Well, if you're looking to start drama, good work.
Comment has been collapsed.
I havent been active here for a while, I didnt realized it was offensive to start a debate now.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not. Unfortunately, not everyone can discuss something like racism in a calm manner.
Comment has been collapsed.
calling us white people isnt offensive? this just made the whole post pointless to argue.
how about now im going to call you yellow.... isnt offensive right?
this post is clearly for drama. you cannot be this dumdum
Comment has been collapsed.
White people is a generally used term, isn't it. Didn't ever strike me as offensive. For instance, if you watch US news media from time to time, you will find that they use this term frequently, and it's not meant to be offensive.
this post is clearly for drama.
So it's impossible to discuss something like this? Because someone will always be offended?
you cannot be this dumdum
Well, this is clearly offensive on your part now.
Comment has been collapsed.
once im offended... and u pretend like its nothing. its normal. even i got bl because i said dont call me white. its not that forum where u can have an opinion, becouse of wl and bl buttons. so yeah, u cannot disguss here something like this freely.
Comment has been collapsed.
I was just saying that I didn't ever get the impression "white people" was offensive to anyone. That idea is new to me. I also didn't get the impression this thread was created purely to cause drama on the internet. I think he just wants to talk about this topic, and there's nothing wrong with that.
You shouldn't care if anyone blacklists you for your opinion. It's sad that this happens, but we cannot prevent it anyway. So we should voice our opinion and discuss freely, even if there are a few people who blacklist us for it. :)
Comment has been collapsed.
white people do not constitute the majority of the world
While that's true, they do constitute the majority of the society these movies are made in (ie the western world and more specifically the US) so it makes sense that it would be the way it is
That being said, I don't have any issue against pushing for more diversity in movies
Comment has been collapsed.
While that's true, they do constitute the majority of the society these movies are made in
They don't though. When you see census data and race classification in the US census, it's very likely that the white men we see as protagonists in most movies are a statistical minority.
For one, more than half the population in the US is female so if it's about true representation, there should be more female characters than male, which we know is far from true.
But regardless of gender, the race classification n the US census defines as "white" "people having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa." as well as "White Hispanics" so we're far from the Matt Damon Anglo type that we see in movies.
Comment has been collapsed.
The fuck are you talking about?
They actually do, maybe better check the numbers from your own source?
76.6% / 60.7%, either way that is clearly a majority.
For one, more than half the population in the US is female
Again, bullshit. 50.8%, and if you account for sampling errors and other statistical inaccuracies, that means it's a 50:50 split.
So, talking about "more than half" here is simply wrong, and more, it's disingenuous and makes you appear like some dumb political hack.
And don't get me even started on their bullshit categorization system there... simply get rid of "race" for census data altogether.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wow. Someone's angry. Do statistics get you crazy or did you skip your medication?
76.6% / 60.7%, either way that is clearly a majority.
However you dice it, it's irrelevant. If it was about ratios, we'd still get 40% non-white characters but we don't so the issue of under representation still exists.
Again, bullshit. 50.8%, and if you account for sampling errors and other statistical inaccuracies, that means it's a 50:50 split.
And again faaaaaaaaaaaar less than 50% of characters (let alone protagonists) are female so my point remains the same: under representation is not a "SJW" myth.
So, talking about "more than half" here is simply wrong, and more, it's disingenuous and makes you appear like some dumb political hack.
I love when talking about race and gender and movies became "political"...
And don't get me even started on their bullshit categorization system there... simply get rid of "race" for census data altogether.
Well I don't make the census in the US or anywhere but I actually agree with that so maybe you can chill now.
Comment has been collapsed.
The user you are trying to bully for lack of arguments is not reachable right now . Good luck with your next target and have a nice life
Comment has been collapsed.
Whoever you're talking about.. probably deserves to be bullied for lack of reading comprehension and general intelligence..
Good luck with your next target and have a nice life
I hope so. Would appreciate an actual opponent, not some victim who even fails to grasp the basic concept of the argument.
Comment has been collapsed.
Man, just move on with your life. I'm not your opponent. And I'm certainly not your victim.
"Try again, you can read right?" is not an argument and I have learned long ago not to play games with bullies by their own rules.
Now please stop harassing me
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, we've already established the insufficiency of your reading comprehension, so nothing surprising here.
Maybe start again from the beginning of this comment thread?
And you started with mentioning a "target"... god knows why. Not the way I see things. Probably not how any sane person would describe it. Maybe you're projecting some own insecurities here, I don't know, don't really care either. I've already moved on.
Now please stop harassing me
Aw, really cute. Expressing a small, critical sentiment already threatens the fragile bubble that is your worldview?
This thread was missing a textbook example of a little precious snowflake, glad that you stepped in to help.
Comment has been collapsed.
And you started with mentioning a "target"... god knows why
Dude, you responded to a peaceful post with "The fuck are you talking about?" and multiple verbal abuse. I responded without engaging on your level and your response was again just insult and no argument.
Then I tell you I'm done being abused and your response is more abuse.
Then I say I won't engage with you anymore and you still come back with taunting and abuse... Why would anyone feel you're attacking and not debating is really a mystery indeed.
Now go find someone else to hump because if you think all this verbal abuse is going to make me cry in a corner after you use such language as "snowflake", (OMG he called me a snowflake, how am I going to keep living? I have to bow down to his superior debating skills now! Woe is me!)...
you have the wrong target
Comment has been collapsed.
you just wrong. accept it and move on fluffy.
google is free. once someone learn to use it, you lost.
Comment has been collapsed.
lol oh no it's a mob now. That's sure to make me change my mind.
Why don't you tell your buddy to move on? I've moved on already. You're teh only ones still humping your keyboard...
Comment has been collapsed.
However you dice it, it's irrelevant. If it was about ratios, we'd still get 40% non-white characters but we don't so the issue of under representation still exists.
No to that, most "mixed" look white.
Notable halfies would be Meghan Markle and Rashida Jones, both white as fuck.
Louis CK is mexican. Yep..
So you're looking at really.. 20% of people don't look white enough to pass as white.
Thus 80% of people on TV should be, or look, white. So what we have in the states is a pretty accurate representation of life here.
And then you have shows like Glee where half of an entire high school is gay people.. but that's another story.
Comment has been collapsed.
Look, man, I get what you're saying but my point was, say hypothetically that 70% of Americans are white, look white, whatever you want to call it (those examples you give are a bit anecdotal but hypothetically, let's go for it, with 50% of the population being male (again a high hypothetical but again, let's go for it), that would mean that only 35% of the US population is both white and male, which is not a majority (it's mathematics, not politics) and yet white guys make up way more than 35, 50 or even 70% of main characters in movies, right?
So there is a representation imbalance. I'm not saying white men have to disappear; I'm not saying they're evil, and I'm not saying they shouldn't be in movies anymore or that movies with white guys in the lead suck... I'm just saying that the reason there are so many movies with white male leads don't have anything to do with ratios and real population representation.
And then you have shows like Glee where half of an entire high school is gay people.. but that's another story.
Heh well LGBT percentages vary depending on where you are. If you spend 20 mn walking on Broadway, chances are you'll run into more gay people than most people would in their entire life in Kentucky. Well, at least not those in the closet. But you're right (although I never watched Glee so I can't tell if it's really half the school), it's most likely exaggerated but it's just one show out of hundreds, so it's hardly a trend
Thanks for making your point peacefully and intelligibly.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't see it. What genre?
Like.. action? Your demographics are going to be mostly male, and based on the US.. mostly white. People like to see themselves in their heroes, makes sense to cast a male lead. Doesn't necessarily need to be white, Idris Elba and Denzel are as good as any white action star I can think of.
Specially in action/fighting movies.. god damn if I see another 90 lb woman knocking out 200+lb trained killers.. COME ON lol.
I'm a fan of the show Preacher and one of the lead characters is one of these tiny fiesty women, at one point she kills a huge guy.. easily 300lbs with one of those restaurant buzzer things. Sigh..
Women are for sure half of the population, and more of the spending power.. but.. are they watching action movies?
Comment has been collapsed.
Who's talking about action movies?
And I agree that Denzel and Idris are as good if not better as anyone (and Dwayne Johnson and Vin Diesel make a lot of movies too) but that's beside the point.
I love Preacher too but it's not exactly a documentary so I suspend my disbelief for that the same way I do when he used the Voice on people.
And conversely, it's not any less credible than Tom Cruise killing a room full of goons, all of 5'6 tall but that never seem to be a problem for anyone (and Bruce Lee wasn't a big guy but he could have easily dispatched Johnson, Diesel and the likes, and he wasn't using his dick lol) but let's get back to our main topic.
Women are for sure half of the population, and more of the spending power.. but.. are they watching action movies?
Talking about movies in general but yeah they are. If only men were watching action movies, they wouldn't make the numbers they're making. MCU movies for instance have a fairly diverse audience.
People like to see themselves in their heroes, makes sense to cast a male lead
Some people. Some like to see movies about others that are different from them. Not everybody is looking for people to identify with in movies and again, action movies are only a fraction of the movies made. And a lot of movies don't have heroes and villains.
Comment has been collapsed.
According to this certain races are actually underrepresentated.
https://www.thoughtco.com/diversity-in-hollywood-3026690
What I couldn't find is any statistics about diversity on the actors market (so how many white, black, asian etc. actors are there). Would be interesting to see if the representation in movies matches the market, or if we actually get to see more whites than we should. ^^
I personally don't care that much, though. I am fine with whatever actors they put in a movie, as long as they're good.
