Black face?! Samuel Jackson and Halle Berry = black face?! How?
Black face is a comical and insulting portrayal. I can't think of a single instance where it would be appropriate.
So you are withdrawing your comment? Good. Then there isn't any conflict. Because I fail to see how barring someone from a role because of RACE is good.
You've said you want to see the best actor, regardless of race. For example, Laurence Olivier in Othello. Olivier is a celebrated actor and one of the best of all time. Therefore, I can make the assumption based on your stance of "best actor for the job" that you have no problem with his portrayal of the character in black face.
Why are you in favor of the use of black face?
Of course, you can get me to back off this assumption, by agreeing to back off the assumption that I'm in favor of quotas. But if you're going to make ridiculous assumptions about me, I'm going to assume you're in favor of the use of black face.
Seems like we might have a better conversation if we stop making assumptions about one another, don't you agree?
Um no. Black face is when an actor smears black paint over their face to look like a caricature of a black person. This is accompanied by extremely stereotyped acting to highlight the negative aspects of the race they are insulting. I expect yellow face is no different.
I expect the studio discarded the cosmetic special effect because it started to look "yellow face" and not accurate at all.
You have to be super careful with cosmetic race alterations because insulting another race is horrible.
Black face?! Samuel Jackson and Halle Berry = black face?! How?
Black face is a comical and insulting portrayal. I can't think of a single instance where it would be appropriate.
So you are withdrawing your comment? Good. Then there isn't any conflict. Because I fail to see how barring someone from a role because of RACE is good.
You've said you want to see the best actor, regardless of race. For example, Laurence Olivier in Othello. Olivier is a celebrated actor and one of the best of all time. Therefore, I can make the assumption based on your stance of "best actor for the job" that you have no problem with his portrayal of the character in black face.
Why are you in favor of the use of black face?
Of course, you can get me to back off this assumption, by agreeing to back off the assumption that I'm in favor of quotas. But if you're going to make ridiculous assumptions about me, I'm going to assume you're in favor of the use of black face.
Seems like we might have a better conversation if we stop making assumptions about one another, don't you agree?
I haven't seen Othello.
Your continuing to lie about me isn't hurting me, it's just making you look bad.
I broke down the reason why I got quota from your comment. You haven't denied that this explanation is accurate just the term quota? Are you or are you not saying that whites should be banned from roles based on race BUT that non-whites shouldn't be banned in the same way?
Um no. Black face is when an actor smears black paint over their face to look like a caricature of a black person. This is accompanied by extremely stereotyped acting to highlight the negative aspects of the race they are insulting. I expect yellow face is no different.
So, only the literal old time version counts?
With better modern techniques you consider it just fine. No problem with white actors playing black characters as long as the effects are good - and it's not an obviously insulting parody.
The ultimate judge of whether a cosmetic change is good or bad should be people of the race in question, not me or you. I am staying neutral on it.
Black face?! Samuel Jackson and Halle Berry = black face?! How?
Black face is a comical and insulting portrayal. I can't think of a single instance where it would be appropriate.
So you are withdrawing your comment? Good. Then there isn't any conflict. Because I fail to see how barring someone from a role because of RACE is good.
You've said you want to see the best actor, regardless of race. For example, Laurence Olivier in Othello. Olivier is a celebrated actor and one of the best of all time. Therefore, I can make the assumption based on your stance of "best actor for the job" that you have no problem with his portrayal of the character in black face.
Why are you in favor of the use of black face?
Of course, you can get me to back off this assumption, by agreeing to back off the assumption that I'm in favor of quotas. But if you're going to make ridiculous assumptions about me, I'm going to assume you're in favor of the use of black face.
Seems like we might have a better conversation if we stop making assumptions about one another, don't you agree?
I haven't seen Othello.
Your continuing to lie about me isn't hurting me, it's just making you look bad.
I broke down the reason why I got quota from your comment. You haven't denied that this explanation is accurate just the term quota? Are you or are you not saying that whites should be banned from roles based on race BUT that non-whites shouldn't be banned in the same way?
You're continuing to lie about me advocating quotas. I'm not advocating quotas and I find your insinuation that I am to be offensive and mischaracterizing my position.
Are you getting how this works yet?
I find it curious Irontruth won't answer my questions.
He either believes whites should be banned from roles while non-white are not banned or he doesn't.
If he doesn't then this can be cleared up with a single post.
If he does then it vindicates my position.
I guess it is up to you all to judge his intent since he is being secretive all of a sudden.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok. ENOUGH!!! This is getting now where! It is the political threads all over again. Maybe the mods need to shut this thread down too?
