Are audiences too sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

It just seems that way, as Hollywood never wants to make anything, that they afraid may offend anyone in the slightest, especially comedies. Everyone wants to play it safe it seems.

I don't know how all this started in the last few years though. The only thing that I could come up with is the Me too movement. Not that I have anything against the movement at all, but it shouldn't turn people into sensitive ninnies, or maybe it's not audiences that are, so much as the filmmakers being afraid of possibly offending anyone.

But it feels like it may be a society thing as well as people are pushing for movies to be in a more censored Hays code form, like back in the Hays code days. Back in the 20s, there were some scandals going on in Hollywood, that lead to the birth of the Hays code.

Now we have another set of scandals going in Hollywood with the Metoo movement, and a new Hays-like code, is gradually starting to form all over again. It's not an official code yet, but the way people do not want to see anything that is possibly deemed controversial, it could very well turn into one. History repeating itself it seems.

But does anyone else see this being the case, and is perhaps bothered by this, or do I have it wrong possibly?

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Is it just me or haven't you made this kind of thread at least three times? I mean, it's not an unworthy subject to discuss, but there are so many much more interesting aspects about movies for me than "are audiences getting too sensitive". The fact is, there are still filmmakers who are willing to experiment and tell any kind of stories they want to, no matter what the audience thinks. Quentin Tarantino didn't start toning his movies down for a modern audience, Once Upon A Time In Hollywood isn't much less edgy than his early works like Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction. People will always come with their loud and obnoxious reactions, but the fact remains that it's always gonna be the MPAA that's really threatening the movie industry. And even they can't stop an ambitious filmmaker from making their voice heard.

Even though there are problems with the modern film industry, I don't think movies as an artform is in any danger dying out.

It's late and bedtime for me, so I'll just say for now that: You're right there is an over sensitivity in Hollywood film making these days. I think it comes from society in general and isn't just a movie thing. I don't think the Me Too movement caused it, though it did influence attitudes in film making just as all important events have shaped cinema. But it's not exactly like the Hays Code...I mean you can easily see genital and sex in main stream movies, that never happened during the Hays Code. If you ask me the over sensitivity comes from people having their attitudes shaped by online communities which then causes group think...it's like society is permanently stuck at the Jr. high school level, where what you're friends think really, really matters and you would never dare to go against the crowd.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, maybe I did, sorry if I did, it's just it seems like it's much more sensitive than usual now. Tarantino does tone down certain aspects of movies. He plays it safer by setting his movies in past tenses, where as they would cause more controversy if set in modern times. So I feel that he uses the past, as a safety net somewhat, unless I am seeing that wrong.

But as far as showing things like genitalia or violence goes, I am talking more about subject matter content. For example, you can't even have a character smoking in modern times, without them saying that they are trying to quit, or that it's bad for you, etc. Anything controversial has to have a message attached to it now, it seems.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

I'll check back on this thread tomorrow and answer. BTW I just added more to my post, you might want to re read it.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

I don't think Tarantino lets his movies play out in the past because it's "safer" though. Even though Django Unchained was set in the 1800's, it still received a lot of controversy for having the single most uses of racist slurs in a movie. Would it really have made any difference if it was set in modern times? I don't think so.

I think the reason he sets more of his movies in the past than before is because he's a very nostalgic man. Both Django Unchained and The Hateful Eight are inspired by classic westerns made during the 50's and 60's. Once Upon A Time In Hollywood is an ode to the 60's in general. Even earlier back you have Jackie Brown which takes inspiration from 1970's blaxploitation movies, most particularly Foxy Brown. If you look at it this way instead, it makes more sense why he now sets most of his movies directly in the past.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, I thought that Django Unchained for example, would have been a more daring issue if it dealt with slavery and racial issues in modern times, rather than setting in in the past. I thought that Inglourious Basterds would have been far less safe if he set it in the current Irag war at the time, rather than WWII.

