Hollywood Whitewashing - Page 12

I think it also needs to be said that Blade got made because New Line was a ballsy fucking studio.  They were like Dimension Films (the genre arm of Miramax)...they didn't think about race, or maybe they did, but didn't give a fuck.  New Line was a maverick (they were only ones who would consider LOTR) and it showed in their films...they were run by a guy who rode a motorcycle to work and got blowjobs under the table at parties (DeLuca) and a guy who's idea of a good time was to take corporate retreats with his execs and do lots of psychadelics and run around naked (Bob Shaye). 

Disney/Marvel is a corporate behemoth and those places are run by conservative pussies who bow down at the alter of their shareholders.  And they are hypocrites.  Marvel may have hit a home run with The Avengers, but the core of their studio is still a disgrace.

Great point!

Larry King did an IAmA on Reddit today and said this:

Love that King quote. 

Just more food for thought, back during slavery times, blacks were counted as 3/5 of a human being or something like that.  You look at movies (past and present) and really don't see any improvement from that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

Love that King quote. 

 

Just more food for thought, back during slavery times, blacks were counted as 3/5 of a human being or something like that.  You look at movies (past and present) and really don't see any improvement from that.

Okay, I feel like I have to address this because I see or hear it mentioned so often these days.

So here goes: When the Constitution was framed, a slave was counted as 3/5 of a person for the purposes of representation in the House. This was actually a benefit to the slave-holding states in the South, who thereby sent more Representatives to Congress than their white population would otherwise allow.

That slaves were counted at all for this purpose was not a good thing.

In reality, blacks were almost all chattel slaves in those states. Which is to say they were property. Which is to say they were not counted as human at all.

But to say the frequency with which black people star, appear or are represented in modern American cinema is somehow analogous to that state of affairs is ludicrous in the extreme. 

There are problems still, of course, and they are the legacy of that terrible history...

My point above regarding whether or not they make a movie out of an obscure comics character like the Black Panther was predicated on the idea that we don't seem to have many black actors who aren't in that Will Smith / Denzel Washington upper-tier of movie stars. A middling action-star like Snipes, who made the "Blade" movies possible.

We've had, for instance, the marketing machine of Hollywood trying to cram Taylor fucking Kitsch down our throats the last year. And people ain't biting. It's definitely a problem that the major studios don't throw their weight behind more black actors of a similar or better quality.

But you, Ambler, called Marvel's decision "borderline racism". And Faraci intimated the same in his piece. I consider that to be a hasty jump to a distasteful conclusion. They may have to deal with the realities of their business that are bigger than them.

Say, for instance, that it goes as I suggested above and they plan to introduce T'Challa in the Avengers sequel... They're certainly not going to tell us that, are they? So that executive feels like he has to answer when asked about it, and gives a totally bullshit explanation. Because bullshitting is what those guys do. 

I don't know-- I suppose I would prefer to examine other possibilities for certain things, before I cast aspersions on people's motives. But maybe that's not within the spirit of this thread. 

A wise man once said that some motherfuckers are always trying to ice skate uphill. That could be me in this case. 

I don't think it's borderline.  It is racism.  The hard-to-pin-down insidious and institutionalized kind.  Whatever the 'motives' of the Marvel executive was, his job-mandated bullshittery was total weaksauce and cowardice because he thought that BS justification could pass muster on people.  How insulting is that?  What does that say about the state of the representation of minorities in media that he seriously thought that such weak justification would convince anyone who pays attention to this as an issue?

Sad thing is that he's probably right.  Most people don't give a shit and will just let this instance slip by as so many similar situations have. 

I am definitely casting aspersions on the motives here.  The motive is completely corporate cowardice.  The BS that was spouted was no different than saying, "We don't think there is profit to be made from a big budget fantasy starring a black  character."  Except that the latter is honest. 

Prankster started this thread waaaaay back with this:

We often deride a studio for pandering to the lowest common denominator for the "all ighty ollar."  Why do we so easily give them a pass for pandering to institutional racism for the same thing and brushing off the topic with obvious bullshittery?  At least give us better bullshit than that.

So to sum up: the people at Marvel Studios are racist? Or is everyone else?

No.  I'd just say that they're cowards who are pandering to racism, which is pretty shitty in itself.  I think that's really the point being made by people.

Honestly, I wish these people WERE openly racist.  It would be so much easier to call it out for the cheap seats.  Hahahah

I am incredibly frustrated that their bullshit probably IS subtle for most people.

UGH I'M SO SMART.

They are certainly willing to gamble on a movie that will include a talking raccoon alien instead of one featuring a black lead.

Lauren-- I'd readily admit the the "Guardians" movie seems like a risky bet. But given the Thanos tag on the end of "The Avengers", I'd guess that they're explicitly tying it in to that franchise. So the rule for that is kind of the same as for the Thor and Cap movies.

An Ant-Man feature seems just as unlikely to me, except that Edgar Wright is determined to make it, for some reason I can't imagine. (Talk about a movie that precisely no one asked for.)

Look-- there was a lot of expectation around that they were going to announce a Black Panther project at ComicCon. And then they didn't. And then we got that wholly bullshit explanation for why not. Thing is, we really don't know what went into that decision. We don't know. To make the assumption that's been made here seems like the definition of "knee-jerk" to me.

I've taken pains to say that is race is a factor here. Just not the only one. But I honestly don't see people sitting around the board room saying:

"So what's up next? Black Panther?"

"Nah. Too black. Never play in Peoria."

"What if he were white? White Panther?"

"Let's move on... So, Rocket Raccoon, right?" 

I can completely buy into the idea of them taking a look at the property, seeing how it's mostly filled with Africans and labeling it a "black movie" that more than likely would be targeted to a niche audience.

Oh, I can see that scene happening.

I get the point you're making.  And yeah... this IS a knee-jerk reaction.  A knee-jerk reaction supported by everything that has been discussed in this thread since it started.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurenOrtega 

They are certainly willing to gamble on a movie that will include a talking raccoon alien instead of one featuring a black lead.

This right here is making me actually angry. Seriously, you bullshit spewing dipshits? Antrhopomorphic racoons and aliens with a romantic hard on for the actual manifestation of death are OK. A strong prosperous African nation isn't?

I'm so fucking glad I'm not black. My body is ill equiped for swallowing all this.

You don't have to burn crosses while wearing a white sheet and shout "white power!" or sick dogs on blacks/latinos/asians to be racist.

If you make any decision where race is a determining factor as far as advantage/disadvantage leading to discrimination (profit driven or not), you are racist.  It's that simple.  Racism or racial prejudice, they are pretty much the same thing. 

And it's disturbing how people can bend over backwards to excuse people participating in it.  The fact that there is alot of money at stake for a company with regard to certain races being cast in a film is meaningless...it's just another closet to hide in.  If you have a job at a company that would make a determining distinction about what movie would work based on the race of the main characters (or any characters), and you had a say in that decision, you have effectively become a racist, because you are participating.  Just like the guy driving the getaway car of a bank robbery would be in handcuffs in the same courtroom as the robber who stole money and shot a teller.  The driver would be charged with a different crime, but he committed a crime, same as the other guy.  Crime is crime.  And while check fraud isn't necessarily as bad as murder, for instance, they still both fall under the same category of law breaking.  It is the same as a guy lynching black people because they're black, is being a racist, like the guy who refuses to give a black person a job because they're black.  They are both particpating in racism.

But because it's movies and they're fantasy and it's harmless and the guys are just doing their job, that they get a pass.  Fuck that, and fuck them and fuck anybody who gives it a pass.  Devin is correct.

(sorry, I just woke up)

The main thing for me is context. For example, the fact that Ben Kingsley is playing the Mandarin in Iron Man 3 doesn't bother me much for two reasons: 1. He's a damn good actor. 2. He's not strictly white, considering his father was Indian, and you can tell that he looks different from other English actors because of that. We also don't know what specific country the Mandarin will hail from in the movie yet. It's not the same thing as the blatant white-washing that happened in Prince of Persia (which, funnily enough, Kingsley was also in) or Shyamalan's The Last Airbender.

Regarding the whole Black Panther thing: are we really surprised by dumbass studio executive comments on this kind of thing? The guy's absolutely an idiot in his unconscious racism. Sadly, while I certainly hope Black Panther appears in the Marvel movie-verse, odds are it's going to happen in another Avengers film before he gets a solo pic.

