|
Wandle Cax posted:If anyone can make the slightest amount of sense of this sentence I would love to hear it. What a meaningless puff of a comment. The film expresses the concept of "Star Trek"... in aesthetic terms. I'm opposing this to literal plot content and more abstract things like franchise rights. "Aesthetic" refer to the principles expressed by the visuals. The film emphasizes the speed at which things take place, the brightness, the fluid motion of the camera, the primary colours. The film obviously rejects the dark, asymmetrical, spiky, secondary-coloured ship owned by the villains. You can extrapolate outwards from there into the philosophy of Star Trek, the optimism and the pursuit of knowledge and truth, and the ethical considerations. The destruction of the villain's ship is presented as an ethical statement - 'this thing should not exist.' Everything is depicted as governed by informational patterns, while the film takes the time to look at the mechanisms. This is the point of Scotty stuck in the pipe, an action beat that serves no plot purpose whatsoever but encapsulates the film's themes. It's a reference to Chaplin's Modern Times, except it's not quite the same as Chaplin reduced to a cog in the machine. The fluid motion is what's important - and this is the scene directly after they literally teleport from one place to the other. The point is that people can't be completely reduced to pure information. They still need bodies, to do things like breathe. This is the recurring tension between idealism and reality, summed up with the 'gag' where they acknowledge there's no sound in space but continue to employ it as a stylistic choice nonetheless. When Spock is pushed to snap out of his 'purely rational' mindset, he audibly cracks the glass screen on one of the computer consoles. It's a metaphor. computer parts posted:It's a setting rather than a set continuity. There are Klingons and the Enterprise and a Starfleet but it's not behoven to choices made a few decades earlier. World War II is the setting, but Basterds uses the aesthetics of blaxploitation films, spaghetti westerns (and so-forth) to express things about World War II and how it's perceived as a historical event.
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 12:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 12:10 |
|
|
Barometer posted:You mean to say that a non-white character was played by a non-white actor? A Latino in "tanface", no less...44 years ago, and that's going to be your standard, now? At least 44 years ago they decided to hire someone who wasn't whiter than Kirk for the role of an Indian. 2012, however, and we're back to square one. Those upset they got a guy the director feels is best for the role sound like those people who were upset that a black man would play a Norse god in Thor. The actor is the directors choice (I think), and JJ Abrams carries enough weight that he's probably not got pressure from above to hire certain people.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 12:32
|
|
|
Barometer posted:You mean to say that a non-white character was played by a non-white actor? A Latino in "tanface", no less...44 years ago, and that's going to be your standard, now? At least 44 years ago they decided to hire someone who wasn't whiter than Kirk for the role of an Indian. 2012, however, and we're back to square one. If they wanted an Indian guy for Khan they could've cast Kal Penn, and then the film's conflict could be solved by Sulu and Khan bonding over a huge blunt.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 12:45
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:Those upset they got a guy the director feels is best for the role sound like those people who were upset that a black man would play a Norse god in Thor. Well, no, it's pretty much the opposite actually. Whitewashing is a pretty henious thing because minorities struggle to get prominent roles as a result of white being considered the default go to or because white people are often given roles that have a specific ethnicity attached to them. Black people generally don't get 'white' roles. So, y'know, pretty much the exact opposite. 'the director got the guy they felt was best for the role' is a nice sentiment, but the reality of hollywood whitewashing isn't nearly as clean cut or as pretty.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 12:59
|
|
|
Yeah I'm not really feeling the complaint of a white guy playing Khan. I could understand if the entire Enterprise crew was cast white and there were no new non-white actors cast in this movie, but holy poo poo they cast someone who apparently killed the audition after going after having their prime choice turn it down (non-white by the way) and there's a huge hullabaloo over it? ?_?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 15:40
|
|
|
I'm always annoyed by Hollywood whitewashing, and I did wish that they could have found some badass Indian dude to play Khan if they really wanted Khan; so I'm not going to stop anyone else from complaining about it. (It's sort of like making another Charlie Chan movie with another white guy still playing Chan in 2012.) Simply rebooting Trek back to the 1960s status quo with Kirk, Spock, and McCoy as the main characters (even though Uhura is now the 3rd most important in marketing) did more to subtly whitewash Star Trek, than how they chose to recast Khan. The makeup of the cast of characters was progressive for the 60s, but not anymore. Casting Cumberbatch as Khan is a sympton of that problem. I guess I'm really saying rebooting poo poo and general franchise dependency are two of many mechanisms for our pop culture to stay mostly white, straight, and male. I say this as someone who enjoyed Trek '09; and I'll admit that movie got me more interested in the old stuff. I'm still looking forward to Trek 12, sadly. Edit: The people who pushed for whole idea of Heimdall being black as controversial were literally white supremacists. The fact that people listened was really sad. Echo Chamber fucked around with this message at 16:28 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 16:05
