|
Terror Sweat posted:His name is Khan Singh for fucks sake. His ethnicity has never been a thing anyone has cared about ever, he's never outright been said to be of indian descent, he was played be a hispanic actor, the movies and shows are set hundreds of years in the future after many huge wars and likely huge shakeups in culture on earth, and the fact that he's indian (if he is) has never played a role at all in star trek ever, except that he might have been a warlord in central or east Asia after being turned in to a eugenics super soldier. Really the only reason anyone cares that he isn't being played by an indian actor is because his name is quite indian instead of something like 'gently caress poo poo Piss I'm Going To Kill You Kirk' in which case a white actor would have zero relevance to anything.
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:12 |
|
|
People care because this is yet another case of whitewashing, and it's especially damning because it's on a franchise that used to be the leader in having people of color in roles that broke boundaries.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 00:18
|
|
|
piratepilates posted:His ethnicity has never been a thing anyone has cared about ever His ethnicity has never been a thing white people have cared about ever. quote:He's never outright been said to be of indian descent "Star Trek TOS: Space Seed" posted:"MARLA: From the northern India area, I'd guess. Probably a Sikh. They were the most fantastic warriors" quote:The movies and shows are set hundreds of years in the future after many huge wars and likely huge shakeups in culture on earth Eugenics wars take place in the 90s. quote:and the fact that he's indian (if he is) has never played a role at all in star trek ever, except that he might have been a warlord in central or east Asia after being turned in to a eugenics super soldier. Except this now means that the true master race is white people? Instead of a vaguely Indian/Hispanic man as the leader with various different cultures under his command.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
Tars Tarkas posted:People care because this is yet another case of whitewashing, and it's especially damning because it's on a franchise that used to be the leader in having people of color in roles that broke boundaries. Yea Trek doing it is kinda extra poo poo because as crazy and weird as Gene was about what he considered 'progressive', the old stuff really did push racial barriers.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 00:21
|
|
|
Terror Sweat posted:
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 00:23
|
|
|
Glitterbomber posted:Yea Trek doing it is kinda extra poo poo because as crazy and weird as Gene was about what he considered 'progressive', the old stuff really did push racial barriers. Also kinda poo poo because Kim Noonien Singh was the name of a war buddy of Gene's that he was trying to reach out to. (At least, according to IMDB) JJ Abrams, disrespecting the troops. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 00:25
|
|
|
korusan posted:TOS was full of the same amount of sex and action as the new movie was, but appropriate for the period. I completely agree with your point, but I couldn't help but think of the following scene when you used the words "appropriate for the period" 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
Tars Tarkas posted:People care because this is yet another case of whitewashing, and it's especially damning because it's on a franchise that used to be the leader in having people of color in roles that broke boundaries. Isn't having a character that's literally Space Genghis Khan in itself a bit racist?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 02:11
|
|
|
I just think it's just a TEENY bit disingenuous to level real strong claims of whitewashing in this particular case. Everything about the circumstances point to JJ Abrams not being a racist, and Cumberbach getting the role after a knockout audition AND after the previous actor dropped out(who would be considered non-white right?). I just think some of the posts hand wringing about whitewashing in regards to this movie are a little over the top sorry. 
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 02:40
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I completely agree with your point, but I couldn't help but think of the following scene when you used the words "appropriate for the period" TOS is horribly sexist by todays standards, yes, but in the 60s it was genuinely, controversially, progressive. ApexAftermath posted:I just think it's just a TEENY bit disingenuous to level real strong claims of whitewashing in this particular case. Everything about the circumstances point to JJ Abrams not being a racist, and Cumberbach getting the role after a knockout audition AND after the previous actor dropped out(who would be considered non-white right?). I just think some of the posts hand wringing about whitewashing in regards to this movie are a little over the top sorry.  It's a completely disingenuous argument for a widely known issue and to write it off because it's coming from a director you personally like is to bury your head in the sand.
