Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
An Asian American writer/director that makes down to earth quirky cultural comedies? You have any examples?
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now. And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
An Asian American writer/director that makes down to earth quirky cultural comedies? You have any examples?
Uh... Alan Yang of Master of None, Ang Lee of Brokeback Mountain, Eddie Huang of Fresh of the Boat, Justin Lin of Fast & Furious, I can go on?
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now. And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
Except a page or two back I posted a lot of evidence to suggest this is untrue. Nobody has gone out of their way to address that, instead people keep insisting it's too risky or nonprofitable when we have demonstrated that A) Hollywood takes risks all the damn time and minorities spend more at the box office annually and movies like "Twelve Years a Slave" do well even in foreign markets.
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
An Asian American writer/director that makes down to earth quirky cultural comedies? You have any examples?
This is like the old joke regarding wheelchair ramps, where business owners would complain, "Why do I need to make my business wheelchair accessible? I've never seen someone with a wheelchair come into my store!"
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now. And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
The thing is, you don't have to actually write the roles specifically for minority actors. Many roles are written for "a guy" or "a girl" and there's nothing that stops them from being cast with minority actors except that that's just who the studios tend to hire for those roles.
People go on about writers maybe not being up to writing minority characters who aren't of their race, or about the lack of roles specifically for minorities. That's only a problem because people don't stop to think that you could cast a black/asian/hispanic/pacific islander/ect man as the same kind of everyman who fills out most of the characters in Hollywood, so suddenly those characters who are specifically written for minorities become a huge deal because that's one of the very very few roles available to minority actors.
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now. And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
Somewhere in the 1940s, a baseball team manager is complaining that there's no point to recruiting black baseball players because we don't have any proof that negro players sell extra tickets.
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
An Asian American writer/director that makes down to earth quirky cultural comedies? You have any examples?
Uh... Alan Yang of Master of None, Ang Lee of Brokeback Mountain, Eddie Huang of Fresh of the Boat, Justin Lin of Fast & Furious, I can go on?
Yeah. I haven't actually seen fresh off the boat, but it seems like Asian Americans are doing high profile feature films.
The point got a little muddied when we confused actors with directors.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
An Asian American writer/director that makes down to earth quirky cultural comedies? You have any examples?
It's strange you have to ask to believe in something like that happening with people who aren't white. Here ya go
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
Intersectionality makes it harder for minorities, and it's lame to dismiss that this isn't a real problem in Hollywood due to institutional racism. This isn't something minorities should sit on their hands on, it'll only get better by doing something about it.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now.
That got debunked a few pages ago, actually. All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
So what? They'll get charged with racism if they don't do anything too. That's not a good reason to not be inclusive.
It makes me sad to think that we're helping China eradicate the Tibetan culture because Hollywood is unwilling to give up market share.
I'd agree if that was actually what Marvel was doing with the Ancient One here. I asked about the connections and gotten crickets so I'm not sold that this is an actual thing that's happening or I'd have heard something by now.
Marvel is under no obligation whatsoever to search the world high and low to cast every part. They just need to get someone decent to good for each part, and Swinton is orders of magnitude better than decent.
Why do you assume any Asian actor they get is going to be decent? Do you seriously think Tilda the only person in the world who can play this role? And yeah, it seems really bad that marvel didn't bother searching for an Asian actor/actress for the role before settling on Tilda, and they don't need to search over the world of them - there are plenty Asian actors in America. Marvel is a big company and had plenty of time to do this, yet didn't bother because they knew who they wanted from the start for an Asian role. (At a time when they have a really bad reputation regarding Asians roles.) So yeah, not impressed.
You're inflicting your own priorities on them like it's some sort of rule or mandate. It very much isn't.
Because movie studios never do that for roles. Oh yeah, they do.
+1
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
That got debunked a few pages ago, actually. All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
Debunked implies evidence was used. Money changes everything.
jungleroomx on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now. And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
Except a page or two back I posted a lot of evidence to suggest this is untrue. Nobody has gone out of their way to address that, instead people keep insisting it's too risky or nonprofitable when we have demonstrated that A) Hollywood takes risks all the damn time and minorities spend more at the box office annually and movies like "Twelve Years a Slave" do well even in foreign markets.
It has been addressed.
There is no evidence showing a positive result for minority casting, because for every X there is a Y disproving the thing that Z is disproving. What we DO have evidence of is that Hollywood is casting white people, and they wouldn't be casting white people if there were a reason involved. Rolling out a few decently successful shows and movies with minority casting is really the height of anecdotal.
It makes me sad to think that we're helping China eradicate the Tibetan culture because Hollywood is unwilling to give up market share.
I'd agree if that was actually what Marvel was doing with the Ancient One here. I asked about the connections and gotten crickets so I'm not sold that this is an actual thing that's happening or I'd have heard something by now.
Marvel is under no obligation whatsoever to search the world high and low to cast every part. They just need to get someone decent to good for each part, and Swinton is orders of magnitude better than decent.
