brazil84, you have been admonished on this point, previously, so we will make this an official Warning. Making a big deal about your little claim that you are not going to respond to another poster is not in any material way different than announcing that you have put that poster on your Ignore List.
This is a Warning to refrain from doing this again.
[ /Moderating ]
No, the issue that really stuck with me was the snow-capped mountains in the background of the Bronx (given that the movie was filmed in Vancouver, I think).
And no, I’m in agreement with you, and was just kidding. Jackie Chan movies are [used to be] live-action cartoons, so why not have a cartoon version of a gang? They’re just there to stand patiently in line waiting for JC to go all chop-socky on them anyhow. I am also going to admit that Bronx gangs don’t ride around in dune buggies or whatever their little conveyances were, nor do hovercraft often come into play. It was still good cartoon fun (and the make-up and costuming of the gang, which some Chinese casting/wardrobe director(s) apparently selected from vague memories of Guys 'n Dolls and West Side Story, was amusing rather than socially offensive to me).
And their latina friend isn’t too bright either, so what? The receptionist is a black guy man who bakes lemon squares to die for and is so gay, I’m waiting for him to burst into flames.
It seems to me that this PC you’re rallying against is simply the evolution of society and the restuffling of roles. This is formulatic tv, my friend.
It’s always been this way, the difference is you now have non white people as leads. There will always be a pretty, attractive lead with a sidekick, maybe two. Sometimes the sidekick will be smarter, sometimes not so…usually fat.
The difference is now, lead characters have a better chance of being played by someone who isn’t white. That’s evolution of the medium.
I confess I don’t understand what your issue here is. Would you rather have segregated tv?
For every Cory in the house, or Raven or True VP, there are shows in which there are no main black characters: Hanna Montana, Icarly, or Jake and Joss and the list goes on.
Does it bother you that Hanna Montana’s brother is a dufus? He’s a white male? Icarly’s brother…dufus and a white male. Jake and Joss, both Dufus; their sister is the bright one, as is their mother. Father…wait for it, dufus.
Or does it only bother you when they are dufus to non-white leads?
Now let’s take those earlier mentioned shows. Cory in the house. Who’s the smartest character? The women, Meena their friend, the President’s daughter, Sophie and the president’s assistant Samantha.
Raven? Raven, her mother and Chelsea (the white one) are smarter than the Eddie and Raven’s father… BUT all of them are dumber than the little brother…who’s black…opps.
True VP, yes she is the most talented one, however she has two sidekicks, Lulu and Ryan neither of who are too bright. Her foil, a white woman is her (True’s) equal and rival. Once again the women, regardless of color are the ones who are the smartest.
See the pattern? It’s not race, it’s mostly about gender; if you want to have something to go all anti-pc about…
I doubt I could make it any clearer.
I’m not sure what your point is. I agree that there are shows with no main black characters, but the big dufus or bad guy on such shows is typically not a black person.
A little bit, yeah.
It’s about race and gender both. shodan’s pecking order hypothesis probably has some validity.
[quote=“brazil84, post:204, topic:485592”]
I’m not sure what your point is. I agree that there are shows with no main black characters, but the big dufus or bad guy on such shows is typically not a black person. [\QUOTE]
I’m trying to understand what you wrote here.
You appear to be making two arguments, one is that on intergrated shows, the dufus is played by a white male, just like it is on the majority of all shows; but somehow that’s wrong when it’s a black lead.
The second argument and I may be misreading what you wrote, is that on all white shows there are no black people at all, but if there was he should be a dufus or bad guy.?
My point was that you rail against the 5% shows, that have same formula that the 95% others do; but only focus on their having a white males as dufus as opposed to those with an all white cast, which have the same setup. This is my disconnect with you and it may be me:
The majority of shows mentioned on disney have a formula.
That formula is, attractive lead and sidekick. When the sidekick is a man, usually he will be a dufus.
The majority of shows will have a mostly white cast, because of that; the dufus will be a white male.
