Construction work continues on the Birds Nest Olympic stadium in Beijing, China. Photograph: Dan Chung
While one of the odder Hollywood stories of recent years has been Steven Spielberg's late middle age attraction to genuine political drama (after the impressively ambiguous Munich, he's soon to make the spirit-of-'68 yarn Chicago 7), his own activism has remained uncontentious and largely under-the-radar.
But a caveat to that emerged today, with the announcement of his withdrawal as artistic adviser to this year's Bejing Olympics - a role that was to see him help choreograph the games' opening ceremony - over the Chinese government's reluctance to use its influence over the Sudanese government to halt the ongoing genocide in Darfur.
There will - as ludicrous as it seems in 2008 - be those who argue that film industry types have no place in any kind of serious debate, and should learn to separate the political from the artistic (as if any such quaint division had ever been possible).
The answer to that, of course, is that in a society as fixated with entertainment as ours, film-makers are exactly the kind of people who should (in fact, must) be discussing issues like China and Sudan - particularly given the behaviour of the British Olympic Association, with their banning of Britain's competitors this summer from commenting on anything "politically sensitive".
Sadly, however much of an indictment it is to say so, when basic humanity has been left as badly served as it has been by world governments and our own fondness for cheap Chinese-made clothes, maybe the best hope for at least bringing the subject to people's minds lies with the likes of Spielberg.
It may be tempting to tut and shake our heads at how Spielberg could have ever agreed to take on such a high-profile, culturally significant role to begin with, given the media attention that surrounded the grimly cosy relationship between China and the Sudan.
But perhaps the more gracious response is to acknowledge that, albeit belatedly, he's now done the right thing - and, however inadvertent the effect, by pulling out now he may well have ended up bringing far more attention to Chinese complicity in the horrors of Darfur than if had he simply refused initially.
Is Spielberg's resignation likely to end the trade of oil for guns between Beijing and Khartoum? In the short-term, of course not. Few governments (particularly those as thick-skinned as the Chinese) are likely to be cajoled into action by the scolding of a Hollywood director.
But in the broader sense, the implications are vast - even that same thick skin should feel the sting of such a blow to their international prestige. For every iota of credibility that Spielberg's involvement as garlanded, globally-famous figure would have lent "new China's" Games, the same is inversely true of such a public hint at pariah status.