Also, they've been trying to make a movie out of that character for DECADES. I seem to recall hearing Wesley Snipes only got involved with Blade in the first place was because Marvel was talking to him about playing Black Panther.

I have to agree with nooj and others that race is the underlying issue here.  Marvel's hesitancy is ostensibly about money.  But those money fears have everything to do with race.  A black lead is looked at as a "risk."  A majority-black or all-black film is looked at as an even bigger risk.  It's why Hollywood keeps majority black films at arms length, they think audiences don't want to see them (which is something that has been proven wrong all the way back since House Party came out in 1990).  People will see good, entertaining movies with black leads and mostly black casts, but black actors just don't get a shot to be in those good projects.  Way back before Hollywood became the money machine it is now, they were willing to take the occasional risk; Sidney Poitier as a black lead with a white girlfriend in the 1960s was a bigger risk than any Hollywood has been willing to make in the last few decades.  If Marvel and the rest of the industry pushed young black talent the way they've pushed Pine, Hemsworth, Kitsch, Tatum, Worthington et al, they would find their next Denzel, Freeman, Jackson, Berry, Will Smith, etc.  The fact is, Hollywood takes risks all the time - if you're young, white, and attractive (notice I didn't say talented).  They'd push an unknown white actor of questionable talent before they'd accept a black lead in a film.  This is reiterated year after year as the likes of Channing Tatum bomb in tentpoles likes GI Joe and Clash of the Titans while Chiwetel Ejiofor, his acting superior in every way, has to fight for secondary roles or the occasional lead in a small budget indie that no one sees.

And Wesley Snipes was certainly not a "middling action star."  He was critically lauded as one of the top young actors in Hollywood during the 80s and 90s, who did everything from drama to comedy to action.  In fact, in the early 90s after releases like Major League, King of New York, Mo Better Blues, New Jack City, Jungle Fever, White Men Can't Jump, Passenger 57, Demolition Man, Waiting to Exhale, US Marshalls (and the list goes on), he was one of the biggest actors in Hollywood and had worked with a ton of the best actors in the industry.  Casting him as Blade wasn't a risk in any sense of the word.  He was an actor who earned his leading man star status - in spite of his blackness.  He proved himself bankable because he got a shot and kept delivering.  There are great black actors out there, and they are ready to be the next Denzel and Will, but they need someone to give them a shot like someone gave a young rapper from Philly a shot or a young television actor (Denzel) a shot.

Like I said earlier in the thread, if D'Esposito and Marvel came out and said their concern was race, I would respect their candor.  But they treated us like idiots thinking we would buy that Wakanda was logistically difficult to reproduce on screen.  If there were only a handful of black actors and no such thing as CGI I could believe that.  If they hadn't just made Thor and Green Latern, I could believe that.  And if they hadn't just jizzed over their GotG announcement I could believe that.  Everyone wants to talk around the issue, but the fact is that decades of Hollywood business has shown that race is an issue all the time.  This isn't some one-off situation.  It's why an MLK movie hasn't been made, and a Malcolm X movie barely got made.  It's why superhero films have been lily white to this point.

Not a single white face.

http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/fox/lifeofpi/

Quote:

Originally Posted by dajuice7 

 If Marvel and the rest of the industry pushed young black talent the way they've pushed Pine, Hemsworth, Kitsch, Tatum, Worthington et al, they would find their next Denzel, Freeman, Jackson, Berry, Will Smith, etc.  The fact is, Hollywood takes risks all the time - if you're young, white, and attractive (notice I didn't say talented).  They'd push an unknown white actor of questionable talent before they'd accept a black lead in a film.  This is reiterated year after year as the likes of Channing Tatum bomb in tentpoles likes GI Joe and Clash of the Titans while Chiwetel Ejiofor, his acting superior in every way, has to fight for secondary roles or the occasional lead in a small budget indie that no one sees.

 

 There are great black actors out there, and they are ready to be the next Denzel and Will, but they need someone to give them a shot like someone gave a young rapper from Philly a shot or a young television actor (Denzel) a shot.

 

 

Now to reveal my own racial prejudice: there are a LOT of young,talented Black actors who outshine any of the vanilla white folk you list above. Hollywood (and Marvel in particular) are leaving money on the table when they ignore motivated raw talent in favor of Himbots that (they think) they can control and mold into a product.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cylon Baby 

 

Now to reveal my own racial prejudice: there are a LOT of young,talented Black actors who outshine any of the vanilla white folk you list above. Hollywood (and Marvel in particular) are leaving money on the table when they ignore motivated raw talent in favor of Himbots that (they think) they can control and mold into a product.

Hey there, let's not get too carried away here. Hemsworth's hotness transcends issues of race and gender.

Let's not get too overblown here. There are plenty of talented-yet-struggling black actors (although Idris Elba has been making some big films lately), but let's not pretend that young white actors are a complete wash. I've been hearing that Channing Tatum has improved in his outings for this year (21 Jump Street, Magic Mike), and Kitsch's problem is that his legitimate charm and skill tends to get overshadowed by either other actors or effects (personally, I thought he was great in John Carter). Chris Hemsworth shines in pretty much anything he's cast for, as does Jennifer Lawrence. And all young actors, no matter what race, struggle to one degree or another.

But black actors do struggle more, even if there have been major improvements from the past. Additionally, many of the big black stars from the 90s and 2000s like Snipes or Halle Berry have hit serious career snags. Will Smith seems content to impose more and more control over every film he makes, no matter how it might ultimately affect the quality, and is also foisting his moderately talented kids on us. Denzel's probably fine, but he's still stuck making bad thrillers here and there.

I like Hemsworth and Lawrence just fine, but Idris Elba (who is maybe not so young) blows them away, and while he's getting in bigger films lately, it's always in a secondary or tertiary role. That guy is most certainly capable of Denzel level performances, as is Chiwetel Ejiofor.

Its' kind of quaint how Hollywood tried to foist these vanilla actors on the public, and they keep getting rejected at the Box Office. Yet the Studios keep on keeping on, when they have multiple potential gold mines that they studiously (heh) ignore.

Hey, I was practically cheerleading for Elba as T'Chala at the Black Panther thread.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Spider 

Let's not get too overblown here. There are plenty of talented-yet-struggling black actors (although Idris Elba has been making some big films lately), but let's not pretend that young white actors are a complete wash. I've been hearing that Channing Tatum has improved in his outings for this year (21 Jump Street, Magic Mike), and Kitsch's problem is that his legitimate charm and skill tends to get overshadowed by either other actors or effects (personally, I thought he was great in John Carter). Chris Hemsworth shines in pretty much anything he's cast for, as does Jennifer Lawrence. And all young actors, no matter what race, struggle to one degree or another.

 

But black actors do struggle more, even if there have been major improvements from the past. Additionally, many of the big black stars from the 90s and 2000s like Snipes or Halle Berry have hit serious career snags. Will Smith seems content to impose more and more control over every film he makes, no matter how it might ultimately affect the quality, and is also foisting his moderately talented kids on us. Denzel's probably fine, but he's still stuck making bad thrillers here and there.

That's exactly the thing, Channing Tatum got chance after chance after chance until he finally put some good performances together.  Kitsch went straight from tv to tentpoles (X Men Origins/John Carter/Battleship).  Why can't great non-white actors get these big risky opportunities unless Hollywood thinks that racial prejudice will negate talent?  That thinking has been shown to be false yet Hollywood is still stuck on decades-old thinking.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dajuice7 

 

And Wesley Snipes was certainly not a "middling action star."  He was critically lauded as one of the top young actors in Hollywood during the 80s and 90s, who did everything from drama to comedy to action.  In fact, in the early 90s after releases like Major League, King of New York, Mo Better Blues, New Jack City, Jungle Fever, White Men Can't Jump, Passenger 57, Demolition Man, Waiting to Exhale, US Marshalls (and the list goes on), he was one of the biggest actors in Hollywood and had worked with a ton of the best actors in the industry. 

