MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > AMC triggers backlash for adding warning...

AMC triggers backlash for adding warning to 'Goodfellas' for stereotypes that don't match modern 'inclusion'

posted 9 months ago by BKB (11260)
92 replies | jump to latest

https://www.foxnews.com/media/amc-triggers-backlash-adding-warning-goodfellas-stereotypes-dont-match-modern-inclusion

AMC Networks faced backlash after it placed a warning before classic 1990 mobster film "Goodfellas," cautioning viewers it may defy modern cultural norms.

"This film includes language and/or cultural stereotypes that are inconsistent with today’s standards of inclusion and tolerance and may offend some viewers," the warning read.

A representative from AMC told The New York Post that "In 2020, we began adding advisories in front of certain films that include racial or cultural references that some viewers might find offensive." However, the Post noted other mob movies are not given the same warning, instead given more typical cautions about nudity and violence."

"The f–king political correctness has f–king taken everything away," A former NYPD cop, who played a police officer in "Goodfellas," Bo Ditel told The Post. "This is how life was back then. It was not a clean beautiful thing. You can’t cleanse history. If you want to tell true history, you gotta tell it the way it is."

Michael Franzese, a one-time captain of the Colombo crime family responded to the warning, "We don’t need anyone protecting mob guys. It’s crazy."

Oh for Christ sake!! I've had just about enough of all of this "Inclusiveness" crap and now, we're adding warnings to classics like GOODFELLAS for the overly sensitive soy boy generation that can't handle it.. If you want to avoid all of this political correctness crap, just watch it on Blu Ray the way it was intended..

https://giphy.com/gifs/transparent-V6hu7KlTY3PtC

[–] mtxmind (3296) 9 months ago

https://www.gocomics.com/bloomcounty/1982/11/14

P.S. - this might be better off on the politics board.😎

[–] kspkap (13625) 9 months ago

Just Priceless! 🙇🏼‍♀️🤷🏼‍♀️

[–] AndyKing1967 (39764) 9 months ago

It will still and always be one of my favourite films of all time.

[–] Skavau (15993) 9 months ago

>Oh for Christ sake!! I've had just about enough of all of this "Inclusiveness" crap and now, we're adding warnings to classics like GOODFELLAS for the overly sensitive soy boy generation that can't handle it.. If you want to avoid all of this political correctness crap, just watch it on Blu Ray the way it was intended..

This would have more punch if it didn't come from the same user who only days ago posted a thread crying about how Taylor Swift is satanic.

[–] capuchin (3358) 9 months ago

"The f–king political correctness has f–king taken everything away,"

In this instance, precisely nothing has been taken away. They've just added a content advisory warning. A lot of films have these. Most films I watch on streaming services seem to have them, in fact. Presumably, they're considered useful by some viewers and for those of us who don't feel we need them, we can just breeze right past them.

I see them come up in the corner of my screen pretty frequently. Usually, I barely notice them.

But they're fine. Consumers should be able to make informed decisions about what they do and do not watch. What isn't acceptable to me is editing things out (like Disney did with The French Connection), but it's fine to give people information.

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4530) 9 months ago

Nailed it. I'd take content warnings 100% of the time. Cause all it's doing is telling you of the era it was made in.

Cause movies like that are an "authentic representation" of the era it was made in.

Movies nowadays that are set in the past seem to be "squeaky clean". In terms of representing the people, era & language.

You don't have to like it but that was how shit was back then.

[–] capuchin (3358) 9 months ago

Cause all it's doing is telling you of the era it was made in.

A lot of the time, yes.

I've got no issue with people wanting and having this kind of information. In the UK, the BBFC has been providing this kind of additional information for viewers for many, many years now. And it's been doing so because -- in a big public consultation -- viewers asked for it. They want to make informed decisions about what they (and their children) watch. And knowing the certificate isn't enough for them. They want to know why it was given that certificate. Fine. The sky hasn't fallen in.

Perhaps, (if people think this stuff contains potential spoilers), streaming services might include an option to turn them off. But, as I say, I barely notice them. I certainly don't go out of my way to read them. But if other people find them useful, it's no skin of my nose. More power to them.

Informed decision-making is good.

Provide people with the tools they need. But no editing the past.

[–] M1sterDoct0r (4530) 9 months ago

But no editing the past

Amen to that.

The reason I prefer content warnings is that the alternative for these studios is editing stuff that they deem "problematic".

Or removing episodes from certain shows. Y'all can't just act like that shit never happened.

[–] capuchin (3358) 9 months ago

Yeah. I'm dead against all of that. Films and television shows are documents of their eras. Re-editing them is treating them as mere commodities (to be repurposed for modern sensibilities) rather than as cultural artefacts and part of a shared heritage. It's basic philistinism as far as I'm concerned. They are what they are.

And, yes, George Lucas, I'm including you in that too.

[–] mtxmind (3296) 9 months ago

They've just added a content advisory warning. A lot of films have these. Most films I watch on streaming

The specific & opinionated language of this particular disclaimer does go a bit beyond the usual general content warnings-

This film includes language and/or cultural stereotypes that are inconsistent with today’s standards of inclusion and tolerance and may offend some viewers," the warning read.

