Paramount Pictures, one of Hollywood’s most storied studios, has found itself at the center of an intensifying global debate after publicly denouncing a sweeping boycott of Israeli film institutions. The boycott, launched on September 8, 2025, by the advocacy group Film Workers for Palestine, has drawn the signatures of over 4,000 actors, filmmakers, and industry professionals—including Oscar-winners like Emma Stone, Mark Ruffalo, Olivia Colman, and directors such as Ava DuVernay. Their pledge: to refrain from working with Israeli film organizations in protest of what they describe as Israel’s complicity in genocide and apartheid against the Palestinian people.
According to USA TODAY, the signatories vowed not to screen films, appear at, or otherwise collaborate with Israeli film festivals, broadcasters, cinemas, or production companies they believe are implicated in the ongoing humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The language of the pledge draws direct inspiration from the anti-apartheid boycotts of South Africa in the 1980s, referencing the legacy of "Filmmakers United Against Apartheid," a movement championed by Martin Scorsese and Jonathan Demme. The pledge states: “Inspired by Filmmakers United Against Apartheid, who refused to screen their films in apartheid South Africa, 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.”
The numbers behind the boycott are staggering. As reported by Fox News and Deadline, the list of signatories ballooned from an initial 1,200 to nearly 4,000 within days, including high-profile names such as Andrew Garfield, Bowen Yang, Elliot Page, and Joaquin Phoenix. The movement, organizers say, is a response to mounting frustration among artists over Israel’s military campaign in Gaza. The Gaza Health Ministry reports that more than 64,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 2023, a figure that does not distinguish between combatants and civilians. The International Association of Genocide Scholars recently declared that Israel’s actions in Gaza met the legal definition of genocide, though this assessment has been rejected by Israeli officials as “Hamas’s campaign of lies.”
On September 12, Paramount became the first major studio to publicly oppose the boycott. In a statement reported by Reuters, Variety, and Fox News, the studio asserted, “We do not agree with recent efforts to boycott Israeli filmmakers. Silencing individual creative artists based on their nationality does not promote better understanding or advance the cause of peace. We need more engagement and communication—not less.” Paramount’s chief communications officer, Melissa Zukerman, echoed these sentiments, emphasizing the studio’s belief in “the power of storytelling to connect and inspire people, promote mutual understanding, and preserve the moments, ideas, and events that shape the world we share.”
Paramount’s statement was swift and unequivocal, but it did not go unchallenged. Film Workers for Palestine quickly fired back, accusing the studio of misrepresenting the intent of the pledge. In a statement shared on social media, the group wrote, “We hope Paramount is not intentionally misrepresenting the pledge in an attempt to silence our colleagues in the film industry. Such a move would only shield a genocidal regime from criticism at a time when global outrage is exponentially growing and while meaningful steps towards accountability are being taken by many.” The organization stressed that the boycott targets institutions, not individual artists, and applauded the thousands of filmmakers for making a “collective moral stand.”
“Almost two years into Israel’s genocide in Gaza, with seemingly no end in sight, a rapidly growing number of filmmakers are recognizing that withdrawing their participation from an evil system, to paraphrase Martin Luther King Jr., is an essential duty they can no longer ignore,” Film Workers for Palestine stated. The group further argued that Israeli film institutions must “end complicity in Israel’s genocide and apartheid, and endorse the full rights of the Palestinian people under international law” if they wish to work with pledge signatories.
The controversy has also drawn attention to the studio’s leadership and ownership. Paramount’s response comes just weeks after its $8 billion merger with Skydance, controlled by David Ellison. Film Workers for Palestine highlighted the close relationship between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Larry Ellison, David Ellison’s father and now Paramount’s controlling owner. The group suggested that this connection may influence the studio’s position on the boycott and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The Israeli Film and TV Producers Association weighed in as well, arguing that the petition’s signatories are “targeting the wrong people.” They contend that the boycott punishes the Israeli creative community, many of whom may not support their government’s policies. This layer of the debate—whether cultural boycotts help or hinder the cause of peace—has become a flashpoint within the global entertainment industry.
The parallels to South Africa’s apartheid era are not lost on either side. Supporters of the boycott see it as a moral imperative, citing the effectiveness of similar actions in pressuring the South African government to change course. Detractors, including Paramount, warn that such boycotts risk stifling artistic expression and closing off avenues for dialogue and mutual understanding. “The global entertainment industry should be encouraging artists to tell their stories and share their ideas with audiences throughout the world,” Paramount’s statement read, reinforcing the company’s commitment to engagement over exclusion.
The debate has spilled over into broader questions about the role of artists and institutions in political conflicts. Some observers see the boycott as part of a larger wave of international frustration with Israel’s conduct in Gaza. Several countries have even threatened to boycott the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest if Israel is allowed to participate, underscoring how cultural events are increasingly becoming battlegrounds for political protest.
Meanwhile, the humanitarian toll in Gaza remains staggering. The Gaza Health Ministry’s figures—over 64,000 dead since October 2023—are cited by advocates as evidence of the urgent need for accountability. Critics of the boycott, however, argue that isolating Israeli filmmakers will not bring about peace or justice, but rather harden divisions and silence voices that might otherwise advocate for change from within.
As the dust settles on Paramount’s decision to publicly oppose the boycott, the entertainment industry finds itself grappling with a profound dilemma: how to balance the moral convictions of its members with the need for open artistic exchange. The coming months will almost certainly see further debate, as more studios, artists, and institutions weigh in on one of the most contentious cultural flashpoints of recent years.
For now, the standoff between Paramount and Film Workers for Palestine stands as a stark reminder of the power—and peril—of collective action in the arts. Whether the boycott will achieve its aims, or whether engagement and dialogue will ultimately prevail, remains to be seen.
