Hobbit Casting Agent Fired For Dismissing Non-White Hobbits

[Kenko]

Fucking load of mother fucking horse shit. If they did a film about Africa and they where asked to find Africans it wouldn't be racist. THIS IS FUCKING HORSESHIT. You need white people to play the hobbit you need fucking black people to play black people.

You're not being discriminated against, if discrimination is such a big problem for you why don't you fuck off back to Africa I'll even pay for your fucking ticket.

uh.... In all fairness, this idiot is from the Middle East....

What are you even talking about?

The better question is to which idiot the "idiot" refers. At least, that's what I'm asking myself.

Even though his rant may seem a bit unwarranted and needlessly offensive. He's got a point. Its not like a person can play the role of Mbatuwe the Hunter in a movie that plays out in Africa. For the same reason a middle-easterner or black person cannot take the roll of a Took in a Tolkien movie. Thats just silly and stupid. The movie shouldnt be punished just because some ignorant brown-shaded tard hasnt read the damn books or the lore.

He'd maybe have a point if the Tooks were to be the only Hobbit clan depicted in the film. But that, I imagine, while possible, is unlikely. The Hobbits of the Shire, according to Tolkien, are of "three somewhat different breeds: Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides. The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller and shorter . . . " and the Harfoots make up the majority of the Shire's inhabitants. So, to cast a "brown-shaded tard" in the role of a Harfoot would, to me, make perfect sense (more so because she's "brown-shaded" and less so because she's an alleged "tard").

Well they were trying to get the part of a took were they not?. As for the other types of Hobbits. Im well aware of the darker shaded ones.

I don't see that kind of specificity in the OP's article. All I see is reference to the fact that they were "casting for extra hobbits" and a requirement that the actor auditioning "look like a hobbit." Far as I -- and, I think, you -- can tell, they were casting for Hobbits regardless of particular breed or clan of Hobbit.

But still. They are overreacting. Its ridiculous and its getting old.

I'll tell what's ridiculous and getting old: racism. But, unfortunately, judging from the OP's article and many of the comments to this thread, it's alive and well and ain't goin' nowhere.

Yep, like the guy you quoted earlier. Its getting old and it goes both ways. Although as of late you can get accused of racism simply for being white. So thats really what irks me here. Oh you only hire white people to play white characters?! RACISM!!! And for all we know maybe the coloured characters already had actors but she didnt care too find out or something. Its just lame when people cry "racism" to get attention when things arent going their way. As if trying to get a sympathy card in order to get a job instead of getting it by merit and skill.

 

[JDKJ]

So, if I were to audition for the role of 'African-American Woman' and be refused I could call both racism and sexism on the casting director?

You're missing an important difference in your analogy. The role that the Pakistani woman audition for (i.e., a Hobbit) is not by definition of Tolkien limited to actors with fair skin and hair. It would seem to properly include those with brown skin. You are comparing an apple to an orange.

 

[Kair]

Was it racist to cast Indians in Slum Dog Millionaire? Why did they not put an African or European in the main role? Forcing ethnicities into roles that were created for another ethnicity is racist, it is called positive discrimination.

 

[JDKJ]

Fucking load of mother fucking horse shit. If they did a film about Africa and they where asked to find Africans it wouldn't be racist. THIS IS FUCKING HORSESHIT. You need white people to play the hobbit you need fucking black people to play black people.

You're not being discriminated against, if discrimination is such a big problem for you why don't you fuck off back to Africa I'll even pay for your fucking ticket.

uh.... In all fairness, this idiot is from the Middle East....

What are you even talking about?

The better question is to which idiot the "idiot" refers. At least, that's what I'm asking myself.

Even though his rant may seem a bit unwarranted and needlessly offensive. He's got a point. Its not like a person can play the role of Mbatuwe the Hunter in a movie that plays out in Africa. For the same reason a middle-easterner or black person cannot take the roll of a Took in a Tolkien movie. Thats just silly and stupid. The movie shouldnt be punished just because some ignorant brown-shaded tard hasnt read the damn books or the lore.

