DC Comics is doing new versions of The Flintstones, Johnny Quest, Scooby Doo, Wacky Races

[Nerys Myk]

It's settling. It's saying "That movie didn't show me a damn thing I wanted to see but thank god everybody did their jobs right. Yay, professionalism!"

That's an interesting interpretation of what @Ancient Mariner said. Probably not accurate, but interesting.

These are motion pictures. They are required to show you something. Either they show you something that you want to see or show you something that you didn't know you wanted to see. If it shows you neither, then it's a waste of a ticket, no matter how expertly the film was crafted.
And to un-hijack the thread, it's the same with comics. From what I've seen of the sample images of the comics in this line-up they are all well drawn and professionally written. Yet, only one of them is showing me what I want to see, so that's the one getting my money. And there's nothing wrong with that attitude either.

Well as the potential consumer that's your right. But every consumer has different priorities. If adding a new character is a deal breaker to someone, that strikes me as an odd priority. If casting (or drawing) an established character with an ethnic background that differs from the previous version is a deal breaker, that's an odd priority to me, YMMV.

 

[JD]

It's settling. It's saying "That movie didn't show me a damn thing I wanted to see but thank god everybody did their jobs right. Yay, professionalism!"

These are motion pictures. They are required to show you something. Either they show you something that you want to see or show you something that you didn't know you wanted to see. If it shows you neither, then it's a waste of a ticket, no matter how expertly the film was crafted.

I guess that makes a certain amount of sense, there have been some movies that were very well made that I just weren't for me.

And to un-hijack the thread, it's the same with comics. From what I've seen of the sample images of the comics in this line-up they are all well drawn and professionally written. Yet, only one of them is showing me what I want to see, so that's the one getting my money. And there's nothing wrong with that attitude either.

That's fine, then don't buy them.

 

[Admiral2]

That's an interesting interpretation of what @Ancient Mariner said. Probably not accurate, but interesting.

His exact words:

I'll take "Story, Acting, and Writing Over Traditional Race And/Or Gender Any Day" for $2,000, Alex.

Which implies he's more concerned with how the movie was crafted than if what he sees on the screen meets his expectations. If that's not what he meant he should learn to write posts more precisely.

Well as the potential consumer that's your right. But every consumer has different priorities. If adding a new character is a deal breaker to someone, that strikes me as an odd priority. If casting (or drawing) an established character with an ethnic background that differs from the previous version is a deal breaker, that's an odd priority to me, YMMV.

And you can find that odd all you like. Lots of people do. What ticks me off is when some of those people imply that I have some kind of obligation to change those priorities, as a couple have done to S. Gallagher in this thread and to me in numerous others. Look, all of you people can go be super-enlightened consumers all you like. Nobody's holding a gun to your heads to agree with me. All I ask for is the same consideration.

That's fine, then don't buy them.

And I don't, cause that's my choice! See JD, you're finally getting it.

 

[Nerys Myk]

And you can find that odd all you like. Lots of people do. What ticks me off is when some of those people imply that I have some kind of obligation to change those priorities, as a couple have done to S. Gallagher in this thread and to me in numerous others. Look, all of you people can go be super-enlightened consumers all you like. Nobody's holding a gun to your heads to agree with me. All I ask for is the same consideration.

Certain priorities and the possible motivation behind them should be questioned and challenged.

Which implies he's more concerned with how the movie was crafted than if what he sees on the screen meets his expectations. If that's not what he meant he should learn to write posts more precisely.

I don't think he's saying that all. It might be what you'd like it mean though. Filtered through your own priorities, prejudices and preferences

 

[JD]

Yeah, I think he's basically just saying that he places a higher priority on things like writing, acting, ect than things like a character's race.
I think it's a matter of being able to look past surface features to the deeper parts of the movie.
That's how it is for me, if the deeper parts of the character(s) and their story/ies are intact I'm happy to look past the surface things like race or even a new team member. To me, adding a new member, especially a female one to a formerly all male group, can actually be an improvement since it can allow you to play with the character dynamics in new ways.

 

[Admiral2]

Certain priorities and the possible motivation behind them should be questioned and challenged.

And I've explained my motivations. Several times. I would rather see Reed Richards portrayed by a white man than a black man. I'd rather see Luke Cage played by a black man than a white man. I would rather see The Ancient One played by an old Asian man than a sour-pussed bald English woman, because my preferences are in the actual fucking comics I read as a kid. That's all. I don't know what else you need to hear.

 

[Nerys Myk]

And I've explained my motivations. Several times. I would rather see Reed Richards portrayed by a white man than a black man. I'd rather see Luke Cage played by a black man than a white man. I would rather see The Ancient One played by an old Asian man than a sour-pussed bald English woman, because my preferences are in the actual fucking comics I read as a kid. That's all. I don't know what else you need to hear.

