Wow. 'Cover up her ethnicity'. And people think I'm being harsh. And she only wore a wig in the second movie. Dyed it in the first.
What was she thinking? No Latinas can have blonde hair. 8-} Maybe she was, I dunno, trying to appease the whiny fanboys with their 'that's not muh' attitudes.
Nobody started a bugaboo about a Caucasian Johnny with a Hispanic sister last go round.
M
Except John Byrne.
I wrote DC about his asinine comments at the time. Still have the letter they wrote back - I believe it was Carlin that responded? That was the last time I purchased a Byrne comic.
Nobody started a bugaboo about a Caucasian Johnny with a Hispanic sister last go round.
M
Except John Byrne.
I wrote DC about his asinine comments at the time. Still have the letter they wrote back - I believe it was Carlin that responded? That was the last time I purchased a Byrne comic.
Just knowing you took the time to write DC comics over something John Byrne said that you feel was insulting and then even went so far as to never purchase a comic book by him again because of it explains quite a lot and makes it easier to tolerate your intolerance towards those with opinions you disagree with.
Wow. 'Cover up her ethnicity'. And people think I'm being harsh. And she only wore a wig in the second movie. Dyed it in the first.
What was she thinking? No Latinas can have blonde hair. 8-} Maybe she was, I dunno, trying to appease the whiny fanboys with their 'that's not muh' attitudes.
Weird... Just checked this whole thread and couldn't find where someone said that Latina women can't be blonde. Jessica Alba was thoroughly unconvincing as a blonde and for that matter, scientist, love interest for Reed, sister to Johnny, or live human being and not the plank of wood she is, is what I was saying. And about as well cast as Denise Richards in The World is Not Enough, or Kate Mara as the invisible woman.
You are a race troll who puts words in other people's mouths to support whatever assumption you've decided is true about their personal ethics. You may think because racism is wrong that you're right but you are just an irritating bully.
"couldn't find where someone said that Latina women can't be blonde."
"Jessica Alba was thoroughly unconvincing as a blonde"
:-\"
Oops. You got me. I totally also said Jessica Alba is the only Latina on the planet, or at least she represents the majority of them, especially considering she's only Latina on her dad's side. Surprised you didn't bring that up considering you were all over Stacy Dash's racial make-up.
Nice to see the race argument from the 'Flash Fans REJOICE' thread continuing here. 8-|
Moving right along though, two points.
NUMBER 1 (and probably the most important):
I'm going to go see it ANYWAYS.
NUMBER 2:
I've been thinking about this for a bit. And I HONESTLY don't know if it's been brought up before, so forgive me if it's been addressed here or elsewhere. But what if we made Black Panther or John Stewart white for a movie? Is that ok?
I don't particularly LIKE people randomly changing a characters ethnicity for seemingly no reason, but I don't FREAK OUT about it either. So would the people adamantly happy with making a traditionally white character black also be ok with making traditionally black characters white? If not, what's the difference? (BTW, that's not meant to spark yet ANOTHER argument. I'm sincerely asking.)
Fantastic Four reboot as a whole? No idea if it'll rock or suck hard. Not much experience with the cast either. But it's a Fantastic Four movie so I'm going to see it. After all, the first one sucked in my view, but I still watch it if it's on. So why not?
Nice to see the race argument from the 'Flash Fans REJOICE' thread continuing here. 8-|
Moving right along though, two points.
NUMBER 1 (and probably the most important):
I'm going to go see it ANYWAYS.
NUMBER 2:
I've been thinking about this for a bit. And I HONESTLY don't know if it's been brought up before, so forgive me if it's been addressed here or elsewhere. But what if we made Black Panther or John Stewart white for a movie? Is that ok?
I don't particularly LIKE people randomly changing a characters ethnicity for seemingly no reason, but I don't FREAK OUT about it either. So would the people adamantly happy with making a traditionally white character black also be ok with making traditionally black characters white? If not, what's the difference? (BTW, that's not meant to spark yet ANOTHER argument. I'm sincerely asking.)
Fantastic Four reboot as a whole? No idea if it'll rock or suck hard. Not much experience with the cast either. But it's a Fantastic Four movie so I'm going to see it. After all, the first one sucked in my view, but I still watch it if it's on. So why not?