However, both those movies came out before this movement has seemed to have started. Also, as for as Once Upon a time in Hollywood goes, perhaps, it is not a safe movie, but that is one one small fish though, a much larger pond it seems.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

The question of whether or not audiences are "too sensitive" arguably has to do with how the Internet's expansion of human communication has gone some way towards democratising the discourse and how previously-marginalised voices have been allowed a greater influence than they've had in the past and communicated new perspectives that do not simply agree with those that have more readily dominated the culture in the past - that they only come across as too sensitive in comparison to the insensitivity that has long been the standard. I don't know exactly how much of it is demanding that films be "censored" so much as delivering legitimate criticisms about films that come across as either ignorant, deliberately bigoted, or unable to justify their insensitivity in the name of artistry. I think Django Unchained is a good example of what I'm talking about because it's invoking an ugly and brutal period of American history where racial slurs and violence are commonplace only to make it window dressing for an epic action buddy comedy (and the period setting supposedly justifies the atrocities because that's just how it was back in the old days). It's basically just a matter of asking why filmmakers make the choices that they do and coming to your own conclusions about whether they were worth making (and if not, why not) - that's not being oversensitive so much as thinking critically about a film and its place in the world. I'll concede moments where the methods have been ill-advised (like trying to prove a film is sexist by counting every single line of dialogue that a female character gets, which happened with Once Upon a Time in Hollywood and The Irishman), but I do think it is a matter of questioning why people would come across as sensitive to certain subjects or approaches rather than just thinking they've gotten too soft or whatever.

As for comedies playing it safe, like mattias said there's always the question of how mainstream films have to actively work to appease ratings boards like the MPAA to get lighter ratings and therefore allow more people to buy tickets (and, by extension, appease the ticket-buyers themselves). That's not so much a fear of offence as it is a cynical business ploy.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, it's interesting to say that Django Unchained has it's issues as window dressing for a buddy comedy. Would Green Book for all into the same league, since it's a buddy comedy, as well of sorts?

As for the PG-13 rating to bring in more people, I thought you could still have movies that deal with sensitive subject matter, and still get a PG-13 rating if you wanted to in a lot of cases, couldn't you?

For example, Django Unchained could have been PG-13 and still have the same subject matter, if the violence were shot differently, and didn't show near as much, as well as take out some of the language, but you still have the same subject matter, don't you?

Speaking of Django Unchained, Tarantino wrote and directed it. The movie holds the all time record for most uses of the "n" word, 116 times...Yet when Tarantino's character appears in the movie he never, says the "n" word. Talk about faux political correctness. Hell he's the one who wrote the script that deliberately broke the record for most "n" words in a movie, knowing full well that action would gain much publicity for Django Unchained and making Tarantino millions, all by deliberately over using racial slurs.

He did that because he knew most people will see him in the movie not using the "n" word so that then he looks like a nice guy. Then to cover his own hypocritical ass he blogs about John Ford at the time of the film's release calling John Ford a white supremacist...which was deliberately done by Tarantino to take the heat off his 116 uses of the "n" word in his entertainment movie.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Are they? A few softies on Twitter post something and the newspapers think the whole world is offended. In the old days, I am sure people used to get hurt, but had no way of putting it out there.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Pretty much this. Sensitivity isn’t new, it’s just been thrown into the forefront due to social media providing a spotlight for them to air it. There have always been complaints about films in one form or another.
80’s slasher films, late 60’s and the entirety of 70’s violence, nudity, perceived racism ands its usage in films. This is old hat.
I don’t see films really toning it down any.
The Irishman didn’t tone anything down.
The Joker didn’t tone anything down.
Both are being expected front runners for the Oscars.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

They shouldn't be. Movies have gotten worse over the years. Modern audiences have become desensitized to gratuitous sex and violence. Much has changed in past decades. Movie makers today don't give a rat's ass about offending people.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well I haven't seen The Irishman yet, but using Joker as an example, which I did see, why were people complaining about the content so much? If the movie came out 10 years ago, I don't think people would have been so sensitive about the subject matter.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

There was some about The Joker, but those are just two examples where they don’t shy away from violence and such.
I haven’t watched too many current films of late, as I’ve looked to the past (pre 2000) mostly when it comes to fulfilling my movie experiences.
I’ll have to watch more to get a proper idea, but I don’t expect it has changed that much

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay. It's just that if Hollywood does release a movie where they don't shy away, people seem to be complaining about it more than ever before, and I'm afraid this could influence Hollywood to pander to those people too much.

It's a Tarantino movie that centers around slavery. Were the characters supposed to say "African Americans"? :confused:

Also I think the assertion that him personally not using that word is an attempt at political correctness is kind of ridiculous. Nobody should ever expect it of him anyway and it's not like he's never said the word himself. You've seen Pulp Fiction, right? Where he rants about not wanting to provide "dead n***** storage"? If he was trying to look like a good guy by not saying it, he would've been at least 18 years too late.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well it's just little things here and there. For example, some people complain about how in older James Bond movies, James will torture information out of a female character, who is complicit with the villains, and has information.