Why do you assume any Asian actor they get is going to be decent? Do you seriously think Tilda the only person in the world who can play this role? And yeah, it seems really bad that marvel didn't bother searching for an Asian actor/actress for the role before settling on Tilda, and they don't need to search over the world of them - there are plenty Asian actors in America. Marvel is a big company and had plenty of time to do this, yet didn't bother because they knew who they wanted from the start for an Asian role. (At a time when they have a really bad reputation regarding Asians roles.) So yeah, not impressed.
You're inflicting your own priorities on them like it's some sort of rule or mandate. It very much isn't.
Because movie studios never do that for roles. Oh yeah, they do.
You keep saying they "didn't bother" or "didn't look" despite the fact that they've made it clear their casting decision was deliberate. They chose to cast the role the way they did, knowing that it would result in the exact complaints you've made.
They considered this preferable over the complaints that would have been made had they gone another way, so they made a reasoned decision which you dislike. I'm not sure how many different ways you're going to say you dislike the decision.
-edit-
Also, rules and mandates that studios dictate to their producers (or more typically writers and directors since studios and producers tend to be the same or on the same page) exist because studios have the authority to make them, which of course the internet lacks. If a producer doesn't want studio interference they can get fucked or go it alone. Your closest corollary is to withhold your money by not seeing the film, something I have suggested repeatedly. But making demands as though you were the studio will not accomplish anything because you're not financing the film.
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
edited May 2016
I do enjoy the idea that there is some secret Hollywood cabal keeping minorities down while knowingly losing money because reasons, and their shareholders are either for it or none the wiser.
All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
I do enjoy the idea that there is some secret Hollywood cabal keeping minorities down while knowingly losing money because reasons, and their shareholders are either for it or none the wiser.
All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
This is just... silly.
No conspiracy needed for ignorance.
It's like imagining that there's a secret cabal keeping writers from making shared universes until Marvel showed up rather than just not really considering why thing are the way they are.
+1
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I do enjoy the idea that there is some secret Hollywood cabal keeping minorities down while knowingly losing money because reasons, and their shareholders are either for it or none the wiser.
All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
This is just... silly.
No conspiracy needed for ignorance.
It's like imagining that there's a secret cabal keeping writers from making shared universes until Marvel showed up rather than just not really considering why thing are the way they are.
Yes, but ignorance has been dismissed and now the reason is some sort of organized malice, apparently.
I do enjoy the idea that there is some secret Hollywood cabal keeping minorities down while knowingly losing money because reasons, and their shareholders are either for it or none the wiser.
All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
This is just... silly.
No conspiracy needed for ignorance.
It's like imagining that there's a secret cabal keeping writers from making shared universes until Marvel showed up rather than just not really considering why thing are the way they are.
Yes, but ignorance has been dismissed and now the reason is some sort of organized malice, apparently.
Here's the thing, the status quo was created at a time when it was okay use "yellowface", and before the kind of more cogent understanding of racism we have at the moment. The status quo is set up so that people don't have to think about it, that's what routine is.
So the people doing it out of routine are working from ignorance, but when you're confronted with the reality and your response is to retreat back to routine, that's malice. You've gone from being ignorant to actively trying to ignore the situation. You can't claim to be ignorant, you're just unwilling to take any steps towards adjusting that easier routine.
And sure, people are going to say that it's easy to talk about it when you don't have to practice it, but it's not a difficult problem and it doesn't have a huge risk attached. A few people just need to adjust how they think about things a little bit to make a big difference.
Change the "default" in your mind to include non-white people. Think about opening up the casting call. Think about how to access new and old markets at once.
While it might be better if people made big changes, I don't think that's likely right off the bat. And none of that has a huge risk attached, it's purely how you percieve the world. Change perception -> change discussion. Change discussion -> change actions. Change actions -> change results.
There is both ignorance and malice and none of that requires some secret cabal.
+1
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
There's also nonchalance, which is perhaps more powerful than ignorance or malice
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
+1
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I do enjoy the idea that there is some secret Hollywood cabal keeping minorities down while knowingly losing money because reasons, and their shareholders are either for it or none the wiser.
All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
This is just... silly.
No conspiracy needed for ignorance.
It's like imagining that there's a secret cabal keeping writers from making shared universes until Marvel showed up rather than just not really considering why thing are the way they are.
Yes, but ignorance has been dismissed and now the reason is some sort of organized malice, apparently.
Here's the thing, the status quo was created at a time when it was okay use "yellowface", and before the kind of more cogent understanding of racism we have at the moment. The status quo is set up so that people don't have to think about it, that's what routine is.
So the people doing it out of routine are working from ignorance, but when you're confronted with the reality and your response is to retreat back to routine, that's malice. You've gone from being ignorant to actively trying to ignore the situation. You can't claim to be ignorant, you're just unwilling to take any steps towards adjusting that easier routine.
