Summary
Tom Hanks reprised his 2016 “MAGA” character, Doug, on Saturday Night Live’s 50th anniversary episode, sparking backlash from Trump supporters.
The sketch, Black Jeopardy!, featured Doug again hesitating to shake hands with a Black host.
Conservative commentators criticized the portrayal as outdated and offensive, calling it an unfair caricature of Trump voters.
Outdated? Maybe. He’s not making them look like nazis
Offensive? Not even close.
Honestly, his portrayal is more human than any interaction I’ve personally had with any Trumper (family coworker, stranger included).
Tom Hanks’s whole brand is around getting you to emphasize with the cast.
If Tom Hanks is playing your character, it’s an implicit compliment. An insult would be if they’d gone with Steve Bushemy.
I would be stoked if either one of them impersonated me.
But Hanks was not complimenting them.
He was humanizing them. An act they see as insulting.
I have to admit, you had me going there for a second lol
Empathy not emphasis. Prolly an autocorrect but just pointing it out.
I haven’t seen the recent sketch–In the original though, his character was racist out of ignorance, but sorta open-minded and empathetic when actually facing black folks.
That latter part is probably what the trumpers actually find offensive.
They literally did that exact thing last time
The fuck is this fascist apologist bullshit?
They don’t need help looking like Nazis. They already look, act, and smell like them. And if they look, act, and smell like a Nazi, they are a Nazi
I’m confused by your comment. Who is the fascist apologist?
They guy who says MAGA “look like” Nazis. They are straight up Nazis.
Ok, so it was the commenter. The OC wrote:
The OC is apparently the Nazi apologist. Just so I don’t get accused of being a Nazi apologist in the future, should the comment say this instead?
Yes. Don’t need to beat around the bush with Nazis. Just say it like it is.
The issue is that to appease your anti-fascist fervor, we have to break grammar rules and phrase things awkwardly.
For Tom Hanks to portray his MAGA character as a Nazi, which is what the OC is saying would be needed to update the skit, he would have to make the character look like a Nazi to the audience. Having him be a Nazi in the script doesn’t benefit the audience. The audience needs to get that he’s a Nazi by having him look like one.
Seems a minor point to be harping on OC about.
Well, they have me blocked, so I can’t address their issues. I don’t even see their original comment in my inbox.
Edit: with this account
Your reading comprehension is off the charts.
Saying Tom Hanks portrayal of Maga is charitable of their behaviour is Nazi apologism?
What is your real issue here? You have that account blocked, and blocked so that it doesn’t receive notifications. (Edit: I may have blocked you due to this type of behaviour)
Are you afraid that I’ll poke holes in your argument?
Were you looking to call me a Nazi or do you just sling mud when someone steps out of your narrow set of authoritarian morals?
No, I’m not afraid you’ll poke holes in my argument. I usually don’t reply to threads of people who are very opinionated against me, as it seems to be a waste of time. But since you made a new account to get my attention…
The point I was trying to make was
That’s it. Take it as you will.
Not a new account chuckles, check the date. Hole one.
What I was saying and you have been told by others is that Hanks’ portrayal is more charitable than they deserve and it makes yhem look like garden variety racists. Hole two.
I feel Hanks went soft on them.
You are worked up about a version of what I said in your fucking mind.
If you were blocked or blocked me why did you go out of your way to be offened?
Again, I don’t really care about holes at this point and I admittedly didn’t check your account date. I’m not sure if I have you blocked or not, I was perhaps a bit sensitive because I have the ever present dread that the US will continue to be a fascist state from here on out.
If you think Hanks went soft, I misunderstood your comment and we agree.
Since you’re from .ca I will charitably assume your primary language is Québécois. In English I assure you that your understanding of the statement is not correct. There is no need to be angry at the person you originally replied to.