I love Kathy Bates but this is more D.E.I gender swapping bullshit. It's designed to erase popular strong male characters and replace them with women or sexual minorities. It's cringe and needs to stop.
The person responsible for these decisions needs to be blacklisted and forbidden to work in the entertainment industry.
FALSE.
shareWhat do you mean?
share"Kathy Bates stars as Madeline Matlock, a lawyer who winks at NBC's 1986-95 iconic lawyer played by Andy Griffith. But the similarities end there."
shareYeah but the point still stands. They made a show about a lawyer whose name is Matlock but now it focuses on a female rather then a male. I still would call this a form of gender swapping. They have replaced a popular man character with a woman because man are bad and they need to be decentered. This has become a common pattern. Have you not seen it?
share I still would call this a form of gender swapping.
THEN YOU WOULD BE WRONG.
They have replaced a popular man character with a woman because man are bad and they need to be decentered.
FALSE.
This has become a common pattern. Have you not seen it?
DUDE...WOMEN ARE PEOPLE JUST LIKE MEN...CHARACTERS ARE FICTIONAL.
Yeah, but you have not really addressed my points. I'm trying to explain to you that this is a pattern and it is deliberate.
In recent years, there's been a noticeable and widespread trend in entertainment toward swapping races and genders and incorporating diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) themes. It's intentional, not random. Movies, TV shows, and video games constantly alter characters to align with DEI values. This push for representation is driven largely by a vocal minority of woke advocates. Studios adopt these changes to appease this vocal group and avoid controversy, rather than appealing to the broad mass of people. I just don't understand how you don't notice this pattern, given its prevalence across various forms of media.
I READ ALL YOUR WORDS...YOU'RE FULL OF SHIT AND SEEMINGLY TERRIFIED OF WOMEN.
shareIf you read all my words than you would know that what I'm saying is the truth and supported by evidence. I feel like you're denying reality and I just don't get why. Are you trying to be a contrarian or just be defiant?
And I love women, i just hate DEI, and I hate Wokes.
YOU EITHER HATE WOMEN OR YOU ARE SCARED OF THEM...ONE OF THE OTHER.
shareI love women. I'm not scared of them, I think they are great. But I hate Wokes and I think they should be [TOS Violation]
shareYour insecurity is showing. Women are getting equal footing in movies and television and you can't take it. Of course there are more women in media now, of course it's deliberate, do you know how long women have been treated as second class citizens? Black men were allowed to go to college before women.
share💯
shareThey should be treated as second class citizens. White men should always be on top. It's a White men's world and everyone else is just living in it. The media should reflect that.
shareSo here is where it gets stupid. Is this a genuine position or are you just playing the fool, or "venting" again? Every post with you is an example of poe's law. If it is serious, what does it mean that women should be "second-class citizens" in terms of entertainment? How should this even work?
shareThe world must be very scary for you. There is a way for you to live without that fear and evolve but I'm willing to bet that you will just continue to live in fear. What a weak man.
shareDon't take the gaslighting by Kowalski and aavfreak. They're being intentionally obtuse on this. She's not playing "Ben Matlock", she's just playing a lawyer with coincidentally the same name, and the TV show will also have a one word title, coincidentally the same as the old TV show. But no, it's not a gender swap, because she's a NEW character.
Bitches puhleeze!
She's not playing "Ben Matlock", she's just playing a lawyer with coincidentally the same name, and the TV show will also have a one word title, coincidentally the same as the old TV show. But no, it's not a gender swap, because she's a NEW character.
CORRECT.
How do you not call it Gender swapping when they're using a very popular Lawyer's last name that everyone pretty well knows unless you've been in a Coma and revive it using a female this time out?? Just accept that's basically what is?? I mean, the only thing they need now to branch it together is a picture of Andy Griffith in the lobby of the Law Firm 🤔
shareNot a gender swap on this one. It's a different character only coincidentally with the same last name.