And sure, people are going to say that it's easy to talk about it when you don't have to practice it, but it's not a difficult problem and it doesn't have a huge risk attached. A few people just need to adjust how they think about things a little bit to make a big difference.
Change the "default" in your mind to include non-white people. Think about opening up the casting call. Think about how to access new and old markets at once.
While it might be better if people made big changes, I don't think that's likely right off the bat. And none of that has a huge risk attached, it's purely how you percieve the world. Change perception -> change discussion. Change discussion -> change actions. Change actions -> change results.
There is both ignorance and malice and none of that requires some secret cabal.
Oh, it's ignorance and malice.
Okay.
Every studio exec and casting director is now a raging racist bigot?
It makes me sad to think that we're helping China eradicate the Tibetan culture because Hollywood is unwilling to give up market share.
I'd agree if that was actually what Marvel was doing with the Ancient One here. I asked about the connections and gotten crickets so I'm not sold that this is an actual thing that's happening or I'd have heard something by now.
Marvel is under no obligation whatsoever to search the world high and low to cast every part. They just need to get someone decent to good for each part, and Swinton is orders of magnitude better than decent.
Why do you assume any Asian actor they get is going to be decent? Do you seriously think Tilda the only person in the world who can play this role? And yeah, it seems really bad that marvel didn't bother searching for an Asian actor/actress for the role before settling on Tilda, and they don't need to search over the world of them - there are plenty Asian actors in America. Marvel is a big company and had plenty of time to do this, yet didn't bother because they knew who they wanted from the start for an Asian role. (At a time when they have a really bad reputation regarding Asians roles.) So yeah, not impressed.
You're inflicting your own priorities on them like it's some sort of rule or mandate. It very much isn't.
Because movie studios never do that for roles. Oh yeah, they do.
You keep saying they "didn't bother" or "didn't look" despite the fact that they've made it clear their casting decision was deliberate. They chose to cast the role the way they did, knowing that it would result in the exact complaints you've made.
They considered this preferable over the complaints that would have been made had they gone another way, so they made a reasoned decision which you dislike. I'm not sure how many different ways you're going to say you dislike the decision.
-edit-
Also, rules and mandates that studios dictate to their producers (or more typically writers and directors since studios and producers tend to be the same or on the same page) exist because studios have the authority to make them, which of course the internet lacks. If a producer doesn't want studio interference they can get fucked or go it alone. Your closest corollary is to withhold your money by not seeing the film, something I have suggested repeatedly. But making demands as though you were the studio will not accomplish anything because you're not financing the film.
And, to reiterate, the backlash from casting TAO as the Asian man he was in the comics wouldn't be from fringe white nationalists offended that an Asian actor was cast in a supporting role. Marvel's been ignoring those chucklefucks since Thor.
The criticism would be that they have a character that's a racial stereotype of a central Asian mystic, and that criticism would be supported by decades of back issues of the comic. Just like how turning the Mandarin into a white businessman might be a little offensive, but nowhere near as offensive as portraying him as, well:
I do enjoy the idea that there is some secret Hollywood cabal keeping minorities down while knowingly losing money because reasons, and their shareholders are either for it or none the wiser.
All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
This is just... silly.
No conspiracy needed for ignorance.
It's like imagining that there's a secret cabal keeping writers from making shared universes until Marvel showed up rather than just not really considering why thing are the way they are.
Yes, but ignorance has been dismissed and now the reason is some sort of organized malice, apparently.
Here's the thing, the status quo was created at a time when it was okay use "yellowface", and before the kind of more cogent understanding of racism we have at the moment. The status quo is set up so that people don't have to think about it, that's what routine is.
So the people doing it out of routine are working from ignorance, but when you're confronted with the reality and your response is to retreat back to routine, that's malice. You've gone from being ignorant to actively trying to ignore the situation. You can't claim to be ignorant, you're just unwilling to take any steps towards adjusting that easier routine.
And sure, people are going to say that it's easy to talk about it when you don't have to practice it, but it's not a difficult problem and it doesn't have a huge risk attached. A few people just need to adjust how they think about things a little bit to make a big difference.
Change the "default" in your mind to include non-white people. Think about opening up the casting call. Think about how to access new and old markets at once.
While it might be better if people made big changes, I don't think that's likely right off the bat. And none of that has a huge risk attached, it's purely how you percieve the world. Change perception -> change discussion. Change discussion -> change actions. Change actions -> change results.
There is both ignorance and malice and none of that requires some secret cabal.
Oh, it's ignorance and malice.
Okay.
Every studio exec and casting director is now a raging racist bigot?
Yes, because the only way to do racist things is to wear a white hood in front of a burning cross, we all know that.
Look, that's exactly the problem right now. People think that only racists do racist things, and that is absolutely untrue. It has never been true. Look at the abolitionists around the Civil War or look up "The Friends of the Indian", people can absolutely do racist things and have the best intentions, even consider themselves progressive. No one needs to be a "raging racist bigot" to ignore how their status quo affects other people, or to ignore how they see the world is not only counter but actively hurtful to other people.
