Forum menu
First I’ve heard of this, it seems that having an actor who’s a person of colour playing another person of colour is unacceptable if the actor isn’t black enough!
https://www.indiewire.com/2019/03/will-smith-colorism-backlash-king-richard-williams-1202048820/
Honestly, isn’t this just getting more than a little bit petty?
Hmmm. Identity politics is getting a bit out of hand. Will there come a point where actors only play themselves and each of us has to be our own MP because we are all unique and no-one can represent us but ourselves?
Both are petty, you are effectively discriminating due to skin color.
We seem to have taught a generation to look at the colour of a person's skin first and apply rough stereotypes unthinkingly based on it.
All in the name of anti-racism.
Where does it end though? Want to play Batman, well you best be a billionaire who witnessed their parents murder.
Where does it end though? Want to play Batman, well you best be a billionaire who witnessed their parents murder.
At least it may mean we get no more Superman films. 🙂
There is quite an interesting film on the subject.
So does this mean a black James Bond would be a bad thing? Because he is pretty darned white and a casual racist in the books.
So does this mean a black James Bond would be a bad thing? Because he is pretty darned white and a casual racist in the books.
Would that not be a clear case of "cultural appropriation", and therefore The Racism ?
So does this mean a black James Bond would be a bad thing? Because he is pretty darned white and a casual racist in the books.
He's already been played by actors from different countries, with different accents, hair colour and eye colour.
Imagine weekend at Bernie’s but with an actual corpse. From comedy classic to creepy in one go. I live in the vain hope that one day all sides of these arguments will meet in the middle and we can all stop acting like daft bastards
It really comes down to the quality of the actor.
Just look at Tom Cruise. In the Jack Reacher films, he completely convinces you he's 6'7" (or whatever) and black.
As much as I´d like Idris Elba to play 007-not cause he is black, but for my appreciation of his character Stringer Bell, a black spy in Russia is a hard sell. Even more so than a black pro-swimmer in a quirky Welsh school in netflix´s "Sex Therapy".
As much as I´d like Idris Elba to play 007-not cause he is black, but for my appreciation of his character Stringer Bell, a black spy in Russia is a hard sell.
Absolutely, we wouldn't want a Bond film to be unrealistic, would we?
It's a bit silly but I suppose if it helps people realise that theres huge variation between people of different skin colours.
Would people be upset if Hitler was played by Owen Wilson ?
Sequence 2 random African's genomes & a random European genome & it's more likely that the European & 1 African will be more closely related than the 2 Africans.
Honestly, isn’t this just getting more than a little bit petty?
Probably to you but you're not black so realistically have no skin in the game
Probably to you but you’re not black so realistically have no skin in the game
Did you just tell someone what skin colour they aren't and that their skin colour means that their opinion is not important ?
You could have argued that James Bond could use masks if infiltrating in such territories, or that they could develop gadgets that temporarily play with an enemies perception, instead you chose to be condescending.
I would also like for James Bond to stop being such a supersoldier. I never enjoyed the pouting crossfitter look.
Judging from almost every commercial I see on TV, everybody is married to somebody black and has two lovely mixed-race children so at the present rate by the year 2500 we will all be a beautiful coffee colour like Lewis Hamilton and Tiger Woods so the question won't arise any more.
I told someone who white that they probably don’t appreciate the various facets of racism, striving for equality and how it affects bame people and how their opinions may reflect this, but you knew that as you’re just trolling as normal
Surely Smith only has to identify as more black and the problem is solved?
Similarly, the OP. only has to identify as being coloured and kilo will have nothing to complain about.
Personally, I'm glad it's now Ash Wednesday as I can go back to identifying as a pancake.
I doesn't appear to be a widely held view thankfully. I mean really, some people think that a Black Man, can't play a Black Man in a film because he's the wrong kind of Black Man? I mean wtaf.
Frankly the whole 'cultural appropriation' thing turns my stomach, it's corrosive and small minded.
Whilst your point is valid, it is still to some extent discriminating based on skin. You are in effect assuming that a person with a particular skin colour, will have experienced what you consider the typical challenges associated to having that skin colour, and as such have first hand knowledge that otherwise would not be available.
Frankly the whole ‘cultural appropriation’ thing turns my stomach, it’s corrosive and small minded.
Exactamundo (I am not Hispanic).
Just look at Tom Cruise. In the Jack Reacher films, he completely convinces you he’s 6’7″ (or whatever) and black.
Reacher's black?
