@bratface said:

Note the date.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2003/cultural-marxism-catching

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/opinion/cultural-marxism-anti-semitism.html

It's articles like this that really piss me off. Anything that's not decidedly pro-left wing/communist is automatically right wing or fascist. I used to consider myself far left wing because I thought they were the ones fighting for free speech against the puritans, and then the far left became the puritans. The right wing isn't much better but at least they're not communists.

@cswood said:

@bratface said:

Note the date.

https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/intelligence-report/2003/cultural-marxism-catching

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/13/opinion/cultural-marxism-anti-semitism.html

It's articles like this that really piss me off. Anything that's not decidedly pro-left wing/communist is automatically right wing or fascist. I used to consider myself far left wing because I thought they were the ones fighting for free speech against the puritans, and then the far left became the puritans. The right wing isn't much better but at least they're not communists.

My favorite thing is watching Antifa and far left people talking about how evil Nazis are and how fascists they are and how they killed 6 million Jews. Which is all true. But than when you bring up the fact that commies killed more than 65 million people, and that number is a low ball, they get all silent and start calling you a racist and a fascist. The irony never fails. As for black Bond. I honestly dont think that would work out. Its proven over and over again that they people that are screaming for inclusivity and for more women lead productions DO NOT consume the final product. But Hollywood continues to listen to the loud crowd, trying to please the mob. And than when it fails it because of straight white males and racists/sexists.

@acontributor said:

@cswood said:

The short answer is no. The long answer is fuck no.

I'm not a woman but I am black, and if they make a "black Bond" he should be an entirely different character not called James Bond. I'm tired of Hollywood giving people hand-me-downs and dressing them up as something new. It's lazy and is an obvious pandering attempt to get pats on the back for being "progressive" while doing as little as possible creativity wise.

And ultimately this is just more Cultural Marxism, and because Google/Wikipedia can't be trusted what I mean by Cultural Marxism is the taking of pop culture, stripping it of its creativity and entertainment value, and using pop culture as a platform to push politics and tarnish the social contract between men and women and incite tensions between people of different races, economic classes, and sexual orientations usually for political gain.

Angelina Jolie wanted to play James Bond so she made Salt. George Lucas and Steven Spielberg wanted to make a Bond movie but couldn't so they made Indiana Jones. Hell, Christopher Nolan is known to be a huge Bond fan and many see Tenet as a Bond-like movie. It's so easy to just take the Bond name and slap a vagina or black skin on him and call it a day, but that's not who Bond is. He's a white straight British dude. Anything else is a parody.

No one wants to see an all male Charlie's Angels or Sex in the City, a black Buffy the Vampire Slayer, or gender swapped 50 Shades of Grey or Twilight or Hunger Games so how about we just leave stuff men like alone and people who want to see female/black/gay versions of those things get off your butt and go make your own thing?

That sums up what I think. But what do you think about the black reboot of Little Orphan Annie starring Jamie Foxx? Just curious what you think. I personally didn't have any problem with most of the movie. But if I recall correctly, there was at least one anti-white remark somewhere in it which I think has no business in a children's movie and is in bad taste in any movie where remarks like that go unchallenged. But my question is more about the characters Annie and Warbucks being re-imagined as black people. I personally think that the re-imaging of characters isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's a slippery slope.

Also creating new characters instead of appropriating old ones isn't always better. Like what if someone wanted to make a sequel to Beverly Hills Cop starring Louis C.K. instead of Eddie Murphy? It wouldn't matter if they made a new detective character and called him Mahoney instead of Foley. Replacing a black character with a white one would still be seen as problematic and I don't think it would go over well.

The 2016 Ghostbusters reboot is another example where just creating new characters doesn't give it any originality and is an insult to the original movie. I really hope that the Ghostbusters Afterlife movie coming out this fall isn't that way.

So what would you suggest? Creating new characters is good for originality.

