Ethnic Revisionism - Mary: Queen of the Multicultural Scots

Undividual

The WAG and I went to see The Favourite last week and Mary: Queen of the Scots tonight.

Both movies are based in ye olden times. Both were ok (The Favourite was far better IMHO). One thing that stuck out like a sore thumb in M:QotS was the inclusion of black and Asian actors/actresses in prominent roles. The envoy for the British monarch was a black man and her lady in waiting was an Asian woman. Apparently a black actor can play a white historical character though the opposite is problematic.

What was interesting is that these were included without any comment on their race. Effectively, their ethnicities were ignored within the film while simultaneously ignoring the supposed real-life impact such placements would have resulted in. For example, a scene where the black envoy is kissing a white lady in waiting is not commented on for being (what I assume would have been) semi-scandalous at the time.

I don't know if this kind of thing is a response to 'Oscars so White' etc, but it pretty much broke the 4th wall for me. The movie 'A Knights Tale' did something similar but it was much more light-hearted, and thematically it was a timeless story. It seems bizarre to do the same with a historical piece.

'Mary' overall was fairly ideologically inconsistent, with her on the one hand being a devout Catholic and on the other being completely tolerant of a gay man (who wore ladies clothing and had it away with her hubby).

Sonic Youth

It's a retarded concept I agree.

sk8erboii

LOL. Someone actually typed that all out

Reverse snow-flake syndrome.

Dakotabigone

I’m semi erect, am I doing this right?

Sonic Youth

sk8erboii wrote: »

LOL. Someone actually typed that all out

Reverse snow-flake syndrome.

I take it you would have no issue with white actors playing Zulu chiefs or Japanese Emperors?

Undividual

sk8erboii wrote: »

LOL. Someone actually typed that all out

Reverse snow-flake syndrome.

Good "point"

pjohnson

sk8erboii wrote: »

LOL. Someone actually typed that all out

Reverse snow-flake syndrome.

Theres really not much of the old "snowflake" threads in AH these days. Just people offended by everything now.

sk8erboii

Sonic Youth wrote: »

I take it you would have no issue with white actors playing Zulu chiefs or Japanese Emperors?

? Loved the last samurai tbhfam

Undividual

Sonic Youth wrote: »

I take it you would have no issue with white actors playing Zulu chiefs or Japanese Emperors?

I think the best suited actor should play the role. I'm not a fan of white people playing Eqyptians etc.

Cloud Atlas is a good example (or twelve) of where Hollywood gets it badly wrong by assuming that make up can change ethnic appearance.

Gimme A Pound

Yeah fantastic mini-series adaptation of Les Miserables (no singing) on BBC at the moment with Javert, the police inspector played by a black actor, David Oyelowo. He's excellent but doesn't this colour-blind approach lack sense when there are also films revolving around skin colour? A black man would not have been a senior police officer in Paris in the first half of the 19th century.

In The Handmaid's Tale novel also, black people are expelled from Gilead once the regime comes into effect - yet this aspect is disregarded in the television series. It's not a *problem* per se, it's a fictional novel, but it's still not just a vague little detail. Gilead takes the Old Testament literally and black people are The Children of Ham according to some extremely fundamentalist interpretations. I guess maybe it wasn't feasible for such a huge television project to cast absolutely no black people whatsoever.

Undividual

pjohnson wrote: »

Theres really not much of the old "snowflake" threads in AH these days. Just people offended by everything now.

Hang on, are you offended by others being offended?

To be clear I'm not offended, just bemused. A perfectly watchable film was made worse by a politically motivated decision.

Sonic Youth

sk8erboii wrote: »

? Loved the last samurai tbhfam

Any issue with white actors playing characters in a film set in ancient China?

sk8erboii

Francesca Sour Stomach wrote: »

Yeah fantastic mini-series adaptation of Les Miserables (no singing) on BBC at the moment with Javert, the police inspector played by a black actor, David Oyelowo. He's excellent but doesn't this colour-blind approach lack sense when there are also films revolving around skin colour? A black man would not have been a senior police officer in Paris in the first half of the 19th century.

