Will political correctness kill classic movies?

Sep 2011
24,980
17,423
aMEEErica
#31
A 'classic' is popularly defined as - an outstanding example of a particular style; something of lasting worth or with a timeless quality; of the first or highest quality, class, or rank – something that exemplifies its class. A literary classic (per example) is a work which has never exhausted all it has to say to its readers, and a classic car (to give another example) is generally an older car with enough historical interest to be collectable and worth preserving or restoring rather than scrapping. In the case of cars, competition success of the marque, and rarity are significant factors in the designation. Many Bentleys, Ferraries, and Aston Martins may be headed for classic status in the course of time, but few Fords, Chevrolets, or Toyotas will be headed for anything but the breaker's yard in their twilight years.

So whilst all manner of things may be considered 'classic' by various individuals - it is not a precise designation. It is a matter of personal taste, and of considerable subjectivity. An old Hollywood Western may well be considered a 'classic' by some devotees of American cinema, but that is not an universal standard. And to an Austrian or Hungarian aesthete reared upon the literary and operatic classics - that may well be considered a heresy. ;)
Oh, you little shit!

:p

Well done young fellow, leave it to you to sort this whole mess out! :)

And here is something very nice for you, the first part is interesting, but skip to 2:40 to get swept away in a beautiful passage; young and wise friend, I want this to touch you, all the way over there across the planet! :p


Isn't that magnificent? I'm dyin' over here! :zany:

That extended passage will stay with me a long, long time, I will never forget it! :)

I will never forget you! :)

Jeff :)
 
Last edited:
Sep 2011
24,980
17,423
aMEEErica
#33
Cannonball run! Smokey and the bandit!
Sorry if I got a bit "shirty" (or "shitty" :p) over the definition of "classic," but doctors, lawyers, engineers, and even amateur classic movie historians have their jargon and associated criteria...

But to the original topic... I just can't separate this from the "Hays" office...

Adopted in 1922, it didn't really sink in until 1934...

Hmm... can't really say one way or the other...

So many movies that might be "censored" for content are just garbage anyway... but here in America, free speech must reign, and there are also the historical considerations for film, so I am against censorship after all, but it's a very difficult decision to make, I just got through saying how much movies had influence on a country...

But where would it end, today movies, tomorrow books...


No, if someone wanted to create their own censored version for themselves that's one thing, but I doubt, for one that this is a serious issue, it's worth comment, but I don't see as a real problem, the examples in the OP don't seem necessarily earth-shattering. 2. no one will completely eradicate a version of anything, there are too many folks like me with large movie archives...

I have classic film put away that even I haven't seen yet... tons of it! :)

Thx :)
 
Last edited:
Likes: The Man
Jul 2011
3,656
5,382
UK/Australia
#34
Sorry if I got a bit "shirty" (or "shitty" :p) over the definition of "classic," but doctors, lawyers, engineers, and even amateur classic movie historians have their jargon and associated criteria...

But to the original topic... I just can't separate this from the "Hays" office...

Adopted in 1922, it didn't really sink in until 1934...

Hmm... can't really say one way or the other...

So many movies that might be "censored" for content are just garbage anyway... but here in America, free speech must reign, and there are also the historical considerations for film, so I am against censorship after all, but it's a very difficult decision to make, I just got through saying how much movies had influence on a country...

But where would it end, today movies, tomorrow books...


No, if someone wanted to create their own censored version for themselves that's one thing, but I doubt, for one that this is a serious issue, it's worth comment, but I don't see as a real problem, the examples in the OP don't seem necessarily earth-shattering. 2. no one will completely eradicate a version of anything, there are too many folks like me with large movie archives...

I have classic film put away that even I haven't seen yet... tons of it! :)

Thx :)
Loved "It happened today!" and cheers for that. :)

I suspect you and I are in agreement about censorship where adults are concerned - it is something which should be avoided in a democratic society. I do however, agree with the right of societies to refuse entry to 'foreigners' who have a proven record of 'hate speech' and spreading racial prejudice. We need to be aware that not all the populace is at a stage of development (irrespective of age) where the appeal of nationalistic tripe, such as "a special chain of unique people who have the natural law right to remain a majority in their ancestral homeland", and "white people as a community of destiny, bound together by blood" (both from the BNP Manifesto), or indeed "Make America Great Again", will be seen as the self-serving propaganda it is. This is doubly important where minors are concerned.

