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 (11335)
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

[–] ShogunofYonkers (78608) 9 months ago

Kind of funny that a realistic film about the New York mob needs a content advisory😄

WHHAAAAA! This movie about killers, thieves, arsonists, junkies and philanderers contains shocking scenes I wasn’t prepared for! If only I had been warned😭

Bunch of crybabies out there.

[–] Mrmojo4700 (21723) 9 months ago

I found Goodfellas on a Blu-ray steelbook at my local thrift store so I recently gave it a rewatch. I had forgotten Samuel L Jackson had a small role in it. That guy really was in everything. lol

[–] ShogunofYonkers (78608) 9 months ago

‘Stacks’ Edward’s👍

Drove the getaway van, went home, parked at a fire hydrant and got ticketed. He was supposed to drive it out to a crusher yard the same night. True story!

I don’t remember if his remains were ever found.

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

I think it's more that they use racist slurs. It doesn't matter that the majority are about the Irish, and Italians. Some people find that very offensive. It's been said before, but I would much rather they put a little warning before the movie than edit it for streaming or home viewing. I mean Disney edited Aladdin for VHS. I think the only place you can hear the original lyrics for Arabian Nights is if you bought the soundtrack while the movie was still in theatres. While I don't really disagree on the changes for that song other than it sounds obviously like an edit, I couldn't imagine watching something like Mississippi Burning with the N word removed. I'd much rather see a warning that said this film reflects the time and place it is set in. Some people might find it offensive.

[–] ShogunofYonkers (78608) 9 months ago

I don’t mind content advisories but the corporate-speak in the OP was insulting to the intelligence. Do we need to be warned that in Rocky some guys are gonna get beat about the head and belly?

For parents of young children I would expect they wouldn’t show the kids Full Metal Jacket but OK, some people are idiots.

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

I get that. I really do. I don't really need content advisories either. But someone might not have an issue with violence, which they probably expect in a gangster movie, but they might not know that there are going to be racial slurs, and they may have an issue with that. I also have no issues with warnings specific to sexual violence opposed to just "regular" violence.

This is just my thought, and I'm not part of the crew that created this "corporate-speak". but to me the comment about modern day inclusion and tolerance is directly related to the racism in the movie. Again, this is just my opinion, but a parent might be okay with their children watching a movie with violence, but maybe not wanting their children to be exposed to racial slurs.

[–] ShogunofYonkers (78608) 9 months ago

I mostly agree with you but the ‘offended culture’ has gained too much ground, it’s almost a hobby or a fetish for certain people to freak out over things that are a given. Italian mobsters treating Jews, women and Blacks in a demeaning way is to be expected, gangsters are deplorable people. I’d like to hear from anybody that requires any kind of content warning when they decide to show a gangland movie to their family.

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

Someone our age gets that. I don't know if a 17 year old gets it. I mean I'm assuming I'm similar to you in that I grew up hearing slurs. It doesn't affect me the same way it might affect someone who has had it drilled into them that it's completely unacceptable to do that ever.

I get that it seems silly. I really do. I just don't see the big deal about adding a warning that includes that, compared to rating warnings that we've had for the last 40 years. They are just being a little more inclusive as to what might not be suitable for some viewers.

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

"inclusive" - there it is. BUZZWORD for the 2020s.

How was it any different before? How was it NOT inclusive? ANYBODY can go see anything. It's up to themselves to police their intake in this world. Just like I do, and just like everybody else on the planet does. I don't need every tiny detail listed out for me just incase I see something that might offend or trigger me... that's on me to deal with it. Shit happens, we cope, and move on. That is what life is.

We've got to stop protecting the weak, people of stupid. They literally need these life things to toughen them up. Because life is NOT a bed of roses. You have to work hard at it.

I don't want six trillion little warning signs on everything about every little thing. That is truly INSANE!!!!!

[–] Kowalski (79156) 9 months ago

NO...WE DO NOT NEED TO STOP PROTECTING THE "WEAK"....THAT IS WHAT MAKES US HUMAN...WHAT IN THE FUCK ARE YOU?

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

How was it NOT inclusive?

There are a ton of movies made in previous decades that lacked diversity. That's not a secret. Like I said, I would much rather have a warning before a movie, than have that movie disappear.

I'm not arguing that it seems to have gone overboard, but I actually appreciate some of the warnings. Like one that includes "sexual violence", which is completely different than just violence, especially if it's not in a movie where I am expecting it.

