Movie Left-Wing Agenda in Cinema/TV

Remove this Banner Ad

GG.exe

Killer on the Road ™
Sep 6, 2005
110,839
63,004
In every girl's wet dream ℠
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
The Riders
Thought this would liven things up. A genuine discussion (fingers crossed) about the sea-change in cinema and TV, of re-booting movies/shows and re-casting males to females, and creating Mary Sues, and the whole meta SJWism being pushed across more than telling good stories.

This video to start things off. Keep in mind, now a Black lesbian James Bond and Thor as a female. Plus there have been a bunch of movies of late where white males in the movie are the stupid/bad/evil/disgusting/etc types in the story.

 

EFC 1871

Hall of Famer
Oct 11, 2007
30,418
12,711
AFL Club
Essendon
I dislike Hollywood's holier than thou attitude, but I can't agree with much of your OP.

Question - What's your issue with white men playing villains? Isn't that kind of more true to life?

Despite what action films in the 80s and 90s told us, the everyday villains aren't just foreigners and/or femme fatales. I mean, this is Hollywood; statistically, the majority of villains in the western world ARE white men.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

EFC 1871

Hall of Famer
Oct 11, 2007
30,418
12,711
AFL Club
Essendon
On another note, I do agree that it'd be nice to see new stories and roles written for diverse actors/actresses.

It comes across as lazy to just create a sequel/reimagining of a film with people of colour or women (e.g. Ghostbusters), but I think that's just the general case with the never ending supply of sequels/reboots.

It's what makes films like Get Out, The Help, and Widows so great; they're new stories that happen to have diverse casts.
 

GG.exe

Killer on the Road ™
Sep 6, 2005
110,839
63,004
In every girl's wet dream ℠
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
The Riders
On another note, I do agree that it'd be nice to see new stories and roles written for diverse actors/actresses.

It comes across as lazy to just create a sequel/reimagining of a film with people of colour or women (e.g. Ghostbusters), but I think that's just the general case with the never ending supply of sequels/reboots.

It's what makes films like Get Out, The Help, and Widows so great; they're new stories that happen to have diverse casts.
totally agree here. no one would argue with diversity/etc if they were all new stories/characters.
but the recasting/rebooting/remaking with such an obvious agenda is what rubs off wrong, can only make a lot of people (including of diversity) aggravated.
 

Roobs321

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 28, 2008
8,477
5,547
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Arsenal Sydney Swans GWS CBR United
technically its not a "Black lesbian James Bond", and youtube montages in any argument is always a red flag personally

The reboots are often dumb hollywood things (did we really need a new Ghosbusters or Oceans film, especially without the directors which made them worth watching), but you could say the same thing about countless other rehash schlock. Reboots really aren't worth getting all worked up about anyway, male or female, black or white, they'll likely struggle. At least the diversity angle signifies an attempt to do something different with it, otherwise what is the point?

The liberal back-slapping by white folk is certainly a bit much at times (the adulation of Black Panther & Crazy Rich Asians last year was embarrassing & johnny-come-lately), but the toxic male geek culture online (specifically Comic book films & Star Wars) is a lot more repulsive. They are basically identical to the Otaku in Japan, have a very narrow & fixed view of things which can be forced upon others. Their sense of creativity is nil. They aren't watching diversifying art cinema, or they perceive it in a certain way. Diversifying mainstream blockbusters is a bit necessary to confront them and shake off that white & nerdy stranglehold.

With that Mermaid thing, you could say exactly the same thing about the historical depiction of Jesus. Mermaids obviously have folklore in contextually cooler environments, but there is a logical sense for mermaids to be more tropical in appearance. Obviously North America disproportionally projects its own culture to a world which has largely never even seen an African American in the flesh, but most of us live in ethnically diverse areas and can take something away from those depictions.

White people are probably like a 1/5th of the world's population, and men & women are fairly equal in ratio. It makes sense for the screen to reflect the community that bit more, despite the cringey tokenism in practice at times. We're living through that adjustment.
 
