Jacco said:
I think instead of focusing on the semantics of his words, you should try to understand the meaning behind them.
Uh, you do know
that is what semantics is, right? The study of the meaning of words.
If he didn't mean to oppose "black versions" specifically, then why would he write that? This is a written medium. We don't have anything to go on, besides the words.
Jacco said:
Aardvaarkman said:
Also, the "fewer complaints" thing is telling, as people typically don't get as upset about remakes that don't switch race. It's essentially validating racist attitudes - the implication is; "if you don't want these complaints, keep everything white, as it should be."
Asinine. I don't even know how to respond to that. I think you're the one projecting.
What's asinine about it?
The complaints referred to in the article are racist in nature. The author of that comment said he doesn't want to see "black versions" and that there wouldn't be so many of those kind of complaints if they didn't do black versions. How is it a leap of logic to see this as providing cover for racism?
Jacco said:
That is not increasing diversity. That is giving something to someone because of the color of their skin. By intentionally making a character a certain for the sake of "diversity," you are, by nature, taking that opportunity away from others who are not that race. The coin flips two ways, friendo.
But white actors already have more opportunity. And you are assuming this one done specifically to give black actors jobs, rather than as a simple creative or casting choice.
And how does making the character white also not deprive others of the opportunity?
Jacco said:
No one is arguing that black people shouldn't be able to act.
Actually, you are, in this case.
Jacco said:
But if you are going to make characters a certain race, have a reason for it.
Why? If race is not important to the character, then why not make them any race?
Jacco said:
If you were telling a story about slavery in the 19th century, you need black actors to play the slaves. If you are telling a story about immigration in the 21st, you need hispanic actors to play the immigrants. Arbitrarily changing a race in the name of diversity is just another form of racism.
This isn't a documentary or a historical piece, it's fiction. And how exactly do you know that the characters were made black "in the name of diversity"? Do you have any quotes from the director or writers saying that that was the reason?
Why can't a character just happen to be black?
Jacco said:
Aardvaarkman said:
So, casting a white person wouldn't be a racial issue, but casting a black person is? Hmmm.
Not sure where you're going with this....
It's simple. Why wouldn't casting a white actor be just as much a racial issue as casting a black one?
Jacco said:
Aardvaarkman said:
And why should there be no attention paid to race and racial differences?
You tell me. You're the one harping on about diversity and racism. And the other guy who apparently shares your views was talking about how there are no differences between white and black people.
No, you were the one who claimed that there should be no attention paid to race and racial differences. So, you should probably explain why that should be so. Do you just ignore race and pretend it doesn't exist, Stephen Colbert style?
(Apparently you don't, because you say it's important for Annie to be white - but then turn around and say that race shouldn't matter. So, which is it?)
Jacco said:
Aardvaarkman said:
Why not? Characters can be whatever their writers and directors want them to be.
Yes. But they have the fit the story. As I said above. That's one of the first rules of characterization and writing. Your characters need to be at home in their environment. If they aren't, then you aren't doing your job as a writer.
So, what's your reasoning behind the argument that the Annie in this remake doesn't fit the story?
Jacco said:
It is being forced because someone arbitrarily decided to make an iconic character who's most defining characteristics are her race and hair color the very opposite of that. There was simply no reason to do it, hence race being "forced." Why is that difficult to understand?
It's difficult to understand, because that image doesn't have to be the image of the character forever. What's wrong with making different versions of a character? Should Batman still be wearing campy outfits and mincing around with Robin?
I also think you're wrong. Annie's most defining characteristics is that she's a happy-go-luck
orphan who was taken from poverty into wealth. If you think her character is just about red hair and race then you have probably missed the point.