Old TV shows are beating Hollywood's DEI agenda

[Flopper]

If that's the case, why are the diverse movies losing so much money and "normal" ones like Dune II making it hand over fist? I very much doubt the young people watching Dune ever read Frank Herbert's book.

Diverse Films Make More Money at the Box Office​

This is because most tickets saying go to younger audience, under 34 who are the group that wants more diversity movies. The group over 45 who that wants to see less diversity movies are the group that go to movies the least.

 

[Flopper]

Deliberately over representing black people in film casting, in television advertising, etc. is a form of affirmative action. And it is viewed negatively by a great many Americans who don't like having race thrown in their faces in that way. Again it is time to take advantage of the equality made available to all Americans and allow people to compete on merit instead of implementing affirmative action so that there is no question that they earned what they have. No competent, qualified person of ANY race should be questioned as to whether he/she merited his/her position rather than being the 'affirmative action' person.

Don't know about television advertising but I looking at the top 10 grossing movies who had 69 listed cast members. The blacks in movies are probably less than you think. There were 13 Blacks but that include 2 Asians, not sure of race but they were dark and 2 were mixed race, about half white. The percent worked out to 13% to 18% depending on how you count Blacks.

It might surprise you learn to learn that when it comes to traditional TV, African-Americans tune in nearly 213 hours per month, more than twice as much as Asians and roughly 57 hours more than Whites. Thus it should be expected that there will be a lot of Blacks in traditional TV advertising.

 

[Failzero]

Black people in 12th Century Ireland is pushin it

 

[Flopper]

Black people in 12th Century Ireland is pushin it

Have you ever looked at older western movies? How often did you see a Native American playing a major role as an Indian. When I was young, I saw so many blue eyed fair skinned Indians in movies, that I was really suppressed to see my first real Native American. I have seen movies set in China in which the entire cast were white Americans.

The first large group of Africans to arrive in Europe were kidnapped slaves in 1444. However there have been isolated cases of Blacks in Europe dating back to the Holy Wars between 1091 and 1294. Although not common, there certainly could have been Blacks in Europe for over a thousand years.

 

[Failzero]

Have you ever looked at older western movies? How often did you see a Native American playing a major role as an Indian. When I was young, I saw so many blue eyed fair skinned Indians in movies, that I was really suppressed to see my first real Native American. I have seen movies set in China in which the entire cast were white Americans.

The first large group of Africans to arrive in Europe were kidnapped slaves in 1444. However there have been isolated cases of Blacks in Europe dating back to the Holy Wars between 1091 and 1294. Although not common, there certainly could have been Blacks in Europe for over a thousand years.

Yep Charlton Heston as a Mexican and John Saxon & Henry Silva as Indians, it was bad

 

[Foxfyre]

Don't know about television advertising but I looking at the top 10 grossing movies who had 69 listed cast members. The blacks in movies are probably less than you think. There were 13 Blacks but that include 2 Asians, not sure of race but they were dark and 2 were mixed race, about half white. The percent worked out to 13% to 18% depending on how you count Blacks.

It might surprise you learn to learn that when it comes to traditional TV, African-Americans tune in nearly 213 hours per month, more than twice as much as Asians and roughly 57 hours more than Whites. Thus it should be expected that there will be a lot of Blacks in traditional TV advertising.

I'm not keeping score my friend. But I do know something about promotion and perception and what the public wants. And I think Hollywood would do better to give people what they most enjoy instead of being PC. But I think we've both stated our personal position on this particular issue and we probably won't agree which is okay. I don't require anybody to agree with me in order to be pretty okay.

 

[my2¢]

And here I thought it was just my age keeping me from tuning in.

NFL football is the only thing I watch on commercial TV. I pay something like $16 a month to get ad-free YouTube and subscribe to videos. The real court stuff I see on OldSquishyGardener's Court Watch is as entertaining as anything I ever saw on Perry Mason.