But now this kind of thing offends modern audience so much, that heroes only torture information out of male characters now as a result. That's just one example of what I mean by modern audiences being too sensitive.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Yes. Why? Because they can. How? Because of the why, the internet. Opinions and information circulating at incredible speeds, the number of people that can now share ideas and opinions in a group, like this forum, dangerously through social media, and all of them knowing there opinions won't matter unless, yes, unless they're enough to make a change and everyone wants to change something, wants to impose there view to everybody else, they don't question anything. People never changed and they never will, they will keep believing they are the good guys and those before us the bad guys. What is true today is false tomorrow, the Holy Inquisition truly believed they were doing good things, everyone knew it, anyone who didn't saw the word of God obviously had a demon and they had to expel it, they had to save that person or at least save her soul, they were seen as psychotherapists are seen today, total acceptance. Tomorrow things we consider completely understandable and correct can be questionable.

116 times the 'n' word was used, that's a record and a record that was paid attention to by bloggers and the media. That decision to use the 'n' word 116 times was a conscious one made by Tarantino... and it wasn't about movie making, it's about media buzz and promotion of his film. If he had any integrity his character also would've used the 'n' word too. Better yet he should've not been in the movie, his role was the worst thing about the film.

My review of Django Unchained

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

It s a shame we used to have so much profanity and nc17 rated films back in the 80s and 90s, especially those random sex scenes of people in back of cars or in broken wall entering rooms(commando) we dont have those anymore

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well it's just I will often watch older movies with friends and they will often point out things and say you can never get away with that today. So if today's thinking hasn't really changed aside from a few people complaining online, than how come people would say things like that about older movies, if it's not true?

Your friends are right, there are a lot of things in old movies that 'couldn't' be made today. Well of course they could be made, but most film makers would shy away from it and a percentage of the audience would react negatively, which hurts ticket sales and profits. Have you ever seen The Jerk (1979) or Breakfast at Tiffany's (1961)? There's scenes in both movies that would be deemed racial insensitive today, so most likely wouldn't get made. So yeah, your friends are right. But it's not censorship per say, it's just social trends and market targeting.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

There were things I would have said when five years old that I probably would not say today. Society, like people, grow and evolve.

That's not to say growth is always in the right direction, but it is constantly moving and rarely looks the same tomorrow as it does today.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Just a quick word of advice - if your growth looks markedly different from one day to the next please see a doctor about it. Best to get these things checked out sooner rather than later, more often than not they are not serious but you never know.

I knew I came here for a good reason. :rotfl:


A good rule of thumb for life, "Believe nothing that you hear and half of what you see."

If the world was full of all these sensitive, caring people, things would be a lot different in day to day life. The comments on the internet are about as real as the butts on IG.

I haven't seen The Jerk but saw Breakfast at Tiffany's. But even more recent things my friends say would not be allowed today. We were watching 3rd Rock from The Sun, and they said that that show has gags in that would be too offensive for today's audience. And it's such a harmless show, so I am thinking really??? Today's audience wouldn't allow that? They also said the same thing about the show Boston Legal.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

The way I see this is the following:

a) social media allows the sensitive (and at times marginalized) people to have their outrage heard
b) for some reason traditional media decides to make these butthurt individuals part of the news
c) "normal" people "learn" from the media that there's some massive wrong in the making
d) "normal" people in their kindness try to live by the new "right"

So yeah, I blame the internet and how it's provided an easy platform for all sorts hysteria to spread. We really shouldn't be always thinking whether someone gets offended or not because it doesn't matter. Someone will always be offended regardless of what we do.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Yeah I can understand that, but I don't feel that Hollywood should not make certain movies because of it. For example, Todd Phillips said he hasn't been making comedies anymore cause woke culture killed comedy. Why do filmmakers have that kind of attitude in Hollywood, just because of some social media complaints?

That's a perfect description of how it all happens. Well said:up:

$$$ because if there's a huge backlash against your film it can cost the filmmaker millions in lost revenue. That's why.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

I dont think people are because I grew up in the area where Walter Mattau as a Joke to Jack Lemon a said the line. Hey Dick Head did you win the Lottery in Grumpy Old men. I was not offended or really thought about the humor.


What has mostly changed is what people say to each other in films. All comedies are mostly the same jokes and 2 old men cannot bicker just to bicker.


