From Cold War to cold feet: Why movies won't touch real politics

Big studios are playing it safe as they fear that addressing the politics of our times may backfire financially

- John Lui

Go to Google Maps or Apple Maps on your phone now. See the body of water off Mexico's east coast? It's labelled "Gulf of Mexico (Gulf of America)" - even here in Singapore, on my Singapore-registered account.

Mr Donald Trump had demanded the name change and the American presidency is already reaching across oceans to a screen I keep in the pocket of my trousers - it feels like a violation of personal space.

Speaking of American politics going global, I just watched the Marvel superhero movie Captain America: Brave New World, which bills itself as a political thriller. Spoiler alert: It's neither political nor thrilling.

What makes the studio and publications like The Los Angeles Times or The New York Times want to label it a political thriller? I think they just like the prestigious sound of it, when all that movie has is the president being not very nice and acting a bit shifty.

Old heads will remember movies that sprang from the Cold War or the cynicism that followed the Watergate scandal - everything from The Manchurian Candidate (two films, in 1963 and 2004) to All The President's Men (1976) and Three Days Of The Condor (1975).

On television, there was the deliciously cynical House Of Cards (the British original, in 1990 and the Netflix adaptation, from 2013-2018).

The list of movies involving the CIA, MI6, journalists, the White House and No. 10 Downing Street getting up to shenanigans is long and everyone has their favourites. Some have the president losing his temper, but none have him bursting out of his shirt to become the Red Hulk.