[W:99] If a historically white fictional character is actually cast as a white character, does it harm non-white people?

[jpevans]

Another point:

When a white person plays a brown or black character and is so polite as to colour his or her face brown or black, then some brown or black persons are "offended".
I will never understand that, and when I live for 120 years.
Methinks, those people are always on the lookout to find something that might possibly "offend" them.

There is no shortage of fine black actors, who would be deprived of the role. That is the point. Blacks for most of the movie industry were only given roles as subservient, shuffling bumpkins or criminals. Mermaids are mythical, Jesus was brown with a probable hook nose & black hair, comic book hero's are fantasy, someone made 'em up, someone can remake 'em. Should John Leguizamo only play gang members & waiters, for example. Typecasting is a problem for minority actors. Gay actors playing straight & vise versa, that's acting.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Harm to anyone not getting the part, no, but of course I said "hurt".

So there is that.

Whatever. If that's a hurt, then it's a hurt that deserves no salve or remedy. The ones who didn't get the part can go try out for something else.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

There is no shortage of fine black actors, who would be deprived of the role. That is the point. Blacks for most of the movie industry were only given roles as subservient, shuffling bumpkins or criminals.

Not for a long long time, and it was never exclusively true. Although I will give you that there was racism back in the day, but that really changed more than 60 years ago, and has improved ever since.

Mermaids are mythical,

Sure, they can be played by any character. It's not been about whether a mermaid could be played by a black character. It's whether there is a double standard, and that if there was a story featuring a black character, would there by bitching about it from the Left if a production changed it to white. I think we all know there would be.

Jesus was brown with a probable hook nose & black hair,

That you don't know, because (a) it's not known if there really was a Jesus in real life - there is zero proof, and (b) even if there was one, if we're basing it on the available genetic possibilities at the time, he could very well have been more Greek,Macedonian, Philistine, or other local ethnicity than "hook nosed Jew" as you suggest. We don't really know where his family came from, and there was plenty of mixing.

comic book hero's are fantasy, someone made 'em up, someone can remake 'em. Should John Leguizamo only play gang members & waiters, for example. Typecasting is a problem for minority actors. Gay actors playing straight & vise versa, that's acting.

Sure, but Ariel is the subject of an old fairy tale, and in the actual tale she is definitely described as white with long straight hair, sufficient to actually clothe her. So, as a piece of Scandinavian culture, it is what the Left would - in the reverse situation - call "cultural appropriation." Again, it's really the double standard people are identifying here.

John Leguizamo should play whatever part he and those producing a movie think he should play, and if they want to create a unique production where John Leguizamo portrays Adolph Hitler or Czar Ivan the Terrible, go for it. But the reverse should also be true, and it doesn't have to be a hispanic actor playing Fidel Castro. Fidel was white hispanic. And a lot of people could play him and still be true to skin tone, but even if a black or Irish ginger actor were to play him in a different production it should be fine.

The trouble is all the bitching about this issue and the focusing on it being one-sided - in other words, when the Left applies its "progressive stack" mentality to the issue, it then becomes a grievance list of who gets to complain - and of course - white men don't get to complain - well the straight ones, anyway - but everyone else does. We need to jettison that bullshit.

 

[Rumpelstil]

Blacks for most of the movie industry were only given roles as subservient, shuffling bumpkins or criminals.

That was a long long time ago.

 

[jpevans]

Not for a long long time, and it was never exclusively true. Although I will give you that there was racism back in the day, but that really changed more than 60 years ago, and has improved ever since.

Sure, they can be played by any character. It's not been about whether a mermaid could be played by a black character. It's whether there is a double standard, and that if there was a story featuring a black character, would there by bitching about it from the Left if a production changed it to white. I think we all know there would be.

That you don't know, because (a) it's not known if there really was a Jesus in real life - there is zero proof, and (b) even if there was one, if we're basing it on the available genetic possibilities at the time, he could very well have been more Greek,Macedonian, Philistine, or other local ethnicity than "hook nosed Jew" as you suggest. We don't really know where his family came from, and there was plenty of mixing.

Sure, but Ariel is the subject of an old fairy tale, and in the actual tale she is definitely described as white with long straight hair, sufficient to actually clothe her. So, as a piece of Scandinavian culture, it is what the Left would - in the reverse situation - call "cultural appropriation." Again, it's really the double standard people are identifying here.

John Leguizamo should play whatever part he and those producing a movie think he should play, and if they want to create a unique production where John Leguizamo portrays Adolph Hitler or Czar Ivan the Terrible, go for it. But the reverse should also be true, and it doesn't have to be a hispanic actor playing Fidel Castro. Fidel was white hispanic. And a lot of people could play him and still be true to skin tone, but even if a black or Irish ginger actor were to play him in a different production it should be fine.

The trouble is all the bitching about this issue and the focusing on it being one-sided - in other words, when the Left applies its "progressive stack" mentality to the issue, it then becomes a grievance list of who gets to complain - and of course - white men don't get to complain - well the straight ones, anyway - but everyone else does. We need to jettison that bullshit.

