| Alara317 said: This 'controversy' might be the dumbest thing I've ever seen people get upset about. This or the whole puddle thing in the new Spider-Man game. No idea why I fool myself into thinking I can inject a bit of decency and reason into a discussion like this. All I see is a bunch of easily offended people somehow hurt by the idea that a character who's race is not important being cast as not-white despite being portrayed as white in the past. Reminds me way too much of people who counter 'black lives matter' with 'all lives matter', thus completely missing the point while trying to turn the argument into being all about them once again or somehow devaluing the hardships that some groups experience. Literally nothing of value is harmed by making this character non-white in an adaptation. There's literally no argument that makes your whining justified no matter how much you've internalized the character as white. Stop whining about change, stop whining about 'the SJW agenda', and get some perspective. This is NOT the sort of social issue that needs attention. If you don't LIKE the idea of a traditionally white person being played by a non white person, that's fine, but don't try to pretend that your outrage is justified. There is honestly too much wrong with the arguments in this thread for me to keep up. There are so many poor examples of logic, faulty arguments, and irrelevant views that I'd need 4 days, 7 gallons of coffee, and fingers of steel to explain in graphic detail how so many of you are just wrong when I only need to repeat the same point: The character's skin color is not important. She's a fantasy character and not based on any real person. Therefore, in the spirit of adaptation, there's literally no reason to be upset about her being portrayed as non white no matter how much it offends your fragile sensibilities. No amount of 'but that's how she was in the game' or 'she was described that way in the books' will change the fact that you're whining about an aesthetic change that will not do anything to make it untrue to the book. Take Hermoine. Hermoine Granger from Harry Potter was traditionally portrayed as white. She was drawn as white on the book covers and was played by a white girl/woman in the movies. However, when a black girl was cast in her role for a stage play (An adaptation), folks like you had a shit fit even when JK Rowling publically announced that Hermoine's skin color was not specified in the books and wasn't relevant to her character. This is the exact same sort of thing. You're just a bunch of immature brats having a fit about a perceived slight that almost certainly will not affect the quality of the end product. Heimdall. that is all. |
Oh, for fuck's sake. The importance of Ciris's heritage in that universe has been explained here a dozen times already, but you just refuse to understand. Or maybe you just don't understand genetics or something?
JK Rowling is an SJW, so she will flip her own characters any which way to satisfy whatever the flavor (color?) of the month happens to be. By the way, is there really no description of Hermione's appearance in the books? No mention of her ginger hair or something? That would be weird, because usually the author wants to give the reader some notion of what the characters look like. However, we are talking about a modern British girl, so there's no reason why she couldn't be black, so it's not the same situation as with Ciri and her specific bloodline.
Heimdall. Yes. The Norwegians came up with their ancient gods at a time when none of them had ever seen black people. They simply created a pantheon of gods for themselves, with their knowledge of the world, as all humans tend to do. So a black Heimdall makes zero sense whatsoever, it's just pandering that is happening over a thousand years after the fact in another culture that's plagued by these silly politics.