What changed was basically more women is in hollywood power and makes films a bit more kid friendly and thats fine. But people are allot smarter and dont need kid gloves in movies.Obviously though some words should have been cut from films and scenes. But really films are still violent and dirty. Just what is said has changed.

But do people actually care? Joker got a lot of backlash and it made a lot of money though, cause people still wanted to see it.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Joker is overrated.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Sure it's overrated, but the point is, is that it got backlash, and it still made money. Todd Phillips was worried that making a comedy would get too much backlash and not be successful. So he makes a comic book thriller, and the movie gets a lot of backlash, and still made huge money. So he proved his own notion incorrect.

Quoted for truth.

For anyone not convinced just take a look at the recent Peloton fiasco. Remember, movie making is all about financial risk reduction.

I think the market is different though and the release weekend audience for a Joker origin movie is far more resilient than a comedy. Obviously it's built on that, but the budget (for a A-List Hollywood film) was a lot less than the average, so it wasn't really in danger of losing money even with a poor opening weekend in the US. Let alone worldwide.

Again, it's not about the directors not wanting to make certain kinds of films. It's them trying to get producers to fund them. Scorsese spent about 20 years trying to get funding for Silence. Scorsese. Years. Now, obviously an R rated comedy (I say R rated because of Phillips previous work) and an historical drama about foreigners in a foreign land are two very different subjects. But so is the Joker origin story and a comedy. So I don't really see how he's disproved himself.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, so people are more offended by comedies nowadays, than serious movies?

I also shouldn't have used directors only, cause it probably goes both ways. Are their cases of producers nowadays, wanting to make a more risky movie, but they are having trouble finding directors that want to touch them?

As for this Peloton fiasco, I didn't know what it was, so I looked it up.

This is another example of society becoming too sensitive. A woman can't even advertise a piece of exercising equipment, without it coming off as sexist. If a man got an exercise bike as a Christmas gift in a commercial, no one would be offended, which just goes to show the double standard people have.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

The movie making business is just that, a business and so it makes financial sense to make films that appeal to the broadest audience possible.

As far as Taratino and the 'n' word goes, people get offended about racial slurs in any film. I remember reading about the Dambusters in IMDB threads years ago and most of the threads were people complaining about the name of Gibsons Dog, demanding it should be cut out of all copies of the film.

So it is not a recent thing as i read those threads several years ago. It's just others have already said, social media gives everyone a voice and it gets peoples complaints (however trivial) into the public conscious and people jump on the bandwagons and it gains momentum.
I said to my wife recently that i don't think rising sea levels are down to global warming, its down to all these delicate snowflakes melting.

Sea levels aren't down, their up:cool:

But that's just it though. If the complaints are trivial, then why are they taken seriously by the film industry? How come they do not know it's trivial?

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

I can't think of any trivial issues with Hollywood as the Me Too movement, racism and sexism are not trivial in the slightest. But Hollywood, like others on here have said are all about making money and will do there best to push their films into a wider audience as possible.

The trivial thing i mentioned is mainly things like at the Auatralian Open Tennis a year or two ago, there was a post on instagram from a woman complaining that the womens trophy was smaller than the mens, with the hashtag #realequality. It had hundreds of likes and hundreds of replies with similar posts. I replied back asking if she knew that women got the same amount of prize money as the men despite playing a shorter format than the men. And also that the womens Wimbledon trophy is bigger than the mens.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Yes, despite the ability to turn it off and check out something else... But no, they have to absolve their own personality defects by being pious and self-righteous, even if they don't believe it. They know where the wind blows. They covet money just like most.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well if these complainers are just a minority on the internet then, then why does Hollywood listen to just a minority, rather than the majority?

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Because they're not always a minority, and it's hard to tell the difference. And sometimes they don't stay a minority if they make enough noise. And sometimes it's not worth the hassle or risk of a small number of people maybe getting picked up and arbitrarily amplified by a sympathetic media outlet and then the whole thing is in the periphery of the otherwise disinterested majority in a way that actually hurts the property.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, but what I don't understand is, why is that other movie industries, other than Hollywood are making movies that are more risky? The South Korean film industry or European ones for example. Hollywood has the most money, so wouldn't you think that the film industry with the most money would take more risks?

If you have all the money why risk losing some of it? What is to be gained if profit is the motivator?