I do enjoy the idea that there is some secret Hollywood cabal keeping minorities down while knowingly losing money because reasons, and their shareholders are either for it or none the wiser.
All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
This is just... silly.
No conspiracy needed for ignorance.
It's like imagining that there's a secret cabal keeping writers from making shared universes until Marvel showed up rather than just not really considering why thing are the way they are.
Yes, but ignorance has been dismissed and now the reason is some sort of organized malice, apparently.
Here's the thing, the status quo was created at a time when it was okay use "yellowface", and before the kind of more cogent understanding of racism we have at the moment. The status quo is set up so that people don't have to think about it, that's what routine is.
So the people doing it out of routine are working from ignorance, but when you're confronted with the reality and your response is to retreat back to routine, that's malice. You've gone from being ignorant to actively trying to ignore the situation. You can't claim to be ignorant, you're just unwilling to take any steps towards adjusting that easier routine.
And sure, people are going to say that it's easy to talk about it when you don't have to practice it, but it's not a difficult problem and it doesn't have a huge risk attached. A few people just need to adjust how they think about things a little bit to make a big difference.
Change the "default" in your mind to include non-white people. Think about opening up the casting call. Think about how to access new and old markets at once.
While it might be better if people made big changes, I don't think that's likely right off the bat. And none of that has a huge risk attached, it's purely how you percieve the world. Change perception -> change discussion. Change discussion -> change actions. Change actions -> change results.
There is both ignorance and malice and none of that requires some secret cabal.
Oh, it's ignorance and malice.
Okay.
Every studio exec and casting director is now a raging racist bigot?
Yes. Obviously. I mean, Dedwrekka even said it right there: "If you're ignorant about any racial issue anywhere ever, that makes you a raging racist bigot." I don't know how much more clearly Dedwrekka could state it.
I actually hate it when asian americans are cast as asians and not americans
I think it's because asian culture is actually kind of oppressive and hard to live up to, and American culture is freeing in comparison
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I do enjoy the idea that there is some secret Hollywood cabal keeping minorities down while knowingly losing money because reasons, and their shareholders are either for it or none the wiser.
All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
This is just... silly.
No conspiracy needed for ignorance.
It's like imagining that there's a secret cabal keeping writers from making shared universes until Marvel showed up rather than just not really considering why thing are the way they are.
Yes, but ignorance has been dismissed and now the reason is some sort of organized malice, apparently.
Here's the thing, the status quo was created at a time when it was okay use "yellowface", and before the kind of more cogent understanding of racism we have at the moment. The status quo is set up so that people don't have to think about it, that's what routine is.
So the people doing it out of routine are working from ignorance, but when you're confronted with the reality and your response is to retreat back to routine, that's malice. You've gone from being ignorant to actively trying to ignore the situation. You can't claim to be ignorant, you're just unwilling to take any steps towards adjusting that easier routine.
And sure, people are going to say that it's easy to talk about it when you don't have to practice it, but it's not a difficult problem and it doesn't have a huge risk attached. A few people just need to adjust how they think about things a little bit to make a big difference.
Change the "default" in your mind to include non-white people. Think about opening up the casting call. Think about how to access new and old markets at once.
While it might be better if people made big changes, I don't think that's likely right off the bat. And none of that has a huge risk attached, it's purely how you percieve the world. Change perception -> change discussion. Change discussion -> change actions. Change actions -> change results.
There is both ignorance and malice and none of that requires some secret cabal.
Oh, it's ignorance and malice.
Okay.
Every studio exec and casting director is now a raging racist bigot?
Yes, because the only way to do racist things is to wear a white hood in front of a burning cross, we all know that.
Look, that's exactly the problem right now. People think that only racists do racist things, and that is absolutely untrue. It has never been true. Look at the abolitionists around the Civil War or look up "The Friends of the Indian", people can absolutely do racist things and have the best intentions, even consider themselves progressive. No one needs to be a "raging racist bigot" to ignore how their status quo affects other people, or to ignore how they see the world is not only counter but actively hurtful to other people.
The line of reasoning I was arguing against was they were actively, knowingly losing money to maintain a status quo of whitewashing.
That's some Adam Sandler villainy right there. Not even the blatant white supremacists of the olden days of yore in this nation could turn away a dollar, which is why we got the minstrel shows and negro leagues.
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now. And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
Except a page or two back I posted a lot of evidence to suggest this is untrue. Nobody has gone out of their way to address that, instead people keep insisting it's too risky or nonprofitable when we have demonstrated that A) Hollywood takes risks all the damn time and minorities spend more at the box office annually and movies like "Twelve Years a Slave" do well even in foreign markets.
It has been addressed.
There is no evidence showing a positive result for minority casting, because for every X there is a Y disproving the thing that Z is disproving. What we DO have evidence of is that Hollywood is casting white people, and they wouldn't be casting white people if there were a reason involved. Rolling out a few decently successful shows and movies with minority casting is really the height of anecdotal.