~shakes my head~ You know what. Never mind what I said. I think I will just hit the ignore button on this thread. Maybe make another one that does not have all this talk in it?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With better modern techniques you consider it just fine. No problem with white actors playing black characters as long as the effects are good - and it's not an obviously insulting parody.
Not trying to be judgy here but I am curious as to your take on the ultimate cosmetic alteration; CG or Animation and the race of the voice actor? Should only Japanese voice actors be allowed to portray a Japanese character? Even in the English language version?
I find it curious Irontruth won't answer my questions.
He either believes whites should be banned from roles while non-white are not banned or he doesn't.
If he doesn't then this can be cleared up with a single post.
If he does then it vindicates my position.I guess it is up to you all to judge his intent since he is being secretive all of a sudden.
I am in favor of bans/quotas as much as you are in favor of black-face.
So, if you post that you think I'm in favor of a ban/quota, then I will have to assume you approve of black-face. If you post that I'm not in favor of a ban/quota, then I will assume you oppose black-face.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Munch....munch....
Munch....munch....
Ohhh... can I get some of that popcorn?
It sounds so good right now.
I think that's an excellent idea. I would love to stop having people accuse me with strawmen of their own creation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Or we can just let it drop and go back to discussing how allowing ScarJo to play an anime character is or isn't a good idea and/or if this movie will be any good despite or because of her.
From the trailer, it at least looks nice and almost gave me a nostalgic twinge to play Shadowrun/Cyberpunk again. Almost.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*Watches the butthurt flow while munching*
Hell, I don't know. Maybe demanding that a character named Major Kusanagi wears an east asian cyborg body in a cyberpunk future is clinging to outmoded memes. My issue is, given that it is a cyborg body, I think the motion capture should by done by a ballet dancer, possibly an olympic gymnast, and the voice over artist should be a completely different person who's olympic level at the voice work.
I mean, if this thing's cyberpunk, let's cyberpunk it to the best degree we can in this day and age, right?
(Full disclosure, I think Scarlett Johansson is a bad choice, but that has more to do with my preexisting ideas about the character than Johansson's acting ability.)
*Watches the butthurt flow while munching*
~grins~
You are so eloquent.
Hell, I don't know. Maybe demanding that a character named Major Kusanagi wears an east asian cyborg body in a cyberpunk future is clinging to outmoded memes. My issue is, given that it is a cyborg body, I think the motion capture should by done by a ballet dancer, possibly an olympic gymnast, and the voice over artist should be a completely different person who's olympic level at the voice work.
I mean, if this thing's cyberpunk, let's cyberpunk it to the best degree we can in this day and age, right?
(Full disclosure, I think Scarlett Johansson is a bad choice, but that has more to do with my preexisting ideas about the character than Johansson's acting ability.)
This IS what I was worried about. The preexisting idea... not the voice acted ballet dancer. It is what hurt Arise and it could seriously hurt this too.
I don't understand what you mean Aranna; please explain at greater length. I haven't seen Arise, so I won't feel patronized if you go into detailed explanation of how it relates to what I posted.
I think that's an excellent idea. I would love to stop having people accuse me with strawmen of their own creation.How about we all drop it and not in the passive aggressive "I'll stop because you're wrong" way either?
I suspect that a lot of this go-round is due to Aranna using a different definition of "blackface" than I am, or I suspect you are. Makes it hard to communicate.
Are there two types of blackface?
I broke down the reason why I got quota from your comment. You haven't denied that this explanation is accurate just the term quota? Are you or are you not saying that whites should be banned from roles based on race BUT that non-whites shouldn't be banned in the same way?
Just curious, have you found the post yet where I advocated a quota or ban yet?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Goodness, let it go or take it to PMs. This pissing contest got old a page or so back. You are both right. You are both wrong. You both win. Everyone feel better now?
So, there's only one actual definition and we're all using the same one then.
Goodness, let it go or take it to PMs. This pissing contest got old a page or so back. You are both right. You are both wrong. You both win. Everyone feel better now?
You know, this reminds of something a freh-yahn'd once said:
"Girls, girls, you're both pretty!"
... churros, anyone?
All I know is the plot will help dictate how much I think the actors can work this to be an actual GitS thing and not just some Hollywood slapped on label.
Quark,
How about we lay off the conspiracy theories and just wait until the movie comes out?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't understand what you mean Aranna; please explain at greater length. I haven't seen Arise, so I won't feel patronized if you go into detailed explanation of how it relates to what I posted.
To elaborate they have been changing the Major all along; movies, SAC, manga, Arise, and probably the live action all have different characterizations for her. The popular one that most Americans are in love with is the SAC version of her. So I fear people will walk into the theater looking for 'their' version of the Major and they will be disappointed.
