FireFly wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2024 10:00 pm
What movie even is this a review for? Why even post this at all if you're not even going to specify what film its from?
FireFly wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2024 10:00 pmForced diversity exists and has plagued numerous TV shows and canons,
1) Name names then. Go ahead, list specific examples (besides The Little Mermaid, which I'll get to). If its been happening "numerous times", then list a bunch of specific, concrete examples.
2) And not just the titles, but also the actual, specific casting choices therein that show "forced diversity".
3) And lastly, once you name specific titles and specific casting choices, cite evidence or specific behind the scenes stories that point to the diversity being "forced" unwillingly on the studio or the creatives, rather than simply being a choice that was made freely.
This is the central rub with "forced diversity": either its all kept incredibly vague without ANY specific examples noted, or in the cases where any specific examples are cited, there's NEVER
any evidence shown that the diversity casting was unwillingly "forced" onto the production.
This is my primary ask of anyone in this thread (or other similar threads) who wishes cite "forced diversity" as being an actual phenomenon or problem in media: please,
please submit
actual, tangible evidence - even if its in the form of candid, behind the scenes interviews with cast or crew or SOMEONE aligned with the actual production - that the "diversity" casting was
FORCED onto the production. Either by the studio, the creatives, or literally ANYONE.
Cite some actual, hard evidence that this casting was unwillingly forced onto the production and wasn't a freely made creative choice, and THEN we can have an actual, serious conversation about this.
Because without actual proof or evidence that the diversity casting was forced, or without ANY kind of specifics other than just general grumbling and grousing... then it doesn't take a genius to understand why to the average person seeing these complaints, it looks an AWFUL lot like these complaints are really just about seeing more black/brown/gay/trans people on camera in and of itself, and not like there's anything "nefarious" going on other than diversity is popular among more people today and the studios and creatives are just following where the audience/money is.
FireFly wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2024 10:00 pmI mean we have Ariel from the Little Mermaid being swapped out for a black chick (a completely pointless change and one that arguably undermines redheads, who themselves have had a history of marginalization) and totally ruining its chances in cinema polls for god's sake lol.
1) As noted earlier, redheads are and have been literally EVERYWHERE in media, and include high brow Oscar winners to low brow bit players across both old and new movies and TV shows.
From (and these are
just off the top of my head) Amy Adams to Jessica Chastain to Isla Fisher to Christina Hendricks, to Julianne Moore, to Lindsay Lohan, to Eric Stoltz, Seth Green, Molly Ringwald, Rupert Grint, David Caruso, Carol Burnett, Bryce Dallas Howard, Ron Howard, Bella Thorne, Alicia Witt, Cynthia Nixon, Nicole Kidman, Debra Messing, Sophie Turner, all the way down to fucking D-list examples like Carrot Top and Danny Bonaduce, and goddamned animated/drawn examples like Jessica Rabbit, Batgirl, Lois Griffin, Poison Ivy from Batman, George and Jane Jetson, Wilma and Pebbles Flintstone, Jean Grey, Ranma Saotome (female), Kyle Broflovsky, Yosemite Sam, and Daphne from Scooby Doo and the chick from that Pixar movie Brave...
...mainstream examples, obscure examples, classic Hollywood examples, modern examples, fictional examples... hell, non-redheads from Kim Kardashian to Katy Perry to Emma Stone to Rihanna, have been dying their hair red because its seen as so attractive now (and no, before someone chimes in with this ludicrously dumb point, that is NOT the same or equivalent to blackface, for reasons so stupidly, historically obvious and glaring that I should not have to rehash it here: god help you if your basic grade school education failed you here)...
...the days of redheads being significantly discriminated against (which in modern times go all the way back to the days when the Irish were considered non-white: which is roughly 100 years ago now, literally) had stopped being a significant problem in Hollywood and in overall general media at least (in regular day to day life, it still happens primarily as a form of bullying among small children) a LONG time ago and has not been a thing media-wise in literally almost a century now.
Redheads haven't carried NEARLY the same degree of social stigma as black and brown people have for a VERY, very long time now.
Hell, I say all that as an Italian myself - who were in much the same basket as Irish/Redheads a century ago and were not considered white at the time and were very similarly discriminated against much in the same way as Irish/Redheads were: that discrimination ended and has not been a significant obstacle in a hundred fucking years now.
Redheads/Irish (and Italians, such as myself, along with them) have not faced employment and voter discrimination, pay discrimination, redlining, unlawful/unjust police violence, street harassment (beyond playground bullying as kids largely, which still sucks granted), and so forth due to their ethnicity/color for a VERY long time: unlike black and brown people, for whom ALL of this has been and continues to be, a problem
to this day. This is and has been a non-issue for redheads for quite some time now.
Simply put: equating redhead discrimination with black/brown skin discrimination in 2024 is... highly, laughably out of touch and smacks of desperately grasping at straws for an absurdly false equivalence.
