Wokeness Wrecked ‘The Bachelor’ Only For Matt James To Get Back Together With A ‘Racist’

The latest rumor circulating the Bachelorsphere is that the last “Bachelor” Matt James is back together with his recently-wrapped season’s front-runner Rachael Kirkconnell, whom he dumped in disgrace after internet trolls dug up purportedly racist photos of the sorority girl at an antebellum-themed college party.

“It’s been a while but here’s some news: Matt and Rachael? Yeah, they’re not over. They’re currently in New York together. FYI,” tweeted Reality Steve on Tuesday night after somebody snapped a photo of what is allegedly the pair walking together in the Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn.

The buzz about Matt and Rachael is truly fascinating as it comes only three weeks after the cringiest episode of “After the Final Rose” in “Bachelor” history, in which romance took a backseat while race issues were front and center. Matt and interim host Emmanuel Acho — who was tapped to host the finale after Chris Harrison got canceled for initially asking for grace for Rachael before folding to the woke bullies — put Rachael through an on-air struggle session. The conversation was egregious, and it ended in Matt telling Rachael that their relationship wouldn’t work because of her “not fully understanding” his “blackness” and Matt refusing to initiate a “final embrace.”

The Matt-Rachael rumor also comes on the heels of news that current casting for another franchise spin-off, “Bachelor in Paradise,” is not going so well, as Bachelor Nation stars are hesitant to jump on board the turbulent train of Hollywood wokeness.

“Casting has begun and some members of Bachelor Nation are apprehensive to sign up,” one “Bachelor” insider told E! News. “Some are wondering what direction the season will take and are curious if it will strictly focus on contestants falling in love.” If the next run of “Bachelor in Paradise” looks anything like the last “Bachelor” season, fans can expect the focus to stray from contestants falling in love to land instead on progressive politics.

“Many people are declining due to the current state of Bachelor Nation. A lot of people are removing themselves from the franchise,” reportedly added another source.

At this point in the franchise’s progressive purge, it seems the options are for the stars to remove themselves or be removed — just ask Chris Harrison, who hosted the show for nearly two decades and then got the boot for saying essentially the same thing as his replacement host before resorting to groveling pathetically to keep his post. It’s hard to blame potential would-be contestants for walking away. Who wants to be the next victim of a rose-strewn struggle session?

Wokeness ruined “The Bachelor.” It watered the franchise down to the worst version of itself and became repulsive even to woke millennials desperate for Instagram fame. Anything the show had going for it in the way of mindless entertainment has now been replaced by insufferable leftist dogma and cancel culture landmines that nobody wants to navigate for fear of blowing up their life and reputation on national television and being remembered as nothing more than the next fill-in-the-blank controversy.

And for what? If the rumors about Matt and Rachael turn out to be true, which many fans of the show have said would not be surprising, the main takeaway will be that the girl at the center of this year’s biggest pop culture racism scandal will ride off into the sunset with her black boyfriend.

You didn’t solve racism, Hollywood. You effectively matchmade the first black bachelor and his prejudiced lover. Was destroying the franchise worth it?


Socialist Filmmaker Michael Moore Says Republicans Are ‘Trying To Kill As Many Americans As Possible’

In a podcast episode published on Wednesday, self-proclaimed socialist filmmaker Michael Moore said the Republican Party is “trying to kill as many Americans as possible.”

“I’m for trying to make sure that as many of our fellow Americans get to live to see the summer and the fall, and Republicans are taking every opportunity they can to stop that from happening,” Moore said. “What political party has as their message, ‘We’re trying to kill as many Americans as possible,’ and think that they’re going to stay in office?”

Moore went on to claim that the GOP is opposing the sweeping elections bill H.R. 1 “to stop black and brown people from voting,” because of “racism” and “white supremacy.” See some of The Federalist’s coverage of the controversial leftist wishlist bill here, here, and here.

“We will do everything and anything we can in the meantime to stop these laws from being passed state by state to create voter suppression,” said Moore, alluding to Republican state leaders proposing legislation to safeguard American elections. “To stop black and brown people from voting — that is exactly what this is about. It’s racism. It’s white supremacy.”

This is only the latest extremist outburst by Moore, who recently fantasized that “millions” of Trump supporters would die for not wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.

“Look at it this way: If millions of you die off, that’s a lot less Republican voters, and that means we win every election from here on out! Do you want your loved ones who are left behind to be ruled by us?” he asked. “Because when you’re gone, we’re gonna make sure every single one of them has free health care, free college, a middle-class wage, and living in a neighborhood with all kinds of people — and in cities and states being run by women! And I’m going to see that that all happens — all because you wouldn’t wear a 50-cent mask!”

Moore notably said in December 2019 that “you should be afraid” of white people.

“Two-thirds of all white guys voted for Trump,” Moore said on the “Useful Idiots” podcast. “That means anytime you see three white guys walking at you, down the street toward you, two of them voted for Trump. You need to move over to the other sidewalk because these are not good people that are walking toward you. You should be afraid of them.”

The “Bowling for Columbine” director is favorable among left-wingers for his intense and showy hatred for the GOP. In Moore’s documentary “Fahrenheit 11/9” about the rise of Trump, he likened Trump’s ascent to Adolf Hitler.

“F-ck the Republicans,” Moore added on his “family-friendly” podcast. “Stop listening to them. Why are we still even listening to people who voted on the night of the terrorist attack on the Capitol?”


Rachel Maddow Wins Grammy for Best Spoken Word Album

MSNBC host Rachel Maddow won a Grammy Award on Sunday evening in the Best Spoken Word Album category for the audiobook recording of her latest book, Blowout: Corrupted Democracy, Rogue State Russia, and the Richest, Most Destructive Industry on Earth.

“Congrats Best Spoken Word Album winner – ‘BLOWOUT: CORRUPTED DEMOCRACY, ROGUE STATE RUSSIA, AND THE RICHEST, MOST DESTRUCTIVE INDUSTRY ON EARTH’ [Rachel Maddow],” tweeted the Grammys Award Twitter account on Sunday.

“wait, what?” tweet Maddow shortly after it was announced that she had won the award.

“That is exactly what it sounded like in the car when Susan and I heard. We scared the dog awake,” Maddow added in a follow-up tweet, responding to her blog’s Twitter account, which tweeted in all CAPS, “HA! WHOA! WOW!!!”

Maddow’s book focuses on “the greed and incompetence of Big Oil and Gas,” and suggests that “the Russian government hacked the 2016 U.S. election” — a talking point used by Democrats to question the legitimacy of Donald Trump’s election in 2016.

Other nominees alongside for the Best Spoken Word Album category included Red Hot Chili Peppers guitarist Flea for Acid For The Children: A Memoir, former Jeopardy! contestant Ken Jennings for Alex Trebek – The Answer Is…, journalist Ronan Farrow for Catch And Kill, and an audiobook of E.B. White’s classic children’s novel, Charlotte’s Web, narrated by Meryl Streep.

Former President Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle Obama, Jimmy Carter, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Kathy Griffin are among those who have also won a Grammy in the Best Spoken Word Album category.

You can follow Alana Mastrangelo on Facebook and Twitter at @ARmastrangelo, on Parler @alana, and on Instagram.


Piers Morgan Responds to Critics and Defenders of Meghan Markle

This ongoing saga is ridiculous, but it is one of the rare times when Piers Morgan is in alignment with common sense and the majority sentiment within his country.  Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are insufferable elites attempting to make their entitled selves into victims.  It is ridiculous.

[embedded content]

People who have watched the way the Obama team use pop culture to advance Marxist political objectives have already seen through the ruse of the Meghan Markele comments with Oprah Winfrey.  It was not accidental the interview comments about racism were organized, timed and released to coincide with the George Floyd trial in Minnesota.  It’s how the cultural Marxists work.

If any group of people can see through to the orchestration of this, it is you, the CTH community.  We have researched the Obama use of racism as a political tool for years; that technique includes using media figures like Oprah.  The Chicago fingerprints of the familiar architects are clear as day on this ridiculous story.


Big Tech Thinks You’re An Idiot Child Who Can’t Govern Yourself

Last week, YouTube removed videos of former President Donald Trump’s speech at the recent Conservative Political Action Conference, citing violations of its rules about “misleading election claims” under its “presidential election integrity” policy.

Also last week, Ebay blocked all sales and purchases of the half-dozen Dr. Seuss books recently deemed unfit for children because they allegedly “portray people in ways that are hurtful and wrong.” Amazon blocked access to a documentary about Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

Twitter suspended the account of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Facebook continued its purge of QAnon-linked accounts, which began back in October. And the cable network TCM announced a program to reframe classic films like “Breakfast at Tiffany’s,” “The Searchers,” and “My Fair Lady,” which it considers “problematic” and “troubling.”