I also watch a lot of asian movies, and I noticed a heavy underrepresentation of whites in those! ;)
Comment has been collapsed.
...media should reflect that...
I disagree. Diversity for the sake of diversity is simply racism in another form. When the race of a character is unimportant, deciding who should play the role based on the color of someone's skin is racist. Similarly, trying to achieve parity with the genetic make-up of the population instead of awarding jobs based on qualification is also racist. Color should not matter. Talent and ability should.
Comment has been collapsed.
Diversity for the sake of diversity is simply racism
But how about diversity for the sake of reality?
Comment has been collapsed.
In reality, the human population is diverse, and the talents and abilities of people are diverse. When hiring someone for a task, you want someone who is qualified to perform that task. For most tasks, ethnicity is inconsequential. In those cases where a particular ethnicity is required (for whatever reason), ethnicity is then one of the qualifications for the task. In film, where suspension of disbelief is affected by the movie's visuals, appearances need to be taken into account. That is not to say that they are necessarily the deciding factor (as there are multiple ways to deal with the suspension of disbelief), but if you screw things up, your audience "won't buy it."
TL; DR: "Reality" is relative in movies. A talking cat with a Spanish accent works. A white Ghandi does not.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sorry I was talking about diversity of representation in movies.
I do agree with you about enforced quotas, they're counterproductive. However, they are the result of systemic discrimination. Since or most tasks, ethnicity is inconsequential, and considering the natural diversity of any population, statistically, we should see a diversity de facto and yet we're not.
TL; DR: "Reality" is relative in movies. A talking cat with a Spanish accent works. A white Ghandi does not.
Heh true enough. On the other hand, suspension of disbelief (as our expectations) is dictated by the standards in place. In theatre for example, because audiences are used to having to use their imaginations and rely less on their senses (or it would be pretty hard to buy anything other than a play about actors on a naked stage), there is more freedom and less expectations of "realism" and the success of plays like Hamilton with founding fathers played by Dominicans, Puerto Ricans and African American actors shows it can work if people care only about the story and not so much about the form.
My point is sure a movie with an Asian Hitler would not be realistic but if the performance was good, I wouldn't care. I'm sure I'd be in a minority though lol. So if movies did show us more diversity we'd get used to it. It's only because it doesn't that we find it jarring
Comment has been collapsed.
... statistically, we should see a diversity de facto and yet we're not.
You have to be careful with statistics. As Mark Twain once said, "There are three kinds of lies: white lies; damned lies; and statistics."
The reality is that we do see diversity de facto. Out of any given ethnic group, the number of people interested in pursuing a career in acting is small, and only a fraction of those achieve success in the field. When you translate that small percentage into an ethnic group with fewer members, you are going to get a correspondingly small population of successful actors.
People of all ethnic groups face hurdles in life, and some of those hurdles are tied to the color of our skin. we can choose to cry about it and wait for someone to baby us, or we can take charge, overcome the hurdles, and succeed. The world is full of successful people from all walks of life and ethnic backgrounds. What they all have in common is that they refused to let other people determine what they could and couldn't do. It is those people, those with determination, whom we should be encouraging.
Comment has been collapsed.
Heh kudos for the Mark Twain quote
Out of any given ethnic group, the number of people interested in pursuing a career in acting is small, and only a fraction of those achieve success in the field. When you translate that small percentage into an ethnic group with fewer members, you are going to get a correspondingly small population of successful actors.
Success is different from talent. Success is determined primarily by exposure. And if you're saying that working actors are mostly white, because there are more white people, hence we only ever see white actors in movies, I am forced to challenge your argument on logic alone.
What they all have in common is that they refused to let other people determine what they could and couldn't do.
That is a rather optimistic and somewhat naive perspective, I'm sorry. I have worked in a lot of places where women and guys from various "minorities" were simply not given the same opportunities as white guys. They just kept going. They were not whining on twitter about it but that didn't make it less of a reality and saying they didn't succeed because they are cowards or weaklings is unfair and untrue. When you are as or more skilled than someone else and they are getting the promotions and raises because they are white, how are you supposed to not "let other people determine what they could and couldn't do"?
Comment has been collapsed.
Success is determined primarily by exposure.
Personally, I think there are many things which determine success. I would even go so far as to say that "success" is defined differently for each individual. I did take some time to elaborate on my comment about "successful people." If you care to do so, you can read about it, below.
Comment has been collapsed.
Personally, I think there are many things which determine success.
I very much agree, generally speaking but I was mainly talking about actors here, and while I'm sure that most actors would be happy just being able to make a living from their acting, I meant success as in actors being successful enough to achieve fame that allows them to get the big lead parts, which is what we were discussing. And that is nearly impossible to achieve if casting directors and studio execs (who are the ones making these calls) always go for the Matt Damon type, whatever the part.
Thanks for the link. I had read that comment and while I see your point, I still believe it's limited. People cannot always make their own opportunities and banging on closed doors will most of the time only result in a bloody hand. If a certain employer refuses to see the value of an individual because he's not white enough or because she's lacking a Y chromosome, nothing will change that. Laws won't either obviously, which is where I was agreeing with you.
People who are successful regardless may have been more persistent or just luckier and they are certainly commendable but that doesn't mean people who aren't deserve less
Comment has been collapsed.
And that is nearly impossible to achieve if casting directors and studio execs (who are the ones making these calls) always go for the Matt Damon type, whatever the part.
It will never get achieved that way either. These days, casting decisions are made by committee. Big studios are hemorrhaging money and their continued survival hinges more and more on the success of "tent pole" movies - expensive movies for a global audience that spawn multiple sequels. Taking chances on unknown or little known faces, no matter what color they are, it out of the question.
The good news is, as demographics continue to change and minority actors rise up through the ranks and become eligible for big leading roles, you will see more and more of them. This is a process that has been evolving since Sidney Poitier and Harry Belefonte hit the big screen in the 1950s.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nah big studios are doing fine. They just don't make their money from theatre release anymore. Most budgets are too big for that now. They make their money in licensing (I mean... Avengers cereals? yup), product placement and hype.
Taking chances on unknown or little known faces, no matter what color they are, it out of the question.
I agree it's about risk (though most movies are massively losing money anyway so why would they stick to a losing strategy makes you wonder, right?) but then huge runaway hits that seem to shock everybody in the industry like Wonder Woman or Black Panther or Get Out should change that in time.
This is a process that has been evolving since Sidney Poitier and Harry Belefonte hit the big screen in the 1950s.
Exactly. It's slow progress but we'll get there. No amount of social media bitching will change the way things are. In fact, even negative social media exposure makes the studios money so it's better to go watch movies that make a difference.
Comment has been collapsed.
They make their money in licensing (I mean... Avengers cereals? yup), product placement and hype.
True. Merchandising (which has actually fallen off in the past few years), product placement, VOD and international box office are what keep studios afloat. I suppose it depends on which studios we are talking about. Disney, with the lion's share of major franchises (and soon to possess Fox's assets as well) and plans to launch a streaming service to compete with Netflix and Amazon, is probably not hurting much. But Paramount is still struggling in the wake of some disappointing releases - 2 of them starring that Matt Damon guy btw :)
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah Paramount also put too much stock in the Cloverfield franchise (the latest of which featured a large diverse cast and ended up straight on Netflix)
And it's funny that the likelihood of toy sales also impacts what we get in movies. Disney has been largely reluctant to feature non white characters and female characters in their Marvel movies for fear toys wouldn't sell as well.
So yeah it's all risks vs rewards just like any business but they tend to imagine risks too and then Black Panther happens and they're shocked to find out they may have been wrong.
Comment has been collapsed.
You misunderstand me. I said nothing about people in power, and I did not even mention hiring. Apparently, what I said was not clear.
For most tasks, skin color is irrelevant. That is to say, if you take the same person and change his or her skin color (by whatever method), it is unlikely to affect his or her ability to perform the task at hand. In the case of ethnicity, there are social and cultural differences between different ethnic groups, but these characteristics usually have no relevant impact upon a person's ability to perform most tasks. Granted, there are some tasks which require experience and/or a working familiarity with a particular group's culture, but cultural identity is not defined by skin color, and for the purpose of performing those tasks, skin color is (once again) irrelevant.
In fact, the only type of task in which the appearance of an individual becomes relevant are those tasks which involve said appearance. As qualification for such a task involves possessing the desired appearance (or the ability to "fake it" sufficiently well), physical characteristics (possibly including ethnic characteristics) could be the difference between success and failure.
Now, let's get back to your point. Specifically, let's talk about those who hire actors within the film industry.
It is reasonable to assume that there are some casting directors who are bigoted (a more accurate term than "racist"). It is also reasonable to assume that there are some who are not. Moreover, we can safely assume that, of the population of casting directors who are bigoted, there are those who are predisposed to reject a particular ethnic group, and those who are predisposed to hire that particular ethnic group. We must not, however, neglect human caprice. Even if a specific casting director would normally avoid hiring a Belgian (for example), circumstances might prevail upon him or her to do so anyway. Putting all of that together, we can see that there is a high chance of opportunities being available to any person seeking them, regardless of his or her ethnic group, and regardless of how many bigots he or she may encounter. Thus we return back to my point about "successful people."
