Are audiences so sensitive and offended by movie content now

Page 1 of 8 [ 121 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

17 Apr 2020, 11:32 pm

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?



Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia

18 Apr 2020, 5:22 am

I would actually like for you to give some examples to explain what you mean rather than ambiguous descriptions that people are afraid to offend now.

The first questions you would have to consider is could the inverse also be true, could movie makers be less afraid of certain content than they would have before? The obvious example that comes to my mind is on cases like homosexuality, that it was reasons in the past that movie makers were so afraid of offending people over showing things like homosexuality that rules were put in that prevented being able to show anything positive. These are the sort of things that led to gay codifying characters to have any relevant themes, and became especially prevalent with villains since showing a queer character positively would be too offensive, just look at a great deal of Disney villains like Hades, Scar and Ursula.

The general consensus I have been hearing from those in the know is that Disney is still afraid of offending people by being positive with LGBT characters, this is because of the growing importance of China for movie audiences, and that it is a known fact that their government will even censor movies with LGBT themes because it finds it offensive. This has been a noted reason why even the Marvel cinematic universe has been so bare of them, that these movies that are so large and should be able to do what they want to represent the times, is so afraid of a culture so easily offended by something harmless.

But I have a feeling that this is not what you meant. Your mention of the Me Too movement has me thinking that you are asking why are there not as many jokes that may be sexist, make fun of rape, or do so about minority groups. You can't do something like Ace Ventura where it ends by making fun of a trans woman for used to being a man. You can't have a movie like Revenge of the Nerds where one of the protagonists rape a girl by pretending to be her boyfriend, and it treated like a funny and good thing. Characters can't just have the personality of being a dumb foreigner, or other bad racial stereotypes. And audiences are waking up to things like exploitative nature of female characters used as props for the protagonist like an object. Or the disposability of male characters as the go to cannon fodder, kind of why I liked how The Rise of Skywalker, for all it faults, had some of the storm troopers be women.

I think that you will find that things have always been a little controversial and movie makers would not show, it just changes over time and have different reactions from the audiences than it used to, and the audiences have changed for certain to not be as accepting or find things as funny as it used to be. I would be willing to discuss specific examples you might have, such as certain trends and social changes.


_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

18 Apr 2020, 1:57 pm

Oh well Ace Ventura and Revenge of the Nerds would be examples, because I think people forget that IT'S A MOVIE, and therefore, all those gags are not meant to be taken seriously. If it's down out of silly comedy, then why take it seriously, like it's suppose to be a philosophical outlook on things? Take revenge of the Nerds for example, the woman liked the guy after and went with him. It's a comedy, you're not suppose to overanalyze these things, are you?

If it were a drama or a thriller then sure, but don't overanalyze a comedy, where you turn your brain off more and just have a good time. In Ace Ventura, the whole trans thing was used a plot twist, so why does it have to offensive?

But as for other examples, several movies that have come out of Hollywood lately. Everything just seems so safe compared to before, like no one is afraid to take near as much risk.

If you watch movies from the 70s and 80s, there is more risk there, compared to now.



Last edited by ironpony on 18 Apr 2020, 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

18 Apr 2020, 1:57 pm

Sorry, it posted twice by accident.



maycontainthunder
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Mar 2020
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,875

18 Apr 2020, 2:15 pm

Part of the issue is people are either thin skinned or, far more often, looking for something to be offended by. These morons then are joined by more of their kind leading to the company having to alter the film to shut them up.

Next thing all the old gold films will no longer be funny because they've had all the jokes taken out like when they put Smokey and the Bandit on in the afternoon; most of the jokes and one liners are gone.

Give it time and these morons will force all the old, actually funny, films to have the jokes removed.

For the record; I can sit through films that are supposed to be comedies without laughing once.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

18 Apr 2020, 2:43 pm

Ironpony's subject line implies that ALL audiences are sensitive and offended by movie content now, when in reality only SOME people are offended by only SOME movie content.

Also, SOME people will over-analyze SOME movie content.  It happens, and there is nothing wrong with that.

@Ironpony: You may find that your life will become much easier for you when you stop obsessing over what you believe other people are thinking.


_________________
 
No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

18 Apr 2020, 2:55 pm

Oh okay for sure, if it's just a small population that may be easily offended, then it's a small population. However, Hollywood is afraid to make anything risky anymore, and that makes the movies less interesting in a lot of ways. So why is Hollywood afraid of this, if it's just a small percent of the population?