The difference is that white people have been over represented in the media for decades and that minorities when represented have had far more negative portrayals percentage wise. Changing certain characters ethnicities from white to minority gives an opportunity for the kinds of positive representations that have been lacking. Changing a character from minority to white has the opposite effect, and was prevalent for many many years.
The difference is that white people have been over represented in the media for decades and that minorities when represented have had far more negative portrayals percentage wise. Changing certain characters ethnicities from white to minority gives an opportunity for the kinds of positive representations that have been lacking. Changing a character from minority to white has the opposite effect, and was prevalent for many many years.
Then I suppose that's the question. Are we casting people of different ethnicitys in the historically white role because they're the best person for the job?
Or are we doing it simply to "level the playing field"/"even things up"?
Because if it's the former, AWESOME. If it's the latter....eh that's pretty shaky ground for anyone to stand on. I get the INTENT, but if that's the ONLY reason then the execution is wrong.
Herein ends my commentary on the matter of race in this discussion. On to FF-ness!
I own the last to FF movies on DVD, so I may or may not see this in the theater. I'm waiting on the trailers to make that call. However, there are many issues with the casting here that have been mentioned.
For one, even for those trying to stamp out all signs of racism, it seems a bit cliché to cast a black man as the team’s womanizing hothead and not as Reed, the team’s genius scientist leader. Secondly, it severely alters the relationship between brother and sister Sue. We all know it isn't impossible for a black person and a white person to be siblings since one or both could be adopted, or half-siblings, or step-siblings, or shapeshifters or aliens, etc - it’s a comic book movie.
But if we go with what we already know and assume that they’re just ordinary family members, (unless you believe adoptive or blended families are somehow lesser than “traditional” families) none of this is outside the realm of believability.
What I and others have asked is why didn’t FOX cast a black actress as Sue Storm? Did they even consider it? Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Lupita Nyong’o or Jasika Nicole have been suggested as black alternatives in the role. But was FOX afraid of having an interracial relationship between Reed and Sue, or, too many black characters? It’s curious that the filmmakers decided that creating an adoptive or blended Storm family was more obvious than simply casting two black actors.
Interesting to note, Trank, the director, killed off Michael B. Jordan's super powered character first in Chronicle, and FOX killed off Darwin first in the X-Men First Class movie, so before everyone starts celebrating the FF reboot because "diversity" or something, let's not put TOO much faith in the studio's racial sensibilities. The black guy dying first trope was established with this studio.
FOX has a very uneven reputation with Marvel properties and simply replacing a white character with a black actor isn't an adequate enough change for people to suddenly be applauding them for diversity. Comic fans tend to want a reflection of their favorite comics to be faithful in the movies made about them. Calling people racists for disagreeing with the way a change like this takes place is reactionary at best and insulting and ignorant at worst. It is worth discussion, not derision and insults. An amiable discussion of the merits and demerits of the casting decisions is appropriate since they just released the info (that the director had been trying to falsely debunk), just a few days ago.
I would say that there are middle steps between race being "a" reason for casting and being the "ONLY" reason for casting. Of course it shouldn't be the only reason. Just as a resemblance to an existing character (be they a historical figure, or a cartoon or comic book character) can be "a" reason for casting, but shouldn't be the ONLY reason.
I can't know what the actual reasoning and discussion of the decision makers of FF was. But another way to think of race and casting is not that they don't always set out to cast one race or the other, because that is not always decided ahead of time. There have been a number of very successful projects- the kind that got praised for the strength of the cast- that supposedly cast without making limiting decisions in advance about race, age, or even gender. Alien supposedly went that way. I have read stories that the gender of Ripley (something that was later praised a departure from expectation) was not implicit in the screenplay (or maybe the treatment- not sure when the casting process started); TV shows like Homicide: Life on the Street, The Wire, and The Shield have similar stories about characters that either were originally thought of as being one thing, but that changed because a stronger performer came along that was even better to bring the character to life. (I think Lost might have been similar? I don't know as much about their behind the scenes.)