Except films fail all the time, and yet they never point to the white cast as the issue! You can't keep holding up white casting as more profitable or less risky when it's been demonstrated that isn't the case. The idea that a minority cast has to be MORE profitable to be even ventured as an idea is so ridiculous it is insulting.
The reason we only have a few examples is the exact issue in question! Do you see the hypocrisy in what you're saying? It's only an anecdote when it's convenient to your argument, but not against it. We have already been over this, it's a self fulfilling prophecy.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Jay;
Because casting all white people has proven to not affect box office sales. Casting minorities has proven to not increase sales.
A bad movie is going to flop regardless of who they cast in it, so why add additional risk of breaking the status quo for casting.
Because by excluding minorities from your cast, you discourage future minorities from pursuing this career track, which means you have a very limited talent pool to work with.
Smaller talent pool = shittier movies.
Maybe there's an Asian version of the Coen Brothers out there, with stories depicting their Asian American heritage. But we'll never know if we keep telling them that they don't belong in Hollywood.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now. And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
Except a page or two back I posted a lot of evidence to suggest this is untrue. Nobody has gone out of their way to address that, instead people keep insisting it's too risky or nonprofitable when we have demonstrated that A) Hollywood takes risks all the damn time and minorities spend more at the box office annually and movies like "Twelve Years a Slave" do well even in foreign markets.
It has been addressed.
There is no evidence showing a positive result for minority casting, because for every X there is a Y disproving the thing that Z is disproving. What we DO have evidence of is that Hollywood is casting white people, and they wouldn't be casting white people if there were a reason involved. Rolling out a few decently successful shows and movies with minority casting is really the height of anecdotal.
Except films fail all the time, and yet they never point to the white cast as the issue! You can't keep holding up white casting as more profitable or less risky when it's been demonstrated that isn't the case. The idea that a minority cast has to be MORE profitable to be even ventured as an idea is so ridiculous it is insulting.
The reason we only have a few examples is the exact issue in question! Do you see the hypocrisy in what you're saying? It's only an anecdote when it's convenient to your argument, but not against it. We have already been over this, it's a self fulfilling prophecy.
I mean, what do you want me to say? White people are being cast more. That's a fact. Studios have better accountants than we do and they know what sells and why, so if minority casting truly was able to bring in boatloads more then we'd see boatloads more. Money talks.
Unless you are arguing that the studios are turning down money to maintain the whiteness of Hollywood.
They are certainly overpaying big name actors instead of hiring minorities is roles they could do just as well
You are ignoring the 100 years of cultural and societial issues that lead us to a white dominated Hollywood. It didn't just happen that way, whitewashing goes back a long time. Yes, I am sure the accountants and executives can look at a lot of data that says "white people make money yo" when all the do is already cast white people in those parts anyway! It's the snake eating it's own tail.
+3
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
They are certainly overpaying big name actors instead of hiring minorities is roles they could do just as well
You are ignoring the 100 years of cultural and societial issues that lead us to a white dominated Hollywood. It didn't just happen that way, whitewashing goes back a long time. Yes, I am sure the accountants and executives can look at a lot of data that says "white people make money yo" when all the do is already cast white people in those parts anyway! It's the snake eating it's own tail.
Which is not actively malicious, correct?
Again, the argument that I was going against is NOT that they are eating their own tail, or that they are simply ignorant, but that they KNOW they are losing money but that is less important than keeping the white guy on top. That's where my responses have been coming from.
If we need to shift gears I will do so, because at the moment were not even on the same page.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
And it's probably my fault for getting stuck on that argument, so I'll apologize for that.
I guess I will go ahead and say that, it doesn't matter how you justify furthering whitewashing, be it through profits or risk or however you want to frame it; it's happening, it is a real issue, and you're trying to pull focus away by saying "Well obviously only money matters in business" which is hot garbage. If you say racist things, you get ejected by any company or business like Donald Sterling. The leaked Sony emails shed a lot of light on how they talk about minority actors and directors. We can't in good conscience keep justifying this stuff by saying "there's no reason to change, financially" which is how we get things like chld labor, sweatshops, Foxconn and other Chinese manufacturers, etc. Sometimes, business goes too far and uses practices that go outside the realm of reasonable. If nobody cared about anything socially we would have so many more issues today, but we don't because we don't do things just for the money... It's never that simple. We can sit here all day and compare links and poke holes, but you still refuse to acknowledge the issue is at hand and needs to be dealt with. We have to accept reality as it is, not how we want it to be. We gotta reach a common understanding to move forward.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I guess I will go ahead and say that, it doesn't matter how you justify furthering whitewashing, be it through profits or risk or however you want to frame it; it's happening, it is a real issue, and you're trying to pull focus away by saying "Well obviously only money matters in business" which is hot garbage. If you say racist things, you get ejected by any company or business like Donald Sterling. The leaked Sony emails shed a lot of light on how they talk about minority actors and directors. We can't in good conscience keep justifying this stuff by saying "there's no reason to change, financially" which is how we get things like chld labor, sweatshops, Foxconn and other Chinese manufacturers, etc. Sometimes, business goes too far and uses practices that go outside the realm of reasonable. If nobody cared about anything socially we would have so many more issues today, but we don't because we don't do things just for the money... It's never that simple. We can sit here all day and compare links and poke holes, but you still refuse to acknowledge the issue is at hand and needs to be dealt with. We have to accept reality as it is, not how we want it to be. We gotta reach a common understanding to move forward.