Superbro19999
Emu Egg
Emu Egg

Joined: 6 Nov 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 1

18 Apr 2020, 4:15 pm

This is because Hollywood seems to think there's a bigger population getting offended than there actually is. Leading them to be afraid of potential boycotts by the offended, like in the past.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

18 Apr 2020, 4:23 pm

ironpony wrote:
... Hollywood is afraid to make anything risky anymore, and that makes the movies less interesting in a lot of ways. So why is Hollywood afraid of this, if it's just a small percent of the population?
Money.

A studio pours tens of millions of dollars into a movie expecting hundreds of millions of dollars in return.  Thus, they stick to the same old formulas with the same old actors playing the same old characters ("Star Wars MCMLXVII", anyone?).

The only time studios are willing to take a risk on a new production is when a successful director is in charge and/or when successful actors are involved -- Think "Avatar", not "Live By Night".

So, until Hollywood decides to take on more risk, expect to see more sequels featuring the same plots and characters for decades to come.


_________________
 
No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.


collectoritis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,050

18 Apr 2020, 6:10 pm

Not point in censored Murpy on stage :|



ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

18 Apr 2020, 6:25 pm

Fnord wrote:
ironpony wrote:
... Hollywood is afraid to make anything risky anymore, and that makes the movies less interesting in a lot of ways. So why is Hollywood afraid of this, if it's just a small percent of the population?
Money.

A studio pours tens of millions of dollars into a movie expecting hundreds of millions of dollars in return.  Thus, they stick to the same old formulas with the same old actors playing the same old characters ("Star Wars MCMLXVII", anyone?).

The only time studios are willing to take a risk on a new production is when a successful director is in charge and/or when successful actors are involved -- Think "Avatar", not "Live By Night".

So, until Hollywood decides to take on more risk, expect to see more sequels featuring the same plots and characters for decades to come.


But why they are like this now a lot more than before though? If you watch Hollywood movies from the 70s and 80s for example, they took much bigger risks. It seemed there attitude was, "our movie has dark subject matter, brutal violence, and sex and nudity in and if you don't like that, then you're just a prude and can go shove it."

And a lot of moviegoers liked that attitude. But now they do not have it anymore. Sure it's millions of dollars, but it was back then too, and they still took the risks. Also, a lot of foreign films have this attitude as well, and make a lot less safe films compared to Hollywood. They are much more comfortable with risking millions.

Why is it different for Hollywood now compared to older movies, or foreign?



Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia

18 Apr 2020, 6:59 pm

ironpony wrote:
Oh well Ace Ventura and Revenge of the Nerds would be examples, because I think people forget that IT'S A MOVIE, and therefore, all those gags are not meant to be taken seriously. If it's down out of silly comedy, then why take it seriously, like it's suppose to be a philosophical outlook on things? Take revenge of the Nerds for example, the woman liked the guy after and went with him. It's a comedy, you're not suppose to overanalyze these things, are you?

If it were a drama or a thriller then sure, but don't overanalyze a comedy, where you turn your brain off more and just have a good time. In Ace Ventura, the whole trans thing was used a plot twist, so why does it have to offensive?


If you think people cannot be influenced by even comedy movies, I think that you might need an increased understanding of how media can affect culture.

The Revenge of the Nerds example as you say has the girl go with the nerd after he rapes her, because apparently she liked it, the movie never acknowledges that he raped her by taking away her consent of who to sleep with. It is really bad taste, using rape as a positive, and even encourage people to do the similar.

Ace Ventura was in a different time, where the trans people were simply treated as the but of jokes and as if they are incredibly disgusting, all the characters in that movie look like they are going to throw up when they hear she used to be a man and still has some of the parts. There was pretty heavy discrimination, and showing it in a big blockbuster really could perpetuate discrimination in the audience by telling them that is the correct way to act. It does not fly anymore because people are aware that the high suicide rate of trans people is because of discrimination they face from being treated like aberrations. It is not funny when a joke goes along the lines of telling a minority group to go kill themselves. Comedy against a marginalised group is not harmless.

It would be like having movies that treated all black people as disgusting, really not cool and a lot of people would protest the movies. Sure they are free to release awful content in movies, they can just expect audiences to protest them by calling them racist, sexist, transphobic or rape enabling, which would be accurate and could be career ruining.