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:Those upset they got a guy the director feels is best for the role sound like those people who were upset that a black man would play a Norse god in Thor. No, it's not the same thing at all. I love Benedict Cumberbatch and want him to get more and more roles and be in everything until everyone's sick of him. I think he'll do an amazing job. Doesn't mean I can't be disappointed that an ethnic character is being whitewashed. Apparently Benicio Del Toro had the role first and dropped out last minute, which explains it a little more, but it still kind of sucks. Fat Turkey posted:The actor is the directors choice (I think), and JJ Abrams carries enough weight that he's probably not got pressure from above to hire certain people. You think directors get pressured to hire more ethnic actors?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 16:19
|
|
|
Fat Turkey posted:Those upset they got a guy the director feels is best for the role sound like those people who were upset that a black man would play a Norse god in Thor. Well no, not even getting into the fact that whitewashing is a fairly important deal to discuss and all, for the god in Thor that was a case of 'uh they're loving gods, they can be purple with pink spots if they want to', but for this Khan in Trek was an Indian human man who was altered genetically, so casting a white actor for him is...fairly lovely. It's not like any of us are saying 'boycott the movie!' or anything, it's just a valid topic to bring up because it's something that hurts media as a whole to encourage.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 16:22
|
|
|
ColonelPanic posted:I guess I'm in the minority in not looking forward to this film and not caring for JJ Trek.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 16:26
|
|
|
I have bad news if you think 'the masses' suddenly decided Trek should have a ton of caricatures and callbacks....
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 16:27
|
|
|
Noone is saying whitewashing isn't a deal in Hollywood. Its clearly prevelent when looking at the general make up of the cast of major films and how they are marketed. When it clearly happens, I think it should be called out, but I don't think it flatly implies eberytime a white actor takes on the roleofsa non-white character, then instantly this is whitewash. Especially in this scenario where they had a non white actor set up as their first choice, and then apparently this guy has a fantastic audition. Should no non Indians have been considered for the role? Then again, it makes you wonder why they choose Khan as the villain, but you choose the character and write the script before an acting decision is made I suppose. On a tangent, I was listening to a film podcast when there had be a hurrah that an Englishman would play Mandella in a film, why wasn't a South African chosen. Then they talked about Streep playing Thatcher and Kingsley playing Ghandi. It would have been interesting for them to move onto race, but it certainly becomes a political issue. Fat Turkey fucked around with this message at 17:07 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 17:00
|
|
|
The excuse that studios 'can't find non-white actors' or whatever is just such complete bullshit and making that excuse is almost more offensive than not even trying.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 17:27
|
|
|
Pioneer42 posted:But anyone who was raised by the originals will never be happy with it turned into--no better off than it was when Nemesis came out. I was raised on a potent mix of TOS and TNG and I thought it did a pretty great job of capturing the essence of the original. TOS was full of the same amount of sex and action as the new movie was, but appropriate for the period. I don't really get it when people say things like how Uhura was a sex symbol to sell the movie then forget that William Ware Theiss's wardrobes were used for the exact same purpose.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 18:30
|
|
|
Danger posted:The excuse that studios 'can't find non-white actors' or whatever is just such complete bullshit and making that excuse is almost more offensive than not even trying. It's bankable non white actors that will satisfy an investment due to guaranteeing a return. Which is true, to a degree (although not really relevant in this particular case) - but is actually a chicken/egg situation that is best discussed in its own thread.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 19:30
|
|
|
Oh this old song and dance. "The guy from Mr Mom is Batman?" "Starbuck isn't a chick!" "Bond ain't Blonde!" Who wants to bet that a year from now will all be hearing about how brilliant Cumberbatch and how his casting was a no-brainer?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 19:52
|
|
|
BrandonGK posted:Oh this old song and dance. "The guy from Mr Mom is Batman?" "Starbuck isn't a chick!" "Bond ain't Blonde!" Who wants to bet that a year from now will all be hearing about how brilliant Cumberbatch and how his casting was a no-brainer? Of course Cumberbatch will be awesome and you're completely, irreversibly dense if you don't understand the difference between those three examples and the conversation at hand. LesterGroans fucked around with this message at 20:03 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 19:59
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:Of course Cumberbatch will be awesome and you're completely, irreversibly dense if you don't understand the different between those three examples and the conversation at hand. You're right. It is ridiculous that Hollywood won't give roles to genetically-enhanced supermen actors.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:03
|
|
|
Okay, cool, you don't get it.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:06
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:Okay, cool, you don't get it. My point is it doesn't matter who they got to play Kahn or what his ethnicity is. There'd be nerd rage in any event. Besides this may all be a moot point anyway. This is all based on unconfirmed internet rumors that may turn out to be bullshit anyway.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:14
|
|
|