That was just last week. The growing movement on the left to censor, purge, block, and suspend anyone who expresses disfavored views, or any book or film that some might consider offensive, isn’t just an attack on conservatives or a quixotic war on the past. It represents the single greatest wholesale rejection of liberal democracy, civil society, and the ideal of self-government in American history.

Simply put, the people who will not allow Trump’s CPAC speech to be searchable on YouTube do not think you can think through things and make your own decisions, let alone participate in democratic governance. To them, you are only slightly more intelligent than an animal, and ought to be treated as such.

The reason it matters—and the reason this illiberal, censorious impulse can’t just be laughed off—is that the institutions and industries behind all this are incredibly powerful. They control what you watch, read, discuss, and share—even with your own children.

Disney Plus, for example, pulled a bunch of classic titles from its children’s programming back in January for “negative depictions and/or mistreatment of people or cultures.” The banned films include “Lady and the Tramp,” “Peter Pan,” “The Jungle Book,” and “Dumbo.” The titles are still available, with a disclaimer, on the main streaming service, but the writing is on the wall: if you want your kids to enjoy the originals, better buy the DVD now.

Let’s be clear about something: this isn’t about ferreting out “offensive” content or ideas, or making society more tolerant and inclusive. After all, whether or not something is offensive is relative. This is about taking away your agency, your ability to make choices and decide for yourself what you think, whether it’s about Dr. Suess or a presidential election.

Why else would Amazon pull down a well-reviewed and by all accounts fair and sober book about transgenderism, as they did last week to Ryan T. Anderson’s 2018 book, “When Harry Became Sally”? It’s not because the book is offensive to a wide swath of the reading public. It’s because the ideas presented in it—including the now-radical notion that biological sex is immutable and that encouraging children and teens to “transition” causes irreparable harm—challenge the left’s utopian vision for society.

In other words, it’s not that these ideas are offensive, it’s that they’re in the way. The people who applauded Amazon for taking down Anderson’s book do not want to contend with Anderson’s arguments. It’s much easier for them if a corporate behemoth like Amazon just blots them out, makes them disappear.

Otherwise, Anderson might actually persuade some people that he’s right, that transgenderism isn’t just morally wrong, it’s also bad for society, and maybe we should rethink our sudden embrace of it. Maybe we should have some honest debate about it and let people make up their own minds.

The left would like to take those kind of choices away from you, even (especially) for children’s literature. The hypocrisy of the left in this regard knows no bounds.

CNN’s Jake Tapper, who once championed the publication of controversial images—including cartoons of Mohammed, even though it’s deeply offensive to Muslims—denounced Republicans last week for complaining about the cancellation of Dr. Seuss. Tapper was upset because they keep citing beloved titles like “Green Eggs and Ham,” not the half-dozen books that contain what Tapper calls “empirically racist” images that are “indefensible.”

He’s wrong about that. This is an argument for another column, but the images in those banned Dr. Seuss books are entirely defensible and, to my mind, not at all racist, empirically or otherwise.

But of course one need not defend the content of burned books to protest the burning of them. It’s even possible simultaneously to object to the content of a book and the notion that it should be burned for its content. This is a pretty basic tenet of classical liberalism, and Tapper knows it. He’s just being dishonest.

Everyone, in fact, who champions the banning of books—any books—or films or speeches or whatever, is engaged in a deeply anti-American project to undermine the means by which we form citizens capable of self-government. If you can’t be trusted to think through whether the mention of “Eskimo Fish” in Dr. Suess’s “McElligot’s Pool” is appropriate for your kids, then you certainly can’t be trusted to think through whether the 2020 election was marred by fraud and loose rules for absentee ballots.

Likewise, you can’t be trusted to make decisions about COVID-19, about whether to get a vaccine or wear a mask, which is why Dr. Anthony Fauci saw fit to lie about mask-wearing to the American people at the onset of the pandemic last year. He doesn’t think you can be trusted with the truth because he thinks you’re an idiot child who needs be governed, not an American citizen who has the natural right to govern himself.

When I watch Fauci lie, or see Tapper and his peers cheer digital book-burnings, or see example after example of censorship to protect us from supposedly offensive ideas or images, all I can think of is a line from an interview conducted in 1842 with a veteran of the American Revolution. The man was asked why he fought, and he replied, “Young man, what we meant in going for those redcoats was this: we always had governed ourselves, and we always meant to. They didn’t mean we should.”