It was a general statement.
Reed being black wouldn't bother me because being white isn't part of who he is. Casting someone who can pull off Reed's personality and brilliance is what I want in a Mister Fantastic. OTOH Being black and American is part of who Luke Cage is. It informs the character. So casting Bradley Cooper or Tom Hiddleston just wouldn't work for me. I'm with you on the Ancient One, though. I'm a case by case kind of guy.

 

[JD]

But is them changing the Ancient One enough to send off into a rant, refuse to see the movie, and throw another fit every time someone mentions the Doctor Strange movie?

 

[ancient]

And I've explained my motivations. Several times. I would rather see Reed Richards portrayed by a white man than a black man. I'd rather see Luke Cage played by a black man than a white man. I would rather see The Ancient One played by an old Asian man than a sour-pussed bald English woman, because my preferences are in the actual fucking comics I read as a kid. That's all. I don't know what else you need to hear.

What we need is an inquisition about your opinion to sniff out whether your commitment to the revolution is pure enough, because that certainly never gets out of hand, just ask the French!

 

[Nerys Myk]

But is them changing the Ancient One enough to send off into a rant, refuse to see the movie, and throw another fit every time someone mentions the Doctor Strange movie?

Not for me. It's not like someone said "Cleaning Woman"

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[JD]

What is that from?

 

[Nerys Myk]

What is that from?

Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid. A great comedy by Carl Reiner, starring Steve Martin.

 

[Greylock Crescent]

Which implies he's more concerned with how the movie was crafted than if what he sees on the screen meets his expectations.

It's amusing how prioritizing a desire to see quality (e.g. funny, or entertaining, or moving, or emotional, or inspiring, or thoughtful, etc.) story writing, directing and acting over preconceived notions of race and/or gender is equated to having no expectation for what is seen on screen.

Funnily enough, a movie that is well crafted would, by definition, meet my expectations. But I guess having priorities is what counts for being "neutral" nowadays?

my preferences are in the actual fucking comics I read as a kid. That's all.

You're entitled to your express opinions and preferences, of course. I'm also entitled to express my opinion that this is an overly rigid, backward-thinking statement about story telling in general and movie making, specifically.

Ain't free speech a peach?

Seriously, though, something like @Nerys Myk 's case-by-case perspective is much more reasonable. And besides, all else being equal (an important qualifier not to be ignored), having characters be more representative of today's society can, in my opinion, be an example of a better overall production - and, therefore, go further to meet my expectations and priorities for what I see on-screen.

 

[S.Gallagher]

It's settling. It's saying "That movie didn't show me a damn thing I wanted to see but thank god everybody did their jobs right. Yay, professionalism!"

These are motion pictures. They are required to show you something. Either they show you something that you want to see or show you something that you didn't know you wanted to see. If it shows you neither, then it's a waste of a ticket, no matter how expertly the film was crafted.

And to un-hijack the thread, it's the same with comics. From what I've seen of the sample images of the comics in this line-up they are all well drawn and professionally written. Yet, only one of them is showing me what I want to see, so that's the one getting my money. And there's nothing wrong with that attitude either.

Again - fully agree with this!!!

 

[S.Gallagher]

Was someone suggesting that a female Impossible would somehow solve the problem of sexual harassment?

No, it's that the character seems to me to be there for no other reason than pandering to some PC agenda at DC, yet this is contradicted if harassment of real-life female workers is going on there!

 

[JD]

The people making the creative choices aren't the same people who decide who gets to keep their jobs.

 

[Nerys Myk]

No, it's that the character seems to me to be there for no other reason than pandering to some PC agenda at DC, yet this is contradicted if harassment of real-life female workers is going on there!

It's a big company. They can have people who promote inclusion and expansion and have others who have outdated and offensive attitudes and action towards women.

 

[S.Gallagher]

The people making the creative choices aren't the same people who decide who gets to keep their jobs.

I do realise that of course, but they all represent the company! Although I think there are guidelines the actual artists and writers have to follow regarding their products and those deciding who gets/ keeps their jobs have some say in that.

 

[Nerys Myk]

I do realise that of course, but they all represent the company! Although I think there are guidelines the actual artists and writers have to follow regarding their products and those deciding who gets/ keeps their jobs have some say in that.

Depends on what is meant by "represent the company". The artists and writers are usually freelancers, doing work for hire. The editors, management and production people work directly for the company. The editors tend to be the link with the freelancers. Some are very much in control of their books. Others give the creatives "free range".

 

[JD]

^And different editors are in charge of different ranges, so there's a pretty good chance that the guy from the linked story has nothing whatsoever to do with the Hanna-Barbera Beyond line. I was just looking around on the DC website and that's apparently what they call these books.