That bothers you…a little bit.
When the show has an interracial cast. It has a formula. The formula is exactly the same as that of the all white cast; except that the lead is no longer white; but the dofus may be. That bothers you much more than a little bit; because they don’t give the roles of dufus to other blacks and instead leave the role open for the white dufus, as every other show does?
How do you see that playing out in a show that has three main charactes? Would two people have to be the same race, playing the lead and dufus, in order to not bother you so much? Again it only bothers you a little in the all white shows, with the white male as dofus, but bothers you much more with an interracial cast.
What’s funny, is there are some who would say that because of racism and statistical data; they (the TV peope) believe that having a certain ratio of blacks vs whites on a show avoids the tipping point that will make the show a ‘black’ show and therefor reduce the market. So by having a white male character, especially in the time tested position of dufus to smart, talented and attractive women, is a familiar receipe that would allow white people to be comfortable watching an intergrated show.
I wouldn’t however call that theory… PC.
Actually, what I’m saying is a bit broader than that. On integrated shows, the dufus (if there is one) tends to be played by a non-black.
Well, if it’s a typical all-white show (with at most a token black), then it’s hardly surprising that the dufus should be played by a white person. Who else would play that role? Similarly, if it’s an all-black show, it’s hardly surprising that the dufus would be played by a black person.
No, I’m not saying that.
I don’t understand your point here.
What would not bother me so much is if everyone got their turn in the barrel, i.e. if multiracial shows sometimes had a black person as the big idiot of the show. I’m not sure how to make it any clearer.
I’ve given you examples, using the very shows you railed against, to show that
a. the black characters play the fool on those shows
b. the majority of the time ALL the men are played for fools, regardless of color.
c. that when there is a fool, the role is often shared between characters; BIG idiots are a dying breed.
Cheslea (white girl)and Eddie (black male) shared the role; this ignores that Raven herself often performs ‘slapstick’ humor and often gets her predictions wrong. She’s black.
Lulu (latina)and Ryan(white male) share the role In True Jackson
Cory(black male) and Newt (white male) share the role and Cory often plays the fool.
Let me ask you question: the Suite life of Zack and Cody (which you mentioned), has one main black character Mr. Moseby. Does it bother you that while he is often the foil of the boys, he’s not the big idiot?
I like this show, because it’s big enough to mess with, as opposed to having 3 main characters, you have an ensemble cast.
The only true idiot on that show is London Tipton (asian). The rest have idiot moments, including Moseby which are shared amongst the cast.
So if you had to restuffle the cast, jhow you would in order not to be bothered, cast Moseby as big idiot? I mean really, you have to use the existing cast; how do you make it not as bothersome?
Are you sure? For example, there is a scene where Raven reads Chelsea’s mind and hears crickets chirping. Are there similar scenes with Eddie?
From what I saw, that just is not true.
From what I saw, that just is not true.
Just looking at that particular show, no. But in general, yes.
Actually I think that Arlen (white male) also plays the role of dufus, although London fits that role more strongly.
Does there have to be one big idiot? If so, I would choose at random.
[quote=“brazil84, post:208, topic:485592”]
Are you sure? For example, there is a scene where Raven reads Chelsea’s mind and hears crickets chirping. Are there similar scenes with Eddie?
[quote]
I think this may be subjective matter. Chelsea may have had crickets, but Eddie often says and does stupid things; they **both **are foils for Raven…equally. Who herself plays the fool.
(on True Jackson VP) You admit you didn’t see very much of it.
(on Cory in the house)
Sure it is, it’s just displayed in different ways. Newt is an innocent, he’s not ‘street’ smart, but he has his moments. Cory often ends up in stuck in lizard costumes, or stuck on giant balls taking a header into a giant clam. Newt misunderstands things.
There’s an episode in which Newt won’t kiss a girl, because he promised he would save his first kiss for his camp girlfriend when they were 8, he’s what, 16-17?