Poll: Two-Thirds Of Americans Think Corporate Wokeness Has Gone Too Far

Results from a national poll released Friday found 65 percent of Americans think corporate America is “taking political correctness too far.”

The study surveyed 1,098 adults about their thoughts on a range of high-profile actions corporations have taken recently to appease left-wing activists, including Hasbro dropping the “Mr.” from its Mr. Potato Head toy, Disney closing down popular rides at its theme parks that activists claimed were “racist,” and Lucasfilm’s firing of actress Gina Carano. On Thursday, eBay began banning the sales of Dr. Seuss books.

The study was conducted by Survey Monkey and Public Opinion Strategies and commissioned by The Daily Wire between Feb. 26 and March 3, following a storm of recent cancel mob moves, such as Disney placing warning labels on “The Muppets.”

Nearly 80 percent of respondents believe toymaker Hasbro’s changing “Mr. Potato Head” to “Potato Head” is “silly.”

When initially asked, 58 percent of respondents said they opposed Disney’s decision to fire Carano over social media posts. After being shown the actual post that resulted in her termination, however, 72 percent said they didn’t agree with the firing, including a majority of liberals and Democrats and 70 percent of Disney fans.

During an interview with The Federalist, Carano said she first became vocal about reportedly touchy or taboo subjects “because I feel like there is a large group of people that were being silenced this year and being forced to play this game of wokeism or whatever it is.” The cancel mob made sure to punish her for daring to speak freely and challenging the status quo.

[embedded content]

Pushing back against toxic cancel culture, The Daily Wire announced last month after her firing that Carano will produce and star in a film for them.

Participants reported being less likely to consume Disney products after hearing of the company’s politically biased actions. Nearly half also said they believe Hollywood is biased against conservatives.

Sixty-four percent, including 60 percent of Disney fans, oppose the company’s decision to close down or “re-theme” rides such as Splash Mountain just because activists claim they have racist origins and messages.

“Corporate America’s lunge into ‘wokeness’ and cancel culture might hit a bump in the road given public reaction to Disney’s recent actions,” said researcher Neil Newhouse of Public Opinion Strategies who oversaw the study. “This data clearly shows that actions like the ones Disney has taken recently definitely have the potential to negatively impact its bottom line.”


Turner Classic Movies Examines ‘Problematic’ Film Classics in New Series

(AP) — Loving classic films can be a fraught pastime. Just consider the cultural firestorm over “Gone With the Wind” this past summer.

No one knows this better than the film lovers at Turner Classic Movies who daily are confronted with the complicated reality that many of old Hollywood’s most celebrated films are also often a kitchen sink of stereotypes. This summer, amid the Black Lives Matter protests, the channel’s programmers and hosts decided to do something about it.

The result is a new series, “Reframed Classics,” which promises wide-ranging discussions about 18 culturally significant films from the 1920s through the 1960s that also have problematic aspects, from “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” and Mickey Rooney’s performance as Mr. Yunioshi to Fred Astaire’s blackface routine in “Swing Time.” It kicks off Thursday at 8 p.m. ET with none other than “Gone With the Wind.”

“We know millions of people love these films,” said TCM host Jacqueline Stewart, who is participating in many of the conversations. “We’re not saying this is how you should feel about ‘Pyscho’ or this is how you should feel about ‘Gone with the Wind.’ We’re just trying to model ways of having longer and deeper conversations and not just cutting it off to ‘I love this movie. I hate this movie.’ There’s so much space in between.”

Stewart, a University of Chicago professor who in 2019 became the channel’s first African American host, has spent her career studying classic films, particularly those in the silent era, and Black audiences. She knows first-hand the tension of loving films that also contain racial stereotypes.

“I grew up in a family of people who loved classic films. Now, how can you love these films if you know that there’s going to be a maid or mammy that shows up?” Stewart said. “Well, I grew up around people who could still love the movie. You appreciate some parts of it. You critique other parts of it. That’s something that one can do and it actually can enrich your experience of the film.”

While TCM audiences will know her as the host of Silent Sunday Nights, this past summer she was given a bigger spotlight when she was selected to introduce “Gone With the Wind” on HBO Max to provide proper context after its controversial removal from the streaming service. She remembers drafting her remarks for that while also concocting this series.