So they are not playing the same character?
shareNo, not the same character. In the trailer she introduces herself as "I'm Madeline Matlock. I'm a lawyer. Yeah, Matlock, like the old TV show."
shareAs I mentioned above in a reply to another poster, I still consider this a form of gender swapping. They basically took the character of Matlock who is a man and a popular character, and replaced him with a woman who has the same last name and is in the same profession. It's just another example of erasing popular White male characters in favor of women and sexual minorities and racial minorities. It's just cringe.
shareYOU'RE WRONG...DOESN'T REALLY MATTER WHAT YOU CONSIDER....AS YOU ARE WRONG.
I MIGHT CONSISER MY NEIGHBOR A COCKSUCKING TROLL...DOES NOT MEAN HE IS.
I can appreciate that's how you see it, but I don't see it that way.
If the premise were the same and it was just updated for a modern era, I would agree. But the premise is different. It looks to be just another legal procedural type show, where the character could have been named anything. The fact that they picked Matlock gives it instant name recognition and likely a few gags to play off of, but not an outright swap of the original Matlock.
Maybe you're right. I'm commenting on a show I've never watched, so I could be missing something. All I'd say is they shouldn't have used 'Matlock' as the title. It's cringe. They're just trying to ride the coattails of that great show because they don't have the guts to let it stand on its own merit. And they should have. I mean, it's Kathy Bates—she's always great. They don't need to ride Matlock's coattails. It's just cringe.
shareNot playing the same character, but using the same surname to wrangle in the last dozen or so non-discriminating television viewers at the assisted living facility who might remember the original.
shareIt's sad when even your Grandparents favorite TV shows isn't safe from this shit.
shareSAFE FROM WHAT?...BEING REFERENCED BY A NEW SHOW?...BEING RESPECTED AND LOVED ENOUGH FOR A NEW GENERATION TO WANT TO CREATE SOMETHING NEW THAT HONORS SOMETHING OLD?...BEING RETOLD?...THAT IS THE NATURE OF STORIES.
shareI know these Wokes are like locusts; they move from place to place, destroying everything in their wake by hollowing it out from the inside. It's sad and disgusting
shareSo what?
Is screaming DEI the new N WORD for dorkservative Whites now?
Fuck you NEIGHBOR.
I don't need to hide behind DEI to use the "N-word"
KKKalm down Grand Dragon.
There will be more hate rallies after the MAGA convention convenes.
Woah woah woah, hold on there partner...I'm not in the KKK. Eeeww. I'm a fascist neo-Nazi. I have standards. And I'm certainly not a Trump supporter, he's not doing anything to further White people's interests and supports faggotry like the Democrats.
shareThis one doesn't bother me. It's not like Matlock is this iconic character. She's a great actress, too, so I can see doing the gender swap if they could get her for the gig.
shareMatlock was a big deal back in the day. He was a pretty popular character but he was old so the younger generation didn't pay attention to him.
I agree that the one thing this show has going for it is that it has Kathy Bates. She is always great.
If you like Kathy Bates you'll love At Play in the Fields of the Lord, in which you get to see Bates twerking her blubber completely in the buff. One of the most amusing things about that film, which a couple of the characters do point out, is how Aidan Quinn was hitched to Kathy Bates while John Lithgow scored Daryl Hannah.
share"It's not like Matlock is this iconic character."
I disagree.
It's not a gender swap. It's a rip-off, pure and simple.
Had it been stated the character is a relative of Matlock with his quirky characteristics it would be homage, but that would have involved coughing up some cash. So, rip-off.
Kathy Bates as the lead character could use any name and draw an audience. Then the success would be dependent on the scripts.
That's what pisses me off, why even use the Matlock brand? Kathy Bates is good enough to carry a show on her own. Just have some fucking balls and make something original. Stop riding the coattails of other established brands. It just ends up feeling like some kind of bait and switch. It's cringe.
shareWhat I don't quite understand is the motivation to reboot a show that younger audiences at the time didn't care about and who today never heard of the show in the first place. If they're trying to rekindle the fond memories of senior citizens, they're the least likely to be accepting of major changes to the format, even if they do like Kathy Bates.
shareExcellent point. These TV producers are so out of touch with what people actually want to see.
share