|
Danger posted:Ok, fixed. No reason to change up the language you used. "Solution" is still in there, which still misses the point. An ideal is an end-point. Solution are the steps you make to make that end point feasible. The overall ideal is to make non-ethnic specific character casting completely color blind where any race can play any role. That's why, for instance, Kingpin being black was good (and actually added a slight bit of subtext to the character) - they took the best actor for the part at the time and gave him the role, since race was not an intrinsic part of the character. And while I pointed out Bane's British heritage earlier to make a point, that's also why there's nothing wrong with Tom Hardy's Bane casting - Bane's British or fictional South American ancestry have poo poo all to do with the character (and probably much less to do with the character as played in the movie), so best actor for the role according to the director's vision is perfectly fine. The issue is not at the casting level for these particular movies for these specific things. It's that there aren't more "black Tom Hardys" or whatever because of the amount of whitewashing that IS done in general. No one casts ethnic actors on a lower level due to marketability or having a specific race in mind. Ethnic actors never get even the smaller parts unless it's race-specific, creating a cyclic situation where there isn't a big enough pool of ethnic actors at the major level for proper representation. Just for an example, on the most minor level, outside of being "Extra #2923834 in the background," my actual featured roles were "guy in the boxer's entourage", I got kicked out of "guy that meets his girlfriend at the train station" at the last second for someone that looked more "white," and "stand in for whatever black actor was around at the time, who already had a minor role in the film." The only auditions I would have a chance with all had to do specifically with my race - I only got a couple of bit parts in stuff that were non-race specific. Otherwise, you don't make it past the read level, if you don't just get filtered out due to your picture alone. That's where the problem is; changing the overriding vision in the mid levels. The overall end goal is to cast completely race-free where race isn't a part of character, thus the ideal, but we aren't at a point where that's doable yet, because there isn't enough representation in general because almost no one IS doing this on the minor/mid levels of acting. However, pointing out a case where someone is blind-casting at the major level is pretty pointless and annoying; you don't get mad at someone for actually being color blind - you get mad at all the people who aren't and who are actually creating the situation.
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 17:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
I can imagine that people working on this movie were just super pumped to get Benedict Cumberbatch when Benicio Del Toro dropped out, since he's pretty hot right now. But now they are going to have to address why Khan looks pale and skinny, and change the movie accordingly. The 2009 Star Trek movie explicitly planted itself in the universe already established. I guess that really should've made them scratch their heads.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 21:01
|
|
|
davidspackage posted:I can imagine that people working on this movie were just super pumped to get Benedict Cumberbatch when Benicio Del Toro dropped out, since he's pretty hot right now. But now they are going to have to address why Khan looks pale and skinny, and change the movie accordingly. The 2009 Star Trek movie explicitly planted itself in the universe already established. I guess that really should've made them scratch their heads. 2/3rds of this movie's writers are terrible so I wouldn't count on much consistency, so unless Lindelof is the second coming for genre writers this movie is not going to be strong on plot and previously established continuity. Edit: Am dumb can't spell. Plump and Ready fucked around with this message at 21:17 on May 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 21:12
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:I'm going to guess you are white. You may not understand this, Next time just open up with "I'm going to assume you are racist" and stop beating around the bush.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 21:15
|
|
|
Maxwell Lord posted:I'd like the Klingons to act more like they did in the old series. The "we are HONORABLE WARRIORS" stuff got played out quickly enough, it'd be interesting to see a throwback to them as Cold War stand-ins. If you liked the TOS Klingons at all, I cannot recommend reading John Ford's Klingon books. They are really great.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 21:56
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:I'm going to guess you are white. You may not understand this, but for many non-white people, it can be frustrating to never see anyone of your own race in decent roles. For people to write off changing a character who is of an ethnic minority to a white character as 'not a big deal' and raise a bunch of little excuses like you are can be maddening, because the opposite very rarely if ever happens. Now think about that for a second... a Mexican of Western European ancestry was used as a placeholder for an Indian. And you're upset that Khan is being played by Benedict Cumberbatch? Would it make you happier if Bennedict Cumberbatch developed a dark tan and acted like an Indian man instead of a British one? Minorities are way underrepresented in cinema, but in this case the "non-white" character was completely racially ambiguous in the first place and the actor was basically a white dude. Would it have been better to cast a minority instead? I don't know, I'm not the casting director, maybe there wasn't a good candidate. I understand what you're saying and I agree that minorities are underrepresented in cinema, but don't go around assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is just a racist white man because that undermines your credibility.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 22:43
|
|
|
Dolphin posted:Ricardo Montalban was a Mexican of Spanish descent--so his race (race is a scientifically meaningless term except as a cultural phenomenon) was basically white. He spoke with a Latin American accent and his skin was tan at the time and he was cast as an Indian character. I am an Afghan, by most I am considered a racial minority but on any form I am defined as being Caucasian, or an Aryan. In no way does this make me white to anyone including myself; racial identity is a strange and mysterious thing that I feel is super poorly and ill defined. Also Khan is definitely an Indian racially, Space Seed defines him as such very clearly, it is also super cool that a man from India is a superhuman and controls one of the largest Empires in the history of earth and also was not a total oval office about the whole thing.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 22:53
|
|
|
FlamingLiberal posted:I really wish they would just write an original story rather than continually revisiting old material, but clearly they want to go the Khan route. It's a bit annoying though, because just 10 years ago with Nemesis that film was attempting to recreate Wrath of Khan and failed miserably. Granted, JJ Abrams and Co. are light-years better than Stuart Baird and John Logan. I'll be curious to see how the Klingons fit into everything. They have the entire universe to tap into for characters and chicken out to go with a familiar name in order to maximize the profit potential of their next product. I expect that at some meeting the name came up and it went like, "Khan? Yes, let's have a Khan against Kirk rematch - the screenplay practically writes itself!"
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 23:03
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:Worse than annoying, it's disappointing. And lazy. And cowardly on the part of the producer to revisit an old villain. I'm glad I don't live in the same world that you live in, where people really do twirl their mustaches evilly at product meetings for potentially anything ever, with orchestral accompaniment if it's affordable. Considering the risk/reward situation making a Star Trek film really is, it's hard for me to fault them for bringing back Khan. Considering the differences in this Trek universe and the rest of the franchise, as well as the actor they've got playing Khan, I want to see where they go with this. At the end of the day, we still don't know a whole lot about the movie.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 23:14
|
|
|
Darko posted:The issue in this case is not one of purposely casting a white actor to profit more (which is whitewashing), it's that there are less ethnic actors in general, which is a problem with the underlying system in Hollywood. Hrithik Roshan even looks like a young Montalban:  ... Though casting a Hindu as a Sikh may not play very well in India. unlimited shrimp fucked around with this message at 23:20 on May 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
MrMo posted:I am an Afghan, by most I am considered a racial minority but on any form I am defined as being Caucasian, or an Aryan. In no way does this make me white to anyone including myself; racial identity is a strange and mysterious thing that I feel is super poorly and ill defined. My point is that in terms of the underrepresented minorities in cinema issue--Benedict Cumberbatch isn't a substitution of a white actor for a minority actor--and Ricardo Montalban passing as an Indian is an example of another race issue that has been present since early Hollywood. Hollywood has been using tanned white guys and generic "ethnic" characters in place of every non-white character since the beginning. I think you're right that the character is more interesting as an Indian man, and I personally think that they would have been better off casting someone like Kal Penn (they could do a White Castle joke!). I just don't think that Benedict Cumberbatch is any more an example of white washing than Ricardo Montalban was. Dolphin fucked around with this message at 23:19 on May 6, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 23:16
|
|
|
SpaceMost posted:
Unfortunately he is a terrible actor just like most of Bollywood actors, but there are good actors who are in and come from India, they just need to find them. Unfortunately they don't all speak english so they would have to go the phonetic route but whatever it could be done.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 23:55
|
|
|
Clearly the correct answer is Danny Pudi.
|
|
#
?
May 6, 2012 23:56
|
|
|
Supercar Gautier posted:Clearly the correct answer is Danny Pudi. "Ok Khan, here's the Genesis Code!" "Cool. Cool, cool, cool."
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 00:05
|
|
|
Also as popular as Bollywood movies and the stars in them are the movies make poo poo money.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 00:11
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:Next time just open up with "I'm going to assume you are racist" and stop beating around the bush. Nice kneejerk. Privilege is more complicated than straight up racism and is not the same. It can be understandably hard for someone to perceive subtle discrimination when they are not themselves the subject of it. In that post I was basically asking people to view this from a non white perspective. As a white person, I know how hard it is to understand this issue because I myself had a similar reaction at first. Amethyst fucked around with this message at 01:04 on May 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 00:39
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:Nice kneejerk. Privilege is more complicated than straight up racism and is not the same. It can be understandably hard for someone to perceive subtle discrimination when they are not themselves the subject of it. In that post I was basically asking people to view this from a non white perspective. Nice backpedal. I think it was a fair response to your initial post. As a non-white (Cuban-Domenican parentage, great grandfather was from Palestine) I think it's pretty hilarious how white people like yourself go out of their way to demonize eachother by calling out someone for being white, especially in the middle of trying to make some sort of point regarding racism. You don't make a strong argument by starting off accusing people of being from a certain race, gender, or having a specific religious preference, regardless of the lovely justification you use to try and prop yourself atop some sort of moral or enlightened pedestal. Especially over the internet, where such assumptions leads to nobody actually agreeing about anything.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
Is it okay if I'm white and say that it sounds kind of lovely? It would be one thing if they pulled homeless people off the street to play Kirk and Spock, but they actually tried to get people to fit the part of those pre-existing characters. If they're going to make movies that require you to read comic books and memorize every single episode of Star Trek to understand, you would think they would care a bit more about what people who have actually seen Star Trek think. If they want to use some guy who sent in an audio recording made in a public bathroom on a cell phone, they should seriously reconsider. I think pretty much everyone is reading this as them just not giving a poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 01:49
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:Nice backpedal. I'm sorry if what I said came of as accusatory, but the point where I changed my mind came when someone said something similar to me. Amethyst fucked around with this message at 01:55 on May 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 01:53
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:So what is your point of view about the topic at hand? My point of view is that it's unfortunate that Benicio Del Toro discarded the opportunity to play Khan, especially since he was all but given the part. Benedict Cumberbach is a capable actor and apparently did an amazing job with his audition, and therefore earned the part. I don't think this ought to be as big an issue as it is, but then there's people like you. People like you, spouting accusatory bullshit just so you can feel a little better about your inherent privilege in society bother me. You don't actually do anything to improve the situation, nor do people like you actually attempt to recognize the source of the issue at hand. You just saw 'WHITE PERSON IN A MOVIE INSTEAD OF SOMEONE ELSE' and reacted to it. Then you accuse other people of being white and had to backpedal on that because it was a loving retarded assumption to make when trying to prove a point. Yes, it sucks that white actors get more representation in Hollywood. The reasons for this have been discussed IN THIS VERY THREAD, if you've bothered to read the posts. Pretending that JJ Abrams is somehow out to stick it to Trekkies and ethnic minorities with a casting decision is silly.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 02:14
|
|
|
The way to change things like this is to talk about them though.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 02:20
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:The way to change things like this is to talk about them though. And you can do that without reducing yourself to making blind accusations of ethnicity while discussing it. I'm not saying stop talking about it. I'm saying you could do a lot better while trying to discuss it. You read some of the posts in the thread and you'd think that JJ Abrams himself sat in a dark room, surrounded by monitors with the shadowed figures of secretive white supremacists visible, hands steepled while he said in a gravely, evil voice "Call forth the British one."
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 02:35
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:And you can do that without reducing yourself to making blind accusations of ethnicity while discussing it. I think the point he is making is that J.J Abrams doesn't have to do that for it to have the same overall effect. The continuation of whitewashing in what is a problem in Hollywood. He doesn't have to be an evil mustache twirling racist in order to perpetuate a cycle of racism, which is the whole point of fighting against color-blind discourse.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 02:41
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:I'm glad I don't live in the same world that you live in, where people really do twirl their mustaches evilly at product meetings for potentially anything ever, with orchestral accompaniment if it's affordable. And I'm glad I don't live in the world of something something race racism racist. This movie already sounds completely predictable. There will be quotes from Shakespeare, there will be chess strategy references, and most assuredly there will be MORE LENS FLARE. 