“I continue to feel a sense of urgency around these topics,” she said. “We’re showing films that really shaped the ways that people continue to think about race and gender and sexuality and ability. It was really important for the group to come together to think about how we can work with each other and work with our fans to deepen the conversations about these films.”

TCM hosts Ben Mankiewicz, Dave Karger, Alicia Malone and Eddie Muller will also be part of many conversations. The films that they’ve selected aren’t under the radar novelties either. As Stewart said, “They’re the classics of the classics.”

The series, which runs every Thursday through March 25, will also show “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner,” “Gunga Din,” “The Searchers,” “My Fair Lady,” “Stagecoach,” “Woman of the Year” and “The Children’s Hour.”

The selections allow the hosts to think about Hollywood films more broadly, too. For “Psycho,” which will be airing on March 25, the hosts talk about transgender identity in the film and the implications of equating gender fluidity and dressing in women’s clothes with mental illness and violence. It also sparks a bigger conversation about sexuality in Alfred Hitchcock films.

During the “My Fair Lady” conversation on March 25, they talk about why the film adaptation has a less feminist ending than the stage play, and Henry Higgins’ physical and psychological abuse of Eliza Dolittle. Not feeding her and stuffing marbles in her mouth are played for cute laughs in the film. Is it a commentary on misogyny or just plain misogyny?

In the series, Alfred Hitchcock’s “Psycho” will face scrutiny about its depictions of transgender identity and gender fluidity in conjunction with mental illness and violence.
And on the “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” night, airing March 11, Stewart discusses the complex legacy of Sidney Poitier.

“His career is so important for the ways that white Americans really started to have more sympathy and understanding of Black people. But at the same time, there are aspects of his films that are clearly oriented primarily to white audiences,” Stewart said. “That opens up all kinds of complications for Black viewers who felt that he wasn’t a representative of the race as a whole.”

Companies have lately taken to adding disclaimers before shows and films depicting outdated or stereotypical characters and themes. And in some instances, films have just been made unavailable. Disney has said that its 1946 film “Song of the South” will never be on Disney+. The classic film podcast “ You Must Remember This” has an excellent series about the controversial movie and how it came to be.

The goal of “Reframed Classics” is to help give audiences the tools to discuss films from a different era and not just dismiss or cancel them. And Stewart, for her part, doesn’t believe that you can simply remove problematic films from the culture.

“I think there’s something to be learned from any work of art,” Stewart said. “They’re all historical artifacts that tell us a lot about the industry in which they were made, the cultures that they were speaking to.”


Trevor Noah Slams People Who Praised Cuomo Last Year After Calling Himself A ‘Cuomosexual’

Comedy Central’s “Daily Show” host Trevor Noah called out prior supporters of New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo on Monday and, in turn, dunked on himself.

“Even if Cuomo did think that he was just being playful, it’s still not okay,” Noah said in regard to the mounting sexual misconduct allegations against the governor. “This is what bosses never seem to understand. If you’re a boss, you should never be flirtatious with your employees. … So right now things are looking pretty bad for Gov. Cuomo. He’s facing investigations and even calls to resign. You know that it’s not good when you’re the person in trouble, and you’re like, ‘Guys, please, remember all those people in nursing homes I got killed? Let’s talk about that again.’”

[embedded content]

Noah’s rebuke of the New York governor, though, comes after he — along with the left throughout the pandemic — unnecessarily praised Cuomo as an exemplary leader. For his briefings, Cuomo was even awarded an Emmy that International Academy of Television Arts and Sciences President and CEO Bruce Paisner said, “worked so well because he effectively created television shows, with characters, plot lines, and stories of success and failure.” Speaking on “The Ellen Show” in April 2020, Noah described himself as a “Cuomosexual.”

“I saw people online falling in love with [Cuomo],” Noah said. “There’s a group of women who came out and they said, ‘We’re falling in love with Cuomo,’ and I said, ‘Well, yeah, everyone should be a Cuomosexual in that way.’”

[embedded content]

Now in the midst of an ongoing federal investigation into the reportedly more than 9,000 COVID-19-infected seniors that were sent to nursing homes at the directive of Cuomo, over 15,000 who died in total, and three women accusing him of sexual misconduct, Noah and other celebrities are acting as if they did not spend month after month celebrating the governor.

