Reply to Color blind casting or color quota casting

Forum Index » Entertainment and Pop Culture

Reply to "Color blind casting or color quota casting"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Sorry. But I think the remake of the magnificent  seven worked just fine with Denzel and lee byung+hun. I think the new Mary Poppins is fine. Hamilton is great. Drunk History"s diverse casting works for me

Is it really worth your time and energy to rail on about artistic choices?

you don't sound thoughtful or interesting. Even if it is not your intention, it just comes of bigoted and closed-minded[/quote]

It's fascinating how quickly people accuse others with differing views as bigoted and close-minded. Especially as to do so says far more about you than the other poster. How old are you? I find it's kids who have these very black and white views of how the world should be and scream bigotry and racism when someone else takes a more nuanced perspective. It's a bit of a shame as we could have a great discussion on how the past should be portrayed and the inappropriateness of casting different types of people in different historical roles but no, we must resort to childish name callings and typical adolescence style belittlement.

So you would be totally fine and non-judgmental if Disney made a movie with white actors playing Zulu warriors? I suppose to make it even more Hallmark-worthy we could come up with a story of a Boer baby being adopted by a Zulu tribe ;) [/quote]

look I'm 45. I'm not a kid. And we have been around and around on this thread about history, documentaries, and historically accurate films. We've discussed it. We've done it.

None of that changes the fact that at least in purely fictional fantasy films like Mary Poppins, racel blind asting is fine...

We've also discussed Hamilton as a historical artifact and that was dismissed by someone as well it doesn't count because it's theater. It's not as real as film.

people don't want to actually have a discussion about this topic. They want to make some kind of so-called gotcha  point about casting white people as Zulu warriors which is a strawman representation of what the other side is saying.

In an industry that has largely ignored people of color and used History and accuracy as an excuse to exclude them, I don't think that the accuracy side has a good point.

Especially not when we are talking about art instead of a history book.

and people have ignored or dismissed the point about whether or not Emma Stone was distracting in aloha, or Tom Cruise in The last samurai, or Jared Leto in the Dallas buyers club. Why? Because apparently sexual orientation and gender identification and close enough ethnic casting can be ignored.

And you know what? Maybe if we ever get to a point in which we see a proportionate number of people of color in film and television, then maybe we'll be okay to play to have white people play those historical figures. But we are not there yet
[/quote]

You have merit in your argument but I think you are also ignoring much of what the other poster has said so there's hypocrisy in accusing people of not wanting to have a discussion, especially as there's a lot of good comments that have been raised and discussed about accuracy of historical portrayals. You're looking specifically for what you want to see and ignoring the rest of the posts. I also think it's ignorant to pretend there's no difference among different types of artistic performances. Different acting mediums and types of productions and films send out very strong messages for different reasons. They are, each in their own ways, powerful instruments. One never goes to the opera for the plot (god forbid!) but for the music. One goes to ballets for the dancing. One certainly watches movies for different reasons depending on the movies.  Some movies are meant to be taken seriously, others are not. The power of films and the lasting impression they give can be stronger than you acknowledge, and which is why in totalitarian states they were often used as effective tools of propaganda. We should absolutely show movies to reflect the diverse world we live in today but, in the case of more serious films, not to pretend that the past, in which racial attitudes and racial beliefs and racial divides were severe and substantial, was different.

The difference in views on this thread may be in that some people are more concerned with portraying the past accurately because history should be venerated as a sacred subject, while others are much more casual and don't really care. 
[/quote]

Please. Tell us what discussion points we are missing?I can guarantee you they have almost all been addressed. But some people seem to think that unless we agree with their amazing sparkling points that we are ignoring them

and putting venerating history in the same sentence as Cinema and Hollywood is on its face ridiculous.

we can't really have a discussion because I see film as art. You apparently see of is a history lesson[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics