Hacker News Reader

Comment by maroonblazer | Hacker News Reader

>The roots of Brooks’s anger are surely complex, yet clues are scattered throughout his interviews. “I always felt it was my job to amuse those around me,” Brooks once said. “Don’t ask why.” You don’t need to be a Freudian to see how such a burden could stir up intense resentment, even rage, at an audience.

Several comedians I've come across seem to share this attribute. Robin Williams and Jonathan Waters immediately come to mind. To a lesser extent Martin Short. They seem almost desperate to get a laugh. It can become overbearing to those watching.

>Politically, Brooks was a liberal—or so people assumed after Blazing Saddles.

Ooof...some of the liberals you see these days (I consider myself liberal) would be outraged at "Blazing Saddles". I re-watched it recently and wasn't sure if the film would survive today.

View on HN

"Blazing Saddles" is complicated. It's dated, and was dated when it was made. The racist tropes it skewers weren't from 1974, or from the 1880s, but from the 30s and 40s -- as was much of the rest of it. (For example, Hedy Lamarr was 60 years old when the film was made, and had long since retired.) They were familiar enough to be joked about, and distant enough to not be an immediate threat. Today, many of the jokes need explanation, and that explanation can feel more like reviving racism than jeering at it.

It doesn't really poke fun at the racism of the 1970s but is instead immured in it. Parts are cringey and insulting in the way almost any reference to race from the period is. It's a bit like watching original Star Trek: progressive and chauvinist at the same time.

Many people can enjoy the film, including black people. But I'd be leery of white people explaining to black people why they shouldn't be offended by it. It's important and a classic, but I wouldn't recommend it to people.

Lindsay Ellis has a great video essay exploring this subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62cPPSyoQkE

> Ooof...some of the liberals you see these days (I consider myself liberal) would be outraged at "Blazing Saddles". I re-watched it recently and wasn't sure if the film would survive today.

I think Blazing Saddles still does OK with audiences, although it would be tough to make it in the first place.

IMO, The History of the World Part 2 has a much tougher time of it. The movie's attitudes towards women don't have any satire to lean on. It just comes across as crass and lecherous.

> Ooof...some of the liberals you see these days (I consider myself liberal) would be outraged at "Blazing Saddles". I re-watched it recently and wasn't sure if the film would survive today.

No it wouldn’t survive today. Too many people would have their feelings hurt and we can’t have that - even if it’s just for laughs. I recently watched it with my 13 year old daughter and I was shocked that she loved it (surprisingly) - after which I explained to her that these kinds of movies can’t be made anymore because too many people would be outraged.

>I explained to her that these kinds of movies can’t be made anymore because too many people would be outraged.

I don't get this attitude. I think movies like this aren't made any more because they wouldn't be original or worth making. They wouldn't be commercially viable. Outrage is only going to come from a minority, and everyone else just won't care.

I think we have so far passed the degree of shock that people don't even notice any more.

Borat, South Park, Tropic Thunder, Shameless, The Boondocks, examples are easy to find and I don't even care for this flavor of humor.

I guess these examples are mostly from several years ago or more, but I have been hearing "these kinds of movies can't be made anymore" for the last 20 years.

“Three white men sitting around saying the n-word?” My millennial girlfriend made it about five minutes into Blazing Saddles before she refused to watch. It didn’t matter that all three men were buffoons and villains and were being portrayed as such. It reminded me of my parents’ generation not getting that Beavis and Butthead were not role models. But no, I don’t think you can make movies like that today.

Yes you can definitely make something like Blazing Saddles today!

But the main obstacle isn't snowflakes (lol) it's that not many comedians match up to Mel Brooks or Richard Pryor. At worst it might be more difficult for a white guy to make it (I've seen lots of satire from black comedians that's more raw and uncomfortable then anything in Blazing Saddles) but if he was smart and was making fun of the racism it would be fine.

Your girlfriend is the exception.

I bet it would get more backlash from people who like to pretend racism doesn't exist then supposed liberal snowflakes.

It does include Richard Pryor in the writing credits. (I believe the opening 'Sing us a work song..' is all his, but I can't find a reference.) He was meant to be starring as the Sheriff but couldn't get bonded.

There are plenty of movies from the last decade with white people saying the N word both ironically and unironically.

> movies like this aren't made any more because they wouldn't be original or worth making

Are we thinking of the same film industry?

People make movies for two reasons: art or money. Comedies don't make money. That leaves art. Artists won't remake blazing saddles because it's been done before.

The artistic voices of this generation are making different art.

Check out jo Jo Rabbit

Jojo Rabbit is tame.

A friend of mine said his favorite moment in Blazing Saddles was the “beans around the campfire” scene. He’d already seen the movie but this time it was airing on TBS or some other station that edited it for content. It was the same scene but with particular sounds removed. If you remember the scene I’m sure you can guess which sounds. He said the absurdity of it made it funnier than unedited version when you already know what’s happening.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com