One thing I do know is that usually a LOT of actors get considered, seen, read, met with, etc. Heck, that is usually true for even little projects that pay very little. A director friend of mine saw 300 actors this week (mix of a union open call, and agent-submission appointments) for a production that pays about as little as a union contract can. Compared to that, the amount of time and resources dedicated to casting a big studio project that can make or break careers in front of and behind the camera can be huge. And, of course, the potential to gain more audience of color by having more actors of color in the mix was likely part of the equation, as financially that is always part of the equation. But it could be that they set out not knowing who or how many people in the cast might be racially different from the source material. And it could be that, even if a black Johnny Storm and a white Sue Storm was not the easiest or simplest way for them to go, maybe that was because those were the actors they liked for it. It could be that black actors were considered for Reed, but they liked the person they picked better. Again, not saying I have any knowledge of the specifics on this one, but rather that we should remember that sometimes (maybe not often enough) people head into casting ready to consider a variety of looks.
But, whatever the story behind this was, I think the casting decision behind every role was not only one thing. Because there are simply too many people and too much money at stake for it to come down to a single thing.
the amount of time and resources dedicated to casting a big studio project that can make or break careers in front of and behind the camera can be huge. Whatever the story behind this was, I think the casting decision behind every role was no one thing.
I wonder if the same expectations of seeing more black roles would apply to, for instance, previously established characters in the upcoming big-budget Star Wars films? Do you think Marvel Studios auditioned any black or Latino actors for Captain America or Iron Man or any white guys for the War Machine or the Falcon? If they didn't, would that be considered racist?
I don't think anyone here is trying to diminish black actors from getting work. I think most everyone here, myself included, actually think the best casting choice in this bunch is Jordan. The most common complaint on this thread is in regards the other actors. Secondary are those taking issue with supposed the sensibility of making previously established same race characters into opposite races. The suggestion here is not that FOX is colorblind, but that they are SO self-conscious about it that they either didn't have the guts to cast the whole family as black, or at least cast Reed or Grimm as black. Insulting people for noticing and disagreeing with it is disingenuous and stifles discussion.
It's possible that Trank made using Jordan as one of the leads a demand of his when agreeing to helm the movie. It's also possible that FOX doesn't take Marvel properties seriously enough to have understood that this sort of casting decision could require careful consideration.
I think people made perfectly reasonable explanations and excuses back when FOX made Galactus into a cloud creature in the last FF film. Was there this much vitriol against comic fans that criticized that decision too?
the amount of time and resources dedicated to casting a big studio project that can make or break careers in front of and behind the camera can be huge. Whatever the story behind this was, I think the casting decision behind every role was no one thing.
I wonder if the same expectations of seeing more black roles would apply to, for instance, previously established characters in the upcoming big-budget Star Wars films? Do you think Marvel Studios auditioned any black or Latino actors for Captain America or Iron Man or any white guys for the War Machine or the Falcon? If they didn't, would that be considered racist?
I don't think anyone here is trying to diminish black actors from getting work. I think most everyone here, myself included, actually think the best casting choice in this bunch is Jordan. The most common complaint on this thread is in regards the other actors. Secondary are those taking issue with supposed the sensibility of making previously established same race characters into opposite races. The suggestion here is not that FOX is colorblind, but that they are SO self-conscious about it that they either didn't have the guts to cast the whole family as black, or at least cast Reed or Grimm as black. Insulting people for noticing and disagreeing with it is disingenuous and stifles discussion.
It's possible that Trank made using Jordan as one of the leads a demand of his when agreeing to helm the movie. It's also possible that FOX doesn't take Marvel properties seriously enough to have understood that this sort of casting decision could require careful consideration.
I think people made perfectly reasonable explanations and excuses back when FOX made Galactus into a cloud creature in the last FF film. Was there this much vitriol against comic fans that criticized that decision too?
I'm not 100% Galactus actually was "just a cloud." Something that large could, theoretically, generate space dust like we gather dust. The cloud was all we could definitely see, but that doesn't mean a man-shaped creature couldn't have been inside. Did Surfer specifically say Galactus was a cloud?