Those individuals who purposefully strive for success and refuse to be dissuaded eventually achieve their goal. Bigots won't stop them. If the employer fails to respond, they contact him or her. If the employer cannot be reached, they show up in person. If the employer is unavailable, they schedule a time when he or she is available. If the successful person decides it is no longer worth pursuing that employer, he or she begins the same process with the next employer.
This is not to say that other factors (including "exposure") have no impact. Even a "chance encounter" can lead to new opportunities. Successful people, however, not only seize such opportunities, they actively hunt them down. Not only that, successful people do whatever needs to be done to capitalize on those opportunities. Such people are "unstoppable," but not everyone has this mindset. It requires a burning desire to achieve your goals, and the belief that you can. Unfortunately those two things are sadly uncommon among some groups of people. Opportunities may be all around you, but if you turn your nose up at them because they are "beneath you," if you fail to recognize them because they do not fit the exact picture you have in your head, if you insist that other people jump through hoops for you before you put forth an effort, if you just sit back and wait for opportunities to fall in your lap, in short, if you are unable or unwilling to reach out and snatch them up the moment you can, most opportunities will pass you by.
[NOTE: I am exhausted, and my brain is numb at this time. I do hope that what I just wrote is actually intelligible.]
Comment has been collapsed.
So, you believe that white people are more talented?
Comment has been collapsed.
Whatever gave you the idea that talent has any connection with the color of a person's skin?
Comment has been collapsed.
I did not say anything of the sort. You, however, stated that talent matters more than skin color. If you have equally talented actors why should the white one be hired most of the time. This is what diversity attempts to correct. The bias of people who are not color blind. It is not racism unless the person making the decision is non-white or the person being selected has inferior talent.
Comment has been collapsed.
This is what diversity attempts to correct.
No, that is what reverse-discrimination claims to correct. Yet discrimination is discrimination, regardless of who benefits.
It is not racism unless the person making the decision is non-white or the person being selected has inferior talent.
Not so. Racism is judging people by the color of their skin instead of the content of their character. Being a particular color does not exclude one from being racist, nor does it prevent one from being discriminated against. Hiring one actor over another because he or she "deserves it" due to his or her skin color is a classic example of racism.
Comment has been collapsed.
I specifically cited the case of equal talent. Where as saying because "they deserve it" implies one of them has inferior talent. You can call it what you want, but it is justice to correct a disparity because of inherent bias in a system. I would prefer a system that is color blind. However that does not exist.
Comment has been collapsed.
The problem is that the "correction" itself is a disparity and inherent bias, whereas the "bias" in the system may only be one in perception. Even in cases where it is not, two wrongs do not make a right. A better to solution is to ensure opportunity for those who wish to pursue their goal despite the bias.
I would prefer a system that is color blind. However that does not exist.
See my response here
Comment has been collapsed.
That's a very idealistic world view. Is it right to allow people that control hiring to continue to deny those opportunities? If a producer in their last 20 movies has hired whites 99 out of one hundred for major roles, is it another wrong to ask him to hire a black/hispanic/asian person once in a while? I'm not asking for quotas, but sometimes certain people have to intervene to get others to do what's right.
FWIW statistics do not lie, only the people that interpret them.
Comment has been collapsed.
It will never be enough to hire some minority "once in a while", because you'll still perceive the same thing: inequality/unfair racial or sexual discrimination. It only ends when you've achieved equality of outcome - some insane government regulated representation mandate - and in my opinion that is a flawed goal to pursue because it doesn't change what you're supposedly against. It's also an idealistic worldview that assumes everyone has the exact same value, meaning you can just swap colours without anything else changing.
Even if you were to assume that you see minorities less often because they're are unfairly discriminated against (ie. not discrimination of talent and merit) and not because they're minorities (ie. there are far less of them), then you'll be replacing one unfair system with another.
Everyone should have the opportunity to achieve no matter what they look like. The job should go to the one that works the hardest and will perform the best. That's the main principle. A less talented white person shouldn't be selected for a job over a more talented black person, and vice versa (with obvious caveats like if you're trying to cast Ghandi or the British Queen as Khalaq pointed out). No matter what you think, it's unfair discrimination of immutable characteristics that don't directly define the character of a person.
So yes, it is wrong to hire <minority x> for the sake of their skin colour even if they're not the best person for the job, because it's really no different from hiring a white guy because he's white. If you want to be fair, then you have to start thinking about your fundamental principles and ruminate on them.
As an aside, there are situations in western societies today where minorities unfairly take the place of more qualified "majorities". It's called affirmative action; implemented in universities and companies throughout, it's basically what you're describing. On the surface, one can understand why it's implemented - to prop up and aid problematic (crime/drugs) and poverty stricken communities; fair enough - but just forcing organisations to not hire "Racial/sexual category x" is the flawed approach I've been discussing. Why not tackle the problems at their roots so we can still live by our common principles? I mean, all the poor people (that is poor whites, blacks, asians, hispanics, men and women) could use help.
And perhaps the sooner you stop thinking in terms of these immutable social categories, the sooner we'll get less racists and sexists in positions of power. It's not like you can't be a successful black person in film anyway.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd still think teaching a man how to fish is a better solution.
FWIW statistics do not lie, only the people that interpret them.
...or the people who gather them....
...or the people who present them....
...or the people who use them as evidence....
Yep. Probably a good idea to be careful with statistics. Mmhmm.
Comment has been collapsed.
I still love how South Park has one black kid in the school, who is called Token Black.
Comment has been collapsed.
This!!! I would rather have a good actor than someone who knows not how to act but serves the purpose of "making it right". I care not of what race the actor is (unless it is a milky white Genghis Khan, a Hispanic Gandhi, or a black Sitting Bull)
Comment has been collapsed.
Just because you claim that diversity for the sake of diversity [is simply racism in another form] doesn't make it so.
True. That is why I like to base my claims on evidence. In this case, it is sufficient to point out the meaning of "diversity" and "racism" in this context.
Diversity: the state of having people who are of different races or who have different cultures in a group or organization [considered desirable by some as insurance that an ethnic group is represented when it might otherwise not be].
Racism: racial prejudice or discrimination.
Breaking it down: Diversity is the purposeful inclusion of a representative (i.e. "token") of a particular, chosen ethnicity (i.e. racial discrimination) out of fear that the particular ethnic group will otherwise not qualify for inclusion (i.e. racial prejudice).
As I said, diversity for the sake of diversity is simply racism in another form. To be even more clear, I am not saying that diversity itself is bad. I am merely saying that "forcing it" is not a good "solution."
The quote above is basically how you sound like,
Interesting, seeing as how I disagree with the quote. For the record, I am conservative, but not authoritarian. On the Political Compass, I am smack in the middle.
Comment has been collapsed.
Right, diversity should always serve a purpose, not be the purpose.
When the 2016 Oscars were boycotted by several black actors, actresses, directors, and other Hollywood professionals they did not intend for the 2017 or 2018 Oscars to be flooded with black nominees. That would be a hollow victory. You want a sustainable change that organically grows.
I want to deserve my seat at the table, not get a seat because someone feels guilty or wants to be correct.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, really, who gives a shit? I find it amusing that people bitch about stuff like this in general like it's some conspiracy when it's really just the people who make the movies. If someone has a problem with it then why don't they bitch directly to the people who are in charge of who gets cast for what role in what movie instead of impotently pissing all over every review?
Comment has been collapsed.
If the majority of the cast in a film were of one race, you may not notice. If the majority of a cast in most films you saw were that race, you would probably notice. Things like that don't really enter your mind until something creates a ripple, and then it stands out like a sore thumb. It's kind of like the Wilhelm Scream, heh. Or audio technicians making mouth-noises close to a microphone to unnecessarily exaggerate eating (hearing tooth-scrapes on a metal fork when a character is eating with a plastic fork, etc). Doesn't bug everyone, but stands out to some. Same with the filler 'girl power' and 'token black' side-character tropes, along with 'the two leads must fall in love' thing.
Comment has been collapsed.
"but who gives a shit? and why give a shit?"
You obviously give a shit. Otherwise you wouldn't have started the discussion here.
To quote Shakespeare, "The lady doth protest too much, methinks."
Comment has been collapsed.
Majority is still white, but who cares about facts, right?
Comment has been collapsed.
The lack of androids is offensive!!! I'm offended!!!,
.#Robotslivesmatters #Iamandroidtoo #nosensehashtaghere #andhere
police of decency and political correctness is coming for you.
Comment has been collapsed.
I think it's just an equality issue. White people for whatever reason have dominated Hollywood forever. Times are changing though, thankfully.
Comment has been collapsed.
There are more white people in the US. So.. it would make sense, if there's a role.. more white people would go for it. Statistically, more good actors would be white = more white actors in movies.
On the flip side, for like.. if there's one "black" role available, you get the cream of the crop. Practically zero "mediocre" black actors in Hollywood, they're all freaking denzel quality.
Mediocrity will come when there's more roles than quality actors available.
Currently watching a show, recurring actors: 1 white male, 3 white females, 2 black males, 1 white kid.
1 white male = amazing
1 white female = amazing
1 black male = amazing
1 white kid = amazing
2 white females = garbage
1 black male = garbage
In contrast several one episode actors were something like a brown IT guy, pretty stereotypical.. but filled the role great, good actor.
Female brown actress for two episodes, probably the best acting in the show.
Too many roles "assigned" to certain race or genders and you're gonna get some bad actors.
Comment has been collapsed.
I personally think that stereotyped character is wrong, since it is really depicting the real reality in the movie.
