Hacker News Reader

Comment by andrepd | Hacker News Reader

>Not even sure you could make Blazing Saddles today either.

I keep hearing stuff like that, but why not? Why would you think it couldn't be done today?

Well, to start, the number of n-bombs they drop is super uncomfortable these days, even with satire in mind. I love the movie, but that aspect just feels off now, even though I understand the intent.

> Well, to start, the number of n-bombs they drop is super uncomfortable these days, even with satire in mind.

It was, then, too, and intentionally so in contrast to the sanitized approach to the time period in conventional cinema of the time.

OTOH, that specific thing that it is satirizing is far less current and relevant today, so I suppose without active consideration of context, it might seem gratuitous as well as uncomfortable.

You’re right. But this is pure satire. The joke is that the white plains-folk are way dumber than Sheriff Bart. It’s a mockery of how stupid racism is.

I understand that its a mockery, but the word carries a lot more weight now than it did. Even just rewatching it with someone who knows nothing about it is really weird, because I have to genuinely worry if they're getting the sarcasm or if they think it was just made by racist people. It's not a casual word anymore, and that definitely affects how the film works.

It couldn't be made today in that state, because nobody would be comfortable with the language used, regardless of its historical accuracy. A TV show about

It could (many films use the "nig---" word repeatedly, look no further than tarantino) and honestly it should. Racism in the USA was brutal and still continues to this day. We should not try to whitewash it because the word, of all things, offends us.

That sort of mentality is what leads people to try to ban Huckleberry Finn from school libraries, because the depiction itself offends their sensibilities, regardless of the underlying message.

I'll concede Tarantino films are a good example. I think maybe the difference is that Hateful Eight, Jackie Brown, Pulp Fiction, and Django aren't comedies, and it tends to be a lot less casual. I recall most cases in Django being very hateful, used for a purpose. BS dropped it very casually, as if the characters were normal people talking that way every day (which is pretty accurate).

I'm not claiming anything should be whitewashed or censored at all, just that language in a modern context has an effect on how a movie comes across to the audience. I don't think that a modern audience would find it funny without the social atmosphere of the 1970s. I'm making no claims about the quality of the movie itself, as it actually was made. Similarly, if Huck Finn was written today, I do think it would have a really hard time. It works because of the place it has in history.

They're not dumb, they're the common folk, the clay of the Earth.

> they're the common folk, the clay of the Earth.

"You know ... morons."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHJbSvidohg

RIP Cleavon Little (1932-92) and Gene Wilder (1933-2016).

Then it might be impossible to film Huckleberry Finn as well today.

Tarantino is proof that you can use as many "nig* * * *" words as you want, in the context of a film.

I don't think that really draws the ire most people expect it to, when it appears satirically.

As one example, here's an excerpt from the award-winning and highly popular Australian show Angry Boys, where a white character in blackface drops 37 n-bombs in 3 minutes. It aired on a publicly-owned broadcaster to no real disapproval.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJ8LM9NDGxk

Sorry To Bother You from 2018 has a particular scene that runs counter to this idea. Very funny too

Reply on news.ycombinator.com