Rumple asked why blacks would get upset if a white actor in makeup played a black character.
That is speculation, we all don't know anything. speak for yourself.
There is ancient writing that says Jesus had an extraterrestrial parent, maybe the rapist had blond hair & blue eyes. There is that possibility.
Myths, fairy tales ect. open to interpretation, they're fictional beings.
I mentioned John Leguizamo because he said he started writing his own matinal because when he started out all he could get were gang punks & waiters, him & Benicio Del Toro both. Stereotyping wasn't confined to black actors.
Anyone can bitch, if they feel aggrieved & people can judge who has the better grievance, if anyone. You seem to be doing more speculating than you usually do.

 

[jpevans]

That was a long long time ago.

Not so very long ago that living people still remember the Breakthroughs like Cosby in I Spy, In the heat of the night or Guess who's coming to dinner.

 

[Queen Margo]

There is no shortage of fine black actors, who would be deprived of the role. That is the point. Blacks for most of the movie industry were only given roles as subservient, shuffling bumpkins or criminals. Mermaids are mythical, Jesus was brown with a probable hook nose & black hair, comic book hero's are fantasy, someone made 'em up, someone can remake 'em. Should John Leguizamo only play gang members & waiters, for example. Typecasting is a problem for minority actors. Gay actors playing straight & vise versa, that's acting.

Oh, how fun it would be to watch a movie with all white rappers.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Rumple asked why blacks would get upset if a white actor in makeup played a black character.
That is speculation, we all don't know anything. speak for yourself.

We've seen it many times. We've had scandals erupt, for example, over a white actor playing Cleopatra, who wokies declared should be black, even though she was in real life, white.

There is ancient writing that says Jesus had an extraterrestrial parent, maybe the rapist had blond hair & blue eyes. There is that possibility.

Link to something about that writing? Never heard of it.

Myths, fairy tales ect. open to interpretation, they're fictional beings.

Sure, even if the fair tale character is traditionally black or brown, I agree. My objection is only to a double standard.

I mentioned John Leguizamo because he said he started writing his own matinal because when he started out all he could get were gang punks & waiters, him & Benicio Del Toro both. Stereotyping wasn't confined to black actors.

Sure, because putting together a movie is literally an exercise in stereotyping. You would definitely stereotype a Redcoat in a revolutionary war movie as white, anglo-saxon, with a kind of British accent when he speaks - the soldiers are stereotyped as male, too. Same thing with Vikings - stereotypically Scandinavian in appearance, bearded, etc. Russian gangs in movies are stereotypically Russian.

Anyone can bitch, if they feel aggrieved & people can judge who has the better grievance, if anyone. You seem to be doing more speculating than you usually do.

Not really speculating, because I have repeatedly seen bitching from the Left about white people doing ANYTHING the Left feels should be relegated to black or brown people. White people playing Cleopatra or Aida, for example. White people making tacos on a taco truck. That's what "cultural appropriation" is - the bullshit Leftist concept that specifically white people aren't allowed involvement in what the Left regards as underprivileged cultures. White ought not have dreadlocks -- but blacks can, because it's black, even though it's Celtic, whites are appropriating.

The double standard is literally built into the Leftist view on this. That's what the Progressive Stack bullshit it. That's what "white privilege" is all about. It's about white people get treated differently because they are white and are the oppressor class, and black and brown people can do all sorts of things white people can't because they are the oppressed. It's the same double standard that has Lefists declare that black people literally can't be racist. They can't culturally appropriate anything, because they lack the institutional power to do so. It's baked into Progressivism.

 

[Rumpelstil]

Guess who's coming to dinner.

I can remember that film

 

[MrNiceGuy]

Not so very long ago that living people still remember the Breakthroughs like Cosby in I Spy, In the heat of the night or Guess who's coming to dinner.

I love Guess Who's Coming to Dinner. Spencer Tracy's character is hilarious as the upper crust liberal, upper west side, rich New Yorker, confronted with his lily-white daughter bringing home Kunta Kinte in the form of Sydney Poitier as her fiance.'

They illustrate the difference in how an early 60's youngster treats race as compared to the adults -- this is hilarious and cringy at the same time --



Oh, those young folks and their groovy music, all footloose and dancing whenever they can. "You wanna give me a lift to market today? Save me a cab?" --- "you know it, doll!" - He doesn't even care if she's black!

Watch Katherine Hepburn's face ---



And the daughter has only known the guy for 10 days..... lol

"He thinks you're going to faint, because he's a Negro." LOL!

 

[weaver2]

I'm surprised wokies haven't gotten their paws on Tarzan.

From the looks of this thread it would seem that the people most upset about role-race changes are conservatives not wokies.

 

[Bodecea]

I'm surprised wokies haven't gotten their paws on Tarzan.

Have you ever read the Tarzan books? Edgar Rice Burroughs was an extreme racist....painfully so.

 

[MrNiceGuy]

From the looks of this thread it would seem that the people most upset about role-race changes are conservatives not wokies.

Who, specifically? Have an example of such a post?