Comment has been collapsed.
The US is a White nation for over two centuries, so it makes sense.
Comment has been collapsed.
Representation in Hollywood is way out of balance, but that criticism is anti-Semitic. I don't want to go there.
Comment has been collapsed.
Are you saying that 12% of the actors in Hollywood are black? In that case, yes, they would seem to be under-represented.
Comment has been collapsed.
My point is that you are misinterpreting your statistics.
- Of all white people in the United States, how many of them decide to take up acting?
- Of all the white people who take up acting, how many of them turn professional?
- Of all the white actors who turn professional, how many of them go into film?
- Of all the professional, white actors who go into film, how many of them become "successful?"
- Of all the professional, white, film actors who become "successful," how many of them can you name?
Now, taking all of the above into account, what is the final ratio of (all white people you know of who have become successful film actors) divided by (all white people in the United States)? Once you have that ratio, you may substitute "black" for "white" in the above steps. The difference between black and white percentages for each step may surprise you.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't see how that should be a concern. It's whoever fits the character for the story. And for background people/figurines/whatever they're called, it's just whoever shows up first.
Honestly, a director that his concerns are more to keep a 17% hispanic and 12% black ratious and not the visuals or writing, music, camera play, all other things that defines what a movie is, is a bad director. Unless of course his movie is about some social portrail, like bullying and/or racism in schools or something.
Comment has been collapsed.
what white Americans are comfortable with and what gives Hollywood more money
They are making movies for profit. It's a job, a profession. Of course they're going to focus more on what gives them more profit.
They are only going to change if the audience makes them change. It's your fault and my fault and whoever watch movies(well, I haven't watched a movie in years, so I guess is not my fault :P).
So far I see no problem in that.
As to the story, the white writer doesn't know the american black culture, the american black slang and traditions. They talk differently, use different terminologies, different body language, things that the writer is not comfortable with("not comfortable" as in he doesn't know, not as racism).
I grew up and lived with Angolans all of my life. I know their slang and culture, even a bit of their native language(one of many that they have, most of them are dead though). But I have no idea about black american culture and slang. For starters, we listen to way different kinds of music.
The writer never had much contact with different cultures to write something specific to them. And if he does, it will feel artificial, or not realistic. The good writers, if they want a story on that setting, will do their investigation, but not your average writer. Your average writer is there to make a quick buck.
Comment has been collapsed.
Really? That would mean on average every show would have 1 hispanic person and 1 black person..
I'd say they're more represented if anything. If we're trying to reflect real life, you'd never have any gay people on Tv.. gay/trans/etc population is like 3%.
My wife watches that 13 reasons why show and half the kids in that highschool are gay, and half the straight ones are played by gays. Plus everybody is freaking 25 playing highschool kids but that's a different story.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well I'm saying Hollywood should mostly be white.
Generally speaking.. you'd have 1 asian, 1 hispanic, 1 black, and 7 whites going for each role.
You'd have to be pretty damn good to get the role. Thus denzel and smith.
I'm sure sometimes they've been given roles because there was a need for a black person or whatever, but I bet most of their roles were given to them because they're damn good.
Comment has been collapsed.
it seems like things are slowly coming to a change
Comment has been collapsed.
For Hollywood it's historically been primarily a money issue over other considerations. It was always a matter of who was going to attract audiences, and yes, those audiences were primarily white, albeit, ethnically very diverse, as were the actors, directors, producers and studio heads, who had predominantly come from recent immigrant stock, or had themselves "just gotten off the boat". So not a bunch of grumpy old conservative anglos descended from Civil war veterans (the early movie business was much too disreputable and risky for fellows like that anyway) but people who themselves had some first hand experience with disenfranchisement and bigotry. And yet, somehow, despite the idea that black actors in leading roles wouldn't sell tickets, movies like Cabin in the Sky and The Emperor Jones, still got made - the latter to much controversy, which doubtless scared film makers off. But while there is no denying that audience bigotry kept black actors from leading roles, that cannot be said about Hispanic actors. Ramon Novarro was a superstar of the silent and early talkie period - audiences loved him and he was regarded as sex symbol, taking over that role on an international basis after the death of Valentino. But he wasn't limited to that niche - he landed the lead in Ben-Hur, a huge silent blockbuster, and later on, neither was Ricardo Montalban, who played more that his fair share of Latin lovers in the '40s and '50s but enjoyed a very diverse career as well. These aren't isolated examples - the list of Hispanic actors who played leading roles and many of whom were even considered big stars in their day is substantial: Dolores del Rio, Lupe Velez, Caesar Romero, Rita Hayworth, Anita Page, Martin Sheen, Anthony Quin, John Gavin.
Comment has been collapsed.
Finally someone who actually knows a bit of history...
Comment has been collapsed.
It has a name: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generation_Snowflake
Comment has been collapsed.
snowflake, cuck,
Those terms are insults no matter what are your political beliefs xD Right wingers use them because huge part of their opponents can be described with them :) Soyboy is new to me and don't even know what it means.
Comment has been collapsed.
for me that word just has a positive connotation, no matter what rightwingers would want me to think
I love cats. So I will call you pussy and because that word just has a positive connotation, no matter what rightleftwingers would want me to think.
Language is evolving. Insults as well. Snowflake is melting fast and I think that as insult it's more poetic than for example "redneck".
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly! Left-wingers use word "pussy" and right-wingers use word "snowflake". These words are protected by copyrights and can be used only after clear political declaration.
Comment has been collapsed.
lol so true! Someone should write a book about the evolution of the English language in the social media era. When snowflake became an insult I pretty much checked out of Twitter... and ofc no "sides" has the monopoly of stupidity.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah yes, snowflakes. I have a love/hate relationship with the term.
It's funny when people think they are different from others...while they are carbon copies of each other.
Like, we have two "hipsters" at work, they pride themselves in being different...I thought they were twins at first...
"They laugh at me because I'm different; I laugh at them because they're all the same."
That's a quote attributed to many rebels over the years, who actually came up with it...probably a t-shirt salesman. The funny thing is, if too many people try to be different...they tend to blend into one big mass :P
Comment has been collapsed.
It's funny because being a twin I've always felt apart from most people but it made me strive more to find things in others I could relate to so it feels like those who insist on feeling unique are missing the point. We are who we are and some of it is different than the person next to us, and some is the same.
Comment has been collapsed.
This has nothing to do with politics. "Snowflake," or more commonly used "special snowflake," refers to someone who thinks they're very unique (as each snowflake is unique in its form). So the beauty of the actual snowflakes is why it's used. It's usually used against someone who is self-entitled, offends easily, etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
When I get blacklisted for simply mentioning a definition of a word, that just strengthens talgaby's point - "generation snowflake."
Comment has been collapsed.
Get used to it, I got 3 only for this thread.
It's ok, you gained my heart, unless you trigger me!
Comment has been collapsed.
Haha, thanks! Yep, I'll get used to it. It's kind of interesting to see just how little it takes to get blacklisted, though, so I'll occasionally check those stats.
Comment has been collapsed.
When I said in another topic a woman attacking gamers for no reason was her being an idiot that instantly gained me 8 blacklists.
That's politics nowadays :/
Comment has been collapsed.
just wish people were able to talk again without getting triggered.
Again? You're acting as if this is some new phenomenon. People have been getting "triggered" since we oozed from the slime.
Comment has been collapsed.
The majority of human history exists outside of your personal scope.
Comment has been collapsed.
Are you trying to argue from a point of authority or what's your point? The majority of human history exists outside of your personal scope as well I'd reckon.
Comment has been collapsed.
Might be true and might not be. I still don't see your point
Comment has been collapsed.
My point was that she was "trying to argue from a point of authority," the very thing you decry. Her further comment below illustrates such.
Comment has been collapsed.
I really can't see this argument from a point of authority you are claiming. Are you saying that she is arguing from a point of authority simply for expressing her opinion about how easily people get "triggered"?
Besides that, how is pointing out that the majority of human history exist outside of someone's personal scope helpful as to countering a perceived argument from authority?
I can easily believe that people, in general, are getting more easily "triggered" as their lives are getting more comfortable over time. I'd actually be surprised if that was not the case.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's simply because you live in a fucking bubble..
Comment has been collapsed.
The term "special snowflake" (later shortened to simply "snowflake") originated from the novel Fight Club, and was then further popularized by the film of the same name.
You are not special. You're not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You're the same decaying organic matter as everything else. We're all part of the same compost heap. We're all singing, all dancing crap of the world.
Comment has been collapsed.
Snowflake is a word that came from the military..mainly the marines.
Incorrect. It was popularized by the book Fight Club.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm telling you how and why it became popular.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/the-less-lovely-side-of-snowflake
Wiki entry
Comment has been collapsed.
And, as usual, you have nothing to back up what you say except "your word."
Using your logic, every curse word in existence originated with my mother.
Comment has been collapsed.
Go play the victim elsewhere. I was simply correcting your misinformation (again).
Comment has been collapsed.
I know, I fell into her trap earlier today. She actually denied that the majority of human history exists outside of her personal scope. Her neighbor agrees with her though, so you know it's true.
Comment has been collapsed.
MissDefi, it's hard to take anything you say seriously. In the same breath I mentioned above, you also claimed to have lived and visited everywhere. You continually confirm imaginary facts with personal anecdotes.
Comment has been collapsed.
@ Doc
I read it. How did you get out? I'm contemplating chewing my own leg off.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think I did, I'm here back at it again >__<. I don't know why I do this to myself.