Binary Logic fucked around with this message at 03:25 on May 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 03:22
|
|
|
Binary Logic posted:and most assuredly there will be MORE LENS FLARE. Good. gently caress the anti-lens flare white noise. I loved the lens flare. It looked great.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 03:25
|
|
|
LesterGroans posted:Good. gently caress the anti-lens flare white noise. I loved the lens flare. It looked great.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 03:28
|
|
|
I want two hours of a washed out screen. \/\/\/\/\/ They'd better not. Death of the Author. More lens flare. \/\/\/\/\/ LesterGroans fucked around with this message at 04:25 on May 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 03:32
|
|
|
Abrams did say he thought they went a little far on the first one, so MAYBE they'll dial back the flare for this.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 04:06
|
|
|
The thing about color-blindness is that it is not a step towards equality, it is what happens naturally in a truly equal society. Advocating color-blindness in an unequal society only perpetuates the status quo of inequality, and is the easy way out for the priveledged classes because they don't have to sacrifice anything. JJ Abrams should have picked a minority, even if said minority isn't as good at acting.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 05:04
|
|
|
wolfman101 posted:Counter-point: I don't care if I can literally buy black people tomorrow because of this movie, Benedict Cumberbatch is an amazing actor and I consider the complete breakdown of race relations forever a fair trade to get him in the film.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 06:07
|
|
|
wolfman101 posted:JJ Abrams should have picked a minority, even if said minority isn't as good at acting. This is incredibly shortsighted. If you think throwing a minority actor into the role would, regardless of talent, would somehow be a good 'next step' in race relations, you are kidding yourself. As far as we know an actor, regardless of skin color, auditioned for the role, alongside of other actors, and won the part. I don't know what to tell you if you can't handle that. Don't watch the movie, I guess?
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 06:39
|
|
|
wolfman101 posted:JJ Abrams should have picked a minority, even if said minority isn't as good at acting. This I can't agree with. I don't doubt that there are actors of the right ethnicity for Khan who are as good or better than Cumberbatch- there's no reason to "settle" unless they're all unavailable or something.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 06:46
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:This is incredibly shortsighted. If you think throwing a minority actor into the role would, regardless of talent, would somehow be a good 'next step' in race relations, you are kidding yourself. This implies that there aren't minority actors with talent. Yes, fighting systematic racism is hard work and he might have to actually seek out someone for the role, but what his actions pretty much did is just perpetuated the cycle.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 06:47
|
|
|
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. So in one sense, you are right, and it's a fair point. It would make 100% sense if this was a pure reboot. But this trek isn't actually a pure reboot. Because of the way they did "reboot" this is actually still a sequel, meaning Khan still has to resemble Khan from the show, meaning has to resemble Ricardo Montalban. Yeah I know Sherlock Holmes looks nothing like Ricardo Montalban, but they probably weren't going to get an Indian actor for this. If this was a pure reboot they could 100% change the background of the character. Hell the show could take place in 2543 with a captain named Kirk, and science officer named Spock and a plucky new navigator named Picard. With this reboot if they really wanted to be interesting they would have Q show up (I would think the continuum would be interested with such a drastic alteration in the timeline) But I hearrd JJ doesn't like TNG
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 06:48
|
|
|
One thing I haven't thought about is whether or not they're going to kill off Spock like they do in the original. I doubt it would have the same impact as it did in the original, since we simply haven't spent as much time with this new character.
Amethyst fucked around with this message at 06:59 on May 7, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 06:51
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:One thing I haven't thought about is whether or no they're going to kill off Spock like they do in the original. I doubt it would have the same impact as it did in the original, since we simply haven't spent as much time with this new character. I doubt it. They did that because the actor wanted to leave and they thought II would be the last movie anyway since how far can they keep this going (since shooting the first movie had been such a pain for everyone).
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 06:59
|
|
|
blackguy32 posted:This implies that there aren't minority actors with talent. Now you're just putting words in my mouth. I'm not implying this at all.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 06:59
|
|
|
fivegears4reverse posted:Now you're just putting words in my mouth. I'm not implying this at all. quote:As far as we know an actor, regardless of skin color, auditioned for the role, alongside of other actors, and won the part. I don't know what to tell you if you can't handle that. He was the best guy that auditioned!! My hands are tied!
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 07:03
|
|
|
Amethyst posted:One thing I haven't thought about is whether or not they're going to kill off Spock like they do in the original. I doubt it would have the same impact as it did in the original, since we simply haven't spent as much time with this new character. Khan appeared in the show first, I imagine they're going to focus on that era of Khan rather than what you're talking about from Wrath.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 08:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 17:14 |
|
|
Amethyst posted:One thing I haven't thought about is whether or not they're going to kill off Spock like they do in the original. I doubt it would have the same impact as it did in the original, since we simply haven't spent as much time with this new character. You REALLY don't need to spoiler that.
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2012 09:32
|
|