Edit: Arise was new finishing up with a movie in 2015. But it was nearly cancelled because people were upset that they changed the Major.
I thought the 1995 movie had more exposure in America?
No. SAC aired on cable here for a while, it was quite popular.
I don't understand what you mean Aranna; please explain at greater length. I haven't seen Arise, so I won't feel patronized if you go into detailed explanation of how it relates to what I posted.To elaborate they have been changing the Major all along; movies, SAC, manga, Arise, and probably the live action all have different characterizations for her. The popular one that most Americans are in love with is the SAC version of her. So I fear people will walk into the theater looking for 'their' version of the Major and they will be disappointed.
This thread has gone all totally Thunderdome, so I won't say any more than thanks for the answer, but honestly, thanks for the answer. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"white washing" is a complicated issue to me. I have put some thought into it and can't decide my feelings towards it.
By the base definition of racism its not technically.
"the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."
Also Hollywood does do the reverse as well. Wally west in Flash is one that comes to mind (since that flash is a Red-headed white guy but is being portrayed by a black actor.) so isn't that the same? It doesn't bother me personally. I do feel like One should be all in. If its not OK to replace one ethnicity with another it should be that way across the board no matter the ethnicity, Or vice-versa. It doesn't make sense to say its OK to replace this ethnicity with this X but not this y with this Z.
Its kind of why i'm not sure on this issue. Does one ignore race and ethnicity completely or does one treat it as a requirement for acting as a certain character. Maybe its more nuanced and If an Actor intends to play a character of another race it should be treated a certain way. I just think it should be one way across the board without exceptions I just don't know what way that should be.
That is how I prefer to look at it too. We are all humans. Races are something we created (like dog breeds in a way) When the reality is the difference amounts to only If the region we evolved from had more or less sun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Funny thing is no one, and I mean no one who disagrees with me has posted a single link to support their contention that the Japanese don't like the ScarJo casting for the Major. Not a single link. Just repeating their unsubstantiated opinion that there are 'people out there who are mad about ScarJo being cast as the Major'. Oh really? You found people somewhere on the "Asian boards" who are disagreeable?
I found the same thing on the Internet, like everywhere on every topic, but so what? I want to know if there is among people in Japan. And if so, who?
Post some links please.
Up thread I posted This Link, and no one seems willing to comment on how non-type-Japanese the Major is drawn in this Japanese-made anime movie.
Additionally, no one, and I mean no one, seems willing to take on the Sam Yoshiba quote
She has the cyberpunk feel. And we never imagined it would be a Japanese actress in the first place.In the interests of being less contentious over this patently non-issue issue; here's a short list of Japanese actresses, listed in order of preference using only my biases, that could play the Major:
Yukie Nakama
Maria Ozawa
Erika Toda
Aoi Miyazaki
Rinko Kukuchi
Only the Rinko has any international exposure to speak of and I list Aoi Miyazaki out of a soft spot for Wolf Children. There's a lot of money riding on this film and I don't think the backers want to risk their investment on relatively unknown actresses.
"Whitewashing" was the last thing on their minds I'm sure. Or maybe the casting directors are secret members of some alt-right acting guild?*
* it could happen!
Asian-American actors find the casting of ScarJo disrespectful.
Whitewashing isn't intentional. Woody Allen has described his casting process where he doesn't even consider casting black people unless the role specifically calls for it, because he doesn't see race as being part of the casting process. This has produced all-white casts in all of his movies, except for characters that had to be explicitly black.
He doesn't intentionally exclude black people from his movies, it just doesn't even occur to him to include them. When he pictures "bellhop #2" as a nonspecific person, he automatically imagines them as white. When he imagines a romantic interest for the main character, unless something about that character specifically calls for them to be non-white, he imagines a white person.
The argument that studios don't want to put money behind untested actors is b&&~#$*%. Routinely major money is put behind directors AND actors who haven't had major movies all the time. You could make a decent list out of just the MCU movies. Chris Evans for example had been in some big movies, but most of them didn't do well commercially. The movies that did do well, he wasn't the lead and most were smaller films. He was in the two Fantastic Four movies, neither of which did very well and both are widely panned by critics and audiences alike. Guardians of the Galaxy had both a first time director (for a major movie) and an untested lead. You might notice a gender/racial pattern with these three people though.
Here's a challenge for you, if you think whitewashing isn't a thing, please explain to me the casts for Exodus and Gods of Egypt. Two movies that take place in Egypt, but don't include much of anyone that one might vaguely describe as African.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"white washing" is a complicated issue to me. I have put some thought into it and can't decide my feelings towards it.
By the base definition of racism its not technically.
