Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Prestor Jon wrote:
Having Samuel L Jackson be Nick Fury was a bigger deal because it required the character's backstory to be retconned because you couldn't have a black Nick Fury leading a unit of US commandos in WWII. I personally didn't mind because I think Jackson does a good job in the movies but that is an instance where changing the ethnicity of a character had greater ramifications than just appearance.

Well, a retcon to Nick Fury also might have been necessary because Nick Fury's original backstory would have required a 95 year old actor.

Prestor Jon wrote:

Idris Elba's portrayal of Heimdal isn't any different from having Gerard Butler and Nikolaj Coster-Waldau portray Egyptian gods.

To be honest, I thought that was silly, too. On top of the silliness of that entire movie.

And while I still think black movie Heimdall is silly, it hasn't stopped me from seeing, and enjoying it, and Elba, in that role. I just don't think movies are important enough to get worked up about to the degree that some people are. I don't watch them for the social commentary or to be engaged on a deeper level. I just wanna have a good time with some popcorn and a beer or two.
But you people keep on rationalizing why having a black guy playing a Norse God is perfectly logical. Me, I'm a simple guy. I think a Norse God, even a third-generation derivative, should look the part.

So props to Ed Skrein bowing out in this instance (apparently the Japanese part is a big part of the character after all - I don't remember him that well), but the argument goes both ways.

In more important matters: Is Hellboy himself going to be played by Ron Perlman again?

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
All I can argue in reply is that Shakespeare's plays are still after 400 years regarded as one of the pinnacles of world literature, yet, all of his women characters were played by men and no-one thought anything of it.

If it was good enough for Shakespeare, Queen Elizabeth and the population of London, why is it wrong for the modern Marvel Superhero fanboi that a fictional alien god be played by someone with a dark skin tone?

Nobody has argued that having men play woman characters in Shakespearean plays in Elizabethean England was bad.

Two points to note regarding male actors playing female roles in Shakespeare's time:

1. It was socially acceptable for women to be actors at that time so there were no female actors in the acting troupes, they were all male so casting women wasn't an option.
...

Yes, this is the core point. Is it socially unacceptable in the present day for a woman to play a man, or a black guy to play a character that some people think should have white skin, and if so, why?

Socially unacceptable? No. Mighty silly? Absolutely.

For some reason, I like the word silly.

Bran Dawri wrote:

But you people keep on rationalizing why having a black guy playing a Norse God is perfectly logical.

Ok... Again, he's not a Norse God. He's one of a race of beings who the Norse saw as gods. And given recent developments in the comics, may or may not even be the same guy the Norse were familiar with, and may just be the current bearer of the name.

Bran Dawri wrote:
In more important matters: Is Hellboy himself going to be played by Ron Perlman again?

No:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2274648/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast

 Ouze wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Having Samuel L Jackson be Nick Fury was a bigger deal because it required the character's backstory to be retconned because you couldn't have a black Nick Fury leading a unit of US commandos in WWII. I personally didn't mind because I think Jackson does a good job in the movies but that is an instance where changing the ethnicity of a character had greater ramifications than just appearance.

Well, a retcon to Nick Fury also might have been necessary because Nick Fury's original backstory would have required a 95 year old actor.

Not really, as he's taking anti-ageing drugs. (David Hasselhoff played Nick Fury in the 1998 movie)

 Kanluwen wrote:
Which kind of renders the whole "black dude played a Norse god!" argument pointless.

To be fair, I think it's more Marvel kicking themselves over that casting, 'cause they've 'wasted' Idris Elbar on a relatively minor role. Could'a used him for something way better.

It's not as though they can't get Idris back in another role.
Look at what they did with Ryan Reynolds.

 Ouze wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Having Samuel L Jackson be Nick Fury was a bigger deal because it required the character's backstory to be retconned because you couldn't have a black Nick Fury leading a unit of US commandos in WWII. I personally didn't mind because I think Jackson does a good job in the movies but that is an instance where changing the ethnicity of a character had greater ramifications than just appearance.

Well, a retcon to Nick Fury also might have been necessary because Nick Fury's original backstory would have required a 95 year old actor.

No it wouldn't have because Nick Fury's character in the MCI was taking the Infinity Formula to prevent his body from aging.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nick_Fury


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kilkrazy wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
All I can argue in reply is that Shakespeare's plays are still after 400 years regarded as one of the pinnacles of world literature, yet, all of his women characters were played by men and no-one thought anything of it.

If it was good enough for Shakespeare, Queen Elizabeth and the population of London, why is it wrong for the modern Marvel Superhero fanboi that a fictional alien god be played by someone with a dark skin tone?

Nobody has argued that having men play woman characters in Shakespearean plays in Elizabethean England was bad.

Two points to note regarding male actors playing female roles in Shakespeare's time:

1. It was socially acceptable for women to be actors at that time so there were no female actors in the acting troupes, they were all male so casting women wasn't an option.
...

Yes, this is the core point. Is it socially unacceptable in the present day for a woman to play a man, or a black guy to play a character that some people think should have white skin, and if so, why?

I think there's no evidence that it is socially unacceptable. There's certainly no evidence that the casting of Elba and Jackson hurt the success of the MCU movies since they've been wildly popular and successful. If the movie remains internally consistent then casting isn't going to have a negative impact as long as the actors perform well (which has nothing to do with their physical characteristics). You'd still have some complaints about not being true to the source material in some instances but that is more of a product of fans being fanatics not society being racist.

Marvel star slates 'racist' Hollywood over name change

[spoiler]
Chloe Bennet, who stars in TV series Marvel's Agents of SHIELD, has said she had to change her name from Chloe Wang in order to make it in Hollywood.
The actress praised Ed Skrein for recently pulling out of Hellboy.
His casting had been criticised for "whitewashing" the original character, who is of Asian heritage.
She told an Instagram follower who queried her name change: "Hollywood is racist and wouldn't cast me with a last name that made them uncomfortable."
"Changing my last name doesn't change the fact that my BLOOD is half Chinese, that I lived in China, speak Mandarin or that I was culturally raised both American and Chinese... It means I had to pay my rent."
She added: "I'm doing everything I can, with the platform I have, to make sure no one has to change their name again, just so they can get work."

Chloe, who plays a secret agent, has previously explained how her name change led to a more successful career almost immediately.
"Oh, the first audition I went on after I changed my name, I got booked," she told The Daily Beast last year. "So that's a pretty clear little snippet of how Hollywood works."
The actress has since created RUN (Represent Us Now) a group which campaigns for Asian American and Pacific Islander communities to be better represented in Hollywood.
She praised Skrein's decision earlier this week, saying: "DAMN, that's a man. Thank you @edskrein for standing up against Hollywood's continuous insensitivity and flippant behaviour towards the Asian American community.

"There is no way this decision came lightly on your part, so thank you for your bravery and genuinely impactful step forward. I hope this inspires other actors/film makers to do the same.

 Skinnereal wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
In more important matters: Is Hellboy himself going to be played by Ron Perlman again?

No:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2274648/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast

Lame.

beast_gts wrote:
Marvel star slates 'racist' Hollywood over name change

[spoiler]
Chloe Bennet, who stars in TV series Marvel's Agents of SHIELD, has said she had to change her name from Chloe Wang in order to make it in Hollywood.
The actress praised Ed Skrein for recently pulling out of Hellboy.
His casting had been criticised for "whitewashing" the original character, who is of Asian heritage.
She told an Instagram follower who queried her name change: "Hollywood is racist and wouldn't cast me with a last name that made them uncomfortable."
"Changing my last name doesn't change the fact that my BLOOD is half Chinese, that I lived in China, speak Mandarin or that I was culturally raised both American and Chinese... It means I had to pay my rent."
She added: "I'm doing everything I can, with the platform I have, to make sure no one has to change their name again, just so they can get work."

Chloe, who plays a secret agent, has previously explained how her name change led to a more successful career almost immediately.
"Oh, the first audition I went on after I changed my name, I got booked," she told The Daily Beast last year. "So that's a pretty clear little snippet of how Hollywood works."
The actress has since created RUN (Represent Us Now) a group which campaigns for Asian American and Pacific Islander communities to be better represented in Hollywood.
She praised Skrein's decision earlier this week, saying: "DAMN, that's a man. Thank you @edskrein for standing up against Hollywood's continuous insensitivity and flippant behaviour towards the Asian American community.

"There is no way this decision came lightly on your part, so thank you for your bravery and genuinely impactful step forward. I hope this inspires other actors/film makers to do the same.

whilst part of this is racist I suspect more than 50% of it a childish sniggering factor over a name more suited to a certain part of entertainment industry, which again isnt really fair or right but understable to a degree

 Skinnereal wrote:
It's not as though they can't get Idris back in another role.
Look at what they did with Ryan Reynolds.

Huh?

Green Lantern was DC.
Deadpool is FOX.

Neither of them are the MCU.

Sam Jackson as Nick Fury in the MCU is because in the 'alternate universe' version of the Avengers - The Ultimates - the creators specifically made Nick Fury look like Sam Jackson - on purpose!