If I have nothing then I'm more likely to take a risk to gain something. Even if it's just for attention because I've nothing to lose. If I already have everything, why would I risk it for maybe minimum gains or more likely losses?

Also, maybe everything Yoda already typed?

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well I just thought that with all of Hollywood's money they could afford to lose more compared to a film industry than South Korea's or even India's, which take more risks.

But what I feel that audiences are more sensitive to movies nowadays than ever, and wonder what the movie industry did to them to make a lot of people feel this way. Even if it was a minority, and then they got other people on their side to become a majority, what did the movie industry do, that that feel they are on such thin ice with their customers? I thought maybe it was the Metoo scandal which originated in Hollywood, but if it wasn't that, why is the film industry on such thin ice with moviegoers?

I think there is a lot more too this, than being afraid of some complainers on the internet who like to hear themselves talk. There is something that the industry must of done to cause this, that goes deeper than that.

I doubt it's anything the industry did specifically but more likely a reflection of society and the wave of social media that loud people can use to make louder noise.

I have no idea. But I doubt it's a simple cause and effect.

I don't think I've ever watched a Shirley Temple film from start to finish, but I caught this clip and wondered how it would be viewed today.
Adorable or Racist? (or adorably racist)? ;)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WW3vrbKZUUQ

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

If anything, the people getting offended are the ones who rant on about things being PC every time you have a person of colour or someone who’s LGBT in a film, or always bring the discussion back so white men are the victims.

The Internet means you have a vast amount of opinion, often at extremes, and people may jump on the bandwagon or simply have more conviction in their opinion because others seem to think the same thing.

People were sensitive in the 70s and 80s- video nasties for example. Also, a TV example but on Dynasty, the gay son had to stand a certain distance away from his lover, no kissing, because some people wouldn’t have been offended.

Also, there is a difference between someone remarking that a joke hasn’t aged well and someone insisting a film or TV show should be banned because of it.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

An interesting aspect of the Shirley Temple clip - despite Shirley's singing style and some of the words she uses when singing to her black doll, the doll appears to be dressed as a wealthy society woman wearing some highend looking fashion (as opposed to having her dressed like Aunt Jemima or something like that). So I guess that's a good thing.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well for example, my friend say that a show like Boston Legal wouldn't be allowed to be aired today, cause of some of the jokes, even though it only ended 10 years ago.

How would the Shirley Temple click be views as racist? Is it cause one of the dolls, from what I could tell, looked to be of a different culture than hers?

They were all different cultures from hers: a German (or Dutch), a Russian, Chinese and African American presumably, and she tries to copy the accents of each in the song.

Performing accents of most other nationalities is not considered racist these days... but performing a Chinese accent is (consider Mickey Rooney's role in Breakfast at Tiffany's).

Referring to a black person as a "pickaninny" (even in doll form) is strictly taboo in modern times and would be considered racist... including if a white person inserted words like "honeychild" & "Mammy" in a song that's referencing black culture.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well I mean let's say you have a movie where an Asian little girl is playing with a white cowboy doll. Would that be racist? I wouldn't think so? So if not, then why is it when you see a white little girl playing with non-white dolls. My niece is white and she has a doll of a black barbie she plays with and I don't think it's racist, is it?

Good question.
I don't think any of it is racist.

I don't think celebrating national, cultural or ethnic differences or simply acknowledging such is racist as long as it's not done with animosity, or with some suggestion of superiority, or the inference that different (from the local majority) is somehow inferior or bad.

But I don't make the rules. The topic is about modern audiences and, as we know, there's a current portion of our society that sees "racism" everywhere and is constantly looking to be offended by it even when it's not offensive and has no harmful intent.

The label of "Racism" or "Racist" seems to have become an accusation to hurl at others as a form of political or social aggression. It's a label everyone is afraid of being smeared with, yet one others are ready to use against those they disagree with simply as a weapon whether there is any racial component to a situation or not (and no matter whether if it is benign or not).

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Another thing audiences are being sensitive about it, is that I think one of the reasons why so many comedies lately, with women characters, haven't been that good over the last few years, is because the filmmakers are afraid to portray women as stupid, like they do with male characters in comedies. So because of that, we have comedies with female characters who are not dumb enough to be funny as a result. Has anyone else noticed this?

Firstly, why do female (or indeed male) characters need to be dumb in order to be funny? There are female actresses who play dumb- Rebel Wilson scratching her groin in Cats wasn’t exactly high wit.