@acontributor said:

But what do you think about the black reboot of Little Orphan Annie starring Jamie Foxx? Just curious what you think. I personally didn't have any problem with most of the movie. But if I recall correctly, there was at least one anti-white remark somewhere in it which I think has no business in a children's movie and is in bad taste in any movie where remarks like that go unchallenged. But my question is more about the characters Annie and Warbucks being re-imagined as black people. I personally think that the re-imaging of characters isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it's a slippery slope.

I don't remember a thing about it, because it was forgettable. I didn't hate it but it wasn't worth seeing. If studios want to make gender/race swapped movies they are within their right as a private company, but I'm not watching them anymore.

And as an aside, I do like Samuel Jackson as Nick Fury (at least the comics created black Nick Fury specifically modeled off of him), there are situations where it's not as big a deal (also liked female Doc Ock in the Spiderverse movie), but it's just gone rampant these days.

@acontributor said:

Also creating new characters instead of appropriating old ones isn't always better. Like what if someone wanted to make a sequel to Beverly Hills Cop starring Louis C.K. instead of Eddie Murphy? It wouldn't matter if they made a new detective character and called him Mahoney instead of Foley. Replacing a black character with a white one would still be seen as problematic and I don't think it would go over well.

I don't think Louis C.K. is getting a big job anytime soon (come on, you know full well they'd cast Kevin Hart), but in that case just don't call it Beverly Hills Cop. Don't even remake Beverly Hills Cop. 80s movies should be off limits for at least 30 years.

If they want to remake something it should be something that sucked that can now be made good (Dredd 2012 was amazing) or something that's really old that no one remembers. I'm just sick and tired of sequels/prequels/reboots/remakes, but mostly in relation to popular movies. I'm a huge film noir fan, there are a lot of old film noirs no one remembers or has seen that could be adapted to modern day, but the studios only bother remaking things people remember and liked.

@acontributor said:

The 2016 Ghostbusters reboot is another example where just creating new characters doesn't give it any originality and is an insult to the original movie. I really hope that the Ghostbusters Afterlife movie coming out this fall isn't that way.

Aside from the fact that movie was a humorless black hole of terrible, that movie COULD have worked if it were well written and wasn't made specifically for the gender swap. And when I say "new characters" in this case I mean not calling it "Ghostbusters". A group of women fighting ghosts, by itself, sounds interesting. Call it something else besides Ghostbusters. But the only reason why they made it was so they could call it Ghostbusters.

Jason Voorhees is one of the most iconic horror movie monsters of our generation, and we only have him because the makers directly ripped off of Halloween. Same basic premise, different characters and setting. I would much rather have a bunch of loving ripoffs than blatant remakes. At least ripoffs are fun.

@acontributor said:

IMO, there was more wrong with Ghostbusters (2016) than that but this maybe isn't the place for that conversation.

I was just reminded that the original Veronica in Shameless (2004) was white but in the 2011 reboot they rewrote her as a black woman. I was fine with that until later in the series when she started spouting out establishment talking points about race and white people which is the equivalent of blackface. The last season of the show was a disaster and it would have been better if they had just ended it without the last season.

Agreed about GB. Never watched Shameless, but yes, that's what black/female/gay characters are mostly reserved for these days, spouting political talking points or leftist ideologies instead of being interesting 3-D characters, and pointing this out or not liking it means you hate those groups. "Equality" is the trojan horse Hollywood uses to push their (usually communist leaning) political ideology. If the product was actually good I probably wouldn't notice it as much, but you can rarely tell a good story while pushing a political message at the same time.

@acontributor said:

I was just making a point about Louis C.K. since he is white and he is a comedian like Eddie Murphy but IMO not as funny as Eddie Murphy used to be. My point being that people don't want to see black characters get replaced with white ones any more than white characters should be replaced with black ones.

Of course they're not going to do that, they'll get cancelled for white-washing. I think this is happening right now with Marvel's What If series where they turned Captain American into a woman and Star Lord black, but they're doing one where Black Panther was white and the same people praising the first two changes hate the Black Panther one. They're hypocrites who want rules for thee but not for me.

@acontributor said:

But writing all new scripts with all new characters with a plot similar to another show is different, but still not necessarily better. I Am Not Okay with This is an example of that IMO. It is basically Carrie with a lesbian spin.

