View Single Post
  #145  
Old 06-17-2019, 07:21 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ellis Dee View Post
Okay, then, I'll bite: When you say "sameness", what exactly are you talking about?
Exactly what he said:

Quote:
Nope....its a 'band of brothers movie.'

There's a certain quality to films that....basically...have no female roles. It simply wouldn't be the same movie if one of the roles were female.
E has set some kind of boundary around the "band of brothers" quality that e is familiar with that requires there to be no female characters. But:

(1) It's an arbitrary boundary. There's nothing inherent about it and one could easily draw other boundaries. Why focus on the absence of female characters?

(2) It's seldom that any two movies have exactly the same "X quality" anyway. Everything moves a bit this way and that way.

(3) So what if it doesn't have exactly the same quality? With every tick of the clock we're all experiencing all kinds of different qualities. That old "band of brothers" movie has "X quality." This next one will have "X +/- (Y * 10 ^ Z)" quality. Meanwhile, we might learn that the "band of brothers" quality is either (1) much more flexible than we thought, or (2) not really all that interesting, or (3) a mistaken category in the first place.

(4) You can go around until the end of time saying that "nothing's the same if we don't keep this thing purely X." It's just not the same if we start allowing girls in our club. It's just not the same if we start allowing Jews in our club. It's just not the same if we start allowing non-whites in our club. It's just not the same if we start allowing Eastern Europeans and Southern Europeans in our club, or Irish people.

That just becomes a crutch to prevent progress. In the end it serves nothing but to preserve the institutional prejudices of (in this case) the entertainment industry.

Again, the racial issue in the entertainment industry is the systematic exclusion of non-white people from and the over-representation of white men on-camera, and behind-the-camera roles. It's not because non-white people can't play certain roles. It's simply because they're not being given the opportunity to play them. And any argument that allows that to be perpetuated is disregardable.

It's all very convenient for the white men who represent the status quo power structure to say, well, if we don't preserve X, Y, Z exclusivity for white men, then you just won't get the same feeling from the next band of brothers story.

And they get to ride that argument on the back of people who combine their biases with their failures of imagination to say "oh, believe me, it just won't work."

No, actually, there's no reason to believe you.

A black man just can't be a leading man. Will Smith leads some fairly successful action films. (But!but!but! Will Smith is the only black leading man who will travel! )

A superhero movie can't be headlined a black man. Black Panther becomes the second highest grossing superhero movies of all time.

A superhero movie can't be headlined by a woman. Wonder Woman and Captain Marvel are the 9th and 10th highest grossing superhero movies of all time.

Can't can't can't. Until it can. Oh, that's an exception. Meanwhile all the bombs that were led by white men somehow are always exceptions.

It'll be the same thing. You can't have a black James Bond. You can't have a woman James Bond. You can't have a "band of brothers" movie if one of the characters is a woman. Until someone finally is allowed to make one that works.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.