What happened to honest, moral shows?

> Darker television in the modern age

Colten Kamlade
Senior Columnist

 

don't watch a lot of TV anymore. I’ve

tried to get into action dramas like Hell
on Wheels and sitcoms like The Big Bang
Theory, but I always grow tired of them.

I used to love sitting down to watch
a good show. There’s something magical
about getting wrapped up in a blanket
with a hot cup of tea and watching a story
unfold. So what has turned me off of
television? I believe it’s because TV shows
have become darker, characters are nastier,
and the subject material is depressing.
My parents raised me on Little

House on the Prairie, The Waltons, and
other classics. The primary focus of
these shows is the moral development
of the characters. There are struggles,
and there isn’t always a happy ending
for the protagonists, but they face
each problem with an arsenal of moral
convictions. At the episode’s conclusion,
there is a sense that the “right thing”
has been done. Modern television does
not give us this satisfaction. Everything
is morally ambiguous to the point that
even protagonists are not really heroes,
but anti-heroes. I don’t want to discuss
whether this is good or bad, but to

ask why this change has occurred.

I think that art often reflects the state
of society. Battlestar Galactica mirrored
the fear and paranoia that festered in
the U.S. after 9/11 and the 2003 invasion
of Iraq. I believe that current TV shows
reflect the uncertainty that we feel
towards world events. Characters like
Rick Grimes from The Walking Dead
and Tyrion Lannister from Game of
Thrones are prime examples of this trend.
Rick is volatile, unpredictable, and in
some episodes, prone to hallucinations.
Tyrion is vile in many ways, and yet he
can't quite be labeled a villain. In a time
when it’s not clear what is true or false,
what is right or wrong, such characters
represent a generation of people who
are not quite sure of anything.

TV has always involved some darker
elements, but these dark elements seem
to be the main focus of recent television
shows. Even Riverdale, the new live
action take on the Archie comics, involves
murder. It’s not necessarily bad that
writers are tackling more difficult moral
questions, but I do miss the simplicity
of older television. It’s comforting to
know who the good guys are. In an age of
uncertainty, I’m thankful that I can retreat
back into the annals of television history.

No music 1n ‘Mulan’

doesn't mean the movie 1s doomed

> The progress and development of Disney remakes

Cazzy Lewchuk
Opinions Editor

 

think Mulan is one of the greatest

Disney movies of the ’gos. It takes place
in the gorgeous setting of ancient China,
and stars one of the most ass-kicking
Disney “princesses” (not defined bya
lack of royal status!). She’s a woman of
colour, she spits in the face of patriarchal
standards, and she even has Eddie
Murphy as a dragon guardian. The songs
are pretty great, too—“as mysterious as
the dark side of the m-coo000-00n!”

The internet went bananas when it
was announced that it would be the latest
Disney film to get a live-action remake.
More recently, fans nearly had a complete
meltdown when it was announced by the
director that current plans indicated there
are to be no songs in the new movie.

No doubt, the music of Mulan is part
of what makes it so awesome. But it’s also
not essential to the story. Mulan is already
a great deal darker than many Disney
films, with the entire plot revolving
around massive battles. While the songs,
like most Disney movies, are excellent,
their purpose is to cater to children and
lighten the mood of a story. They often do
not match the tone of the epic story, and
may not translate well into live-action.

I suspect choreographing and
recording the music from Mulan ina
live-action context would be incredibly
difficult, expensive, and risky. There’s
a good chance it just wouldn't work
out well. By removing music from the
story, the movie can instead focus on

cinematography, plot details, and other
opportunities to expand on current
elements. The live-action Cinderella wasn't
a musical, and the live-action Jungle Book
only featured two songs. These remakes
chose to highlight the visuals and use what
made sense for the live-action medium.
These movies show that the storyline

of Mulan as a big-budget adaptation
doesn’t need songs to be effective.

Mulan is a Chinese legend that’s
1,500 years old. China has made several
adaptations of the story already, including
a live-action epic in 2009. Hollywood
continues to focus on movies, particularly
big-budget ones, with casts dominated
by white people. Ghost in the Shell
features white Scarlett Johanssen as a
dark-haired cyborg woman in a heavily
Asian-inspired setting based on a Japanese
franchise. The Great Wall featured Matt
Damon (as a European mercenary)
in medieval China fighting monsters
alongside a lesser-known and lesser-paid
Asian cast. Mulan will actually feature
an all-Asian cast, including a Chinese
actress to play the woman warrior. This
remake is an incredible opportunity to
show that mainstream big-budget films
can succeed even with a non-white cast.
It’s an opportunity for an Asian actress
(how many young female Chinese actors
can you name?) to be recognized and
appreciated by western audiences. She
doesn't have to sing to make this iconic
Disney princess stand out on the screen.
She can inspire and entertain children
everywhere with her actions instead.

 

 

Image from ‘Game of Thrones’

Image from ‘Once Upon a Time’