The Name of the Rose (1986) | How Woke Is It?

Our VerdictNot Woke

18%

The Name of the Rose1986

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

A rare period drama that respects historical context, avoids ideological shoehorning, and actually trusts older institutions and traditions to carry meaningful conflict. Very low on the woke-o-meter, refreshingly non-woke for modern audiences.

Score Breakdown

Compromised:Narrative Integrity

Not Woke

What is this?

'The Name of the Rose' remains focused on story and character over ideological identity markers. Casting choices and character arcs prioritize narrative and period authenticity rather than modern diversity checklists. The film avoids forced representation or flawless, preachy characters.

Compromised:Cultural Foundations

Mildly Woke

What is this?

The film critiques aspects of organized religion and medieval dogma, but does so within authentic historical context and with respect for complexity. Masculinity, family, and tradition aren't pathologized or subverted for modern messages; rather, they're explored through plausible, imperfect people.

Compromised:Ideological Monoculture

Mildly Woke

What is this?

There's room for conflicting viewpoints, religious fundamentalism, skepticism, and reason debate each other. Traditional views aren't simply mocked or villainized, and while the film probes religious hypocrisy, it doesn't flatten all alternatives into caricature.

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 The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles

Movie poster for Distant Voices, Still Lives

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.