We've got to stop protecting the weak, people of stupid. They literally need these life things to toughen them up.

I agree with you to a point with this. I'm just not sure what you are wanting to protect people from. Is it just that you think that the world is fine the way it is and nothing should change about it? Inclusion might be a buzzword right now, but do I think that the idea behind it is wrong? No. No, I don't. Do I think that the methods of achieving inclusion are all messed up? Yes. Yes, I do.

Because life is NOT a bed of roses. You have to work hard at it.

Perhaps. But isn't the point to try to improve things for future generations? I'm sorry, but I'm the type of person who prefers to leave things better than when I found them. To be a hand up for those in need, and not kick them down. The times I have faltered there really weigh on me.

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

diversity push is playing out as a joke. people are wising up, BUSINESS is wising up, reality is reality and there is nothing anyone can do to change reality.
Indian people will mostly make films for and with indian people.
Chinese people will mostly make films for and with chinese people.
Black people will mostly make films for and with black people.

AND THAT IS ALL OKAY. Trying to please EVERYONE in one film is a joke. And it keeps failing.
That's like saying, "We'll sell tons more soup if we combine ALL the soup flavors together and sell it like that." Yeah, no. That's not how reality works.
We seem to be in a time where REALITY is no longer respected and fiction has taken it's place.

And guess what: White people tend to mostly make films with and for white people.
again, and that is okay.

RATINGS are what they are: a little note of warning. Not a surgical deconstruction of every possibly offensive word being uttered in the film, and warning everyone... again, that is totally unrealistic. Where would it stop?? You don't want to view sexual violence (I respect that) but I don't like seeing people in film wearing Yellow and that is important to me... so we need warnings about THAT now. And someone else was hit by his parents with a shoe as a child, and never wants to see shoes in a movie... where would it stop?? This is LITERALLY the problem. Subjective moral enforcement. Good luck with that! :)

Let's PROTECT people from becoming watered down stupid due to allowing stupid to flourish as a "Choice". It's not a choice, and shouldn't be an option. We should be better, not looser, dumber, and allowing more stupid. That is making the world worse, and the smart people see it plain as day.
For inclusion, go back to my first paragraph. Is what it is. I've already always been "inclusive": I watch everything, if it is entertaining, never caring about people's color or sex. I don't SEE the problem. Just people whining about white people only making white movies.... see paragraph one again.

I LOVE change, I LOVE improvement, but ONLY ONLY ONLY if it is for the better. Shoe horning in blacks, gays, women, men, whites, whatever into every movie to "Change" or improve, just makes that soup that interests nobody.

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

India, China, South Korea, and Nollywood etc are mostly homogeneous populations. The US isn't. While I don't agree with quotas, I don't have an issue seeing non white people in film.

I also think that your comparison to someone not wanting to see a violent rape, to seeing the colour yellow as ridiculous.

I've also not said that I want warnings for every little thing. Nor do I think that there are warnings for every little thing. What I'm saying and have said several times, that they don't really bother me, nor do they take any thing away once I've started watching the film. If they start editing that stuff out, or making the movies disappear (Song of the South) that's when I get pissed off.

I don't think that our opinions are really that different here. I'm just not going to get all worked up, and upset when I see a warning.

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

"I also think that your comparison to someone not wanting to see a violent rape, to seeing the colour yellow as ridiculous."

Thank you, that is a PERFECT example of "Subjective moral enforcement" and you dsiplayed my point perfectly.
YOU are deciding which offense is ridiculous.... OF MINE. When we all get to do that, there is NOTHING left in the world. Just a movie showing a grey painted wall, and nothing else, for two hours. And even that color will offend someone somewhere.

I'm fine agreeing with our agreeing :D but you are allowing the tip of the ice berg that I, and many others, see as THE massive slippery slope. So, I want to stop that. We already have a rating system in place that has been very effective for decades - before the internet gave everyone's personal offense as voice as most important of the moment.

Here's where it's headed (and this happens TODAY already) its a 1.5 minute clip
https://youtu.be/9y07mDRJUcU?si=Je4XL0rrArdPbXSG&t=21

"Anything that makes me uncomfortable should be illegal!!" hahhah exactly

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

I'm sorry that you cannot see how a violent rape can actually be triggering to someone with PTSD from a sexual assault. If someone like a soldier has PTSD from war, and didn't want to see a shoot up movie, they can easily avoid that. Unless a movie is marketed as like a rape revenge film, those scenes can pop up without knowing. Something like The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo for instance.