In The Handmaid's Tale novel also, black people are expelled from Gilead once the regime comes into effect - yet this aspect is disregarded in the television series. It's not a *problem* per se, it's a fictional novel, but it's still not just a vague little detail. Gilead takes the Old Testament literally and black people are The Children of Ham according to some extremely fundamentalist interpretations. I guess maybe it wasn't feasible for such a huge television project to cast absolutely no black people whatsoever.

Make a movie about race: Its SJW pandering
Make a movie NOT about race: Its SJW pandering

some people should just admit they dont like seeing brown people onscreen

sk8erboii

Sonic Youth wrote: »

Any issue with white actors playing characters in a film set in ancient China?

What like that matt damon movie?

Who cares legit lol

the real answer is that movies are products that cater to a demographic that is no longer euro-centric. Hence the inclusion of asians and blacks.

I really sincerely do not care

pjohnson

Undividual wrote: »

Hang on, are you offended by others being offended?

To be clear I'm not offended, just bemused. A perfectly watchable film was made worse by a politically motivated decision.

Nope just amused.

Undividual

Francesca Sour Stomach wrote: »

In The Handmaid's Tale novel also, black people are expelled from Gilead once the regime comes into effect - yet this aspect is disregarded in the television series. It's not a *problem* per se, it's a fictional novel, but it's still not just a vague little detail. Gilead takes the Old Testament literally and black people are The Children of Ham according to some extremely fundamentalist interpretations. I guess maybe it wasn't feasible for such a huge television project to cast absolutely no black people whatsoever.

Thank you. This is my new 'annoyance-fact', to be deployed the next time my GF watches that drivel.

Undividual

sk8erboii wrote: »

What like that matt damon movie?

Who cares legit lol

the real answer is that movies are products that cater to a demographic that is no longer euro-centric. Hence the inclusion of asians and blacks.

I really sincerely do not care

You're cool!

Sonic Youth

sk8erboii wrote: »

What like that matt damon movie?

Who cares legit lol

the real answer is that movies are products that cater to a demographic that is no longer euro-centric. Hence the inclusion of asians and blacks.

I really sincerely do not care

Fair enough if you don't care but I think it's pretty stupid putting black characters in historical settings in which they would have not existed for the sake of cheap 'diversity'.

I suspect you would care if a white actor portrayed a historical black person...

Gimme A Pound

sk8erboii wrote: »

Make a movie about race: Its SJW pandering
Make a movie NOT about race: Its SJW pandering

some people should just admit they dont like seeing brown people onscreen

And then there are others who would question white folks being cast as black historical characters in the very same manner.

Nobody said "make a movie not about race: it's sjw pandering."

And of course there's no issue with "brown" people in film or tv. E.g. Moonlight would be pretty sh1t without "brown" actors.

Undividual

pjohnson wrote: »

Nope just amused.

Your amusement offends me!!! WHAT COLOUR ARE YOU!?!?!

Dyr

sk8erboii wrote: »

LOL. Someone actually typed that all out

Reverse snow-flake syndrome.

Typing isn't that much of an effort for grown ups.

whisky_galore

It's a movie, a piece of fluff/entertainment.

If you want accuracy, go watch a documentary, or better still read a book.

sk8erboii

Francesca Sour Stomach wrote: »

And then there are others who would question white folks being cast as black historical characters in the very same manner.

Nobody said "make a movie not about race: it's sjw pandering."

Nah its a thing. Some people refuse to watch true detective season 3 because the lead actor is black, despite the show not even being concered marginally about that

Undividual

Bambi wrote: »

Typing isn't that much of an effort for grown ups.

It seems like English is the problematic part nowadays.

Sonic Youth

sk8erboii wrote: »

Nah its a thing. Some people refuse to watch true detective season 3 because the lead actor is black, despite the show not even being concered marginally about that

That's silly but surely you have the brainpower to understand why putting coloured actors into historical dramas for the sake of ' diversity' is equally silly?

sk8erboii

Bambi wrote: »

Typing isn't that much of an effort for grown ups.

Im so grown up i write paragraphs on boards.ie because i saw a brown guy on the telly

Gimme A Pound

sk8erboii wrote: »

Nah its a thing. Some people refuse to watch true detective season 3 because the lead actor is black, despite the show not even being concered marginally about that

Like who? But anyway, I don't see them here so why bring it up?

I'm loving series three of True Detective, and I love that actor in general.

Sardonicat

Really is it any different to having a blonde haired, blue eyed Jesus as we did in years gone by? I'm not sure there has ever been an "ethnically correct" actor cast in that role.

sk8erboii

Sonic Youth wrote: »

That's silly but surely you have the brainpower to understand why putting coloured actors into historical dramas for the sake of ' diversity' is equally silly?

Mate if we’re talking about ‘brainpower’ surely you’d know the distribution of that movie is going to chinese markets?

FunLover18

I haven't seen the Mary film but I have seen The Favourite, race is not a theme of the film and the diverse actors aren't playing named characters nor do they have any lines. The film is far from historically accurate in terms of clothing and actual history so I don't see why shouldnt play it loose with the casting.

Undividual

sk8erboii wrote: »

Im so grown up i write paragraphs on boards.ie because i saw a brown guy on the telly

Maybe you'll understand when you're a skater man.

Sonic Youth

sk8erboii wrote: »

Mate if we’re talking about ‘brainpower’ surely you’d know the distribution of that movie is going to chinese markets?

And? Why do you keep dodging my question. Here I'll simplfy it even more and hopefully you'll get it: let's say there's a movie made about the slave rebellion in Haiti, one of the rebel leaders is portrayed by a white actor for 'diversity'.

Would that be ok?

Undividual

FunLover18 wrote: »

I haven't seen the Mary film but I have seen The Favourite, race is not a theme of the film and the diverse actors aren't playing named characters nor do they have any lines. The film is far from historically accurate in terms of clothing and actual history so I don't see why shouldnt play it loose with the casting.

Sorry, I was just contrasting Mary with the Favourite. For me, the Favourite did it correctly. They didn't use inaccurate ethnicities to play roles yet they took some liberties with the fashion and used relatively edgy camera shots for the genre.

sk8erboii

Sonic Youth wrote: »

And? Why do you keep dodging my question. Here I'll simplfy it even more and hopefully you'll get it: let's say there's a movie made about the slave rebellion in Haiti, one of the rebel leaders is portrayed by a white actor for 'diversity'.

Would that be ok?

Cringe. Your strawman transition is rough man.

Brass tacks: guy gets offended because a movie had brown people

Sonic Youth

sk8erboii wrote: »

Cringe. Your strawman transition is rough man.

Brass tacks: guy gets offended because a movie had brown people

Why do you keep dodging the question?

Gimme A Pound

Actually just recently watched a documentary on the American War of Independence - a mixed race woman said she didn't agree with the musical Hamilton deliberately casting black and Latino actors as historical political figures who were white, seeing as black and Latino people of the time could not have hoped to be in such positions.

Hardly a racist take - it's a take I'd share.

Sardonicat wrote: »

Really is it any different to having a blonde haired, blue eyed Jesus as we did in years gone by? I'm not sure there has ever been an "ethnically correct" actor cast in that role.

Well we don't exactly know what Jesus looked like and that depiction of Christ does get questioned. I think he should be depicted as an Arabic looking dude.

sk8erboii

Sonic Youth wrote: »

Why do you keep dodging the question?

‘Let me ask you a particularly tailored question to pigeonhole you into mental gymnastics to deflect the bottom line that some guy was pathetic enough to write an entire paragraph cause a brown guy was in a movie’

Cringe.

Sonic Youth

sk8erboii wrote: »

‘Let me ask you a particularly tailored question to pigeonhole you into mental gymnastics to deflect the bottom line that some guy was pathetic enough to write an entire paragraph cause a brown guy was in a movie’

Cringe.

It was a very simple, fair question. Don't know why you can't just answer it.

Undividual

whisky_galore wrote: »

It's a movie, a piece of fluff/entertainment.

If you want accuracy, go watch a documentary, or better still read a book.

