Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 07-14-2018, 05:34 PM
Sherrerd Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 5,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
...There is a question here though, is there a certain type of role that must be taken by an equivalent type of actor? if so, which type and why?
It's a perfectly reasonable question, to which there will never be a consensus answer. Practically speaking, the answer will be 'YES, roles are restricted in all cases in which protests take place that have a large-enough effect on the movie-going public to alarm filmmakers.'

My personal feeling is that it's good to discuss the unconscious ways in which bias plays out--and that one of those ways is in the casting of entertainment projects. Having the discussion was fair, though the malice directed at Johansson strikes me as unhelpful.

Many trans people appear to be happy that Johansson dropped out. If a major motion picture about Gill will now fail to be made, will they be as happy? Perhaps. Would a movie starring Johansson (or some star with equivalent drawing power) have brought new levels of understanding and acceptance of trans people to the masses? Is foregoing that possibility a good thing?

Absent a window into a parallel world in which the movie was made and widely viewed, we can't know. But in human affairs, the squeaky wheel does indeed get the grease. For good or ill.
__________________
__________________

Self-correction is the secret strength of freedom. ---George W. Bush, 19 October 2017
  #52  
Old 07-14-2018, 07:36 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 51,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigT View Post
They convinced Johansson that accepting this role would do more harm than good.
Well that and she probably got tired of the harassment.

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not saying that people weren't right to feel that this part should be played by a trans actor, or possibly even a cis male. But some of the backlash against her was really over the top. I mean, it was downright hateful, and I wouldn't be surprised if she was getting threats. That's just not cool.

People were acting like this was Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffanys.
  #53  
Old 07-14-2018, 08:48 PM
Lamoral Lamoral is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fenario
Posts: 1,758
Either trans-people should be regarded as being functionally the same as people who define their identity by the physical characteristics that they were born with, or they shouldn't. I happen to believe that they should, with the possible exception of certain situations like competitive physical sports. In other regards there is absolutely no reason why the physical characteristics, or sexual identity, of an actress portraying a transgender individual in a movie, should enter into the equation. The kind of people who would object to Johansson's performance in the movie are only further dividing people, rather than encouraging co-operation...do we really need any more of that at the present time?
  #54  
Old 07-14-2018, 09:28 PM
Dale Sams Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenWyvern View Post
It's strange that both lead actors in the recent gay romance Call Me by Your Name are straight, yet nobody is making a fuss that gay actors should have been used. On the contrary, the film won a number of awards.
It'll happen. Just wait.

The issue wasnt that SJ didn't look the part. It was that "She was taking a job away from a Trans actor"

Some of the more idiotic things i heard was "If they want an actor with star power and a familiar name, why don't they cast Chaz Bono."
  #55  
Old 07-14-2018, 09:33 PM
Dale Sams Dale Sams is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 3,892
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
I would take people upholding the principle of acting freedom a lot more seriously if I hadn't seen a lot of those same people complaining when the role of a white male character is recast and given to a minority or female actor.

"Oh no, Idris Elba can't play Heimdall. Heimdall's supposed to be white. Halle Berry can't play Catwoman. Catwoman's supposed to be white. Katee Sackhoff can't play Starbuck, Starbuck's supposed to be a man. Michael Clarke Duncan can't play Kingpin. Kingpin's supposed to be white. Michael Jordan can't play the Human Torch The Human Torch is supposed to be white. Morgan Freedman can't play Red. Red's supposed to be white. Judi Dench can't play M. M's supposed to be a man. Billy Dee Williams can't play Harvey Dent. Harvey Dent's supposed to be white. Women can't play the Ghostbusters. The Ghostbusters are supposed to be men. It's all a bunch of political correctness gone mad."

But take a minority character and cast a non-minority actor in the role?

"What's the matter? Haven't you ever heard of acting? You just want reverse discrimination."
Heimdell isn't Asgardian and is portrayed very much as 'other'

Morgan Freeman is Morgan fucking Freeman.