As Federalist Senior Editor Chris Bedford wrote Tuesday:

An essential aspect of the reckoning coming for Cuomo from within his own party (and their allies in the corporate media) is it comes after a long year of agreement, praise, and adulation. Everything he is guilty of before accusations of sexual harassment, his former allies are also guilty of — until now. Witness Sunday evening’s similar condemnations of Cuomo by Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and the White House, cutting cleanly along the harassment line.

Noah and others may virtue-signal about the evils of Cuomo, but conservative media has been reporting on his malfeasance for months. Only with the departure of former President Donald Trump, who was vocal in his disdain for the governor, did the corporate media finally wake up from their Cuomo honeymoon.


Exclusive– Conservative Documentarian: Elections Are Not Won and Lost in the Days During an Election, but in Between Elections

“Elections are not won and lost in the days during an election; it’s between the elections,” advised Amanda Milius, director of The Plot Against The President, a documentary film based on Lee Smith’s book of the same name on Thursday’s edition of SiriusXM’s Breitbart News Daily with host Alex Marlow.

Milius held that winning over hearts and minds on the ideological and political battlefields is an unending endeavor.

She urged concerned Americans to “get involved” in state efforts “to clean the voter rolls” and “turn over the crazy last-minute state laws that the Democrats pushed through right before this last election that allowed a lot of the misbehavior to happen.”

 “All you have to do to volunteer or work for a campaign that you like is walk into their headquarters and say, ‘I want to volunteer,’” Milius added.


Effective documentary filmmaking appeals to an audience’s sense of justice and pulls on emotional levers, Milius explained.

“I’d always studied narrative scripted features; that’s what I was trained in,” Milius said of her academic pedigree at the USC School of Cinematic Arts. “However, I think that it’s helped me in making documentaries.”

Milius added, “The problem [with political documentaries on the right] is they lack an emotional guide. They don’t utilize the tools that you have available to you as a narrative scripted filmmaker as far as setting a mood, as far as keeping the audience on a roller coaster, as far as having people feel their way through the movies as opposed to think their way through the movie.”

“You don’t want to go to a movie and have it be a homework assignment about classified documents,” she warned.

A former Los Angeleno, Milius said she grew tired of conservative “whining” of left-wing political corruption in Hollywood. She described this fatigue as an impetus for her professional journey, which led her to direct The Plot Against The President.

“It’s one of the reasons why I kind of threw my hands in the air with the culture [and] California in general,” Milius recalled. “I sort of lost it and went on a vision quest across the desert and started working for the Trump campaign in Nevada in 2016, which changed my life. Then I joined the administration … and then I end up in the perfect position to make this documentary, proving that the Russia conspiracy was a hoax.”

“I’m not going to whine about how I can’t get hired for Star Wars,” Milius remarked. “I don’t want to work at Star Wars.

Milius concluded, “I think that there is more available to us [as conservatives]. [We must] shake this idea that all creatives have to be blessed by some left-wing organization. [It’s] not the case. Just do your own thing. I know it’s not easy, obviously, but to try as much as possible. … We’ve got to for the country and for the culture.”

Breitbart News Daily broadcasts live on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.


‘Silence Of The Lambs’ At 30: How Would It Be Different Today?

On this episode of “The Federalist Radio Hour,” writer and producer at Sinclair and Federalist Senior Contributor Ellie Bufkin joins Culture Editor Emily Jashinsky to celebrate the 30-year anniversary of the iconic thriller movie “Silence of the Lambs” and discuss how the film demonstrates the evolution of Hollywood.

“One of the things I like, you know, obviously movies based on a novel or multiple novels, but the story itself, the way that it translated onto screen, was almost pitch-perfect,” Bufkin explained. “It’s difficult to put a story with as much detail as these novels had on camera, and to be able to make it as interesting and as terrifying as a reader would have been going through with that story, they did such an incredible job. And that’s complicated. I think that’s probably the most difficult to screen is like actually keeping the complexity of the characters.”

When critics label the film as “anti-trans” and attempt to view it through a current lens instead of seeing it as 30 years old, Bufkin said, it is “harmful to the film’s reputation.”

“I think that the idea that we can’t trust viewers to make their own decisions about what is moral and what is good is a real shame. And I think that as soon as you start, you know, putting, whatever moral high ground you think, you are in front of every single piece of art that has been made, is being made, or will be made in the future. You really lose the ability to make anything of quality, and you suck the soul out of things that have already been made.”