Black Thor Actor Talks About Racist Comic Book Fans

[stueymon]

Saw Thor the other day, The issue of race never really occurred to me for some reason, but in hindsight, the "one black Norse god, one Asian Norse god, the rest is whitey!" thing did some a bit peculiar, that these racial anomalies occur in a primarily white society and no one comments or even bats an eyelid to it, would have made more sense to have more racial diversity in asguard.

One point that did ring to me is that our current Marvel line up is that we're very in the XY bracket, where's the lady superheroes? sure we had Scarlett Johansen (murrrr..... sorry where was I?) as Black Widow, but she didn't even have her own film. I dont think my Marvel knowledge is vast enough to suggest any female superheroes with their own title to their name.

 

[thecoreyhlltt]

i'm a white guy, (i'm only saying that as not to incur any moderator wrath), and the first thing i thought after reading that was "Wow, only a White guy could say a Black guy playing an originally white character is "an attack on 'White Culture'. And not think the same sorta thing for robert downey jr. playing a black character... kinda, idk. i guess i just proved my point, incorrectly.

 

[Sparcrypt]

I saw Thor and enjoyed it - Heimdallr was one of my favourite characters.

However I can see where some people are coming from. If Elba was cast because he fit the role best (and no arugments here, he did awesome) then great! But if he was cast just so they could have a black guy in a main role that irks me.

I'm not rascist, at all, to the point where if I see people deliberately chosing people based on ethnicity just to be politically correct I find it as distateful as yelling at a black guy to 'get a job you lazy ni-- etc'.

The character was a white guy in the comic that the movie was based off. Therefore if there was a white actor who played the role equally as well, he should have been cast. If there was not, Elba was a fine choice.

So basically.. casting him cause he was the best? Great! Casting him BECAUSE he was black? Just as bad as not casting him because he's black.

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

Then you're making the implication that the conspiracy theorists and Mel Gibson have a gain of truth when it comes to the "Greedy Jews in control of hollywood" or are you just singling out the straight, white christians, atheists and scientologists as being the ones causing the problems? Because that's all anyone envisions when they imagine the people protecting the "Status quo", forgetting about all those other religions involved in the industry, and most being powerful enough to make the selections like those jewish directors, producers, and writers I mentioned earlier.

The colour in power is green. Hollywood's primary goal is to make money. They realize that they're making the most money with white leads. Thus, they stick to whites as leads.

I'm not even sure what the rest of your rambling is going on about. Your eagerness to turn this into a debate on those pesky Jews and their stranglehold on the world is mind boggling.

1) I think he's implying that other people believe in a Jewish conspiracy as an argument against them. I'm not sure, it's not very coherent.

2)There's an interesting question that stems from this: does a business leader have an obligation to go against the market in order to pursue what they deem worthwhile, or is their first obligation to their investors.

Now I think we'd say that in extreme cases where human rights are involved, the person will have to go against the market to pursue what they think is right. However, it's not as clear to me that one should try to make a multicultural cast in a movie if it is really just geared towards one demographic anyway. Now in the case of Thor I think the producers want it to be a family blockbuster that appeals to pretty much everyone, as I think is the general case for most superhero movies (it's plainly absurd to think that they're made just for comic book fans, or even with pleasing comic book fans as a high priority because movies are a hugely popular media with huge production costs and there just aren't that many comic book fans). So it makes sense for them (from a capitalistic perspective) to try to include characters that will appeal to a wide range of audiences.

However, I think there are plenty of cases in which the target demographic is so specific that it's pointless to try to include something for everyone. I don't think every individual piece of art has to be internally multicultural for multiculturalism to succeed: I think it's the corpus of works as a whole that should be diverse. Right now it seems that there are a lot of token 'black dude' roles in movies that just seem unnecessary and awkward. Only include the part if it makes sense in the work as a whole, and for those movies that try to appeal to everyone, don't do it in a superficial way. I haven't seen Thor, but I can't imagine that Heimdall acts 'black' as perceived in American popular culture, so hopefully they avoid stereotypes and he makes sense as a character.

 

[Nurb]

1) I think he's implying that other people believe in a Jewish conspiracy as an argument against them. I'm not sure, it's not very coherent.