Besides, if you want to watch films with dumb female characters, you have plenty to choose from. Why do you think we need more?

Most comedies have ‘women characters’- if you mean, why are the female remakes of comedies not as good, partly it's just because it’s a remake. The remake of Ghostbusters wouldn’t have been much better or more respected had there been male actors in it.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Why do female characters need to be dumb to be funny, I suppose they don't maybe it's just my personal taste, as I like comedies with stupid characters doing dumb things, as long as it's well done and funny.

There are plenty of comedies where women are playing silly humorous roles. Besides, people tend to already have their favourites for those type of comedies- they’re comfort films.

Do you have Melissa McCarthy in mind? :)

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Melissa McCarthy is okay, but there is something about her that seems off for me. It's as if she is not really dumb but trying to be but cannot convince me. Maybe she's not giving it her all, or it's the director, not sure.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

There is another thing people have been talking about lately. People have talking about how not enough movies have African-American characters as it's put. But is this really necessarily the movie industries fault?

Back in the 70s for example, there were a lot of movies made by filmmakers with hugely black casts for example. But you never see that now, so I am wondering, why were their more movies with black characters in in the 70s compared to now? Have filmmakers just lost interest perhaps?

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

She has the the dubious problem of being typecast. But she really turned up last year with a very different role in Can you ever really forgive me. She has the range, but she just gets overlooked I guess.

They were exploitation films. Not any major release had black actors as a lead. It's getting better. But a long way to go. Beale Street, Waves, Moonlight, Straight out if Compton, Last black man in San Francisco and all Denzel movies. Now at least you get them as a lead character or many stories revolving around the black community.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, but I didn't think they had to be exploitation films. I thought it was the filmmakers choice to be exploitative with them and that was just the thing back then. I didn't think they had to be exploitative because of black casts.

I mean they could have chose to make a movie like say... Boyz in the Hood, Do The Right Thing, or Set It Off back then, if they wanted to, but instead they chose to make exploitation movies like Shaft, Blackula, etc. But wasn't that still there choice?

Where do you think they would've got the money to make those films? Remembering that all this is a business. Who would distribute them? Who would show them? I think it's unfair to say they could've made those films 20+ years earlier considering how different the culture (and business) was back then. Some could've been made, sure, but the fact that Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song is the only one I can name which was made in that way goes to show how difficult even getting a small film like that would've been.

Imagine you wanted to tell those stories without a Hollywood studios money or distribution? Or you couldn't put together a soundtrack with great artists? But the money men can allow you to make Shaft or Blackula. Which do you do?

Are you sure he wasn't just trying to say "Not all white people are bad?"

Nah he wasn't about that, he's about serving potato chips for dinner.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

I don't get it.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well one thing is though, that if Hollywood does make movies that these people who complain want, they still won't be satisfied I don't think. They will find problems in those movies then, and then complain about them.

It's like for example, when The Last Jedi came out, the producers put in more female characters than usual, which was commented on by many viewers, but then when people saw the movie, they complained that they didn't like the female characters having flaws, for example.

So I feel like they will always find something to pick on and Hollywood should realize they won't be satisfied, even if their demands were met? Unless I'm wrong?

I think The Last Jedi is an obvious example of Hollywood using issues like femism both for marketing purposes and to cover poor writing. I don't think theres much real substance there politically but the focus seems to have shifted away from that and towards tokenism, seemingly learnt from politics.

As far as the general climate goes beyond blockbusters I would still say there in a fairly open era but perhaps not as open as the first 2/3rds or so of the 2010's? that did seem like a period were you had quite a few sexually daring films(not just in content but politics) and IMHO there was a certain conservative reaction to it that I think has been trying to slip in with #metoo.

You could say the same about the anti-PC brigade though. Unless the actor is a white male, there’s always a comment how it is token casting and ‘diversity’ is ruining things and the women are taking over. Why should those people be pandered to?

At the end of the day, a good writer keeps his finger on the pulse in modern society and can create dramatic engaging characters. If it’s well-written, you will get strong female roles and roles for people of colour as a natural by-product. The problem is when writers try to manufacture these roles.

The only complaints I've ever heard about token casting (including from myself) is when Hollywood feels compelled to replace an already established character with someone of a different race, gender or orientation. If filmmakers feel more diversity is needed in a particular story, then by all means insert more diverse characters by creating new ones or using other characters that are already minorities - but don't change established characters just to fulfill some kind of quota.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well what I don't understand is where these arguments are coming from cause there are a lot of movies with characters of diversity out there, yet people are complaining like it's still the 60s, or something like that. I'm thinking where have these people been in the last 20 years or so. Unless I am wrong?