He'd maybe have a point if the Tooks were to be the only Hobbit clan depicted in the film. But that, I imagine, while possible, is unlikely. The Hobbits of the Shire, according to Tolkien, are of "three somewhat different breeds: Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides. The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller and shorter . . . " and the Harfoots make up the majority of the Shire's inhabitants. So, to cast a "brown-shaded tard" in the role of a Harfoot would, to me, make perfect sense (more so because she's "brown-shaded" and less so because she's an alleged "tard").

Well they were trying to get the part of a took were they not?. As for the other types of Hobbits. Im well aware of the darker shaded ones.

I don't see that kind of specificity in the OP's article. All I see is reference to the fact that they were "casting for extra hobbits" and a requirement that the actor auditioning "look like a hobbit." Far as I -- and, I think, you -- can tell, they were casting for Hobbits regardless of particular breed or clan of Hobbit.

But still. They are overreacting. Its ridiculous and its getting old.

I'll tell what's ridiculous and getting old: racism. But, unfortunately, judging from the OP's article and many of the comments to this thread, it's alive and well and ain't goin' nowhere.

Yep, like the guy you quoted earlier. Its getting old and it goes both ways. Although as of late you can get accused of racism simply for being white. So thats really what irks me here. Oh you only hire white people to play white characters?! RACISM!!! And for all we know maybe the coloured characters already had actors but she didnt care too find out or something. Its just lame when people cry "racism" to get attention when things arent going their way. As if trying to get a sympathy card in order to get a job instead of getting it by merit and skill.

If you apply for a job in which to hire someone with brown skin makes some sense but are told that the job is only open to those with fair skin and which makes no sense, then to cry "Racism!" doesn't seem to me to playing a race or sympathy card. It seems to me that you've got a legitimate beef.

 

[Kenko]

Fucking load of mother fucking horse shit. If they did a film about Africa and they where asked to find Africans it wouldn't be racist. THIS IS FUCKING HORSESHIT. You need white people to play the hobbit you need fucking black people to play black people.

You're not being discriminated against, if discrimination is such a big problem for you why don't you fuck off back to Africa I'll even pay for your fucking ticket.

uh.... In all fairness, this idiot is from the Middle East....

What are you even talking about?

The better question is to which idiot the "idiot" refers. At least, that's what I'm asking myself.

Even though his rant may seem a bit unwarranted and needlessly offensive. He's got a point. Its not like a person can play the role of Mbatuwe the Hunter in a movie that plays out in Africa. For the same reason a middle-easterner or black person cannot take the roll of a Took in a Tolkien movie. Thats just silly and stupid. The movie shouldnt be punished just because some ignorant brown-shaded tard hasnt read the damn books or the lore.

He'd maybe have a point if the Tooks were to be the only Hobbit clan depicted in the film. But that, I imagine, while possible, is unlikely. The Hobbits of the Shire, according to Tolkien, are of "three somewhat different breeds: Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides. The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller and shorter . . . " and the Harfoots make up the majority of the Shire's inhabitants. So, to cast a "brown-shaded tard" in the role of a Harfoot would, to me, make perfect sense (more so because she's "brown-shaded" and less so because she's an alleged "tard").

Well they were trying to get the part of a took were they not?. As for the other types of Hobbits. Im well aware of the darker shaded ones.

I don't see that kind of specificity in the OP's article. All I see is reference to the fact that they were "casting for extra hobbits" and a requirement that the actor auditioning "look like a hobbit." Far as I -- and, I think, you -- can tell, they were casting for Hobbits regardless of particular breed or clan of Hobbit.

But still. They are overreacting. Its ridiculous and its getting old.

I'll tell what's ridiculous and getting old: racism. But, unfortunately, judging from the OP's article and many of the comments to this thread, it's alive and well and ain't goin' nowhere.

