Post: #26

(11-11-2015 05:48 AM)brick tamland Wrote:  A report in 2013 showed that 94% of film executives were white and that nonwhite people were under-represented as filmmakers and actors.

Yes, it's well known that Hollywood in general and movie execs specifically are "white"


Just top clarify my point: of course it's completely ridiculous when a white guy plays a black role, but it's equally ridiculous when a black guy plays a white role. The thing is though that people cheer for the latter and have wildly repulsed reactions to the former. I would prefer it if we had sanity and common sense to prevail, so black people are cast into black roles and white people into white ones. But if we can't have sanity, then I say double down on the insanity to confront the SJWs with it. I'd fully support a remake of Django where he is white and his slave masters are a politically correct diverse mix of blacks, asians, indians, jews and the other indians. Hell just remake Roots with an all white cast!

Post: #27

In Hamilton (the play based on the book), black actors play our founding fathers...gasp.

This thing sold $57 million in presale tickets in 3 months. I want to see it.




Yeah, having a white guy play MLK is more strange.

Post: #28

(11-11-2015 09:16 AM)GIMME BACK MY SON Wrote:  I'd fully support a remake of Django where he is white and his slave masters are a politically correct diverse mix of blacks, asians, indians, jews and the other indians.

That would be pretty funny, the ensuing shitstorm would be fantastic

Post: #29

Of course it's completely ridiculous and stupid having a white man portraying a black man, but the people losing their shit over this are the same people who have no problem advocating for blacks to portray white characters all the time. It's interesting that when the roles are reversed all the talk about race not existing, race being a social construct, how it only matters that an actor is competent or not, goes out the window.

Post: #30

(11-10-2015 09:59 PM)PrimeTime32 Wrote:  

(11-10-2015 07:58 PM)GIMME BACK MY SON Wrote:  So hold on hold on.... female Ghostbusters are ok, female Ocean's 11 are nothing to scoff at, James Bond should be played by Idris Elba and a NORSE God in Thor was also black, but MLK can't be played by a white actor?

What's the deal here guys, I thought we are past race now?

You're a fag.

I hope they give him black face next time just to out the rest of you sensitive SJW's lurking around here.

Post: #31

It's hilarious when people lose their shit on Hollywood about mundane casting based on race. I also love it when people attack a theatre play that they wouldn't watch anyways.

Here's the best and funniest reactions a Hollywood movie or a play will garner based on anecdotal evidence.

1) black male with a non black female. It's a good one, always gets the haters out on twitter. Great for promoting new material.

2)white male playing non white role - gets the SJW's right riled up, a twitter/social media shit storm. Always love the comments.

3)non white (usually black) cast playing a historically white role - this is the opposite of the one above. Instead of SJW's, you've got reactionaries losing their shit.

This shit promotes itself, controversy makes money. Promotional trailers should take the outraged twitter commentary and post it as testimonials on the commercials.

Post: #32

(11-11-2015 06:56 AM)SunW Wrote:  

(11-11-2015 01:32 AM)extracube Wrote:  It's pretty interesting to see that even on a forum like this there are still a lot of guys still brain-washed and "blue pill" when it comes to ... culture.

This forum has quite a few SJWs in hiding on it and also attracts quite a few who want to manipulate and influence the men here and they generally do these things subtly, though not in the OP's case. I warn about that here. Notice how even a thread discussing solutions gets derailed by members. Some of this is just the retard level of some people here, while some of it is intentional.

I can't speak for Primetime (his reply does not seem SJWish either) but I'm not an example of a secret SJW. You MacCarthyist hacks can go back home. The guy who quoted me and backhandedly suggested I was some kind of blue pill because I disagree with casting MLK as a white guy is a dumbshit who can't read.

I also disagreed with casting Idris Elba as Heimdallr (he was literally the whitest god of the Norse pantheon). That's a pretty clear and unequivocal fuck you to pagans, white nationalists, and Scandinavians in general.

Hollywood loves to court controversy by playing gender and race baiting games to put asses in seats because they're no talent hacks and they know it. It's a substitute for making media that's actually good.

SWPLs get a big fat chub knowing that a white supremacist pagan neo nazi from Finland who nobody has heard of tweeted disapproval about Heimdallr as Thor and consider it part of being a good person and Not a Racist to feed the outragist media with their money. Hollywood gets paid big time and plans their next move. I guarantee you guys if this cycle keeps going we're going to see a pre-op and post-op tranny James Bond in the next 30 years. It's going to be a big budget movie and it might barely make it's money back but will inexplicably sweep all the awards even though it will be garbage.