Last edited:

BlakeyNoFlakey

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 7, 2009
10,663
15,710
On the Buses
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Melbourne Stars
I'm about as leftie as they come these days, but the blatant 'girl-power' in modern TV and cinema does nothing for me really. How about writing great stories where the female is a strong protagonist for the right reasons, rather than replacing male roles with females to show girl-power, which I find a bit patronizing to women anyway. The classic example recently is that moment in Avengers Endgame where all the superhero ladies get together for a girl power moment in the battle. But why highlight it, why not just treat the female superheros the same as the male ones. Give them equal time. That's called equality.
 
Last edited:

Ryz

Premium Platinum
Aug 26, 2002
15,371
15,517
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
MMA
Is a female Thor the best example of demonstrating the point? No-one has seen a word of the script but are people aware of the comic that it's allegedly based on?. If being true to source material is the issue, then what is the problem?

Like most political discussion these days it seems like something people have jumped the gun over and lost their sh*t over nothing.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

spinynorman

Club Legend
Dec 1, 2014
1,346
3,100
Greater Western Sydney
AFL Club
Richmond
It's true, cinema was far greater when it was apolitical, and you got the true classics such as The Grapes of Wrath, Citizen Kane, Casablanca, 12 Angry Men and Dr Strangelove, which were all careful to not give commentary or political messaging relevant to their times, and are loved today for this.

The film studios' primary aim is to make money. They've had an overdue realisation that audiences who aren't straight white men will be happy to see movies that aren't about straight white men. They're also keen on making endless remakes and sequels or adaptations of texts with large existing audiences, because they represent surer box office success than new and original properties.

If you want to change it, go support independent or world cinema. Go to the movies today and watch Parasite or Apollo 11 or anything but The Lion King and actively reject the current culture of cash in remakes. There's great movies out there with strong leading female roles, and even more with strong leading male roles, so just go enjoy them. Or whinge, whatever. I'd easily take the 2010s in cinema over the 1980s though.
 

Roobs321

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 28, 2008
8,477
5,547
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Arsenal Sydney Swans GWS CBR United
This whole blurb is largely irrelevant to the heart of the matter, because it's a case of Disney not staying faithful to the author's original vision of the character. So the only thing to take away from this depiction is the fact that Disney are projecting identity politics as a talking point into the story and anyone who disagrees with it is a racist - if social media is anything to go by. But like I mentioned, cast Tiana from Princess and the Frog as white in a live adaption and see what happens.

Also, Cheer up GG.exe lol
You obviously aren't too familiar with the history of Disney adaptations of classic stories. The author's original vision has been tampered with many times, often to be more PG-appropriate. If the original idea involving Aladdin or Sleeping Beauty graced the screens, little kids wouldn't have been allowed to see it. Whether the protagonist is black or white is highly irrelevant. We know Disney are currently sweeping through their back catalogue for some live-action redos which no one with a brain will ever plan to see and naturally The Little Mermaid is one of them. Why be triggered by a likely-to-be-lame film?

There was another non-Disney version with a white girl made last year anyway which includes Shirley MacLaine. Watch that instead if you deem it more faithful.
 

Roobs321

Norm Smith Medallist
Apr 28, 2008
8,477
5,547
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Arsenal Sydney Swans GWS CBR United
You actually have it backwards. The characters are the central point of the story given and in live adaptions they should show a reflection of the culture they are representing based around the time of its original telling. Of course over time it's not really going to be a surprise that a company like Disney is going to take liberties in the telling of the story to make it palatable, but to use one of the examples you mentioned, try putting a Japanese man to represent Aladdin which is culturally based in Arabic folklore and will you say that is ok? So yes, black, white or whatever else is relevant. And please, this is just a discussion/debate, nothing else. There is no need to throw around terms like 'triggered' which seem to have been coined by modern social media movements including and not limited SJW's and the likes, which are completely ridiculous.
Just don't see it. We don't know yet in which culture the new version is based. Did the mermaids have a fixed ocean address in the 1989 Disney? Assumptions. It is the type of original tale that tends to get redone all over the globe. I'd be surprised if there wasn't already some Bollywood version.
 

Top Bottom