the G-man wrote:
Because that particular characters' sex was irrelevant to that particular character. Are you really going to argue Superman should be a woman?
Asked and answered. See what I already said about Supergirl etc. Obviously each situation is different and it doesn't contribute to a meaningful discussion of a nuanced question if you try to reduce everything to pat generalizations.
Because if you are, that seems...sorry...pretty much a classic "PC" position.
Again, I must stress how deeply insulting I consider that to be. I am NOT dishonestly hewing to some party line because I think it will improve my political standing or acceptance. I'm just saying that I don't have a rigid set of assumptions about how to portray a character in an adaptation, and I'm open to multiple possibilities. Exploring variations on a theme is interesting to me creatively
, and part of the value of adaptations is that you do
get to change things and try out new possibilities. You're just so obsessed with this ugly "PC" nonsense that you're blinding yourself to the completely different set of ideas I'm actually talking about.
...and Judd Winnick gave us a black Batman with Bat-wing. So making Bruce Wayne black is redundant.
Unless you're trying to cast Bruce Wayne in a movie and the best actor for the role happens to be black. Your problem is that you're thinking of this in terms of "white actors" versus "black actors." That's the wrong way to look at it. Think in terms of actors
. Just actors
-- who happen to be black or happen to be white or whatever, among all their other attributes
. They didn't cast the late Mr. Duncan as Kingpin because he was a "black actor," but because he was the right
actor. That is so simple and obvious and it's frustrating that you won't let yourself see it because of your fixation on irrelevant racial politics.