BrandonGK posted:My point is it doesn't matter who they got to play Kahn or what his ethnicity is. There'd be nerd rage in any event. Nerd rage is when someone says "Khan isn't supposed to be white because of CANON". The grievance here is different. Non-white actors are heavily underrepresented in Hollywood films, and this is yet another opportunity to cast one in a major role being thrown away.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:18
|
|
|
I'm hoping we all understand that Khan's character arc is more-so about meglomania than him being a persecuted minority? What ethnicity the actor is has very little relevance, especially since we don't have a leaked script or know what this new Khan's role in the movie is.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:19
|
|
|
BrandonGK posted:My point is it doesn't matter who they got to play Kahn or what his ethnicity is. There'd be nerd rage in any event. Besides this may all be a moot point anyway. This is all based on unconfirmed internet rumors that may turn out to be bullshit anyway. But that point doesn't make sense because it isn't 'nerd rage'. I agree that we don't even know if he's actually playing Kahn, so it may not matter, but do you not see the troubling implications of casting ethnic characters with white actors? What if they made Shaft white? What if they remade Night of the Living Dead and made Ben white? It's a practice that happens a lot and is still happening and is really regressive. MoaM posted:I'm hoping we all understand that Khan's character arc is more-so about meglomania than him being a persecuted minority? What ethnicity the actor is has very little relevance, especially since we don't have a leaked script or know what this new Khan's role in the movie is. That's not the point. It's not a discussion of his character arc in the film. Benedict Cumberbatch is a great actor and will do a great job. The problem is with taking an ethnic character and whitewashing it for no real reason. LesterGroans fucked around with this message at 20:22 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:20
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:Nerd rage is when someone says "Khan isn't supposed to be white because of CANON". To take this a bit further, its very frustrating how nerd rage is most often specifically directed at casting non-white actors as characters who were portrayed as white or even characters with no discernible racial characteristic (hell, even when fans just falsely presume such as with Hunger Games). This doesn't happen at all in the reverse, or when it does happen people make excuses similar to what have been made in this very thread.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:24
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:That's not the point. It's not a discussion of his character arc in the film. Benedict Cumberbatch is a great actor and will do a great job. The problem is with taking an ethnic character and whitewashing it for no real reason. You mean the fact that he loving spot on nailed the audition using nothing but his voice on a lovely phone is whitewashing? Stop looking for controversy. They picked him because he can act, not because he's white.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:25
|
|
|
Danger posted:To take this a bit further, its very frustrating how nerd rage is most often specifically directed at casting non-white actors as characters who were portrayed as white or even characters with no discernible racial characteristic (hell, even when fans just falsely presume such as with Hunger Games). This doesn't happen at all in the reverse, or when it does happen people make excuses similar to what have been made in this very thread. Exactly. Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin, the Ultimates making Nick Fury black and Idris Elba as Heimdall were all fans making GBS threads the bed because their characters weren't white anymore. 7thBatallion posted:You mean the fact that he loving spot on nailed the audition using nothing but his voice on a lovely phone is whitewashing? Stop looking for controversy. They picked him because he can act, not because he's white. No one's denying he can act. Tons of people can act. Are you saying there wasn't a single non-white person who could have done as good a job? LesterGroans fucked around with this message at 20:28 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:25
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:No one's denying he can act. Tons of people can act. Are you saying their wasn't a single non-white person who could have done as good a job? I'm saying no one nailed the audition as good as he did. Are you saying that when they realized Cumberbatch was white, they should have gone with somebody who was subpar in the audition?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:31
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:Are you saying there wasn't a single non-white person who could have done as good a job? This really isn't an issue of affirmative action though?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:34
|
|
|
Oh poo poo, guys. This dude that's been wanting this part for months, the one with the awesome phone audition? It turns out he's white. Can we get someone else to do this? You know, not white?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:39
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:Nerd rage is when someone says "Khan isn't supposed to be white because of CANON". Is this really nerd rage? It's not like they suddenly made Kirk black thinking that nobody would notice. It seems like they knew that the first movie was pretty forgettable and are trying to go out with a bang with this one. The weird thing is that I think they already tried to do this with Brent Spiner in Enterprise, although I didn't see all of those episodes to know exactly how that went down. He played an ancestor of Soong who was creating superhumans, and the Enterprise crew was trying to kill them all. I don't know if this movie will play it much different than that, but it might have Star Trek 9 stamped all over it.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 20:58
|
|
|
7thBatallion posted:Oh poo poo, guys. This dude that's been wanting this part for months, the one with the awesome phone audition? It turns out he's white. Can we get someone else to do this? You know, not white? It's almost as if movies are a visual medium and not purely audio...
