I put that in the same category as comic book fans who were upset that Hugh Jackmack is around 6 feet tall while Wolverine is supposed to be a little dude around 5 foot nothing. And, yes, I’ve certainly met some who were that picky about casting choices.
This is absolutely right, and I feel pretty dumb for needing to be told it. In Spiderverse, it’s not like Morales is off fighting the Klan while a bunch of MAGA goons are calling ICE on him or anything. You can switch the race and have a story exist in a world with implied discrimination, and if discrimination fights aren’t at the forefront of the story you’re telling, that’s fine.
Of course you get to do that. That’s what literally every Marvel superhero director has done. Why would you carve out an exception to that process for when the director hires someone who’s not white to play the part of a character traditionally depicted as white? That’s ridiculous.
I’ve never read the book nor seen the movie, but in general I want a movie or a book to work on its own merits. The question for me isn’t, is the book different from the movie, but, does the Judge character work within the movie’s own story?
If not, that’s bad; and if his struggles with his own racism are the main thing that makes the character work in the book, then it’s a lost opportunity, in the same way that the final Harry Potter movie fucks up by ignoring the lovely showdown-at-high-noon climax of the book in favor of a CGI 3D mess of a final fight.
I don’t consider either of those to be “picky”. I think it is totally understandable for black people to be tired of light-skinned biracial women being the choice for a dark-skinned super heroine, especially given the lack of representation of dark skinned women in the media. And I don’t at all blame short guys who wish to see a short guy super hero given the absence of short guys in the media.
It would be nice for the folks who insist that a black Superman is nonsensical to concede the nonsensicalness of a light-skinned Storm and a tall Wolverine. If the X-Men franchise can be successful despite its decrepancies, why not other superhero flicks?
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Bah everybody going on about Asgardians having to be played by white actors is missing the fact that they are all short, grey,and baldin reality.
Re Black Panther.
Wakanda was very unrealistic. We are supposed to believe Wakandans were both closed off from the rest of the world and ridiculously culturally heterogenous? Umpossible! Yet 99% of movie goers were able to go along for the ride. The animated set-up in the beginning of the movie provided just enough information for the audience to understand Wakanda and why it exists in its current form. And that set-up was only a couple of minutes long.
There is no good reason to assume that a black Superman movie or a movie with multiracial elves couldn’t do the same thing.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
I’m mostly containing my opinion to what I consider extreme cases of fiction, like comic books. When it comes to these extreme cases of fiction (where you can pull any and everything out of your ass just because you feel like it) I honestly don’t see why a story about an alien from another planet who gets dropped on earth and basically has the power of a god has to change just because you use a different color crayon. And yes, this does extend to the non-white comic book characters as well. Spawn doesn’t stop being Spawn just because he is now white/Asian/Latino/first nation/whatever.
People in this thread are losing their shit because in their minds using a different color crayon requires the story to change so that they can continue to suspend their disbelief all while ignoring the simple fact that 95% of the shit in the story is an egregious violation of reality.
God like aliens and all that make believe bullshit is cool so long as we keep thing racially accurate? Sorry, but in my mind that says A LOT about the audience
Let’s not forget the tendency of Hollywood to use make-up that makes dark skinned actors lighter skinned than they would otherwise be, and having shorter leading men standing on boxes while next to their leading ladies (Tom Cruise being just one example).
If we could have had a five foot tall Hugh Jackman play Wolverine I would have been thrilled. Well, Jackman went and grew to six feet and there’s no fixing that now and I have to admit he did an excellent job with the character despite the liability of his excess height. But if you don’t give good roles to short male actors you’re never going to have a short leading man.
I would have been thrilled with a darker-skinned Halle Berry playing Storm. Unfortunately, the real weakness in the character wasn’t the actress, it was the wretched writing for the character. But if you don’t give good role to dark skinned actors you’ll never have a dark skinned leading lady.
