You couldn't Make Blazing Saddles today.

[JoeB131]

This was a really interesting video that blows up right wing talking points about "Political Correctness"




His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

John frigging Wayne turned down the Waco kid role
He loved the script ..thought it was hysterical but thought his fans wouldn't approve

Could You imagine how awesome John friggin Wayne as the Waco kid

 

[JoeB131]

John frigging Wayne turned down the Waco kid role
He loved the script ..thought it was hysterical but thought his fans wouldn't approve

Could You imagine how awesome John friggin Wayne as the Waco kid

Not sure if that is true... Gene Wilder had already worked with Mel Brooks on Young Frankenstein, so he was a known commodity.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

This was a really interesting video that blows up right wing talking points about "Political Correctness"




His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

Which is why films like Silverado, Tombstone and Unforgiven were all abject failures.

 

[hjmick]

His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

I'm pretty sure he completely missed what the movie meant to do... talk about being fucking clueless.

 

[JoeB131]

Which is why films like Silverado, Tombstone and Unforgiven were all abject failures.

Did you watch the video, buddy? The movies you listed were POST Blazing Saddles, which means they couldn't do the White Hat/Black Hat western that was common from the 1930's to the 1970's.

I'm pretty sure he completely missed what the movie meant to do... talk about being fucking clueless.

Again, did you watch the video? He did a very good job of pointing out how Brooks deconstructed the classic western.

 

[miketx]

This was a really interesting video that blows up right wing talking points about "Political Correctness"




His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

That's right, crying little b*thes like you would be all over themselves with angst and fake cries of racism, like you do now.

 

[Mindful]

This was a really interesting video that blows up right wing talking points about "Political Correctness"




His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

That's right, crying little b*thes like you would be all over themselves with angst and fake cries of racism, like you do now.

I wonder why he doesn't claim asylum elsewhere.

He sounds desperately unhappy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This was a really interesting video that blows up right wing talking points about "Political Correctness"




His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

You're only allowed to mock Christians and Conservatives, right?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Which is why films like Silverado, Tombstone and Unforgiven were all abject failures.

Did you watch the video, buddy? The movies you listed were POST Blazing Saddles, which means they couldn't do the White Hat/Black Hat western that was common from the 1930's to the 1970's.

You stated it "destroyed the Western as a genre", but now you qualify your statement.

It obviously did not.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This was a really interesting video that blows up right wing talking points about "Political Correctness"




His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

That's why Clint Eastwood's Unforgiven was "destroyed"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

John frigging Wayne turned down the Waco kid role
He loved the script ..thought it was hysterical but thought his fans wouldn't approve

Could You imagine how awesome John friggin Wayne as the Waco kid

Not sure if that is true... Gene Wilder had already worked with Mel Brooks on Young Frankenstein, so he was a known commodity.

Young Frankenstein destroyed the horror genre, right?

 

[hjmick]

Again, did you watch the video? He did a very good job of pointing out how Brooks deconstructed the classic western.

Yes, I watched the video. Yes, Brooks did a good job of making a send-up of the western genre. But the movie was meant to be a rebuke of racism and its ignorance, among other things. At least according to Brooks, who says he wrote the movie out of anger at white corruption, racism, and Bible-thumping bigotry.

When Brooks asked Richard Pryor, one of the writers, if they were using the "N-word" too much... well, here:

“When I thought it was getting to be too much, Richard said, ‘No, we are writing a story of racial prejudice. That’s the word, the only word. It’s profound, it’s real, and the more we use it from the rednecks, the more the victory of the black sheriff will resonate.’”

So, to say that the point of the movie was to "destroy the western genre" absolutely misses the point of the movie.

 

[TheParser]

In all fairness, one could not make a lot of movies today.

Some people, for example, want "Gone with the Wind" banned from TV and movie theaters.

And some people even fault "Friends" for its portrayals of women and gays.

*****

"The Birth of a Nation" (1915 silent classic) is still so controversial that it is NOT allowed to be shown, except to selected cinema students at the university. Its famous director, D.W. Griffith (often called the "Father of Film"), said in later years that he agreed that his masterpiece should NO longer be shown. He said that a certain ethnicity had suffered enough in this country.

 

[JoeB131]

That's right, crying little b*thes like you would be all over themselves with angst and fake cries of racism, like you do now.

Would they? Based on what?

Here's the thing. Blazing Saddles didn't make fun of black people, they made fun of all the white racists and the white-washed conventions of the 1950's Western. (Most cowboys in the 19th century were black and hispanic, but you'd never know that from Hollywood.)

Movies like those made by the Wayans brothers use the same kind of humor.

the problem with Blazing Saddles is that it was a product of it's time. When Brooks did the Campfire Scene, it was hilarious, because no one up to that point used flatulence as a joke. Today, Fart Jokes aren't shocking, they are old and you even see them on kiddie shows.

You're only allowed to mock Christians and Conservatives, right?

Again, did you watch either the Video or Blazing Saddles. Christians and Conservatives WERE what Brooks was mocking.

You stated it "destroyed the Western as a genre", but now you qualify your statement.

It obviously did not.

How many westerns are produced a year now, vs. how many were produced a year in the 1950's. How many western TV shows are on the air right now? Back in the 1950's, when we only had four channels, they had dozens. Now we have hundreds of channels and would be hard pressed to find one or two.