I agree it's not necessarily better, but that product would depend on its quality and not the nostalgia or name recognition of a pre-existing work. Haven't seen I Am Not Okay With This but would sooner watch it than another Carrie remake.

I was mature enough to go see Quentin Tarantino's Jackie Brown in the cinema when it was released theatrically, and I don't recall anyone making a peep about Tarantino changing the main character from a white woman (in the novel) to a black woman in the finished film (played by Pam Grier).

This is like a robust culture that's being discussed here about these contemporary movies, the culture of complaint vs. so-called "wokeness."

@CelluloidFan said:

I was mature enough to go see Quentin Tarantino's Jackie Brown in the cinema when it was released theatrically, and I don't recall anyone making a peep about Tarantino changing the main character from a white woman (in the novel) to a black woman in the finished film (played by Pam Grier).

This is like a robust culture that's being discussed here about these contemporary movies, the culture of complaint vs. so-called "wokeness."

You don't understand. Jackie Brown came out in 1997. If people did complain, how would they do it? On some little seen chat message board that companies wouldn't care about? Or a letter writing campaign? Whitewashing was always a source of criticism but social media has changed the entire game of how people voice their complaints. Now companies will make changes if enough people raise a stink on Twitter.

The UK recently made an Anne Boleyn series where she, a real life white woman, was played by a black woman. It's ridiculous. It was met with tons of backlash but most of that criticism was written off as people being racist/sexist or some other buzzword.

Adapting a fictional character I can sort of understand changing elements if you are trying to get a big name actor (Will Smith in I Am Legend comes to mind), but race/gender swapping real life people or well known characters I think should be avoided, or at least make it clear you are making a new story "inspired by" a pre-existing story.

If I had the money I'd love to make a knock-off X-Men where I could take all the mutant powers I liked and attach them to new different characters in a mafia or spy setting. This is why I'm in favor of more movies like Push or Project Power or The 4400 or Alphas which, although not outstanding works, are all interesting derivatives of the X-Men concept.

@cswood said:

@CelluloidFan said:

I was mature enough to go see Quentin Tarantino's Jackie Brown in the cinema when it was released theatrically, and I don't recall anyone making a peep about Tarantino changing the main character from a white woman (in the novel) to a black woman in the finished film (played by Pam Grier).

This is like a robust culture that's being discussed here about these contemporary movies, the culture of complaint vs. so-called "wokeness."

You don't understand. Jackie Brown came out in 1997. If people did complain, how would they do it? On some little seen chat message board that companies wouldn't care about? Or a letter writing campaign? Whitewashing was always a source of criticism but social media has changed the entire game of how people voice their complaints. Now companies will make changes if enough people raise a stink on Twitter.

The UK recently made an Anne Boleyn series where she, a real life white woman, was played by a black woman. It's ridiculous. It was met with tons of backlash but most of that criticism was written off as people being racist/sexist or some other buzzword.

Adapting a fictional character I can sort of understand changing elements if you are trying to get a big name actor (Will Smith in I Am Legend comes to mind), but race/gender swapping real life people or well known characters I think should be avoided, or at least make it clear you are making a new story "inspired by" a pre-existing story.

If I had the money I'd love to make a knock-off X-Men where I could take all the mutant powers I liked and attach them to new different characters in a mafia or spy setting. This is why I'm in favor of more movies like Push or Project Power or The 4400 or Alphas which, although not outstanding works, are all interesting derivatives of the X-Men concept.

I know that Jackie Brown was released in 1997. One aspect of my earlier post had to do with its release being so much earlier than 2021. But ponder this: Director Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ was released in 1988, 9 years before Jackie Brown's release. I remember the
controversy surrounding this release well: There was public outcry and condemnation of Scorsese's film by conservative Christian groups, and even the Catholic Church rated the film "morally offensive." A boycott was called of Scorsese's film.