It becomes a vicious cycle: “We can’t have a short leading man because there are no short male actors up to the job.” Yes, because they’ve never been given the opportunity. “We can’t have a dark skinned leading lading because there are no dark skinned female actors up to the job.” Yes, because they’ve never been given the opportunity. They don’t get those opportunities because no one with [trait] has been that opportunity. At some point someone has to take a chance. Usually several chances by several people before it all works out.
It doesn’t make sense to you, it made perfect sense to millions of others. You can present arguments for why you feel that way, but they are irrelevant to the experience of others.
As I said before, I personally, as a Norseman, find the link between Asgardians and Norse mythology annoying, but the casting of black actors I was completely fine with. The Asgardians are already so distant from their Norse Mythology inspirations the race of the actors make no difference.
I’m much more upset about scenes set in Norway using locations in other countries with geography that doesn’t exist anywhere in Norway. The place where Hela meets Loki and Thor? Absolutely not Norway. The Asgardian refuge in “Norway”? Very obviously a Scottish fishing village and nothing like the real Tønsberg
.jpg){kind=link}
Project Almanac is set in Atlanta but black people are hardly seen in the whole movie. It is jarring if you are a black person from Atlanta. But it is a movie about a conventionally attractive, socially put-together teenager with a hawt girlfriend and multiple friends who invents a time travel machine all by himself. Realism is obviously not the point of the movie.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
I was curious so I took a look through some of the threads on Captain Marvel and the twist with the Skrulls, which as far as I know is a complete inversion of their portrayal in the comics, was received well or neutrally. No one seemed to consider it problematic or a betrayal of the comics, even though, to me, it seems like a much greater change to the world of the Marvel Universe than someone’s skin color.
I think that it’s safe to say that, the more obscure a character or other fictional element is, the easier it is to change it. Everyone is familiar with Superman, but very few are familiar with the Skrulls.
It doesn’t seem to me like the root of the issue here is familiarity but one of accuracy. Both instances violate the ‘accuracy’ of the translation of the comics to the movie screen, but only the one is upsetting to some people.
Do you have a cite for that? I’m pretty plugged into both comic geek and SJW circles, and I’ve never heard of anyone having a problem with Miles being bi-racial. Usually, the fact that he’s mixed and neither half of his parentage is white is considered a major plus. You sure you didn’t mistake anti-SJW trolls for the real thing?
If you can find one person to say something you can use it to disregard an entire social issue.
I really don’t understand why some white men are so invested in this stuff. I just want to see a good acting performance. Especially with all the fictional alternate universe storytelling options.
That said, I think a black Superman would be great, but a black Clark Kent would seem odd. The long-established origin story feels pretty white to me. Just like Miles Morales isn’t Peter Parker, a black Superman would be better served, IMHO, with a different secret identity and background.
Huh. The new Supergirl made Jimmy Olsen black, and AFAICT it had like zero effect. The fact that he’s super hot is a bigger change from how I remember the character. How would it significantly change Clark Kent to say that he was black?
Hot damn.
I am confused by this. Are you saying a black Clark Kent isn’t realistic? Is this because you have a hard time imagining a black bespeckled nerd? Or is it because you can’t imagine a black reporter?
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Is DC averse to playing around with secret identities/backstories? Or at least more averse than Marvel? I’m not a big comic reader, and especially not a DC reader aside from the Vertigo stuff. (Though I did love Red Son, where Superman’s a Soviet citizen.)
It seems to me that changing a few details might make the basic backstory work. Yeah, “Clark Kent” sounds pretty white-bread, but he is an adoptee … And shoot, plenty of immigrants to the US take on very white-sounding names. (Ask my Cambodian friend Bruce. He chose that name, which is so cool.)
Aside: the IRC is claiming Superman as an example of a famous refugee you maybe didn’t think of as a refugee, which I kind of love. (Tomorrow’s the UN’s World Refugee Day.)