I responded to that in my post. What it boils down to is this:

Comic fans, who go nuts about the SLIGHTEST CHANGE in their mythos/canon/universe in the first place (movie bob already went into this with spiderman movies), criticize a change that happens to involve race of an actor and they are unfairly getting lumped together and called "racists". Ironically assuming their criticism is racist because the color of most comicbook fans' skin is white

 

[ark123]

I thought he was fine in the movie, but I feel that accusing people who didn't of racism is bullshit.
What, should they remake Wizard of Oz with a old male asian midget as Dorothy? If you don't like that idea, are you sexist? Racist? Hate little people? Ageist?

 

[ZeroAE]

The hate would be understandable if his color affected the history (ex:a black nazi) but it didnt. In fact, why everyone complains about the black guy and not the asian guy, because he is not exactly "white".

I liked him. In fact , I think he was the best actor and character on the movie.

 

[Droppa Deuce]

Idris Elba was great as Heimdall.

Nazis can suck it

 

[Fetzenfisch]

Well, it isn't because we're racist.
It's because the Norse gods were all white.
(Ya dumb prick)
Since most of the vikings lived in the northern parts of Europe then they didn't see alot of black folk, so they thought that the gods were just more badass versions of them selves (hence the reason why the Aesir are not immortal).
So it's rather silly that a black guy was playing a Norse god, not because I'm a racist, but because I like it when people actually follow the story and follow mythology.
This would be like taking Anubis and putting him in a clown costume.

you are talking about stargate ?
Yeah i totally would agree with you. But its (like i said before) not a movie about norse mythology, its a marvel superhero movie. So its ok. Its not about the actual gods, its about comic book characters in tights. Asian mmos are raping norse myths for years, without loud cries of terror. marvel still does a decent job at it. ('xcept the tights).

It goes against the comics thou as well, an I honestly think if it goes against the comics an thus the fans, that give them the solid fan base for every single one of these films to at least break even (hence why there are so fckin many as they know they have nothing to loose) then it should be enhancing that experience, instead it just creates a WTF moment!?!?!

Seriously if you had a charter you had loved as they were, would't you be pissed if you rolled up to the cinema and he was a compleatly different race to what he originally was?

Cause I'll be fucking pissed off if in 60 years they remake rocky an Apollo creed is white, I swear to god I would be rioting in the street, even if I was the only one there!!

1st) I hope you are as drunk as me, if not: go see a fucking tutor

2nd) i can totally understand what you want to say and yes it is strange and something you have to get used to. But that's usually what happens if comics, games, books, etc. are made into movies. They change stuff. Lord of the rings changed a lot of stuff and just erased a lot of others. but it was ok. Spiderman changed a lot of stuff. still a good movie.
I could go on now, but i really want to watch my series, so i just summarize again: Its just the movie made after a comic.And those have NEVER been true to the original and: Its never been ment to be faithfully after the ancient religion. So: watch it or leave it.

1st) Another grammar and spelling nazi on a internet forum? lmao

2nd)You know its funny how someone can be telling me not to express my opinion . . . on a forum . . .

3rd)Fuck Off

if you don't want to take part in a discussion, dont post in a forum, you have been reported for unskillfull trolling.

 

[ReiverCorrupter]

1) I think he's implying that other people believe in a Jewish conspiracy as an argument against them. I'm not sure, it's not very coherent.

I responded to that in my post. What it boils down to is this:

Comic fans, who go nuts about the SLIGHTEST CHANGE in their mythos/canon/universe in the first place (movie bob already went into this with spiderman movies), criticize a change that happens to involve race of an actor and they are unfairly getting lumped together and called "racists". Ironically assuming their criticism is racist because the color of most comicbook fans' skin is white

It's more than just comic book fans. The fact of the matter is just that calling someone a racist in our culture is the best way to not only discredit them, but to evade the point entirely by making the argument shift to them defending themselves as not racist.

That being said, I'm sure there were more than a few people who just didn't like the idea of a black Norse god because they are racist. Why? Because there are a lot of racists out there and they generally respond to this sort of stuff.

That doesn't mean that everyone who questions it is a racist though. Frankly the idea of a black Norse god seems to be deliberately provocative no matter which way you slice it, although this movie specifically escapes this by only being a comic book version of mythology set in space, and thus can allow for greater suspension of disbelief.

 

[agge.se]

Seriously as a Swede I find it more irritating that some stupid American managed to do a comic about Thor whear he is blond and not red haired and inventing a character named Kelda (In Sweden kelda is a some of heat and eat soups http://www.matochdrycker.se/tag/kelda/ so it becomes a little funny) and it is fabulously stupid to make Sif black haired when in the "Edda" it is a major plot that she have hair of actual gold.


The fact that they cast a black man as a minor god is just one of all the seriously fucked up things about the marvel Thor. I do agreed that Heimdall http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filrocessed_SAM_heimdallr.jpg is a prity stupid choise if you have to have token black in the movie a better choice would have been Loki but then you would have the discussion about a evil black character. Since all the Nordic gods was good shape shifters they could lock however they wanted often they used it to take animal form but they could take the form of other humans.


In the end what I want to say is that if a good actor in a strange role in a stupid movie based on a stupid comic can make the movie better I for one is all for it even if you cast Jesus a Asian in the end if the story told is better who is playing who is not that important.

 

[Nurb]

They are about making money, and I agree there's a race issue, but we're looking at things based on different POV. You seem to think it's intentional "pro-white" racism, but it's the result of that greed and focus groups, explaining why it strays so far from the comics (I hear, I'm not a thor fan) to appeal to as many demographics as possible. I'm not saying he's not a good actor, but in this case it looks more like a token casting to exploit the "urban market". I'd be more angry about someone saying: "Comics fans are mostly white people, we need some black people watching... Find a badass role and put a popular black guy in it"

People say "I don't see the problem, he was a badass!", "He was such a badass in that role"

Notice none of the reserved or stoic characters are black, only the one that gets a lot of action to appeal to a demographic, which IS race-based casting and isn't positive for racial diversity AT ALL. It's exploiting a character (and racial) stereotype that "busts shit up".

Lucas did it too in star wars with Sam Jackson who didn't fit the role of a wise, reserved Jedi council member, and there are PLENTY of other black men who could fill that role perfectly, but Sam Jackson plays a particular kind of role in most movies he's in and he's popular, so they chose him, made him "badass" and spout crappy one-liners like he was in an action movie.

People seem to think that "A black guy is in that role, look at that progress!", but miss the bigger picture of why they're picked and it's not for the right reasons. Just because an actor is black, doesn't mean it's moving diversity forward when they're mostly playing ass-kicking "bad ases".

And I'm not "turning this around", I'm making you guys see your idea of some sinister white guys purposfully keeping movies unbalanced includes calling the many Jewish producers, directors, and writers "pro white money making" racists as well, not just the stereotypical straight white christian/atheist exec smoking a cigar. You can see a problem, but your finger is waggling at the wrong people.

Plinkett made the Star Wars observation and goes into it.

Well, the fact that you think "token" and not "good actor" when you see the name Idris Elba tells me you've never seen The Wire. (And the fact that you think that Mike Stoklasa was saying "whenever black people are cast in a movie, it's tokenism" and not "Samuel L. Jackson was an example of token casting in the Star Wars prequels" suggests to me that you were missing the point in that part of the review.)

And dude, what is your deal with Jewish people? Those comments are honestly coming off as a little creepy at this point.

I think it's hilarious you're trying to make me look racist for saying too many black actors play violent characters and not getting cast enough for the reserved stoic roles. This is why I said he was cast for the wrong reason, which you missed... Or did you skim over those parts?

You also complain about execs wanting to make money casting the way they do, and when I actually make a statement agreeing with you, saying they are casting a black man as a "Badass" once again to appeal to as many demographics as possible, making more money, you imply I'm racist AGAIN... and that I seem to be racist if I didn't think he's a good actor.

That's the point Plinkett was making; the problem with Sam Jackson's casting was not because he was black, it was because his race was exploited by Lucas to get the young black audiences to watch his movie because they would most likely go to watch HIM rather than a black actor who was better suited to the role, or in a different "non ass-kicking" role (token casting). That is what I'm saying about this situation. Him being black isn't the problem, it's how they're using his race to make money in a calculated casting decision based on stereotypes and popularity.

This is part of the problem right here, any criticism is assumed to be racism. That's why these nerds are pissed at the accusations; people are assuming their cricism is racism because they're white, not because they're comic fanboys and it's not fuckin' fair.

It's more than just comic book fans. The fact of the matter is just that calling someone a racist in our culture is the best way to not only discredit them, but to evade the point entirely by making the argument shift to them defending themselves as not racist.

That being said, I'm sure there were more than a few people who just didn't like the idea of a black Norse god because they are racist. Why? Because there are a lot of racists out there and they generally respond to this sort of stuff.

That doesn't mean that everyone who questions it is a racist though. Frankly the idea of a black Norse god seems to be deliberately provocative no matter which way you slice it, although this movie specifically escapes this by only being a comic book version of mythology set in space, and thus can allow for greater suspension of disbelief.

Of course there are real racists too, but they are a small minority, but the real problem of lumping them all together and making token casting decisions to make money don't get dismissed because of them.

It's that way in reality too. There are white supremacist groups out there, but it doesn't mean all white people are racist when they criticize something and it doesn't mean anyone who isn't white can't be racist themselves.

 

[bluewolf]

I don`t see the problem. It sounds like quiet an interesting idea.

 

[Throwitawaynow]

Heimdall being the white Aesir, described as being whiter than every other norse god.

 

[Technicka]

A whole lotta rambling

You're...pretty all over the place with what you're saying.

1. I never said "Black casting = PROGRESS!"

2. Thor is an action flick - so everyone's a badass in it (at least, on the side of the "gods")

3. For the most part, Jackson was pretty mellow in SW. On a Scale of how over-the-top Jackson can be, at any rate. And, well, compared to a lot of the wooden acting going on in the prequels, Tom Cruise could've been accused of hamming it up.

4. I never said the unbalanced hiring practices of Hollywood was some evil master plan by some phantom group of white people. I said it was a bunch of businesspeople playing it safe. If anything, I'm blaming us, the movie watchers for not pushing for a change in the status quo.

5. And, seriously, what is it with you and Jewish people?

 

[Raesvelg]

/shrug, it made relatively little difference to me that they cast Idris Elba in the role. It's... rather blatant multicultural shoe-horning, mind you, but some people feel that that's necessary.

Of course, I can spin this in another light, if you prefer.

Obviously the producers felt that they had to include some diversity in casting, because that's what's expected these days. So, who did they pick, character wise? Not a main character, no, we couldn't have a black Thor, or a black Odin.

So we pick a less prominent Asgardian to fill our required multicultural quota. I can accept this... but.

Who did they pick?

Heimdall.

What does Heimdall do?

Guards the Rainbow Bridge.

So they effectively cast a black man in the role of Lawn Jockey to the Gods.

If you look at it that way, it's even more racist than not having any black people in the movie at all.

 

[Danglybits]

Not talking about racial issues will NEVER solve them. I don't care about Thor at all, but he looks pretty badass in that armor.

 

[LaughingJester]

I'm Swedish. So it's "my people's" mythology that this is all based on.

I offer a big "fuck you" to anyone who complained about the casting, because Mr. Elba was awesome as Heimdall. He's the last of the Asgardians I would ever want to see a recast for.

I'm pretty happy to go with this view, I havent seen it yet and have been avoiding it given that it was compared to the latest Seth Rogen fail The Green Hornet

It's always a shame to have your expectations missed.

 

[OManoghue]

Granted the closest black person to Norway is in Algeria, but I think if he got the job he deserves it. Fanboys have to live with it.

 

[Danglybits]

They are about making money, and I agree there's a race issue, but we're looking at things based on different POV. You seem to think it's intentional "pro-white" racism, but it's the result of that greed and focus groups, explaining why it strays so far from the comics (I hear, I'm not a thor fan) to appeal to as many demographics as possible. I'm not saying he's not a good actor, but in this case it looks more like a token casting to exploit the "urban market". I'd be more angry about someone saying: "Comics fans are mostly white people, we need some black people watching... Find a badass role and put a popular black guy in it"

People say "I don't see the problem, he was a badass!", "He was such a badass in that role"

Notice none of the reserved or stoic characters are black, only the one that gets a lot of action to appeal to a demographic, which IS race-based casting and isn't positive for racial diversity AT ALL. It's exploiting a character (and racial) stereotype that "busts shit up".

Lucas did it too in star wars with Sam Jackson who didn't fit the role of a wise, reserved Jedi council member, and there are PLENTY of other black men who could fill that role perfectly, but Sam Jackson plays a particular kind of role in most movies he's in and he's popular, so they chose him, made him "badass" and spout crappy one-liners like he was in an action movie.

People seem to think that "A black guy is in that role, look at that progress!", but miss the bigger picture of why they're picked and it's not for the right reasons. Just because an actor is black, doesn't mean it's moving diversity forward when they're mostly playing ass-kicking "bad ases".

And I'm not "turning this around", I'm making you guys see your idea of some sinister white guys purposfully keeping movies unbalanced includes calling the many Jewish producers, directors, and writers "pro white money making" racists as well, not just the stereotypical straight white christian/atheist exec smoking a cigar. You can see a problem, but your finger is waggling at the wrong people.

Plinkett made the Star Wars observation and goes into it.

Well, the fact that you think "token" and not "good actor" when you see the name Idris Elba tells me you've never seen The Wire. (And the fact that you think that Mike Stoklasa was saying "whenever black people are cast in a movie, it's tokenism" and not "Samuel L. Jackson was an example of token casting in the Star Wars prequels" suggests to me that you were missing the point in that part of the review.)

And dude, what is your deal with Jewish people? Those comments are honestly coming off as a little creepy at this point.

I think it's hilarious you're trying to make me look racist for saying too many black actors play violent characters and not getting cast enough for the reserved stoic roles. This is why I said he was cast for the wrong reason, which you missed... Or did you skim over those parts?

You also complain about execs wanting to make money casting the way they do, and when I actually make a statement agreeing with you, saying they are casting a black man as a "Badass" once again to appeal to as many demographics as possible, making more money, you imply I'm racist AGAIN... and that I seem to be racist if I didn't think he's a good actor.

That's the point Plinkett was making; the problem with Sam Jackson's casting was not because he was black, it was because his race was exploited by Lucas to get the young black audiences to watch his movie because they would most likely go to watch HIM rather than a black actor who was better suited to the role, or in a different "non ass-kicking" role (token casting). That is what I'm saying about this situation. Him being black isn't the problem, it's how they're using his race to make money in a calculated casting decision based on stereotypes and popularity.

This is part of the problem right here, any criticism is assumed to be racism. That's why these nerds are pissed at the accusations; people are assuming their cricism is racism because they're white, not because they're comic fanboys and it's not fuckin' fair.

It's more than just comic book fans. The fact of the matter is just that calling someone a racist in our culture is the best way to not only discredit them, but to evade the point entirely by making the argument shift to them defending themselves as not racist.

That being said, I'm sure there were more than a few people who just didn't like the idea of a black Norse god because they are racist. Why? Because there are a lot of racists out there and they generally respond to this sort of stuff.

That doesn't mean that everyone who questions it is a racist though. Frankly the idea of a black Norse god seems to be deliberately provocative no matter which way you slice it, although this movie specifically escapes this by only being a comic book version of mythology set in space, and thus can allow for greater suspension of disbelief.

Of course there are real racists too, but they are a small minority, but the real problem of lumping them all together and making token casting decisions to make money don't get dismissed because of them.

It's that way in reality too. There are white supremacist groups out there, but it doesn't mean all white people are racist when they criticize something and it doesn't mean anyone who isn't white can't be racist themselves.

I agree about the scarcity of 'serious' roles for black actors versus action type movies. I don't think that the population of racists is a small minority though. There are many degrees of racism and prejudices aren't always obvious to the people that hold them; and no, being a racist isn't just a caucasian prerogative. Not by a long shot; and unlike white racists, racists of color get to be more open about it. Because, 'they can't be racist, they're not white'. It probably was deliberately provocative to cast him in this role; but to what end I wonder. The fact that I don't see a problem with this casting decision (having not seen the movie) makes me reconsider my stance on the Airbender movie somewhat.

Did anyone complain about making Halle Berry Catwoman? If not, is it because she wasn't Selina Kyle? Or because Halle Berry is hot? Or that no one cared about that movie? There are even fewer roles for black women out there.