Amethyst fucked around with this message at 03:22 on May 5, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 03:16
|
|
|
Also the level of racism required for whitewashing can very easily just be an unfortunate effect of privilege and no one at all has claimed JJ has any legit hate or disdain for minorities. Whitewashing is a very subtle form of bigotry and doesn't require a guy waking up going 'gonna gently caress over a minority today' to happen.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 03:44
|
|
|
Glitterbomber posted: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. I think we already have Bane for that.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 03:50
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:When Avatar: the Last Air Bender was cast entirely with whites, idiots posted in the thread that "Clearly, M.Night Shyamalan isn't racist because he is himself not white!" Nowhere did I say whitewashing isn't happening at all or imply that. Also my opinion was slightly more nuanced then "JJ is a good guy he would never do that DERP!" The example of Avatar: Airbender is actually a pretty valid example of it where I would actually agree that whitewashing is totally what happened considering how blatant is is in that movie and how much of a hack M.Night is. I just don't think it is worthwhile to derail the thread over this. Save the outrage for a movie that does it and clearly knows it is doing it and doesn't give a gently caress.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 04:15
|
|
|
ApexAftermath posted:Nowhere did I say whitewashing isn't happening at all or imply that. Also my opinion was slightly more nuanced then "JJ is a good guy he would never do that DERP!" The example of Avatar: Airbender is actually a pretty valid example of it where I would actually agree that whitewashing is totally what happened considering how blatant is is in that movie and how much of a hack M.Night is. I just don't think it is worthwhile to derail the thread over this. Save the outrage for a movie that does it and clearly knows it is doing it and doesn't give a gently caress. I'm sorry but I the distinction between a movie that "knows what its doing and doesn't give a gently caress" and a movie that....doesn't know what it's doing and does give a gently caress is completely artificial. Whitewashing happens because of deeply ingrained, cultural ideas that many perpetrators aren't even slightly aware of. This makes it all the more important to draw attention to.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 04:26
|
|
|
ApexAftermath posted:Nowhere did I say whitewashing isn't happening at all or imply that. Also my opinion was slightly more nuanced then "JJ is a good guy he would never do that DERP!" The example of Avatar: Airbender is actually a pretty valid example of it where I would actually agree that whitewashing is totally what happened considering how blatant is is in that movie and how much of a hack M.Night is. I just don't think it is worthwhile to derail the thread over this. Save the outrage for a movie that does it and clearly knows it is doing it and doesn't give a gently caress. When my grandma calls Obama 'our first negro president' I remind her we don't use that word anymore even when she's saying how nice it is 'one of them' got elected. Yes, when it's intentional you should be a bit more polite about bringing it up than you would if it was intentional but that's not a magic shield.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 04:41
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:Whitewashing happens because of deeply ingrained, cultural ideas that many perpetrators aren't even slightly aware of. This makes it all the more important to draw attention to. Ok so what do you want them to do about it in this case I guess is my question? I do get the point of talking about these things in broader terms so that attitudes change over time and I think that is a very good thing. That seems like the only way to combat this, but I also think it really belongs in its own thread.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 04:51
|
|
|
Here's a question I wouldn't have imagined ever being able to pose: Is it more or less racist for a white person to play an Indian compared to a Mexican playing an Indian? Or for that matter, a Puerto Rican? Is it just generally worse for a white to play any non-white role, and always some degree less racist for any non-white to do so? Relatedly, if we assume Del Toro was going to play him originally, how many non-white actors would have to drop out before it's *not* whitewashing? Is it always whitewashing, or can it ever be picking the best actor for the part? Like if five people dropped out before they went with the white guy, do we just assume he *really* waited to start whitewashing the film? I find the issue amusing because the original role was so racially confused in the first place. I want the current Khan to speak Mandarin with an Australian accent just to completely gently caress with everybody.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 04:53
|
|
|
I think it's very agreeable to say that whatever problems or questions that might have been with Del Toro aren't as bad as what we're getting now with Cumberbatch. If no other names were publicly considered, and they went with a South Asian actor; that probably would have been the "safest" route to go with a character that itself is confusing and sort of problematic. In the best case scenerio, had they not taken the reboot route, we would be talking about the casting of new heroes and villians. The confusion and concerns about Khan are only happening again because they decided what the Star Trek brand needed was some sense of familiarity. If we had new characters, the attitude could have been "Let's have a new villian that will be as unique yet interesting as Khan or the Borg, without rehashing them." And the specific confusing racial questions (of the past, at least) might be gone. But they did go with the bringing back Khan, it seems. The problems with the choice of Cumberbatch are expected, to say the least.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 05:10