Honestly, isn’t this just getting more than a little bit petty?
non-story whipped up by social media and frenzied tweeters.
if you look at the feeds on Twitter, in amongst the more traditional news are headings of "backlash" which constitutes a news outlet reporting something and a nobody tweeting something against it.
next up, there will be reports of a "backlash" based on YouTube comments.
Surely the only person in a position to object to who plays Richard Williams in a biopic is Richard Williams.
Surely the only person in a position to object to who plays Richard Williams in a biopic is Richard Williams.
Spot on. Otherwise what do we do? What level of difference in skin colour is acceptable?
I tell you who the worst offenders are.
The Avengers.
They had Mark Ruffalo, a white guy,“greening up” to play the Hulk, the pale skinned Paul Bettany playing a red man and Josh Brolin, rampaging about in Blue Face.
Bradley Cooper isn’t even a real raccoon FFS
Just look at Tom Cruise. In the Jack Reacher films, he completely convinces you he’s 6’7″ (or whatever) [b]and black.[/b]
Erm.... ?
Similar to Samuel L Jackson complaining that Daniel Kaluuya wasn't really suitable to play a fictional black American, it's a strange world - by this reckoning the end point is no "acting" can actually take place and so story telling becomes defunct.
by this reckoning the end point is no “acting” can actually take place
Tom Cruise was way ahead of the curve then?
Similar to Samuel L Jackson complaining that Daniel Kaluuya wasn’t really suitable to play a fictional black American, it’s a strange world – by this reckoning the end point is no “acting” can actually take place and so story telling becomes defunct.
Pfft, SLJ complains that Daniel Kaluuya doesn't know what it's like to be in a mixed race couple in America, because he's not American. I bet he's never even BEEN to Dagobah, let alone done any real Jedi training.
I reserve judgement on this issue - what's more interesting to me is the fuss about straight people playing gay characters and able people playing disabled characters. And trans characters come to think of it.
I know it's facile to say things like "next they'll be saying right-handed people can't play left-handed people", but seems to be a kernel of common sense there.
Whether it's Bryan Cranston playing a disabled person, Will Smith playing a blacker person or Rachel Weisz playing a gay woman - it basically comes down to the economics. The Rock was in a movie where his character only had one leg. It's not gonna be easy to find someone with his box office pull who actually only has one leg.
So should any other groups (apart from ethnic ones) have tacit "protected status" in how they who represents them on screen?
Frankly the whole ‘cultural appropriation’ thing turns my stomach, it’s corrosive and small minded.
It can be quite a problem though in some contexts.
What if a basic white middle class singer/songwriter decided to release a drill album? Objectively might be outstanding and do well commercially. But in doing so he's used his existing advantages to the detriment of another group of musicians who then would be unlikely to succeed as the market is already flooded.
You've heard Ed Sheeran's new album as well then Spoony?
What nobody has mentioned is the sad fact that *whisper* lots of black people use skin toning creams so as to appear less black. Michael Jackson was the stark staring bonkers example but there are plenty of others who have mysteriously become paler as the years have gone by.
It's a cream with hydroquinone, a photographic chemical. The WHO allows 2% but most American and African manufacturers are using 7% for that quick bleaching effect.
Frankly the whole ‘cultural appropriation’ thing turns my stomach, it’s corrosive and small minded.
It can be quite a problem though in some contexts.
What if a basic white middle class singer/songwriter decided to release a drill album? Objectively might be outstanding and do well commercially. But in doing so he's used his existing advantages to the detriment of another group of musicians who then would be unlikely to succeed as the market is already flooded.
In this case some people are arguing that in this case there was an opportunity to cast someone 'black' and that instead they've given it to someone 'brown'. If you're on the receiving end of the discrimination that sort of thing probably matters.
There are other roles where casting could be more gender/race/orientation blind. Would it really make a difference if Möbius in the matrix films was a white lesbian? But it wouldn't work if Laurence Fishburne tried to play the lead in a biopic of Margaret Thatcher.
You’ve heard Ed Sheeran’s new album as well then Spoony?
I was trying not think of him while I wrote that! But yea, if he decided to release a rap album about gang life then that would be a good example. As it is he just make fairly derivative songs about getting into ladies knickers with elements of rapping.
And why did edit create a new post?
What nobody has mentioned is the sad fact that *whisper* lots of black people use skin toning creams so as to appear less black. Michael Jackson was the stark staring bonkers example but there are plenty of others who have mysteriously become paler as the years have gone by.
