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'

Torillian on 28 March 2019
vivster said:
Torillian said:

That's fun, because I'm not sure you know what disproportionately means. If whites make up 61% of the population but make up 86% of the leading roles in film than they are disproportionately represented. Now that doesn't sound like a big difference if but from the minority perspective that's the difference between having 39% of the roles if it were proportionate to 14%, a massive drop. 

Here's a report on the proportion of leads by race compared to the general population: 

https://socialsciences.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/UCLA-Hollywood-Diversity-Report-2018-2-27-18.pdf

What do demographics of the general population have to do with target audiences?

I'm discussing with someone the following quote:

"A population that makes up the majority; are going to be the ones most represented, that's just logic, that's math."

and letting him know that numerical representation is not as simple as "they're the majority of the population so they're the majority of the media"

If you want to have a different discussion you're going to have to define it for me, because you seem to be debating something I've never stated.



...

Around the Network
HylianSwordsman on 28 March 2019
Machiavellian said:

My question to you is did you read the article and see all of his responses or did you get upset over the blurb the OP added to the thread and only focused on that part.  First, Peel is a comedian, and when throwing a off hand joke in text verbiage does not always come across the same way.  Another point is that you have to take in everything a person says not pick and choose the parts you want to isolate.  This is why context is always king when reading something people say. 

People will take a statement like this "I hate white people who hate black people" and only focus on the part where the person said "I hate white people".  They will isolate just that part and ignore the rest just like this whole thread.  This is why people get triggered so much in threads like this because people post only the part they want to isolate to form a narrative dismissing everything else.

I read the article, but fair enough, perhaps the article didn't capture the full context. If the quote in the headline wasn't the focus of the article, or better yet was left out altogether as it wouldn't capture the feeling of the joke, then the focus of the article would be the latter quote "The way I look at it. I get to cast black people in my movies," he said. "I feel fortunate to be in this position where I can say to Universal, 'I want to make a $20 million horror movie with a black family.' And they say yes." Which is a completely fair thing to say.



RJTM1991 on 28 March 2019
SpokenTruth said:
thismeintiel said:

Oh, I know what racism is. The problem is that you want to believe in some ridiculous definition of it where it's all contextual and power based. Which really, in a world where people have equal opportunity (sorry, there are no guaranteed equal outcomes), is just racist. You feel those poor minorities can't make it on their own, so must be boosted up by society and/or the government more than whites, while having a different set of standards to how they act and talk. I just don't buy that BS. Not when we have Asians, another minority, that have basically excelled in every category despite all this supposed continuing racism.  And especially pathetic when you see what the newly freed slaves and their children and grandchildren accomplished when they faced actual racism. 1000x anything we see today. They didn't need to constantly fake hate crimes because they were actually happening.

You don't create equality by having lower standards for one group, while trying to bring the majority group down a few notches. That's racism on both ends.

And then you proceed to prove you don't.

sugenis said:

Did he say the bolded? because if that's true, then it looks even worse on his part, since his films borrow heavily (Us especially) from other directors in the horror genre, many of whom are white.

No, he didn't say the bolded.  His statement was provided in the original post.

RJTM1991 said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_films_of_the_2010s

I personally don't have an issue with Jordan's comments, let him make what he wants. I just hope that there's no shitstorm when a white director says the same thing about a white lead.

But why would a white director say that? 

Black director: Not enough movies are made for the black audience so I'm going to cast black actors for my leads to address that omission in the market.
White director: Not enough movies are made for the white audience so I'm going to cast white actors for my leads to address that omission in the market.

Does that make any sense to you?

RJ_Sizzle said:

For some people, ANY representation is over representation. Note how heated things get politically when a genre movie starring a woman or a minority becomes a blockbuster. Example: All the people that claimed they were attacked at Black Panther showings.

As I stated earlier, to those people of privilege and dominance, equality and representation must feel like oppression and racism.

You know what I meant.

