It Pays to Lie About Movies

I was scrolling on Facebook the other day when I noticed a post from a fan page that will go unnamed.

The post in question featured a caption offering its readers a “first glimpse” photo at Renée Zellweger in costume as Bridget Jones in the upcoming film, “Bridget Jones: The Last Chapter”, accompanied by said photo.

According to the post, this film features the return of Hugh Grant and Patrick Dempsey who will be joined by Naomie Harris and Jodie Comer as new characters. It is the conclusion of the franchise and is set for a Christmas 2024 release.

About 1/8 of this post is true. Yes, there is another Bridget Jones film in development, as announced by author Helen Fielding last year. However, this is where fact ends, and fiction starts. No details about its nature have been released, apart from the book in which it is based.

The most alarming piece of this post is not the fictional cast, release date and title, but the picture. Even at a close glance, the image of Zellweger, sitting in a study, is utterly convincing. It is also fake or, at the very least, its context is fake (I was unable to find this photo anywhere else online).

Something that isn’t fake, however? The likes, comments, and shares that the post has accumulated go into the thousands. Comments such as “I’m hyped!” and “Can’t wait” along with seemingly endless tags. There have been more than 37,000 engagements with this post. This is not unique. A brief look at other posts from this page and you will find numerous fabrications, including news of a remake of Disney’s Bedknobs and Broomsticks (not happening) and another adaptation of Roald Dahl’s The Witches (apparently no one remembers the recent 2020 disaster from Robert Zemeckis?). All of these have received likes and comments in this same numerical range.

This page (and its enormous response from Facebook users) is just one example of a concerning pattern of misinformation scattering the web, convincing casual and unassuming moviegoers. How are readers supposed to know what is true and what is not? A quick Google search will usually dispel egregious fabrication, but sometimes it is harder to catch, particularly with clickbait headlines running rampant. In July, actor Rainn Wilson responded to the clickbait headlines regarding comments he made during his time on The Office that were taken wildly out of context.

On the opposite side of this entertainment journalism spectrum, we have the official Hollywood trade publications: Variety, Deadline, and The Hollywood Reporter. A recent article from Defector examined their role in decreasing trust among readers. Author Katharine Trendacosta points out that the trades are somewhat in cahoots with the studios. “The problem for the trades is… being in the good books of the studios.” Trendacosta argues that because they depend on one another, the trades will go to great lengths to speak in favor of the studios, even among such complications as the ongoing WGA and SAG strikes. The reason? Money. Both the studios and the trades profit from ad revenue and a “quid, pro, quo” relationship. If this is true, then there is an incentive for the trades to err on the side of support for the studios and ignore the voices of writers and actors who are fighting for their livelihoods.

It is nearly universally known that spreading fake “news” can be profitable. Remember the Facebook page I mentioned earlier? The page itself has hundreds of thousands of followers. To monetize a Facebook page, you need 10,000 followers and 50,000 post engagements, which this page has vastly surpassed. In other words, it is highly likely that they are profiting from spreading this misinformation. This then begs the question: if everybody is spreading some form of misinformation, how different are the fan sites from the trades after all?

Right now, it’s hard to say. While the trades are certainly still more reliable than that Facebook page for example, readers are encouraged to take a closer look at all the entertainment news they consume, regardless of the source. Fortunately, there are reputable publications available that also have the added benefit of not being owned by one umbrella company (all of the trades mentioned are owned by Penske Media Corporation).

One such example is TheWrap, an excellent place for those interested in both current film coverage and long-form history pieces. Another trustworthy source is Matthew Belloni at Puck, a former editor of The Hollywood Reporter who covers the business side of “show biz”.

Though the average consumer may place more value on the accuracy of political or financial news, accurate entertainment news is of great importance to our understanding of what is going on within popular culture.

Remember: your favorite movie or TV show exists because of the efforts of numerous individuals who probably don’t want you to believe or spread false information about the nature of their work.