psy-ops come along". Ramsay reviews the book as "competently done, decently written and, if you’ve seen a lot of American movies – and I have – it is interesting to have the ideological content articulated. I could do it myself, and I’m sort of subliminally aware of it; but most of the time I’m just watching the movie. So the author’s considerable efforts are both useful and entertaining"[4]
Academics and film critics also gave a generally positive response. Contemporary Sociology called it "an attractive and up-to-date set of tools for the critical literacy that should be mandatory in today’s media-saturated environments"[5]. Simon Kinnear from Total Film gave Reel Power four stars out of five and called it a "laudable study" and "an eye opening expose". "Alford's occasionally guilty of straw-clutching", he said, "but you'll watch the next gung-ho blockbuster a little closer".[6] Roy Stafford, former editor of In the Picture magazine, says that Reel Power is a "solid introduction" to Hollywood and American politics but which, he implies unfortunately, "renders much that film studies has tried to do over the last fifty years... as effectively wasted effort."[7] In The Scotsman, Hannah McGill, artistic director of the Edinburgh International Film Festival opined that Reel Power "is at its best when it identifies and analyses cases of direct influence being brought to bear on film production by the US political establishment [...] its stonewalling of more contentious projects [...] or individuals in positions of constant influence" but that "so relentless is Alford's one-sided dogma that I find myself rebelliously inclined to defend" militaristic film-makers like Michael Bay.[8] In contrast, Ramsay thought the reviews were "slightly chastening" as Alford "makes me feel that I don’t have my ideology detector turned up high enough".[9]
The Hollywood publicist Michael Sands, as well as the filmmakers Ken Loach, Haskell Wexler and Tom Rolf also endorsed Reel Power[10].