@bralinator my post was not about those who dislike the casting choices, why they should or shouldn't, or whether or not their complaints are valid. I think there has been enough talk about that, and I don't have anything new to add to it. I am more interested in the discussion than those discussing it. Why comic fans do or don't like change when it comes to adaptations of comics to other media, whether it is character likeness or costume likeness is, honestly, a subject I am growing less and less interested in as time goes on, and as it comes up again and again.
Rather, I felt like @CageNarleigh post asked a question that suggested a binary:
Are we casting people of different ethnicitys in the historically white role because they're the best person for the job?
Or are we doing it simply to "level the playing field"/"even things up"?
And I think it is not as simple as such an either/or. I think the truth lands somewhere in the middle. Casting is a complicated thing, with a lot of hands in (and other people's money). I feel like a lot of people are assuming that Johnny was the only role that was considered to be for an actor of a different race. And that might not have been the case. All sorts of people in all sorts of roles might have been in play. All we find out is where they landed. As for how they got there-- their job is finding out who are the best people they can get, who will get the most people to want to see the movie, for the money they have.
As for what the racial makeup of the cast will mean for the relationships and the story, well, that will be something to find out in the work. Just like we'll find out how the origin story has changed (I am going to go out on a limb and guess they are not trying to beat the Soviet Union to the moon). Things will be different. The movies are different from the comics. So it goes.
@Matt - that's strictly a technicality. That's like only showing a silver streak instead of a chrome Silver Surfer. They could've showed SOMETHING, as in something closer to this.
@Matt - that's strictly a technicality. That's like only showing a silver streak instead of a chrome Silver Surfer. They could've showed SOMETHING, as in something closer to this.
Then couldn't say all these movies (aside from possibly Sin City) are technicalities? None are exact interpretations. All take some type of liberties with the source material.
My problem with Galactus was if they' were willing to go with a rock monster and a silver alien on a surfboard then go all in and show the god with the funny hat. Nobody is going to sit through a movie with giant holes appearing on earth, Doctor Doom, the FF, Silver Surfer, and all the rest of it only to shake their heads at a humanoid Galactus and say, "Pffft! I don't buy that!"
Then couldn't say all these movies (aside from possibly Sin City) are technicalities? None are exact interpretations. All take some type of liberties with the source material.
M
LOL ~ You are never going to tire of defending every decision they make, are you @Matt? I don't expect @David_D to chime in on this one since he implied in a previous thread that he is unwilling to accept a non-bald Lex Luthor :)
My problem with Galactus was if they' were willing to go with a rock monster and a silver alien on a surfboard then go all in and show the god with the funny hat. Nobody is going to sit through a movie with giant holes appearing on earth, Doctor Doom, the FF, Silver Surfer, and all the rest of it only to shake their heads at a humanoid Galactus and say, "Pffft! I don't buy that!"
Pretty much this movie will rise and fall like any other comic book film. It depends on the script, the performances, the effects, the direction and does it reasonably remind you of the source material? The bar was set pretty low with the first two and that had the fanboy Johnny Storm wet dream.
Then couldn't say all these movies (aside from possibly Sin City) are technicalities? None are exact interpretations. All take some type of liberties with the source material.
M
LOL ~ You are never going to tire of defending every decision they make, are you @Matt? I don't expect @David_D to chime in on this one since he implied in a previous thread that he is unwilling to accept a non-bald Lex Luthor :)
My problem with Galactus was if they' were willing to go with a rock monster and a silver alien on a surfboard then go all in and show the god with the funny hat. Nobody is going to sit through a movie with giant holes appearing on earth, Doctor Doom, the FF, Silver Surfer, and all the rest of it only to shake their heads at a humanoid Galactus and say, "Pffft! I don't buy that!"
Not as much as I've accepted that these movies aren't made for us. They're made for the general populace. Sometimes the minute dissection of these movies by comic book fans get redundant, kill enjoyment, & are actually pointless.
I think this really started to get to me after listening to sports talk pretty regularly for the past couple years. Fans call in complaining even when the team win.
Then couldn't say all these movies (aside from possibly Sin City) are technicalities? None are exact interpretations. All take some type of liberties with the source material.
M
LOL ~ You are never going to tire of defending every decision they make, are you @Matt? I don't expect @David_D to chime in on this one since he implied in a previous thread that he is unwilling to accept a non-bald Lex Luthor :)
I think you meant the opposite. I'd be fine with a Luthor that isn't bald.