Do want to correct myself here. I didn't mean that Snipes is a middling actor. He's done a lot of excellent work. But I consider the action/thriller pictures he's starred in to be fairly middling. Your "Passenger 57", "Boiling Point", "Rising Sun", "Art of War", and, well, "Blade". Like that. In fact, my original point was that "Blade" was able to get produced because he was such a popular name, who just didn't happen to be in the Smith/Washington tier of stars.

I agree completely with the comments here  about how young white actors are sold to us when black actors are not. It's why I brought up Kitsch a few posts above. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slim 

Do want to correct myself here. I didn't mean that Snipes is a middling actor. He's done a lot of excellent work. But I consider the action/thriller pictures he's starred in to be fairly middling. Your "Passenger 57", "Boiling Point", "Rising Sun", "Art of War", and, well, "Blade". Like that. In fact, my original point was that "Blade" was able to get produced because he was such a popular name, who just didn't happen to be in the Smith/Washington tier of stars.

 

I agree completely with the comments here  about how young white actors are sold to us when black actors are not. It's why I brought up Kitsch a few posts above. 

No problem, I knew you were referring to his film output and not his talent.  I would disagree about the level of the films though.  Demolition Man and US Marshalls were major releases with major co-stars (Stallone and Tommy Lee Jones, respectively).  Rising Sun was a fairly big release with Sean Connery.  Hell, he even did a movie with DeNiro (The Fan).  He certainly did his fair share of middling to moderate actions films during this period, but he consistently starred in big productions all the way up through the release of Blade.

I would...Love to see a Black Panther film!  I cannot understand why it hasn't happened yet.  There is no need to change the...Race of the title character, like Fox and Marvel did with Kingpin and Nick Fury!  He is an...A List Superhero, that fights for his people in Wakanda where he happens to be a...King, and fights for the cause of the oppressed away from his Island Home as well.  He even is an Avenger!  I would definitely produce a Black Panther film over Guardians Of The Galaxy.  I do want to see Ant-Man, as The Wasp is one of my favorite female superheroines, and want to see her in...The Avengers 2!  Adding the happy, goofy, Wasp would lighten The Avengers much more than the dour Black Widow.

I will say one thing: bringing Black Panther to the screen would entail inevitable comparisons with contemporary Africa which would be awkward to say the least. In the comics Wakanda is a technologically advanced civilization. Anyone watching a film based in or portraying Wakanda will be 1) incensed at the fairy tale nature of the film compared to the real life misery in Africa 2) be totally racist and dismiss the film as a fantasy (which, duh).

Of course they could avoid either scenario and go full "coming to America", just showing Wakanda briefly and have BP in America the whole film.

Cylon Baby, Wakanda is comparable to Paradise Island in Wonder Woman.  It...Is a fantastical place where an invaluable metal...Vibranium, from an asteroid that crashed years earlier, provided the key to developing the nation.  Marvel has several supergeniuses, and not just superheroes but demi-gods, cigar smoking ducks, foul mouthed heavilly armed Racoons, so why should Wakanda have to be compared to any real place?

Considering that Africa on screen is very rarely shown as anything else but a giant horror-show? My bet is that more than a few people wouldn't mind seeing Africans treated as capable people who have a lovely country that doesn't need to be rescued by white people.

Tricky situation.  You can easily go too far with it and be accused of being insensitive to the plights of real life Africa.  Still, it shouldn't stop them from doing a Black Panther movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by duke fleed 

Cylon Baby, Wakanda is comparable to Paradise Island in Wonder Woman.  It...Is a fantastical place where an invaluable metal...Vibranium, from an asteroid that crashed years earlier, provided the key to developing the nation.  Marvel has several supergeniuses, and not just superheroes but demi-gods, cigar smoking ducks, foul mouthed heavilly armed Racoons, so why should Wakanda have to be compared to any real place?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan Benenson 

You really think those would naturally be the only two, or even the two most prominent reactions from people? I really don't think so, and it seems like it's just that kind of thinking that turns into an excuse not to take this supposed risk that isn't really that risky. Look at DISTRICT 9 and BEASTS OF THE SOUTHERN WILD; I think both those points (definitely the first one, at least) came up in the conversations surrounding those films bu not so much that it prevented them from from being successful (critical AND commercial in the case of D9, so far more critical for BEASTS but it's a smaller movie that only came out recently, and the positive reaction suggests it'll do well in its bracket, so to speak). It was just that - part of the conversation. Far from a reason not to make a movie.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurenOrtega 

Considering that Africa on screen is very rarely shown as anything else but a giant horror-show? My bet is that more than a few people wouldn't mind seeing Africans treated as capable people who have a lovely country that doesn't need to be rescued by white people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by neoolong 

Tricky situation.  You can easily go too far with it and be accused of being insensitive to the plights of real life Africa.  Still, it shouldn't stop them from doing a Black Panther movie.