You gotta admit, the part I highlighted in bold goes beyond the pale for a standard content advisory.

[–] capuchin (3358) 9 months ago

I'll concede it's very corporate-speak and certainly not how I'd word it.

[–] mtxmind (3296) 9 months ago

And this also raises the question:

Are they going to start applying "content advisorys" like this to, say Breaking Bad, because of its depiction of Latinos as meth dealers?

How about "Once Upon A Time in America" for its depiction of Jewish involvement in the Mafia?

"Gangs of New York" for its depiction of the Irish?

[–] capuchin (3358) 9 months ago

Well, I don't really know. I don't really care. I don't personally need them. If other people feel they do, then that's fine with me -- whatever they're applied to and whatever the potential sensitivity might be.

I care much more about things being available unexpurgated. Content advisory warnings: fine. People make their own choices. But you take away that choice by re-editing or otherwise interfering with the material to accommodate these contemporary sensitivities and I have a problem with you.

[–] curiousMInd101 (4540) 9 months ago

I reject today's standards of inclusion and tolerance. We need new standards that are more in line with traditional standards of exclusion and intolerance.

[–] WandererFromYs (2403) 9 months ago

The content warning in this case is warning about a lack of diversity. This implies that this is something to be offended by. Even though it’s a movie about a specific group of people, during a specific time period, and at least partially based on a true story. Diversity doesn’t make much sense here. And Samuel L Jackson is still in the movie.

And who exactly would be triggered by this other than a racist? That’s the only way to describe people that would be offended by seeing too many white people.

[–] capuchin (3358) 9 months ago

The content warning in this case is warning about a lack of diversity.

Not sure where you've got that idea from. Unless the reported statement:

This film includes language and/or cultural stereotypes that are inconsistent with today’s standards of inclusion and tolerance and may offend some viewers

isn't the entire 'warning', then it says nothing whatsoever about a lack of diversity. I mean, you'd certainly be right that diversity wouldn't make much sense in Goodfellas. This is a film about Italian-American gangsters centred around an Italian-American neighbourhood. But that's not what the warning as reported says.

But I'm not going to get into a debate about the semantics of it -- as I honestly don't care what the warning is about. As I've said repeatedly, the important thing to me is that the material is unexpurgated. They could warn about the presence of processed meat products if that's a sensitive issue for somebody out there. It makes no substantive difference to my own viewing choices.

[–] WandererFromYs (2403) 9 months ago

The reported statement has modern standards of inclusion right in it. Inclusion usually implies some sort of diversity.

If we are just talking about the language and stereotypes, then I would point out Italian writers, Italian director, majority Italian cast, based on Italian Americans. If nothing else, they are going to get the culture right, and no one from that culture is going to be offended. It’s going to be others getting offended on their behalf.

[–] moviechatterer (16300) 9 months ago

I think all you angry offended people , NO , not them - not what you call "snowflake soy boys" I'm talking about you - all the angry OFFENDED posters saying "FFS , cant have anything anymore in case someone is offended" , need to take a step back and realize
- the movie is still there, unchanged , is hasnt been banned
- how come you cant handle a little warning at the start ?
- do you feel the same about the "18" certificate ( or whatever in your country) ?

watch it on Blu Ray the way it was intended
It Hasnt Changed ffs

You claim to be the generation that doesent get offended and look at you , crying like little babies
Would it help if they put up a little warning to alert you about the content warning ?
Are you just looking for things to get upset about?

Also isnt this incredibly old news reposted thats set you all off an got you all hot under the collar all over again ? this happened in 2020.

[–] Keelai (36087) 9 months ago

I have always been offended about Hollywood's stereotyping of Italians as being stupid and in the mafia. That's probably the reason for the disclaimer.

[–] spacecomedy (2060) 9 months ago

Tommy D would agree with you...

Tommy: Okay, what? She don't want to go out with Italians alone. She's prejudiced against Italians. Do you believe that? In this day and age? What the fuck is the world coming to? I can't believe this, prejudiced against Ital—a Jew broad—prejudiced against Italians. Anyway, she won't go out with me alone unless her girlfriend comes with her, so I figured you could come along and go out with her girlfriend.

Of course, he was also a complete psychopath...so there's that.

[–] Keelai (36087) 9 months ago

Pesce was really good in that film, but he usually is.

[–] coreydude (331) 9 months ago

They should make the same trigger warning for movies like "Car Wash" and "Tarzan of the Apes".

[–] AndyKing1967 (39764) 9 months ago

Which reminds me: -
https://youtu.be/-t_LAEGcnRY?si=SCn9Jmnek_Qvi6hH

[–] BKB (11260) 9 months ago

I'm curious as to why FAMILY GUY never received the big screen treatment like The SIMPSON'S did?? Not as popular?? 🤔

[–] AndyKing1967 (39764) 9 months ago

I guess Seth MacFarlane is too busy. In the meantime: -
https://youtu.be/t30JzS0LHpk?si=1AayEtVhDicDq2FA