As for the movie Galactus thing, I never saw the FF movies. Even the trailers looked terrible.
My only word on this new reboot of the FF is that the story is going to have to be damn good in order to outweigh the poor decisions of choosing the cast. As it currently stands, I have no interest in seeing it.
Luthor's baldness is like his brand. Anyone who knows the Superman legend remembers him as the bald mad scientist. It's also his own badge of his personal flaws. "Hey! That's the mad scientist who fights Superman, who's super-brilliant but can't figure out how to synthesize Rogaine!"
“You must let suffering speak, if you want to hear the truth” ― Cornel West
Hashim R. Hathaway writes for Bleeding Cool,
I’m a man of color…and I’m a fanboy.
When it comes to fandom in general, the stereotypical geek is presented as someone white; people of color are rarely, if ever, presented as part of the culture. We’re the ghosts in the room, always watching, rarely reacting; of course that’s nothing new. Sometimes, it feels like other voices overcompensate just a bit when talking about something that doesn’t affect them directly.
From the minute Michael B. Jordan was officially Johnny Storm/The Human Torch in the upcoming Fantastic Four reboot/exercise in rights retention, the Internet has been on fire with a mixture of derision and support. Like a fanboy who doesn’t get their way, I took to the message boards to bitch; in doing so, I found myself on the uncomfortable side of the racists, traditionalists and other malcontents.
It wasn’t about just wanting to remain faithful to source material anymore, now I was confronted with questioning why I was so bothered with a black actor portraying a white character in the first place. It wasn’t until I read Louis Falcetti’s take at Bleeding Cool that I realized why.
While the fanboy in me is tired of seeing changes made to certain properties just for the sake of making the changes, as a man of color, I’m put out that all these arguments about “diversity” are being made by…well…white people.
All I see are pieces from white writers and critics telling me why we should somehow be grateful that a black man gets to play a white role because, diversity. “It’s a baby step” I hear. “It’s better than nothing” I hear. Did anyone ask black fans their thoughts?
Of course this isn’t the first time a black actor filled the role of a white comic book character. What started with Eartha Kitt in Batman ‘67 continued with Billy Dee Williams, the late Michael Clarke Duncan, Idris Elba and Samuel L. Jackson. So, what makes Michael B. Jordan as Johnny Storm so different?
Some wish to believe that we’re in some post-racial era; we’re not. Eartha Kitt as Catwoman certainly broke a mold, which is great for the actors getting paychecks, but where are our black heroes? Where is Luke Cage? Where is Black Panther? We don’t have key characters up on the big screen, and yet somehow it’s supposed to look like an achievement that white characters get to be played by black actors?
The number of original black heroes in their own films is scarce. Wesley Snipes has gone on record about the hell he had to go through to get Blade onto the big screen; while it was an achievement, and something that should’ve spawned even more…it hasn’t.
Here’s why I can’t get behind Jordan as Johnny Storm: it’s not enough. In fact, it’s so “not enough” because what some, like Louis, would argue as a positive step only serves to highlight just how far away we are. Kate Mara, was cast as Sue Storm. Are they stepbrother and sister? Are they adopted siblings? Does it matter? In one way, it shouldn’t matter at all, but in another way, the fact that it even has to be explained shows how diversity can be forced, because suddenly we have a token black guy on a team of white superheroes.
So what about Sam Jackson? Nick Fury is an iconic character, so why is it OK that he’s black and I’m bitching about Johnny Storm, regardless of the reasons I just gave? For the same reason Michael Clarke Duncan being cast as Kingpin didn’t change his relationship to Daredevil, a black Nick Fury doesn’t fundamentally change his relationship with S.H.I.E.L.D. and thus, the story. Johnny Storm being black means there’s some hitherto-unnecessary explaining to do in various other parts of the story.
How does this reinvention of the wheel make the overall story more compelling? If this were a story specifically about the relationship of a black brother and white sister…sign me up, because that’s a story we haven’t really had on screen, and it would make for the sort of social commentary compelling on its own. But you know that’s not what’s happening here at all, because this is a comic book movie. At most, it will be addressed in maybe a line or two of dialogue and that’s it.