 

[Flopper]

I'm not keeping score my friend. But I do know something about promotion and perception and what the public wants. And I think Hollywood would do better to give people what they most enjoy instead of being PC. But I think we've both stated our personal position on this particular issue and we probably won't agree which is okay. I don't require anybody to agree with me in order to be pretty okay.

Hollywood delivers or at least tries to delivery what sells, regardless of content. Take a look at the top performers for 2023

2023 Worldwide Box Office

www.boxofficemojo.com

 

[Foxfyre]

Hollywood delivers or at least tries to delivery what sells, regardless of content. Take a look at the top performers for 2023

2023 Worldwide Box Office

www.boxofficemojo.com

They're not doing a very good job of it in my opinion because they rarely ever put out anything I want to see or see twice these days. Sloppy direction, confusing or erratic or non existent story lines, mediocre acting, and with lack of creativity, imagination and great cinematography covered up with unnecessary gratuitous sex, violence, profanity and also special effects that are too often more confusing than entertaining.

 

[Flopper]

They're not doing a very good job of it in my opinion because they rarely ever put out anything I want to see or see twice these days. Sloppy direction, confusing or erratic or non existent story lines, mediocre acting, and with lack of creativity, imagination and great cinematography covered up with unnecessary gratuitous sex, violence, profanity and also special effects that are too often more confusing than entertaining.

If you are saying there are better old movies than what is being release, I agree. However consider this. Hollywood released 88 movies to the theaters last year and 84 were released directly to streaming services in the US. In total there were about 250 new movies from all sources released to theaters and streaming services in the US.

If you considered old movies to be those released in the 20th century, the total released in the US exceeds 100,000. However, those around today would number about 50,000. I would estimate that less than 1 in 10 was really a good quality movie.

My point being that you will always be able find better quality movies made in the past because there are so many to choose from. When I say quality I am referring to the story itself, direction, acting, script, and cinematograph. I believe some of the newer innovations such as CGI, high definition video, and Dolby multichannel sound can enhance a movie or it can be a distraction. Unfortunately today, it often is the main attraction of movies, so less attention is paid to the script and acting.

As you might have guessed, I'm an old movie fan.

 

[Failzero]

The Sand Pebbles is a perfect example of how top tier Older Films can be

 

[Foxfyre]

If you are saying there are better old movies than what is being release, I agree. However consider this. Hollywood released 88 movies to the theaters last year and 84 were released directly to streaming services in the US. In total there were about 250 new movies from all souses released to theaters and streaming services in the US.

If you considered old movies to those release in the 20th century, the total released in the US exceeds 100,000; those around today would number about 50,000. I would estimate that less than 1 in 10 was really a good quality movie.

My point being that you will always be able find better quality movies made in the past because there are so many to choose from. When I say quality I am referring to the story itself, direction, acting, script, and cinematograph. I believe some of the newer innovations such as CGI, high definition video, and Dolby multichannel sound can enhance a movie or it can be a distraction. Unfortunately today, it often is the main attraction of movie, so less attention is paid to the script and acting.

As you might have guessed, I'm an old movie fan.

I'm sorry but in my eyes even bad movies from years ago were better than most of the most awarded movies made today. But each to his/her own.

 

[Flopper]

I'm sorry but in my eyes even bad movies from years ago were better than most of the most awarded movies made today. But each to his/her own.

You have plenty to choose from in the 20th century. Since I don't have a woke meter, I can enjoy movies about LGBTQ, diversity, and most of the other themes that conservatives hate.

What annoys me are movies with long sequences of CGI and Dolby multichannel sound at ear shattering volume, bad direction that results in scenes with no clear purpose, scripts with trite phrases and irrelevant dialog, and lastly movies that regurgitate the same plots over and over.

 

[Flopper]

I like old movies.
They have better plots and better acting.

You are bound to find some good old movies since there are about 50,000 of them depending on what you call old.

Although I’m an old movie fan, I have to admit that most old movies are not worth watching.