 

[devildavid]

All sorts of possible reasons; They happen to be the best actor for the job, as part of shifting the time/place/context of a traditional story (e.g. a version of Romeo and Juliet based around present day gangs), to make an underlying point about the traditionally assumed race of a character being just a cultural assumption and not actually mattering to the plot or to challenge to the assumption of a general assumption of the race of a character (e.g. Hermione Granger being played by a black actress in a play).

Throughout the history of film (and theatre for that matter), material has been presented in all sorts of different ways, including having characters played by different kinds of actors an/or differently to their traditional or conventional portrayal. That can include differences in ages, gender, sexuality, nationality, culture or race. None of that replaces the existing versions nor prevents more conventional versions being presented in future. Much of the greatest film and theatre comes from some kind of version, variation or spin on existing material after all and anything that is adapted from a different medium (sometimes even the same medium) literally can't exactly mirror the source material (I'd love to see the reaction to Disney making a true-to-source version of The Little Mermaid for children ).

All of this reminds me of when Daniel Craig was first announced as the new James Bond actor and there was a brief outcry in the media because he is... blond (gasp!). I think there was an interview where he was perplexed about being pressed on whether he would have to (or should) dye his hair to play the role.

My problem with Daniel Craig is that he looks like a thug.

 

[quip]

What are you even asking? No, if a historically white fictional character is played by a non-white actor, it doesn't harm white people, or any people. It's just ****ing play or movie, portrayed in a new way. Who ****ing cares? And, it's a free country. You want a black Santa Clause, or a white Svaart Piet? Go for it! You want George Washington or Tom Sawyer played by a black guy? Fine - what do I care? You want Mrs. Cratchet in A Christmas Carol played by a black actress? No worries at all - there in fact was that version a few years ago - I thought the movie was terrible, and they changed the moral to one of collective guilt, not the individual guilt of Ebeneezer Scrooge, but it was an interesting take, I suppose - the Leftist take on A Christmas Carol. Doesn't "harm" anyone, though.

What is a "pang of the great replacement theory?" What are you on about?

Just gauging reactions to tGRT. Seems there isn't much here.

 

[Ren]

Have you ever read the Tarzan books? Edgar Rice Burroughs was an extreme racist....painfully so.

So what? Joe Biden is also a racist. What are you so afraid of? We're talking about wokeness freaks revising original stories to fit their bullshit agendas, not whether a dead author's beliefs triggers snowflakes.

 

[Ren]

Jesus Christ, you people need a hobby.

Not nearly as badly as wokeness disciples need one. Actually, wokies need a helluva lot more than new hobbies. They need new jobs, new perspectives, new relationships and a good dose of Christianity.

 

[Rumpelstil]

Besides, we're talking about wokeness freaks revising original stories to fit their bullshit agendas

Lots of fine children's books are now denounced as "racist" by extreme wokers.
Maybe we will soon see burning-books-celebrations in the Nazi style.

 

[Ren]

Lots of fine children's books are now denounced as "racist" by extreme wokers.
Maybe we will soon see burning-books-celebrations in the Nazi style.

I hope not.

 

[Ren]

Can you tell us more about it?
What exactly did Amazon do?

Oh, they changed up Tolkien's work to fit their political agenda.

Here, check it out:

'The Lord Of The Rings: The Rings Of Power' Showrunner Responds To Criticism The Show Is Only "Vaguely Connected" To J.R.R. Tolkien's Work

The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power showrunner Patrick McKay recently responded to a criticism that the Prime Video show is only "vaguely connected" to J.R.R. Tolkien's works.

boundingintocomics.com

 

[Ren]

Another point:

When a white person plays a brown or black character and is so polite as to colour his or her face brown or black, then some brown or black persons are "offended".
I will never understand that, and when I live for 120 years.
Methinks, those people are always on the lookout to find something that might possibly "offend" them.

Or maybe some of them just want to see continuity, like so many of us do already. Politeness is nice, but in this case, consistency is better - a lot better.

 

[AGENT J]

Oh, they changed up Tolkien's work to fit their political agenda.

Here, check it out:

'The Lord Of The Rings: The Rings Of Power' Showrunner Responds To Criticism The Show Is Only "Vaguely Connected" To J.R.R. Tolkien's Work

The Lord of the Rings: The Rings of Power showrunner Patrick McKay recently responded to a criticism that the Prime Video show is only "vaguely connected" to J.R.R. Tolkien's works.

boundingintocomics.com

so in others words, NO you cant LMAO
watching your triggered retarded meltdown thread get the shit kicked out of it has been hilarious
incoming continued deflection, starman, attack and or meltdown in 3 . . . .2 . . . . .


this is awesome

 

[Ren]

so in others words, NO you cant LMAO

What are faux laughing about now?

Tell me.

 

[AGENT J]

What are faux laughing about now?

Tell me.

BOOM!!!!!!!
once again i called it perfectly!! BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
wow i wonder if its done on purpose to make his posts look this triggered and retarded or is it just total ignorance either way its hilarious!

 

[Ren]

BOOM!!!!!!!
once again i called it perfectly!! BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
wow i wonder if its done on purpose to make his posts look this triggered and retarded or is it just total ignorance either way its hilarious!

What did you call? lol

You can barely string together a coherent sentence.

Try again.