The MCU Avengers take a lot from The Ultimates, so when the chance came to actually have Sam Jackson play the role, they took it!

Marvel then found a way to have a Nick Fury (Jr.?) look kinda like Sam Jackson too...

And since Marvel's books are stuck in an odd place - having basically started in the 60's and yet maybe 'only' 10 or 15 years worth of comic book history as taken place (maybe?), it doesn't make sense for too many characters to have a backstory that stretches all the way back to WWII, or Vietnam, etc.

Nick Fury had the "Infinity Formula" and Steve Rogers had a prolonged Ice Bath, but other than that...

Bottom line - I don't think Sam Jackson as Nick Fury was a big deal. At all!

 Turnip Jedi wrote:

beast_gts wrote:
Marvel star slates 'racist' Hollywood over name change

[spoiler]
Chloe Bennet, who stars in TV series Marvel's Agents of SHIELD, has said she had to change her name from Chloe Wang in order to make it in Hollywood.
The actress praised Ed Skrein for recently pulling out of Hellboy.
His casting had been criticised for "whitewashing" the original character, who is of Asian heritage.
She told an Instagram follower who queried her name change: "Hollywood is racist and wouldn't cast me with a last name that made them uncomfortable."
"Changing my last name doesn't change the fact that my BLOOD is half Chinese, that I lived in China, speak Mandarin or that I was culturally raised both American and Chinese... It means I had to pay my rent."
She added: "I'm doing everything I can, with the platform I have, to make sure no one has to change their name again, just so they can get work."

Chloe, who plays a secret agent, has previously explained how her name change led to a more successful career almost immediately.
"Oh, the first audition I went on after I changed my name, I got booked," she told The Daily Beast last year. "So that's a pretty clear little snippet of how Hollywood works."
The actress has since created RUN (Represent Us Now) a group which campaigns for Asian American and Pacific Islander communities to be better represented in Hollywood.
She praised Skrein's decision earlier this week, saying: "DAMN, that's a man. Thank you @edskrein for standing up against Hollywood's continuous insensitivity and flippant behaviour towards the Asian American community.

"There is no way this decision came lightly on your part, so thank you for your bravery and genuinely impactful step forward. I hope this inspires other actors/film makers to do the same.

whilst part of this is racist I suspect more than 50% of it a childish sniggering factor over a name more suited to a certain part of entertainment industry, which again isnt really fair or right but understable to a degree

Yeah, to me that looks less like racism and more like them not wanting a name that's basically slang for penis.
Stupid, but not racist as that implies an ongoing discrimination against asian actors and actresses.
Hollywood had no problem with Jacky Chan or Jet Li, after all. If Hollywood had a thing against chinese names, they would have pushed to have those names changed as well.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:
It's not as though they can't get Idris back in another role.
Look at what they did with Ryan Reynolds.

Huh?

Green Lantern was DC. Deadpool is FOX.
Neither of them are the MCU.

OK. He's probably a bad example.
By 'they', I meant Hollywood. Hasn't there been anyone who played different characters in the same series? It happens a lot on TV.

 Skinnereal wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:
It's not as though they can't get Idris back in another role.
Look at what they did with Ryan Reynolds.

Huh?

Green Lantern was DC. Deadpool is FOX.
Neither of them are the MCU.

OK. He's probably a bad example.
By 'they', I meant Hollywood. Hasn't there been anyone who played different characters in the same series? It happens a lot on TV.

Does it now, at least for a major production? I only remember actors being recycled in small productions, such as Nero Wolfe and Black Adder.
In larger productions, such as HBO series, I don't remember actors being reused for different characters.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:
It's not as though they can't get Idris back in another role.
Look at what they did with Ryan Reynolds.

Huh?

Green Lantern was DC. Deadpool is FOX.
Neither of them are the MCU.

OK. He's probably a bad example.
By 'they', I meant Hollywood. Hasn't there been anyone who played different characters in the same series? It happens a lot on TV.

Does it now, at least for a major production? I only remember actors being recycled in small productions, such as Nero Wolfe and Black Adder.
In larger productions, such as HBO series, I don't remember actors being reused for different characters.

Doctor Who (I know, BBC and all that) get a lot of their cast from previous episodes. Both Capaldi as the Doctor and Amy Pond were in the Pompeii episode as different characters. Bernard Cribbins was a few people, over the decades.
Maybe it's not as much a thing outside the UK.

 AduroT wrote:

 Skinnereal wrote:

Bran Dawri wrote:
In more important matters: Is Hellboy himself going to be played by Ron Perlman again?

No:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2274648/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast

Lame.

He's 67 years old. He'd be in his 70s for any sequel. I'm okay with them moving to a younger actor. And I'm excited that this project sounds like it'll be a little closer to the comics. Note that Del Toro's adaptation was a bad one, mind you.

"That said, the role of actors is to pretend to be people they aren't. Why shouldn't a white man play an oriental man, or a black woman play a white woman?"

I disagree - the role of actors is to pretend they are the people depicted in the story/screen play/whatever you want to call it. You should try your best to cast actors that look like the characters in the story. This is honestly one of the only situations where race actually matters about anything to me. I couldn't care less what race the person sitting next to me on the bus is. However, the Asian robot super cop in ghost in the shell being played by a white woman really irritates me. Totally breaks immersion and immersion is the reason we watch films in the first place. Just cast people properly based on how they look first- people that don't look the part should not be considered for the roll - period.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, to me that looks less like racism and more like them not wanting a name that's basically slang for penis.
Stupid, but not racist as that implies an ongoing discrimination against asian actors and actresses.
Hollywood had no problem with Jacky Chan or Jet Li, after all. If Hollywood had a thing against chinese names, they would have pushed to have those names changed as well.

That sounds a bit too glib to be convincing--having a name that might make a twelve-year-old go "hur hur" hasn't held back Dwayne Johnson. And the Asian actors you named (indeed, most of the big Asian actors I can think of) made it big in China or Hong Kong and were then belatedly "discovered" by Hollywood.

On a tangent, I'd be interested to know how this works for non-white-majority countries with big domestic film & TV industries, like India, China or Japan. Do minority actors there have the same problems? Is it seen as something that needs redressing?

That sounds a bit too glib to be convincing--having a name that might make a twelve-year-old go "hur hur" hasn't held back Dwayne Johnson.

However that's not a good example for several reasons

1: Johnson is a far more obscure nickname for that bodily part then Wang

2: He was a Pro Athlete who eventually went into the World Wrestling Federation. He made it big before moving onto movies, as your examples of "Made it big in China".

 Elemental wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
Yeah, to me that looks less like racism and more like them not wanting a name that's basically slang for penis.
Stupid, but not racist as that implies an ongoing discrimination against asian actors and actresses.
Hollywood had no problem with Jacky Chan or Jet Li, after all. If Hollywood had a thing against chinese names, they would have pushed to have those names changed as well.

That sounds a bit too glib to be convincing--having a name that might make a twelve-year-old go "hur hur" hasn't held back Dwayne Johnson. And the Asian actors you named (indeed, most of the big Asian actors I can think of) made it big in China or Hong Kong and were then belatedly "discovered" by Hollywood.

On a tangent, I'd be interested to know how this works for non-white-majority countries with big domestic film & TV industries, like India, China or Japan. Do minority actors there have the same problems? Is it seen as something that needs redressing?

Wang is a more well known slang term for penis than Johnson though, especially for young ones. You find more jokes about wangs than Johnson, Shadow Warrior being an example ("Who wants some Wang?" - Said by the main character, Lo Wang, who's name is also a double entendre)

Noriyuki Morita's (Mr Miyagi from Karate Kid) film career started in the states. He was Japanese, though born in US. So that's an actor who didn't make it big in Japan before getting discovered by Hollywood.
Furthermore the fact Chan and Li had existing careers is irrevalent; had Hollywood been truly racist they either would not have bothered or stressed in their contract that they must go under a different name if they are to work in the states.

Amazingly enough, Japan is positively seething with Japanese actors who have managed to make it big in Japanese cinema and TV without the benefit of having been discovered by Hollywood.

I...never said there wasn't? I know Japan has a fairly large film industry, en par with Hollywood's. There's Akira Kurosawa, the Toho films, Tokyo Story, etc. And that's to name a few. Not sure what your point is.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
had Hollywood been truly racist they either would not have bothered or stressed in their contract that they must go under a different name if they are to work in the states.

Actually, no. Chloe changed her name on her own. It's just that before she did so, she wasn't getting any acting jobs. She thinks it's due to her last name, because it was Chinese. You say it's because it was a double entendre in English. I'm not a Hollywood casting agent, so I can't vouch for the veracity of that either way. Just pointing out that both of those statements are opinion.
I'm leaning towards her side, because I don't think a funny name would be all that much of a problem in Tinseltown, and she could also have gone with retaining her real name but going for a nom-de-plume onscreen. Only the auditions and contracts would have needed her real name on it. But again, I'm no casting agent, so that, too, is only an opinion.