Brooks took Hollywood's cash cow and turned it into hamburger.

Now, the difference between his other parodies like Spaceballs or Young Frankenstein, which treated the source materials with a certain amount of respect, Blazing Saddles took a sledgehammer to them.

 

[JoeB131]

Young Frankenstein destroyed the horror genre, right?

Not really, since no one was making that kind of horror film by 1970, anyway. I would argue that the Classic Universal Horror films had already been "Deconstructed" by the much better Hammer Horror films that took the same stories and gave them a lot more depth.

Hammer Horror got it right. The real monster isn't the creature, it's Dr. Frankenstein.

Brooks did a lot of these kinds of films. Some remembered like Young Frankenstein and Spaceballs, some less remembered like "Silent Movie" and "High Anxiety". What made Blazing Saddles stand out was that it was the right movie at the right time. It deconstructed our white-washed myths about the old west by having a black protagonist.

Yes, I watched the video. Yes, Brooks did a good job of making a send-up of the western genre. But the movie was meant to be a rebuke of racism and its ignorance, among other things. At least according to Brooks, who says he wrote the movie out of anger at white corruption, racism, and Bible-thumping bigotry.

When Brooks asked Richard Pryor, one of the writers, if they were using the "N-word" too much... well, here:

“When I thought it was getting to be too much, Richard said, ‘No, we are writing a story of racial prejudice. That’s the word, the only word. It’s profound, it’s real, and the more we use it from the rednecks, the more the victory of the black sheriff will resonate.’”

So, to say that the point of the movie was to "destroy the western genre" absolutely misses the point of the movie.

I don't think it does, because the problem with the Western up until that point was how much it white-washed and glorified a white-supremacist past. Racism was never mentioned at all... and certainly not by the heroes... Native Americans were almost always savages and blacks barely existed at all. This is what made the casting of Cleavon Little in the role so inflammatory.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

That's right, crying little b*thes like you would be all over themselves with angst and fake cries of racism, like you do now.

Would they? Based on what?

Here's the thing. Blazing Saddles didn't make fun of black people, they made fun of all the white racists and the white-washed conventions of the 1950's Western. (Most cowboys in the 19th century were black and hispanic, but you'd never know that from Hollywood.)

Movies like those made by the Wayans brothers use the same kind of humor.

the problem with Blazing Saddles is that it was a product of it's time. When Brooks did the Campfire Scene, it was hilarious, because no one up to that point used flatulence as a joke. Today, Fart Jokes aren't shocking, they are old and you even see them on kiddie shows.

You're only allowed to mock Christians and Conservatives, right?

Again, did you watch either the Video or Blazing Saddles. Christians and Conservatives WERE what Brooks was mocking.

You stated it "destroyed the Western as a genre", but now you qualify your statement.

It obviously did not.

How many westerns are produced a year now, vs. how many were produced a year in the 1950's. How many western TV shows are on the air right now? Back in the 1950's, when we only had four channels, they had dozens. Now we have hundreds of channels and would be hard pressed to find one or two.

Brooks took Hollywood's cash cow and turned it into hamburger.

Now, the difference between his other parodies like Spaceballs or Young Frankenstein, which treated the source materials with a certain amount of respect, Blazing Saddles took a sledgehammer to them.

The lack of Westerns is not due to "Blazing Saddles". Science fiction films have supplanted Westerns in recent years. Same stories, plots - different environment.

AVATAR, among other things, is simply "Dances with Wolves" redone against whatever backdrop Cameron could steal from Dune.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This was a really interesting video that blows up right wing talking points about "Political Correctness"




His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

Pedophiles are in complete control of Hollywood, they

Which is why films like Silverado, Tombstone and Unforgiven were all abject failures.

Did you watch the video, buddy? The movies you listed were POST Blazing Saddles, which means they couldn't do the White Hat/Black Hat western that was common from the 1930's to the 1970's.

I'm pretty sure he completely missed what the movie meant to do... talk about being fucking clueless.

Again, did you watch the video? He did a very good job of pointing out how Brooks deconstructed the classic western.

Stop. Just stop

 

[harmonica]

This was a really interesting video that blows up right wing talking points about "Political Correctness"




His point is not that you couldn't make Blazing Saddles today, but that you shouldn't make it today because it had already accomplished it's point, which was to destroy the Western as a genre.

..your hypothesis makes no sense ..Blazing Saddles destroyed the Western as a genre???!!!!
..how come there are tons of MODERN movies in the genre Western on Pluto, Hulu, Popcornflix, Roku, etc etc ?
hahahahhahahahahahahahhahahha

 

[JoeB131]

The lack of Westerns is not due to "Blazing Saddles". Science fiction films have supplanted Westerns in recent years. Same stories, plots - different environment.

AVATAR, among other things, is simply "Dances with Wolves" redone against whatever backdrop Cameron could steal from Dune.

Dune and Avatar are nothing alike.

but you kind of stumbled into a point. We stopped making lots of westerns... right after Blazing Saddles. Because if you made a classic western with the white hats/black hats, it would be laughed off the screen.

The reason why Blazing Saddles destroyed the western, but Spaceballs didn't destroy the SciFi movie, was because Saddles ripped the mask off our sanitized history.