Our respective societies already create role models (and potential heroes) from sports and entertainment stars - few of whom have any decent education, contribute anything of lasting value to society, or display anything but the most meretricious of personal values. Of course, we all need to be citizens of the world in the wider sense of the term, and avoid provincialism, but do we really need to import the ethnic and religious prejudices of other societies? Do Americans really need to hear the views of someone like Nick Griffin, or do Brits need the 'wisdom' of Sarah Palin?

BTW, this is not a political viewpoint - I mention these people merely as examples of unintelligent and extremist points of view. Propaganda is alive and well in the 21st century, and if it takes a marginal level of governmental control to protect the young and impressionable - we should give that due consideration.
 
Aug 2018
2,060
3,272
Vancouver
#35
Yeah. I remember thinking when I watched "sausage party" on Netflix "has political correctness gone too far!

I wish we could go back to non-politically correct movies of the 40s snd 50s that were heavily censored by studios and the government and anyone who stepped out of line or criticised authority in any way was blacklisted. And you couldn't show a married couple fully clothed in the same bed.

Now THAT was freedom
 
Aug 2018
2,060
3,272
Vancouver
#36
Classic movies.


"The Motion Picture Production Code was the set of industry moral guidelines that was applied to most United States motion pictures released by major studios from 1930 to 1968. It is also popularly known as the Hays Code, after Will H. Hays, who was the president of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) from 1922 to 1945. Under Hays' leadership, the MPPDA, later known as the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), adopted the Production Code in 1930, and began rigidly enforcing it in mid-1934. The Production Code spelled out what was acceptable and what was unacceptable content for motion pictures produced for a public audience in the United States"

Sorry baby bloomers. You're confused.
 
Sep 2011
24,980
17,423
aMEEErica
#37
Classic movies.


"The Motion Picture Production Code was the set of industry moral guidelines that was applied to most United States motion pictures released by major studios from 1930 to 1968. It is also popularly known as the Hays Code, after Will H. Hays, who was the president of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA) from 1922 to 1945. Under Hays' leadership, the MPPDA, later known as the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), adopted the Production Code in 1930, and began rigidly enforcing it in mid-1934. The Production Code spelled out what was acceptable and what was unacceptable content for motion pictures produced for a public audience in the United States"

Sorry baby bloomers. You're confused.
They didn't really start enforcing until 1934, lots of movies from the early thirties are considered "pre-code."

"adopted the Production Code in 1930, and began rigidly enforcing it in mid-1934."

And if I recall, they paid Hays $150,000 a year for that job, like they wanted him to have a "movie star" salary or something.


DeMille was sort of able to get around it by producing Biblical epics, there was plenty of "approved" sin in there~! :p

Thx :)
 
Nov 2008
62,200
4,783
Washington state
#38
The best movies were politically incorrect. Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry series was about a cop that wanted justice , while The politically correct police force was trying to stop him from getting justice. When Harry finally got justice we all cheered him on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Aug 2018
2,060
3,272
Vancouver
#39
The best movies were politically incorrect. Clint Eastwood’s Dirty Harry series was about a cop that wanted justice , while The politically correct police force was trying to stop him from getting justice. When Harry finally got justice we all cheered him on


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Just curious.

Did Harry get justice for people being pushed around by arrogant aggressive assholes? Or did he get justice by making sure the arrogant aggressive assholes had their right to push people around protected if that's what they felt like doing?
 
Nov 2015
5,460
1,744
UK
#40
Will political correctness kill classic movies?

Will political correctness kill classic movies?

“The Hustle,” a gender-swap remake of 1988's “Dirty Rotten Scoundrels,” rails against the patriarchy between sight gags. “Avengers: Endgame” shoehorns a minor gay character into the story as a super-virtue-signal. “Long Shot” shows Seth Rogen apologizing for the United States bombing Japan to help end World War II.

Even older films, and the stars who made them great, are now seen through the PC prism. Just ask the estate of John Wayne. The legendary star got pummeled a few months ago, decades after his passing, for a racially insensitive Playboy interview in 1971. Some critics demanded that his name be stripped from John Wayne Airport in Orange County, Calif.


Singer Kate Smith’s film career is dwarfed by her radio, TV and stage accomplishments. Yet Smith’s recording of two 1930s songs deemed racist convinced two professional sports teams — the New York Yankees and the Philadelphia Flyers — to strip her iconic rendition of “God Bless America” from their programming.

***************************************************************************************************















What say you? Do you think classic films, movies, music, should all be put through todays political correctness filters? was removing kate smith's rendition of god bless america appropriate?
Political correctness has fucked a lot of things. It's a cotton wool society ran by wet flannels.
 

Similar Discussions