Bran Dawri wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
had Hollywood been truly racist they either would not have bothered or stressed in their contract that they must go under a different name if they are to work in the states.

Actually, no. Chloe changed her name on her own. It's just that before she did so, she wasn't getting any acting jobs. She thinks it's due to her last name, because it was Chinese. You say it's because it was a double entendre in English. I'm not a Hollywood casting agent, so I can't vouch for the veracity of that either way. Just pointing out that both of those statements are opinion.
I'm leaning towards her side, because I don't think a funny name would be all that much of a problem in Tinseltown, and she could also have gone with retaining her real name but going for a nom-de-plume onscreen. Only the auditions and contracts would have needed her real name on it. But again, I'm no casting agent, so that, too, is only an opinion.

Fair enough. I do think her claim that hollywood, as a collective entity, wouldn't accept her audition because of her name is unfounded as you do have actors in hollywood with asian names, but it is entirely possible that she had a casting agent that rejected her because of her name. Whether its due to a race thing or because the agent couldn't help snickering whenever he read wang is unknown.
Its still unfortunate, either way. Going by a pseudonym would have been an acceptable solution. Not sure why she didn't do that, but there was probably a good reason.

Kilkrazy wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-41080906

We've discussed this before in regards to Scarlett Johanssen in the remake of Ghost in the Shell.

The point here is that the character of Major Daimyo in Hellboy is a Japanese-American. Ed Skrein was unaware of this (so was I, in fact) and pulled out when he came to understand the situation.

Now, in my view, there are two opposing principles at stake. The first is that ethnic minorities should not be denied their fair chance of screen time when depicting ethnic minorities. The second is that a character should not be defined by his/her "race", which most people understand to be a relatively superficial surface characteristic. It's cultural background that has a much more important effect in forming and defining a character.

In that respect, I have no idea if Major Daimyo's key defining characteristic is his Japanese cultural heritage or his "slitty eyes".

That said, the role of actors is to pretend to be people they aren't. Why shouldn't a white man play an oriental man, or a black woman play a white woman?



On balance, my opinion is that the "race" of the actor is not all that relevant to the "race "of the role, and the primary concern must be that everyone of every "race" should have a fair chance of playing any role.

Personally, I think the whole "debate" about Hollyweird "whitewashing" is a load of crap to generate controversy in the interests of marketing and PR. But in the end, it makes the ones crying about it look stupid as all hell.

Case in point: Star Trek: Into Darkness. Cumberbatch as Khan. Garrett Wang (of Voyager fame) and George Takei started talking out their asses about choosing a white, British actor to portray Khan being "whitewashing". What those two has-beens didn't stop to think about is that 1. Khan's nationality, race, and ethnicity was never explicitly specified in Trek canon or in the Original Series. (other than the fact he wears a turban in a "historical" picture and has an Indian sounding name). 2. The whole "Sikh" BS was something cooked up by fans (based on an unused line in the Space Seed script's final draft) that became soft canon at some point. And 3. (This is the key point) Ricardo Montalban was a white Spanish-born Mexican national portraying somebody (allegedly) from the Indian subcontinent. In other words, the character was "whitewashed" from the get-go.


Nobody makes an issue out of "blackfacing" of iconic characters (i.e. Nick Fury). So-called "whitewashing" shouldn't be an issue either, As long as the actor can do a good job, I don't give a damn. (Cumberbatch did a good job as Khan, and Samuel L. Jackson makes a great Nick Fury).

Kanluwen wrote:

 trexmeyer wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
It helps that the Asgardians are no longer really considered "gods" but rather just extraterrestrials with godlike abilities.

Which kind of renders the whole "black dude played a Norse god!" argument pointless.

And yet they influenced Earth and Norse Mythology. How many black guys are there in Norse Mythology?

What exactly is your point?
A vocal number of Christians think that Jesus is a white guy, despite being born in the Middle East.

History and myth rarely align perfectly.

Technically, most so-called modern "Arabs" are white. So are most of the original Semitic and non-semitic peoples of the region stretching from Asia Minor to parts of North Africa.


Anything not originating in Europe doesn't automatically equate to non-white.

 BaconCatBug wrote:
So a guy decided to give up a job because he was scared of the SJW mob, because he was white?

Hmm, funny. I wonder how people would react if a black actress felt pressured into giving up her job because she was black?

Where was the outrage when white characters were replaced with black actors? Anyone?

Non-existent, because for every 1 role for a PoC there's 8 million roles for a white guy.

If Ed Screin gave up this role there are two hundred more on a list waiting for him to step into.