This is why I quit enabling this kind of shit with money. Public library, two or three books per month instead of wasting time on the movies.

Post: #33

Hilarious trolling 10/10.

I just wanted to say, is Primetime really an upset SJW or did he just take that post literally and didn't see the sarcasm? Hence the 'GTFO'?

Post: #34

I personally don't get what is so controversial - what matters is whether the actor can fulfill the role, not whether he is the correct skin colour. I've been to various stage plays and frankly the only thing that matters to me as a theatre goer is that the actor convincingly expresses the part, not that he or she superficially resembles the part.

In Shakespeare's day, all the female roles were done by men anyway - people still went because a great actor can act as anything, another gender, another race, another person... That's part of the point of watching an actor, that certain aesthetic beauty watching someone crafting a convincing 'presence' and even entire settings, sometimes with nothing but speech and mannerisms and body language and minimal props.

But anyway, the playwright has clearly gone full retard in making this an issue, and we all know, one should NEVER go full retard...

Post: #35

(11-11-2015 10:38 AM)RioNomad Wrote:  I hope they give him black face next time just to out the rest of you sensitive SJW's lurking around here.

Right. This goes well with the next points....

(11-11-2015 02:13 PM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  I personally don't get what is so controversial - what matters is whether the actor can fulfill the role, not whether he is the correct skin colour. I've been to various stage plays and frankly the only thing that matters to me as a theatre goer is that the actor convincingly expresses the part, ....

Agreed. Acting is only about portraying with incredibly believable skill, and adding a little more flair that someone else might not -- it's not about social issues or politics, as stated above. For the users who are expressing otherwise, you still need yet more and more time to realize just how uptight you are about race.

Post: #36

This thread reminds me of members going crazy over a black guy possibly playing James Bond and the black storm tropper in Star wars.

Post: #37

(11-11-2015 09:35 AM)heavy Wrote:  In Hamilton (the play based on the book), black actors play our founding fathers...gasp.

This thing sold $57 million in presale tickets in 3 months. I want to see it.




Yeah, having a white guy play MLK is more strange.

With a video like that, it seems like anything can go.

Although I can understand where the director is coming from. It would be like Roosh being portrayed by a feminist or a virgin.

Post: #38

(11-11-2015 02:13 PM)Thomas the Rhymer Wrote:  I personally don't get what is so controversial - what matters is whether the actor can fulfill the role, not whether he is the correct skin colour. I've been to various stage plays and frankly the only thing that matters to me as a theatre goer is that the actor convincingly expresses the part, not that he or she superficially resembles the part.

I couldn't disagree more with you.

(11-11-2015 04:30 PM)extracube Wrote:  Agreed. Acting is only about portraying with incredibly believable skill, and adding a little more flair that someone else might not -- it's not about social issues or politics, as stated above. For the users who are expressing otherwise, you still need yet more and more time to realize just how uptight you are about race.

You might be right about me being uptight but it still doesn't change the fact that I think having someone from a different race or sex playing a character is ridiculus and idiotic.

(11-11-2015 05:03 PM)Brian Shima Wrote:  This thread reminds me of members going crazy over a black guy possibly playing James Bond and the black storm tropper in Star wars.

I'm certainly not going crazy over it but I'm one of those that definitely disagrees with it.

Post: #39

(11-11-2015 09:16 AM)Libertas Wrote:  The play that's all the rage in NYC currently is a hip hop story about Alexander Hamilton.

Hamilton, George Washington, etc. are all portrayed by non-white actors.

If that's fine, then this is fine also.

You SJW's made your bed, now lie in it.

Only King George is white in the play. Surprise.

It's a wonderful time to be ethnic on Broadway. Demand for ethnic-looking talent is through the roof over the last few years.

All sorts of ethnic shows are being made and / or making a comeback. TV shows with nostalgia about the 60s, 70s, and 80 set in the cities. Netflix, HBO, etc. are jumping on original content to appeal to minorities.

Performing arts are still hard to break into, but ethnic shows are a major growth segment, and there's a low supply of qualified talent.

