Jewish World Review August 19, 2002 / 11 Elul, 5762

Jeff Jacoby

Jeff Jacoby
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
Kathleen Parker
Wes Pruden
Sam Schulman
Amity Shlaes
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports

A screenwriter's remorse | Joe Eszterhas, who was once the highest-paid screenwriter in Hollywood, is today a stricken man -- stricken in body and stricken with remorse.

"Eighteen months ago I was was diagnosed with throat cancer, the result of a lifetime of smoking," the writer of "Basic Instinct," "Jade," and a dozen other movies disclosed in a recent New York Times op-ed column. Much of his larynx has been removed. He speaks with difficulty. He describes himself as "alive but maimed" and, "desperate to see my four boys grow up," has given up smoking and drinking for exercise and prayer.

Now that he realizes what cigarettes can do, Eszterhas says he is filled with guilt for all the scenes in his movies that deliberately glamorized smoking.

"I find it hard to forgive myself," he writes. "I have been an accomplice to the murders of untold numbers of human beings. I am admitting this only because I have made a deal with G-d. Spare me, I said, and I will try to stop others from committing the same crimes I did."

Time was, Eszterhas thought of himself as a militant smoker and reveled in his bad-boy image. He believed that smoking was every person's right and wrote that view into his scripts. ("What are you going to do," a cool and alluring Sharon Stone taunts Michael Douglas in "Basic Instinct," "arrest me for smoking?") Now he says that smoking should be "as illegal as heroin" and that "a cigarette in the hands of a Hollywood star onscreen is a gun aimed at a 12- or 14-year old." Cancer opened his eyes. "My hands," he confesses, "are bloody."

Like a lot of Eszterhas's writing, this is vivid, hard-hitting -- and ridiculously overdone. He may have a lot to answer for, but he isn't "an accomplice to the murders of untold numbers of human beings." Smoking is nasty and unhealthy, but it is not nearly as deadly as heroin. Some smokers do eventually die from their bad habit, but they are typically in their 70s, not 12 or 14 years old.

Of course it is a terrible thing to be afflicted with cancer. I wish Eszterhas a complete recovery and many more years with his sons.

It is admirable that his suffering has prompted a moral self-reckoning, and that he now wants to atone for the damage his movies have done. But if he really believes that the worst thing about his screenplays is that they glorified smoking, his self-reckoning has a considerable way to go.

After reading Eszterhas's New York Times piece, I went out and rented "Showgirls," his 1995 picture about a Las Vegas stripper who claws her way to stardom. It came out in 1995, and was as noteworthy for its NC-17 rating as for its witheringly bad reviews ("a film of thunderous oafishness" -- L.A. Times). To be honest, I can't actually remember if any of the characters in "Showgirls" smoked, so if there was a message in there about tobacco, I missed it. But there were plenty of other messages, and those came through loud and clear.

There was the message that it's stylish to use drugs -- that a little cocaine, for example, is just the thing when you want to celebrate or relax or be entertained.

There was the message that sex is simply one more commodity, something to be bought, sold, or bartered for. Or extorted or taken by force, if you can get away with it.

There was the message that deception and lies are everywhere and only suckers tell the truth.

There was the message that ruthlessness is the key to success -- that only those who are willing to break their rival's bones (literally, in the case of "Showgirls") will make it to the top.

There is the message that decency is for losers. Of all the characters Eszterhas created for this picture, only one is kind and considerate -- and her fate is to be brutally beaten and gang-raped.

But above all there is the message about women. Some of them are conniving sluts, others are stupid sluts, but all of them, Eszterhas makes clear, are primarily sex objects who can be degraded at will. The point of women is their bodies, and Eszterhas's script calls for female bodies to be paraded, ogled, leered at, mocked, and exploited almost without letup. Misogyny runs through "Showgirls" like sewage through a pipe.

And not only in "Showgirls." In the best-known scene from Eszterhas's best-known movie, an actress languidly uncrosses her legs during a police interrogation, giving the detective (and the audience) a flash of her naked private parts. In his New York Times mea culpa, he says he regrets writing that scene into "Basic Instinct." Because of its crude suggestion that women are nothing more than "holes," to use Eszterhas's own term from his book American Rhapsody? No. Because Sharon Stone had a cigarette in her hand.

Well, it's just a little hard to take Eszterhas's self-flagellation seriously. During his years as a screenwriter, the percentage of Americans who smoke cigarettes steadily declined. At the same time, the debasement of American society -- the sleaze, the violence, the coarseness, the relentless sexualization, the moral insensitivity -- went through the roof. Eszterhas and his Hollywood friends do indeed have much to answer for. Smoking is pretty far down on the list.

Like this writer's work? Why not sign-up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.

Jeff Jacoby is a Boston Globe columnist. Comment by clicking here.