Yes, social media and especially Twitter have empowered the complainers, the whiners, etc. -- the latter situation being one I find a bit repulsive -- but there have been incidents of controversy and complaint for a long, long time before what you mentioned. How about "Amos 'n' Andy" and the ensuing fallout taking it off the air? What I'm saying is, as a person whose ear has been very much to mass media for decades, I don't recall hearing or reading anyone saying anything negative about the race change in Jackie Brown.

I guess my other point was that social media has bolstered a thriving culture of complaint. And for the record -- I try not to use that word, "understand." So I guess you were right when you said I don't do it.

@CelluloidFan said:

I know that Jackie Brown was released in 1997. One aspect of my earlier post had to do with its release being so much earlier than 2021. But ponder this: Director Martin Scorsese's The Last Temptation of Christ was released in 1988, 9 years before Jackie Brown's release. I remember the
controversy surrounding this release well: There was public outcry and condemnation of Scorsese's film by conservative Christian groups, and even the Catholic Church rated the film "morally offensive." A boycott was called of Scorsese's film.

Rum Punch wasn't a pop culture icon the way Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter was, so changing it didn't raise that much of a big deal. Apparently in the new Masters of the Universe show they've killed off He-Man and replaced him with his female love interest who's extremely masculine and has a very unattractive haircut, which many people don't like. But it's still probably going to get a second season and positive articles written about it because it serves "the message" the people in control of social media want.

As for the catholic church, they had way more influence back in the day than they do now. In the past a bunch of Karens boycotted Silent Night Deadly Night because it had a killer Santa Clause, these days no one would raise an eyebrow about a killer Santa Clause because you don't have to go to a theater to see most movies. It's much harder to boycott something when it can be streamed to millions of homes and its money already made before a boycott is even thought about. Remember Cuties, about the little girls twerking? Lots of people saw that before anyone could complain about how gross it was.

@CelluloidFan said:

Yes, social media and especially Twitter have empowered the complainers, the whiners, etc. -- the latter situation being one I find a bit repulsive -- but there have been incidents of controversy and complaint for a long, long time before what you mentioned. How about "Amos 'n' Andy" and the ensuing fallout taking it off the air? What I'm saying is, as a person whose ear has been very much to mass media for decades, I don't recall hearing or reading anyone saying anything negative about the race change in Jackie Brown.

I had to look up the Amos n Andy situation as that was before my time, but that was almost 100 years ago (1930), I don't think we can compare it to today.

I've been taking notice of these online entertainment boycott movements ever since 2016-ish with the whole Ghostbusters and Last Jedi controversy and to be honest complaining online almost never works because you usually get an equal or greater amount of people defending whatever it its. When an online movement actually does work it's usually with the help of the people in charge of the social media website boosting it because they agree with it.

Whenever people complain about or try to rally against anything that has "the message" it's going to get written off as haters/incels/neckbeards/misogynists/homophobes or whatever and you will have just as many people supporting the content to prove they're not an incel/misogynist etc. I'm currently seeing it with the He-Man show and the Cowboy Bebop actress. Go against "the message" and you are committing hate speech.

Going back to that black Anne Boleyn show, I think that failed to draw viewers because they simply weren't interested, not because of the race swapping complaints, which means the swapping will continue until too much money is lost. A race-swapped Rocketeer movie was just announced with David Oyelowo, who I like as an actor, but I'm not interested in more hand-me-down movies from Disney. They don't respect black people, they think we'll settle for any watered down version of white stories they feed us and I'm sick of it. If they made a whole new thing inspired by The Rocketeer mixed with Iron Man that was new and original I'd be much more interested.

@CelluloidFan said:

I guess my other point was that social media has bolstered a thriving culture of complaint. And for the record -- I try not to use that word, "understand." So I guess you were right when you said I don't do it.

I meant understand as in understand my perspective. I pay attention to this stuff because it's one of the central ways I see our society being destroyed. Politics is downstream from culture, so people are changing the culture for political reasons in ways that create huge divisions between men/women, black/white, rich/poor, gay/straight, right/left and I miss the days I could watch a movie without someone's political agenda being shoved down my throat or how much of a victim I am because I have dark skin or how evil I am because I have a penis and like attractive women.