If you make Johnny Storm black, why not make Sue Storm black? Why not double down on diversity? If, as a film studio, if Fox is genuinely interested in forwarding diversity, then that would take a radical, yet positive direction.
But it isn’t that simple, is it? Making Sue Storm a black woman brings with it the specter of interracial dating; while we, as a “post-racial society”, should be fine with that, the backlash experienced as a result of a recent Cheerios commercial showing an interracial family says otherwise. Fox wants to sell tickets and preserve a franchise more than forward the cause of race relations. This is why the whole argument that casting a black actor in a white role is somehow a positive for anyone other than Michael B. Jordan is a joke.
This isn’t so much about preserving the racial purity of a character to support some semblance of superiority, especially in the case of fans of color like myself who think such changes are little more than stunt casting. This isn’t about “white being right.” It’s about taking something you know and changing it into something you don’t. It’s also about imagery. In this whole argument about accepting Jordan in the role, no one stopped to think about something this: at least in American society, the image of a black man on fire carries with it a connotation that goes far beyond a comic book character.
Burning slaves alive was a routine method of execution for those considered too dangerous or otherwise worthless. This is the intrinsic baggage that comes with such imagery, and it’s unfair to say that casting a black man in the role of a character that burns perpetually is a mark of diversity without taking into consideration the very baggage it brings to the table. It may not have the same meaning for everyone, but it exists, and diversity with racial understanding can’t be a piecemeal process. It simply can’t.
It’s unfair to castigate fans for defending the properties they love (even if some of the properties have dubious roots). The very reason that such properties are even viable as franchises is because of their popularity. What makes it easier to beat up the fanboy than it is to hold filmmakers accountable for making changes that are less about attracting a larger market and more about their own vanity of ideas?
I simply don’t see casting Jordan as any sort of victory for diversity. What I DO see as a victory is seeing Anthony Mackie bring The Falcon to life, because that represents something far more tangible in terms of giving black characters that exist on the page a chance for new audiences, regardless of race, creed or color, the chance to latch onto them. That’s a better representation of diversity than a collective pat on the back because black actor was cast into a certain role.
I get that people want to get beyond the idea of race as a barrier. As close as we’ve come, in many aspects, we’re still farther away than we need to be. That said, forced diversity isn’t always good diversity; when we can get that kind of honesty, that kind of clarity, then maybe, just maybe we’ll be taking a step forward.
Calling it now: Terrible. Everything they're doing is at best misguided.
I'm surprised they don't just come to you with their ideas before making the movie in the first place so they can get the call before spending a dime.
Just to rehash the other thing that was being talked about. Until Machete I didn't know Jessica Alba was of Latin descent. Granted I've never paid attention to the plot of Honey, so there might have been clues before then. They could cast her as the Hulk for age of Ultron I'm still buying a ticket before I "call" anything.
From this day forth Alicia Keys should stop singing "Girl on Fire". Ohio Players should probably take note too. Fire has been used to kill a lot of people of all races and religions through time and there were many ways to kill black folks in the day. I just find the author's analogy nit-picky. There's a big difference between someone being set afire and someone having the power of fire.
And I am waiting to hear why Josh Trank cast Michael B. Jordan in the role especially since he worked with him. There's a part of me that says because of his talent.
Comments
What was she thinking? No Latinas can have blonde hair. 8-} Maybe she was, I dunno, trying to appease the whiny fanboys with their 'that's not muh' attitudes.
I wrote DC about his asinine comments at the time. Still have the letter they wrote back - I believe it was Carlin that responded? That was the last time I purchased a Byrne comic.
You are a race troll who puts words in other people's mouths to support whatever assumption you've decided is true about their personal ethics. You may think because racism is wrong that you're right but you are just an irritating bully.
"Jessica Alba was thoroughly unconvincing as a blonde"
:-\"
Oops. You got me. I totally also said Jessica Alba is the only Latina on the planet, or at least she represents the majority of them, especially considering she's only Latina on her dad's side. Surprised you didn't bring that up considering you were all over Stacy Dash's racial make-up.
Moving right along though, two points.