2) The live action Little Mermaid evidently did just fine at the box office. So I don't know what this "ruining its chances at the cinema polls" bit is referring to. It wasn't the highest grossing Disney movie ever or anything, but it certainly made its money and didn't bomb. Note: I don't now, nor have I ever given two shits about The Little Mermaid either way: I'm just going by verifiable, actual box office numbers here, which directly contradict your statement.
3) Once again... there is ZERO evidence that the change of Ariel's ethnicity from white (bear in mind, Redheads a century ago used to be considered non-white) to black was in any way a change that was "forced" on anyone, either at the creative level or even at the studio level. According to pretty much ALL accounts from all levels of production, the actress was chosen based solely on her singing ability first and foremost: again, what happened to color-blindness and meritocracy?
Again: provide SOME hard evidence - literally ANYTHING at this point - that even
vaguely hints that these casting decisions are being "forced" onto the filmmakers/creatives, and aren't simply a response to audience demand and chasing the almighty dollar.
And if they're being "forced" on the filmmakers/creatives (for reasons beyond simply attracting a bigger audience and making more money): to what end or purpose? What possible reason is there that isn't to do with just increasing profits from a bigger audience?
Again: BE SPECIFIC AND NOT VAGUE: "pushing a political agenda" is NOT a specific answer AT ALL. What's the "agenda" in question? How is it political in nature (do you even know, like on a basic dictionary level, what the word "political" even means or refers to)? What's the purpose of the agenda? Who does the pushing of the agenda (whatever it is) benefit and how/why does it benefit them?
These are not difficult gotcha questions I'm asking: I'm asking you to lay out the basic-most foundations of a basic-ass argument here. One that isn't steeped in vague innuendo and oblique evasiveness.
FireFly wrote: ↑Tue Jan 09, 2024 10:00 pmI also find it funny this thread has done a 180 from simply discussing female representation to shitting on capitalism and calling the opposition Nazis. Really goes to show the state of the modern left today.
1) Capitalism came up in this thread for a very logical reason: it came up in reference to the
actual real life reasons why corporations and studios are using more diverse casting choices: because they wish to make more money.
Capitalism is, among other things, the business acquisition of an ever-increasing amount of profit (or Financial Capital): it is literally THE reason why you're seeing "more diversity" in media: Corporations, who under a Capitalist economic system (such as the one we have largely worldwide, and particularly in the USA) exist SOLELY to make more and more money every year, see a bigger audience to attract with these more diverse casting choices (which has come about largely organically as social mores towards other races, ethnicities, and sexual orientations has softened across many corners of society: which, unless you're a genuine racist/bigot, is generally seen as a GOOD and positive social development), and with a bigger audience comes more profit.
There: we just now, in but a single paragraph, solved the "great mystery" of why big movie studios and TV networks are casting more and more people of color and queer people in movies and TV/streaming shows: because lots of people of color and queer people watch movies and TV too, and the studios want to add their money to their yearly revenue.
Hence: Capitalism came up in this thread. VERY organically, as its impossible to talk about these kinds of decisions without at least mentioning capitalism.
Hell, its almost impossible to talk about damn near ANYTHING that happens of note or substance in the world without mentioning capitalism, as capitalism is the mechanism/engine for which basically EVERYTHING happens among people and groups/entities with any power in the world: they happen to make more and more money for said people in power. Because in a capitalist society (which we're in here in real life), money = power and power = money.
To avoid ever mentioning capitalism in such discussions is to basically avoid acknowledging reality in favor of fantasy.
Fantasy like say... studios and artists are just randomly out of the blue deciding to "force diverse casting" onto an unwilling and unwanting audience (who keep showing up and breaking box office/ratings records for many of these films and shows anyhow) for absolutely no reason whatsoever other than some undefined, vague, murky "woke agenda" that achieves... something undefined which no one ever wants to discuss or describe in any detail what that "something" entails.
2) The Left Wing as its ALWAYS existed in politics has ALWAYS been defined in no small part by its criticism and (to varying extents) opposition - or at least, adversarial relationship - toward Capitalism. I find it incredibly laughable, not to mention historically illiterate, in your presenting criticism of Capitalism as a reason why "the state of the modern Left" is somehow in dire straights... as if Left Wing politics has EVER
been anything without an adversarial view towards Capitalism as one of its central, primary defining characteristics.
Its like saying "this is why no one can take basketball seriously anymore: all that dribbling and players constantly sinking the ball into a net".
My dude: what the fuck did you think the Left Wing in politics
even was for all this time and all these years? Never mind just "the modern Left", go back like a few hundred fucking years ago even.
Not understanding that an oppositional eye (to one varying degree or another) towards Capitalism was ALWAYS one of its central, defining tenants... that says WAY more about you and your base of basic historical knowledge than it does ANYTHING about the Left as a political entity.
3) I word-searched this whole thread: literally NO ONE,
not a single person in this thread was ever
once called a Nazi. By anyone.
Go and word search the thread and see for yourself if you don't believe me.
Nazis were referenced only a couple of times in abstract or in historical reference or in calling certain specific hate groups outside of this thread: but NEVER as a name called to anyone in this thread or even as something to compare anyone in this thread against.
It sounds like you're dragging in baggage of yours from other discussions, but not this one we're having in this thread.