It’s a cream with hydroquinone, a photographic chemical. The WHO allows 2% but most American and African manufacturers are using 7% for that quick bleaching effect.
So what do you infer from this? It's definitely a thing - I give you that - but what's the relevance in this context please?
So what do you infer from this? It’s definitely a thing – I give you that – but what’s the relevance in this context please?
That colorism is a thing and puts pressure on groups to try and change their appearance to make themselves acceptable to a racist/colourist market?
It can be quite a problem though in some contexts.
What if a basic white middle class singer/songwriter decided to release a drill album? Objectively might be outstanding and do well commercially. But in doing so he’s used his existing advantages to the detriment of another group of musicians who then would be unlikely to succeed as the market is already flooded.
In this case some people are arguing that in this case there was an opportunity to cast someone ‘black’ and that instead they’ve given it to someone ‘brown’. If you’re on the receiving end of the discrimination that sort of thing probably matters.
There are other roles where casting could be more gender/race/orientation blind. Would it really make a difference if Möbius in the matrix films was a white lesbian? But it wouldn't work if Laurence Fishburne tried to play the lead in a biopic of Margaret Thatcher.
I think that would be great, if we say that *this* is only for people of that race and *that* is only for another aren't we just reinventing Jim Crow for the 21st century?
That colorism is a thing and puts pressure on groups to try and change their appearance to make themselves acceptable to a racist/colourist market?
And I agree with that, just wondering if that was where Globalti was going with it.
So how do we decide if someone is the wrong colour? Do we have to break out the Pantone or RAL colour charts?
I think that would be great, if we say that *this* is only for people of that race and *that* is only for another aren’t we just reinventing Jim Crow for the 21st century?
Well that's focusing on once aspect and taking it without any nuance.
The counter argument in the high horse one upmanship stakes is that you're racist for allowing a successful person from one minority background to be written out of history thus depriving them of a role model.
The nuance is that some casting isn't/shouldn't be blind. Black Panther would still be a good film with a white lead, but after ghost in the machine that mistake thankfully wasn't going to be made. Ditto would American history x make any sense if they cast Samuel L Jackson instead of Ed Norton?
Whereas A Midsummer Nights Dream could be cast in any way you like and make no difference to the story.
Who'd have guessed that black people can be racist too? Having been taught the same curriculum that says white people are better than black people and been conditioned by the media that says white people are better than black people, they actually believe it too.
They could have cast another darker actor but if they're trying to appeal to a wider audience, we all know that lighter skin brings in the dollars.
My kids have mixed Nigerian/Scottish heritage and have a beautiful skin tone (mother's bias?) but I caught one of them trying to lighten their skin with toothpaste at 5yrs old, they'd been told by their "friends" that brown skin was dirty, brown skin looks like a monkey... The school dismissed their concerns by saying they were over sensitive, at 6yrs old they were trying to commit suicide.
We're all arguing over ID politics, it's easy to dismiss if you fit the stereotypical norm of cis white as trivial but if you vary from that by your ability, appearance, belief, gender or sexuality then it helps you identify and gain acceptance in a society where you otherwise would not.
Do we have to break out the Pantone or RAL colour charts?
Coupontone I reckon.
". Michael Jackson was the stark staring bonkers example "
He had vitiligo. Even going as little distance as Wiki can confirm that.
That aside, he was definitely, a 100% drug addled crazy man.
Did you just tell someone what skin colour they aren’t and that their skin colour means that their opinion is not important ?
I think he did, yes. Although, he’s making a bit of n assumption regarding my ethnicity.
I think what we can take away from that is nobody can possibly have an opinion on anything at all unless they are the exact same gender and ethnicity as those they’re commenting on.
Of course, this also disallows kilo from having an opinion as well...
but after ghost in the machine that mistake thankfully wasn’t going to be made.
Hmmmm, GITS is a bit of a problem, in that the fuss is being made about a character who is entirely synthetic, apart from their brain, operating in a noticeably multicultural society set in a fictional Japanese coastal city. This quotation sums it up:
“One of the core underlying themes of the Ghost in the Shell franchise is the proposition that when human consciousness and individuality, essentially the “ghost,” can exist independently of a physical body, visual identification of ethnicity is no longer relevant.”
Major Kusenagi has never looked Asian in any GITS series, either manga or animé, so none of the ‘whitewash’ arguments were valid.
Will Smith doesn't look anything like Dr Bennet Omalu either...can't remember anyone giving a stuff about that when concussion came out.
