In a striking move that has sent ripples through the global film industry, more than 4,000 actors, directors, and other film professionals have pledged to boycott Israeli film institutions accused of complicity in what they describe as genocide and apartheid against Palestinians. This bold stance, reported by BusinessLIVE and others on September 12, 2025, marks one of the most significant cultural interventions by Hollywood in recent memory, echoing the strategies of historic boycotts that targeted oppressive regimes.
The pledge, which began circulating on September 8, 2025, quickly gained momentum. By September 11, the number of signatories had more than doubled since the start of the week, surpassing the 4,000 mark. The list of supporters reads like a roll call of contemporary cinema: Oscar winners Olivia Colman and Emma Stone, celebrated actors Mark Ruffalo, Tilda Swinton, Javier Bardem, Ayo Edebiri, Susan Sarandon, Riz Ahmed, Elliot Page, Andrew Garfield, Brian Cox, and Cynthia Nixon, alongside acclaimed filmmakers such as Ava DuVernay, Yorgos Lanthimos, Boots Riley, and Joshua Oppenheimer. Their collective statement was unequivocal: “We pledge not to screen films, appear at or otherwise work with Israeli film institutions – including festivals, cinemas, broadcasters and production companies – that are implicated in genocide and apartheid against the Palestinian people.”
This movement comes at a time when the international film community is increasingly scrutinizing its own role in global affairs. The boycott specifically targets Israeli film festivals, broadcasters, and production companies accused of supporting or enabling human rights abuses against Palestinians. According to Haaretz, the campaign is part of a broader, intensifying cultural and political movement that aims to hold institutions accountable through the power of collective action and visibility.
The roots of this campaign can be traced to earlier efforts to amplify Palestinian voices in cinema. In 2021, Netflix launched its “Palestinian Stories” section, making 32 films by Palestinian directors or about the Palestinian experience available to its vast global audience. This initiative was hailed as a meaningful step toward redressing representational imbalances and exposing mainstream audiences to the rich tapestry of Palestinian storytelling. However, most of these films quietly disappeared from the platform in October 2024, raising questions about the durability of such gestures in the face of broader political pressures.
The current boycott is not merely a spontaneous reaction; it draws heavily on the legacy of historic cultural boycotts. As The Independent recounts, the film industry’s engagement with political activism has deep roots. In 1963, nearly fifty British and American playwrights, including luminaries like Samuel Beckett and Harold Pinter, refused to allow their plays to be performed before segregated audiences in apartheid South Africa. The following year, Marlon Brando and others called on their peers to prevent their films from being shown to segregated audiences. These actions, though controversial at the time, are now widely credited with helping to isolate the South African regime and amplify calls for change.
The 1980s saw further escalation, with Artists United Against Apartheid, led by Steven Van Zandt, targeting South Africa’s Sun City resort and pressuring artists not to perform in the country. Even global superstars like Queen faced intense public criticism for breaking the boycott. By 1987, Martin Scorsese and Jonathan Demme had founded Filmmakers United Against Apartheid, rallying more than 100 industry colleagues to demand that their films not be shown in South Africa. Their letter to then-President Ronald Reagan made their intentions clear: “It has become clear that boycott and divestment ... are the last possible peaceful methods available to achieve the ultimate goal of social change in South Africa.”
Today’s Hollywood-led boycott of Israeli film institutions is explicitly inspired by these earlier campaigns. The organizers, Film Workers for Palestine, have been active since January 2024 and have previously called for indie streaming service Mubi to sever ties with Sequoia Capital, a venture capital firm linked to the Israeli occupation. Their strategy is closely aligned with the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, a Palestinian-led campaign that advocates for cultural boycotts as a nonviolent means of pressuring governments and institutions to respect international law and human rights.
What sets the current boycott apart is the sheer scale and prominence of its supporters, as well as the rapidly shifting political climate in the United States and beyond. As noted in The Independent, Hollywood stars have historically been reticent to take material stands on contentious international issues, particularly those involving Israel, given the longstanding support for the country in American political and cultural circles. The fact that so many high-profile figures have now chosen to speak out suggests a significant shift in both industry norms and public opinion.
Reactions to the boycott have been swift and polarized. Nadav Ben Simon, chair of the Israeli screenwriters’ guild, called the move “deeply troubling,” reflecting widespread concern within Israel’s creative community about the potential impact on cultural exchange and artistic collaboration. At the same time, Palestinian activists and their allies have welcomed the support, emphasizing that the boycott is a direct response to their own calls for solidarity. As organizers pointed out, the pledge was crafted “in response to calls from Palestinians, who last year asked that film-industry workers ‘do everything humanly possible to stop and end complicity with this unspeakable horror.’”
There is, of course, no guarantee that the boycott will achieve its stated aims. As history shows, cultural boycotts are often vulnerable to being circumvented or broken, and their effectiveness depends on their precision, focus, and the ability to sustain momentum. Nonetheless, the campaign has already succeeded in drawing global attention to the plight of Palestinians and the role of cultural institutions in shaping public perceptions and political realities.
For many, the significance of this moment lies not just in the number of signatures or the stature of those involved, but in the broader recognition that culture is inherently political. As The Independent notes, “Culture is a hugely significant means by which nations build their reputation on the international stage. We all consume it, and our opinions are shaped by it.” The decision by so many in Hollywood to take a stand—however controversial—underscores the growing sense that artists and audiences alike have a responsibility to consider the ethical implications of their choices.
As the boycott continues to gather steam, it remains to be seen how Israeli film institutions and the wider entertainment industry will respond. What is clear is that, for now, the world is watching—and the conversation about art, politics, and justice is far from over.