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Isn't having a character that's literally Space Genghis Khan in itself a bit racist? Keep in mind this was the 1960s, this was the only tv series where non-whites played anything besides maids or criminals, if there were any nonwhites on the show. There is plenty of racism still in Star Trek (The Omega Glory, for example) but for the time it is very progressive. And none of that changes the fact that this is still whitewashing. Also how many people have even seen Space Seed to see how Montalban plays Khan even then? This isn't some generic bad guy role, it never has been. Part of the reason this role is iconic enough that a producer who never watched the original series until he did a marathon remembered this role above all others to base a movie on is because how Montalban played him. Montalban was an activist for better representation for Latino roles, established a foundation, lost jobs over his fight. He also starred in another film series famous for it's allegories about racism - the Planet of the Apes sequels. He's not going to return to a role if it is racist. As for the role being racially confused, in the reboot, the Captain of the ship Kirk's dad is on is played by an Middle Eastern guy who according to the character's backstory was born in Cuba.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 05:28
|
|
|
Glitterbomber posted:Also the level of racism required for whitewashing can very easily just be an unfortunate effect of privilege and no one at all has claimed JJ has any legit hate or disdain for minorities. Whitewashing is a very subtle form of bigotry and doesn't require a guy waking up going 'gonna gently caress over a minority today' to happen. Couldn't part of this be Del Toro jumping ship at the last minute and the directors/whoever scrambling to find someone? And in that scramble, finding that the best actor for the part happened to be white? If the entire movie is white people, that's a little more clear. But this is one character, and my understanding is that it isn't very easy replacing an actor that you already had your mind set on.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 06:21
|
|
|
Aquelia posted:Couldn't part of this be Del Toro jumping ship at the last minute and the directors/whoever scrambling to find someone? And in that scramble, finding that the best actor for the part happened to be white? If the entire movie is white people, that's a little more clear. But this is one character, and my understanding is that it isn't very easy replacing an actor that you already had your mind set on. Nope. Racism.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 07:26
|
|
|
Aquelia posted:Couldn't part of this be Del Toro jumping ship at the last minute and the directors/whoever scrambling to find someone? And in that scramble, finding that the best actor for the part happened to be white? If the entire movie is white people, that's a little more clear. But this is one character, and my understanding is that it isn't very easy replacing an actor that you already had your mind set on. It's funny how it doesn't happen the other way round, huh? When Stuart Townsend was dropped from Lord of the Rings in the role of Aragorn, they didn't recast with an actor who happens to be black, like, say Cuba Gooding Jr? "They can't cast a black guy as Aragorn! His character is written as white! Not that it's racist, but that's just the way it is." Strange how the above doesn't hold for Kahn, or Sparrowhawk in a Wizard of Earthsea, or any of the characters from Avatar.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 07:40
|
|
|
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. Look, the new Trek has its flaws but them's fightin' words.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 07:45
|
|
|
Nemesis had Tom Hardy playing a villain and he was poo poo. I didn't even think that was possible, and yet here we are.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 07:55
|
|
|
After watching JJ Trek I must confess, the only things I liked were the new actors for Kirk, Bones, and Pike.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 12:04
|
|
|
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. Of course it happens in reverse. In fact it is happening in reverse right now in this very thread.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 16:14
|
|
|
What if they darken Cumberbatch's skin in post so he looks Indian?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 16:52
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:It's funny how it doesn't happen the other way round, huh? When Stuart Townsend was dropped from Lord of the Rings in the role of Aragorn, they didn't recast with an actor who happens to be black, like, say Cuba Gooding Jr? It doesn't happen the other way around because the pool of non-white actors is significantly smaller than the pool of white actors. That is where the racism is, in the lack of diversity in the actors in Hollywood. We shouldn't jump to blaming JJ of racism when its something that he has relatively little control over. I'm not saying that there isn't racism with the way whites/non-whites are cast in movies, just that shoveling all of the blame on JJ is not the way to go here.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 17:21
|
|
|
ConanTheLibrarian posted:What if they darken Cumberbatch's skin in post so he looks Indian? Yeah, just slap a bunch of make-up on him and have him wear a low-cut shirt, that'll fix everything!