Comment has been collapsed.
@ Doc
Well, my comment to her was for her personal edification.
Most of the rest of us know how it was popularized.
(or at the very least, can click a link and read)
Comment has been collapsed.
Incorrect. It was popularized by the book Fight Club.
Yes, I'm an awful person for actually knowing what the fuck I'm talking about.
Comment has been collapsed.
Just because you hear it on a movie, doesn't mean that's where it came from.
Yes, let's completely disregard the sources I gave you to back up what I said in favor of your personal anecdotes (much the same as you did when I refuted your claims about blacks and Native Americans with link after link in our last discussion), personal anecdotes in which the word "snowflake" isn't even used in the proper context or with the proper meaning as it applies here.
The political meaning (and context it's used in this thread) has nothing to do with "whining," by the way.
Oh, and in point of fact, the term snowflake was used derogatorily long before your "Marine friends" - it was also used in the 1970's to refer to a black man who acted as if he were white. But again, different context and meaning.
Comment has been collapsed.
There were glimmers of this use in the decade and a half that preceded that election, but the meaning at first was a bit softer, referring mostly to millennials who were allegedly too convinced of their own status as special and unique people to be able (or bothered) to handle the normal trials and travails of regular adult life.
That use very likely has its genesis in Chuck Palahniuk's 1996 cult-favorite book Fight Club, in which a member of the anti-consumerist Project Mayhem tells the other members:
"You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everyone, and we are all part of the same compost pile."In the 1999 movie adaptation the lines go like this:
“Listen up, maggots. You are not special. You are not the beautiful or unique snowflake. You are the same decaying organic matter as everything else. We are the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world. We are all part of the same compost heap."
That's from the people who write the dictionary. I'm fairly certain they still allow dictionaries in schools.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, you'd better dial up the dictionary people and all those writers and let them know how wrong they are! :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Lmfao, 7 hours later and you're still trying to start shit.
Seriously, move the fuck on and get over it. I don't have time for your ridiculous nonsense and accusations.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, my comment to her was for her personal edification.
Most of the rest of us know how it was popularized.
(or at the very least, can click a link and read)
Yep, I'm a total asshole. Now move the fuck on.
Comment has been collapsed.
No need to be an asshole for such a trivial subject.
Pot, meet kettle. Now run along.
Edit: I am sure I'll regret explaining this, but whatever, I have a few minutes of free time.
She didn't state what she said as opinion, she stated it as fact, and multiple times in this thread. She didn't say it was where she heard it until I said something - she simply said it originated with the US Marines. She says it many times in this thread. Then you say I was insistent that I was correct, and yet she also insisted she was correct, even in light of hard documented sources to the contrary. Yet somehow, I'm the only asshole for being insistent. And oddly enough, not once did I state any opinion about the subject - I linked a few sources, You'll have to excuse me for taking documented sources as being more credible than "I heard it with my own ears, silly." There are dozens of them out there. Feel free to check it for yourself.
Then I was told that, since some movies and authors use military consultants, that the author "got it from the military." If you knew anything about the author, you'd know that isn't the case. I was also told that the people that write the dictionary don't check their sources and get their information from films, when they should be talking to Marine vets and Facebook groups, and that they're too lazy to go through all of that. Now keep in mind, she wasn't stating any of this as opinion - she was stating it as fact.
Oh, and then the personal insults were flung. Not just by her, but also by you. Sorry, but I won't stoop to that level, but you feel free to do so until you get yourself suspended, and then you can "be against me" for that as well.
So yes, given the circumstances, I was quire reasonable for far too long - with the both of you. Now it's just become wearying debating with someone who cites conjecture as a credible source.
Comment has been collapsed.
From your own damn source..
Palahniuk has often been credited with coining the metaphorical use of snowflake.[3] According to Merriam-Webster, however, "Palahniuk was hardly the first person to use the metaphor. It's the stuff of self-help books and inspirational posters and elementary school assurances.
Comment has been collapsed.
Snowflake is a word that came from the military..mainly the marines.
Her original remark, which is incorrect, and not even the same context.
Incorrect. It was popularized by the book Fight Club.
Key word: popularized.
the terminology "special snowflake" and "special snowflake syndrome" was applied to individuals who behaved as if they were very special. Such terminology refers to a person who believes their status as a unique individual means they are destined for great success and/or that they deserve a special career with abundant praise and admiration.
Has nothing to do with "whining."
Comment has been collapsed.
Her original remark, which is incorrect, and not even the same context.
That is what you claimed, but failed to prove.
Key word: popularized.
Key word: Where they got it from...
Has nothing to do with "whining."
" [..] a person who believes their status as a unique individual means they are destined for great success and/or that they deserve a special career with abundant praise and admiration."
And if the evil, unjust world fails to satisfy their humongous sense of entitlement and hybris, they usually resort to that old and tried tactic, otherwise know as "whining".
Comment has been collapsed.
FWIW, I've heard the same story, basically. Don't get me wrong, I am not from the US, not part of a military family etc., so I don't have any first hand source. But we have relatives there, and I remember that this word was used. In the same context you describe, slang as used by soldiers and so on.. oh my, that was long ago.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's their right to do it. That doesn't make it any less ridiculous. So.. You're defending the act of blacklisting others for getting triggered over nothing, while ranting about right-wingers, even though all I did was come up with the definition of a word. I haven't even said anything about my political views, if I'm left- or right-wing, etc. Seems like self-justification for blacklisting me.
I'm not even getting into politics, because it's pointless.
Comment has been collapsed.
And you wouldn't feel the need to state such an obvious thing if you weren't self-justifying blacklisting me. Sorry, buddy, but your lie was too transparent. I know what a rant is. If you don't know how to use a dictionary, that's not my problem.
Comment has been collapsed.
My bad. I thought you could see the previous giveaways of anyone, even if you were blacklisted. I still don't know why you keep replying to me with anti-right-wing opinions, though. I have no interest in debating politics on some "random" website, because people (including you) let their political bias get in their way of thinking. It's a battle where nobody wins - nobody gets any wiser. At least most of the time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Thank you for the definition of a word i used correctly. Whether you agree with it is another thing.
You seem to be impassioned to me, ergo why I said it. Also, you don't care about any of this? That doesn't even make any sense. You clearly do care, otherwise you wouldn't even bother. I'm bored with this now, though. Have a nice weekend! (I mean that genuinely.)
Comment has been collapsed.
Snowflakes feel offended by calling them snowflakes. They also feel offended by explaining definition of a snowflake because deep in their hearts they know that they are snowflakes xD
Comment has been collapsed.
Again with the right-wingers rant.. You misunderstand the definition. Snowflakes have an exaggerated feeling of uniqueness or entitlement. Just look up the definitions yourself.
Comment has been collapsed.
is supposed to be against uniqueness
You just don't get it and try to act smart :)
It is unlikely that any two snowflakes are alike due to the estimated 10^19 (10 quintillion) water molecules which make up a typical snowflake
Derogatory use comes from other factors but other users explained it already.
Comment has been collapsed.
The really cool thing regarding soy and fitoestrogens that fitoestrogens (plant-originated estrogens) are called that because of the structural buildup - they look similar to estrogen, but they have absolutely no hormonal effect on the human body.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, that's why this term seems popular these days. I've been wondering but I've never managed to muster up the curiosity to do the actual research. Thank you
Comment has been collapsed.
Not true at all. There are a lot of plant-originated substances that have effect on human body after all.
Pure fitoestrogens indeed have no effect on human body because they are inactive. But... they are activated by bacterias in digestive tract. First time when someone described effects of fitoestogens from soy on human body was in 1931!
Other thing is that they have positive effects. Lowering chances of some type of cancer, help with heart diseases and osteoporosis. Hormonal effect is also a fact - but there is less studies about it so far.
Also most of soy is now genetically modified to have much less fitoestogens than in past.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's basically making fun of men by calling them girls while simultaneously being offensive to asians.
And possibly girls women as well?
Though I fail to see how this offends Asians - bit of a stretch.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's used on all sides. Whether someone has eaten too much soy and through that has gotten too much estrogen (which was scientifically debunked decades ago), whether they let their partners get fucked by another person is none of my business. I don't care for that. All these insults show that discussions and normal discourse for them is genuinely a task that they can't accomplish. They're either not mentally mature enough or they lack the education and skills to do so.
I'd say just ignore them and move on with it. I know that that the "snowflake" meme came around when SJWs claimed everything to be of offense and terrible because they themselves were offended. Whether justified or not.
These people and so many others are people that can't carry anything, including a normal discussion. Just like those that use insults for their points. It's always been that only a small percentage of people can discuss these things because these discussions are genuinely, ridiculously intricate and difficult and the chance of making a mistake are sometimes higher than not making a mistake at all. It's not an insult to say that they can't carry that discussion. That's just life. People want to include, but they don't understand that they don't belong in that sphere.
Comment has been collapsed.
I knew this was a thing, I was not aware there was a wiki for it tho, lol
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, that is something related to marketing and psychology, but mostly yes, it's kinda true
Comment has been collapsed.
I recognize is a complex topic, in LATAM for example marketing is targeted "to be" like the whiter skin tones people.
Comment has been collapsed.
or biology. certain phenotype are considered universally more attractive than other, and that is a fact. the case wants that
these traits are europoids.
Comment has been collapsed.
