Sonic Youth wrote: » Agreed but no need to call the op 'pathetic'.
Undividual wrote: » To take your example, the equivalent in literary terms would be something like a novel containing a Jewish officer in the SS, where no other character makes mention of his religion/race and he acts as any other officer in the SS would. Film is uniquely placed for political intervention in this area, unfortunately.
Undividual wrote: » FunLover18 wrote: » 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. Its not for the same reason. To take it to the logical extreme of your argument would be if an actress played a man without any character in the piece commenting on it, or vice versa.
FunLover18 wrote: » 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.
sk8erboii wrote: » Thats a pretty low IQ comparison. Low hanging fruit even. You presupposed media exists in a vacuum, meanwhile not considering the context of its creation. Inclusion of asian characters in the mary movie might have something to do with its distribution company wanting to pander to asian markets. Your scenario could actually be plausible in an alternate reality where the target demographic are jews and a critique of their society
FunLover18 wrote: » I don't think that's quite the same, because I don't believe race is as intrinsic to character as gender. For me it would be more like if say in The Favourite they had had a female Tory in the background of some of the government scenes, not playing a man but a woman in a position that would have been a man's in the time of the film. I don't think the black actors in The Favourite were meant to be playing white characters, because it's not that kind of film. And it is kind of for the same reason, it's just that the intentions behind the reason are different. In olden days black people were viewed as inferior by bigots, nowadays you wouldn't cast a black man because you want to be historically accurate (and as I said I'd agree for certain projects), very, very different intentions but the reason is still skin colour.
Undividual wrote: » Stick that in your PhD. Are you saying that including Asian actresses for non-Asian roles is fine so long as its aimed at an Asian market? Do you think that Asian people want to see a movie with effectively an Asian extra, with less than 10 lines throughout the movie? Do you think that Hollywood today makes movies aimed at one market alone? It wouldn't be plausible even in that scenario, as I've already said that all the characters act as if the person was not Jewish. My example was specifically not for an alternative reality. I'm not sure you understood my point.
sk8erboii wrote: » Thats because your ‘points’ are nothing but low IQ mental gymnastics that masks the fact that you didnt like seeing brown people in a throwaway movie. You’re asking non-congruent questions that i never contested, which i may or may not agree on, that leads to ambiguation of the original point (that someone made this thread because they hated brown people in movies) that might lead to fooling someone into agreeing that tenuous first act by virtue of leading them on which works for afterhours but a lawyer friend of mine has spoiled me to these methods Hence why im spelling it out for you. Movies are no longer eurocentric. The fact that a movie about an english monarch has many minorities is one proof of this The better question is why that makes you mad
Sonic Youth wrote: » Cool. You therefore have no issue with whites being cast in roles where they never existed in reality?
sk8erboii wrote: » C- in debating class.
sk8erboii wrote: » Thats because your ‘points’ are nothing but low IQ mental gymnastics that masks the fact that you didnt like seeing brown people in a throwaway movie.You’re asking non-congruent questions that i never contested, which i may or may not agree on, that leads to ambiguation of the original point (that someone made this thread because they hated brown people in movies) that might lead to fooling someone into agreeing that tenuous first act by virtue of leading them on which works for afterhours but a lawyer friend of mine has spoiled me to these methods Hence why im spelling it out for you. Movies are no longer eurocentric. The fact that a movie about an english monarch has many minorities is one proof of this The better question is why that makes you mad
Sonic Youth wrote: » All you've done in this thread is slander the op, accuse people of being 'low iq' and come across as an arrogant little turd.
Undividual wrote: » "Word Salad for one?" Is your PhD going to be in English? Please tell me its in STEM. 3x you've mentioned "Low IQ" (Meta) 2x only for "mental gymnastics" (Not meta) Not sure what you're spelling out exactly (or if you can) but interesting that you "may or may not agree" with me on those points. Sounds almost like intellectual aerobatics. If you only approach my points as if I created this thread because I hate brown people, you will only come to the same conclusions.
sk8erboii wrote: » Literally not as bad as leading questions lol
sk8erboii wrote: » ‘I dont hate brown people guys.. i just dont like seeing them in movies (; ‘
Sonic Youth wrote: » Your trolling is one thing but your slander of the op is really ****ty.
Sonic Youth wrote: » What do you get out of this posting style? It's not clever or funny. I admire a good troll but you are just sad.
Undividual wrote: » That seems like a fair representation of what I've said so far and definitely not a smokescreen to cover up for not having any valid responses. :rolleyes:
sk8erboii wrote: » K. No slander done here. Dont make a thread about hating brown people on screen then being accused of hating brown people on screen. Classic tactic to play victim though
Undividual wrote: » No slander done here, until my next sentence. Nice moral compass bud. You might think you know I'm a racist, but you only think you know.
sk8erboii wrote: » I Can tell i got to you lol But dont worry. Im not a troll. Just someone with a different opinion
Sonic Youth wrote: » But he didn't make a thread about hating brown people. He made a thread asking why brown and black actors appear in historical movies when they would not have done so in reality. You know that. So why do you keep accusing him of racism?
sk8erboii wrote: » Atleast you didnt lead questions again lol
Undividual wrote: » FunLover18 wrote: » I don't think that's quite the same, because I don't believe race is as intrinsic to character as gender. For me it would be more like if say in The Favourite they had had a female Tory in the background of some of the government scenes, not playing a man but a woman in a position that would have been a man's in the time of the film. I don't think the black actors in The Favourite were meant to be playing white characters, because it's not that kind of film. And it is kind of for the same reason, it's just that the intentions behind the reason are different. In olden days black people were viewed as inferior by bigots, nowadays you wouldn't cast a black man because you want to be historically accurate (and as I said I'd agree for certain projects), very, very different intentions but the reason is still skin colour. In olden days women were supposedly viewed as inferior. Having a female Tory in the background basically introduces the glass ceiling as a side theme. Again, this adds unnecessary (and potentially confusing) elements. How does it add to the story of three main characters who are all powerful women already?
sk8erboii wrote: » This entire thread is you not liking asians and blacks in a movie lol