I don't think the Ghostbusters or Human Torch examples are proving your point.

I'm sure there will always be some berk complaining, but I never heard any carping about Billy Dee or Dench. I heard MUCH MORE about the blonde Bond.
  #56  
Old 07-14-2018, 10:07 PM
Chronos Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 77,367
Oh, certainly any malice directed at Johansson herself is misguided. If you're an actor and you're offered a part, you take it. Now, maybe Johansson has sufficient clout in Hollywood that she can afford to turn down roles, but she's one of very few for which that's true, and I'm sure she still remembers all too well the days before she broke through, when it wasn't true. No, if there's any scorn to be had here, it's for the casting director.
  #57  
Old Yesterday, 04:17 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 22,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Nationality seems utterly irrelevant.
Ethnicity is not, however. Mandela was a particular ethnicity (Xhosa with a large Khoisan component) not found outside South Africa.

The statement made by casting West African-ancestral (with likely a non-zero European component) American and British Blacks is "all Blacks are interchangeable." Goes right in there with general ignorance of Africa, its true size and diversity.


It's a similar statement to that made when Chinese actors are cast to play Japanese - "all you yellow people look alike to us"

Those may not be the intended statements , but those are definitely the statements heard by many PoC.

And all that leaves aside the fact that Mandela is a national icon, which is totally fucking relevant.

Last edited by MrDibble; Yesterday at 04:21 AM.
  #58  
Old Yesterday, 04:19 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 22,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Oh, certainly any malice directed at Johansson herself is misguided. If you're an actor and you're offered a part, you take it. Now, maybe Johansson has sufficient clout in Hollywood that she can afford to turn down roles, but she's one of very few for which that's true, and I'm sure she still remembers all too well the days before she broke through, when it wasn't true. No, if there's any scorn to be had here, it's for the casting director.
Does the fact that her own production company was going to be doing the movie change that for you?
  #59  
Old Yesterday, 04:31 AM
Alessan Alessan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 23,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Ethnicity is not, however. Mandela was a particular ethnicity (Xhosa with a large Khoisan component) not found outside South Africa.

The statement made by casting West African-ancestral (with likely a non-zero European component) American and British Blacks is "all Blacks are interchangeable." Goes right in there with general ignorance of Africa, its true size and diversity.


It's a similar statement to that made when Chinese actors are cast to play Japanese - "all you yellow people look alike to us"

Those may not be the intended statements , but those are definitely the statements heard by many PoC.

And all that leaves aside the fact that Mandela is a national icon, which is totally fucking relevant.
But by this logic, we would never have seen Mandy Patinkin play a Spaniard - and that's a world I don't want to live in.
  #60  
Old Yesterday, 05:21 AM
Derleth Derleth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 20,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
But by this logic, we would never have seen Mandy Patinkin play a Spaniard - and that's a world I don't want to live in.
Less humorously, that logic would mean we'd never have a movie about Nicoleño.

General rule: If your push for increased representation would result in less representation, you might want to rethink things a little bit.
  #61  
Old Yesterday, 05:33 AM
MostlyClueless MostlyClueless is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dutchia
Posts: 999
This isn't hard.

There are plenty roles available for cis white folks. If you give one of those roles to someone who isn't any of those, there will still be plenty.

There's not many roles for trans folks. If you give one of the few roles that are out there to someone who isn't, what fucking odds DO trans people have?
__________________
If it's stupid and it works, it ain't stupid.
  #62  
Old Yesterday, 07:18 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyClueless View Post
This isn't hard.

There are plenty roles available for cis white folks. If you give one of those roles to someone who isn't any of those, there will still be plenty.
Why are you assuming that a trans person is not equally able to take those roles?
  #63  
Old Yesterday, 08:56 AM
MostlyClueless MostlyClueless is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dutchia
Posts: 999
Your reading comprehension is very poor.
__________________
If it's stupid and it works, it ain't stupid.

Last edited by MostlyClueless; Yesterday at 08:57 AM.
  #64  
Old Yesterday, 09:02 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 22,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
But by this logic, we would never have seen Mandy Patinkin play a Spaniard
Yeah, it really makes me sympathetic to counterarguments when my national icon is compared to a fictional comedy character.
  #65  
Old Yesterday, 09:29 AM
Alessan Alessan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 23,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Yeah, it really makes me sympathetic to counterarguments when my national icon is compared to a fictional comedy character.
Hey, if I can deal with Charlton Heston playing Moses, you can deal with Freeman playing Mandela.
  #66  
Old Yesterday, 10:21 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 22,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
Hey, if I can deal with Charlton Heston playing Moses, you can deal with Freeman playing Mandela.
Switching from one fictional character to another doesn't really help...
  #67  
Old Yesterday, 10:38 AM
Alessan Alessan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 23,062
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Switching from one fictional character to another doesn't really help...
You said "national icon", not "historical figure".
  #68  
Old Yesterday, 10:46 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 22,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alessan View Post
You said "national icon", not "historical figure".
The fact that I contrasted it with "fictional comedy character" should have made that part obvious.
  #69  
Old Yesterday, 11:34 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyClueless View Post
Your reading comprehension is very poor.
So those roles are open for trans people too?
  #70  
Old Yesterday, 11:43 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Yeah, it really makes me sympathetic to counterarguments when my national icon is compared to a fictional comedy character.
In your mind, which (if any) of these serious and well-respected actors were bad choices to play Mandela and why?
  #71  
Old Yesterday, 12:04 PM
Chronos Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 77,367
Of course, the question isn't just how many cisgender roles there are. The question is how many are there, relative to their proportion of the population, because there are a lot more cisgender people (audience members, actors) than there are transgender people.

Of course, I suspect that even by this standard, transgender roles are still underrepresented, given that I know at least two transgender people personally, but I'm hard-pressed to think of any respectful depictions of transgendered characters in film.
  #72  
Old Yesterday, 12:20 PM
Tamerlane Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Switching from one fictional character to another doesn't really help...
Eh, Golda Meir was portrayed by Judy Davis, Ingrid Bergman and Colleen Dewhurst among others.

I get your point, but I'm not sure I agree. Generally speaking I'd rather have a tremendous actor who doesn't quite look the part than an average or mediocre actor who does. Best of both worlds would be nice and preferable, but within limits and under most circumstances I'd slot nationality/appearance a step below ability.

ETA: And of course ultimately the real determinant is usually not talent OR appearance/background, but rather availability and for big productions, financial draw. Unfortunately economics matter.

Last edited by Tamerlane; Yesterday at 12:24 PM.
  #73  
Old Yesterday, 12:46 PM
Bijou Drains Bijou Drains is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,218
A while back an actor said a lot of people did not want to play a gay role because people were afraid that people assume they were gay in real life. But he said if you play a murderer do people think you are an actual murderer?

In this case no way should she be getting all the bashing over the role.
  #74  
Old Yesterday, 01:14 PM
MostlyClueless MostlyClueless is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dutchia
Posts: 999
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
So those roles are open for trans people too?
Let's say there's 100 roles for cis people. 1 role for trans people.

Will cis people have significantly more trouble finding a role if one trans person plays a cis role? No.

Will trans people have significantly more trouble is a cis person plays a trans role?
YES.



So personally, I can't be bothered if a trans person takes up a cis role. Or if a black person gets a role written for a white person. Somehow, I think white cis male actors will still get plenty of roles somehow.
__________________
If it's stupid and it works, it ain't stupid.
  #75  
Old Yesterday, 01:31 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 51,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Ethnicity is not, however. Mandela was a particular ethnicity (Xhosa with a large Khoisan component) not found outside South Africa.

The statement made by casting West African-ancestral (with likely a non-zero European component) American and British Blacks is "all Blacks are interchangeable." Goes right in there with general ignorance of Africa, its true size and diversity.


It's a similar statement to that made when Chinese actors are cast to play Japanese - "all you yellow people look alike to us"

Those may not be the intended statements , but those are definitely the statements heard by many PoC.

And all that leaves aside the fact that Mandela is a national icon, which is totally fucking relevant.

That's because it's called acting.

Alan Rickman, an English actor, played Grigori Rasputin, a Russian Orthodox monk. Or what about Liam Neeson? Irish-Catholic, but he was cast as German business man Oskar Schindler. (AND won an Academy Award for it, I might add)

(But hey, all white people look alike. Slavic, British, what's the difference?)
  #76  
Old Yesterday, 01:55 PM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyClueless View Post
Let's say there's 100 roles for cis people. 1 role for trans people.

Will cis people have significantly more trouble finding a role if one trans person plays a cis role? No.

Will trans people have significantly more trouble is a cis person plays a trans role?
YES.



So personally, I can't be bothered if a trans person takes up a cis role. Or if a black person gets a role written for a white person. Somehow, I think white cis male actors will still get plenty of roles somehow.
All that only makes sense if you buy into the idea that there is such a thing as a "trans role". I don't. Trans people are not, and should not be restricted to what you would define as a "trans role". Those 100 roles should be open to trans people as well.
  #77  
Old Yesterday, 02:10 PM
MostlyClueless MostlyClueless is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Dutchia
Posts: 999
Totally agree. Never said otherwise. Congratulations on refuting a point I didn't even make.
__________________
If it's stupid and it works, it ain't stupid.
  #78  
Old Yesterday, 02:19 PM
The Other Waldo Pepper The Other Waldo Pepper is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 15,412
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
Or what about Liam Neeson? Irish-Catholic, but he was cast as German business man Oskar Schindler. (AND won an Academy Award for it, I might add)
In point of fact, he lost to Tom Hanks — for, uh, Philadelphia, as it happens.
  #79  
Old Yesterday, 03:51 PM
monstro monstro is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Richmond, VA
Posts: 19,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
I think that's fair, it has to be "near enough" to allow that willing suspension of disbelief.
Though of course even that can be fraught with issues. Zoe Saldana, a black woman, was subject to complaints that she wasn't "black enough" to play Nina Simone.
And those complaints were valid. They actually had to darken Zoe's complexion and put on a nose prosthetic so she could be halfway believable. That would have been acceptable sixty years ago. But today? That's insane.
  #80  
Old Yesterday, 04:18 PM
Broomstick Broomstick is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NW Indiana
Posts: 26,769
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
All that only makes sense if you buy into the idea that there is such a thing as a "trans role". I don't. Trans people are not, and should not be restricted to what you would define as a "trans role". Those 100 roles should be open to trans people as well.
They should be, but due to bias against trans people they almost always are NOT open to trans actors.
  #81  
Old Yesterday, 04:35 PM
Derleth Derleth is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Missoula, Montana, USA
Posts: 20,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
Switching from one fictional character to another doesn't really help...
First: Did you just tell a Jew that Moses was fictional? I didn't take you for the bigoted type until now.

Second: You really have no idea who Nicoleño was.
  #82  
Old Yesterday, 04:40 PM
Eonwe Eonwe is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Burlington VT
Posts: 8,279
Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyClueless View Post
This isn't hard.

There are plenty roles available for cis white folks. If you give one of those roles to someone who isn't any of those, there will still be plenty.

There's not many roles for trans folks. If you give one of the few roles that are out there to someone who isn't, what fucking odds DO trans people have?
You almost hit upon, but just miss (either by intent or just by poor word choice), what the real issue is with representation.

There are plenty of roles for for trans folks; producers and directors just choose to not cast them.

It's not that "people can't play characters who are of different race/gender/etc/etc". The problem is that that sentiment historically has primarily been applied to non cis/het/white/(thin) performers. Hollywood or Broadway have had little trouble casting white people in all sorts of roles, but struggle to give any role that is "supposed to be white" to non-white performers.

The problem with Scarlett Johansson in this role is not that she can't reasonably play a trans character, but that openly trans people are shut out of most/all roles that are not specifically trans characters. So, taking one of the rare opportunities a trans actor might have to land a role and giving it to a ciswoman further communicates that there is no room for trans actors in Hollywood.
  #83  
Old Yesterday, 04:58 PM
CarnalK CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 15,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyClueless View Post
This isn't hard.

There are plenty roles available for cis white folks. If you give one of those roles to someone who isn't any of those, there will still be plenty.

There's not many roles for trans folks. If you give one of the few roles that are out there to someone who isn't, what fucking odds DO trans people have?
That's the usual line but in this case, istm that the number of trans actors and trans specific roles are so minimal that even with good intentions, it's never going to be much.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
Of course, the question isn't just how many cisgender roles there are. The question is how many are there, relative to their proportion of the population, because there are a lot more cisgender people (audience members, actors) than there are transgender people.

Of course, I suspect that even by this standard, transgender roles are still underrepresented, given that I know at least two transgender people personally, but I'm hard-pressed to think of any respectful depictions of transgendered characters in film.
For reference, how many cis people do you personally know,?

Last edited by CarnalK; Yesterday at 04:59 PM.
  #84  
Old Yesterday, 05:25 PM
Tamerlane Tamerlane is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: SF Bay Area, California
Posts: 13,078
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derleth View Post
First: Did you just tell a Jew that Moses was fictional? I didn't take you for the bigoted type until now.
There is nothing bigoted about calling Moses fictional. He probably was:

The modern scholarly consensus is that the figure of Moses is legendary, and not historical, although a "Moses-like figure may have existed somewhere in the southern Transjordan in the mid-late 13th century B.C."

Quite a few atheist Jews I'm sure would say the same. The historicity of Jesus and Muhammed are better attested in increasing order of certitude, but hardly 100% certain themselves. Homer almost certainly didn't exist( or at least not as a sole author ).
  #85  
Old Yesterday, 05:43 PM
Alessan Alessan is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Tel Aviv
Posts: 23,062
I personally do believe Moses existed, but I can't prove it and I don't see the point in trying. That's basically my approach toward religion in general.
  #86  
Old Yesterday, 09:03 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 51,554
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Other Waldo Pepper View Post
In point of fact, he lost to Tom Hanks — for, uh, Philadelphia, as it happens.
Really? I could've sworn he won. My bad.

But I think my point still stands. You don't have to be the very exact specific ethnicity of the character you're playing.

And just as not all Africans are alike or all Asians, (and I would never say they are), nor are all Europeans. Same with all North/Center/South Americans. (Another good example -- Raul Julia, who was Puerto Rican, yet he was cast as Oscar Romero, an El Salvadoran.) I can think of a GREAT many actors and actresses who played parts of different ethnicities, and did so very well. You don't even have to LOOK like the part you're playing (look at all the make-up they put on Gary Oldman to play Winston Churchill!)

Was this the right choice for Johansson? I don't know. What angered me was the outright harassment she got, and then people started claiming, "oh good for her, she finally got 'woke'." No, she probably got tired of all the shit she was getting.
  #87  
Old Yesterday, 09:23 PM
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Trans people are not, and should not be restricted to what you would define as a "trans role".
...nobody argues this. MostlyClueless did not argue this. Read their post carefully. You are missing the nuance. Nobody has said that trans people should be restricted to what would be defined as a "trans role." The very least you can do is not present an argument completely made out of straw.
  #88  
Old Today, 12:14 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 22,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Derleth View Post
First: Did you just tell a Jew that Moses was fictional? I didn't take you for the bigoted type until now.
Facts aren't bigoted.
Quote:
Second: You really have no idea who Nicoleño was.
Didn't address that asinine argument at all. Nor will I now, except to say
a) I think you meant to say "who the Nicoleño were"
b) I didn't say Mandela had to be played by a Xhosa with Khoisan ancestry. I wasn't narrowing ethnicity down that much. Any Xhosa or Zulu actor would do. I'm OK with "Close enough" - I just, apparently, have very different ideas of what "close enough" means for Black people, compared to non-Africans.
  #89  
Old Today, 01:18 AM
eunoia eunoia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Outside Poker Flat
Posts: 1,571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinastasia View Post
...(Another good example -- Raul Julia, who was Puerto Rican, yet he was cast as Oscar Romero, an El Salvadoran.)
Raúl Juliá is an especially good example, a terrible loss to the profession.

Last edited by eunoia; Today at 01:20 AM.
  #90  
Old Today, 02:15 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by MostlyClueless View Post
Totally agree. Never said otherwise. Congratulations on refuting a point I didn't even make.
You agree that there is no such thing as a "trans role"?
  #91  
Old Today, 02:20 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broomstick View Post
They should be, but due to bias against trans people they almost always are NOT open to trans actors.
And this is by far the biggest problem.

The bias against trans people is wide and deep in many places and making a huge fuss about ring-fencing "trans roles" (whatever they might be) to my mind, does not touch upon the problem at all, it merely prolongs the myth that they are "other". It has a hint of the patronising about it.
  #92  
Old Today, 02:50 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by monstro View Post
And those complaints were valid. They actually had to darken Zoe's complexion and put on a nose prosthetic so she could be halfway believable. That would have been acceptable sixty years ago. But today? That's insane.
So your response to a wonderful black actor a playing black character in a major film production is.........."sorry, not black enough" or "not the right sort of black"? I have visions of you holding up a colour chart against the actors during the casting session. Yay! that sounds like progress.

So you seem to have problem with make-up. Compared to some physical changes made those appear to be very minor indeed.

We are getting to the point where a character's skin and physical features can be altered post-production so that a near-enough resemblance could be achieved without any physical changes at all. That should hopefully allow people to pass your blackness test without having to physically have their skin darkened or nose made bigger.
Will that help matters?

I raised the issues of a radio play before. No requirement for a physical resemblance at all. Would you have any problem then with actors playing a part not of their own ethnicity?

Personally I don't care. The only thing that should matter is the quality of the performance. Any traits central to the character that can be tweaked by make-up, costume or post-production should not form any part of the casting process. Yes, including skin colour, features, height and weight. As an actor you are playing a completely different being to yourself in the first place, that's the biggest change. The physical appearance is just window dressing.
  #93  
Old Today, 03:02 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...nobody argues this. MostlyClueless did not argue this. Read their post carefully. You are missing the nuance. Nobody has said that trans people should be restricted to what would be defined as a "trans role." The very least you can do is not present an argument completely made out of straw.
Read my own post carefully, and please don't snip out of context.

The bit you quoted is a statement of my own beliefs not a claim of what MostlyClueless said and the initial part of the full post and the preceding back and forth between us makes it clear that I know full well what they think. I got that by asking a straight question and getting a straight answer.
  #94  
Old Today, 03:15 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrDibble View Post
I didn't say Mandela had to be played by a Xhosa with Khoisan ancestry. I wasn't narrowing ethnicity down that much. Any Xhosa or Zulu actor would do. I'm OK with "Close enough" - I just, apparently, have very different ideas of what "close enough" means for Black people, compared to non-Africans.
Yes, you do. Most people really don't care that much.

The story and performance is what matters the most Otherwise we'd never be able to watch a performance of "Anthony and Cleopatra" without thinking "that Pyramid is cardboard" or "that actor is never North-African"
  #95  
Old Today, 03:17 AM
Banquet Bear Banquet Bear is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 4,008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Read my own post carefully, and please don't snip out of context.
...I read your post VERY carefully. For full context here it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
All that only makes sense if you buy into the idea that there is such a thing as a "trans role". I don't. Trans people are not, and should not be restricted to what you would define as a "trans role". Those 100 roles should be open to trans people as well.
Lets take that bit by bit shall we?