"the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."Also Hollywood does do the reverse as well. Wally west in Flash is one that comes to mind (since that flash is a Red-headed white guy but is being portrayed by a black actor.) so isn't that the same? It doesn't bother me personally. I do feel like One should be all in. If its not OK to replace one ethnicity with another it should be that way across the board no matter the ethnicity, Or vice-versa. It doesn't make sense to say its OK to replace this ethnicity with this X but not this y with this Z.
Its kind of why i'm not sure on this issue. Does one ignore race and ethnicity completely or does one treat it as a requirement for acting as a certain character. Maybe its more nuanced and If an Actor intends to play a character of another race it should be treated a certain way. I just think it should be one way across the board without exceptions I just don't know what way that should be.
Do you think that minorities have equal opportunities when it comes to on-screen representation?
As an exercise, make a list of white actors who do get leads in major roles involving martial arts. Then compare it to a list of asian-american actors who don't do martial arts. Which list is longer? Which list should be longer? Can you even make the second list without looking someone up?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nope your argument isn't swaying me. I'm not contesting that white actors get chosen for roles more often then non-white. I would need to know why that is? Is the assumption that they choose white actors cause their racist? Or because they've found crowds are more likely to see movies that have more white people in them? Is it because its easier to find white actors? Do you get an Asian actor and a white actor and have them both audition and go with the one with the best audition? What is the theory to why? If you can prove that white-washing happens because of racism then you can make a good point against it. If it happens because the pool of actors are primarily white then its just a consequence of averages.
So i'm going to try and imagine the worst case I can. Lets say a white director wants a white cast because hes racist? or does he want a white cast because he feels it will have an easier time making money because he thinks his audience is racist? did they do a survey to see if audiences responded more to one actor over another? Whats the motivation?
I just feel that I need to the reason and information behind it to say if its such a negative thing.
Assuming all Asians know martial arts is racist no doubt. using an actor for a role because they will sell the movie better is not. Using an actor for a role because the role requires a certain race is racist? I just want to make it clear because the rules should apply to everyone so every time Hollywood changes the race on a comic book character human torch in that terrible FF4 movie for exmaple Shouldn't it be looked down on the same? I know people were upset about that change but those were different people and they were called racists for it. isn't it the same thing as Scarjo playing an Asian?
are we saying its only OK for a black man to play a white man but not vice versa or only ok for a Hispanic to play an Asian etc. for it to be fair it should be treated the same across the board. so do we only allow a race to play the same race?
I'm not making an argument for one way or another I just want to see if people think it should be applied evenly.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why does the reason matter if the result is a system that discriminates based on race? Just because the people who perpetuate that system aren't mustache-twirling villains, doesn't mean the system itself is any less broken or unjust.
That said, you're missing the causal links Irontruth is hinting at.
Most screenwriters are white (IIRC, 95% of feature writers). Many fail to include non-white characters in their scripts, perhaps for explicitly racist reasons, but more likely because they just aren't thinking about it. Like Woody Allen above, the default race for them is white, so unless a character has a reason to be non-white, they end up white.
As a result, before we even get to the point of looking at the availability or marketability of Asian actors, their opportunities for starring roles are already limited. With less opportunities, those actors have a harder time paying their bills, building a portfolio, getting attention--i.e. becoming a "big name" actor.
In other words, the pool of actors being primarily white isn't just a matter of averages, it's the result of racism. That white actors are more marketable isn't just a matter of audience tastes, it's the result of racism.
When people say you shouldn't give non-white roles to white actors (whitewashing), it's often a matter of wanting to correct the injustice inherent in the system. The rule that they want to apply is not "don't change a character's race", it's "give more roles to non-white actors". Changing the human torch's race, but not Motoko Kusanagi's, is applying that rule evenly. A "don't change the race of characters" rule across the board is unjust from that perspective.
This graphic explains the concept a lot more elegantly than I can.
LINK
Just imagine that the fence is Hollywood's systemic discrimination against non-white actors. They may not have put it up explicitly to screw over the short person (non-white actors), but regardless of their intentions, it has done just that.
Ok so in an effort to undo the racial bias that is already present and systematic (and may or may not be with malicious intent) one makes characters who are traditionally not of one race into that race to of set the bias. so in your link its stacking the boxes for the shorter kid.
Removing the fence blocking the view would require erasing the racial bias that is already present. So not as easy as stacking the boxes and will require a lot more work. maybe once we get to star trek levels maybe we won't have that fence anymore (hopefully sooner if your an optimist).
So I think my problem was I was looking at it without the fence in mind to continue with the analogy.
Its really using two wrong to make a right in a way but its a complicated issue and might be the best we can do atm then.