The colour yellow is visible every day in a lot of places.

Completely different.

You say that the rating system has been in place for years and it's fine. I'm saying that I don't get upset when they add sexual violence, instead of just saying violence, sex, and or nudity.

I'm also not trying to enforce anything. I don't want movies to remove these situations. I'm just saying that warnings are not a bad thing.

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

You are only proving my point again, and still:

that YOUR values are more important than MY values and only yours get to survive as important.

Literally, what gives you the right? Nothing. Nothing gives you any right to decide this. (yes this is just an example for discussion) THIS is the entire problem. Who's morality gets to dictate everything? The LEFT's constantly moving goal posts seems like a really bad idea. BUT, they think it is in stone... and it is, for whomeever is making the decision AT THE TIME.

slippery slope.
luckily, dumb thing eat themselves and never last. because they don't really work. :)

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

It's not a value. It's an accommodation. You're asking what gives me the right? Well we are having a discussion, so I think that gives me right to express myself.

I honestly am a little baffled at how you can compare a colour, which appears in nature, to events like violence, sexual assault, and suicide. This to me is a bad faith argument.

I am only stating my preference here, to have a superfluous warning before a movie than to have the movie be edited or disappear. Am I okay with no warning? Again, yes I am. I just can tolerate them because i love film and I don’t want to see movies disappear. If that warning makes such a difference to you that you can no longer enjoy an unaltered film, then I would ask how that makes you different to those on this magical "left" where everyone thinks exactly the same way?

Let me go one hypothetical question even further. If a studio put a warning for a scene about homosexual intercourse, do you think that the magical "right" where everyone thinks exactly the same way, would be upset? Would they complain? Or might they think twice about watching?

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

no, I'm saying why does it get to be up to you to decide right and wrong for what is moral and what isn't? OBVIOUSLY, we are bantering back and forth for the discussion, but it is not about our bantering, it is about the topic of right and wrong.

And you are baffled by the wrong thing. Don't focus on the anecdotal specifics of our example, focus on the wide perspective of the problem. It's not about RAPE verses a COLOR, it's about YOUR VIEW verses MY view.

Let's make it fit your example: pretend the color BLUE triggers you (instead of rape violence), and Yellow triggers me.... do you get it now?

It's not about the warning on the films per se, it's about this new need to label and define everything and create protection for the fragile peoples. We need people to be tougher now, not weaker and more hurt by everything....

We'll never eliminate the hurts and pains from life, it's better to TRAIN people to cope properly.

How will you fix the world? Send everyone to therapy constantly so they can talk and talk and talk and never accomplish anything, or throw a bunch of tacks on the ground and teach people to recognize, assess, cope, and manage things?

Sign, sign, every where a sign....

Everything was working just fine, until people decided being offended was something they thought they could control in others. Nope. That's not how life works.

That would be like someone expecting someone else to use wrong pronouns. How dumb can we be? We've hit rock bottom, no where to go but up now.

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

it is about the topic of right and wrong.

But what is right? I believe that treating people with kindness, and acceptance, even if I don't understand why they feel the way they do, is what's right.

Let's make it fit your example: pretend the color BLUE triggers you (instead of rape violence), and Yellow triggers me.... do you get it now?

No. Quite frankly I don't get it. You are using the analogy of colours. If say that colours didn't exist in the natural world, and they were something that could be removed from film and you wanted a warning about colour in a film, I wouldn't always understand it, but if could save you from emotional hardship, I wouldn't freak out if there was a warning at the beginning of a film which said that there would be colours present in the following film.

We'll never eliminate the hurts and pains from life, it's better to TRAIN people to cope properly.

So I suppose wheelchair ramps, hearing aids, or any sort of mobility aid aren't really needed because we should just tell those people to toughen up?

Everything was working just fine, until people decided being offended was something they thought they could control in others. Nope. That's not how life works.

Translation. Everything was working fine for YOU. Who gives a shit if it wasn't working fine for others right?

That would be like someone expecting someone else to use wrong pronouns.

Wrong pronouns for who? You, or the person you are addressing? Completely different topic, and one that I'm frankly sick of. If you don't want to address people the way they want to be addressed, or even call them by their preferred name, then don't. If someone wants to call you 123Girl, let them. It doesn't matter.