Wait - somebody who selected a literal nazi to be their avatar suggesting that white people are superior?
Who could possibly leap to the conclusion of racism?!
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not entirely clear, but seems you're trying to say it's sad but true that white people are superior.
Whatever dictionary has provided your understanding of "not racism", you might want to consider a different publisher...
Comment has been collapsed.
lol wut?
Maybe they look better to you, but not everyone thinks like you do.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok.It`s "Tolerance".I can understand...Even for the other races white womans are very hot!
Comment has been collapsed.
Again, it would seem to vary from person to person. In my experience, men often often find women from other ethnic backgrounds intriguing. The same may apply to women, but I don't claim to have a woman's perspective.
Comment has been collapsed.
I am the other races, and i do not think white womans are as that hot to be compared to other races.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hmm, must be something wrong with me than that it's always pretty dark skinned women that make my heart pump faster.
Or all those white boys that went to Africa and knocked up black chicks.
And I even have some German blood in me!
Such treachery...
Comment has been collapsed.
I doubt it was phrased as a fact. Looked like him stating his opinion.
It was dumb, of course. But I think you're getting involved with something that shouldn't have been posted in the first place.
Comment has been collapsed.
"Tolerant" people reported my steam avatar xD Double standards !
Comment has been collapsed.
now, if we say a movie has too much of other races it would be racist for some reason
Comment has been collapsed.
Nobody says that.
Infact, 95% black actors (Black Panther) is listed as "diverse".
Come again?
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean, if we complain about it like other people complain about "too much white people"
Comment has been collapsed.
I probably misread your post first time around giving it another look over... oops 0_o
Comment has been collapsed.
Black Panther-this is a movie for black people! xD
Comment has been collapsed.
We are all humans here, who cares?
Racist people care.
Comment has been collapsed.
You have hit the proverbial nail squarely on the head.
Those who get upset because a person isn't "the right race" are all in the same camp, regardless of their reasoning. The color of a person's skin is just another character trait, like the shape of one's eyebrow.
Comment has been collapsed.
Those who get upset because a person isn't "the right race" are all in the same camp, regardless of their reasoning. The color of a person's skin is just another character trait, like the shape of one's eyebrow.
So, why don't you feel the same way about a person's sex?
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm not sure what you are talking about, here. I do feel the same way about a person's sex. Perhaps I'm not understanding what you are saying? In any case, it seems to me that sexuality is off-topic for the current discussion. Go ahead and hit me up on Steam if you want to discuss my point of view on other matters. I enjoy a good discussion.
Comment has been collapsed.
While it's true that there are double standards towards minorities in hollywood, i find that forcing diversity (especially when it has no reason within the story, like people complaining that the protagonist of Kingdom Come: Deliverance is not black*) is not really helping them. People should protest for wage gaps and jobs opportunities rather than a black actor not winning an oscar.
*On the other side, i find quite stupid casting white people in places where it makes no sense whatsoever, Keanu Reeves in 47 Ronin is an example. If there's a minority better suited to fit that role, hollywood shouldn't be afraid to cast the right people as there are lots of great actors all over the world.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, statistically, a wage gap does exist. It's just that it's not caused by the reasons that most think it's caused by.
Comment has been collapsed.
Statistically, I don't think there was a study that properly delved in the what the causes exactly are. It could be simple preference, or it could be choice affected by external factors which may or may not be ideal, or it could be some sort of discrimination, or many other things. It also depends on what measure was used to measure the gap.
Comment has been collapsed.
Statistically, I don't think there was a study that properly delved in the what the causes exactly are.
Yep, and that's the problem. People look at the data, and make assumptions that they have no business making. They say "Oh, less women are working in that field? That must be because men are oppressing women!" or "African-americans are making less money than white people? It must be because everyone is racist!".
They're going around trying to fix problems that most likely don't even exists at all, while creating new problems along the way.
Comment has been collapsed.
I’m saying it goes both ways. You can’t claim that it is not caused by “what most people think it’s caused by” either. But yes, policies should be implemented carefully.
Comment has been collapsed.
You can’t claim that it is not caused by “what most people think it’s caused by” either.
Ah, I see what you are getting at. To clarify, I don't think it's caused caused by anything specific. I think race and gender wage gaps are just a natural reflection of basic cultural and genetic differences between people. Sure, racism and sexism could be a factor, but only at microscopic proportions compared to the big picture.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's an earnings gap. The difference here being that one compares literally all income from everywhere and the other compares perfect similarities with the only difference being their gender.
Women go for lower paying jobs and work less hours on average. They negotiate less and are more agreeable than men, again, on average. What you should go after is the fact that society is so dumb that they don't pay, for example, nurses, the pay they actually deserve. That pay should be massive because they work like hell and they don't get rewarded for it.
People don't appreciate the less noticeable stuff, even if that thing lacking would collapse the whole house of cards that you need for your life.
We need to rethink what we're rewarding those that work this hard.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm finally learning japanese!
Beautiful language. Beautiful.
Comment has been collapsed.
But how am I, as an Apache Helicopter, supposed to relate the characters :c
Comment has been collapsed.
Elite Apache helicopter pilots are tasked with destroying powerful armed drug cartels operating in South America. Fire Birds (1990)
Comment has been collapsed.
We are all humans here, who cares?
Those that think they are far superior just because they live in their delusional alternative reality. ^^
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, imagine e.g. Hong Kong in hands of Brits, and all political offices, company leaders, and even theater casts being Brits. Some of those Brits perhaps argue that it is natural way of things, with claims of Brits being far superior to local population in every way (while tho pretty much holding others at gunpoint about that proclaimed natural order). Some other Brits tho argue that they are not interested to have an apartheid system or Nazi-racial-laws system, which strongly reminds of pure feudal days in which only children of nobles (who in Europe usually married among themselves, even within family) could have expected to be anything else but field slaves, even if the kids of nobles were completely incompetent and not caring as they had their spot for sure through relative, and these other Brits express that as they can and look for means to sort of balance out the negative discrimination.
And whether or not e.g. Charlie Chaplin was racially (that is by some used zoological definition of humans) the same as Hitler, that is rather irrelevant, particularly about acting, which in its origins in Greece even had males playing parts of females.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o61pWzvQMsU
Comment has been collapsed.
Movie studios tend to cast movies based on the crowd draw a particular actor can pull as well ... which is problematic.
I wholeheartedly believe that the casting should stay true to the source material... and that diversity is important for the representation of the period and locations used as well. The problem there is that they often film from a set built in a studio location but the story "location" is somewhere completely different - making casting and extras tough I suppose.
Another issue is the recycling of story material which was created in periods where positive racial inclusion and positive story lines were not all that great. I do wish more SciFi books made it over to movies because the representation and background there can be outstanding at times. I would love to see more diverse superheroes/protagonists/support with interesting back stories and locations... More please!
Comment has been collapsed.
Everyone should be played by cats on drugs.
If movie is original story I don't care if cast is white, black or asian. Cool story is cool story, why make "race fight" out of it.
But I hate when they do adaptation (of book, comic, game, watherver) and they change race of character for no reason.
Or rather I hate it when I suspect they did it only so the movie was more "politically correct".
It's like adding at least one black guy and one girl to the "party", not because you have idea for their characters, but only because you don't want to anybody call you racist or sexist.
Take your race based inseciureties away from good stories D:<
Comment has been collapsed.
Cat on drugs playing roles of minorities is political correctness.
Comment has been collapsed.
And from where you took those minorities?
I clearly described situation where characters in book are for eg white, and someone put for eg black actor in their role for only dumb reasons like "there are too many white characters in that story, this is racist"
Comment has been collapsed.
I was thinking more about generating multiracial characters only for sake of them being multiracial. And keep in mind that I don't mind "white characters being black", I don't like reasons why theyre black. Changing black/asian character to white only because of "race" reason would annoy me in simlar way.
But keeping character in race only to for that reason (when it doesnt really affect plot) doesnt look much better for me. Like I'm pretty sure Samuel L. Jackson is best Nick Fury in the world, but fuck it, lets put someone else in that role because original Fury was white.
But wait! Nobody was triggered by Nick Fury, or while we're at this universum - nobody was triggered by Heimdal, even if it maskes no sense that character based on nordic god was black.
Try to make random non-white character white and then you will se "triggering".
As to "Ghost in the Shell" (because I think you meant to say "GitS" not "Ergo Proxy") - Who said it wasn't ment to be played by white people (and your phrasing is fucked up, like i would say that black people cant play Shaekspere because it wasnt ment to be played by black people, while autor wasnt even thinking about this option). If you really want to be faithful to original then yes, major Kusanagi was japanese, but also... her whole body was artificial.
I don't think it was ever said that her body look "asian". It was only mentionet that it doesnt look expensive (so noone would be tempted with stealing it), and in all honesty, I think that if asians could have fake bodies then "europeian look" would be quite popular (plus many characters in manga had non-asian fetures). Her non-asian looks make more sense than all "social justice warriors" would want to.
It's kind of simlar situation to when they made Harry Potter And The Cursed Child and Hermione was played by black women. Of course people complained that its not like Hermione looks like (because Emma Watson etc), and then someone pointed out that nowhere in the book she was described as white.
So yes, from the context in the book we take shes most likeley white, but its possible that she is black.
Same here, from the context in the comic we assume that Kusanagis body looks asian, but it is possible that its not (since manga style doesn't give you very clear information about race - big eyes, colorful hair, pointy noses, non-asian characters looking same as asian characters etc).