As part of the plan to break him out of his promise, Cory opens a kissing booth, which is sold out. Only Newt refuses to do it, and the girls want their money’s worth. Fair enough, Cory likes the ladies…only the girls have been offered and accepted super-strong garlic balls and Cory has to take one or a hundred for the team.
In the end, Newt is reunited with his first love and finds closure; while Cory is looking for the biggest bottle of mouthwash on earth.
Which one is the biggest fool? I submit they share the role, but ulitmately it’s Cory, because it’s his schemes that awry and he ends up covered glue or food or tossed out a window; while his friends usually avoid the worst of it.
As I said, the role of the big idiot; the foil for the stars, has become more and more a shared role. One character may say something silly, the other may do something silly.
So if I have an actor who’s really good a being the ‘straight’ man, i shouldn’t give him the job, because I wanted to pick names out of hat?
YMMV, of course.
Like what? Does the show constantly make jokes which play on Eddie being stupid?
That’s true, but from what I saw, the white guy was clearly supposed to be a lot dumber than either girl. Can you describe some dialogue from the show which contradicts this?
I would have to see the episode, but it sounds to me like the intended humor there is that the simpleton ends up better. Kind of like Gilligan on Gilligan’s Island in some episodes.
Presumably, the role of idiot is assigned before the show is even cast. So I don’t think your question would come up.
ETA: But if somehow the role of “idiot” is determined after the show is cast, I don’t have any objection to assigning the role to the most qualified idiot (haha) without respect to race or sex.
Using the same joke? Why would they, the writers do that?
30 Rock absolutely does that.
There’s:
-The old white male who is frighteningly brilliant, aggressive, and amoral;
-The middle-aged white woman who is unconvincingly frumpy, nerdy, and insecure;
-The middle-aged white man who’s kind of a straight man;
-The middle-aged white woman who’s a totally shallow ditz;
-The young black man who’s completely insane, unless it’s just an act, but it’s pretty clearly not an act;
-The young white man who’s the reincarnation of Pollyanna via Deliverance.
The first three characters are the most admirable ones, for their different traits. Tracy, the black man, is not admirable.
Admittedly I don’t watch that much TV, and what I do watch tends not to be all that multiracial, and what is multiracial doesn’t have a clear doofus (Weeds doesn’t have one, The Wire doesn’t have one, BSG isn’t multiracial, Firefly doesn’t have one, etc.) But I don’t think this pattern of yours is nearly so clear as you think. 30 Rock keeps getting touted as one of the best, if not the best, comedy on TV these days. If there were a pattern, it oughtta show up here.
No.
:shrug: That may very well be so. I concede the possibility that the PC phenomenon I have observed does not infect every TV show.
This is so obvious I was wondering how long it would take to come up. The ad agency doesn’t want to face accusations of racism or anything else - and after all, the race of the burglar really doesn’t matter to the ad other than to portray a burglar, so why would you want to buy into trouble by even suggesting the possibility of racial sterotyping.
For the record, I do. He’s got a certain irresistible bad-boy charm. I just want to hop on the back of his motorcycle and ride into the sunset! <3
Hostile Dialect,
Hostile Dialect, Narcissist
No black doofuses allowed. Also, no black zombies.
-FrL-
Not in the stock photography world. I’ve seen a lot of interracial handshake photos online; a black man shaking a white man’s hand, a black woman shaking a white woman’s hand, but never a black man with a white woman, or a black woman with a white man.
Of course, the stock photography world is entirely different than the television world. Imagine walking down the street of a busy downtown in Stock Photography City. On your way to the presentation being given by the white woman, black woman, Asian man, Hispanic man, and white man in a wheelchair. you’d regularly be crashing into briefcase-carrying men who stop randomly to look upward at “opportunity”.
Well, we’ve addressed the lack of zombies Frylock mentioned.
Oops. I linked to this thread as an example of people complaining about the race aspects of Brinks ads (in another thread where someone complained about the lack of black criminals in the ads)…and I guess it got revived.