This is just nonsense of the highest order.
Whilst your point is valid, it is still to some extent discriminating based on skin. You are in effect assuming that a person with a particular skin colour, will have experienced what you consider the typical challenges associated to having that skin colour, and as such have first hand knowledge that otherwise would not be available
Although what you are arguing for can lead to colourblind racism.
Globalti, you sound like a racist with a chip on your shoulder.
About 20 percent of the UK population are non white, so I imagine there are a lot more mixed race couples than you think. Got a problem with mixed race marriages, eh?
independently of a physical body, visual identification of ethnicity is no longer relevant.”
Major Kusenagi has never looked Asian in any GITS series, either manga or animé, so none of the ‘whitewash’ arguments were valid.
Except that race has cultural elements as well, not just visual.
Good post ahweeshoe.
I think he did, yes. Although, he’s making a bit of n assumption regarding my ethnicity.
I think what we can take away from that is nobody can possibly have an opinion on anything at all unless they are the exact same gender and ethnicity as those they’re commenting on.
Of course, this also disallows kilo from having an opinion as well…
CBA'ed
Apologies if I've misjudged your ethnicity I based that on your oft repeated anecdote about Chinese restaurants, interest in birds being ingested into jet engines and quite terrible taste in music. Perhaps you could share your ethnicity with us.
White Irish (and Catholic (very lapsed) here).
What on earth does colorblind racism mean? and please explain how my analysis leads to it?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_blindness_(race) - see the criticism section....or you know ...google.
By indirectly arguing that race or class based sociological factors should not be taken into account when it comes to let's say.... university places,...you are essentially weighting in favour of middle and upper class whites.
I reserve judgement on this issue – what’s more interesting to me is the fuss about straight people playing gay characters and able people playing disabled characters. And trans characters come to think of it
It’s crazy! It’s like these actors are being paid to pretend to be something they’re not, the bastards.
I’m still holding out hope that they’ll renew Daredevil and actually cast a blind person as Matt Murdock. I would not like to be the fight choreographer though.
Except that race has cultural elements as well, not just visual
Wouldn't we all be a great deal better off if we regarded those two in the same way we regard sex and gender?
What if a basic white middle class singer/songwriter decided to release a drill album? Objectively might be outstanding and do well commercially. But in doing so he’s used his existing advantages to the detriment of another group of musicians who then would be unlikely to succeed as the market is already flooded.
Oh wow. I hadn't thought of that. I have now. Nah - plain daft. How can a particular musical genre be exclusively owned by any one group to the exclusion of everyone else. It's called crossover and like its biological equivalent 'evolution' it's generally for everyone's benefit.
Wouldn’t we all be a great deal better off if we regarded those two in the same way we regard sex and gender?
Well, abusive posts aside - there is a debate to be had around how transgender issues impact women's issues - eg representation in sport. And the fact that most examples of dressing up as another race are usually based on making a mockery out of those people, where as the vast majority of people who are transgender live that life because of a range of psychological through to genetic factors.
So a bit of a false equivalence there
So a bit of a false equivalence there
I would suggest that the false equivalance is in conflating culture with "dressing up as other people". That trivialises as very complex question of what culture is. And what part of sharing cultural hallmarks crosses into appropriation.
Also focussing on transgender as affecting women dismisses the transgender persons who identify as male and the complications associated with that.
My point was that culture is, at it's base, a social construct.
Gender is, at it's base, a social construct.
I do not see a false equivalence there.
Oh wow. I hadn’t thought of that. I have now. Nah – plain daft. How can a particular musical genre be exclusively owned by any one group to the exclusion of everyone else. It’s called crossover and like its biological equivalent ‘evolution’ it’s generally for everyone’s benefit.
It's almost like you completely missed the difference between inspiration and cultural appropriation.
The beetles later stuff - inspiration from Indian music
A white woman from the uk brining out an album of Bollywood music and dressing up in a sari in a cynical attempt to cash in on India's growing buying power - cultural appropriation.
I would suggest that the false equivalance is in conflating culture with “dressing up as other people”.
I would say comparing transgender issues to racial cultural issues trivialises both. On one hand, the vast majority of appropriation is done to either take the piss or oppress and the other is rooted in complex biological and environmental factors.
The huge majority of the offence around cultural appropriation isn't based on say, a white guy growing up in a more racially diverse and poor setting and becoming Eminem. Those cases are few and far between and people like Eminem are good at walking that tightrope because they recognise the fact they are the products of two different cultures and show self awareness of it.
