By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Why Jordan Peele is Unlikely to Cast White Lead: 'I've Seen That Movie'

Wow! Black comedy means something completely different where I come from. It is about the tone, and has nothing to do with skin colour. For example: Heathers, American Psycho, and Deadpool (though that’s a bit of slapstick as well).



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Around the Network
RJTM1991 said:
Torillian said:

The only way to know if it's underrepresented is to match that 13% of the population number with a similar number from media. You cannot just say "look at all this black people media stuff, they must be fine", that's not how something being numerically over or underrepresented works. Bring some numbers, give us studies, give us anything to legitimize your claim. 

Well, surely that means that you have to prove that black people are indeed underrepresented as well.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8991716

post contains references to sociology papers on the underrepresented nature of minorities in film. I'll be waiting for your academic sources. 



...

Yeah I think I'm done here. There's no changing the mind of the willfully ignorant.

VGChartz, you got an infestation of lowkey racists who don't seem to see their racism as racism but 'justified questioning of the status quo', and as was said before, the most dangerous people in the world are the ones in power convinced they're being repressed.



Alara317 said:
Yeah I think I'm done here. There's no changing the mind of the willfully ignorant.

VGChartz, you got an infestation of lowkey racists who don't seem to see their racism as racism but 'justified questioning of the status quo', and as was said before, the most dangerous people in the world are the ones in power convinced they're being repressed.

This post sums up my feelings and why I started visiting other sites more often



Baddman said:
Alara317 said:
Yeah I think I'm done here. There's no changing the mind of the willfully ignorant.

VGChartz, you got an infestation of lowkey racists who don't seem to see their racism as racism but 'justified questioning of the status quo', and as was said before, the most dangerous people in the world are the ones in power convinced they're being repressed.

This post sums up my feelings and why I started visiting other sites more often

It's astonishing how dedicated to ignorance some can be. My entire life growing up I was taught not to lash out or get angry at others for not being as smart as me but to educate them, to bring others up around me (I was labelled as gifted as a kid). And for most of my life I've dedicated my time to letting others know where they went wrong, showing them the right way, backing up my claims with logic and statistics and historical data...

...but more and more it's clear people don't want to be right, they want to be SEEN as being right, and the only way to do that is to double down when you're wrong until your opponent gives up and stops trying. 

I've been watching this thread, among others, and it's so clear that there is a subset of users on this website that are outright terrible for various reasons and, in the eyes of the mods, it's okay to be terrible as long as you don't get aggressive with it, but the second someone decent says 'hey, you're wrong and this thought process is bad', that person gets banned. I've been banned multiple times for calling stupid people out for the stupid things they've said or otherwise labelled bigots accurately...but it's perfectly okay to say things like 'I have learned to not tolerate people from the middle east'. 

I absolutely hate the idea that it's okay to be racist or sexist or homophobic or xenophobic or otherwise bigoted/terrible in whatever way, but it's not okay to be angry about the prevalence of people like that. I've never run into those issues more than on this forum and it makes me wonder why the fuck I keep coming around if a sizeable portion of the userbase are racist or trolls and they 'win' by not being banned and by goading others into reacting. 



Around the Network
RolStoppable said:
DonFerrari said:

Let's wait for the study showing there is less than 13% of NBA top players being black.

Endorsing a nonsensical post while mocking people who took your thread seriously doesn't make you look good.

Is it really nonsensical to point out that the "representation movements" only looks at where they want more and ignores where they are over-represented?

Like inequality gap complains of lack of woman on CEO position but doesn't complain about lack of woman cleaning sewers?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."



Hiku said:
DonFerrari said:

Hiku I would say you captured most of the revelant point.

On the "even if it's racist" (not claiming Jordan is) I was talking that there could/have been situations where the choice was racist but since it was against white people it was just ignored. But since from what you are saying I understand you would be against racism no matter the source or target we don't have to dwelve much on it.

And also you are right on today landscape in USA someone saying he wants to make a serie of movies based on Han dynasty and thus would only hire asian people (let's ignore that we accept that anyone from asia play any role even if someone that have intimacy with this ethinicities can easily differentiate Japanese, Korean, Chinese, among others) no one would bat an eye and that is totally cool for me, but if someone said he will only cast white people because he wants to do movies based only on experiences of white people or even because the setting is historically on an all white place he would get criticism for not being diverse.

Again, I'm 100% pro creators being free to chose what they want and being criticized on the merits of the result being bad when that happens (would open a caveat for imbecile changes of cast on adaptations that only purpose is shoe horned diversity, still normally those works end up being bad anyway), what I'm against in here is that this same freedom of choice isn't fully embraced depending on who/what is the target.

Ok, here are some thoughts I have about what you've said.

Allowing the same kind of creative freedom for every director is understandable. But not when you're talking about racism.
For example:

#1 "That african american director shouldn't have said something racist."

The first sentence is perfectly adequate on its own when it comes to criticizing someone for that, and that's where it should end.
However, if you add this as well:

#2 "But no one got upset. If a white director said the same thing, people would be up in arms."

Then it's not just critique. It's also saying "white people should be able to get away with racism as well."
And I don't think that's something anyone should feel obliged to be doing. I mean I don't go through withdrawals if I can't use a derogatory term in public. And if someone does, I'm very concerned about them.

But, when it comes to allowing the same kind of creative freedom for the director, then I understand framing the argument that way.
Yes they should be allowed the same kind of creative freedom.