I didn't watch that movie so I can't say much about it, but I think major reason behind putting Scarlet in Kusanagis role was her fame not race.
Easiest way to promote movie and gain some free positie points in reviews is to put someone famous in it.
- How many people will pay to see adaptation of some "old asian cartoon"? - Mostly fans of oryginal (and they will go to see it no matter who plays who).
- But how many people will pay to see new move with Scarlett Johansson? - Oooh its whole other story.
You can probably find many random asian actors in USA (other question is how many of them are good actors), but how many really famous actors USA have that look "asian"? On the level of fame similar to Scarlet is Jackie Chan and Lucy Liu. Maybe few more that I don't recal and some that I won't include because they're dead or retied.
Like you really want to put unknow actor in leading role of a big and expensive movie just because shes asian? Put yourself in the place of investor and read it again.
Oh yeah, fun fact, from what i remember, when they did surveys among japanese people about this move, noone really cared about her being played by non-asian.
Changing environments is rather fair approach, tho some people still will complain about it and call it "whitewashing"... totally ignoring that everybody do it, like Kurosawa did with Macbeth in "Throne of Blood" (and you don't want to know what India did to Star Wars xD).
Its kind of obvious that if youre making movie in country where majorty is caucasian, it will be hard to do it fully asian.
In this context main problem with "Ghost in the Shell" is not that main character is white, but that they tried to put asians in other roles.
So ya, whitewashing is shit, but it doesnt happend so often anymore, at leas not so often as some claim to. Its not popular anymore, so it doesnt generate money.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also, you should really stop talking about stuff you don't know shit about.
LMAO, pot meet kettle..
The original Nick Fury was white, and was inspired by agent-type figures like James Bond.
Comment has been collapsed.
The original Nick Fury was white, and was inspired by agent-type figures like James Bond.
... and was certainly not the reference for the current depiction of Fury.
Comment has been collapsed.
Doesn't matter..
Don't rewrite established characters.
Invent fucking new ones if you must, but cut this crap.
This is exactly why you see those reactions, and I can perfectly understand if people feel angry about that constant shitting on the original sources.
Comment has been collapsed.
Marvels original Nick Fury was not the reference for Nick Fury in the Marvel Movies? Care to elaborate?
Comment has been collapsed.
Comment has been collapsed.
So they based a character of the original but for some reason made him black, very odd. But since this character is based on the original I'd say the movie Nick is also based on the original, only with some weird alterations
Comment has been collapsed.
I mean, you can say that, but it doesn't make it true. My original statement stands, the reference for the current film depiction of Fury is based off of the Ultimates' character and not the original depiction of the Nick Fury character. Both film and comic creators have stated such.
You are certainly feeling argumentative today.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not really argumentative in my opinion. I just don't get how an interim step makes something decoupled from the original.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yes, Marvel Ultimate Universe... that is exactly the crux, because it's a rewrite from the old original characters. Exactly what the gripe is all about. But I heard that Marvel is failing (not movies, comics) pretty hard lately, so that might explain it.
My point stands, I've explained who the original Nick Fury was, if you don't believe me, search for yourself. You know how to use a search engine, right?
Whooo fake news, make america great again!
Anything else intelligent to say you stable genius?
Comment has been collapsed.
First of all I didn't say it doesn't happen, I said it happens much less than media drama claim it to happen. Theres a difference so plese stop shitftin my words to be more dramatical.
As to Nick Fury comics with him being black were based on Samuel L. Jackson, yes. How those it change the fact that original Fury was white? How this is different from making remake movie with black actor? Like they literary told him they expect him to play Fury in next move with him.
But ok, I was wrong, lets not count this as black guy taking place of whit guy.
It just was mine example of black actor taking white role not because "thers need to be more black in movie", but because hes great for that role... so, it doesn't count?
Anyway around 70% of people in USA are withe (I was actually supprised when I looked it up, I thought it was bit less than that).
So what are you expecting?
Black people are like 12-13%... Do you think that threres less black people in american moves than 12-13%?
Lets go back to poor asians not getting chance in movie industry: remember those statistics? You know how many Asian people there is in USA? Less than 5%.
And those are not only people that have chinese/japanese ancestors, those are aslo people fom places like India or westen parts of Russia.
Now we can ignore the fact that putting Japansese people and people from China or Korea in one bag is kind of racist - but its fine as long as they look somehow "asian", right? (We also should ignore fact that probably more japanese people would have problem with Kusanagi being played by Chinese than caucasian). But still that live you with maybe 2,5% of "japanese-like-asians".
Oh, and people from other english-speaking countries, mostly UK, do take bit of that "fame"... (UK is like 90% white people).
So you get like army of white people wanting to be actors and only bunch of asians... chances to find great talent among 100 people are bigger than amog 2-3 - that means that its harder to find more quaility asian actors.
But I'm sure theres so little famosus asian actors because of racism. Maybe we should give them some special rights, only because of their race, right?
I honestly dont like Holywood and many things they do. They don't like to change and Orscars are one big bullshit because they like to prise themselfs (like almost every year thers anime better than "animated oscar").
But I don't thik lack of famous asian actors is result of racism. Its math.
Like how many japanese movie stars are white? They have movies about white people, placed in "white countries", but played by asians. For eg adaptation of Kuroshitsuji - anime that takes place in England, characters are white. They are played by asians. Why? They have some white people appearing in tv, few, but sitll - why didn't they cast them in the first place?
All those questions seem absurd when you shwitch places, right?
oh and Hollywood inst sole filmmaker in the "east" but shh... Maybe bigger problem than lack of minorities in Hollywood is fact that they dominated filming industry.
Comment has been collapsed.
Hollywoo Stars and Celebrities: What Do They Know? Do They Know Things?? Let's Find Out!
Comment has been collapsed.
Some people just want to force diversity and "political correctness" upon everything they touch, regardless of if it's actually an issue or not.
I also find it amusing how if you complain that something has "too many white people", you are a good person who wants equality. If you complain that something has "too many black people", you are a racist and should feel bad. What a fucking time to be alive...
Comment has been collapsed.
If a movie is based on books, real life, other media, then I think the race should stay the same as it was based on
Reminder that Ghost in The Shell got a movie adaptation with the protagonist being a Caucasian actor - While this event got a lot of hate in north America, it was pretty well received in Japan, where the original work (anime) originated from.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also Attack on Titan anime/manga is based on Europe, live action movie has asians
Comment has been collapsed.
in the anime she looked American anyway also shes like full robot except for her brain so she can look anyway she wants. the movie still sucked though
Comment has been collapsed.
Almost every time I read one of your comments I end up Googling "patricia piccinini"...again.
Comment has been collapsed.
I liked it, but I still hard for me to see it as a GiTS movie. Yeah all the cast is there(probably, I didn't see some but they're probably there and I just didn't notice), but that was about it. And most of them are basically just cameos. I only realized Togusa was in the movie when I saw his iconic revolver. But that's just me I guess that got too attached to some characters(and to be fair, the original movies had the same problem). Also some writting didn't make much sense to me, but GiTS is heavy mental crap, so maybe I'm just an idiot(well, I am so yeah :P).
And GiTS has received many reboots(or whatever it's called in comic books/manga), so I can see why Japan received it well. And the action scenes are amazing!
Comment has been collapsed.
it dont matter to me just don't remake movies and try make cash from it . Korean OldBoy best OldBoy . usa oldboy wtf is this s$$t why make it ? Death note we have 3 in japan why make a usa one ? why not just dub the ones we have . Reboot what a show for its time . look what they did to it and then rip on the fans for waiting so long for it to come back . + people getting upset about something in a show/movie . if it upset you don't watch it then and don't try get it pulled from tv . R.I.P clone high , My name is earl , Dead like me , undergrads .reaper ,Todd and the book of pure evil,brickleberry,High School USA!,John Doe ,camp. list keeps going on . a lot of good shows get the can from people upset over nothing
Comment has been collapsed.
The Deathnote thing is because Netflix wanted a bigger audience who can understand it. So they made it americanized and tried to keep it as simple as possible. It was an adaptation that was intended for normies basically. In my opinion it worked pretty well stand alone. Compare it to the source material and it's another story. The Japanese version is definitely superior.
Yeah... I watched 1 episode of the new ReBoot and I wanted to cry... Rip...
Comment has been collapsed.
what failed u.s. oldboy was the shitty rewrite of the script. like the shitty added suspense of the ring (does the tv coming on 2 more time make you more scared?). then you have the shitty changes to ghost in the shell. they dumbed the hell out of GitS and the changes destroyed what made some of the characters what they were. then they changed the ending so they can make a second one killing what the movie was all about.
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems the USA is deadfully frightened of subtitles, much like France and Germany.
As Dutchie I don't understand it either, we got no issue what-so-ever with reading subs :/
Comment has been collapsed.
The solution is obviously to clone Morgan Freeman in a variety of shapes and sizes, and then replace every actor with him.
Even the women, children and animals.
They would no longer be movies, but Morgies.
It would be both amazing and disturbing enough that the matter would be considered settled.
Comment has been collapsed.
Good idea!
Seen that before in Beeing John Malkovich xD It's time to make next step!
Comment has been collapsed.
That last image,
Women with freckles are so freaking hawt.
Comment has been collapsed.
I had no interesting in BJM before, but now I may watch it.
I also don't like how BJM sounds like some kind of wonky internet acronym for a porn tag I don't even wanna touch.
