Why did people complain about Khan's white-washing in STID...

[fonzob1]

It's possible that Montalban had a really nice tan in 1967. I found a pic of him from the Fantasy Island days where his skin tone is very close to Space Seed.

Not saying that's the way it happened, just that it's possible.

Sometimes people's skin tones become lighter with age too. Age could have been a factor.

 

[Maurice]

It's possible that Montalban had a really nice tan in 1967. I found a pic of him from the Fantasy Island days where his skin tone is very close to Space Seed.

Not saying that's the way it happened, just that it's possible.

That one pic makes him look darker than he actually did on FI. Check these out (link).

 

[fonzob1]

That one pic makes him look darker than he actually did on FI. Check these out (link).

Lighting can be a factor too...

 

[urbandefault]

It's possible that Montalban had a really nice tan in 1967. I found a pic of him from the Fantasy Island days where his skin tone is very close to Space Seed.

Not saying that's the way it happened, just that it's possible.

http://i.imgur.com/U9FLAVYl.jpg

That one pic makes him look darker than he actually did on FI. Check these out (link).

Saw those, and I also saw several pics from the 70s where he had the same dark color. I think it's a tan, of George Hamilton quality.

 

[treksster]

In nuBSG the character of Boomer went from Black to East Asian, but not Black to White.

In Darkness, Khan went from a Indian (played by a Brown person) to yet another White actor.

It like if they had cast a White actress to play Uhura and a White actor to play Sulu, but all the previous white characters were still cast with White actors.

Khan has never been played be a brown actor

In WOK, he was white

I can sympathatize with the Mexican casting of the 1960s, but by the early 1980s, what was the excuse for keeping Montalbn white? The film Gandhi was released the same year as Wrath of Khan, and Ben Kingsley was turned from white to full out brown skinned Indian with makeup, why wasn't Montalban?

Hell, why did Montalban wear more makeup in Space Seed than he did WOK?

For Kingsley, it was part of the makeup to be authentic in the role. His color was about the only thing about him that didn't look like Gandhi after he lost all the weight he did for the role. (He's half-Indian on his father's side, too -- I think from same area as Gandhi).

Putting Montalban, definitely not Indian in any way, in dark face just to try to make his fictional character "look Asian" is something else, entirely. At least in the 1980s.

To be blunt, I never noticed the difference in skin color between Montalban in "Space Seed" and in TWOK until at least twenty years after TWOK came out, and then not until someone pointed it out to me.

Interesting explanation. I don't think there would have been much of a problem in Montalban having makeup for WOK, even by the early 1980s.

Just to clarify, I really did like Montalban's performance for what it was; it was menacing, tough and cool. But being North Indian myself, it could be that I personally have to suspend my disbelief more in that regard.

I give props for Roddenberry in making Khan an indian character, especially given the social climate in the 1960s.

 

[treksster]

When the actor for Khan of the original timeline was not Indian either? In 'Space Seed', he was said to be North Indian and probably Sikh; and Khan himself acknowledged the painting of him wearing a turban.

Yet he did not look like a North Indian Punjabi, and he spoke with a Mexican accent. He was nothing like an Indian.

This isn't what people are complaining about. They are complaining that Benedict Cumberbatch is a pasty-white Brit, while Ricardo Montalban was, well, Ricardo Montalban, just because it was never made 100% clear that Khan was genetically altered to look different. If a dark-complected Mexican was cast as Khan in STID, nobody would be complaining (or at least no one who needs to be spoon-fed every detail because they can't work things out for themselves.)

And as for your point: Lots of actors play ethnic roles of which they do not belong. In Hollywood, if a Middle Eastern character is needed, one does not get the role just by being Middle Eastern, one gets the role by being a good actor who can pull off being Middle Eastern.

Try telling people that (including most bloggers) and they tell you that you're being racist and full of it, and need to get it together or get lost.

Most of these bloggers are ignorant Social Justice Warriors.

If you have never heard of that term, watch this video for more information into their ideology:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvYSPxvrq5s

 

[Nerys Myk]

Khan has never been played be a brown actor

In WOK, he was white

I can sympathatize with the Mexican casting of the 1960s, but by the early 1980s, what was the excuse for keeping Montalbn white? The film Gandhi was released the same year as Wrath of Khan, and Ben Kingsley was turned from white to full out brown skinned Indian with makeup, why wasn't Montalban?

Hell, why did Montalban wear more makeup in Space Seed than he did WOK?

For Kingsley, it was part of the makeup to be authentic in the role. His color was about the only thing about him that didn't look like Gandhi after he lost all the weight he did for the role. (He's half-Indian on his father's side, too -- I think from same area as Gandhi).

Putting Montalban, definitely not Indian in any way, in dark face just to try to make his fictional character "look Asian" is something else, entirely. At least in the 1980s.

To be blunt, I never noticed the difference in skin color between Montalban in "Space Seed" and in TWOK until at least twenty years after TWOK came out, and then not until someone pointed it out to me.

Interesting explanation. I don't think there would have been much of a problem in Montalban having makeup for WOK, even by the early 1980s.

Just to clarify, I really did like Montalban's performance for what it was; it was menacing, tough and cool. But being North Indian myself, it could be that I personally have to suspend my disbelief more in that regard.

I give props for Roddenberry in making Khan an indian character, especially given the social climate in the 1960s.

Well he had an Indian actor playing an Indian character in one episode. Captain Chandra And an Indian character in another. Lt Singh , but the actor doesn't seem to be Indian. Though neither role was as prominent as Khan. Most TV shows weren't adverse to casting people of color in the Sixties. Some of the networks ( including NBC) pretty much insisted on it.

 

[BigJake]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvYSPxvrq5s

That's a link to a rant from a founding member of the hate movement #GamerGate, by the way.

If I sound suspicious about people's opinions on "bloggers," it's because I'm aware that there are people like "InternetAristocrat" out there and that they have really no credibility to speak about "ideology" or so-called "Social Justice Warriors."

 

[Mudd]

If you have never heard of that term, watch this video for more information into their ideology:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvYSPxvrq5s

Watching that video will actually lower someone's IQ.

 

[treksster]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvYSPxvrq5s

That's a link to a rant from a founding member of the hate movement #GamerGate, by the way.

If I sound suspicious about people's opinions on "bloggers," it's because I'm aware that there are people like "InternetAristocrat" out there and that they have really no credibility to speak about "ideology" or so-called "Social Justice Warriors."

Um, Gamer-Gate is most certainly not a hate movement, I wrote an article on it.

http://www.buzzfeed.com/thefreethinker/no-gamergate-is-not-a-hate-group-1cmjl

 

[treksster]

If you have never heard of that term, watch this video for more information into their ideology:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CvYSPxvrq5s

Watching that video will actually lower someone's IQ.

Interactions with SJW's will lower someone's IQ.

 

[BigJake]

Um, Gamer-Gate is most certainly not a hate movement, I wrote an article on it.

Sorry sport, the proof is in its actions, not whether you wrote an article about how it was Actually About Ethics in Game Journalism*. GamerGate churned out a thousand articles' worth of chaff like that and continued to act like a hate movement at all times, so its claims about itself have no credibility.

* Didn't even click but I'm betting the phrase "ethics in game journalism" occurred in the first sentence. I'm right, right?

Anyway, back to my original question:

Try telling people that (including most bloggers) and they tell you that you're being racist and full of it, and need to get it together or get lost.

Do you have some examples in mind of the people who would allegedly say this?

 

[treksster]

Um, Gamer-Gate is most certainly not a hate movement, I wrote an article on it.

Sorry sport, the proof is in its actions, not whether you wrote an article about how it was Actually About Ethics in Game Journalism*. GamerGate churned out a thousand articles' worth of chaff like that and continued to act like a hate movement at all times, so its claims about itself have no credibility.

* Didn't even click but I'm betting the phrase "ethics in game journalism" occurred in the first sentence. I'm right, right?

If you want to continue this discussion, please respond to me in PM, I do not wish want to derail this thread.

What I noted in my argument is that this is a group which not only consists of women (and minorities like myself), but raised $60,000 for a Feminist organisation (The Fine Young Capitalists) and helped raise a few thousand dollars for a rape victim. In addition to that, statistical analysis found that the threatening tweets coming from the hash-tag itself was very, very low; a Gamer-Gate harassment patrol account was set up by GG to report troll accounts which attach themselves to the hash-tag.

The fringe minority cannot be used to smear the majority (which is bigoted thinking), especially if that majority not only condemns and actively reports the harassment, but raises money for charity.

If Gamer-Gate is a hate group, it's doing a damn bad job of it.

I'll copy/paste my article here. The relevant hyperlinks/evidence are in the article itself.

You may have heard of the term ‘Gamer-Gate’; it’s a consumer revolt which has been slandered as misogynistic, its aim is to improve ethics in video games journalism. To its credit, after six months it’s made considerable gains (and is growing by the day).

From getting The Escapist, The Destructoid, IGN, The Verge and PC Gamer to all update their ethics and disclosure policies; to helping to raise more than $50,000 for TheFineYoungCapitalists (an organization with the aim of supporting work by underrepresented labor in the media industry) to getting advertisers to pull out of unethical sites (to the point of costing Gawker into the seven figures).

And yet, GamerGate is labelled as ”an evil white male” misogynistic movement?

Wait. The same consumer revolt which raised thousands of dollars to help women in the industry is against women?

Huh?

The same consumer revolt which seen from the hashtag #NotYourShield, compromised of a vast range of ethnic minorities and females advocating their support for GamerGate’s goal of ethical reform is against women and solely exists on the basis of prohibiting ethnic diversity?

Huh?

Yeah, you read that right. Despite a good chunk of the consumer revolt consisting of ethnic minorities (ironically, moreso than those who oppose the revolt) and females, it’s somehow labeled as a hate group against the very group of people the consumer revolt consists of! —- which is is an utterly unfortunate betrayal of rationality and reason.

Being Indian myself, I’ve frustratingly been met with the claim that I’m an evil white racist misogynist for associating with a ”hate group” —- the claim that GamerGate is a hate group mostly comes from the fact that several notable females have received threats, but that’s the deal with a hashtag movement. Anyone (e.g. third party troll) can send a hateful message and attach a hashtag to it on Twitter; for Gamer-Gate atleast, the harassment is actually a fringe minority coming from the hashtag.

If one is going to judge it to be a hategroup, surely it is a remarkable piece of illogic to use a minority to represent the majority of the movement? (judging an entire group based on the actions of a few is what leads to, by definition bigoted thinking).

Or if you’re trying to gauge the movement, atleast use something more representative.

Such as the sub-reddit KotakuInAction, the main hub of GamerGate which not only roundly condemns harassment in it’s official site rules but has a subscriber total of around roughly 28,500 (and it’s only rising). Surely, that is more representative of the revolt, no?

It is completely illogical, irrational and faulty to assume it is a hate-movement. But then again, are we to expect rationality on the Internet?

The reason that you’ve probably not heard of this is because of the lack of media acknowledgement of it; with them instead opting to give professional victims such as Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian a platform to police what Gamers should and shouldn’t do. Brianna Wu, a known liar who sent threats to herself and Anita Sarkeesian, a third-wave Feminist who claimed to have gamed since the age of 5, only to then being found to admitted that she has never cared for Gaming.

Hell, if we focus on the topic of harassment, shall we not point to the fact (and to no surprise, gained no coverage) of the pro-Gamer Gaters who actually received harassment on social media?

Such threats as seen in the link from the Anti-Gamer Gate crew literally call for the genocide of all Gamers and those who support GamerGate. Though who oppose Gamer Gate may protest that ”they are not a group/movement” —- yet the woman they report so much on, outright said that Anti-Gamer Gate is a movement?

I have myself, witnessed several of my friends (who could be considered ethnic minorities) face harassment and doxxing for simply daring to associate themselves with GamerGate.

Here we have, an Anti-Gamer Gate movement, which evidently has dished out far more harassment. Shall we lump all those that oppose Gamer-Gate has abusive people based on the statistic? Or, is that a generalization?

I write this not to appeal to the gaming press; they know they’re in the wrong, and they’ve cast their own narrative (which is beginning to fall apart). I do not write this to even appeal to the radical Social Justice Warriors who align themselves against Gamer-Gate, as they are simply not interested in what they claim to fight for (they only care about minorities and women who agree with the narrative, they’re not interested in the facts).

I write this to appeal to neutrals; those who may be anti-Gamer Gate but have doubts. Do you honestly believe GamerGate is against the very group of people it consists of? Does disliking ultra-third wave politically correct Feminists make you a ”misogynist”? I think not.

 

[BigJake]

GamerGate's "harassment patrol". Right.

No need to go to PM, you and I won't be interacting any further.

 

[Trekkin]

Oh god, that thing is still trying to invade very corner of the Internet?

Soooo...back to Khan. If they hadn't gone for Cumberbatch, what would people have preferred - an Indian actor or a Mexican one? Considering Khan's (presumed) cocktail of a genetic makeup, would it have mattered to people one way or the other?

 

[treksster]

Oh god, that thing is still trying to invade very corner of the Internet?

Soooo...back to Khan. If they hadn't gone for Cumberbatch, what would people have preferred - an Indian actor or a Mexican one? Considering Khan's (presumed) cocktail of a genetic makeup, would it have mattered to people one way or the other?

I wold have preferred an Indian one. The co-writer and screenwriter Bob Orci was clearly ignorant, look at his statement:

Basically, as we went through the casting process and we began honing in on the themes of the movie, it became uncomfortable for me to support demonizing anyone of color, particularly any one of Middle Eastern descent or anyone evoking that. One of the points of the movie is that we must be careful about the villain within US, not some other race"

Middle Eastern people are not like Indians. People from the Middle East are not even brown, they’re olive-skinned. Its ignorant justifications like this which riled me up.

But I wouldn't call it racist to like the film, that’s ridiculous. Cumberbatch was an unfortunate white wash of the character.

To be honest, Cumberbatch's Khan's casting still sorely disappoints me to this day. It's been 2 years, and what a waste of a casting.

 

[JWPlatt]

I know very little about the blogging issues above. It's a little like watching kids arguing on the playground from afar as I pass by on my way to somewhere else. I don't play games much, but I do development them (family oriented). Weird, huh?

What I do know about all too many bloggers and blogging sites in my visits around the internet is that they call themselves journalists, but have no editors or QA for the most part. And it shows. I wish they would take more care with the language.

 

[Marsden]

Was CumberKhan altered so as not to be recognizable by Adm. Robocop?

If only BillJ were here. He'd know the right answer and be shocked I'm trying to make a point in it's favor.

But really, that's entirely within the realm of possiblities that Marcus didn't want anyone to recognize this Khan person and altered him.

Casting foolishness aside, after all didn't Abrams swear time and again it isn't Khan before the movie? Maybe that was a consideration, CumberKhan really doesn't look like Khan, so maybe that was part of the subterfuge?

I think I'm giving them too much credit, though, accusing them of "thinking"!

What am I thinking?

 

[Mudd]

Um, Gamer-Gate is most certainly not a hate movement, I wrote an article on it.

Sorry sport, the proof is in its actions, not whether you wrote an article about how it was Actually About Ethics in Game Journalism*. GamerGate churned out a thousand articles' worth of chaff like that and continued to act like a hate movement at all times, so its claims about itself have no credibility.

* Didn't even click but I'm betting the phrase "ethics in game journalism" occurred in the first sentence. I'm right, right?

If you want to continue this discussion, please respond to me in PM, I do not wish want to derail this thread.

What I noted in my argument is that this is a group which not only consists of women (and minorities like myself), but raised $60,000 for a Feminist organisation (The Fine Young Capitalists) and helped raise a few thousand dollars for a rape victim. In addition to that, statistical analysis found that the threatening tweets coming from the hash-tag itself was very, very low; a Gamer-Gate harassment patrol account was set up by GG to report troll accounts which attach themselves to the hash-tag.

The fringe minority cannot be used to smear the majority (which is bigoted thinking), especially if that majority not only condemns and actively reports the harassment, but raises money for charity.

If Gamer-Gate is a hate group, it's doing a damn bad job of it.

I'll copy/paste my article here. The relevant hyperlinks/evidence are in the article itself.

You may have heard of the term ‘Gamer-Gate’; it’s a consumer revolt which has been slandered as misogynistic, its aim is to improve ethics in video games journalism. To its credit, after six months it’s made considerable gains (and is growing by the day).

From getting The Escapist, The Destructoid, IGN, The Verge and PC Gamer to all update their ethics and disclosure policies; to helping to raise more than $50,000 for TheFineYoungCapitalists (an organization with the aim of supporting work by underrepresented labor in the media industry) to getting advertisers to pull out of unethical sites (to the point of costing Gawker into the seven figures).

And yet, GamerGate is labelled as ”an evil white male” misogynistic movement?

Wait. The same consumer revolt which raised thousands of dollars to help women in the industry is against women?

Huh?

The same consumer revolt which seen from the hashtag #NotYourShield, compromised of a vast range of ethnic minorities and females advocating their support for GamerGate’s goal of ethical reform is against women and solely exists on the basis of prohibiting ethnic diversity?

Huh?

Yeah, you read that right. Despite a good chunk of the consumer revolt consisting of ethnic minorities (ironically, moreso than those who oppose the revolt) and females, it’s somehow labeled as a hate group against the very group of people the consumer revolt consists of! —- which is is an utterly unfortunate betrayal of rationality and reason.

Being Indian myself, I’ve frustratingly been met with the claim that I’m an evil white racist misogynist for associating with a ”hate group” —- the claim that GamerGate is a hate group mostly comes from the fact that several notable females have received threats, but that’s the deal with a hashtag movement. Anyone (e.g. third party troll) can send a hateful message and attach a hashtag to it on Twitter; for Gamer-Gate atleast, the harassment is actually a fringe minority coming from the hashtag.

If one is going to judge it to be a hategroup, surely it is a remarkable piece of illogic to use a minority to represent the majority of the movement? (judging an entire group based on the actions of a few is what leads to, by definition bigoted thinking).

Or if you’re trying to gauge the movement, atleast use something more representative.

Such as the sub-reddit KotakuInAction, the main hub of GamerGate which not only roundly condemns harassment in it’s official site rules but has a subscriber total of around roughly 28,500 (and it’s only rising). Surely, that is more representative of the revolt, no?

It is completely illogical, irrational and faulty to assume it is a hate-movement. But then again, are we to expect rationality on the Internet?

The reason that you’ve probably not heard of this is because of the lack of media acknowledgement of it; with them instead opting to give professional victims such as Brianna Wu and Anita Sarkeesian a platform to police what Gamers should and shouldn’t do. Brianna Wu, a known liar who sent threats to herself and Anita Sarkeesian, a third-wave Feminist who claimed to have gamed since the age of 5, only to then being found to admitted that she has never cared for Gaming.

Hell, if we focus on the topic of harassment, shall we not point to the fact (and to no surprise, gained no coverage) of the pro-Gamer Gaters who actually received harassment on social media?

Such threats as seen in the link from the Anti-Gamer Gate crew literally call for the genocide of all Gamers and those who support GamerGate. Though who oppose Gamer Gate may protest that ”they are not a group/movement” —- yet the woman they report so much on, outright said that Anti-Gamer Gate is a movement?

I have myself, witnessed several of my friends (who could be considered ethnic minorities) face harassment and doxxing for simply daring to associate themselves with GamerGate.

Here we have, an Anti-Gamer Gate movement, which evidently has dished out far more harassment. Shall we lump all those that oppose Gamer-Gate has abusive people based on the statistic? Or, is that a generalization?

I write this not to appeal to the gaming press; they know they’re in the wrong, and they’ve cast their own narrative (which is beginning to fall apart). I do not write this to even appeal to the radical Social Justice Warriors who align themselves against Gamer-Gate, as they are simply not interested in what they claim to fight for (they only care about minorities and women who agree with the narrative, they’re not interested in the facts).

I write this to appeal to neutrals; those who may be anti-Gamer Gate but have doubts. Do you honestly believe GamerGate is against the very group of people it consists of? Does disliking ultra-third wave politically correct Feminists make you a ”misogynist”? I think not.

Way to not derail a thread, dude.

 

[Kobayshi Maru]

Was CumberKhan altered so as not to be recognizable by Adm. Robocop?

If only BillJ were here. He'd know the right answer and be shocked I'm trying to make a point in it's favor.

But really, that's entirely within the realm of possiblities that Marcus didn't want anyone to recognize this Khan person and altered him.

Casting foolishness aside, after all didn't Abrams swear time and again it isn't Khan before the movie? Maybe that was a consideration, CumberKhan really doesn't look like Khan, so maybe that was part of the subterfuge?

I think I'm giving them too much credit, though, accusing them of "thinking"!

What am I thinking?

Correct me if I am wrong, but had Khan been played by a black man, no one would have said a word.