Naa-naa naa-naa
^ *rubs chin* Keanu.... I could really see him as the lead... but who would be Faye Valentine?
Because if they called it the National Association for the Advancement of African Americans, it would be NAAAA. How would you pronounce that?So why does no one change the names of the NAACP and the UNCF?![]()
The thing is, everytime a black/asian/"non-white" actor gets cast in a "white" role, the argument is always "talent first". But somehow this doesn't apply to cases in which a white actor gets a non-white role. Why the double standard?
Keanu is part Chinese. Does this make it all better now?
Since the lead (Kaneda, I assume) is supposed to be a teenager, no.
The thing is, everytime a black/asian/"non-white" actor gets cast in a "white" role, the argument is always "talent first". But somehow this doesn't apply to cases in which a white actor gets a non-white role. Why the double standard?
Why NOT the double standard? The world is multi-ethnic, yet seldom do Hollywood films represent that.
Principal photography is complete. It's set for release on March 9th, 2012.I have heard of the John Carter film, but I've no idea how seriously it is going forward.
Lucy Liu signed on to play Charlie Chan some years back, but the project didn't make it out of development.How many years did a white guy play Charlie Chan? Why not let Asians get a chance to play him?
The thing is, everytime a black/asian/"non-white" actor gets cast in a "white" role, the argument is always "talent first". But somehow this doesn't apply to cases in which a white actor gets a non-white role. Why the double standard?
Why NOT the double standard? The world is multi-ethnic, yet seldom do Hollywood films represent that.
Because there will never be true equality in a world full of double standards.
Lucy Liu signed on to play Charlie Chan some years back, but the project didn't make it out of development.
The problem with the "apply the same rules to reversed situations" approach to equality is that it doesn't correct for the fact that you are beginning from a place of inequality. The exact same decisions and actions have different ramifications in different contexts. If the double-standard functions as a corrective then why not go with it until such a time as the playing pitch is even?
Artistically I can get on board with atypical casting for new interpretations. If a director can do something interesting or thought-provoking with such a change, there's no reason for that not to make great art. It can be awesome. It will also inevitably also be a commentary on race. This is why Patrick Stewart's Othello was not just about 'the most talented man for the role'.
Pragmatically on the other hand, a whitewashed recasting means one less part for a non-white actor in an industry where he's already competing for a tiny percentage of available roles. And it's another missed chance for a movie that could have appealed to those of us in the audience who are dying to see some stories about all the people in the world who aren't white men.
The potentially interesting number of ways in which any story can be retold is infinite. The money and resources in Hollywood are finite. The number of movies my cinema will screen this year are finite. I for one would therefore much rather see at least one version of something which contains some frickin' diversity. It needn't be Akira specifically - but if they won't even cast asian actors in Akira then what really are the chances of 'Untitled Project Where A Black Woman Over Forty and a Gay Japanese Fireman Fight Aliens' getting made? (Incidentally, I would go see that movie so many times the cinema screen would wear out.)
Damn that American writer for creating Tarzan. I'd rather more focus was put on a John Carter movie or even Pelucidar, if someone wants to bring a Burroughs character/setting to life.Hey, I'm always up for a good Keanu flick!
Sorry to interrupt with honky news, but everyone's favorite chest-beating, loincloth-wearing, blindingly-white "African" (or does he consider himself a Primate-American?) is swinging his way back onto the big screen. TWO Tarzan movies in the works?
Hey, Tarzan is tan. He's a bronze god!!!! And he's a British!!!!! So he's Anglo-Mangani.
Americans. They think the whole world revolves around them![]()
I'll bet they change a whole lot more than just the characters' races and ages. They'll change everything and anything they need to, to maximize the potential profit. Most likely, we'll end up with AINO.It sounds here like they'll just be doing Akira, as is, but swapping people and places for American people and places.
I like it, and very often it works well. It shows creativity and emphasizes how timeless the plays are, that they can survive the transition well, even when the result is as far afield as Forbidden Planet, which after all was one of the inspirations for Star Trek, which in turn often made Shakespearean references.btw, I really hate when someone moves a Shakespeare play into a different time period then its subject. There's something...just...wrong about it, IMHO.
I like it, and very often it works well. It shows creativity and emphasizes how timeless the plays are, that they can survive the transition well, even when the result is as far afield as Forbidden Planet, which after all was one of the inspirations for Star Trek, which in turn often made Shakespearean references.btw, I really hate when someone moves a Shakespeare play into a different time period then its subject. There's something...just...wrong about it, IMHO.
People go to see Keanu on purpose?!
I like it, and very often it works well. It shows creativity and emphasizes how timeless the plays are, that they can survive the transition well, even when the result is as far afield as Forbidden Planet, which after all was one of the inspirations for Star Trek, which in turn often made Shakespearean references.btw, I really hate when someone moves a Shakespeare play into a different time period then its subject. There's something...just...wrong about it, IMHO.
Yabbut that's not what I'm talking about. FP was a story based on the story of a Shakespeare play. I'm talking about a completely literal, line-for-line Shakespeare play filmed in a modern setting, a le DeCaprio's Romeo + Juliette. It's just my personal taste that that doesn't work.
btw, I really hate when someone moves a Shakespeare play into a different time period then its subject. There's something...just...wrong about it, IMHO.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.