Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Gaith, May 31, 2010.
^ The next movie is going to be a reboot, which means a completely new cast.
I think it's pretty ludicrous that they're doing Spider-Man again so soon. I'm less concerned about being faithful to the source material than I was in 2002. We recently got a (more or less) faithful version of the character.
So why not cast a black guy if he's right for the part? Just do something different.
That's the problem - you'd only be doing it to "do something different".
If that's the best reason anyone can come up with then you may as well scrap the franchise now.
I want a female Spider-Man. If they don't do that, they are sexist.
I think Freddie Rodriguez, the actor who used to be in Six Feet Under, might have been a good alternate Spider-man, while Freddie Prinze jr was quite anxious to play the character when they began casting in 2000 or so. And yes, there are probably a few black actors who could playa good alternate Spidey.
The question is, though, why bother? Why not depict him as he's traditionally been portrayed? I mean, I can understand and support casting Michael Clarke Duncan as Kingpin, because I can't think of a white actor who could be as convincing a Wilson Fisk as he is. And Ben Grimm's girlfriend in Fantastic Four could undergo a colour change because she's not really an iconic character and if a black actress can play her as well, then well and good.
But with someone like Spider-man/ Peter Parker who is quite iconic and who has a long-standing visual representation - from a medium which is primary visual - why just change his ethnicity for the sake of it? I'm just not persuaded that there's a need.
I think there is much more merit in creating a new black superhero. To give an example, when walter Mosely wanted to have an African-American take on the noir genre, he didn't take Sam Spade or Philip Marlowe and make them black. He created Easy Rawlins, an original black private eye.
Now, Easy is regarded as one of the greats of crime fiction, not just the modern version but of all time. Had Mosely simply written a series of novels with a black version of Marlowe or Mike Hammer or whoever, would they have become so acclaimed and definitive? I don't think so. Would the Blade movies have been any better had Blade instead been called Van Helsing, but with a black man playing the lead? Doubt it.
Actually Danny Glover portrayed Philip Marlowe in a cable television film.
And John Shaft was a take on Mike Hammer as well as James Bond.
And Blade was a comic book character called....well, Blade, not Van Helsing...
And people could throw that back as well, in saying there is more merit in creating a new white superhero (or superheroes) in regards to Asian superheroes or characters being changed to white characters....or even in some cases, black characters....
^I wasn't aware of Glover having played Marlowe. But is his take on the character as well known as Easy Rawlins? Will it ever be more than an interesting one-off take?
Shaft, as you say, is a take on 007 and Hammer. Would simply taking either character and simply having a black actor play them have been as successful? No. Instead, by making an original, standalone black character, an iconic character was created (not to mention a bloody great theme song).
The point about Blade v Van Helsing is that Marv Wolfman and his co-creator (memory fails me at the min) is that they created a memorable and original vampire killer and happened to make him black. They didn't go, 'hmmm, who's an interesting vampire killer? Let's take him and have him played by a black actor, 'cos it's time he was played by one.' They made their own. And he's at least as famous as VH at this stage.
As regards the last paragraph of your post, I'm afraid I simply don't understand it. I haven't advocated making any Asian or black characters white.
I haven't seen it, but I don't think it was considered a bad performance.
Well, personally, I think the original movie is heavily dated, and the story weak.
And having a black actor portray either Hammer or 007 in 1971 wouldn't have went well with the populace at the time.
Well, they could have done that. Doesn't mean it would have been successful or unsuccessful because of the race of the actor.
It's all about the story.
The question was to you personally dude, I was just saying that the question can go both ways....
^I'd be extremely surprised if any of Danny Glover's performances were considered bad (hey, I'm in the minority that prefers Predator 2). But he's unlikely to be considered the definitive take. It's always going to be a one-off. Whereas Walter Mosely has been able to age Easy Rawlins, taking him from the 1940s to the 1960s and create his own private dick, who is probably better fleshed out at this stage than anyone created by Hammett, Spillane etc.
The Shaft movie is certainly dated but I think its significance can't be overlooked. Richard Roundtree was like a black Sean Connery, probably the first time a black actor could play a character like this onscreen, a swaggering sexy badass. The makers could arguably do more with him than they could have with a black Hammer or Bond. And he has a better theme tune than any of the 70s Bonds!
As for the other point, well, yes, I would rather see new characters created than 'bleaching' Asian or black superheroes. If they ever make The Falcon, Black Panther or Luke Cage movies, I want to see them played by black actors. I want to see Zorro played by a Latino actor, not turned into a red-headed Irishman (even if it gives me a shout at auditioning ...).
Separate names with a comma.