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

2nd paragraph, I agree, you don't get it. You remain focused on the details and not the overall arc. And that's fine.

let's just agree to disagree on this one and move on. :)

And you are right the insane stupidity pushing the acceptance of the pronoun thing is a completely different topic, yet perfectly related to the allowance of dumbness in society... which is the overall arc of this topic.
"I identify as a TREE. Call me a tree."

Stop
Supporting
Stupid

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

You remain focused on the details and not the overall arc. And that's fine.

I don't think I am, but that's fine.

I think that you are missing my arc. Like I've said soooooo many times here. I don't see the need for all the warnings. BUT...I would rather have warnings than removals.

You keep mentioning views, and morality. I am not trying to bring morality in to this. It's not about who's views are right for me, it's the idea that art can be removed. In the digital age, there is a chance that that book, movie, tv show can just disappear. Especially if it's never had a physical release.

I do think that it's a small minority of people who have issues with these topics that we are getting warnings for. I also think that companies care more about profit than people.

I'm an avid reader. I love books, and I was never censored by my parents ever for what I was reading. I did have other adults telling me that I shouldn't be reading certain books, but never my own. I really dislike when they change text in books for new readers instead of having conversations about why certain words were used at a time. I'm also staunchly opposed to book bans.

It's so much easier to get books banned than to get movies removed. But again, it's a minute part of the population who complains. Did you know that in 2021 Just 11 people were responsible for filing 60 percent of book challenges? Challenges from one parent lead to a temporary banning of 444 books in a school district in Wisconsin. the last 6 months of 2023 had a record number of bannings. Many of those books are banned without the person complaining about them even reading them. I could go on.

So yeah, while you are getting upset about content warnings, I'm more worried about movies going the Song of the South route.

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

we should totally start a book banning discussion in politics or somewere. :) I'm against bans and censorship as well, BUT, R rated topics in school libraries should have never existed in the first place. R rated movies are 18 and over, but but r rated books allowed in schools?

anyway, a different topic :)

[–] Kowalski (79156) 9 months ago

Let's make it fit your example: pretend the color BLUE triggers you (instead of rape violence), and Yellow triggers me.... do you get it now?

GREEN...RIGHT?....IS THAT THE ANSWER?

123GIRL😂...LMAO...THAT'S A WINNER...NO WAY THAT'S NOT STICKING.😂

[–] Kowalski (79156) 9 months ago

PERHAPS THE WARNING IS MOSTLY FOR UNSUPERVISED YOUNGER VIEWERS THEN...I DOUBT ALI KNOWS WHAT GOODFELLAS IS BEYOND A WELL LIKED FILM...I ALSO DOUBT SHE WOULD BE AWARE OF THE CONTENT...NOT THAT SHE WOULD BE BOTHERED BY IT...BUT A DIFFERENT KID...WHO WASN'T RAISED BY KOWALSKI™️ MIGHT ACTUALLY APPRECIATE THE WARNING.

[–] Kowalski (79156) 9 months ago

OH...I JUST THOUGHT OF THIS...OR PEOPLE NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH AMERICAN CULTURE...THEY MIGHT ALSO APPRECIATE SUCH A WARNING.

[–] capuchin (3369) 9 months ago

Or even just someone who isn't in the mood for a film like that in this particular moment. 'Oh, this might be heavier than I thought it was going to be.'

I basically don't use content warnings at all, but even I've done that on at least one occasion. 'Contains scenes of sexual assault.'

Oh, OK, maybe not right now then...

[–] Kowalski (79156) 9 months ago

EXACTLY...I COULD TOTALLY SEE MYSELF THINKING TWICE ABOUT WATCHING MORE RAPE...I GET ENOUGH OF THAT AT MOVIE CLUB.

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

Exactly. Nudity, and violence, don't say sexual assault to me. There are times when I can't watch that stuff, and when it pops up when you aren't expecting it, it can be triggering.

[–] capuchin (3369) 9 months ago

Yeah. Usually, I don't even read the content stuff. It just sort of flashes up for a moment in the top corner of the screen.

But for the fourth episode of Baby Reindeer, it's right there in the middle of the screen. And I thought 'Well, there was a fairly unpleasant sexual assault in the last episode, and you didn't feel a need to warn me about that one like that -- so this one must be pretty graphic. Not. Right. Now.'

I'll get around to it, but I wasn't in the mood to sit through that the other day. So, yes, I can perfectly see why this information is useful for people. It's not over-sensitivity; people bring different things to a film, so we react in different ways to them.