I agree with you, but this isn't Foxconn.
How do you get a studio to hire more minority actors for spots when you continue to purchase tickets from said studio when there aren't minority actors aplenty? Do you force studios to hire minorities by law? Is every movie going to be regulated to a 1990's pander-a-thon of forced diversity? Or do you simply not purchase tickets for white-lead films, at all?
And people getting ejected for racist diatribes are usually to fend off potential boycotts. Again, money.
Change doesn't have to be forced by customers. It can come from within. We can organise on Facebook pages or make petitions, but like everyone loves to point out, Hollywood will still make money. I admit, maybe I am part of the problem. I see MCU movies pretty much without hesitation. But the idea we have the power to change this alone is silly. I still vote with my wallet when given the option. Until I have more details on the GitS remake, I am likely to skip it altogether. Again, I don't think the message of my not seeing it will convey to them why I dislike the idea. They will blame it on the property or the fans or but not on Scarjo or the white cast.
Change doesn't have to be forced by customers. It can come from within. We can organise on Facebook pages or make petitions, but like everyone loves to point out, Hollywood will still make money. I admit, maybe I am part of the problem. I see MCU movies pretty much without hesitation. But the idea we have the power to change this alone is silly. I still vote with my wallet when given the option. Until I have more details on the GitS remake, I am likely to skip it altogether. Again, I don't think the message of my not seeing it will convey to them why I dislike the idea. They will blame it on the property or the fans or but not on Scarjo or the white cast.
You aren't voting with your wallet at all, sorry.
When you go to one white washed film, but not another, all you are saying is you aren't interested in that second film. Everyone has to stop going to every movie, or nothing is going to change.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Change doesn't have to be forced by customers. It can come from within. We can organise on Facebook pages or make petitions, but like everyone loves to point out, Hollywood will still make money. I admit, maybe I am part of the problem. I see MCU movies pretty much without hesitation. But the idea we have the power to change this alone is silly. I still vote with my wallet when given the option. Until I have more details on the GitS remake, I am likely to skip it altogether. Again, I don't think the message of my not seeing it will convey to them why I dislike the idea. They will blame it on the property or the fans or but not on Scarjo or the white cast.
Yes to the bottom part. Unless you say ALL white-lead casts are bad, then the message will be "it's just that movie". You can petition and protest all you want, but if at the end of the day those box office receipts don't go down then don't expect change.
Change doesn't have to be forced by customers. It can come from within. We can organise on Facebook pages or make petitions, but like everyone loves to point out, Hollywood will still make money. I admit, maybe I am part of the problem. I see MCU movies pretty much without hesitation. But the idea we have the power to change this alone is silly. I still vote with my wallet when given the option. Until I have more details on the GitS remake, I am likely to skip it altogether. Again, I don't think the message of my not seeing it will convey to them why I dislike the idea. They will blame it on the property or the fans or but not on Scarjo or the white cast.
You aren't voting with your wallet at all, sorry.
When you go to one white washed film, but not another, all you are saying is you aren't interested in that second film. Everyone has to stop going to every movie, or nothing is going to change.
I honestly don't think that's how it works. And I don't specifically need to be held responsible to your ideals on this subject. Really, until only a few years ago I didn't even realise this was happening. Now that I can see it, I think it's fucked up. Do I think there's an easy solution? No. No one wants this concept to continue, I would imagine, and also no one wants to stop consuming media at large as well. If you are really suggesting I just stop watching literally everything in protest, I don't think that will work. Now maybe if there was a social movement, and I pledged along with others to say "I will not see these films" and sign it, I could get behind that. This isn't gonna be solved by just my actions, but the actions of many people.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Like, if we wanted change right now, it could possibly mean shitcanning the entire MCU.
Posts
An Asian American writer/director that makes down to earth quirky cultural comedies? You have any examples?
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
That a shit load of career tracks in Hollywood involve working for free (at least most of the time) to break in, you're already discouraging minorities by virtue of discouraging people who aren't wealthy or have family capable of paying their way while they work for free. This is the situation for pretty much all media.
We all agree here that writing good roles for minority actors is a desired action simply in and of itself. However it seems to have been lost in the last few pages that posters here aren't arguing that it's not the right thing to do, but that there's no profit motive to do it to more of a degree than it is done now. And that even if you do it realistically you're risking accusations of racism.
