The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by QE2
There is only one issue here. Nothing to do with "defending culture" or "the regressive left" or whatever.
It is simply "do real people need to be played by actors of the same race, or not?"

Personally, I would say no.
I love to see Dominic Cumberbatch as Malcolm X, or Tom Hardy as Mike Tyson in their respective biopics.
(Seriously, I think they'd both be brilliant)


I can't offer you either, but I can offer Bryn Terfel as Porgy and Lesley Garrett fresh from the cotton plantations of Doncaster as Bess

[video]https://youtu.be/S8XKFm4GbzE[/video]
Original post by QE2
There is only one issue here. Nothing to do with "defending culture" or "the regressive left" or whatever.
It is simply "do real people need to be played by actors of the same race, or not?"

Personally, I would say no.
I love to see Dominic Cumberbatch as Malcolm X, or Tom Hardy as Mike Tyson in their respective biopics.
(Seriously, I think they'd both be brilliant)


Its not as simple as that. The BBC is not just another media outlet, its pretty much part owned by us the "licence payers" and should do what we want.

As such, of course, since about 10% of licence payers are not anglo-saxon they should get at least 10% of the good parts on the Beeb, this is because it should fairly represent its paying public.

What I object to is the lack of actors from "sink estates" . These communities watch the most TV but have the least representation (or role models) on the Beeb.

Why can't Lady Macbeth be someone from "Jeremy Kyle" culture?

The Beeb should be there, in part to help, ESPECIALLY those stuck in "Jeremy Kyle" type underclass culture
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by FredOrJohn

What I object to is the lack of actors from "sink estates" . These communities watch the most TV but have the least representation (or role models) on the Beeb.

Why can't Lady Macbeth be someone from "Jeremy Kyle" culture?

The Beeb should be there, in part to help, ESPECIALLY those stuck in "Jeremy Kyle" type underclass culture


On the subject of Lady Macbeth; she was brought up on a council estate in Dreghorn and joined the SNP at 16. :colone:

However, the general point is true but it is a relatively new phenomenon. Most actors until the 1990s came from fairly humble backgrounds, even if their "working" accents suggested the contrary.
Original post by nulli tertius
On the subject of Lady Macbeth; she was brought up on a council estate in Dreghorn and joined the SNP at 16. :colone:

However, the general point is true but it is a relatively new phenomenon. Most actors until the 1990s came from fairly humble backgrounds, even if their "working" accents suggested the contrary.


Yeah before the 1990s hardly anyone had a degree.

Its no point talking pre-1990s, this is a new time where the distance between the Sink Estate and the rest is accelerating. The Beeb should be there to patch it up.

Typical example:
David Tennant

"
Tennant was born in Bathgate, West Lothian, to Dr. Alexander 'Sandy' McDonald (1937–2016;[4] later Moderator of the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland) and Helen McLeod (now deceased).[5] He grew up with his brother Blair and sister Karen[6] in Ralston, Renfrewshire, where his father was the local minister.[7][8][9] Tennant's maternal great-grandparents, William and Agnes Blair, were staunch Protestants from County Londonderry, and were among the signatories of the Ulster Covenant in 1912. William Blair was a member of the Grand Orange Lodge of Ireland. Tennant's maternal grandfather, footballer Archie McLeod, met William and Agnes's daughter Nellie while playing for Derry City. McLeod's parents were from the Isle of Mull and are descended from tenant farmers.[10][11]
"
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by FredOrJohn
Yeah before the 1990s hardly anyone had a degree.

Its no point talking pre-1990s, this is a new time where the distance between the Sink Estate and the rest is accelerating. The Beeb should be there to patch it up.


I don't think you can blame this on higher education. Most actors either went to drama school or got a job sweeping the stage in a provincial theatre.

The problem is a real one, but I think it is within the industry not universities. I suspect it has got more to do with all these Saturday theatre schools that Mummy and Daddy like and to which they ferry little Begonia.
(edited 8 years ago)
Racism & Colorism never die . They always exist. How boring!