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 19:00
|
|
|
At least the British actually have a history in the region. I still find it less racist than a Mexican and [potentially] a Puerto Rican. Both of which are acceptable because, what, all non-whites are interchangeable?
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 19:06
|
|
|
Boogaleeboo posted:At least the British actually have a history in the region. I still find it less racist than a Mexican and [potentially] a Puerto Rican. Both of which are acceptable because, what, all non-whites are interchangeable? The British is way goddamn worse. Hey Indian people, your genetic superiors are the people who were conquering you 70 years ago.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
Boogaleeboo posted:At least the British actually have a history in the region. I still find it less racist than a Mexican and [potentially] a Puerto Rican. Both of which are acceptable because, what, all non-whites are interchangeable? Both of which are acceptable because at least a non-white actor is getting a decent sized role. When that playing field is leveled, I'll be more than happy to point out how it sucks that that Puerto Rican actor is taking a role away from an actual Mexican actor or whatever, but when we're still at the stage when a major Puerto Rican role will be filled by a white actor with a tan and a horrible accent playing along a supporting cast of Puerto Rican actors, then it's still a problem and still something worthy of being pointed out and discussed.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 19:33
|
|
|
Crappy Jack posted:Both of which are acceptable because at least a non-white actor is getting a decent sized role. When that playing field is leveled, I'll be more than happy to point out how it sucks that that Puerto Rican actor is taking a role away from an actual Mexican actor or whatever, but when we're still at the stage when a major Puerto Rican role will be filled by a white actor with a tan and a horrible accent playing along a supporting cast of Puerto Rican actors, then it's still a problem and still something worthy of being pointed out and discussed. That actually came up when the Korean John Cho was offered the Japanese role of Sulu - Takei pointed out that the character was a cultural representative of Asia in its entirety and not Japan specifically.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 19:41
|
|
|
Aquelia posted:It doesn't happen the other way around because the pool of non-white actors is significantly smaller than the pool of white actors. That is where the racism is, in the lack of diversity in the actors in Hollywood. We shouldn't jump to blaming JJ of racism when its something that he has relatively little control over. I'm not saying that there isn't racism with the way whites/non-whites are cast in movies, just that shoveling all of the blame on JJ is not the way to go here.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2012 23:27
|
|
|
Boogaleeboo posted:At least the British actually have a history in the region. I still find it less racist than a Mexican and [potentially] a Puerto Rican. Both of which are acceptable because, what, all non-whites are interchangeable? Uh you are aware what the British history in the region is, right? Like, they weren't having a decades long tea party over there.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 00:05
|
|
|
I honestly suspect that Abrams really didn't identify the character as being non-white. It's like Nolan casting Tom Hardy as Bane- he didn't really look close enough to see "Oh, wait, this guy's from South America."
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 00:10
|
|
|
Glitterbomber posted:Uh you are aware what the British history in the region is, right? Like, they weren't having a decades long tea party over there. Yes, but it's a history. A Mexican, a Puerto Rican? Their tie is "They are sort of darker skinned than Caucasians". It's still racist. I'd rather personal racism that at least pretends there is such a place as India with it's own history than the casual, dismissive racism of "Eh, close enough." because the character isn't played by someone white. I mean if you can't write a compelling story about a British superhuman taking over India, you aren't trying hard.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 00:48
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:I honestly suspect that Abrams really didn't identify the character as being non-white. It's like Nolan casting Tom Hardy as Bane- he didn't really look close enough to see "Oh, wait, this guy's from South America." This isn't that bad, it's just like <other prominent example of recent whitewashing>
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 00:50
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:This isn't that bad, it's just like <other prominent example of recent whitewashing> I'm not saying that makes it okay. Just theorizing as to how it happened.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 21:12 |
|
|
I have a feeling this is going to be like the last movie, where it's honestly not about the villain at all. The entire film was all about Kirk, and Spock. So i'm going to probably ignore whatever is decided with Khan as a character. Just calling it right now, nothing special will be done with Khan, it'll be purely fan service. I'm more focused on the Klingons being in this, hell yes.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 01:28
|
|