Comment has been collapsed.
I also don't like how BJM sounds like some kind of wonky internet acronym for a porn tag I don't even wanna touch.
That was my first impression when you write that shortcut. I needed time to process it.
Comment has been collapsed.
don't hate me mate, the first thing I did was checking your steam profile and looking at your nationality xD
this argument is for us Europeans a typical American stereotype - only Americans have these discussions for us, we don't even come to think about these things xD it's of course related to the States' history and demographics! but you'd never see in Europe such reviews or everything talking about whites and blacks.. xD
edit: of course I'm talking about these discussions made by Americans as a whole, I mean, citizens of the States, it's not important their race or anything but they're the only one for us that debate over these issues xD
Comment has been collapsed.
Customs and sensitivities vary from place to place. In the U.S., for example, not only do we have no "Asian problem," we also have a different meaning for the word "Asians."
Generally speaking, however, racism is alive and well all over the world. Most people don't attach too much importance to a person's ethnicity, but there are enough who do that it remains an issue.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh for what concerns racism, you're totally right!!
Yeah I just wanted to point out not so seriously that these discussions are typically Americans for us XD We don't even have a word for "asians", but we don't even have all the immigration questionnaires asking for races or such.. even hearing words like "hispanic" makes us automatically think that it comes from an American since here we don't hear or use those words in general, not talking about racism or other things :P
But for what regards racism immigration and so on Europe of course and all the countries of the world have their own problems to deal with.. just you'll never hear "blacks" "whites" and "asians" in Europe ahah XD
Comment has been collapsed.
we don't even have all the immigration questionnaires asking for races or such
This might be due to your local laws. I don't know what immigration questionnaires look like here, but I know ethnic statistics are prohibited and the processing ethnic data is highly regulated (I suppose one possible exemption would be for medical reasons, as we know some diseases are more or less common among different races and it would be stupid or even dangerous to ignore that information). So as a result, you pretty much don't ever see race mentioned in any questionnaire...
Comment has been collapsed.
I find it odd that you should say that. I have been to multiple European countries on different occasions and have heard "blacks," "whites," and "asians" coming out of the mouths of Europeans. Has Europe totally changed in the past 15 years?
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't know about other countries, in Hungary they were always called blacks, asians, chinese, korean, arab. Maybe because of the mostly caucasian eastern europe they are more of an exception from the usual, so in a non-obviously racist context these names are (or were?) more matter of fact than judgemental. Like you said in another comment of yours, skin colour is a physical thing, like the guy with blonde hair or the black woman. The people aren't as trigger-happy to jump on these expressions as in the US, so that's surely for the different level of tolerance towards these things.
Comment has been collapsed.
Short answer, we usually use nationalities rather than saying races.Also we dont really have the concept of "us white people" we use nationalities.
Also when saying asian , we only think about chinese/japanese people.
(Not me though, i read a lot of news from USA politics )
Comment has been collapsed.
Interesting. Practicing Muslims consider all humanity as "brothers and sisters," so we distinguish people in a similar manner. However, we denote them as "tribes" instead of "nations," although both words have the same meaning in English. This is because some national boundaries cut across ethnic regions, and social bonds are deemed more important than political boundaries. The idea is the same, however. People sharing ethnic, social, and/or cultural traits are referred to as a "tribe," so American Muslims are considered a "tribe."
Comment has been collapsed.
Maybe for your reference, US's 'hispanics' are like Europes '(North-)Africans'.
Comment has been collapsed.
but you'd never see in Europe such reviews or everything talking about whites and blacks
I don't read movie reviews, but I'm quite sure we have that "positive discrimination" hysteria in France so I guess some reviews must mention it.
To give a few high level examples:
- in 2015, the woman who is CEO of the national television (Delphine Ernotte from "France Television" if you want to search for more details) make a statement about "too many 50+ year old white men"
- June 4, 2018, the Ministry of Culture, Françoise Nyssen, basically repeated it
- May 22, 2018, the President of France himself (the infamous Emmanuel Macron) talked about "white males" with a negative connotation when talking about difficult suburbs (NB: literally "males", which in French, unlike in English, is only used for animals, not humans - and even kids know it, I remember well how shocked / amused we were in English class when we learned that was a usual way of referring to men and women in English)
More generally, the expression "50+ year old white males" appears to be used more and more commonly in local political correctness rallies. I heard it at a conference just a few weeks ago, a conference that had very prominent guidelines about having zero tolerance for racism, sexism, harassment, abuse, etc. I guess that just didn't apply to the lecturer
It's only my interpretation, but I believe it's more meant in a sexist and "ageist" way than in a racist way, even though it's all 3 equally. Anyhow, that was just to say... we do have this kind of BS in parts of Europe too, sadly.
Comment has been collapsed.
Pretty much. Seems a US thing.
Yet that doesn't really take away their insistent need to stuff politics everywhere can no, and does not ruin movies internationally.
I am of course talking about Star Wars, but there are plenty more examples to be found most likely, just not as well known.
Comment has been collapsed.
We are all humans here, who cares?
Absolutely agree, and I know there are racist people out there but I also feel like (at least where I'm at and in the countries I've visited) the race / racist issue is really overblown by the media and certain groups. I would go a step further and make the claim that much of it is a divide-and-conquer tactic, intentionally stirring up bad feelings and tribalism (us vs them mentality). Whereas when you actually spend time with people from different races you realize just what you originally stated, we are all just humans of the same type, living the same experiences, and we're all in this together.
In my opinion the best way to combat racism is to stop running around like the house is on fire crying "racism" at every little thing we dislike. Now, we should absolutely call out real racism and say something if someone is behaving in a racist manner; unfortunately the word racist has lost a lot of it's meaning because it's thrown around so much and used as a slur against people who are not actually racist.
I guess I've gone a little off the original topic, so I'll just say the best way to deal with reviews like that is to ignore them. They don't represent the majority of rational individuals. They are going for a reaction, and hopefully if they don't get it they'll change their behavior or move on.
Comment has been collapsed.
it's thrown around so much and used as a slur against people who are not actually racist
Agreed. The word "racist" also tends to be used a lot by the black folks when they actually do something bad and get caught. It's like a ticket out of troubles for them, all they have to do is point at a white person and say "racist!", and no one questions them out of fear of being labeled as racists as well. Also tends to happen with the word "sexist" lately :/
Comment has been collapsed.
I think Denzel explained it very nicely here: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ayf8Iny9Eg
Comment has been collapsed.
Smart man. And probably my favorite actor of all times.
Comment has been collapsed.
I adore almost any movie he is in. Another of my favorite actors is Will Smith, such a good actor.
Comment has been collapsed.
Without following the link I'm like 99.9% sure it's Morgan Freeman. It's a god damn amazing clip and a very sound position if it is what I imagine
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh, now I feel slightly silly, it's even in the comment. I couldn't think of anything more fitting than https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeixtYS-P3s
The posted video almost seem off-topic
Comment has been collapsed.
so basically you have to respect all the races or you are racist but you can't point them out or you are a racist. seems legit.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't follow. The point he is making in the video is that he doesn't want special treatment because of his black skin
Comment has been collapsed.
after that. he answered the question "how do we get rid of racism" by going to denying racialism. the kind of slippery slope very common from characters in his position.
Comment has been collapsed.
That's your interpretation. What he actually is saying is "stop talking about it".
Comment has been collapsed.
could be. as it could be that morgan isn't much of a free man as he is repeating like a parrot what almost the whole totality
of his colleagues say, with the only difference being merely dialectical. and repetition is the most effective propaganda method.
that aside, i'll stick with muhammad ali
Comment has been collapsed.
+1 but the interviewer was exceptionally dumb that it's actually suspicious
Comment has been collapsed.
it is a very stupid statement imo. to deny racial realism in exchange of idealogical suprastructur (culture) its part of a precise narrative, very popular in the western block. but after all he is part of the hollywood clique and there if you want to stay on the crest of the wave you have to lower yourself to that level.
Comment has been collapsed.
He survived/succeeded, so the system worked for him. This view disregards all of those who did not succeed, in favor of the system that helps those who did.
Comment has been collapsed.
i still don't see how it is related. the system we are talking about works for you as long as you follow the line dictated by it.
Comment has been collapsed.
the system we are talking about works for you as long as you follow the line dictated by it.
Right. So, those that have succeeded in said system have a reason to support it, in turn disregarding those who fail explicitly due to said system.
We aren't saying different things here, I'm not sure why you think I'm disagreeing with you.
Comment has been collapsed.
no im just not sure what you are trying to point out. or perhaps i am and thats even more confusing.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually i don*t care if to much white or black in movies..as long as the black guy dies first...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scg3LOF6Lv0
Comment has been collapsed.
So I was trying to find a good movie to watch and I decided to read some reviews and damn.. people are really concerned about which race play the characters and specially the protagonist. Some review says "too much white people". It just doesn't make sense to me.
We are all humans here, who cares? does that really make the movie better if an asian person is the protagonist? If a movie is based on books, real life, other media, then I think the race should stay the same as it was based on. If it make sense that the character should be that race because of settings, etc, then yeah, I understand the critics, but when people are demanding the race to be different simply because there isn't enough of that race in movies, then I don't understand.
Maybe I am missing something here. People give bad reviews because of that reasons, it grinds my gear.
psst. also im asian..I know people will assume I'm white if I don't include this, also the title is a bit click baity.. sorry
Comment has been collapsed.