All very good points!

Neolong, as I point out above, a BP movie could take place mostly in America (the classic Panther stories had T'Calla observing the Savagery of "civilized" New Yprok whilst he beat some Justice into Bad Guys alongside the Avengers!).

I was thinking more of Thor and how Asgard was depicted when I typed my post. Depicting Wakanda as "Magic Negro Land" would be a big mistake: showing Wakanda as a High Tech City State along the lines of Singapore might work.

Looking at Marvel's MO, it'd likely be in New York or something.  The real world.  Like you said, there are certainly those Black Panther tales to tell though.

Like what happened with Thor, though that did have a fair amount of magical lands.

There would also be the issue of, if Wakanda is that advanced, why isn't it helping the rest of the continent? Why didn't it end Apartheid? And why does the ruler of the country waltz off to America?

The later issue was addressed in the comics, the former, not so much (although I only read a few of the Christopher Priest issues so may have missed it).

Originally Posted by Cylon Baby 

I will say one thing: bringing Black Panther to the screen would entail inevitable comparisons with contemporary Africa which would be awkward to say the least. In the comics Wakanda is a technologically advanced civilization. Anyone watching a film based in or portraying Wakanda will be 1) incensed at the fairy tale nature of the film compared to the real life misery in Africa

Originally Posted by neoolong 

Tricky situation.  You can easily go too far with it and be accused of being insensitive to the plights of real life Africa.  Still, it shouldn't stop them from doing a Black Panther movie.

...Guys. Not all of Africa is an impoverished AIDShole. Come on. 

Fair point.

I hate that #1 Ladies' Detective Agency was cancelled by HBO. It had a great depiction of Botswana that was not an African AIDShole, to borrow the phrase.   Any interview you hear where black actors talk about Nichelle Nichols, they always comment that it was invigorating for the actor to just see her there, with everyone else, just as important as everyone else. It inspired them.  Show us an African country that isn't a hellhole and maybe we, the peoples of Earth, will help the nations that are struggling to be that. 

Wakanda, in my head since I haven't read that much Black Panther except where he showed up in other books and I was just reading a description, always seemed like Germany, set somewhere in East Africa. I imagine trains, and factories, and bakeries, and markets with people in suits and tribal dress, cellphones and laptops and tablets everywhere, and occasional foreigners (now, mostly Asians - Chinese and Indians, who are heavily investing in minerals in Africa.)

I commented on the Life of Pi trailer on Facebook that I was glad it wasn't whitewashed. I think the CGI may be a bit heavy, but I dug it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by LaurenOrtega 

Considering that Africa on screen is very rarely shown as anything else but a giant horror-show? My bet is that more than a few people wouldn't mind seeing Africans treated as capable people who have a lovely country that doesn't need to be rescued by white people.

Reminded me of my favorite part about When We Were Kings. Ali was flying to Kinshasa for the fight with Foreman in an Air Zaire airplane. Seeing the all black crew he just looked so genuinely happy and proud. He kept saying (I'm paraphrasing a bit) "Look at that. I wish kids back home could see this."

Growing up in the world we do as white men we take the ability to live vicariously through our on screen heroes for granted. Watching Peter Parker onscreen I identify with him automatically and completely. People of different color have to take a pretty major step in order to achieve what to us comes naturally. But a lot of us get indignant at people wanting a chance to skip this step. Why? I don't know  where I would have been mentally without having Peter Parker and Bruce Wayne and Tony Stark when I was growing up. I want every kid to have chance to hear a hero he identifies with say to him "Do the right thing. Even if it's difficult. Even if it hurts you."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cylon Baby 

 1) incensed at the fairy tale nature of the film compared to the real life misery in Africa 2) be totally racist and dismiss the film as a fantasy (which, duh).