Quote:
All that only makes sense if you buy into the idea that there is such a thing as a "trans role". I don't.
Nomi Marks is a "trans role." To quote the wiki page: "Nomi is a proud transgender woman and lesbian, happily living with her wife Amanita."

Its a "trans role." It objectively is 100% a "trans role."

You don't "buy" that its a "trans role." But how on earth can you dispute it?

You are simply wrong.

Quote:
Trans people are not, and should not be restricted to what you would define as a "trans role".
Already dealt with.

Quote:
Those 100 roles should be open to trans people as well.
Who is disagreeing?

Quote:
The bit you quoted is a statement of my own beliefs not a claim of what MostlyClueless said and the initial part of the full post and the preceding back and forth between us makes it clear that I know full well what they think. I got that by asking a straight question and getting a straight answer.
There was only one way to take your quote in context.

MostlyClueless took your quote in exactly the same way as I did because what you wrote is what you wrote. If you only intended to make a statement of your own belief then there was no need to quote MostlyClueless's post. Because all that did was imply that that was a position that MostlyClueless held and you were asking them to defend it.
  #96  
Old Today, 04:58 AM
Novelty Bobble Novelty Bobble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: South East England
Posts: 7,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
Nomi Marks is a "trans role." To quote the wiki page: "Nomi is a proud transgender woman and lesbian, happily living with her wife Amanita."

Its a "trans role." It objectively is 100% a "trans role."

You don't "buy" that its a "trans role." But how on earth can you dispute it?

You are simply wrong.
Not sure what you are saying here. If you are putting forward the startling revelation that some people depicted on screen are trans people....well duh. This thread wouldn't exist were it not for that very mundane fact that I accept fully. But if that is the definition of "trans role" that you think I am challenging then I really can't help you.

As you say you appreciate clarity , I don't buy that there is any such thing as a "trans role" where "trans role" means "must be reserved for a trans actor".

What do you mean when you use the term "trans role"?

Quote:
MostlyClueless took your quote in exactly the same way as I did because what you wrote is what you wrote. If you only intended to make a statement of your own belief then there was no need to quote MostlyClueless's post. Because all that did was imply that that was a position that MostlyClueless held and you were asking them to defend it.
You don't need to read anything into what I wrote. I gave a response to what they wrote and gave a statement of my own.

If I were asking them to defend anything or challenging them I will, you know, ask them directly. You'll know it when you see it. It'll have one of these "?" on the end.

FWIW I already received a perfectly straightforward response from MostlyClueless. I'm perfectly clear that, like me, they are generally in favour of ensuring all roles are open to as wider group as possible. I'm exploring a little further why then "trans roles" should be treated any differently (I don't think they should, MostlyClueless seems to arguing that they should.....clear so far?)

So thanks for the help but I'm getting all the responses I need already.
  #97  
Old Today, 05:09 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 22,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
Yes, you do. Most people really don't care that much.
You say it like that makes it OK...
Quote:
The story and performance is what matters the most
To you.

And the implicit assumption there, anyway, is that you wouldn't be able to find a capable South African actor to play Mandela which - yeah...let's say no, shall we?
Quote:
Otherwise we'd never be able to watch a performance of "Anthony and Cleopatra" without thinking "that Pyramid is cardboard" or "that actor is never North-African"
Depends on if it's stage or screen, I make a lot more allowances for the former, but yes, I'd expect more than cardboard pyramids and poor casting choices from a modern film production of the same.
  #98  
Old Today, 05:23 AM
MrDibble MrDibble is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Cape Town, South Africa &
Posts: 22,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble View Post
In your mind, which (if any) of these serious and well-respected actors were bad choices to play Mandela and why?
Most of them are not bad choices, by themselves. Well, Morgan Freeman now would be a terrible choice. Terrence Howard was always a terrible choice.

Go back to my original statement: I don't like that they keep casting non-South Africans. As a constant thing (I can only think of one movie recently that had a local)
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:33 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2018 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017