Regarding race as something fluid and purely cultural that anyone can attain, would also contribute to colourblind racism. It also lets racists use culture as their weapon of choice.
. On one hand, the vast majority of appropriation is done to either take the piss or oppress and the other is rooted in complex biological and environmental factors.
So you've never had a curry then? Your view of "appropriation" which may not be appropriation at all is incredibly narrow an blinkered. Just about every form of popular music is "appropriated".
Culture,where it intersects with race, is equally rooted in "complex biological and environmental factors". We just haven't got as far down the road as we have with gender to enable us to have sensible and dispassionate debates about it.
Regarding race, at it's biological base, as purely cultural would be as wrong as saying sex is cultural.
For the record *I* didn't compare transgender and racial cultural differences. I compare gender and culture as constructs.
So you’ve never had a curry then?
Depends how you have a curry.
Because you like curry - fine.
Because you dress up like General Neill when you do it - probably racist
Because you're Jamie Oliver and want to make some money and invent Jerk Rice - appropriation of Caribbean culture. Or Lloyd Grossman curries. Both of these are probably quite weak examples TBH but do fit the mould of white guys doing something mediocre with ease where some Indian or Caribbean chef could do something better but doesn't have the opportunity.
First I’ve heard of this, it seems that having an actor who’s a person of colour playing another person of colour is unacceptable if the actor isn’t black enough!
Makes perfect sense. You definitely wouldn't cast an Indian or a Chinese to play him.
Forked has it... 😳
If you like curry but don't ascertain that it is made by tamils, benefitting only tamils, is that appropriation? Isn't that exactly the problem that the OP is pointing out - if you are not Tamil but are really good a making curries you shouldn't be allowed to profit from it?
Makes perfect sense. You definitely wouldn’t cast an Indian or a Chinese to play him.
I bet they would in Bollywood and turn his life in to a musical at the same time.
Right I’ve read up on this and as an oppressed northerner I’m going to verbally beat the shit out of anyone wearing a flat cap who doesn’t use the M62. Definitely puts knife crime, Brexit and global warming into context...
beat the shit out of anyone wearing a flat cap who doesn’t use the M62.
On ya go
Culture,where it intersects with race, is equally rooted in “complex biological and environmental factors”.
There is more genetic variation within the races than there are between them, very little variation can actually be attributed to genetics. Off the top of my head there are only a few variations found with any consistency - eg melanin, gingerism and sickle cell - none of which really matter in the grand scheme of things. There are however, plenty of studies that attribute aspects of transgenderism to genetics or biology. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_transsexuality#Genetics
Again, you aren't comparing like for like, humans haven't evolved separately for long enough for there to be significant variations between groups - but there is a shit load of variation within them.
Great, another thing for people to get pissy about.
In the Bob Dylan biopic "I'm not There", multiple actors played different incarnations of Bob Dylan including Cate BLanchett (a woman) and Marcus Carl Franklin (*whispers* black *whispers*) and nobody batted an eyelid......other than to say the film was a bit cack
In Star Wars: The Force Awakens, Lupita Nyongo'o played Maz Katana, nobody mentioned she wasn't the right shade of orange or a shortsighted alien midget at any point.......and the guy that dresses up as Chewbacca is white.
If the guy can act the part, who cares if he's a couple of shades further up the B&Q paint chart, I'm sure not every part of the film will be 100% accurate and every interaction every character has probably won't be with a person of the right height/colour/age/personality, but it's not like the local Klan membership are playing the lead roles
very little variation can actually be attributed to genetics. Off the top of my head there are only a few variations found with any consistency – eg melanin, gingerism and sickle cell
True around 6.5%. Your list is missing quite a lot.
You also missied the culture part and went straight to race. Culture is influenced by genes and in turn influences genes. Hence intersection.
but there is a shit load of variation within them.
Yeah, makes you think that separating race and culture might be an idea, maybe treating them like we do sex and gender, because the primary basis for both the former is genetic and immutable and the other is largely a social construct.
In Star Wars:
Episode 1, or 4 depending on which way you look at it, rumour has it there was not one non-white person involved, even in the storm trooper suits, which is why James Earl Jones got the voice over gig.
If the guy can act the part, who cares if he’s a couple of shades further up the B&Q paint chart
I don't know, could Ben Kingsley get away with Ghandi, these days? It was as close to blackface as there's been in film since Al Jolson.
could Ben Kingsley get away with Ghandi, these days?
Only with approval from the man himself.