Taboo (1999) | How Woke Is It?

Our VerdictMildly Woke

33%

Taboo1999

In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected speech. These reviews reflect personal opinions and not statements of fact.

What We Think

'Taboo' is a provocative film for its era, but its approach is more about psychological drama and exploring forbidden themes historically, not enforcing today's woke agenda. Relatively non-woke by 2020s standards.

Score Breakdown

Compromised:Narrative Integrity

Mildly Woke

What is this?

'Taboo' centers its story around character and psychological tension, not on pushing overtly modern identity politics. Identity is explored mainly in the context of historical Japan and the samurai code. The casting and character development appear rooted in the narrative, rather than being driven by modern wokeness.

Compromised:Cultural Foundations

Woke

What is this?

The film does subvert some traditional notions, particularly regarding masculinity and sexuality within the samurai class, exploring homoerotic tension. However, since it is set in historical context without excessive didacticism, it stops short of aggressively undermining cultural foundations as seen in contemporary woke works.

Compromised:Ideological Monoculture

Mildly Woke

What is this?

While the movie explores taboo topics (as the title promises), it doesn't portray a world where only one modern ideology exists. The film presents multiple perspectives within its samurai setting, suggesting complexity over monoculture.

User Reviews

No user reviews received yet.

Please leave a review and let the world know what you think.
Your review will be kept completely anonymous.

Your Review

Comments

Users Also Viewed

Movie poster for Quill: The Life of a Guide Dog

Movie poster for A Class to Remember III: The New Voyage

Disclaimer: In a free society the right to critique art is essential and protected as a form of free speech and freedom of expression. The reviews and commentary on this site represent personal opinions and interpretations. They are not statements of fact and should not be taken as factual claims about any individual, company, or creative work.