Yep, like the guy you quoted earlier. Its getting old and it goes both ways. Although as of late you can get accused of racism simply for being white. So thats really what irks me here. Oh you only hire white people to play white characters?! RACISM!!! And for all we know maybe the coloured characters already had actors but she didnt care too find out or something. Its just lame when people cry "racism" to get attention when things arent going their way. As if trying to get a sympathy card in order to get a job instead of getting it by merit and skill.

If you apply for a job in which to hire someone with brown skin makes some sense but are told that the job is only open to those with fair skin and which makes no sense, then to cry "Racism!" doesn't seem to me to playing a race or sympathy card. It seems to me that you've got a legitimate beef.

If you arent what they are looking for its yer own fricking fault if you go there. If they specifically mention what they want, wich was white females. Then its pretty obvious you dont go there to apply for it as its not for you. Whatever the reasons they have. And there is no legimitate beef. Its just whining and crying.

 

[JDKJ]

Was it racist to cast Indians in Slum Dog Millionaire? Why did they not put an African or European in the main role? Forcing ethnicities into roles that were created for another ethnicity is racist, it is called positive discrimination.

See my "apples and oranges" post above your post.

 

[Daveman]

I don't know. Maybe I'm just secretly racist but I can't imagine a pakistani hobbit or a black hobbit. I just picture them as white in my head. I don't know, do any black or non-white escapists think of hobbits as being of a certain ethnicity.

I mean, not the same thing really but nobody is cross-gender auditioning are they and that's not sexist.

"Maybe I'm just secretly racist . . . ."

If something's obvious for all to see, is it a "secret?" I don't think so.

Yeah, I suppose I meant subconciously now that I think about it.

If you do "just picture [Hobbits] as white in [your] head" despite the fact that Tolkien probably never pictured them as white in his head (and certainly doesn't in his writing describe them as being all white), then you may want to spend some time asking yourself why you subconsciously do that. The answers may be, if nothing else, self-enlightening. And time spent introspectively, like Buddha contemplating his navel, in an attempt to better understand why we do what we do is always time well-spent, I think.

Maybe it's because every image I've seen of a Hobbit has shown them as white or maybe it's because I myself am white and most of the people I know are white and I just naturally picture that as the norm for characters (hobbit or not) as that is what I'm most used to, either way I'm pretty sure it's nothing to do with racism actually.

And how do you know Tolkien didn't picture them as white?

 

[JDKJ]

Fucking load of mother fucking horse shit. If they did a film about Africa and they where asked to find Africans it wouldn't be racist. THIS IS FUCKING HORSESHIT. You need white people to play the hobbit you need fucking black people to play black people.

You're not being discriminated against, if discrimination is such a big problem for you why don't you fuck off back to Africa I'll even pay for your fucking ticket.

uh.... In all fairness, this idiot is from the Middle East....

What are you even talking about?

The better question is to which idiot the "idiot" refers. At least, that's what I'm asking myself.

Even though his rant may seem a bit unwarranted and needlessly offensive. He's got a point. Its not like a person can play the role of Mbatuwe the Hunter in a movie that plays out in Africa. For the same reason a middle-easterner or black person cannot take the roll of a Took in a Tolkien movie. Thats just silly and stupid. The movie shouldnt be punished just because some ignorant brown-shaded tard hasnt read the damn books or the lore.

He'd maybe have a point if the Tooks were to be the only Hobbit clan depicted in the film. But that, I imagine, while possible, is unlikely. The Hobbits of the Shire, according to Tolkien, are of "three somewhat different breeds: Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides. The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller and shorter . . . " and the Harfoots make up the majority of the Shire's inhabitants. So, to cast a "brown-shaded tard" in the role of a Harfoot would, to me, make perfect sense (more so because she's "brown-shaded" and less so because she's an alleged "tard").

Well they were trying to get the part of a took were they not?. As for the other types of Hobbits. Im well aware of the darker shaded ones.

I don't see that kind of specificity in the OP's article. All I see is reference to the fact that they were "casting for extra hobbits" and a requirement that the actor auditioning "look like a hobbit." Far as I -- and, I think, you -- can tell, they were casting for Hobbits regardless of particular breed or clan of Hobbit.

But still. They are overreacting. Its ridiculous and its getting old.

I'll tell what's ridiculous and getting old: racism. But, unfortunately, judging from the OP's article and many of the comments to this thread, it's alive and well and ain't goin' nowhere.

Yep, like the guy you quoted earlier. Its getting old and it goes both ways. Although as of late you can get accused of racism simply for being white. So thats really what irks me here. Oh you only hire white people to play white characters?! RACISM!!! And for all we know maybe the coloured characters already had actors but she didnt care too find out or something. Its just lame when people cry "racism" to get attention when things arent going their way. As if trying to get a sympathy card in order to get a job instead of getting it by merit and skill.

If you apply for a job in which to hire someone with brown skin makes some sense but are told that the job is only open to those with fair skin and which makes no sense, then to cry "Racism!" doesn't seem to me to playing a race or sympathy card. It seems to me that you've got a legitimate beef.

If you arent what they are looking for its yer own fricking fault if you go there. If they specifically mention what they want, wich was white females. Then its pretty obvious you dont go there to apply for it as its not for you. Whatever the reasons they have. And there is on legimitate beef. Its just whining and crying.

No it's not. Most civilized nations, including both the US and the UK, have laws against making race and gender a factor in a hiring decision for a job in which race and gender play no part. To be refused employment because you are a particular race or gender when race and gender is of no importance to the job being offered is illegal discrimination as a matter of law.

 

[Kenko]

Ok dark skin is gained in human evolution by being out in direct sun with little to no clouds.

Hobbits live in Hills and most come out at night.

So hobbits being pasty goths would be better casting indeed.

Should they also sport black nail polish on their fingers and wear black eyeliner? And listen to weepy albums by The Cure?

And you've got the evolutionary process reversed. Man started out with an overabundance of melanin in their skin which they lost as part of the adaptive process (i.e., the less sunlight on the skin, the less need for the protective qualities of melanin) when they migrated out of the African continent (the birthplace of Mankind) and into the less tropical climates of Europe.

But that reversal of evolutionary science is frequently made. Often in a feeble attempt to place greater value on fair skin over that of dark skin. Racists come up with dumb shit like that all the time. It don't make no sense, but that don't stop 'em.

Yeah thats pretty stupid. They live in area's where they are exposed to direct sunlight most time of the day. They arent unevolved because of it , they have just evolved to better live in their habitat. Like those who went to the milder and colder habitats have lighter skin and are more resilient to cold weather. Calling them unevolved is simply just uneducated and silly.

 

[Hosker]

That is absolutely ridiculous. The hobbits are white, plain and simple. I feel very sorry for the person who got fired.

 

[JDKJ]

I don't know. Maybe I'm just secretly racist but I can't imagine a pakistani hobbit or a black hobbit. I just picture them as white in my head. I don't know, do any black or non-white escapists think of hobbits as being of a certain ethnicity.

I mean, not the same thing really but nobody is cross-gender auditioning are they and that's not sexist.

"Maybe I'm just secretly racist . . . ."

If something's obvious for all to see, is it a "secret?" I don't think so.

Yeah, I suppose I meant subconciously now that I think about it.

If you do "just picture [Hobbits] as white in [your] head" despite the fact that Tolkien probably never pictured them as white in his head (and certainly doesn't in his writing describe them as being all white), then you may want to spend some time asking yourself why you subconsciously do that. The answers may be, if nothing else, self-enlightening. And time spent introspectively, like Buddha contemplating his navel, in an attempt to better understand why we do what we do is always time well-spent, I think.

Maybe it's because every image I've seen of a Hobbit has shown them as white or maybe it's because I myself am white and most of the people I know are white and I just naturally picture that as the norm for characters (hobbit or not) as that is what I'm most used to, either way I'm pretty sure it's nothing to do with racism actually.

And how do you know Tolkien didn't picture them as white?

Because that's what he wrote in The Hobbit. That some of them were "browner of skin."

 

[Kenko]

Fucking load of mother fucking horse shit. If they did a film about Africa and they where asked to find Africans it wouldn't be racist. THIS IS FUCKING HORSESHIT. You need white people to play the hobbit you need fucking black people to play black people.

You're not being discriminated against, if discrimination is such a big problem for you why don't you fuck off back to Africa I'll even pay for your fucking ticket.

uh.... In all fairness, this idiot is from the Middle East....

What are you even talking about?

The better question is to which idiot the "idiot" refers. At least, that's what I'm asking myself.

Even though his rant may seem a bit unwarranted and needlessly offensive. He's got a point. Its not like a person can play the role of Mbatuwe the Hunter in a movie that plays out in Africa. For the same reason a middle-easterner or black person cannot take the roll of a Took in a Tolkien movie. Thats just silly and stupid. The movie shouldnt be punished just because some ignorant brown-shaded tard hasnt read the damn books or the lore.

He'd maybe have a point if the Tooks were to be the only Hobbit clan depicted in the film. But that, I imagine, while possible, is unlikely. The Hobbits of the Shire, according to Tolkien, are of "three somewhat different breeds: Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides. The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller and shorter . . . " and the Harfoots make up the majority of the Shire's inhabitants. So, to cast a "brown-shaded tard" in the role of a Harfoot would, to me, make perfect sense (more so because she's "brown-shaded" and less so because she's an alleged "tard").

Well they were trying to get the part of a took were they not?. As for the other types of Hobbits. Im well aware of the darker shaded ones.

I don't see that kind of specificity in the OP's article. All I see is reference to the fact that they were "casting for extra hobbits" and a requirement that the actor auditioning "look like a hobbit." Far as I -- and, I think, you -- can tell, they were casting for Hobbits regardless of particular breed or clan of Hobbit.

But still. They are overreacting. Its ridiculous and its getting old.

I'll tell what's ridiculous and getting old: racism. But, unfortunately, judging from the OP's article and many of the comments to this thread, it's alive and well and ain't goin' nowhere.

Yep, like the guy you quoted earlier. Its getting old and it goes both ways. Although as of late you can get accused of racism simply for being white. So thats really what irks me here. Oh you only hire white people to play white characters?! RACISM!!! And for all we know maybe the coloured characters already had actors but she didnt care too find out or something. Its just lame when people cry "racism" to get attention when things arent going their way. As if trying to get a sympathy card in order to get a job instead of getting it by merit and skill.

If you apply for a job in which to hire someone with brown skin makes some sense but are told that the job is only open to those with fair skin and which makes no sense, then to cry "Racism!" doesn't seem to me to playing a race or sympathy card. It seems to me that you've got a legitimate beef.

If you arent what they are looking for its yer own fricking fault if you go there. If they specifically mention what they want, wich was white females. Then its pretty obvious you dont go there to apply for it as its not for you. Whatever the reasons they have. And there is on legimitate beef. Its just whining and crying.

No it's not. Most civilized nations, including both the US and the UK, have laws against making race and gender a factor in a hiring decision for a job in which race and gender play no part. To be refused employment because you are a particular race or gender when race and gender is of no importance to the job being offered is illegal discrimination as a matter of law.

It's a bit different for movies isnt it, muppet? Like I said earlier. It'd make no sense to cast european whites in the roles of black africans in a movie. As there makes no sense in casting black people as vikings in a movie either. So quit being an overly political correct douché.

 

[JDKJ]

That is absolutely ridiculous. The hobbits are white, plain and simple. I feel very sorry for the person who got fired.

Hobbits are not "white." That's plain. Are you simple-minded?

 

[Hosker]

That is absolutely ridiculous. The hobbits are white, plain and simple. I feel very sorry for the person who got fired.

Hobbits are not "white." That's plain. Are you simple-minded?

I would like to know what they are then.

 

[Daveman]

I don't know. Maybe I'm just secretly racist but I can't imagine a pakistani hobbit or a black hobbit. I just picture them as white in my head. I don't know, do any black or non-white escapists think of hobbits as being of a certain ethnicity.

I mean, not the same thing really but nobody is cross-gender auditioning are they and that's not sexist.

"Maybe I'm just secretly racist . . . ."

If something's obvious for all to see, is it a "secret?" I don't think so.

Yeah, I suppose I meant subconciously now that I think about it.

If you do "just picture [Hobbits] as white in [your] head" despite the fact that Tolkien probably never pictured them as white in his head (and certainly doesn't in his writing describe them as being all white), then you may want to spend some time asking yourself why you subconsciously do that. The answers may be, if nothing else, self-enlightening. And time spent introspectively, like Buddha contemplating his navel, in an attempt to better understand why we do what we do is always time well-spent, I think.

Maybe it's because every image I've seen of a Hobbit has shown them as white or maybe it's because I myself am white and most of the people I know are white and I just naturally picture that as the norm for characters (hobbit or not) as that is what I'm most used to, either way I'm pretty sure it's nothing to do with racism actually.

And how do you know Tolkien didn't picture them as white?

Because that's what he wrote in The Hobbit. That some of them were "browner of skin."

So what... tanned? But yeah, fair enough, maybe there are black hobbits, tbh I'm not sure I'd notice in the film. In fact, now I think about it, they feature so little in The Hobbit I can't imagine there being a huge number of scenes they'd be needed for though, this being hobbit actors in general, not just coloured ones.

 

[Mako SOLDIER]

So, what? Does this mean that in the interest of equal opportunity employment they aren't gonna cast some Jewish guy as Gollum? That's ridiculous! Everyone knows that Gollum's Jewish.

Ahem, that's Golem you're thinking of. Golem is Jewish, Gollum is named after his own vocal sounds.

Ahem, there's a library full of scholarly research that suggests Tolkien's Gollum was inspired by the Golem of Jewish folklore.

See, for example, http://www.taylor.edu/dotAsset/57599.pdf

Haven't read the rest of your PDF, as I stopped reading right after it claimed the Judaism took the idea of the golem from the bible. Um, no, Judaism came first, otherwise Christ wouldn't have been Jewish now would he. Judaism has a rich enough heritage without having to steal from a younger religion. That pretty much destroyed any credibility that PDF had.

Edit: Just noticed that both post I replied to were yours. Coincidence, not some kind of personal grudge I assure you.

Are you aware that the first five books of the Christian Bible (the so-called Pentateuch) reappear almost word-for-word in the Torah (the Jewish equivalent of the Christian Bible)? In fact, the names of the first five books of the Torah translate from the Hebrew into English as Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, which is precisely what they're called in the English Christian Bible. In fact, Leviticus (which is mostly a set of laws) is named after the Tribe of Levi who, among the so-called Twelve Tribes of Israel, are known as "the law-givers."

Bible or Torah. If you're about talking the first five books of the New Testament or the Torah, ain't no difference.

I am aware of that, but the wording in the pdf implies that Jewish folklore was influenced by the bible when it was clearly influenced by the Torah. That's like me directly copying The Lord out the Rings for the first part of my book and then claiming that Games Workshop's Orks are inspired by my book. To steal an idea and then attempt to take credit for it instead of the original source is pretty low.

In regards to your other post, absolutely, the harfoots clearly do have darker skin, I was merely playing with the wording as your original comment could have been incorrectly taken to mean that all Hobbits were dark skinned.

Again though, Torah or New Testament Bible. What's the difference? To say something was influenced by the one is probably to just as well say it was influenced by the other. Doesn't a rose, regardless of what you call it, still smell just the same?

That makes no sense at all. The Torah came first, it's historical fact. It doesn't matter that they're the same, the new testament is a copy of the Torah, not the other way around. There's this crazy little thing called chronology that is often a good indication of what came first. There is no way that the Torah is influenced by the New Testament, and to claim that Jewish folklore is influenced by the bible is high preposterous and entirely based on Christian arrogance or delusion (by all means have your faith, just don't try to take credit for an idea that clearly came from elsewhere). The golem as a concept would have existed long before the bible did.

 

[JDKJ]

Fucking load of mother fucking horse shit. If they did a film about Africa and they where asked to find Africans it wouldn't be racist. THIS IS FUCKING HORSESHIT. You need white people to play the hobbit you need fucking black people to play black people.

You're not being discriminated against, if discrimination is such a big problem for you why don't you fuck off back to Africa I'll even pay for your fucking ticket.

uh.... In all fairness, this idiot is from the Middle East....

What are you even talking about?

The better question is to which idiot the "idiot" refers. At least, that's what I'm asking myself.

Even though his rant may seem a bit unwarranted and needlessly offensive. He's got a point. Its not like a person can play the role of Mbatuwe the Hunter in a movie that plays out in Africa. For the same reason a middle-easterner or black person cannot take the roll of a Took in a Tolkien movie. Thats just silly and stupid. The movie shouldnt be punished just because some ignorant brown-shaded tard hasnt read the damn books or the lore.

He'd maybe have a point if the Tooks were to be the only Hobbit clan depicted in the film. But that, I imagine, while possible, is unlikely. The Hobbits of the Shire, according to Tolkien, are of "three somewhat different breeds: Harfoots, Stoors and Fallohides. The Harfoots were browner of skin, smaller and shorter . . . " and the Harfoots make up the majority of the Shire's inhabitants. So, to cast a "brown-shaded tard" in the role of a Harfoot would, to me, make perfect sense (more so because she's "brown-shaded" and less so because she's an alleged "tard").

Well they were trying to get the part of a took were they not?. As for the other types of Hobbits. Im well aware of the darker shaded ones.

I don't see that kind of specificity in the OP's article. All I see is reference to the fact that they were "casting for extra hobbits" and a requirement that the actor auditioning "look like a hobbit." Far as I -- and, I think, you -- can tell, they were casting for Hobbits regardless of particular breed or clan of Hobbit.

But still. They are overreacting. Its ridiculous and its getting old.

I'll tell what's ridiculous and getting old: racism. But, unfortunately, judging from the OP's article and many of the comments to this thread, it's alive and well and ain't goin' nowhere.

Yep, like the guy you quoted earlier. Its getting old and it goes both ways. Although as of late you can get accused of racism simply for being white. So thats really what irks me here. Oh you only hire white people to play white characters?! RACISM!!! And for all we know maybe the coloured characters already had actors but she didnt care too find out or something. Its just lame when people cry "racism" to get attention when things arent going their way. As if trying to get a sympathy card in order to get a job instead of getting it by merit and skill.

If you apply for a job in which to hire someone with brown skin makes some sense but are told that the job is only open to those with fair skin and which makes no sense, then to cry "Racism!" doesn't seem to me to playing a race or sympathy card. It seems to me that you've got a legitimate beef.

If you arent what they are looking for its yer own fricking fault if you go there. If they specifically mention what they want, wich was white females. Then its pretty obvious you dont go there to apply for it as its not for you. Whatever the reasons they have. And there is on legimitate beef. Its just whining and crying.

No it's not. Most civilized nations, including both the US and the UK, have laws against making race and gender a factor in a hiring decision for a job in which race and gender play no part. To be refused employment because you are a particular race or gender when race and gender is of no importance to the job being offered is illegal discrimination as a matter of law.

It's a bit different for movies isnt it, muppet? Like I said earlier. It'd make no sense to cast european whites in the roles of black africans in a movie. As there makes no sense in casting black people as vikings in a movie either. So quit being an overly political correct douché.

What makes you think that film production is exempted from the anti-discrimination hiring laws, Mr. Snuffleupagus? If a Harfoot Hobbit is, as Tolkien described, of brown skin, then it is against the law for a casting call to exclude actors with brown skin. There's no legitimate reason to say that a brown-skinned actor can't play a brown-skinned Hobbit. And to attempt to say so suggests that you're either a racist twat or a mumbling moron.

 

[KSarty]

Has anyone realized that she's playing the race card for what is probably the role of an extra? The only Hobbit actually featured in the book is Bilbo, you only see the others during the main characters' very brief stay in the Shire.

 

[PecosBill]

It makes you wonder how Hollywood manages to make any historic movies. You can't do a movie about 14th century England because 14th century England wasn't ethnically diverse and the casting calls would be declared "racist".

 

[JDKJ]

So, what? Does this mean that in the interest of equal opportunity employment they aren't gonna cast some Jewish guy as Gollum? That's ridiculous! Everyone knows that Gollum's Jewish.

Ahem, that's Golem you're thinking of. Golem is Jewish, Gollum is named after his own vocal sounds.

Ahem, there's a library full of scholarly research that suggests Tolkien's Gollum was inspired by the Golem of Jewish folklore.

See, for example, http://www.taylor.edu/dotAsset/57599.pdf

Haven't read the rest of your PDF, as I stopped reading right after it claimed the Judaism took the idea of the golem from the bible. Um, no, Judaism came first, otherwise Christ wouldn't have been Jewish now would he. Judaism has a rich enough heritage without having to steal from a younger religion. That pretty much destroyed any credibility that PDF had.

Edit: Just noticed that both post I replied to were yours. Coincidence, not some kind of personal grudge I assure you.

Are you aware that the first five books of the Christian Bible (the so-called Pentateuch) reappear almost word-for-word in the Torah (the Jewish equivalent of the Christian Bible)? In fact, the names of the first five books of the Torah translate from the Hebrew into English as Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, which is precisely what they're called in the English Christian Bible. In fact, Leviticus (which is mostly a set of laws) is named after the Tribe of Levi who, among the so-called Twelve Tribes of Israel, are known as "the law-givers."

Bible or Torah. If you're about talking the first five books of the New Testament or the Torah, ain't no difference.

I am aware of that, but the wording in the pdf implies that Jewish folklore was influenced by the bible when it was clearly influenced by the Torah. That's like me directly copying The Lord out the Rings for the first part of my book and then claiming that Games Workshop's Orks are inspired by my book. To steal an idea and then attempt to take credit for it instead of the original source is pretty low.

In regards to your other post, absolutely, the harfoots clearly do have darker skin, I was merely playing with the wording as your original comment could have been incorrectly taken to mean that all Hobbits were dark skinned.

Again though, Torah or New Testament Bible. What's the difference? To say something was influenced by the one is probably to just as well say it was influenced by the other. Doesn't a rose, regardless of what you call it, still smell just the same?

That makes no sense at all. The Torah came first, it's historical fact. It doesn't matter that they're the same, the new testament is a copy of the Torah, not the other way around. There's this crazy little thing called chronology that is often a good indication of what came first. There is no way that the Torah is influenced by the New Testament, and to claim that Jewish folklore is influenced by the bible is high preposterous and entirely based on Christian arrogance or delusion (by all means have your faith, just don't try to take credit for an idea that clearly came from elsewhere). The golem as a concept would have existed long before the bible did.

Takes a pretty sharp knife to split a thin hair, don't it?