NUMBER 1 (and probably the most important):
I'm going to go see it ANYWAYS.
NUMBER 2:
I've been thinking about this for a bit. And I HONESTLY don't know if it's been brought up before, so forgive me if it's been addressed here or elsewhere. But what if we made Black Panther or John Stewart white for a movie? Is that ok?
I don't particularly LIKE people randomly changing a characters ethnicity for seemingly no reason, but I don't FREAK OUT about it either. So would the people adamantly happy with making a traditionally white character black also be ok with making traditionally black characters white? If not, what's the difference? (BTW, that's not meant to spark yet ANOTHER argument. I'm sincerely asking.)
Fantastic Four reboot as a whole? No idea if it'll rock or suck hard. Not much experience with the cast either. But it's a Fantastic Four movie so I'm going to see it. After all, the first one sucked in my view, but I still watch it if it's on. So why not?
Or are we doing it simply to "level the playing field"/"even things up"?
Because if it's the former, AWESOME. If it's the latter....eh that's pretty shaky ground for anyone to stand on. I get the INTENT, but if that's the ONLY reason then the execution is wrong.
Herein ends my commentary on the matter of race in this discussion. On to FF-ness!
For one, even for those trying to stamp out all signs of racism, it seems a bit cliché to cast a black man as the team’s womanizing hothead and not as Reed, the team’s genius scientist leader. Secondly, it severely alters the relationship between brother and sister Sue. We all know it isn't impossible for a black person and a white person to be siblings since one or both could be adopted, or half-siblings, or step-siblings, or shapeshifters or aliens, etc - it’s a comic book movie.
But if we go with what we already know and assume that they’re just ordinary family members, (unless you believe adoptive or blended families are somehow lesser than “traditional” families) none of this is outside the realm of believability.
What I and others have asked is why didn’t FOX cast a black actress as Sue Storm? Did they even consider it? Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Lupita Nyong’o or Jasika Nicole have been suggested as black alternatives in the role. But was FOX afraid of having an interracial relationship between Reed and Sue, or, too many black characters? It’s curious that the filmmakers decided that creating an adoptive or blended Storm family was more obvious than simply casting two black actors.
Interesting to note, Trank, the director, killed off Michael B. Jordan's super powered character first in Chronicle, and FOX killed off Darwin first in the X-Men First Class movie, so before everyone starts celebrating the FF reboot because "diversity" or something, let's not put TOO much faith in the studio's racial sensibilities. The black guy dying first trope was established with this studio.
FOX has a very uneven reputation with Marvel properties and simply replacing a white character with a black actor isn't an adequate enough change for people to suddenly be applauding them for diversity. Comic fans tend to want a reflection of their favorite comics to be faithful in the movies made about them. Calling people racists for disagreeing with the way a change like this takes place is reactionary at best and insulting and ignorant at worst. It is worth discussion, not derision and insults. An amiable discussion of the merits and demerits of the casting decisions is appropriate since they just released the info (that the director had been trying to falsely debunk), just a few days ago.
Andrew Wheeler of Comics Alliance, whom said most of this better than I did, even suggested this casting tweak: Miles Teller looks like he’d make a pretty good Ben Grimm, especially if he’s as good an actor as critics say; Jamie Bell could work very nicely as hotheaded Johnny Storm, and he looks like a plausible sibling to Kate Mara’s Sue; and Michael B. Jordan as Reed Richards, the smartest man in the universe, would really challenge some people’s prejudices.
We don't have to agree with each other here to be respectful. If so, then I guess we should all debate only the following 3 topics.
1) Bacon is delicious.
2) The Princess Bride is a fantastic film.
3) It’s nice to have money.
I see no arguments there.
I would say that there are middle steps between race being "a" reason for casting and being the "ONLY" reason for casting. Of course it shouldn't be the only reason. Just as a resemblance to an existing character (be they a historical figure, or a cartoon or comic book character) can be "a" reason for casting, but shouldn't be the ONLY reason.