Uh... Alan Yang of Master of None, Ang Lee of Brokeback Mountain, Eddie Huang of Fresh of the Boat, Justin Lin of Fast & Furious, I can go on?
I don't expect Marvel to take up the Tibetan cause. But I'm allowed to feel sorrow at it's passing.
Except a page or two back I posted a lot of evidence to suggest this is untrue. Nobody has gone out of their way to address that, instead people keep insisting it's too risky or nonprofitable when we have demonstrated that A) Hollywood takes risks all the damn time and
This is like the old joke regarding wheelchair ramps, where business owners would complain, "Why do I need to make my business wheelchair accessible? I've never seen someone with a wheelchair come into my store!"
The thing is, you don't have to actually write the roles specifically for minority actors. Many roles are written for "a guy" or "a girl" and there's nothing that stops them from being cast with minority actors except that that's just who the studios tend to hire for those roles.
People go on about writers maybe not being up to writing minority characters who aren't of their race, or about the lack of roles specifically for minorities. That's only a problem because people don't stop to think that you could cast a black/asian/hispanic/pacific islander/ect man as the same kind of everyman who fills out most of the characters in Hollywood, so suddenly those characters who are specifically written for minorities become a huge deal because that's one of the very very few roles available to minority actors.
Somewhere in the 1940s, a baseball team manager is complaining that there's no point to recruiting black baseball players because we don't have any proof that negro players sell extra tickets.
Yeah. I haven't actually seen fresh off the boat, but it seems like Asian Americans are doing high profile feature films.
The point got a little muddied when we confused actors with directors.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
It's strange you have to ask to believe in something like that happening with people who aren't white. Here ya go
It's not like white people have a monopoly on being quirky or down to earth.
Intersectionality makes it harder for minorities, and it's lame to dismiss that this isn't a real problem in Hollywood due to institutional racism. This isn't something minorities should sit on their hands on, it'll only get better by doing something about it.
That got debunked a few pages ago, actually. All the money I'm the world isn't going to change Hollywood's attitude on this, or this wouldn't have gotten this bad.
So what? They'll get charged with racism if they don't do anything too. That's not a good reason to not be inclusive.
I'd agree if that was actually what Marvel was doing with the Ancient One here. I asked about the connections and gotten crickets so I'm not sold that this is an actual thing that's happening or I'd have heard something by now.
Why do you assume any Asian actor they get is going to be decent? Do you seriously think Tilda the only person in the world who can play this role? And yeah, it seems really bad that marvel didn't bother searching for an Asian actor/actress for the role before settling on Tilda, and they don't need to search over the world of them - there are plenty Asian actors in America. Marvel is a big company and had plenty of time to do this, yet didn't bother because they knew who they wanted from the start for an Asian role. (At a time when they have a really bad reputation regarding Asians roles.) So yeah, not impressed.
Because movie studios never do that for roles. Oh yeah, they do.
Debunked implies evidence was used. Money changes everything.
It has been addressed.
There is no evidence showing a positive result for minority casting, because for every X there is a Y disproving the thing that Z is disproving. What we DO have evidence of is that Hollywood is casting white people, and they wouldn't be casting white people if there were a reason involved. Rolling out a few decently successful shows and movies with minority casting is really the height of anecdotal.
You keep saying they "didn't bother" or "didn't look" despite the fact that they've made it clear their casting decision was deliberate. They chose to cast the role the way they did, knowing that it would result in the exact complaints you've made.
They considered this preferable over the complaints that would have been made had they gone another way, so they made a reasoned decision which you dislike. I'm not sure how many different ways you're going to say you dislike the decision.
-edit-
Also, rules and mandates that studios dictate to their producers (or more typically writers and directors since studios and producers tend to be the same or on the same page) exist because studios have the authority to make them, which of course the internet lacks. If a producer doesn't want studio interference they can get fucked or go it alone. Your closest corollary is to withhold your money by not seeing the film, something I have suggested repeatedly. But making demands as though you were the studio will not accomplish anything because you're not financing the film.
This is just... silly.
No conspiracy needed for ignorance.
It's like imagining that there's a secret cabal keeping writers from making shared universes until Marvel showed up rather than just not really considering why thing are the way they are.
Yes, but ignorance has been dismissed and now the reason is some sort of organized malice, apparently.
The ancient one is cast as white: "We decided to completely reinvent the source material!"
Here's the thing, the status quo was created at a time when it was okay use "yellowface", and before the kind of more cogent understanding of racism we have at the moment. The status quo is set up so that people don't have to think about it, that's what routine is.
So the people doing it out of routine are working from ignorance, but when you're confronted with the reality and your response is to retreat back to routine, that's malice. You've gone from being ignorant to actively trying to ignore the situation. You can't claim to be ignorant, you're just unwilling to take any steps towards adjusting that easier routine.
And sure, people are going to say that it's easy to talk about it when you don't have to practice it, but it's not a difficult problem and it doesn't have a huge risk attached. A few people just need to adjust how they think about things a little bit to make a big difference.
