In practical terms this has meant that the bean counters have taken over Hollywood (which includes TV production) with a vengeance, as well as Broadway. Their fingerprints are found in the numerous productions these days that are simply cheap knock-offs or bankable remakes (or remakes of remakes) of what these geniuses, only interested in the bottom line, regard as a sure buck. Why try something new and risky when the younger generations probably never saw the original? And there's always the nostalgia appeal for the philistines who don't mind their art thoroughly cannibalised. Under such circumstances, creativity is discouraged and the cuture is impoverished. That's why today's Broadway is a cadaverous whorish reflection of the vibrant theater culture from the 1940s through late 70s, that gave us classic musicals and comedies like Oklahoma, South Pacific, Cats, Evita, Phantom of the Opera, My Fair Lady, Hello Dolly, The Odd Couple, Man of La Mancha, and many more. It is noteworthy that Broadway, despite its conceit of being a more genuine rampart of true art than the movies, has been as eager as Hollywood to reach for the easy buck. That's why The Producers was first a huge comedy hit with musical numbers in 1967 and later in 2001 a money-making musical, this time starring Nathan Lane and Matthew Broderick in the lead roles (pallidly impersonating the inimitable imprints left on the roles by Zero Mostel and Gene Wilder). Oh, and the cannibalising was assisted by the creator himself, an older and probably even more cynical Mel Brooks. The apotheosis of this imbecilic and altogether debasing trend (which appears enormously successful in the age of bloated riches for the upper 10%) is now the Broadway production of To Kill a Mockinbird, a book whose 1962 film version with a stellar cast headed by Gregory Peck and Robert Duvall, is just about as perfect a rendition of Harper Lee's tale as one can find, yet here we have it, being trotted out as another bankable moneymaker, and invested with the cloying solemnity accorded (as the ad campaign suggests) "scripture". Without losing sight of what we criticise in these lines, the revolting financialisation of culture, we may be pardoned to ask: who are the natural "marks" for this kind of adulterated product? All the signs point to this generation of comfortable, utterly corporatised liberals, yea the same ones who, deeply afflicted by identitarian politics and an apparently incurable case of Trump derangement syndrome, see no contradiction in jumping into bed with the CIA and the FBI, while remaining vitually mum and uninterested in the empire's bullying and crimes across the planet. I must deduce from this obtuseness that they know nothing and care even less about what the CIA and FBI really do in the world, starting right here at home, and how, in the case of the downtrodden, such as Harper Lee's central victim, they play decisive roles in crushing their attempts at liberation. Aaron Sorkin, the well connected fellow behind this theatrical outing (nine Tony nominations so far) could argue that in this age of ugly fascistoid Trumpian rants the masses need more reminders of how foul racism is, and in that sense he may be right, albeit only to a degree, for if such is the case, why do liberals think that a Broadway production at $100 and $200 and up a pop is the way to go to bring enlightenment to the hoi polloi? Why not simply enlist more popular and effective ways of evangelising against this plague, like scheduling via PBS and TCM (or use the largely wasted air on MSNBC and CNN) more films like To Kill a Mockinbird? Or, better still, energise neighborhood popular theater via well distributed grants? TCM alone has a huge inventory of inspiring films. After all, there was a time when Hollywood, mercenary as it always was, still managed to produce veritable gems instead of the cartoonish idiocies it cranks out these days. —P. Greanville APPEARING ON RT.COM
Published time: 15 Jul, 2019
The UK’s Daily Mail reports that British actress Lashana Lynch will take over from Craig as codename 007 in the as-yet-untitled film. The movie will reportedly see Craig retain the title role, however, being called out of retirement in Jamaica for one last mission. If previous trends are anything to go by – and if the move pays off – Lynch may then take over fully for the 26th movie.
The revelation is not so surprising in an era when political correctness has become something of a new religion – and naturally, the casting has somewhat ironically prompted much divisiveness on social media, where there have been both celebrations of the daring move and anger that the long-established brand of the male, martini-sipping Bond would be fundamentally changed forever.
To avoid confusion, it should be pointed out that Lynch won’t be playing ‘James Bond’ per se, but will be taking over the 007 codename, which, technically speaking, can be done by anyone.
The question is whether or not it should be.
The Bond news comes shortly after it was announced that the Little Mermaid character would also be playedby a black actress in an upcoming live-action remake of the 1989 classic, causing similarly divided social media reaction. Before that, there was the controversy over the casting of a black actress in the role of the white, red-haired Annie in 2014 – and the way things are going, a black female Bond won’t be the end of it, either.
Amid all of the outrage and celebrations, only a few are pointing out the laziness of rehashing the same old stories with ‘diversified’ casts in blatant attempts to make bag-loads of money pandering to more varied demographics – all without having to get the creative juices flowing to come up with entirely new characters and storylines.
Perhaps afraid to pour money into untested ideas, Hollywood studios are churning out remakes a dime a dozen – but the creative inertia could backfire if enough people decide that Bond (and the rest of the modernized remakes) are no longer worth the price of a movie ticket.
If the opposite happens and people eat up the recycled offerings, then we can look forward to an endless stream of tedious remakes of everything from The Sound of Music to Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.
ALSO ON RT.COMDisney makes Little Mermaid’s Ariel black, a win for diversity or pandering to PC culture?The trend also points to an arguably insulting assumption that women – of any race – would be so overwhelmed with gratitude to be ‘given’ a traditionally male role.
In an era when Hollywood actresses talk so much about a lack of strong female leads, one might assume they’d be happier to see each other take on new, challenging roles in female-driven stories – instead of being placated by the offer of recycled male roles that have been around for decades.
Does everything old need to be fixed? If a movie franchise is outdated, surely the better option is to simply move on and make something new? Bond critics have long said the character is a womanizing player unfit for the #MeToo era – or, a “sleazy sexist pig” as one tweeter put it. Why is the solution to that to simply turn the 007 character into a woman? Even if that description of Bond is apt, “sleazy sexist pigs” do exist in the world and erasing them from the plots of all movies to sanitize stories for the sake of political correctness is quite unrealistic.
If the latest obsession with rewriting movie history to be less ‘sexist’ and ‘racist’ continues in the current vein, audiences may soon start to catch on to the fact that this lazy pandering is more about Hollywood studios making a quick buck than genuine interest in diversity and inclusivity.
Then they’ll realize they’ve been duped all over again.
Like this story? Share it with a friend!
This is an article from our series on disgusting western propaganda
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.