I can't know what the actual reasoning and discussion of the decision makers of FF was. But another way to think of race and casting is not that they don't always set out to cast one race or the other, because that is not always decided ahead of time. There have been a number of very successful projects- the kind that got praised for the strength of the cast- that supposedly cast without making limiting decisions in advance about race, age, or even gender. Alien supposedly went that way. I have read stories that the gender of Ripley (something that was later praised a departure from expectation) was not implicit in the screenplay (or maybe the treatment- not sure when the casting process started); TV shows like Homicide: Life on the Street, The Wire, and The Shield have similar stories about characters that either were originally thought of as being one thing, but that changed because a stronger performer came along that was even better to bring the character to life. (I think Lost might have been similar? I don't know as much about their behind the scenes.)
One thing I do know is that usually a LOT of actors get considered, seen, read, met with, etc. Heck, that is usually true for even little projects that pay very little. A director friend of mine saw 300 actors this week (mix of a union open call, and agent-submission appointments) for a production that pays about as little as a union contract can. Compared to that, the amount of time and resources dedicated to casting a big studio project that can make or break careers in front of and behind the camera can be huge. And, of course, the potential to gain more audience of color by having more actors of color in the mix was likely part of the equation, as financially that is always part of the equation. But it could be that they set out not knowing who or how many people in the cast might be racially different from the source material. And it could be that, even if a black Johnny Storm and a white Sue Storm was not the easiest or simplest way for them to go, maybe that was because those were the actors they liked for it. It could be that black actors were considered for Reed, but they liked the person they picked better. Again, not saying I have any knowledge of the specifics on this one, but rather that we should remember that sometimes (maybe not often enough) people head into casting ready to consider a variety of looks.
But, whatever the story behind this was, I think the casting decision behind every role was not only one thing. Because there are simply too many people and too much money at stake for it to come down to a single thing.
I don't think anyone here is trying to diminish black actors from getting work. I think most everyone here, myself included, actually think the best casting choice in this bunch is Jordan. The most common complaint on this thread is in regards the other actors. Secondary are those taking issue with supposed the sensibility of making previously established same race characters into opposite races. The suggestion here is not that FOX is colorblind, but that they are SO self-conscious about it that they either didn't have the guts to cast the whole family as black, or at least cast Reed or Grimm as black. Insulting people for noticing and disagreeing with it is disingenuous and stifles discussion.
It's possible that Trank made using Jordan as one of the leads a demand of his when agreeing to helm the movie. It's also possible that FOX doesn't take Marvel properties seriously enough to have understood that this sort of casting decision could require careful consideration.
I think people made perfectly reasonable explanations and excuses back when FOX made Galactus into a cloud creature in the last FF film. Was there this much vitriol against comic fans that criticized that decision too?
M
Rather, I felt like @CageNarleigh post asked a question that suggested a binary: And I think it is not as simple as such an either/or. I think the truth lands somewhere in the middle. Casting is a complicated thing, with a lot of hands in (and other people's money). I feel like a lot of people are assuming that Johnny was the only role that was considered to be for an actor of a different race. And that might not have been the case. All sorts of people in all sorts of roles might have been in play. All we find out is where they landed. As for how they got there-- their job is finding out who are the best people they can get, who will get the most people to want to see the movie, for the money they have.
As for what the racial makeup of the cast will mean for the relationships and the story, well, that will be something to find out in the work. Just like we'll find out how the origin story has changed (I am going to go out on a limb and guess they are not trying to beat the Soviet Union to the moon). Things will be different. The movies are different from the comics. So it goes.
@Matt - that's strictly a technicality. That's like only showing a silver streak instead of a chrome Silver Surfer. They could've showed SOMETHING, as in something closer to this.
M
Thank-you @Mr_Cosmic. Seems perfectly reasonable.
I think this really started to get to me after listening to sports talk pretty regularly for the past couple years. Fans call in complaining even when the team win.
M
As for the movie Galactus thing, I never saw the FF movies. Even the trailers looked terrible.
Just to rehash the other thing that was being talked about. Until Machete I didn't know Jessica Alba was of Latin descent. Granted I've never paid attention to the plot of Honey, so there might have been clues before then. They could cast her as the Hulk for age of Ultron I'm still buying a ticket before I "call" anything.
(hey, I don't get out much)
And I am waiting to hear why Josh Trank cast Michael B. Jordan in the role especially since he worked with him. There's a part of me that says because of his talent.