1461618412684.jpg

1461618445726.jpg

Posted from TSR Mobile
All fits with the plan to align and propel us into the future EU federation of states by imposing the politics of social multi-culturalism and degrading the notion of national identities. It's all about this push by the pro-European Union elite to blur the borders of truth and fiction to confuse and silence the masses, in order to meet their objectives. The government control the BBC and take advantage of it's influence. Politics is not about truth. It's about influencing minds. White Britons have been programmed already not to speak about race (illustrated all too clearly in the case of the Rotherham Council's disgraceful handling of grooming gang victims and offenders. If the gang members are of a certain race or national identity they thought it better to turn a blind eye and let the victims keep on being abused by criminal sex gangs rather than take action.

Accuracy of race is a basic prerequisite for the BBC role surely. As brilliant an actress as Sophie Okenedo is, Margaret of Anjou was French caucasian Queen of England, with light coloured hair the portraits suggest. So how can you put a black woman in the role? It's a grand misrepresentation. Let's keep basics like this accurate. What next, a Chinese Henry VIII? But I'm sure the BBC, and pro-muliculturalists would welcome that!
(edited 8 years ago)
Original post by NickLCFC
The new series of the 'The Hollow Crown' on the BBC has cast a black woman (Sophie Okonedo) as Margaret of Anjou. This is an actual historical figure who was the wife of Henry VI and thus was Queen of England from 1445-1461 and from 1470-1471.

See the trailer for the new series:

[video="youtube;W0kO-pVsc3E"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0kO-pVsc3E[/video]


The only reason I post this is because there always seems to be an outrage when movies/tv shows are supposedly 'white washed'. For example, more recently, Scarlett Johansson was cast as an Asian character in a Hollywood adaptation of a Japanese anime franchise: 'Ghost in the Shell'. There was outrage because this was apparently 'yellowface' (see this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zB0lrSebyng).

That is just a fantasy character however. The difference with this is that it's a real historical figure being represented inaccurately. Just imagine the outrage if someone like Martin Luther King was cast as a white guy.


Hahaha it's not as if it was impossible o find a white actress. And it's clearly not like it's it's irrelevant. No one sensible would cast a white European as the last
Emperor of China or a Chinese person as Idi Amin. BBC agenda.


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Marco1
Accuracy of race is a basic prerequisite for the BBC role surely. As brilliant an actress as Sophie Okenedo is, Margaret of Anjou was French caucasian Queen of England, with light coloured hair the portraits suggest. So how can you put a black woman in the role? It's a grand misrepresentation. Let's keep basics like this accurate.


The crucial difference is that she isn't playing the historical Margaret of Anjou, but the Shakespearean character based (possibly loosely, as is often the case in Shakespeare) on the historical figure. Shakespeare plays are quite often not themed 'historically accurate' - for example, I saw a version of Macbeth a few years ago set in a kind of pagan society, with tropes and themes from various horror films. I've also heard of Julius Caesar done but with the main characters as African warlords rather than Roman politicians. All of this kind of thing is normal for such plays.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by anarchism101
The crucial difference is that she isn't playing the historical Margaret of Anjou, but the Shakespearean character based (possibly loosely, as is often the case in Shakespeare) on the historical figure. Shakespeare plays are quite often not themed 'historically accurate' - for example, I saw a version of Macbeth a few years ago set in a kind of pagan society, with tropes and themes from various horror films. I've also heard of Julius Caesar done but with the main characters as African warlords rather than Roman politicians. All of this kind of thing is normal for such plays.

Posted from TSR Mobile


Those examples were different takes on the same play, this isn't as far as I am aware. It's the same play, same everything, except they have replaced white characters with black people. That the white person in question was based on a real life European queen just makes it all the more insulting.

A fair contrast would be, having some white actor hired by an African arts company to play some ancient African leader, to a black African audience.

They would burn the theater to the ground.
(edited 8 years ago)
This thread is interesting and unusual because it shows racism in a non-abusive context. You have a number of posters who are racist in that race matters to them above above all else. Various posters have pointed out the extent to which a dramatic production differs from "reality" but for these posters the race of the actress matters more than anything else. They can be blind to virtually any other inauthenticity, probably even as far as gender, but they are incapable of being "colour-blind".
Original post by HanSoloLuck
Those examples were different takes on the same play, this isn't as far as I am aware. It's the same play, same everything, except they have replaced white characters with black people. That the white person in question was based on a real life European queen just makes it all the more insulting.

A fair contrast would be, having some white actor hired by an African arts company to play some ancient African leader, to a black African audience.