Change the "default" in your mind to include non-white people. Think about opening up the casting call. Think about how to access new and old markets at once.
While it might be better if people made big changes, I don't think that's likely right off the bat. And none of that has a huge risk attached, it's purely how you percieve the world. Change perception -> change discussion. Change discussion -> change actions. Change actions -> change results.
There is both ignorance and malice and none of that requires some secret cabal.
Danny Rand cast as white: "Deviate from the source material and make him asian!"
Ancient one cast as white: "What about the source material!?"
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Oh, it's ignorance and malice.
Okay.
Every studio exec and casting director is now a raging racist bigot?
And, to reiterate, the backlash from casting TAO as the Asian man he was in the comics wouldn't be from fringe white nationalists offended that an Asian actor was cast in a supporting role. Marvel's been ignoring those chucklefucks since Thor.
The criticism would be that they have a character that's a racial stereotype of a central Asian mystic, and that criticism would be supported by decades of back issues of the comic. Just like how turning the Mandarin into a white businessman might be a little offensive, but nowhere near as offensive as portraying him as, well:
Yes, because the only way to do racist things is to wear a white hood in front of a burning cross, we all know that.
Look, that's exactly the problem right now. People think that only racists do racist things, and that is absolutely untrue. It has never been true. Look at the abolitionists around the Civil War or look up "The Friends of the Indian", people can absolutely do racist things and have the best intentions, even consider themselves progressive. No one needs to be a "raging racist bigot" to ignore how their status quo affects other people, or to ignore how they see the world is not only counter but actively hurtful to other people.
Yes. Obviously. I mean, Dedwrekka even said it right there: "If you're ignorant about any racial issue anywhere ever, that makes you a raging racist bigot." I don't know how much more clearly Dedwrekka could state it.
I think it's because asian culture is actually kind of oppressive and hard to live up to, and American culture is freeing in comparison
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
The line of reasoning I was arguing against was they were actively, knowingly losing money to maintain a status quo of whitewashing.
That's some Adam Sandler villainy right there. Not even the blatant white supremacists of the olden days of yore in this nation could turn away a dollar, which is why we got the minstrel shows and negro leagues.
Except films fail all the time, and yet they never point to the white cast as the issue! You can't keep holding up white casting as more profitable or less risky when it's been demonstrated that isn't the case. The idea that a minority cast has to be MORE profitable to be even ventured as an idea is so ridiculous it is insulting.
The reason we only have a few examples is the exact issue in question! Do you see the hypocrisy in what you're saying? It's only an anecdote when it's convenient to your argument, but not against it. We have already been over this, it's a self fulfilling prophecy.
I mean, what do you want me to say? White people are being cast more. That's a fact. Studios have better accountants than we do and they know what sells and why, so if minority casting truly was able to bring in boatloads more then we'd see boatloads more. Money talks.
Unless you are arguing that the studios are turning down money to maintain the whiteness of Hollywood.
You are ignoring the 100 years of cultural and societial issues that lead us to a white dominated Hollywood. It didn't just happen that way, whitewashing goes back a long time. Yes, I am sure the accountants and executives can look at a lot of data that says "white people make money yo" when all the do is already cast white people in those parts anyway! It's the snake eating it's own tail.
Which is not actively malicious, correct?
Again, the argument that I was going against is NOT that they are eating their own tail, or that they are simply ignorant, but that they KNOW they are losing money but that is less important than keeping the white guy on top. That's where my responses have been coming from.
If we need to shift gears I will do so, because at the moment were not even on the same page.
I agree with you, but this isn't Foxconn.
How do you get a studio to hire more minority actors for spots when you continue to purchase tickets from said studio when there aren't minority actors aplenty? Do you force studios to hire minorities by law? Is every movie going to be regulated to a 1990's pander-a-thon of forced diversity? Or do you simply not purchase tickets for white-lead films, at all?
And people getting ejected for racist diatribes are usually to fend off potential boycotts. Again, money.
You aren't voting with your wallet at all, sorry.
When you go to one white washed film, but not another, all you are saying is you aren't interested in that second film. Everyone has to stop going to every movie, or nothing is going to change.
Yes to the bottom part. Unless you say ALL white-lead casts are bad, then the message will be "it's just that movie". You can petition and protest all you want, but if at the end of the day those box office receipts don't go down then don't expect change.
I honestly don't think that's how it works. And I don't specifically need to be held responsible to your ideals on this subject. Really, until only a few years ago I didn't even realise this was happening. Now that I can see it, I think it's fucked up. Do I think there's an easy solution? No. No one wants this concept to continue, I would imagine, and also no one wants to stop consuming media at large as well. If you are really suggesting I just stop watching literally everything in protest, I don't think that will work. Now maybe if there was a social movement, and I pledged along with others to say "I will not see these films" and sign it, I could get behind that. This isn't gonna be solved by just my actions, but the actions of many people.