Somewhat strange assumptions IMO. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by stelios 

I want every kid to have chance to hear a hero he identifies with say to him "Do the right thing. Even if it's difficult. Even if it hurts you."

Well, Ossie Davis already did that, so I guess black kids are already covered. [/joking]

Blade?

Joon and I got nothing.  They even took Avatar: The Last Airbender away from us.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ambler 

 

Somewhat strange assumptions IMO. 

I'm just trying to get into Marvell Exec's head....what I'm sure are somewhat strange.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cylon Baby 

I'm just trying to get into Marvell Exec's head....what I'm sure are somewhat strange.

This is an interesting idea.  It speaks to the age-old conflicting goals of artists and suits in the movie industry.  Marvel wants to make money.  Artists want to tell stories.  From the producers on down to the actors, the ones charged with crafting a Black Panther movie will be ultimately beholden, rightly or wrongly, to the financial demands of the studio - probably to the detriment of the film.  It's why some of us are anticipating, given the movie gets made, that they may relocate the action to New York, or some other more "palatable" locale.  D'Esposito and Marvel are obviously trying to crack the "problem" of a character whose story, they believe, may alienate white movie goers.  The question is, does this problem really exist?  I believe Quentin Tarantino may be about to answer that question definitively with Django, Unchained.

And then there's the popular industry belief that black characters/black movies (and not to forget our Asian, Latino, Arab, and other non-white peers) don't do well at the international box office (unless you're Will Smith or Denzel Washington...and I think Sam Jackson has joined that exclusive list of "safe" black actors by sheer force of will).  What's even more interesting is that it's assumed/known that white characters/movies will perform well in countries with a majority non-white population.  This means that there is the belief that people are willing to spend their money on stories that don't necessarily include characters that look like them...but only if those characters are white (African-Americans, for instance, have been patronizing mostly-white productions in film and television since forever).  So, there's still the belief that an Asian movie goer will watch Chris Hemsworth toss a hammer at some ne'er-do-wells (who, themselves, may look a lot like those movie-goers) but apparently won't pay for the privilege of watching Idris Elba do the same?  That in South America, a Cable movie with Stephen Lang (awesome) would outperform a Bishop movie with Ving Rhames (quite possibly the most awesome thing ever)?  In either case, I would argue that comic book properties are the medium to dispel that arcane notion, or brake down that wall once and for all.  We've seen black heroes (Blade), B-list heroes (Iron Man/Thor), Galactic Heroes (Green Lantern), anti-heroes (The Hulk, Ghost Rider, Punisher), Mash Ups (Cowboys and Aliens), and spin-offs that had no business being produced (Elektra).  The (supposed) risks, financial and content-wise, are being taken (hell, they're taking Deadpool and Lobo films seriously), but the final frontier (to borrow a term from a race-forward program) remains as always, blackness.

This is a partial list of rumored/confirmed projects that, were they to make it to screen before Black Panther, would cause me to throw up in my mouth.  And not a little bit.  Note: not that I'm against any of these projects on their own merit; I'm looking forward to some, others...not so much.

Plastic Man, Metal Men, Guradians of the Galaxy, Lobo, The Crow Remake, Ant Man, The Fantastic 4 remake, Hawkeye, Zombies vs Robots (you can thank Michael Bay for that one), RED 2.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hammerhead 

 

When I first saw this, I thought it was the greatest thing I ever laid eyes on.  After having seen it a few dozens times, I feel just as strongly.

"Don't summon me again unless you ready for that pain."

Regarding the preferences of the international market: I don't think they're primarily race-based. American films have dominated for decades because they're generally better-produced, better-shot, better-financed. To cite a historical example: in China in the 1920s, local filmmakers couldn't compete with Hollywood. But then talking pictures came in-- and in an age before dubbing, foreign films ceased to be easily translatable. There was a subsequent boom in Chinese silent film, lasting into the late 30s, but it had nothing to do with the complexion of the actors and everything to do with accessible product.

American films still have a reputation for delivering the highest-quality audiovisual experience. They don't have a lot of motivation to alter their casting methods.