But I wouldn't say I am part of an anti-PC brigade either. I am part of the brigade that wants movies to tell good stories, regardless race or gender. Whatever race or gender fits in that story, is what fits. I am a part of that brigade, if there is one like that.

I actually think this is what Hollywood is deliberately fishing for in a lot of those films personally, knowing you have overly sensitive alt right types who would howl at any "diversity" casting as the end of masculinity. This can then be played up and the film sold as somehow politically significant.

At the end of the day I think quality still provides the final judgement for most audiences away from the more vocal fringes and there attendant media. Something like Fury Road for example doesn't seem to get much criticism and that's I think a blockbuster with some genuine political substance to it.

Oh okay, that's fair, that they wouldn't have been able to get the money, if that's true. But if that's true, then how come producers who had the money were mostly only interested in making exploitation films back then, if that's true?

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Something similar happened with The Farewell. Disney first approached LuLu Wang for the movie. They wanted to change the main characters to American ones, coz they were skeptical that without white lead characters it would be a hard sell to Americans. If that would have happened, that would have lost all its charm. The cross-continental family and difference in family values in the east (China, India etc) and the west, all would have been lost. And it would gone from from 8.1 rating to 2.5 or so. Luckily, the magical people of A24 stepped in and she did it for less money. A24 accepted the movie should be in Chinese. And we got one of the best movies of the year.

Were there actually 'exploitation films' or were most of them just cheesy popcorn movies made for the teens going to their local drive-in theater? During the same time period there were plenty of the same kind of over the top, low budget cheese movies being made with white cast such as Roger Corman films and nobody calls them 'white exploitation films'.

As you pointed out the civil rights movement is over and it's not the 1960s anymore, and yet we still have some: extremist liberals...who missed out on fighting for actual civil rights back in the 60s, so they use social media to whine about nothing at all. And in doing so they cause more racial strife, by artificially convincing people that the world is full of racial hatred and by claiming that institutions like movie making are inherently racist and so need to be shouted down.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, but where is all this racial hatred coming from though, since movies have had lots of diversity in them for the last three decades or no so even?

And sure there are instances like LuLu Wang not being able to get a non-white cast from Disney, but that's just Disney. She still got it from somewhere else and it seemed to work. So things don't seem bad, like these millennial are making them out to be. I just don't get why millennial have to fight for something, that is behind their time, just because they missed doing so back then. And I'm a millennial too, but I don't understand. However, I grew up watching a lot of 90s and 2000s movies. I feel that maybe millennials don't actually watch many movies, so they are not aware of the diversity maybe?

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

If it wasn't A24, it probably wouldn't have been made. I don't think millennials fight for anything in the past. Millennials are just an easy target. The only thing that would get millennials' knickers in a twist would be Android Vs iOS (for the record, I am team Android)!


It's not as bad as it sounds.... It has taken a lot of fight to get to where we are today. But there is still a looooong way to go.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

This offended people needs to know the old and good Takashi Miike.
Honestly, american films can't offend too many people 'cause most films are made for people that can be offended by a comedian in the Golden Globe.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

If I am talking about 90s-2000s, there is very little diversity to be honest. For a black actor, you have to be twice as good to garner the same reputation. There is a common saying in British TV, if you are black, move to America, there is very little chance of him/her making it. But it's getting better.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, how is it that they have to be twice as good exactly? I guess I just see diversity in movies I watch. For example, a lot of the complaints are too white male characters, but I can think of lots of movies off the top of my white male actors are not the leads. Thelma and Louise, Set It Off, and Widows off the top of my head.

When Widows came out, it's almost as if the same people wanting diversity were angry about it. They didn't even acknowledge the movie when it came out for having female lead characters, with the main one being black. It's almost as SJW complainers said "darn, they actually did it, but we can't compliment their efforts, cause it will be more effective to deny it, and just complain only". I mean people want diversity, and than Widows comes out and nobody acknowledges it for diversity.

Unless I am wrong?

