I'm of two minds when I hear objections like this.

On the one hand, it's not as if I don't know what you're talking about. The paint-by-numbers approach to social justice is frustrating even to people who support it. It feels sloppy and inauthentic. But then again, so does any new worldview finding its bearings. Awkward films now may be paving the way for nuanced ones later.

And on the other hand, when I watch older movies, I don't see the absence of an agenda. Forrest Gump is a conservative fairy tale. My ears prick up when I hear people complaining about "narratives" and "agendas" because when I scratch the surface, it usually turns out that what they're really complaining about is the sidelining of their own narrative and agenda. Seemingly neutral films aren't agenda-free, either: the status quo is just as much a product of ideology.

Cordially,

Defensive Millennial

Hmm, “woke” is the term bandied around for much of this along with “virtue signalling” to show just how “on message” companies, wannabe “leaders” and the like are as part of “on-message” “group think” - motivated in large part, I suspect, by fear. Fear that if anyone even questions the “ideology” just for a moment then they will be “the enemy”, to be shunned, attacked, brought down. Coupled with the new Holy Commandment - Thou Shalt Cause No Offence To Anyone. It’s a toxic combination and doesn’t augur well for free speech. Or the whole point of education - which surely ought to be about how to think for yourself and make up your own mind.

Of course, even Star Trek TOR had its lecturing storylines, although mostly it was about entertainment. But if the Prime Directive is to be not causing offence to anyone then the industry may end up entertaining no-one.