You didn't give a specific example, and I'd prefer if you do that next time so that it's easier to respond. But in a hypothetical scenario where a white director said the same thing, and people got upset about it, here are a few things to consider.

Why would they be upset?

Consider the current state of hollywood. While it's better than it was 50 years ago when it comes to representing minorities or stories written with those kind of sub genres in mind, if you walk by a cinema, the vast majority of the movie posters you pass will probably predominately feature Caucasian cast members on the poster, right?
Because everyone knows that, if someone wants more movies about let's say the Chinese dynasty, then someone has to actively push for it.
And if their ambition is to push for it so much that they want to devote all their films to it, then that's understandable.

If a white director says he wants to push for stories centering around Caucasians, then people would wonder why he wants to do that when it's already overwhelmingly dominated by Caucasians.

Our situations are different. So people react accordingly.

If someone uses a racial slur regarding white people aimed at me (and someone has) I'm not bothered by it. Partially because there was no systematic enslavement of people belonging to my ethnicity, and we were not treated as sub-human by people who made up derogatory terms to demean us.
But that's me. If someone else finds it offensive, I can certainly respect it. No one should have to be subjugated to bigotry.
(Though when their mindset is based on white nationalistic ideas, I'm concerned. For several reasons.)

But I think people are more commonly like me in that regard, which may factor into why 'people are less upset' in that regard.

Another thing to consider is if the reactions are warranted. (Your reaction to this Peele comment included, and your original thread title as a result of it.)
If people misunderstand something and get upset over it, is it worth our time and attention? And can we do something about it?

The answer to racism is definitely not to ask for more racism.
And if you think some subject surrounding this is worth discussing, it's much better to compare one example to another, than one example that probably isn't even (by your own words) an example of such racism, to a hypothetical scenario.

Your previous version of the thread title is an example of why I'd prefer an actual example of what you're discussing, next time.
I don't think Pelee's comment was based on racism. As in it's not because he dislikes or fears white people that he made it.

Again I have to agree to most of what you have put forward. And yes I find it terrible to be racist (still I would rather people are free to show they are racist and you can avoid them, than forbid they act racist so they just control themselves to not get caught, although I know I would be a minority in this thinking). Also yes I totally understand someone wanting to make more movies regarding black people POV (although in the replies here was brought quotes from Jordan talking about how his movie was to show that experience wasn't based on race by showing a black family in a horror movie, so in this case he would be pushing a race agenda to show race doesn't matter which is what I put on more racist won't solve current one) and certainly I think we still have a low number of good movies showing black people out of bad stereotypes (yes we have great movies about slave, like Kinta Kunte, Amstad and a few others, but certainly there are still plenty of movies that could be told during the period that may focus on slavery or have it just as background).

Also yes I understand why we are more tolerant to derogatory and discriminatory treatment made by minorities than white males, but that again gives the feeling of special permission that don't help out on ending segregation.

I do appreciate that you didn't try to go high horse and judgmental to assume my different opinion is due to being dumb, uninformed or closet racist, by discussing and trying to understand why the opinion is different and what background someone different than yourself may have to think different.

Race and division is quite different in USA and in Brazil, while some just assume everyone lives in USA except when there is a need to attack lack of english fluency. Here we also have a problem of lack of lead on TV shows from black people, there are plenty of great black actors, some quite famous and prolific, but still under used (even though we have plenty of soap operas that were lead by black people). One great difference though is that Brazil is much more mixed, you'll hardly find someone with really dark skin (from my experience I have found at least 10x more people with really dark skin in my trips to USA than during my regular life in Brazil, as also I found 10x more very light skin there than here). But since our country receives great influence from USA race discussion is something that is quite present here as well with the included issue of very distorted statistics. You can pick similar picture with similar people skin tone distribution and if it is talking about university it will say that 90% of students are white, while if it was in prison would say 90% black. While on reality we would have both being 10% white, 10% black and 80% mixed with great skin tone divergence (and yes I would agree that you have darker skin on prison than university, but most are mixed), in my family I have a light skin and my brother a dark skin with we both coming from 3/4 slave heritage 1/4 italian.

I won't dwelve much on one of your points as that would be another thread, but white people have been systematically enslaved and racially "hunted" during egypt hey days and some other situations, and also most of the black slaves that arrived in America had been captured and sold by other African tribes.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

RolStoppable said:
DonFerrari said:

Is it really nonsensical to point out that the "representation movements" only looks at where they want more and ignores where they are over-represented?

Like inequality gap complains of lack of woman on CEO position but doesn't complain about lack of woman cleaning sewers?

Yes, the way these arguments are framed is definitely nonsensical.

Women would like to be members on the board of directors, but it has happened time and time again that a man who was less qualified for the job got the job because he is a man. On the other hand, there aren't any stories about women getting denied the occupation of cleaning sewers, so where there is no problem, there's no reason to act like there is a problem.

So you don't think there is a problem with woman not wanting these positions like cleaning sewers? But then there is a problem on women not trying STEM courses?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

I find comfort in knowing that the opinion of those who think this is racist will no longer be taken seriously in wider social enviornments. This simply will not be an issue and Peele will receive no meaningful backlash, if anything it'll push the film even higher. The current zeitgeist is conscious enough to know that his statement is ultimately harmless and will have no negative impact on the lifes of white people, and the truth behind it (actively casting minorities) will do good. If that's your definition of racism, you can throw it in the bin x