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

Good fellows is rated "R".
That should be plenty of "trigger warning" for normal people. That's what the ratings are for.
If someone doesn't understand RATED R, they should never attend movies, period.

Bunch of idiots out there these days. We need to stop protecting them.

[–] capuchin (3369) 9 months ago

the corporate-speak in the OP was insulting to the intelligence

I agree with this. This particular content warning seems to have been written by someone who can't actually formulate proper English sentences, but only speaks corporate.

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

This film includes language and/or cultural stereotypes that may offend some viewers

I think both versions of the sentence above convey the same intended meaning, but whoever wrote it just couldn't help but lard it up with the fatuous phrasing you might find on their company's 'mission statement'.

[–] Kowalski (79156) 9 months ago

THAT MAKES SENSE...WELL SAID.

[–] sslssg (35200) 9 months ago

I agree with that and like your version, just trying to think about it from the other side, a cultural stereotype isn't the same as hearing a character call someone a racial slur. Do I think that they could have worded it better? Absolutely. But inclusion seems to be the current buzzword so I get why they used it.

[–] capuchin (3369) 9 months ago

Yup.

As I've said elsewhere in the thread, I've got no issue with content advice / warnings. Some people find them useful and they don't get in my way at all. So that's fine. But that is a horribly prolix and clunky one. Netflix and the BBFC both do this stuff better.

[–] Stratego (31085) 9 months ago

It's ridiculous. Anyone who's too sensitive to this should just turn it off. It's absurd to add a warning for this kind of stuff. Some people might be triggered by a person picking their nose. That's their problem, not everybody else's.

[–] ShogunofYonkers (78608) 9 months ago

We have a pretty standard ‘parental warning’ tag here regarding language, violence, nudity etc. and I get that. But to speak down to the audience in such a preachy way is just corporate PC nonsense. Of course these guys are awful, violent and dishonest, they are in the Mafia, duh!

[–] Kowalski (79156) 9 months ago

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

AND FIVE SECONDS LATER THE MOVIE PLAYS UNALTERED.

I DON'T SEE THE ISSUE HERE.🫤

[–] BKB (11335) 9 months ago

The issue is that they felt the need to post that disclaimer anyway given how we live in such a pussified society now where YES, everyone is offended and I suppose they felt the content would offend those particular people..

[–] Skavau (15993) 9 months ago

Reminder that this user thinks Taylor Swift is satanic

And has the temerity to talk about being offended

[–] KiwiJim (1814) 9 months ago

Yeah these warnings are unnecessary but I would pay as much attention to them as I do to the maturity ratings. I was surprised that the cultural/racial warnings have been around since 2010 though, I’ve read a lot about them but I haven’t seen a single one myself.

[–] BKB (11335) 9 months ago

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/news/it-s-an-insult-goodfellas-actor-blasts-amc-s-trigger-warning-for-mobster-movie/ar-BB1naTEu?ocid=msedgntp&pc=SMTS&cvid=084e8518fbd44cc8a89eefa589202bd7&ei=16

One of the Cast members also bagging on this nonsense from AMC.. 🙄

[–] 123Guy (7841) 9 months ago

...but the woild is a skaawy, skawwy pwace, an I need protection from all bad things in life, and am not capable of learning to cope with reality or deal with anything but getting trophies every time I take a pee and being told I can do anything... ANYTHING!

(sigh) we brought this on ourselves
"whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap"

[–] Kowalski (79156) 9 months ago

YOU SURE IMAGINE YOURSELF TO BE ULTRA MACHO...THAT IS VERY TELLING.

[–] kspkap (13629) 9 months ago

” Oscar-winning director Steven Spielberg has said he regrets editing guns out of his classic 1980s movie E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial.

” The 1982 theatrical cut includes a scene where police officers chase young children while holding firearms.

Spielberg edited the guns out of the 20th anniversary release of the film and replaced them with walkie talkies.

"That was a mistake," Spielberg told a master class at the Time 100 Summit in New York City.

"I never should have done that.

"E.T. is a product of its era. No film should be revised based on the lenses we now are, either voluntarily, or being forced to peer through.

THIS^^^^

[–] moviechatterer (16326) 9 months ago

Its stupid yes , is it worth worrying about?

Look at all the free publicity we ,and all the media publishing articles about it, are giving to the culprits of this stupidity

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7993) 9 months ago

It's probably referring to the line, "2 ******* just stole my truck!"