Before TV, there was little entertainment that the public could afford other than radio or movies. Just about every movie made money so Hollywood made a lot of real junk.

 

[Leo123]

It's interesting that today, even commercials have to depict lifestyles that are only woke fantasies.

 

[LuckyDuck]

I don't watch TV shows or movies with a DEI cast or story line. If the cast isn't White and straight I don't watch it.

It has greatly reduced the amount of TV and movies I watch. I don't care.

It looks like I am not alone.

Just another example of the demented minds of the Hollywood Liberals.

Why Old TV Shows Are Beating Hollywood’s Billion Dollar DEI Machine | Frontpage Mag

Directors, writers and actors hired to fill DEI quotas make garbage that turns off viewers.

www.frontpagemag.com

Why Old TV Shows Are Beating Hollywood’s Billion Dollar DEI Machine​

Directors, writers and actors hired to fill DEI quotas make garbage that turns off viewers.​

Wokeness is dying.

'Suits,' a legal drama that premiered 12 years ago, had more than double the number of viewing minutes than Netflix's race-swapping woke usurpation fantasy, "Queen Charlotte: A Bridgerton Story."
'Reacher' now ranks as the number two series on streaming, vastly outperforming anything else on Amazon, suggesting that male audiences have been deprived of programming.

But another issue is a radical demographic transformation in the industry that began with #MeToo and the BLM hate movement. Hollywood made DEI commitments and carried them out, whether it was locking the Oscars behind racial quotas for participating films or dumping white male talent in favor of affirmative action quotas.

I'm an old coot....really old. So, here's what I recall watching in many films and television series.
American Indians: Played by whites. Native Americans, need not apply.
Asians: Played by whites. Asians rarely given substantial roles, only bit parts.
Mexicans: Played by whites. Bit parts only for Mexicans.
Blacks: Relagated to roles as servants, bit parts, or musical parts.
So, what do I think of what is presently being seen? As blacks represent only 14% of the population, I believe that making them half or more of most films coming out, is a bit of overkill, but okay if done well with excellent actors.
Native American: While they are only 2% of the US population, they need to be used more in films as other than what we normally see them in. Resident Alien is a good example.

 

[Flopper]

I'm an old coot....really old. So, here's what I recall watching in many films and television series.
American Indians: Played by whites. Native Americans, need not apply.
Asians: Played by whites. Asians rarely given substantial roles, only bit parts.
Mexicans: Played by whites. Bit parts only for Mexicans.
Blacks: Relagated to roles as servants, bit parts, or musical parts.
So, what do I think of what is presently being seen? As blacks represent only 14% of the population, I believe that making them half or more of most films coming out, is a bit of overkill, but okay if done well with excellent actors.
Native American: While they are only 2% of the US population, they need to be used more in films as other than what we normally see them in. Resident Alien is a good example.

I think because you notice Blacks in films you assume a much greater representations than actually exist.
I just Googled the top 10 motives in US and this is the results:

1. Agrylle - Top 12 cast members - No Blacks
2. Ordinary Angles -Top 12 cast members - No Blacks
3. Land of the Bad - Top 12 cast members - 2 Blacks
4. The Beekeeper - Top 12 cast members - No Blacks
5. American Fiction- Top 12 cast members - 6 Blacks
6. Lisa Frankenstein - Top 12 cast members -No Blacks
7. Out of Darkness - Top 12 cast members - 1 Black
8. Poor Things - Top 12 cast members - 2 Blacks
9. Mean Girls - Top 12 cast members - No Blacks
10. All of Us Strangers -Top 12 cast members -No Blacks

Only 1 movie out the 10 starred a Black.
6 of the top 10 movies had No Blacks at all.
Of the 120 top cast members in the top 10 movies only 11 (9%) were Black
You are completely wrong about half of the movies coming out have Black casts. Hollywood has a long way to go to fully represent Blacks in movies.

 

[Sparker]

I assume the people who still watch ads are mostly old farts who don't know how to block ads.