Plus I find it very hard to believe that A24 is the only movie company in the world that would have funded The Farewell.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Movies like Prince of Persia with Jake Gyllenhal. It's Persia for F sake! Now if Hollywood can't find a middle Eastern dude who can speak some darn English, then I am lost. And what is Gerrard Butler doing in an Egyptian movie? And I paid 12 bucks for that garbage! :mad:


I mean whitewashing is a real thing. Don't know what happened in the aftermath of the release of Widows, so can't really comment on that.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Prince of Persia is not very good though is it? It's McDonald's level entertainment, so that's like saying diversity of the food at McDonald's is not as good as diverse as The Capital Grille.

From what I know, Disney and one other major production company MGM or Fox approached her, but with the condition of white characters.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Posted this elsewhere, but some black Americans are outraged because Cynthia Erivo, who is British, played Harriet Tubman. Cynthia is black, but she is not the descendant of African slaves.

Yet in the very good movie The Two Popes nobody has seemed to give a damn that 2 Welshmen play, respectively, a German pope & an Argentinian pope.

:rolleyes:

It isn't, but just saying. It is just an example. Lone Ranger and Johnny Depp also comes to mind. But that is the biggest loss making movie ever if I recall correctly.


About SJW, there is nice video about it on YouTube on the channel knowing better. Give that a shot.

Some had issues with Kamala Harris, coz she is Carribbean. It's like black people are only from Africa! But that is a different discussion altogether!

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Oh okay, well The Lone Ranger was trying to be an over the top comedy that one cannot take seriously, so I didn't think race was an issue if the movie is trying to be silly and wacky. However, I only got this impression from the trailer, and haven't watched the movie. That was just my interpretation of the trailer.

I'll give that video a shot.

I thought that when it came to a movie like Harriet, that casting a British actress was based on who they felt did best in the auditions, rather than the actors ancestry. To compare, when Schindler's List came out, was anyone back then complaining about Ben Kingsley's character, not descending from actual Jewish ancestry?

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Okay thanks, I am watching the video now.

I feel that Hollywood is the most diverse film industry in the world possibly. Sure it is run by white people, but it is more diverse than other film industries in the world that are not run by white people. The Hong Kong film industry is not as diverse, the East Indian film industry is not as diverse, etc. The Canadian one where I live, does not seem as diverse possibly, but it's getting close to Hollywood now I think.

So I find it ironic that the most diverse film industry, possibly Hollywood is the one that is picked on the most. Could it be that the reason why they are most diverse is the reason they are picked on the most, cause the complainers feel that that if they can get the most diverse one do things their way, than the rest will follow?

I love Korean cinema for example, but every time I watch a Korean movie, the filmmakers never have included any non-Asians in their movies so far from what I've seen. But I don't get bent out of shape about it, if that's the filmmakers choice.

Diversity seems to be a racist term to me To me, it looks like it means, less White people.

So, I think that would be the reason that Hollywood is being the one forced into this, and why the likes of Bollywood and Nollywood aren't

I don't care were a person's family line originated from...But just for conversation purposes: I don't think there were any black people in the Caribbean before white slave traders brought them there. The Caribbean was inhabited originally by indigenous people who historically were referred to as 'Indians'. One of the more numerous peoples were the Caribs who after contact with Europeans mostly died off from diseases and war.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

Well for a movie like Harriet, I think what some people just need to realize is that it's a movie. It's an illusion. Actors and filmmakers trying to sell the world they are creating. Why does everything have to be so authentic, as oppose to being sold on an illusion?

Yeah true. Mostly for sugar. But I guess people here think 5-6 centuries has diluted it a lot! :)

I've been to many different Caribbean islands, some are almost all populated by black slave descents. Some have more Spanish and European mix. Each island is unique in it's cultural history.

Re: Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content nowadays?
 

When it comes to lack of race diversity in Hollywood, is the argument that most rich people in Hollywood are white, and white people do not want to fund movies with non-white characters? This is correct to an extent.

However, when it comes people complaining there are not enough women roles in movies, where is this coming from. I see so many women roles in movies. So this one seems more like getting bent out of shape then the race argument. So with millennials complaining about lack of women roles, I am thinking where have they been, and what have they been watching this whole time. Unless I am wrong?

As Julie Christie said decades ago after her brilliant movie Darling came out, when asked if it were based on parts of her own life she was incredulous. She replied that if she were playing her own life it wouldn’t be acting.

In Away from Her, Julie plays a Canadian. Nobody cared or questioned this. Now that I think about it, there was, of course, no hoopla over her playing a Russian in Zhivago.

I guess, but it still comes off as a double standard though, that is never acknowledged.