They would burn the theater to the ground.


But actors are challenging such as approach as being wrong, yet you defend it.

https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/2016/simon-callow-denying-black-roles-to-white-actors-is-nonsense/
Original post by nulli tertius
But actors are challenging such as approach as being wrong, yet you defend it.

https://www.thestage.co.uk/news/2016/simon-callow-denying-black-roles-to-white-actors-is-nonsense/


Make a point and have it stand on it's on merits, you don't need a link for that. Also make a coherent point, I shouldn't have to click on your link to figure out what you meant, so I'm not going to.

Care to try again?

Actors are challenging what approach, is 'approach' the word you really want to use here?

All actors or just a few, again what are they challenging?

When did I defend this 'approach', please quote me and consider this an exercise in how to present yourself to strangers.
Original post by HanSoloLuck

Care to try again?



No
Original post by QE2
He'd nail it.

Neither would 'nail it'

Malcolm X;

Protests and people would be as disruptive as possible. Going into the film(s) and shouting and screaming, throwing things at other movie goers........ movie theaters would not be able to show it. There would also be a 'movement' against it, which many liberal arts performers would back. Wouldn't be surprised to see a few theaters burned down. Most theaters would outright refuse to show it.

Tyson;

White Tyson is essentially just Rocky, except he's a woman raping criminal who goes to jail. The only way it would get copyright from Tyson is if he could cameo and perhaps veto certain things in the script, which would be everything that makes it different from Rocky. Rocky reboot, death sentence. nothing to nail here either.
Original post by Vikingninja
Why the **** do people actually care about the skin colour of someone in a role. They gave avatar as an example with them being lighter skinned than the originals, who gives a ****? "sorry guys have to turn you down for the role, too white", that would be racist and ****in ridiculous.

People didn't care when attack on titan live action was played by japanese people rather than Europeans. So why at this?

**** off ****.
Original post by anarchism101
The crucial difference is that she isn't playing the historical Margaret of Anjou, but the Shakespearean character based (possibly loosely, as is often the case in Shakespeare) on the historical figure. Shakespeare plays are quite often not themed 'historically accurate' - for example, I saw a version of Macbeth a few years ago set in a kind of pagan society, with tropes and themes from various horror films. I've also heard of Julius Caesar done but with the main characters as African warlords rather than Roman politicians. All of this kind of thing is normal for such plays.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Yeah we all know that Shakespeare productions have come in a wide variety of imaginative ways. Some work and some don't. Margaret of Anjou was a real figure unlike Hamlet, Ophelia or Juliet. There's an element of indisputable fact to be recognised. I wouldn't want to see Martin Luther King played by a white actor. Would you? Can you understand the point I make? I think it's a reasonable one.
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 217
Original post by nulli tertius
This thread is interesting and unusual because it shows racism in a non-abusive context. You have a number of posters who are racist in that race matters to them above above all else. Various posters have pointed out the extent to which a dramatic production differs from "reality" but for these posters the race of the actress matters more than anything else. They can be blind to virtually any other inauthenticity, probably even as far as gender, but they are incapable of being "colour-blind".


Yeah, a desire for historicity has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand, it's all wayyyyycism. I can truly see the Leftist intellectual master race in action here.
Original post by nulli tertius
This thread is interesting and unusual because it shows racism in a non-abusive context. You have a number of posters who are racist in that race matters to them above above all else. Various posters have pointed out the extent to which a dramatic production differs from "reality" but for these posters the race of the actress matters more than anything else. They can be blind to virtually any other inauthenticity, probably even as far as gender, but they are incapable of being "colour-blind".


Nollywood (the nickname of Nigeria's film industry) is worth billions. How many of its actors are white - actually more than you would think:

http://www.nairaland.com/539760/im-fed-up-white-nollywood/5

Bollywood not so good:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24867345

The BBCs historical fable Arthur has significant numbers of black and asian actors - one was the queen, but in America HBO Game of Thrones it appears to be an all white cast and there is no rational reason why this should be.... What is wrong with HBO??)

In summary Nollywood OK, Bollywood NOT OK, BBC OK, HBO Game of Thrones appears racist (and sexist and nearly every ism going)
(edited 7 years ago)
Reply 219
Black man wanna see dat white bootay.

Latest

Trending

Trending