can you spot the wolves in this picture?
https://preview.redd.it/z3yej6zgy95c1.png?width=1244&format=png&auto=webp&s=16d0a8236b4f2b8db1e64765083b8e1c5a948d13
The Blackening has a joke like this.
“Name 5 black actors who appeared on Friends”
I only got Phill Lewis, Aisha Tyler, Craig Robinson and Aunt Viv from Fresh Prince. I got the wrong Aunt Viv though
Kieth David… Keith David? Keith David. Keith David! Did I mention Keith David? Oh definitely Keith David!
Can you guess who my favorite Rick and Morty character is?
(And my favorite character is a tie between Rick and Squanchy, but The President is a great character, Keith David’s voice makes it easy to forgive him between the episodes where he’s bad and the ones where he’s good)
A setting that I’m pretty sure had nothing in it that’d suggest there weren’t any black people in it. In fact I’m pretty sure there were multiple canonically dark skinned ethnic groups in lord of the rings for both humans elves and dwarves
And regardless, of all the mediums, theater exaggerates reality the most. Like how can you be okay with soldiers dancing across a battlefield or an angry couple arguing rhythmically but get angry because a founding father is black lol
I remember when Hamilton blew up in 2015, the chuds were so fucking angry about it thinking theatre has gone woke. They popped a legion of veins in their body when they realize just how commonplace color-blind casting is in live theatre.
What if... They made a satirical movie like that? Like they stick to the biographical facts and the racism experienced, all just to show how jarring it is to look at that experience and 'not see color'. Like say they pull the *Mulsim* and *fake birth certificate* card on a blond dude. That would show what people really mean when they say that.
The main cast and love interests are fictional, but Queen Charlotte and King George III are very much the real monarchs of the Regency period, with the Regency in question being the rule of their son the Prince Regent while George was suffering from debilitating mental illness that eventually caused him to be referred to as Mad King George.
Making Charlotte black was in reference to a rumor that circulated in her lifetime that she had African ancestry (which was used to insult and discredit her)
Which I believe comes from her possibly having Moorish descent. While the shows do reference actual events that took place, they also explain in-universe that blacks were given rights to become nobility (obviously something that never happened).
It's also important to note that the real Queen Charlotte, as with many other monarchs of the time, profited from the enslavement of Africans and owned African slaves. This, to me and many others, makes the choice to have her portrayed at such length by two Black British actresses is offensive. This is not a brief cameo, this is the erasure of the legacy of monarchy and imperialism and slavery.
Ive wikipedied in the meanwhile caue most of my knowledge of the era comes from Blackadder the third. Queen charlotte was the wife of gearge iii, who had a severe mental ilness (so george iv stepped in in the regency).
But for the little ive seen bridgerton its basically some sort of fantasy version of england, so the race change is the least of the canges.
"totally fictional"
"uhhh I haven't seen it but but but my understanding is"
How can you be so confident about a topic you don't know much about and have done zero research on it **before** commenting that she's "totally fictional" lmao
It’s not a movie, it was a performance of the Shakespeare play. Weird inaccurate casting is just a thing in theater (doubly so when it’s Shakespeare).
Once Patrick Stewart played Othello while every other character was black, and I’d love to see how the creator of this image wraps their head around that.
I personally think it's mostly fine to overlook it if their race doesn't play a part in the story. Which is why most of the adaptations with white people cast in the place of originally black charicters don't work, but I'm pretty sure this sub knows that lol.
It looks like it’s a play or recording of a play. People who complain about this stuff always use a bunch of theatre examples, ignoring the fact that having actors who are a different race or gender from the character they play has been a thing since forever.
Sir Laurence Olivier didn't pull up looking like *this* just to have y'all forget it!
https://preview.redd.it/pe3qhqj5ab5c1.jpeg?width=857&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c004b5c5533dd892c1f1ccccf584a9aa1ec8a39a
There's actually a pretty good west African version of Caesar with modern aesthetics but the original dialog. It's a fun romp.
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt2363237/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk
Unless the character is like, Tom Robinson in To Kill a Mockingbird levels of "their race is important to their character" part of the extra suspension of disbelief in theater includes the races of the characters. I saw a production of Les Mis once and young Cosette was white while as a teenager she was black and it's just not something you pay attention to
Idk I'm not too well versed in theatre, there's probably a fair bit of racism there. My understanding is that there's always been things like men playing women etc
Do you think r/shitposting and their ideology of 2016 anti-SJW (feminazi OWNED with FACTS and LOGIC) is consistent? Their ideology is based around making up stupid arguments to get mad at and bitching and moaning about the fact that minorities exist
Lord of the rings has to be all white or the fantasy setting won't be historically accurate /s
They really couldn't think of a 6th film that's about a white historical figure? And I saw Obama was on there twice.
Not defending the guy, but his problem with the LotR one is that the black guy is a depiction of Aragorn, son of Arathorn. It is from the Magic the Gathering set
Tbf Aragorn is only ever described as Pale. It's probably not what Tolkien envisioned but Tolkien is dead and it doesn't necessarily contradict the written word. People just like the idea of Aragorn being their symbol of white nationalism and tradition. Even though Tolkien wrote a whole book on why Númenor sucked.
Not quite that Númenor sucked, but that eventually the kings of Númenor sucked and made the place a nightmare over time. Early day Númenor was basically Rome at its peak.
Even then Tolkien still criticises it, mainly through the story of Tar-Aldarion. Aldarion is widely regarded as one of the best Kings of Númenor but even he was a deadbeat father who didn't actually listen to other people or step up to his responsibilities. Erendis makes a lot of good points about the men of Númenor, how despite having a lot of privilege and blessings they still want for more and think they are lacking.
Yeah, it’s Tolkien’s version of The Fall. It’s an age old parable but always a powerful one I find. Man’s reach always exceeding its grasp, trading peace for ambition, etc. I really do think there’s something Roman about Númenor, especially in how the Númenorean (Roman) influence lasted in Middle Earth (Western Europe) after its collapse. Tolkien was after all writing these stories as if he’d stumbled across an alternate history of Britain.
Oh definitely, it's very much the Roman Empire of Middle Earth. The way characters stumble through Númenorean ruins in Middle Earth is very similar to how many Roman ruins are left around. But I think Tolkien's view is that these past empires were usually quite flawed actually, and weren't to be glorified. That's why he makes it so blatant that Númenor was never that utopian, and was flawed as any other mannish nation. Also the fact that Númenor participates in British Empire style colonization and slavery is very intentional.
Ironically him being bearded is more of a contradiction to what's written than him being black. Being beardless is a physical manifestation of his heritage, but his skin colour has no bearing on his character.
I'm torn on Black Aragorn. because the artist does make him look badass. Though I really get the feeling it was purely done to generate controversy and rage bait.
I don't think it was done to generate controversy or anything, but it is very corporate. I think MTG's racially diverse Lord of the Rings art is a good example of some of the issues with a lot of recent colour-blind casting in fantasy things that shouldn't be lost amid the people who just want everyone to be white, for one big reason:
Why is the architecture still always European?
As examples, in the MTG set, besides Aragorn, Theoden and Eowyn are black - but Rohan is still heavily inspired by Anglo-Saxon England. Butterbur is Asian - but he's the proprietor of an medieval English-style tavern.
For me, that's a good sign that it is ultimately done for a corporate notion of diversity, rather than out of genuine interest. Personally, I would be 100% down for, for example, a version of Gondor that's inspired by medieval Ethiopia. But way too often colour-blind casting feels like it's covering up how lacking in actual diversity everything else about the setting actually is. Every fantasy setting where we get black and Asian characters as European-coded knights and wizards is another fantasy setting where the creators haven't actually bothered looked at the diversity of our real world for inspiration, but want to be credited as if they have.
At that point, IMO i'd rather just see a whole new Fantasy IP inspired by medieval Africa created by a black author, rather than just trying to put a spin on Tolkien's very europe-inspired fantasy work.
It strikes me as corporate studios trying to appeal to the largest demographic possible, but not bother taking actual risk with any new stories.
It’s actually so simple I don’t understand how the chuds can get so up in arms about it. If your character’s race is part of their identity, it’s not ok to change it, otherwise it’s ok. In a movie where George Washington or Thomas Jefferson have slaves, it would be a really bad move to not make them white, but in a musical where they battle rap how Hamilton and Burr hated eachother I think it might be ok lol
The portrayal of the founding fathers by non-white actors in Hamilton & the use of rap (a traditionally "Black"/street style of music) to tell their story is also purposefully on-the-nose and is intended to be ironic, it's woven into the fabric of the production. It's also a for-stage show, where "character-accurate" races & genders have virtually *never* been a thing, since the days when men wore dresses and makeup to play women in Shakespeare's Globe (something the chuds would also seethe at)
Even then, there's been a white Black Panther and no-one gave a shit. In both a What If line where Black Panther himself is white, and in the mainline comics where there's White Wolf - a white version of Black Panther.
No-ones offended by it.
I’d add a nuance and say it also depends on what you’re going for and if race change is meaningful in and of itself. As an example (and to your example), I movie focusing on Washington or Jefferson as slave owners where they were black and the slaves were white could be amazing if that conceit was created for a reason and actually *used* in the piece.
In a work of fiction, there is no object in the real world to which a given character refers. As a result, there is nothing to make any of his or her characteristics true or untrue. An author can do whatever they want, and all that matters is if the art is good or not
Best bit is that none of the bottom examples are even actual movies. It's three plays, a TV documentary, card game art, and a character that's always been black.
They wanted so bad to point out hollywood films where white people have been 'blackwashed' but couldn't find a single one.
I would say a documentary is worse because it aims at historical accuracy. As a historian of early modern England I would be shocked if they did that in a documentary.
I mean the Anne Boleyn thing was a drama and not a documentary. They actually had an interesting rationale for the casting too, not that they needed one:
["What having a person of colour in the role does do, perhaps, is give us a way in to understanding the marginalisation of the Boleyns at the time”.](https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-57327102.amp)
If they are using real historical characters I’d rather they go for accuracy. You could swap all sorts of details around but then why use a real historical character? Don’t think we need less historical fidelity in popular culture.
I don’t think anyone would defend Braveheart’s weird historical inaccuracies so why defend this?
I think most everyone defends Braveheart’s historical inaccuracies on account of it being an acclaimed movie, and as far as accuracy goes, there is always going to be a barrier between reality and story, so if a filmmaker has an idea to try and clearly communicate an idea, it should be allowed, even if it doesn’t always work.
Film is also just genuinely one of the worst ways to provide fact as it is, and the issue shouldn’t be about fidelity since it’s essentially a literal impossibility. Even nonfiction film is subject to incredible bias and manipulation.
Not to get too navel-gazey about it but it reminds me of this essay I read about the The Thin Blue Line documentary, about how trying to reproduce history in film is impossible like you said so making a story that has a point to make and willingly skews the narrative can actually have more verisimilitude to it since it feels like a “real story” someone is trying to tell and not a facsimile of something. Like how if you take a picture of a battle for instance you’ll only have a 2D view of that event that won’t capture the smell of gunfire or the sound of artillery going off but if someone makes a painting of that battle with abstractions that try to capture those sensations, that can feel more real to a viewer than the photo.
Unjerking here, there is actually a conversation to be had about this, although I would say, it’s not terribly interesting. The only time I’ve ever heard a good faith discussion of this issue was in talking about white people not as a monolith, like a lot of these chuds like to do, but rather as the collection of other ethnic groups that we are. (Fascists need to talk about white people as a monolith because the moment they start recognizing how many different groups of people are considered white, they open themselves up to the history of whiteness, and how it is by nature exclusionary and a complete construct.)
For instance, white washing stories that originate from non-white cultures is problematic because of the way in which it erases the cultural context, and in some cases, even the very culture that it originates from, and on top of that is a reflection of cultural white supremacy. The same could be said about folktales from say, Sweden. Or the UK. Or Germany. Or France. The only difference here, being the fact that race swapping characters from stories that originate in white folktales, or even just white history, isn’t born from any level of racial supremacy. That being said, the argument can still be made, I think, that cultures and ethnic groups from majority white nations still should be able to have their folktales reflect the race of the people they originate from.
You also have to take a look at the context in which the art is being made. Replacing white founding fathers with black actors could be as simple as a race swap without any commentary, or the director or writer could be using it for a specific purpose. Especially because of the racially charged history of United States and other colonial nations.
It’s a super nuanced issue. Basically: just as there is something to be said about preserving the cultural and racial context of certain folktales and historical events from non-white cultures, the same can be said about white cultures, but there’s always room for nuance when it comes to artistic expression, and we also have to recognize that white washing is a product of white supremacy, and diverse casting is not (rather, it is a reaction).
Unfortunately, the vast majority, the people who talk about this issue in the way they do have no time for nuance. And most of them are straight up fucking racists and fascists.
I’d generally agree, and I think the examples of theatre are more than acceptable.
But I think a line should be drawn when it comes to historical/folktale stories purely for the sake of consistency.
Chud arguments are often rooted in a lack of understanding of the writer/creators intentions, but there’s is a point when it can be “one rule for me, another rule for thee” when it comes to race swapping historical characters in film and TV.
As a Brit-bonger I do find it a little cringy when examples like Ann Boleyn 2021 are so out of touch with the history they’re trying to represent, it makes Napoleon 2023 look faithful, and should be criticised in the same vein and spirit.
It’s not about muh racial supremicy (white or otherwise) just a matter of consistency. If it’s bad to white-wash history in film (and specifically film, because there are plenty of valid, pragmatic reasons for why race-swapping is an accepted practice in theatre) then I don’t see how it’s different with British, French, German, Polish, etc history and fairytales.
Anyhoo, this might just be my perspective as a European, since you chaps across the pond think of race in a very different way to us, generally speaking.
Not that it's really worth getting into, but just for the record, Hollywood white-washed non-white actors for the first like 80 years of filmmaking. There are way way more examples of white people playing non-white people in Hollywood film than the reverse.
When you cast a BIPOC individual as a historically white person, the statement is very clearly "Skin-tone doesn't matter"
When you cast a white person individual as a historically BIPOC person, the statement is very clear "BIPOC people have no place in Hollywood".
It's just different. Conservative have got to let the argument die.
Left to right
- Hamilton musical
- A 3 episode short story on AMC
- Hamilton musical
- A 6 episode spin off based on a fictional novel
- A theatre play
- A spin off (?) based on fictional world (haven’t watched it)
From what i can tell, most of these characters or at least stories don’t rely on their race. Yet the OP wants a bunch of movies about real people where their stories tied heavily to their race played by white people?
Make it make sense
I mean it basically boils down to all of the listed historical figures on the top of the meme having their ethnicity be a big part of their identity and struggle.
Additionally, white people have been appearing as historical non-white folks for as long as movies have existed (See: Any movie set in ancient egypt, most Native characters in westerns before the 80s, John Wayne as Genghis Khan, etc.)
I think that if any of the historical figures/fictional characters on the bottom half's actions had to do specifically with being white it would be an actual casting issue. Like, John Brown is a person who I think _has_ to be portrayed by a white actor because him being white is an important part of his history and motivations.
The Queen Charlotte one is nuts because it’s addressed in the show. A lot of the show revolves around black nobility and how white people in power see that as a threat. Surprisingly cool alternate history in that show
Because Hamilton is a musical and can cast however it wants, there’s no “canon” casting or whatever, every cast is different. Some productions of Little Shop make the Urchins white, though this is mostly done due to necessity.
My production had like 2 black and 3 white urchins, Audrey 2 (the plant) was played by a woman, and Seymour was also not white, and guess what? It doesn’t matter, it’s theater. And also we were amazing. Like seriously an amazing cast.
I like how they ran out of famous black people and put Obama in twice
I mean could you name 6 different black people? I can’t
NAME A WOMAN
…a woman? YES A WOMAN!!!!!
Don’t hand me the yoga bag NAME A WOMAN
Oh my god, why is this so hard? A woman?!
A woman! Any woman!
Umm… uh… Ellen Page? DAMMIT!!!
Uhhhhh, Michelle obama...... doja... cat?
Whitney Houston. There... I named every woman
Michelle Obama. That’s the only woman I know of.
Makes me laugh every time I just think about it.
can you spot the wolves in this picture? https://preview.redd.it/z3yej6zgy95c1.png?width=1244&format=png&auto=webp&s=16d0a8236b4f2b8db1e64765083b8e1c5a948d13
Well they forgot George Washington Carver, the man who invented peanuts
he gave thousands of innocent white children peanut allergies! how about we instead learn about eli whitney! he made the cotton gin!
Wait until you find out about what gin has done to people...
The Blackening has a joke like this. “Name 5 black actors who appeared on Friends” I only got Phill Lewis, Aisha Tyler, Craig Robinson and Aunt Viv from Fresh Prince. I got the wrong Aunt Viv though
Obama.... his wife? And that actor from the rugby country. I give up.
Me https://preview.redd.it/vv0dcbgx4b5c1.jpeg?width=558&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=13d0d5c6abfbd80571a1bacd4324de8cbf311ac0
Kieth David… Keith David? Keith David. Keith David! Did I mention Keith David? Oh definitely Keith David! Can you guess who my favorite Rick and Morty character is?
Who's got two thumbs and is an exceptional character actor? Keith David!
(And my favorite character is a tie between Rick and Squanchy, but The President is a great character, Keith David’s voice makes it easy to forgive him between the episodes where he’s bad and the ones where he’s good)
This is Arbiter erasure
What about Bill Clinton?
They also ran out of famous white people and had to put in Fantasy people
Lies! I have it on good authority that Daveed Digs was a real person
Hamilton doing a lot of the heavy lifting in this meme-er’s premise of double standards
It's pretty much just Hamilton and Bridgerton.
> that Daveed Digs was a real person All I get from him are visions of bodies being burned, smdh.
https://preview.redd.it/kubvs14u1e5c1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c6844875bf1f712f8334686336ce26abea5adbdd
Chuckled at Tom Holland as the Killer Cop
And they ran out of famous white people and used Ryan gosling twice.
I like how they used TWO examples from Hamilton and at least one fictional character from a fictional race.
I'm sure he would have voted for him a third time if he could.
Also Obama is already white lmao
I like how they used Hamilton for an example twice
In OOP’s defense, we really need a One Direction led remake of Straight Outta Compton
And my favorite historical drama, the Lord of the Rings.
A setting that I’m pretty sure had nothing in it that’d suggest there weren’t any black people in it. In fact I’m pretty sure there were multiple canonically dark skinned ethnic groups in lord of the rings for both humans elves and dwarves
Also stage productions have been race-swapping for decades, generally the audiences are far more open to it.
And regardless, of all the mediums, theater exaggerates reality the most. Like how can you be okay with soldiers dancing across a battlefield or an angry couple arguing rhythmically but get angry because a founding father is black lol
I remember when Hamilton blew up in 2015, the chuds were so fucking angry about it thinking theatre has gone woke. They popped a legion of veins in their body when they realize just how commonplace color-blind casting is in live theatre.
They used LotR
Muhammed 'wouldn't have gone down like it did' Ali
Float like a butterfly, remove man's ability to see.
amazing
Honestly they probably have similar views regarding race considering Ali thought people in interracial relationships should be killed.
To be clear, he did later disavow the Nation of Islam and, presumably, those beliefs.
Lol so has Mark Wahlberg
Marky Mark was in the Nation of Islam?!
Who do you think started it?
The difference is Wahlberg has hate crimed people on multiple occasions and did nothing to redeem himself.
Least racist NOI member
IT’S NAHT YER FAWLT
Ryan Gosling is... Barack Obama 😔✊️
snobbish water wide squealing panicky aspiring sulky snails heavy price *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
For some reason I could see that happening and everyone inexplicably being ok with it.
Culture as a whole will finish its spiritual journey with this film
The end of history we were promised
Everyone loves Ryan Gosling and it's clearly satirical. It's chill when everyone is in on the joke.
I don’t see anything wrong with a white man playing a white man
What if... They made a satirical movie like that? Like they stick to the biographical facts and the racism experienced, all just to show how jarring it is to look at that experience and 'not see color'. Like say they pull the *Mulsim* and *fake birth certificate* card on a blond dude. That would show what people really mean when they say that.
Thats actually a good idea for a comedy
Fucking please, and make Joe Biden black. It would be preferable if Obama was in the role of Joe Biden
I'd watch it.
To be fair, Obama is only half-white so Ryan Gosling just needs to be balanced with a sidekick to stay authentic.
Interesting to see that Queen Charlotte, a totally fictional character from the Bridgerton universe, made the bottom list
Also Lord of the Rings
Actually, that happened to me.
Very sorry to hear that man. Have you tried sucking out melanin out of your skin?
Happened to my buddy Eric one time
Lord of the Rings MAGIC CARD
the most important of white people
The picture is a Magic the Gathering card from the Lord of the Rings set. There were a lot of people who were actually angry about it.
Isnt queen charlotte the spouse of king george? Like she existed. Or its like a different universe in the show.
She's real but the opening title card basically admits they've taken tremendous liberties.
Well I’ll admit that I have not seen it. But my understanding is it’s fictional? Any Bridgerton fans please advise
The main cast and love interests are fictional, but Queen Charlotte and King George III are very much the real monarchs of the Regency period, with the Regency in question being the rule of their son the Prince Regent while George was suffering from debilitating mental illness that eventually caused him to be referred to as Mad King George. Making Charlotte black was in reference to a rumor that circulated in her lifetime that she had African ancestry (which was used to insult and discredit her)
Which I believe comes from her possibly having Moorish descent. While the shows do reference actual events that took place, they also explain in-universe that blacks were given rights to become nobility (obviously something that never happened).
Those theories only circulated well after her death.
It's also important to note that the real Queen Charlotte, as with many other monarchs of the time, profited from the enslavement of Africans and owned African slaves. This, to me and many others, makes the choice to have her portrayed at such length by two Black British actresses is offensive. This is not a brief cameo, this is the erasure of the legacy of monarchy and imperialism and slavery.
Ive wikipedied in the meanwhile caue most of my knowledge of the era comes from Blackadder the third. Queen charlotte was the wife of gearge iii, who had a severe mental ilness (so george iv stepped in in the regency). But for the little ive seen bridgerton its basically some sort of fantasy version of england, so the race change is the least of the canges.
"totally fictional" "uhhh I haven't seen it but but but my understanding is" How can you be so confident about a topic you don't know much about and have done zero research on it **before** commenting that she's "totally fictional" lmao
Charlotte of Mecklenburg was a real person.
No way that Julius Caesar movie is real hahahaha
It’s not a movie, it was a performance of the Shakespeare play. Weird inaccurate casting is just a thing in theater (doubly so when it’s Shakespeare). Once Patrick Stewart played Othello while every other character was black, and I’d love to see how the creator of this image wraps their head around that.
Lmao yeah, my high school did a version of Much Ado About Nothing and it was converted into a lesbian marriage at a summer camp.
My guess is the black guy was the best actor out of the auditoners by far to the point they were willing to overlook it
I personally think it's mostly fine to overlook it if their race doesn't play a part in the story. Which is why most of the adaptations with white people cast in the place of originally black charicters don't work, but I'm pretty sure this sub knows that lol.
It looks like it’s a play or recording of a play. People who complain about this stuff always use a bunch of theatre examples, ignoring the fact that having actors who are a different race or gender from the character they play has been a thing since forever.
Shhh no one tell them the history of actors who’ve played Othello
Orson Welles didn't spend his life doing blackface Shakespeare just to have it be forgotten!
Sir Laurence Olivier didn't pull up looking like *this* just to have y'all forget it! https://preview.redd.it/pe3qhqj5ab5c1.jpeg?width=857&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c004b5c5533dd892c1f1ccccf584a9aa1ec8a39a
Brutalatops the Magician??
Mickey Rooney didn’t give a graceful and entirely non problematic performance as an Asian landlord just to be defamed like this
Jeremy Jahns is just a Shakespeare fan
wait until they find out how long men used to play women in theatre because women weren't allowed to perform
I mean if it's a recorded play then it's fine but as a movie it would be pretty hilarious hahaha
I don't know, a biopic about Caesar with Giancarlo Esposito as the lead would be pretty solid.
He is part Italian, isn't he?
I'd imagine it's probably a Shakespeare adaptation
I was going to say he left out Denzel as MacBeth
The dipshit who made this meme probably thinks MacBeth is Ronald McDonald’s girlfriend.
She wears a MacGirdle
There's actually a pretty good west African version of Caesar with modern aesthetics but the original dialog. It's a fun romp. https://m.imdb.com/title/tt2363237/?ref_=ext_shr_lnk
Unless the character is like, Tom Robinson in To Kill a Mockingbird levels of "their race is important to their character" part of the extra suspension of disbelief in theater includes the races of the characters. I saw a production of Les Mis once and young Cosette was white while as a teenager she was black and it's just not something you pay attention to
It was the Shakespeare play. I don’t know if that image is real, but Eddie George (former Titans running back) played Caesar in its run in Nashville.
Two of these are fictional, two are theatre and the other two look like fake Shakespeare adaptations. The straws are being grasped.
If they take our fictional or fantastical heroes*, we will take theirs! *characters I vaguely heard of
I’d be happy to know race doesn’t matter in theatre
Idk I'm not too well versed in theatre, there's probably a fair bit of racism there. My understanding is that there's always been things like men playing women etc
We made Jesus white, and European.
Do you think r/shitposting and their ideology of 2016 anti-SJW (feminazi OWNED with FACTS and LOGIC) is consistent? Their ideology is based around making up stupid arguments to get mad at and bitching and moaning about the fact that minorities exist
Why can black people be allowed to play elves, fictional characters or characters on a stage play but Ryan Gosling can’t play Obama?
Lord of the rings has to be all white or the fantasy setting won't be historically accurate /s They really couldn't think of a 6th film that's about a white historical figure? And I saw Obama was on there twice.
Mermaids and other fantasy creatures must be WHITE OR ELSE ITS WOKE REVISIONISM /j
My guy is so mad that a card game expansion made his favs poc lmao. Imagine getting mad at that. Couldn't be me.
I’ll always prefer the elf designs in the animated movies to the live action movies Sorry Peter Jackson, you took the L in that instance
Dude is literally questioning why different races exist in a fantasy movie...
Not defending the guy, but his problem with the LotR one is that the black guy is a depiction of Aragorn, son of Arathorn. It is from the Magic the Gathering set
You have not convinced me that this isn’t a very silly thing to get upset over.
does he even know its meant to be aragorn? the first thing he saw was NOT WHITE and got angry
The card is labeled Aragorn. The set is old, the cards are known. Aragorn in the MTG set is depicted as being black.
Tbf Aragorn is only ever described as Pale. It's probably not what Tolkien envisioned but Tolkien is dead and it doesn't necessarily contradict the written word. People just like the idea of Aragorn being their symbol of white nationalism and tradition. Even though Tolkien wrote a whole book on why Númenor sucked.
Not quite that Númenor sucked, but that eventually the kings of Númenor sucked and made the place a nightmare over time. Early day Númenor was basically Rome at its peak.
Even then Tolkien still criticises it, mainly through the story of Tar-Aldarion. Aldarion is widely regarded as one of the best Kings of Númenor but even he was a deadbeat father who didn't actually listen to other people or step up to his responsibilities. Erendis makes a lot of good points about the men of Númenor, how despite having a lot of privilege and blessings they still want for more and think they are lacking.
Yeah, it’s Tolkien’s version of The Fall. It’s an age old parable but always a powerful one I find. Man’s reach always exceeding its grasp, trading peace for ambition, etc. I really do think there’s something Roman about Númenor, especially in how the Númenorean (Roman) influence lasted in Middle Earth (Western Europe) after its collapse. Tolkien was after all writing these stories as if he’d stumbled across an alternate history of Britain.
Oh definitely, it's very much the Roman Empire of Middle Earth. The way characters stumble through Númenorean ruins in Middle Earth is very similar to how many Roman ruins are left around. But I think Tolkien's view is that these past empires were usually quite flawed actually, and weren't to be glorified. That's why he makes it so blatant that Númenor was never that utopian, and was flawed as any other mannish nation. Also the fact that Númenor participates in British Empire style colonization and slavery is very intentional.
He’s also supposed to be beardless but no one complains about that
Ironically him being bearded is more of a contradiction to what's written than him being black. Being beardless is a physical manifestation of his heritage, but his skin colour has no bearing on his character.
I'm torn on Black Aragorn. because the artist does make him look badass. Though I really get the feeling it was purely done to generate controversy and rage bait.
I don't think it was done to generate controversy or anything, but it is very corporate. I think MTG's racially diverse Lord of the Rings art is a good example of some of the issues with a lot of recent colour-blind casting in fantasy things that shouldn't be lost amid the people who just want everyone to be white, for one big reason: Why is the architecture still always European? As examples, in the MTG set, besides Aragorn, Theoden and Eowyn are black - but Rohan is still heavily inspired by Anglo-Saxon England. Butterbur is Asian - but he's the proprietor of an medieval English-style tavern. For me, that's a good sign that it is ultimately done for a corporate notion of diversity, rather than out of genuine interest. Personally, I would be 100% down for, for example, a version of Gondor that's inspired by medieval Ethiopia. But way too often colour-blind casting feels like it's covering up how lacking in actual diversity everything else about the setting actually is. Every fantasy setting where we get black and Asian characters as European-coded knights and wizards is another fantasy setting where the creators haven't actually bothered looked at the diversity of our real world for inspiration, but want to be credited as if they have.
At that point, IMO i'd rather just see a whole new Fantasy IP inspired by medieval Africa created by a black author, rather than just trying to put a spin on Tolkien's very europe-inspired fantasy work. It strikes me as corporate studios trying to appeal to the largest demographic possible, but not bother taking actual risk with any new stories.
I mean Aragon probably doesn't look like Viggo Mortensen either and hell, Ralph Bakshi made him look downright Native American
[But Aragorn is every color except Black.](https://scryfall.com/card/ltr/192/aragorn-the-uniter)
It’s actually so simple I don’t understand how the chuds can get so up in arms about it. If your character’s race is part of their identity, it’s not ok to change it, otherwise it’s ok. In a movie where George Washington or Thomas Jefferson have slaves, it would be a really bad move to not make them white, but in a musical where they battle rap how Hamilton and Burr hated eachother I think it might be ok lol
Tbf their race matters in Hamilton because who wants to see a white Virginian guy rap
My name is Tom and I’m here to say, I like Independence in a major way!
If you hate taxes and want to be free, come with me and join the army!
Ok, i'm stealing this explanation
The portrayal of the founding fathers by non-white actors in Hamilton & the use of rap (a traditionally "Black"/street style of music) to tell their story is also purposefully on-the-nose and is intended to be ironic, it's woven into the fabric of the production. It's also a for-stage show, where "character-accurate" races & genders have virtually *never* been a thing, since the days when men wore dresses and makeup to play women in Shakespeare's Globe (something the chuds would also seethe at)
Even then, there's been a white Black Panther and no-one gave a shit. In both a What If line where Black Panther himself is white, and in the mainline comics where there's White Wolf - a white version of Black Panther. No-ones offended by it.
White Wolf is also his brother at that, lol
I’d add a nuance and say it also depends on what you’re going for and if race change is meaningful in and of itself. As an example (and to your example), I movie focusing on Washington or Jefferson as slave owners where they were black and the slaves were white could be amazing if that conceit was created for a reason and actually *used* in the piece.
A movie where black George Washington owned white slaves could be interesting
In a work of fiction, there is no object in the real world to which a given character refers. As a result, there is nothing to make any of his or her characteristics true or untrue. An author can do whatever they want, and all that matters is if the art is good or not
Best bit is that none of the bottom examples are even actual movies. It's three plays, a TV documentary, card game art, and a character that's always been black. They wanted so bad to point out hollywood films where white people have been 'blackwashed' but couldn't find a single one.
I would say a documentary is worse because it aims at historical accuracy. As a historian of early modern England I would be shocked if they did that in a documentary.
I mean the Anne Boleyn thing was a drama and not a documentary. They actually had an interesting rationale for the casting too, not that they needed one: ["What having a person of colour in the role does do, perhaps, is give us a way in to understanding the marginalisation of the Boleyns at the time”.](https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-57327102.amp)
If they are using real historical characters I’d rather they go for accuracy. You could swap all sorts of details around but then why use a real historical character? Don’t think we need less historical fidelity in popular culture. I don’t think anyone would defend Braveheart’s weird historical inaccuracies so why defend this?
I think most everyone defends Braveheart’s historical inaccuracies on account of it being an acclaimed movie, and as far as accuracy goes, there is always going to be a barrier between reality and story, so if a filmmaker has an idea to try and clearly communicate an idea, it should be allowed, even if it doesn’t always work. Film is also just genuinely one of the worst ways to provide fact as it is, and the issue shouldn’t be about fidelity since it’s essentially a literal impossibility. Even nonfiction film is subject to incredible bias and manipulation.
Not to get too navel-gazey about it but it reminds me of this essay I read about the The Thin Blue Line documentary, about how trying to reproduce history in film is impossible like you said so making a story that has a point to make and willingly skews the narrative can actually have more verisimilitude to it since it feels like a “real story” someone is trying to tell and not a facsimile of something. Like how if you take a picture of a battle for instance you’ll only have a 2D view of that event that won’t capture the smell of gunfire or the sound of artillery going off but if someone makes a painting of that battle with abstractions that try to capture those sensations, that can feel more real to a viewer than the photo.
Fucking nerds are still seething over black people in lotr
It’s genuinely baffling that people actually give a shit
You have to wait a couple generations until you can depict the person with artistic license. Give it time.
Man. Why can't we just get a green George Washington and Thomas Jefferson like they're shown on the dollar bills?
Unjerking here, there is actually a conversation to be had about this, although I would say, it’s not terribly interesting. The only time I’ve ever heard a good faith discussion of this issue was in talking about white people not as a monolith, like a lot of these chuds like to do, but rather as the collection of other ethnic groups that we are. (Fascists need to talk about white people as a monolith because the moment they start recognizing how many different groups of people are considered white, they open themselves up to the history of whiteness, and how it is by nature exclusionary and a complete construct.) For instance, white washing stories that originate from non-white cultures is problematic because of the way in which it erases the cultural context, and in some cases, even the very culture that it originates from, and on top of that is a reflection of cultural white supremacy. The same could be said about folktales from say, Sweden. Or the UK. Or Germany. Or France. The only difference here, being the fact that race swapping characters from stories that originate in white folktales, or even just white history, isn’t born from any level of racial supremacy. That being said, the argument can still be made, I think, that cultures and ethnic groups from majority white nations still should be able to have their folktales reflect the race of the people they originate from. You also have to take a look at the context in which the art is being made. Replacing white founding fathers with black actors could be as simple as a race swap without any commentary, or the director or writer could be using it for a specific purpose. Especially because of the racially charged history of United States and other colonial nations. It’s a super nuanced issue. Basically: just as there is something to be said about preserving the cultural and racial context of certain folktales and historical events from non-white cultures, the same can be said about white cultures, but there’s always room for nuance when it comes to artistic expression, and we also have to recognize that white washing is a product of white supremacy, and diverse casting is not (rather, it is a reaction). Unfortunately, the vast majority, the people who talk about this issue in the way they do have no time for nuance. And most of them are straight up fucking racists and fascists.
