Is your point related to anything anyone in this thread, or Dinklage himself, has actually said?
Originally it was me saying that he was absolutely entitled to state his opinion but that his opinion is purely that, his, and shouldn’t be taken by others as speaking for other dwarf actors or the community as a whole (as Disney appeared to do)
Well, if he’s absolutely entitled to speak his opinion, then we really are done. That’s all he did, casually mention an opinion.
“No” would have been fewer characters.
“casually” doesn’t quite capture his level of animation on this but yes, in general I agree.
The problem comes when people elevate his opinion above others. When organisations listen to him to the exclusion of other, equally valid opinions, from people who fear that his words can be used to limit their opportunities.
If we are sure that’s not happening then fine. No problem.
Possibly, yes. It would depend on the argument and the relevant experience/knowledge of the person making it.
But that’s not what the reply you were objecting to was discussing. MrDibble was responding to DrDeth’s position, and his position is that Dinklage not only doesn’t have a right to his position, but is actually a horrible person for taking it. That the only reason he is taking it is to try and keep other little person actors from getting the breaks he did.
And that is not an “equally valid view.” It’s like arguing that the actresses who spoke out against having to play “damsel in distress” and other stereotypical roles were actually trying to keep other actresses from getting parts. It’s like saying that the black people who spoke out against blacksploitation movies were doing so to keep other black actors from getting jobs.
It’s entirely normal that those who had to work in an exploitative system will want to try and reduce or stop that sort of exploitation once they get enough power to do so. It’s entirely expected that someone who found it demeaning to play little people stereotypes would speak out against them.
It’s clear that Dinklage’s goal is to get more little people actors, but also with meaty roles. Not to close the door in his fellow little people’s face.
Nonsense. Dinklage does have a right to his position- speaking only for himself. He is not a horrible person, but since he can get non-short person roles, he does seem to have a “I got mine, Jack” attitude. That’s somewhat selfish, but understandable. If he said he is never gonna take a "dwarf’ role again, that’s understandable. But other dwarf actors do want the work- they’d like to pay rent and eat. I don’t think he thought his offhand remark would have the repercussions it did.
And putting words in someones mouth is really a jerk move.
OK, but you’re assuming that my initial response was in someway an objection, either disagreeing with Dibble or agreeing with Deth. It was neither and the only objection I had was to the wording that Dibble used not the point he made.
It was an additional comment, an expansion of what was being said. Such a thing is possible and actually quite common.
I don’t disagree with Dinklage, he makes some valid points.
Can he? The only role I can think of that I’ve seen him in that was in no way predicated on his height was when that X-Men movie where he played the guy who invented mutant-hunting robots. Every other movie I’ve seen him in (and I’ve by no means seen his complete filmography) he’s played a role where him being a dwarf was in some way important to the character.
Like, “I’ve got mine, Jack?”
Not like that!
Rememory, I Think We’re Alone Now, Cyrano (I’m assuming), and I don’t remember clearly but I think also Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri and Pixels.
As far as I can remember (or would assume), his height in those roles was irrelevant and unremarked upon. I feel like I could be wrong about Three Billboards, though. I have no clear memory of his part in that movie.
I haven’t seen it, but he plays the title character in Cyrano, so pretty much zero chance his character being a dwarf isn’t plot-significant. Although having him be a dwarf who’s rejected not for being a dwarf, but for having a big nose, would be kind of a baller move.
Actually, having him play Christian would be even better. Or Roxanne. 
But good call out on the other films.
Funny as that would’ve been, no: he never corted his crush because he thought his height would prevent anything from happening. There is a deathbed confession where he talks about that, and where she basically calls him an idiot.
His role in Death at a Funeral also. And a few of his roles in more indie films like Knights of Badassdom. His height may be remarked on, but isn’t essential to his characterization.
Wait a minute. I thought when Dinklage speaks on matters “ex cathedra” he is always speaking as the sole representative on Earth of the Dwarf Collective.
I’d argue that one - making the secret affair partner not just a guy, but a dwarf, was supposed to indicate that the deceased wasn’t just closeted, but into weird kinky shit, too.
(Not that I’m saying that being attracted to a little person is weird or kinky, but that was the subtext I got from the film.)
Here’s the first trailer for Live Action Snow White and the Seven Bad CGI Magical Creatures.
Someone in another thread asked what I meant when I said DEI (or wokeness) could be taken too far and I kind of think…this.
I don’t understand why the “dwarves” in Snow White should be any more or less offensive than the dwarves in Lord of the Rings.
I also find Rachel Zegler’s casting as Snow White to be an odd choice, given her darker complexion. Sure, ethnicity doesn’t matter if you are casting Arial. But Snow White’s defining characteristic is “skin as white as snow”.
I’m also curious how they might have changed the story to modernize it a bit. I mean Snow White really doesn’t “do” anything in the classic Disney story. She escapes the Wicked Queen who wants to kill her for being too pretty by running off into the woods, lives with a bunch of Dwarves for a bit, gets poisoned by an apple, then wakes up after some total stranger makes out with her without her consent. I think the Dwarves toss the Queen off a cliff or something.
Also if the Queen can change her appearance, why not make herself even more “fair” instead of disguising herself as an old crone?
Dwarfs, not Dwarves.
The Queen is struck by lightning in a storm and falls off a cliff. Thus begins the long tradition of Disney villains being offed by a fall, or of their own hubris, rather than by the hero’s or heroine’s direct hand.
Well that would be cheating!
No one has skin as white as snow. Except maybe clowns. And mimes.
A better criticism might be that Rachel Zegler just does seem like the character, skin colour aside. The seven magical creatures concept is stupid, and puts a bunch of dwarf actors out of one of the few jobs they could have had. Peter Dinklage is one opinion; he does not speak for the Dwarf Collective.
I think this movie looks bad because they fucked up the story. Maybe it was a story that was not worth remaking as a live action cartoon. They don’t all work.