Jon M. Chu instructs on making a script Woke-friendly

“Woke politics” are hypocritical and sanctimonious. Their launching pad is Utopianism and denial of human nature. I am tired of the “Woke” label but it’s convenient and lazy and only 4 letters long; ideal blog fodder for me.

Woke describes that smarmy pretentiousness that liberal people ooze in abundant dosages with the intent to conspicuously signal their concern and commiseration with the putative liberal narrative. It is reactive and convoluted in a very self-congratulatory recursive manner. Being “woke” means that the sensitivities of marginalized and ordained “victims” is your edict of tolerable behavior. The volume of social etiquette and agendas is plentiful and it is humanly impossible to wrap every single one  into your “woke playbook.” In the context of Woke politics, someone will always get butthurt. It’s impossible to tiptoe around the minefield of many overlapping and conflicting agendas without trampling on someone’s delicate feelings.

Human nature is rough and utilitarian and very self-absorbed; pretty much everything “woke” pretends it is not.

The sizable blathery Hollywood woke contingent is the most riddled with cognitive dissonance and inconsistencies. Hollywood types, battling their contradictory urges driven by bloated egos and elitist signaling versus the overwhelming social motivations to love and respect all with equal ardor, reveal embarrassing schisms of hypocrisy.  About as entertaining as a Mexican drug cartel beheading video.

For example:  Jon M. Chu, director of “Crazy Rich Asians,” a cinematic dork appears to have newly milked the Victimized Asian trope (as long as it applies to Asians of the Eastern variety).

Chu

Today’s Asian infiltration of identity politics has been the most noteworthy aspect of Liberalism vers. 2020. Asians, prototypically, prefer anonymity and seek to escape the spotlight of cultural identity catfighting, but the past year has seen them transform into the “new Jews.” Complaining and griping like the blacks and browns despite very advanced levels of cultural and economic accomplishment. Asians, like Jews, have attained astounding success that exceeds even that of whites, who have been the baseline of achievement in America for a long time.  Now, they too, have found a voice.  They are discovering the shrill joys of whining about marginalization and that overall woe-is-me racialism while, in the same breath, partaking in upper class frivolities that set them apart from the usual humdrum mediocrity that most American POC are culturally mired in thanks to ignorance, crumbling work ethic and low community trust.

Jon M. Chu will never admit, given today’s eggshell environment, but he is an elitist supremacist.

What a difference two years makes!

“Crazy Rich Asians” director Jon M. Chu said he “should have” made the South Asian characters in the 2018 romantic comedy “more human” after being criticized for casting Brown actors in subservient roles.

At the time of its release, some viewers criticized the box office darling for featuring East Asian actors as protagonists and for casting brown Asian actors in stereotypical domestic worker roles

The “skin tone hierarchy” across all cultures is dependably consistent.  There is no denying it.

While promoting his latest film “In The Heights,” Chu told Insider last Friday that he “totally gets” the criticism.

“That’s a lesson that I did not understand until it happened,” he said. “I was like, ‘This is a book that exists and I’m making this book into a movie.’ I can’t add a new character into this book.”

Chu has not learned to Jew; his “apologies” don’t make sense and sound absurdly contrived.

Despite Indians being the third-largest ethnic group living in Singapore, there are only a few South Asian characters in “Crazy Rich Asians,” who are mostly armed guards working at Nick’s sprawling mansion in the woods.

When Rachel and a friend, Peik Lin (played by Awkwafina), get lost on their way to a party at the home, the guards circle the girls’ car with large rifles as ominous-sounding music plays in the background.

“Looking back, I should have had a joke there [for the guards] being like, ‘These idiots’ [about the girls],” the director said about the scene. “There’s stuff to do to make them more human instead of just like these guards.”

And that is what I call a crock of shit.  There you have it, a real world example of  the semantic contortions and disingenuousness required by so-called artists to render scripts palatable to today’s trigger-happy Woketariat audience.

In 2018, Chu sneaked this flick through, as the social filters were not as fine then. Just two years later, he provides a retrospective sampling of the editorial censorship necessary to make content inclusive by 2021 standards.

It’s quite simple, actually.  Just portray the darkskins as mocking the lightskins. Presto, equality can be simple as throwing shade.  The dynamic built into today’s Woke paradigm is dystopic.  A minority group which collectively excels in most facets of First World modernist culture assumes the drudgery of low-performing subcultures as if it was their own.


Archive

 

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments