So a black actor is considering role of Johnny Storm and nerdrage has turned racist again.

Sepko

New member
Feb 16, 2010
180
0
0
Sparrow said:
My only issue is that if Johnny is black, Susan has to be black too. If that happens, cool. If they try to tie some kind of adoption shit into it or just ignore the brother/sister background... then I'd be pissed.
What's wrong with adoption?
 

Sepko

New member
Feb 16, 2010
180
0
0
Seth Carter said:
Given comics tendency to reboot their characters anyways, I don't have any huge problem with it. Though my fondness for being the Devils Advocate would ask those defending it what they'd say if a white guy played Luke Cage or Black Panther. I can't remember if it was this forum or not, but there was a rage thread about Keanu Reeves being in a japanese samurai movie being made too.
There's a difference between white-washing and having a black guy try out one of the millions of white characters of potential racial interchangeability.
 

Lieju

New member
Jan 4, 2009
3,044
0
0
Seth Carter said:
Though my fondness for being the Devils Advocate would ask those defending it what they'd say if a white guy played Luke Cage or Black Panther.
1) For those characters, their race (or skin colour, or ethnicity) is an important part of their character.
2) There are far less black superheroes than there are white ones, so changing white to black is a step towards diversity, other way around it's not.

So it wouldn't be the same thing.
 

Strain42

New member
Mar 2, 2009
2,720
0
0
I will admit that the small comic fanboy in me is going "but...Sue is his sister and...what?" which doesn't make sense even to me. They could easily still be related. Hell, my first girlfriend was half black. She looked black, her sister looked white. It happens. It could easily raise some audiences eyebrows, but it's hardly a big stretch of the imagination.

Y'know what I HAVEN'T seen mentioned here though? (and maybe it was, I only skimmed the first and last pages)

The people who don't wanna see Michael B. Jordan playing Human Torch because they watched Chronicle, have seen his acting and frankly just don't think he would be good for the part.

For me it's not a race thing. I didn't care when Idris Elba has Heimdall, I don't care that Jamie Foxx is playing Electro, and I wouldn't have cared if Donald Glover had been Peter Parker (I think he would have actually done a much better job than Andrew Garfield, and this may sound racist to some, but does anyone think Donald Glover should totally be Miles Morales if they ever get his movie off the ground?)

It's just that from what I've seen of this actor, I don't think he'd be a good Human Torch, and I don't think he should be handed the role just because he's friends with the director already.

I could be wrong, maybe he'd end up doing a great job. I've been surprised by many actors many times.

But yeah, right now I'm going to say up front I don't really want to see him playing the part, but it's because of what I've seen of his acting. Not the color of his skin.
 

The_Echo

New member
Mar 18, 2009
3,253
0
0
I wouldn't consider it racist.

There's a huge difference between turning a character black and replacing them with a similar, black character (like Miles Morales).

Personally, changing the race of a character just seems... disrespectful to that character. I mean, if the Human Torch had been black to begin with and they were considering a white actor to play him, well that would just be racist as hell wouldn't it? Why isn't it the same the other way around?
MrGalactus said:
So I'm just sat here waiting to be offended? So when people cry for a man to never even be considered for a role based on the fact that he has one physical feature that differs from the original character, nobody should get angry about that? sorry, mate, but it IS offensive, and it IS racist.
So are you saying if there were a movie centered around the bushmen tribes of Africa, that it would be acceptable to consider a white or Asian actor for the role of the tribe leader?
 

Sepko

New member
Feb 16, 2010
180
0
0
The_Echo said:
I wouldn't consider it racist.

There's a huge difference between turning a character black and replacing them with a similar, black character (like Miles Morales).

Personally, changing the race of a character just seems... disrespectful to that character. I mean, if the Human Torch had been black to begin with and they were considering a white actor to play him, well that would just be racist as hell wouldn't it? Why isn't it the same the other way around?
MrGalactus said:
So I'm just sat here waiting to be offended? So when people cry for a man to never even be considered for a role based on the fact that he has one physical feature that differs from the original character, nobody should get angry about that? sorry, mate, but it IS offensive, and it IS racist.
So are you saying if there were a movie centered around the bushmen tribes of Africa, that it would be acceptable to consider a white or Asian actor for the role of the tribe leader?
Ever heard of white-washing? Because it's vastly different to having a black guy play the part of one of the millions of white characters who could be any race.
 

Headdrivehardscrew

New member
Aug 22, 2011
1,660
0
0
Well, they did just that with the characters of Jack Crawford and Freddy/Freddie Lounds in the TV series Hannibal, by having Laurence Fishburne pull off a rather convincing and excellent Crawford, and Freddie Lounds is now no longer an oafish greasy fat guy, but a nosy woman journalist.

I'd say it works like a charm.

Would I personally accept it if Dr. Hannibal Lecter or Will Graham was suddenly black or latino? No, I don't think I'd like that very much. Just as I don't like Lucy Liu doing an ersatz Watson in 'Elementary'. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

With movies and TV series, and movies and TV series based on books, there is a certain leeway you get by identifying and sticking to what really matters.

With iconic characters like those hailing from the comic book world, I don't think it's a very good idea. I personally don't like it. And that's not a racist stance, it's just a stance that strives to respect the source material. When you change something significantly, you're either adding payload that detracts from the original story, or you are creating an alternate universe from the position of a statement that could very well be interpreted as being revisionist.

We live in a sorry age in which we, on one hand, really seem hellbent on making everybody happy and creating equality, not noticing how unbalanced and off kilter everything has gone just in the last, say, twenty years. Characters and actors of colour are attacked pretty much instantly and described as being racist. Any depiction of a character of colour seems to get flagged for uncompromising scrutiny, making it a well trouble-laden thing, no matter the story or context of the character in question. Adding non-white characters can cause a ruckus. Having only white characters causes a ruckus. Turning white characters into non-white characters causes a ruckus. Turning non-white characters into white characters causes Gawker-level internet outrage. So... 'race' is obviously still a hot topic, and the only egalitarian thing I currently sense is that labelling everything 'racism' doesn't really help the situation, the people or the discussion much. Besides, it is evident that white 'racism' gets the shotgun treatment while any other-coloured racism seems to be getting ignored or labelled as a justifiable and totally logical thing. I take offense at that.
 

Strain42

New member
Mar 2, 2009
2,720
0
0
Sepko said:
The_Echo said:
I wouldn't consider it racist.

There's a huge difference between turning a character black and replacing them with a similar, black character (like Miles Morales).

Personally, changing the race of a character just seems... disrespectful to that character. I mean, if the Human Torch had been black to begin with and they were considering a white actor to play him, well that would just be racist as hell wouldn't it? Why isn't it the same the other way around?
MrGalactus said:
So I'm just sat here waiting to be offended? So when people cry for a man to never even be considered for a role based on the fact that he has one physical feature that differs from the original character, nobody should get angry about that? sorry, mate, but it IS offensive, and it IS racist.
So are you saying if there were a movie centered around the bushmen tribes of Africa, that it would be acceptable to consider a white or Asian actor for the role of the tribe leader?
Ever heard of white-washing? Because it's vastly different to having a black guy play the part of one of the millions of white characters who could be any race.
It's not white washing if you don't get a white actor. If there was an Asian Luke Cage, or a Latin John Stewart it would still cause the same discussion. It's still needlessly changing the race of an established character. I'm not saying that it's automatically a bad thing. Just that it's needless. And I think it's a bit unfair that someone should be considered a racist just because they feel it would be equally needless to change a white character as much as a character of any other race.
 

Edguy

New member
Jan 31, 2011
210
0
0
Sepko said:
How sheltered are you? Seriously, you're either trolling or your idea of a family unit hasn't managed to go past the 50's. Does it matter if they're supposed to be related? Does the sibling dynamic somehow dwindle in your mind because they won't be related? What's silly and unneeded about a quick backstory change that won't effect the rest of the story in any conceivably remarkable way in the slightest?
Sepko said:
What's wrong with adoption?
Someone's missing the point here..

No-one's saying those changes are impossible or that they can't be done well. They're saying there's no valid reasons to make those changes. Making a character adopted would change the dynamic, and begs the question that it's plot related. If it ends up just being a change for the sake of having different ethicity of two siblings, then audiences, in most cases, would be left wondering why they made a point of that in the first place. That's a rule of writing; if something stands out from what you would expect, then the audience will expect that it's relevant to the plot somehow.
 
Sep 24, 2008
2,461
0
0
VMK said:
Then why not CREATE good, well-written, non-white, superheroes? They are just lazy shmucks.
You know, the funny thing is that they try. Like Icon, Victor Mancha, John Stewart the Green Lantern, Aqualad, Sunfire, Sunspot (new Mutants), M (Monet Yvette Clarisse Maria Therese St. Croix from Generation X) Moonstar (new Mutants), Wind Dancer (New X-men), Synch (Generation X) and a personal favorite... and what do you know, they killed him off to create tension. Way to be original writers... Anyway, Karma (new Mutants), Cyborg of the teen titans was at once at Amazo's levels of Robotic ass kickery... and a lot of people don't take to it. A lot of people see it as pandering. "Oh. He's a minority AND Powerful?! Right, they are just trying to be PC."

It's very odd. A powerful shape shifting alien who takes the guise of a black man (J'onn J'onzz) is acceptable. A power alien super hero that happens to look like a black man... such a PC reach that it's unforgivable.

Lieju said:
Seth Carter said:
Though my fondness for being the Devils Advocate would ask those defending it what they'd say if a white guy played Luke Cage or Black Panther.
1) For those characters, their race (or skin colour, or ethnicity) is an important part of their character.
2) There are far less black superheroes than there are white ones, so changing white to black is a step towards diversity, other way around it's not.

So it wouldn't be the same thing.
There's a point to this here. I'm not really behind changing a story just to change it. I wasn't and am still not a fan of the Dante redesign. I feel like if you want to do the story, then do it. don't change it to give your own unique flavor.

But to the point, you don't look at the Have-nots and say 'so, what about me?' A person rich in resources should not find himself without a dollar and look to a poor man and ask to borrow one.
 

direkiller

New member
Dec 4, 2008
1,656
0
0
V8 Ninja said:
Wait, Michael Jordan has an acting career? Isn't he that basketball guy?
was space jam so bad you blocked it from your memory

gjkbgt said:
Hi does any one have access to a statistical breakdown of the ethnicity In marvel comics?
I found one for DC, and the justice league has more Aliens then black members.
You might say it's not relevant but if this is about race preservation in source material, then that only counts as long as the source
isn't it's self racist. If marvel universe is 90% white then you can't argue for race preservation without arguing for white superiority.
If it's a fairer split 70% white fair enough race preservation is purely about source material
depends on the run the JL has never been just one set of superheroes.
Just as an example:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/52/JLA1_turner.jpg
20%Black(Vixen,Black Lightning)
50%white(Wonderwoman,Green Lantern,Black Cannary,Red Arrow,batman)
20%Alien(Superman, Hawk girl)
10%Android(Red Tornado)
 

gibboss28

New member
Feb 2, 2008
1,715
0
0
fallendong said:
I'm not sure if this kid should play the Human Torch (he was honestly forgettable in Chronicle), but I do know that Donald Glover totally deserves a crack at Spider-Man.

that just reminds me of his stand up set where he talked about that

"And the other half of the internet were like 'He's black kill him!'"

But anywho, I really couldn't care. More power to the guy.
 

Sepko

New member
Feb 16, 2010
180
0
0
Strain42 said:
It's not white washing if you don't get a white actor. If there was an Asian Luke Cage, or a Latin John Stewart it would still cause the same discussion. It's still needlessly changing the race of an established character. I'm not saying that it's automatically a bad thing. Just that it's needless. And I think it's a bit unfair that someone should be considered a racist just because they feel it would be equally needless to change a white character as much as a character of any other race.
As much as we'd like to live in a perfect world of perfect equality and happiness, that's not the case. There are more white characters in western media than there are any other races combined. Does it have to be needless to try something new with a character, who's skin colour is about as interchangeable as their costume? Does it matter if it's needless? Is it going to dramatically change anything? It doesn't matter. At all. And that's fine. It's not the end of the world. It doesn't mean they shouldn't do it in the first place as well. Because it doesn't matter, allegedly.

Torbjoern Bakke said:
Someone's missing the point here..

No-one's saying those changes are impossible or that they can't be done well. They're saying there's no valid reasons to make those changes. Making a character adopted would change the dynamic, and begs the question that it's plot related. If it ends up just being a change for the sake of having different ethicity of two siblings, then audiences, in most cases, would be left wondering why they made a point of that in the first place. That's a rule of writing; if something is out of what you would expect, then the audience will expect that it's relevant to the plot somehow.
What dynamic are we speaking of here? Is their relationship as siblings somehow going to be a lesser one if it ends up that one of them's adopted? Why does it have to be important to the plot?
So if the movie ends up with a black Johnny and a white Sue, the notion is going to be so radical that it's just going to have to be an important plot point?

Again, why does it matter if the race change is needless? If it's seemingly not impossible to do it then why get up in arms because "there's no valid reasons" for it?
 

Sherokain

New member
Jan 11, 2013
62
0
0
Shouldn't it depend on encapsulating both characters within their roles? What i mean to say if a female actor really steals the show as sue it should also depend on her ethnicity as well, be her black, white, asian or what ever else?
 

ninjaRiv

New member
Aug 25, 2010
986
0
0
This whole "black guy portraying a white character" shit gets on my nerves. Adapt a book with a black character. That is the better idea. No shouts of racism or PC gone mad anywhere! They're thinking about doing Black panther and Blade; there ya go! Now you're getting it! Not enough black comic book characters? Great, best make some new ones! What is using a black actor for a white character supposed to achieve?

I mean, it's as stupid as when people went nuts over Ryan Reynolds being cast as Green Lantern. That's the level of stupid this whole thing is. The highest level of stupid. Top level.
 

Zeldias

New member
Oct 5, 2011
282
0
0
"OMG shut up, it's fine for Cumberbatch to be Khan even though it was a big deal that Khan wasn't a white guy."
"OMG shut up, it's fine that all the characters in Avatar: The Last Airbender movie are cast as white."
"OMG shut up, it's not realistic for there to be minorities here/it's just normal/deal with it/etc etc."

"OMG WTF, A MINORITY IS GONNA BE CAST AS A CHARACTER THAT WAS ORIGINALLY WHITE? HOW DARE YOU!?"

I love the smell of racist, white supremacist hypocrisy in the morning.
 

ninjaRiv

New member
Aug 25, 2010
986
0
0
Also, I feel like I should be "that guy" and point out that there's a difference between being racist and just not wanting a black guy playing a white character.