07/29/02: The real abortion extremists
07/26/02: Another round of Kemp-Roth
07/19/02: Jews among Arabs, Arabs among Jews
07/15/02: Musings, random and otherwise
07/12/02: The new civil rights champions
07/03/02: Riding the rails
07/01/02: The prerequisite to peace
06/24/02: Frisking AlGore
06/17/02: Offense, not defense, is the key to homeland security
06/14/02: Looking at the horror
06/07/02: The cost of a death-penalty moratorium
06/03/02: Executing 'children,' and other death-penalty myths
05/29/02: A real threat?
05/24/02: The message in Arafat's headdress
05/20/02: (Mis)playing the popularity card
05/10/02: Outspoken, Muslim -- and moderate
05/10/02: The heroes in Castro's jails
05/06/02: The disappearing history term paper
05/03/02: Musings, random and otherwise
04/29/02: The canary in Europe's mine
04/15/02: Powell's crazy mission
04/12/02: The slavery reparations hustle
04/08/02: Peace at any price = war
03/26/02: Decency matters most, Caleb
03/22/02: The U.S. embargo and Cuba's future
03/19/02: The keepers of Cuba's conscience
03/15/02: A walk in Havana
02/26/02: Buchanan's lament
02/12/02: What 'peace' means to Arafat
02/05/02: Antismoking: Who pays?
02/01/02: Turn the Saudis
01/25/02: Making MLK cry
01/21/02: Ted to tax cut: Drop dead
01/18/02: Musings random and otherwise
01/14/02: An ultimatum to Saudi Arabia
01/11/02: Friendship, Saudi-style
01/07/02: Shakedown at Harvard
01/04/02: More guns, more safety
01/02/02: Smears and slanders from the Left
12/28/01: Congress gives to others -- and itself
12/24/01: The littlest peacemakers
12/20/01: How to condemn terror
12/18/01: Greenland once was
12/14/01: Parents who never said ''no''
12/11/01: Wit and (economic) wisdom
12/04/01: The war against Israel goes on
11/30/01: Tribunals, motorcycles -- and freedom
11/19/01: Friendship and the House of Saud
11/12/01: The Justice Department's unjust monopoly
11/09/01: Muslim, but not extremist
11/02/01: Too good for Oprah
10/29/01: Journalism and the 'neutrality fetish'
10/26/01: Derail these subsidies
10/22/01: Good and evil in the New York Times
10/15/01: Rush Limbaugh's ear
10/08/01: With allies like these
10/01/01: An unpardonable act
09/25/01: Speaking out against terror
09/21/01: What the terrorists saw
09/17/01: Calling evil by its name
09/13/01: Our enemies mean what they say
09/04/01: The real bigots
08/31/01: Shrugging at genocide
08/28/01: Big Brother's privacy -- or ours?
08/24/01: The mufti's message of hate
08/21/01: Remembering the 'Wall of Shame'
08/16/01: If I were the editor ...
08/14/01: If I were the Transportation Czar ...
08/10/01: Import quotas 'steel' from us all
08/07/01: Is gay "marriage" a threat?
08/03/01: A colorblind nominee
07/27/01: Eminent-domain tortures
07/24/01: On protecting the flag ... and drivers ... and immigrants
07/20/01: Dying for better mileage
07/17/01: Why Americans would rather drive
07/13/01: Do these cabbies look like bigots?
07/10/01: 'Defeated in the bedroom'
07/06/01: Who's white? Who's Hispanic? Who cares?
07/02/01: Big(oted) man on campus
06/29/01: Still appeasing China's dictators
06/21/01: Cuban liberty: A test for Bush
06/19/01: The feeble 'arguments' against capital punishment
06/12/01: What energy crisis?
06/08/01: A jewel in the crown of self-government
05/31/01: The settlement myth
05/25/01: An award JFK would have liked
05/22/01: No Internet taxes? No problem
05/18/01: Heather has five mommies (and a daddy)
05/15/01: An execution, not a lynching
05/11/01: Losing the common tongue
05/08/01: Olympics 2008: Say no to Beijing
05/04/01: Do welfare mothers a kindness: Make them work
05/01/01: Another man's child
04/24/01: Sharon should have said no
04/02/01: The Inhumane Society
03/30/01: To have a friend, Caleb, be a friend
03/27/01: Is Chief Wahoo racist?
03/22/01: Ending the Clinton appeasement
03/20/01: They're coming for you
03/16/01: Kennedy v. Kennedy
03/13/01: We should see McVeigh die
03/09/01: The Taliban's wrecking job
03/07/01: The No. 1 reason to cut taxes
03/02/01: A Harvard candidate's silence on free speech
02/27/01: A lesson from Birmingham jail
02/20/01: How Jimmy Carter got his good name back
02/15/01: Cashing in on the presidency
02/09/01: The debt for slavery -- and for freedom
02/06/01: The reparations calculation
02/01/01: The freedom not to say 'amen'
01/29/01: Chavez's 'hypocrisy': Take a closer look
01/26/01: Good-bye, good riddance
01/23/01: When everything changed (mostly for the better)
01/19/01: The real zealots
01/16/01: Pardon Clinton?
01/11/01: The fanaticism of Linda Chavez
01/09/01: When Jerusalem was divided
12/29/00 Liberal hate speech, 2000
12/15/00Does the Constitution expect poor children be condemned to lousy government schools?
12/08/00 Powell is wrong man to run State Department
12/05/00 The 'MCAS' teens give each other
12/01/00 Turning his back on the Vietnamese -- again
11/23/00 Why were the Pilgrims thankful?
11/21/00 The fruit of this 'peace process' is war
11/13/00 Unleashing the lawyers
11/17/00 Gore's mark on history
40 reasons to say NO to Gore

© 2002, Boston Globe