Switch up the words "black" and "white" in the article and you have a destroyed career.



KLXVER on 28 March 2019
RJTM1991 said:

You know what I meant.

Switch up the words "black" and "white" in the article and you have a destroyed career.

Yes, because in this case black people are underrepresented compared to white people. The "change the color" argument doesn't always hold up.



RJTM1991 on 28 March 2019
KLXVER said:
RJTM1991 said:

You know what I meant.

Switch up the words "black" and "white" in the article and you have a destroyed career.

Yes, because in this case black people are underrepresented compared to white people. The "change the color" argument doesn't always hold up.

Underrepresented? Years and years ago, sure, but not now. A quick Google search debunks that claim.

Asians are underrepresented. Indians, Native Americans, and Hispanics too.

Again, I don't mind his comments. Pandering and ticking boxes is commonplace in Hollywood now. So let him make whatever he wants.

And again, have a look at this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_films_of_the_2010s



Around the Network
KLXVER on 28 March 2019
RJTM1991 said:
KLXVER said:

Yes, because in this case black people are underrepresented compared to white people. The "change the color" argument doesn't always hold up.

Underrepresented? Years and years ago, sure, but not now. A quick Google search debunks that claim.

Asians are underrepresented. Indians, Native Americans, and Hispanics too.

Again, I don't mind his comments. Pandering and ticking boxes is commonplace in Hollywood now. So let him make whatever he wants.

And again, have a look at this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_films_of_the_2010s

So about 20 movies a year average? Of how many? Thousands probably.



RJTM1991 on 28 March 2019
KLXVER said:
RJTM1991 said:

Underrepresented? Years and years ago, sure, but not now. A quick Google search debunks that claim.

Asians are underrepresented. Indians, Native Americans, and Hispanics too.

Again, I don't mind his comments. Pandering and ticking boxes is commonplace in Hollywood now. So let him make whatever he wants.

And again, have a look at this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_films_of_the_2010s

So about 20 movies a year average? Of how many? Thousands probably.

In the mainstream? Nope. There's only, what? Maybe 10-15 big-budget major releases each year?

There's so many black TV shows too. Black music is everywhere.

So this "underrepresented" shit needs to go to bed.



KLXVER on 28 March 2019
RJTM1991 said:
KLXVER said:

So about 20 movies a year average? Of how many? Thousands probably.

In the mainstream? Nope. There's only, what? Maybe 10-15 big-budget major releases each year?

There's so many black TV shows too. Black music is everywhere.

So this "underrepresented" shit needs to go to bed.

What are you talking about? Now it has to be big budgeted movies? Many of the movies with black actors from the Wikipedia list are not big budget movies.



RJTM1991 on 28 March 2019
SpokenTruth said:
RJTM1991 said:

Underrepresented? Years and years ago, sure, but not now. A quick Google search debunks that claim.

Asians are underrepresented. Indians, Native Americans, and Hispanics too.

Again, I don't mind his comments. Pandering and ticking boxes is commonplace in Hollywood now. So let him make whatever he wants.

And again, have a look at this - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_black_films_of_the_2010s

Seriously?  In 2018, there were 27 black films released.  Do you want to know how many total films were played in theaters in 2018? 873.  That's just 3% of all movies targeted towards blacks.

And how do you know that black people weren't in those 873 movies?

Keep in mind that Wikipedia only covers major releases.



RJTM1991 on 28 March 2019
KLXVER said:
RJTM1991 said:

In the mainstream? Nope. There's only, what? Maybe 10-15 big-budget major releases each year?

There's so many black TV shows too. Black music is everywhere.

So this "underrepresented" shit needs to go to bed.

What are you talking about? Now it has to be big budgeted movies? Many of the movies with black actors from the Wikipedia list are not big budget movies.

I never said that it "has to be" anything. There's usually only so many major releases in a year. You're acting like there's a new one every hour with this "probably thousands" yap.