I obviously don't think as little of movies as you. To label the unbelievable achievements of cinema over the past hundred years as fluff is mind boggling.

Have you even seen 2 Fast, 2 Furious?!?!

sk8erboii

Sonic Youth wrote: »

It was a very simple, fair question. Don't know why you can't just answer it.

I already did. Its a pretty low IQ method of deflecting questions.

Its called ‘Leading Questions’ and its banned in court because annoying c*nts (lawyers) use it to derail arguments


http://www.trialtheater.com/articles/leadingquestions.htm

Gimme A Pound

FunLover18 wrote: »

I haven't seen the Mary film but I have seen The Favourite, race is not a theme of the film and the diverse actors aren't playing named characters nor do they have any lines. The film is far from historically accurate in terms of clothing and actual history so I don't see why shouldnt play it loose with the casting.

Well I'd agree there in fairness.

Undividual

sk8erboii wrote: »

‘Let me ask you a particularly tailored question to pigeonhole you into mental gymnastics to deflect the bottom line that some guy was pathetic enough to write an entire paragraph cause a brown guy was in a movie’

Cringe.

Me fail English? That's unpossible!

Are you just jealous of people who can write in paragraphs?

sk8erboii

Undividual wrote: »

Me fail English? That's unpossible!

Are you just jealous of people who can write in paragraphs?

Dont need to write paragraphs for my Phd thankfully

Sonic Youth

sk8erboii wrote: »

I already did. Its a pretty low IQ method of deflecting questions.

Its called ‘Leading Questions’ and its banned in court because annoying c*nts (lawyers) use it to derail arguments


http://www.trialtheater.com/articles/leadingquestions.htm

I just want to know your take on white actors playing historical people of colour, or appearing in historical settings that they would not have appeared in.

Why not just give your opinion?

Undividual

sk8erboii wrote: »

I already did. Its a pretty low IQ method of deflecting questions.

Its called ‘Leading Questions’ and its banned in court because annoying c*nts (lawyers) use it to derail arguments


http://www.trialtheater.com/articles/leadingquestions.htm

Meta

Gimme A Pound

Undividual wrote: »

I obviously don't think as little of movies as you. To label the unbelievable achievements of cinema over the past hundred years as fluff is mind boggling.

Have you even seen 2 Fast, 2 Furious?!?!

Extremely dishonest to dismiss movies as pieces of fluff. That Spielberg eh, with his nonsense auld Schindler's List?

Some movies are pieces of fluff and some are examinations of really important topics and events.

That said though, The Favourite isn't trying to be historically accurate.

sk8erboii

Sonic Youth wrote: »

I just want to know your take on white actors playing historical people of colour, or appearing in historical settings that they would not have appeared in.

Why not just give your opinion?

My opinion: I really dont care

You: keep pushing the race angle

Me: Keeps pointing out derailment

You: ‘But why wont you get derailed?’ (;

I guess i already have but atleast i pointed it out

Lone Stone

If it's a historical film it should be cast correctly if it's a work of fiction no probs. But if they made a film film say about the rising and some black lads declared the declaration of Independence it's just sjw culture trying to rewrite the past and that's not good for anyone.

whisky_galore

Undividual wrote: »

I obviously don't think as little of movies as you. To label the unbelievable achievements of cinema over the past hundred years as fluff is mind boggling.

Have you even seen 2 Fast, 2 Furious?!?!

It's entertainment, Hollywood, some names, events, etc have been changed, it's not an entirely factual account and people are whinging about accuracy. If you're looking for facts, look elsewhere, it's that simple. Shakespeare's plays are great art, but they're not factual.

Gimme A Pound

It's always the "I don't care" folk who get intensely involved.

FunLover18

IMO it's bad enough that people weren't allowed to rise to positions of power purely because of the colour of their skin without now telling them they can't even pretend to be a person in a position of power for the same reason. Unless it's a true historical drama where race is an important theme or crucial to the story, or you're casting real life people, I don't see the issue. But to limit black people to playing slaves and people in poverty in historical films because they're black doesn't sit right with me.