成人X站

The Netflix crime thriller-musical (yup!) “Emilia Perez” earned 13 Oscar nominations, the most of any film, including Best Picture, director, lead actress and supporting actress. And yet it will be derided by conservatives as a “woke” film getting praise because it checks off boxes, while insatiable progressives are already claiming offense despite it fulfilling their very demands.

“Emilia Perez” (Karla Sof铆a Gasc贸n in the titular role) is a dangerous leader of a Mexican drug cartel who embarks on a late-in-life journey of self-discovery after asking her attorney Rita (Zo毛 Salda帽a) to find a competent and discreet doctor to complete his gender transition into a female. After a not-so-chance encounter years later, Perez convinces Rita to reconnect her with her family and help heal the families she destroyed as a cartel leader.

It’s got the hallmarks of a film that progressives should love, and some conservatives will immediately dismiss. Both sides of the culture wars are wrong about “Emilia Perez” and its Oscar nominations.

More from Jason Rantz: The top 10 best films of 2024 feature a Brooklyn stripper, scared cat, snail hoarder and conflicted juror

Progressives hate听Emilia Perez听after demanding trans-centered films

“Emilia Perez” is one of the year’s best films. It’s an inventive musical that manages to work despite the heavy subject matter, driven by standout performances from Gasc贸n and听Salda帽a. The songs were far more satisfying musical than “Wicked” could hope to be. On paper, this film shouldn鈥檛 work, but in reality, I didn鈥檛 want to stop watching.

But progressive activists are livid with the film, despite it having a trans actress as its lead and her journey as the focus of the film.

Progressive activists are upset that Gasc贸n perpetuates supposedly harmful stereotypes. GLAAD the depiction as “a profoundly retrograde portrayal of a trans woman,” claiming a problematic association of trans identity with criminality is “a step backward for trans representation.” One transgender reviewer for PinkNews complained the “screenplay is so cisgender, it鈥檚 almost satirical” because the lead trans character “exudes a kind of confidence that鈥檚 almost nauseatingly sure of itself when it shouldn鈥檛 be.”

Moreover, the film’s depiction of the lead character’s gender transition has been described as superficial, failing to capture the complexities of transgender experiences. One called the film “transphobic” because it reduces gender transition to a plot device rather than a genuine exploration of identity.

These criticisms are, in a word, stupid. But we may likely see understandable, but equally ignorant, criticism from the Right.

More from Jason Rantz: WA Democrats pulled a fast one on voters as they undo parental rights initiative

Tokenism

It’s easy to see how some conservatives will view Karla Sof铆a Gasc贸n’s Oscar nomination as more proof of Hollywood’s agenda to prioritize identity politics over merit. They’ll call this tokenism.

This perspective is supported by the fact that subpar films are lauded and rewarded more for their progressive themes than their artistic merit.

“Moonlight” was a chore to get through, yet it won Best Picture because the lead character was black and gay — checking off boxes that Hollywood has gone out of its way to reward. Activists panned the Academy for not nominating “Barbie” lead Margot Robbie, citing sexism because her co-star Ryan Gosling earned a nod.

“Captain Marvel” was a weak superhero movie that performed poorly at the box office, but Hollywood celebrated it and blamed the lack of audience engagement on sexism from audiences that supposedly didn’t want to see a female superhero. But it seems the movie was only made because it featured a female superhero. Similarly, the all-female “Ghostbusters” didn’t need to be produced, and yet it was. It was awful.

What’s worse, rather than focus on quality filmmaking and casting and hiring decisions based on merit, the Academy new rules mandating certain diversity, equity and inclusion mandates in order to be considered for best picture.

Hollywood is desperate to appear inclusive by highlighting marginalized groups, often at the expense of genuine representation and talent recognition. In the case of Gasc贸n, conservatives might write her nomination off as less about her performance and more about the industry’s desire to be seen as woke.

This isn’t a valid argument with “Emilia Perez.”

More from Jason Rantz: Violent Antifa thugs force Turning Point USA to cancel event, UW admin blames victims

Insufferable progressive activists can never be satisfied

The supposed outrage from progressives over “Emilia Perez”听is peak absurdity, proving once again that nothing will ever satisfy the activist class.

Here鈥檚 a movie that centers on a trans character, played by a trans actress, and instead of applauding the representation, they鈥檙e clutching their pearls because the film didn鈥檛 check every box on their endless list of demands. The main gripe? The trans character is portrayed as 鈥� gasp! 鈥� a complex human being, but not complex enough. She鈥檚 a former cartel boss navigating her identity and past mistakes. But apparently, portraying a trans person like anyone else in a film, flaws and all, is offensive.

For years, activists have demanded more trans characters played by trans actors. “Emilia Perez” delivers that, but it鈥檚 still not enough. Why? Because unless the film is written, cast, produced and directed by woke activists who sanitize every element to fit their insufferable worldview, they鈥檙e never going to be happy. But guess what? Nobody wants to watch that kind of preachy, unwatchable propaganda.