Funny Movies

 

Puritanism -The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.

- H. L. Mencken

 

One hears all the time that Blazing Saddles (or Airplane or Animal House or Caddyshack or Young Frankenstein or Dr. Strangelove or Smokey and the Bandit or many others) could not be made today. It is probably true. We are in a prudish and puritanical time. It is interesting to remember that such films could not have been made much earlier than they were either.

Restrictions come in various forms – including direct government censorship (which is supposed to be illegal in this country), pressure from self-proclaimed defenders of public morality, and so-called self regulation  done as appeasement. Before the 1960s movie makers faced all three. State and local governments prohibited the showing of films on forbidden topics. The Catholic legion of decency and other pressure groups pushed filmmakers to avoid themes and content they considered immoral. The movie industry’s  trade association enforced  the Motion Picture Production Code which specified what was allowed and what was forbidden in movies. These days there are no production code and no censorship from American governments, but the pressure from the defenders of morality is pervasive and intense. Feminist, race hustling, LBGTQ, green, multicultural, “progressive”, and various other woke puritans are on full alert in social and other media to try to make sure that no one, anywhere in the movies is having any good, raucous, politically incorrect fun. They are as dogmatic and seem to be just about as successful with the movie industry as the other legionnaires of decency were in the old days.

Those of us who like that sort of fun can be glad there was a long period between one bunch of prudes losing power and another one gaining it. We can also be glad that for now at least, funny films from those days are still available. However it might be a good idea not to count on that remaining true. Streaming services seem like good targets for pressure to stop offering content someone deems inappropriate. I’d recommend a person going ahead and get copies of the stuff he likes  on his own media in his physical possession just in case.  The forces of decency are on the march.

It is an interesting aside that the puritans in the saddle today and the successors of the ones who were in the past generally despise and would like to cancel each other. There are amusing irony and useful lessons in that, but I doubt if many in either group would see them.

 

,

 

Hollywood, TV, and Business

Many people have noticed and complained that business people are usually depicted in American movies and TV shows (including news shows) as villains.  The usual explanation is that  the industry is controlled by leftists whose work displays their ideology.  While that is well supported by evidence, I think there may be another important reason for the bias. 

When one sees  a priest or preacher denounce all humanity as inherently base, wicked, and damnable, it is fair and useful to remember that the human being he knows best is himself.  When one sees a white American leftist denounce white Americans as vile, pampered, exploitive,  racial bigots who do not deserve anything they have, it is fair and useful to remember that the white American he knows best is himself.  Similarly when one sees people in the movie and TV business  depict  business people as vicious, scheming, unprincipled, hypocritical, brutal phonies and scoundrels, it is fair and useful to remember the business they know best is their own.

While the opinions of business they present are false about  the business world in general,  they  could be accurate and justified takes on business as practiced in  the  industry in which  they live and work  - one dominated by its Kevin Spaceys, Harvey Weinsteins, and Matt Lauers.  There they have direct experience and might know what they are talking about.