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:11
|
|
|
7thBatallion posted:Oh poo poo, guys. This dude that's been wanting this part for months, the one with the awesome phone audition? It turns out he's white. Can we get someone else to do this? You know, not white? Look, let's start off with a serious question - what if the Betty White had put in a performance that blew away the producers. Would you (or the producers for that matter) have said, "maybe an 80 year old white woman isn't the right fit for this part"? If you answered yes, then you've conceded that there are physical factors that apply to casting other than acting ability (and if you've noticed, nobody here has said anything disparaging about Cumberbatch as an actor). There are precious few roles for minorities in Hollywood these days. An iconic character like Khan, whose ethnicity has already been coded into the audience's expectations, is one of the few ways a minority actor can get a role in a major hollywood production. The fact that it's been given to a white man is disappointing because it's another missed opportunity. It's hard to believe there wasn't somebody with chops as good as Cumberbatch who auditioned, but we'll never know. When the assumed race of every major movie character is white, it looks bad to give away a minority role to yet another white actor. EDIT: And don't try to pretend that this doesn't work the other way. Scripts with black lead actors are by and large treated by Hollywood as unmarketable. Crackbone fucked around with this message at 21:23 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:19
|
|
|
7thBatallion posted:Oh poo poo, guys. This dude that's been wanting this part for months, the one with the awesome phone audition? It turns out he's white. Can we get someone else to do this? You know, not white? This would work if the casting people had, until recently, thought this movie was a radio play.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:22
|
|
|
We really need to get some perspective here: JJ Abrams and co. aren't turning Virgil Tibbs into a white Jewish liberal.Crackbone posted:...whose ethnicity [Khan's] has already been coded into the audience's expectations... Seriously? This is an awful stretch. MoaM fucked around with this message at 21:38 on May 4, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
I'm not really invested in Star Trek but I always just thought of Khan as some space dude and not a familiar ethnicity.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 21:49
|
|
|
Crackbone posted:There are precious few roles for minorities in Hollywood these days. An iconic character like Khan, whose ethnicity has already been coded into the audience's expectations, Errr....no this is not the case.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 22:44
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:What if they made Shaft white? What if they remade Night of the Living Dead and made Ben white? It's a practice that happens a lot and is still happening and is really regressive. I'd say the former would matter, the latter would not. The prevailing surface text of Shaft is about race; if Shaft were not <a minority>, it would be completely pointless to carry the Shaft name (I would say it would be possible to use a DIFFERENT minority in situations, though). Night of the Living Dead had racial subtext that resulted specifically from casting a black actor in the lead role (coincidentally, because he was the best Romero could get for the part at the time). However, making a remake without that casting could result in theme shifts that could result in equally interesting material, depending on the script.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 22:48
|
|
|
correct me if I'm wrong but isn't khan supposed to be some eugenics experiment super man? and if so isn't changing him from even just 'vaguely mixed ethnicity' to lily white not just obviously comically inappropriate to anyone else?
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 22:57
|
|
|
I hope he employs a silly accent.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 23:07
|
|
|
Professor Clumsy posted:I hope he employs a silly accent. If he does a totally absurd, in no way meant to be Indian, accent, and just confuses the gently caress out of everyone why the white guy talking like a nutjob is the super-human named Khan, it's the best movie made. "He may be my greatest foe...or...just a dude that escaped from a space asylum? Either way let's try to deal with that."
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 23:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 12:10 |
|
|
Darko posted:Errr....no this is not the case. His name is Khan Singh for fucks sake.
|
|
#
?
May 4, 2012 23:59
|
|