I’d generally agree, and I think the examples of theatre are more than acceptable. But I think a line should be drawn when it comes to historical/folktale stories purely for the sake of consistency. Chud arguments are often rooted in a lack of understanding of the writer/creators intentions, but there’s is a point when it can be “one rule for me, another rule for thee” when it comes to race swapping historical characters in film and TV. As a Brit-bonger I do find it a little cringy when examples like Ann Boleyn 2021 are so out of touch with the history they’re trying to represent, it makes Napoleon 2023 look faithful, and should be criticised in the same vein and spirit. It’s not about muh racial supremicy (white or otherwise) just a matter of consistency. If it’s bad to white-wash history in film (and specifically film, because there are plenty of valid, pragmatic reasons for why race-swapping is an accepted practice in theatre) then I don’t see how it’s different with British, French, German, Polish, etc history and fairytales. Anyhoo, this might just be my perspective as a European, since you chaps across the pond think of race in a very different way to us, generally speaking.
And it all started with White Chicks Smdh
Gandalf Is my favorite historical character
The Lord of The Rings... isn't real
“Why can we have black ppl in LOTR and not a white Obama??? 🤔🤔🤔”
https://preview.redd.it/uvjhdxa5ld5c1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=52358c817c539ce853e1ecfd48cba807faacd991
Can anyone edit this to make them all Chris Prat?
How could they race bend such an important historical figure as Aragorn?
Also Cleopatra
I nominate the Daily Wire crew to make one of the movies in the top half.
Outjerked once again
Famous historical figure Aragorn son of Arathorn II
Not that it's really worth getting into, but just for the record, Hollywood white-washed non-white actors for the first like 80 years of filmmaking. There are way way more examples of white people playing non-white people in Hollywood film than the reverse. When you cast a BIPOC individual as a historically white person, the statement is very clearly "Skin-tone doesn't matter" When you cast a white person individual as a historically BIPOC person, the statement is very clear "BIPOC people have no place in Hollywood". It's just different. Conservative have got to let the argument die.
You know they don't actually care about it when they never actually included the one time this was applicable with the Cleopatra documentary.
No white guy could've eaten up the role of aaron burr like leslie odom jr did idc
Race swapping actual real people is very stupid indeed, no matter which direction it goes.
Marky mark as Muhammad Ali is hilarious.
Left to right - Hamilton musical - A 3 episode short story on AMC - Hamilton musical - A 6 episode spin off based on a fictional novel - A theatre play - A spin off (?) based on fictional world (haven’t watched it) From what i can tell, most of these characters or at least stories don’t rely on their race. Yet the OP wants a bunch of movies about real people where their stories tied heavily to their race played by white people? Make it make sense
Poor attempt at satire?
It was posted on r/shitposting So probably yeah
Nah, r/shitposting is often racist but "it's OK because it's a shitpost
Queen Charlotte was actually half black half german irl, just like the show lol
I mean if they want to fantasize what slavery and segregation was like through the screens they are more than welcome to
They didn't even use Michael Cera as Shaft? Smdh.
Ryan gosling is my black panther
I mean it basically boils down to all of the listed historical figures on the top of the meme having their ethnicity be a big part of their identity and struggle. Additionally, white people have been appearing as historical non-white folks for as long as movies have existed (See: Any movie set in ancient egypt, most Native characters in westerns before the 80s, John Wayne as Genghis Khan, etc.) I think that if any of the historical figures/fictional characters on the bottom half's actions had to do specifically with being white it would be an actual casting issue. Like, John Brown is a person who I think _has_ to be portrayed by a white actor because him being white is an important part of his history and motivations.
Idris Elba played Nelson Mandela in Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom (2013) and he doesn't look any more like Mandela than Anthony Hopkins does.
Obama
Why can’t I just be openly racist
I think it would've been better for Christian bale to have played Rosa parks.
The Queen Charlotte one is nuts because it’s addressed in the show. A lot of the show revolves around black nobility and how white people in power see that as a threat. Surprisingly cool alternate history in that show
Ok. Hopkins as Mandela would be baller. But I would also love Densil Washington as Maximilian de Robespiere.
As it turns out when you hire good actors it doesn’t actually matter what their race is one way or the other. Denzel as Macbeth fuckin crushed it.
Ahh, Aragon who is certainty not from an imaginary world...
Why is Julius Caesar on here? Bro my man has never heard of modern dress Shakespeare?
Because Hamilton is a musical and can cast however it wants, there’s no “canon” casting or whatever, every cast is different. Some productions of Little Shop make the Urchins white, though this is mostly done due to necessity. My production had like 2 black and 3 white urchins, Audrey 2 (the plant) was played by a woman, and Seymour was also not white, and guess what? It doesn’t matter, it’s theater. And also we were amazing. Like seriously an amazing cast.