The Big Picture: Skin Deep

[Dansrage]

Funny how 'historical precedence' immediately gets equated by stupid white bigots as 'SINS OF THE FATHER' as they desperately try to rationalize their own biases and dismiss the concept of white privilege. Funny and sad, obviously. Stupid is as stupid does.

Bite me, i'm not a racist and i'm not guilty of a damn thing, i just don't like being forced to feel guilty for something i never took part in.
Sins of the fathers indeed.

You missed the point again.

It's not about the sins of the father, its about the cultural nonequivalence which is the direct result of generations of racism. That makes it morally responsible to recast a white character as black, yet not the other way around. If this makes you feel somehow slighted, that is the hard-wired white privilege which has been ingrained in your subconscious through years of the cultural doctrine of white superiority. Word of the wise: Get over it, because the world is getting over you.

White privelage is a joke, i don't see black people being held back or opressed, i see affirmative action, black-only scholarship programs, black history month, every conceivable kind of helping hand to get underprivelaged poor black children decent educations, but very little of the same for anyone else.

Equality does not mean giving one group more than another, the defenition of equality means equal rights for everyone, which is just not happening.

While I actually agree with you on one level, I feel like there's something that has to be said for another.

Firstly, just like to point out, I live in Winchester England. So the whole 'poor black ghetto' issue doesn't actually exist here, just thought I should make that apparent.

While it's certainly true that the assistance is coming down one sided in a lot of places (in partular with schooling and residency, even international relocation in some instances) I don't think it's fair to say this isn't a step for actual equality. Why is that? Because both sides did not begin on an even ground. Imagine the original disparity that would have existed between all the high class, educated white population and the oppressed, recently liberated blacks who largely still populated the lowest rungs.
If people instantly went to 'okay, lets offer the same benefits to both' then it would still be heavily weighted against the minorities- essentially, because we started off in a better position. I think what a lot of affirmative action is attempting now is to put more unfortunate groups of different ethnicities onto the same 'level'.
There's no denying after all that there are major problems with the highest crust of employment- by and large, old white men from private education still rule in many circles. Within a few generations, perhaps we can change that.

And THEN, going from 'black only scholarship' to 'universal assistance scholarship' might be a more appropriate step. Just my opinion though.

White privelage is a joke, i don't see black people being held back or opressed, i see affirmative action, black-only scholarship programs, black history month, every conceivable kind of helping hand to get underprivelaged poor black children decent educations, but very little of the same for anyone else.

Equality does not mean giving one group more than another, the defenition of equality means equal rights for everyone, which is just not happening.

Equality is an illusion and that was never the point. How can there be equality when the two parts in question (blacks & whites) have two different starting-points? These "underprivileged poor black children" are the victims of generations of oppression and cultural marginalization, while us white folks are the perpetrators. White privilege is not a joke, it's that ugly thing inside you that makes you sneer when you see people more deserving then yourself get concessions you feel entitled to.

The concept is called equality through inequality. The playing fields much be levelled before the human race as a whole can move past these concepts as true equals. You are in the way.

I think both of these can be answered in one, while i consider only the primary to be a valid argument.
Now we start to tread on shaky ground, is the current state of the underclass the fault of white opression, or of their own culture of violence and contempt for authority? White people did not write the rap songs that sing about shooting police and encouraging tribal gang violence, while grouping even the majority of the black underclass into this generalisation would in itself be ignorant, nothing bad can be said about Barack Obama or Morgan Freeman and such respectfull men, but it can't be denied that the African American community as a whole does hold a lot of responsability.
I am of course talking about the American black underclass, as already stated such ghettos and culture only exist in the very largest European cities, and they take their cues directly from American rap music, which they immitate and emulate.
One could argue that such culture is a direct result of white opression, justified contempt for an authority that opressed them, but for 40 years there has been no such opression, and yet for 40 years these parents have still taught their children to hate.

Racism goes both ways, black people can be just as racist as white people.

 

[ultimasupersaiyan]

Ok I want that Samurai Pizza Cat episode. I miss that show. I also think this whole issue of Heimdall being black is dumb. He's an actor who played a role and did it really well. I welcome things like this because I'd rather an actor who can act over an acting robot or bad actor in a role in a movie/game/animated show.

Why don't we forget colour and look at the value of a person? Ignorance, that's why. Racism still lingers in society and never will go away, same goes for stereotypes. I know this seems off topic but it isn't.

 

[Callate]

'Course, it doesn't hurt that Samuel L. Jackson is freaking awesome and a thousand people would show up to hear him read a grocery list.

Anyway... Generally, well said, and I agree, both with the non-issue of the casting of black actors as characters that appeared white in their original incarnations and with the idea that it would be great if more good, solid roles were written for non-white actors. (And I laughed a lot at the comment on "Tyler Perry" movies, though I reserve the right to like Frank Oz's Death At a Funeral better.)

Regarding the disclaimers: I recognize that much of what Movie Bob says is his opinion, and I'm fine with that, even when I disagree (*cough* Robin *cough*). But sometimes, what Bob says is based- or not based- on facts, often facts which are readily at hand if one is willing to take the time to check.

In that regard, I'm maintaing my right to and the warning that I may go a little apeshit when Person With a Soapbox says something outright false to thousands of people, many of whom won't bother to double-check.

 

[heamrh]

trying to "black wash" the past
tee hee

 

[Baresark]

I can't disagree at all. Good column today.

Though I would direct people to the works of an Economist named Walter Williams. He is a black doctor of economics, and he maintains that race isn't the all empowered do all of our civilization, and even though racism does exist, it's doesn't hold back any minority in America like so many people maintain it does. He gives loads and loads of empirical evidence as well. His last book is called, Race and Economics.

PS. He did a great job as Heimdall, but it wasn't the most amazingly written part either. His character, while incredibly cool, was still a Tertiary character, as he should have been because Heimdall is not a long spoken character. In the comics, he mostly just stares off into the distance, having situational cosmic awareness and all, and taking his job very seriously.

 

[McGuinty1]

Good points, Bob. However, you need to do that Samurai Pizza Cats episode YESTERDAY. The Escapist can eat it, and anyway, didn't they give you this particular show so you could talk about literally whatever came into your head as long as you could do at least 5 minutes about it and make it entertaining?

 

[Evil Alpaca]

I think part of the reason that Samuel L. Jackson could be Nick Fury without an uproar is that he has broken through the color barrier because of his role in other action movies. When we see Jackson on the scene, we don't see a black man; we see Pulp Fiction, Snakes on a Plane, or Mace Windu. The success of his previous films means that we see an actor first and a black man second which is how it should be. Thor created controversy because the actor in question did not have this resume and so it was seen as a black man in a role rather than a talented actor.

When it comes to talking about race in movies, I would first watch the Extra credit on female characters. The same principle applies. Does the race of the character effect the plot and interaction with the character? Think about Gordan Freeman from Half-Life, does his race add anything to the character? Not really, he could have just as easily been black, white, asian, hispanic or what ever else. Now ask if Heimdall being white helped build his character in any way?

 

[Sean951]

As a Swede the whole THOR thing is mostly a joke to us anyways.
Thor in Norse myth is QUITE different from the THOR in the US. So, If they want to cast a great dark-skinned actor I don't give a fuck, since Norse mythology really seems to mostly be an inspiration.
(http://satwcomic.com/nordic-halloween)

But, I don't think that you can inherit guilt. Never mind that European colonialism and technology have risen the standard of for the former colonies. (See india)
So, I really feel that race isn't an issue anymore. But, I'm speaking for northern Europe. Our hands are (Mostly) clean in this issue.

Do you REALLY want to claim innocence as Europe? Sweden may be, but the Dutch, French, Spaniards and to some extent the British really can't claim to be the great benefactors of their old colonies. The Congo was one of the worst examples of how to run a colony EVER, and the French in Algeria didn't really help. Spain is partially responsible for some of the problems in South American nations, setting up a system where only the rich had any power, and slaughtering the natives before essentially enslaving them. The aforementioned and Germany have no right to claim a lack of racism, look at the massive problems they have with immigration and "preservation of culture."

 

[brazuca]

No because Japan is like 96% up to 98% japanese. Also 5% of US is like 15 million people. That is like a lot of people. Also you don't need a world of asian actors, all you need is 10 or 20. You can not name 100 white actors by color.
My point is hollywood is very biased, to the point where some characters became an inside joke to critics. Let's say the magic negro. The flaming rage leg kicker asian. The old white men who governs all. The loving abused and passive white woman.

 

[Harley Q]

Skin Deep

Sometimes embracing a double standard is the right thing to do.

Watch Video

MovieBob, I think I love you. Oh and for the record, Samuel L Jackson could play any character and I'd probably find it convincing, hell, if he played santa I'd think he rocked.

 

[gamer_parent]

What's maddening for me with the whole whitewashing is that you have movies like say, "21", where the original story was about a bunch of ASIAN AMERICAN students at MIT taking down the house. Come 21, they all turn white.

The whole minority actor shaft gets even worse when you break it down by gender as well.

example:
black female characters are almost always sassy black women (unless in a tyler perry movie)
asian male characters are almost always the asexual kungfu/techie/sidekick.
asian female characters are almost always hypersexualized/dragon ladies/both, and pretty much MUST be paired up with a white guy
native americans are universally spiritual "living off the land" types who spout faux new age ideology
middle eastern males are always tied in with terrorism, either as a perp or a victim. If not one of those, then you're watching a period piece.
middle eastern women are basically all there to stand around in burkas.

and so on.

 

[Blunderman]

Once again, you broach the serious stuff and I find myself quite convinced that you just don't have what it takes to treat this kind of subject with the objective and rational perspective it requires. Even the notion that accepting a double standard is the right idea is preposterous. Also, if you yourself don't think you're qualified to talk about this from an international perspective, don't bother at all. This goes without saying.

Sorry, Bob, but fancy editing and a show on the Escapist does not a credible argument make. I have no personal preference on the matter at hand but the issue you've turned it into, no less the solution to propose for it, make no sense.

It's not about the sins of the father, its about the cultural nonequivalence which is the direct result of generations of racism.

This argument misses the fact that the lack of cultural equivalence is a result of white nations being white nations for centuries. This means that culture, in this case media, is created for and by Caucasians. The exact same can be said of any nation of any ethnicity.

During the more recent times, the welfare of the Western world has attracted peoples from all over the world, in effect turning previously white nations into multiethnic nations, admittedly with varying amounts of minorities in each country. This means that there will be people in these previously white nations who feel that the culture isn't representative of them. This is as expected, it isn't strange, and it isn't even remotely related to any kind of racism.

Racism did not have anything to do with this. Rather, what racism did is skew peoples' perception regarding the worth of human beings, implying that a person's ethnicity is somehow indicative of their value. That was the true doctrine of racism. People today throw around this word easily, most of them having no idea of the actual practical implications of racist doctrine. There's not a single person on this forum who could stomach actual racism, and the usage of this term to refer to something as immeasurably trivial as the cast of a motion picture not only smacks of uneducated thinking but it is also grossly dismissive of the people who have experienced actual racism in recent history.

It's curious that believers in "white guilt" are so ready to attribute heinous characteristics to white people. That view of humanity is rather alarming. Contrary to popular opinion, hating someone because of their race isn't racism, it's merely being rather xenophobic. The two are not the same, neither in practice nor in principle.

That makes it morally responsible to recast a white character as black, yet not the other way around.

This statement is based on false conclusions. Even if it wasn't, it's still invalid owing to the fact that it caters to a double standard.

 

[Dansrage]

As a Swede the whole THOR thing is mostly a joke to us anyways.
Thor in Norse myth is QUITE different from the THOR in the US. So, If they want to cast a great dark-skinned actor I don't give a fuck, since Norse mythology really seems to mostly be an inspiration.
(http://satwcomic.com/nordic-halloween)

But, I don't think that you can inherit guilt. Never mind that European colonialism and technology have risen the standard of for the former colonies. (See india)
So, I really feel that race isn't an issue anymore. But, I'm speaking for northern Europe. Our hands are (Mostly) clean in this issue.

Do you REALLY want to claim innocence as Europe? Sweden may be, but the Dutch, French, Spaniards and to some extent the British really can't claim to be the great benefactors of their old colonies. The Congo was one of the worst examples of how to run a colony EVER, and the French in Algeria didn't really help. Spain is partially responsible for some of the problems in South American nations, setting up a system where only the rich had any power, and slaughtering the natives before essentially enslaving them. The aforementioned and Germany have no right to claim a lack of racism, look at the massive problems they have with immigration and "preservation of culture."

I want to claim innocence as having abso-fucking-lutely diddly-squat to do with any of that in any stretch of the imagination.

SINS OF THE FUCKING FATHERS

 

[Verlander]

100% Spot on. And Samurai Pizza Cats were great

 

[gphjr14]

I liked this episode, but I'm left with a question...when was the last time a black character was replaced with a white actor? Does it even happen often enough to be a problem?

Prior to the 50's all the time.
Films like "Birth of a Nation"
Western films historical films about Cleopatra, Genghis Khan, and other historically non white figures were cast by whites, background characters were often the appropriate race but Hollywood didn't give leading roles to minorities. Watch old western films the "Native Americans" are often just white people with make up and you can't forget good ol' Black Face. So yeah our generation hasn't seen anything like that since say Tropic Thunder and that was meant to poke fun at the old practice of casting whites as minorities who played major roles in the story.

I'm black and I didn't really see the need to cast Michael Clarke Duncan as King Pin in Daredevil but he did a decent job of portraying the character also I'm not big of Thor or Norse mythology but I must concede that Elba did a great job.

I also wish more people would attack Tyler Perry he is a horrible producer and actor and should've been left in the last decade, yet has been allowed to germinate.

And I bet in 10+ years he'll eventually come out of the closet as was parodied in Boondocks.

 

[anamizuki]

I agree with Bob that casting a black actor did not really make it worse. The fact is that the vikings in Thor themselves are a far cry from the Norse legends anyway (look at the comic Valhalla for more correct versions).

However, the whole 'white guilt' issue can be a bit problematic to people whose families have not ever even BEEN to america. I think it also is unique to america to see EVERY white person as the same.

Let me explain, here in europe, being from a different country is almost equal to ones race. National stereotypes Americans have did not come from nowhere, after all. The fact is that a person who is from russia is treated differently than a native finnish person here.

Anyway, Last Airbender was a travesty in so many ways, and I was mad that a series which is ASIAN couldn't get ASIAN actors at all. Or say Dragonball completely butchered. But these two are bad ASIDE from their racial insensitivity. Their directors treated their source material badly to begin with.

Airbender's choice to even make the LEGIMATE chinese text the cartoon had gibberish was mindboggling. Then again, that might also be a race issue. Because its foreign, it doesn't matter how you treat it.

 

[Battenbergcake]

You know, thinking about this, Brink is actually the more racially rounded game I?ve ever seen.
Due to its unique setting it's made in such a manner that there is no prominent majority. Black, White, Asian, African or anything in between.
Given there?s going to be some racial stereotyping in the story line with character being defined by their accents no doubt but it?s probably the least stereotypical game I?ve seen in a loooong time.
Also I managed to incorporate different raced without having to have their race the focus of the conflict. i.e. Dragon Age?s apparent racism towards mages. :B
Just the way i'm looking at it personally.

 

[Inglip]

The way I see it, we should base all our casting on what colour the character is, or none of it and just go by acting ability. I really don't see why we should cherrypick when it's acceptable or not, despite what Bob says.