To pick another comedy out of the hat that I am sure you would say people would be too sensitive for, 2005's Wedding Crashers. The movie has a number of spicy comedy elements, but the parts people really would have a problem now would be how the movie makes jokes about a man being sexually assaulted, both by a woman and another man. It has hardly been removed from the comedy lexicon, but people are becoming more and more aware that making light of even sexual assault against men can have real world consequences where people don't take victims seriously. I included a video by a channel called Pop Culture Detective to start to go into what sexual assault against men being played for laughs can represent.



I have a feeling that your response is simply going to be that it is a movie, it does not affect real life. Which, sure, can be true for many things in movies, but some things can really be in bad taste and bad. Otherwise comedies could have things like, as an example, little girls being raped by big minotaur, and just say that it is comedy and you are meant to laugh and not take it seriously. But it would be incredibly in bad taste and make light of something really bad. Would you laugh at that if it was in a movie?


_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall


Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia

18 Apr 2020, 7:28 pm

ironpony wrote:
But why they are like this now a lot more than before though? If you watch Hollywood movies from the 70s and 80s for example, they took much bigger risks. It seemed there attitude was, "our movie has dark subject matter, brutal violence, and sex and nudity in and if you don't like that, then you're just a prude and can go shove it."

And a lot of moviegoers liked that attitude. But now they do not have it anymore. Sure it's millions of dollars, but it was back then too, and they still took the risks. Also, a lot of foreign films have this attitude as well, and make a lot less safe films compared to Hollywood. They are much more comfortable with risking millions.

Why is it different for Hollywood now compared to older movies, or foreign?


But did those movies take other risks, like having a gay protagonist or even positive gay character rather than a villain who is a villain to represent an idea of a threat to manly masculinity to be destroyed by the manly protagonist? The answer is no, and probably the same with having a lot of female characters in similar movies that were powerful but not heavily sexualised, because they would think that their audience (men) would be too sensitive and take it as a hit against their masculinity. That women had to be incredibly sexy and not too masculine. You don't see that as another kind of sensitivity?

Sensitivity did not really just start existing, but changed shape where people became aware of socially uncool things, and that they could increase their audience numbers by making it accessible to other audiences. I am not saying that it is right every time, but changes can make movies feel more accessible to people in minorities that don't treat them as bad jokes, and some people are also thinking that they want to enjoy movies with other people.

I am on the side of making entertainment in general more socially acceptable to other groups, and I really don't think it is as zero sum as you might think. Not a movie, but an anime that came out that I have been a really big fan of is called Interspecies Reviewers, which is a fantasy show that basic premise is about people of different fantasy races going to brothels of different fantasy races to give their opinions on the experience. The show pretty much has full on sex scenes, just stopping short of showing straight genitals, and in general be pretty sexual, I am pretty sure the response against my kind of socially aware person would be to say that I should be fighting against this show as immoral and stuff. But I actually love the show for being sex positive in ways that always has proper consent from those involved, including the explicit non shaming of prostitutes where none of them are being taken advantage of, and treated like people. I don't think it is perfect, being from Japan it still has some weird aversion to things gay people, male prostitutes, and jokes of a female character being harassed before she hits back.

Us socially minded entertainment watchers and analysers are not against things like sex and violence in movies and such, just the need for awareness in how these things do actually influence culture, because entertainment really does influence culture. And we are also frustrated that movies can't have certain things without conservative groups like churches, or people who get upset over Ariel being black, that they are too sensitive to ridiculous things they find offensive.


_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

18 Apr 2020, 7:44 pm

Oh okay the thing about Revenge of the Nerds and Ace Ventura is, I took them as over the top movies not to be taken seriously. They don't take place in the real world. It's a fantasy world. The thing about the sexual assault scene in Wedding Crashers for example... there are comedies out there that to do worse things than that though. For example in the comedy movie Arsenic and Old Lace, two old women are murdering people and it's done for laughs. Murder is probably worse than sexual assault. So does that mean that Arsenic and Old Lace, is more distasteful than Wedding Crashers?

Or does that mean it's more distasteful than Revenge of the Nerds?



ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 39
Posts: 5,590
Location: canada

18 Apr 2020, 7:47 pm

Bradleigh wrote:
ironpony wrote:
But why they are like this now a lot more than before though? If you watch Hollywood movies from the 70s and 80s for example, they took much bigger risks. It seemed there attitude was, "our movie has dark subject matter, brutal violence, and sex and nudity in and if you don't like that, then you're just a prude and can go shove it."

And a lot of moviegoers liked that attitude. But now they do not have it anymore. Sure it's millions of dollars, but it was back then too, and they still took the risks. Also, a lot of foreign films have this attitude as well, and make a lot less safe films compared to Hollywood. They are much more comfortable with risking millions.

Why is it different for Hollywood now compared to older movies, or foreign?


But did those movies take other risks, like having a gay protagonist or even positive gay character rather than a villain who is a villain to represent an idea of a threat to manly masculinity to be destroyed by the manly protagonist? The answer is no, and probably the same with having a lot of female characters in similar movies that were powerful but not heavily sexualised, because they would think that their audience (men) would be too sensitive and take it as a hit against their masculinity. That women had to be incredibly sexy and not too masculine. You don't see that as another kind of sensitivity?

Sensitivity did not really just start existing, but changed shape where people became aware of socially uncool things, and that they could increase their audience numbers by making it accessible to other audiences. I am not saying that it is right every time, but changes can make movies feel more accessible to people in minorities that don't treat them as bad jokes, and some people are also thinking that they want to enjoy movies with other people.

I am on the side of making entertainment in general more socially acceptable to other groups, and I really don't think it is as zero sum as you might think. Not a movie, but an anime that came out that I have been a really big fan of is called Interspecies Reviewers, which is a fantasy show that basic premise is about people of different fantasy races going to brothels of different fantasy races to give their opinions on the experience. The show pretty much has full on sex scenes, just stopping short of showing straight genitals, and in general be pretty sexual, I am pretty sure the response against my kind of socially aware person would be to say that I should be fighting against this show as immoral and stuff. But I actually love the show for being sex positive in ways that always has proper consent from those involved, including the explicit non shaming of prostitutes where none of them are being taken advantage of, and treated like people. I don't think it is perfect, being from Japan it still has some weird aversion to things gay people, male prostitutes, and jokes of a female character being harassed before she hits back.

Us socially minded entertainment watchers and analysers are not against things like sex and violence in movies and such, just the need for awareness in how these things do actually influence culture, because entertainment really does influence culture. And we are also frustrated that movies can't have certain things without conservative groups like churches, or people who get upset over Ariel being black, that they are too sensitive to ridiculous things they find offensive.


Oh okay what are some examples of movies nowadays with gay protagonists then that are risky? Perhaps I missed those?

As for having movies with powerful women that are not heavily sexualized, does Alien count for 1979? What about Pam Grier's movies? Sure, Pam Grier is sexy, but was she heavily sexualized, in those movies? What about Thelma and Louise? Weren't they powerful without being heavily sexualized?

Or what are some examples of risky movies today that have powerful women in for example?



Bradleigh
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2008
Age: 33
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 6,669
Location: Brisbane, Australia

18 Apr 2020, 8:21 pm

ironpony wrote:
Murder is probably worse than sexual assault. So does that mean that Arsenic and Old Lace, is more distasteful than Wedding Crashers?

Or does that mean it's more distasteful than Revenge of the Nerds?


You know, that is a really good question, and reminds me of a topic by a Youtuber named Vaush, asking why rape is seen worse than murder. I am not saying that he is an authority on the subject or gives a single definitive answer, and probably a little long if you want something quick and snappy, but I will link it anyway but not expect you to have to watch it all.



It is like asking why we might be okay with say Lord of the Rings having orcs kill and be killed, but people would not be okay with the orcs raping or being raped. Relevant to the above video especially because it also poses the question of why people can be perfectly fine in a D&D/tabletop game that includes murder and killing, but get super uncomfortable when rape is brought up or other players want to go around raping.

The answers I have seen can be multifaceted, where you could point to the needless violation of intimacy that rape requires, by not just stopping an opponent, but dehumanising and no other reason but for self gratification and torture. The other is that more people can experience that while having suffered rape, rather than having been murdered. Logically murder should be worse, but look at children entertainment and even in there you can see people be murdered, but you are not going to see anyone get raped. Disney Mulan had implications that the Huns murdered villagers, not that they raped them.


_________________
Through dream I travel, at lantern's call
To consume the flames of a kingdom's fall