SJWism is driving "colorblind casting", and given the chance to score points as progressive visionaries, directors sacrifice any pretense of historical accuracy. This seems to be just a form of affirmative action to encourage more minority performers...it's just a question of how much it's driven by economic factors (encouraging supply of talent for a growth market), vs. the effects of the ultra-progressive arts environment.

Post: #40

(11-11-2015 07:17 PM)polar Wrote:  

(11-11-2015 09:16 AM)Libertas Wrote:  The play that's all the rage in NYC currently is a hip hop story about Alexander Hamilton.

Hamilton, George Washington, etc. are all portrayed by non-white actors.

If that's fine, then this is fine also.

You SJW's made your bed, now lie in it.

Only King George is white in the play. Surprise.

It's a wonderful time to be ethnic on Broadway. Demand for ethnic-looking talent is through the roof over the last few years.

All sorts of ethnic shows are being made and / or making a comeback. TV shows with nostalgia about the 60s, 70s, and 80 set in the cities. Netflix, HBO, etc. are jumping on original content to appeal to minorities.

Performing arts are still hard to break into, but ethnic shows are a major growth segment, and there's a low supply of qualified talent.

SJWism is driving "colorblind casting", and given the chance to score points as progressive visionaries, directors sacrifice any pretense of historical accuracy. This seems to be just a form of affirmative action to encourage more minority performers...it's just a question of how much it's driven by economic factors (encouraging supply of talent for a growth market), vs. the effects of the ultra-progressive arts environment.

Money!!! Hollywood execs haven't been ignoring the fact that one of top TV shows on TV is Empire. They haven't ignored the fact that Tyler Perry's crappy movies are consistent chart toppers against all odds. Straight out of Compton was one of the top blockbusters this summer.

Guys like George Lucas and Spielberg have mentioned numerous times the reason they didn't cast more blacks in the past was because it would be received with hostility and execs wouldn't fund the movie because of fear they'll lose money.

This has slowly been proven wrong, a race controversy will not hinder how much money is made. Therefore the gates are wide open now. Blame capitalism, not SJW's.

Capitalism is the great equaliser. The rest is moot.

Post: #41

Guys,

I'm going to remake Bambi. Instead of casting a deer as the lead role as Bambi, I'm going to cast as a human Cis-Gendered Male. A human Cis-Gendered female will be casted as Bambi's mother. Astrapping healthy 10 point buck will be casted as the hunter.

I'm doing this because species are a social construct.

Post: #42

Quite a bit of Social Justice agitation in this thread; either that, or some of you guys failed to read the original post:

Quote:Oatman [the Director], who like Hall is black, said in a statement in August promoting the play that he chose a white actor for the production “to explore the issue of racial ownership and authenticity”.

From what I gather, the whole point of having a white actor play MLK Jr is to point out the universality of MLK's message; that judging a man by the content of his character and not the colour of his skin is a universal (Christian) value, that all men of good character can agree upon.

Making James Bond black - or even blonde haired, for that matter - is cultural appropriation and destruction. We love Bond because of the content of his character (the same reason we love Shaft), but he is a distinctly British man of English descent; black hair, blue eyes. His race and nationality matter just as much as Shaft's does.

Portraying MLK with a white actor was an artistic choice to affirm the message he preached all the more; it was intentional irony and contrast.

Are you guys missing that? Or do we have a problem with poz in here?

Post: #43

Aurini, that was my thinking on it.

This seems to be a bit about nothing.

As to what it has become, I think there is a real sense of 'whiteness' being erased in the new global landscape and the people pushing it, often very aggressively and openly, are the SJW crowd.


Personally I would rather see new characters, especially well-rounded characters, developed for non-white males or even women.

I also think there is a big difference between fictional and historical characters and this largely leans on what the point of the script and show is.

Is it meant to be historical fiction? If so, then I think the cast should reflect as best as possible the realities of the people involved.

If it is meant to be a comedy, then not so much. I am guessing that play is meant to be a comedy, if not it seems strange to me but whatever.

With comic book characters it really doesn't bother me as much because comics, along with a lot of other mediums, are well known for retcons with their characters and it is actually pretty insane how detailed it can get in the different universes.

Post: #44

I think it's a bit ridiculous to have a white actor playing MLK because MLK's whole mission in life was based on his race- he was black and wanted equal rights for black people. If you cast a white actor to play a black person such as Jimi Hendrix or Miles Davis, I think it would be more acceptable as their life stories were not mainly based on their race.