I know it's maybe reactionary but I really never liked the race changed historical figure casting. Idk it just feels weird and pointless. Unless you're trying to do something with it. You could make the argument about representation but it's literally a European monarch. There's nothing aspirational or representative about it.
There are literally thousands of stories you could be telling but instead it's all like "what if Mary Queen of Scots was black" but it also doesn't change the story in anyway.
What's actually progressive about telling the story of a white woman using a black woman? Surely it's just taking away from the potential story of POC people throughout history. Sure, it's a black woman getting a role instead of a white woman but it's still a white woman's story.
I have written an electronic-mail to mr. BBC and he says they are seriously considering never doing anything about the tudors or the monarchy ever again on your reccomendation, but unfortunately their current shows and films already in production will have to proceed for cost reasons. I am assured that if you can all hold off on shitting your pants every time a black person appears on film pre-1939 without every other character gasping or slurring them for three more years, the queen will die and they can wrap on The Crown and focus on only telling stories about racism, a thing which they are very good at
More directed at the thread in general than you specifically, the 'bothered by black people in mary poppins' energy is strong throughout and I'm just firing them off from the hip
What I mean really is, its fine to say "they should do more POC stories rather than tired Henry VIII adaptations", I agree, but it's a non-starter since they will be doing English royal shit roughly every two months for the next 100 years, that is just the reality, and given that reality this is a positive thing.
Have you seen the Bridgertons? If you haven't, don't, it's trash. One of the main characters, the Duke of Hastings, is black, along with a bunch of other characters, including the queen. I thought they were doing a color blind cast, which I mean that's cool I don't really care one way or another on that, it's a schlocky romance adaptation after all. But it's not color blind casting. There's a completely unnecessary scene where one character explains that black people were accepted into English high society because the king chose a black woman to be his queen. I was dumbfounded. This raised so many questions. What happened to the old white Duke of Hastings? Was his title expropriated and given to a black man? Who and by what metrics were the new black nobility chosen? Lottery, relation to the Queen, some watery tart threw a sword at them? None of the implications are examined, its the laziest writing I've ever seen, and I'm left feeling like the only point is that somehow Meghan fucking Markle is going to solve racism.
I mean, that's the worst of both worlds to me. If you're gonna do a colorblind casting, ok. If you're going to go with a sort of "fantasy" world loosely based on 19th century England, ok too. But to go with something SO ahistorically ridiculous like early modern Europeans being totally cool with creating a multiethnic society just because the king had a black wife, c'mon that's ridiculous. Reality is if a king did that back then he'd probably find himself murder by his brother and no one would give a shit.
I think its more about actors getting roles than progressive elements in the story really. Hollywood has a casting and paying problem separate from the decisions around which stories get told and how, which is of course also a problem
Also though fwiw I disagree with your point because these aren't really effective historical accounts, they are stories and stories are more reflections of their tellers than their subjects. Like, most of the shit in period pieces is hollywood invention anyway, why not be inventive away from white supremacy rather than in favor of it in that case
But why keep telling those same stories about the same four or five white people. It's just like Henry VIII (and wives), Mary Queen of Scots, Shakespeare, Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria. There's like a billion stories about these people.
I get that it's good to actually boost the amount of roles available for POC but why not also boost the stories of real POC at the same time? Hell, it might even get people to learn about these people and such.
It just reinforces that the only stories worth telling in history are rich white people, no matter who plays them.
It is sort of making the best of a bad situation, true. But its still a sign of progress. Definitely easier to cast black people than getting people to stop making or watching things about Henry VIII, even if that's the ideal
Yeah it's stupid, and not for the reactionary reasons.
So the characters are just gonna pretend she's white basically. And now the production can't really acknowledge or explore anything related to race or ethnicity because the characters are all colorblind.
If it's a really abstracted film, it can be cool to cast people differently and it can serve the point of the work in various ways, but really doesn't do anything in a serious context like this.
To me it kind of feels like splashing multicolored paint on random people and having them walk around like that. "Race makes me uncomfortable, let's make it not exist"
It can definitely be done badly, as in Hamilton and I guess Brigerton (I can think of other examples for sure) where it ends up overwriting and disguising racist history, but the alternatives are saying either just don't make these stories, make them but don't cast black people in them, or cast black people but every scene they have to be victims of brutal oppression. I think each of those would end up being more racist than just not being upset because of black people being treated 'white' where you might as well just substitute 'normal' because that's what that means in a filmic context
This actress might bring a specific take particular to her identity into this role, the movie might use it to make some race-related point, even as limplib as 'black women can be as regal as whites', or she might not and it could be totally race blind, either way its just a movie and ultimately the content is less important than the labor question of whether black people get a fair amount of roles
the alternative is the mainstream arts establishment reinterpreting the biographies of problematic (for the mainstream) figures to support the mainstream. the real solution is to divest from these kinds of prestige arts productions entirely, although that's easier said than done I guess.
I know it's maybe reactionary but I really never liked the race changed historical figure casting. Idk it just feels weird and pointless. Unless you're trying to do something with it. You could make the argument about representation but it's literally a European monarch. There's nothing aspirational or representative about it.
There are literally thousands of stories you could be telling but instead it's all like "what if Mary Queen of Scots was black" but it also doesn't change the story in anyway.
What's actually progressive about telling the story of a white woman using a black woman? Surely it's just taking away from the potential story of POC people throughout history. Sure, it's a black woman getting a role instead of a white woman but it's still a white woman's story.
deleted by creator
I have written an electronic-mail to mr. BBC and he says they are seriously considering never doing anything about the tudors or the monarchy ever again on your reccomendation, but unfortunately their current shows and films already in production will have to proceed for cost reasons. I am assured that if you can all hold off on shitting your pants every time a black person appears on film pre-1939 without every other character gasping or slurring them for three more years, the queen will die and they can wrap on The Crown and focus on only telling stories about racism, a thing which they are very good at
deleted by creator
More directed at the thread in general than you specifically, the 'bothered by black people in mary poppins' energy is strong throughout and I'm just firing them off from the hip
What I mean really is, its fine to say "they should do more POC stories rather than tired Henry VIII adaptations", I agree, but it's a non-starter since they will be doing English royal shit roughly every two months for the next 100 years, that is just the reality, and given that reality this is a positive thing.
Have you seen the Bridgertons? If you haven't, don't, it's trash. One of the main characters, the Duke of Hastings, is black, along with a bunch of other characters, including the queen. I thought they were doing a color blind cast, which I mean that's cool I don't really care one way or another on that, it's a schlocky romance adaptation after all. But it's not color blind casting. There's a completely unnecessary scene where one character explains that black people were accepted into English high society because the king chose a black woman to be his queen. I was dumbfounded. This raised so many questions. What happened to the old white Duke of Hastings? Was his title expropriated and given to a black man? Who and by what metrics were the new black nobility chosen? Lottery, relation to the Queen, some watery tart threw a sword at them? None of the implications are examined, its the laziest writing I've ever seen, and I'm left feeling like the only point is that somehow Meghan fucking Markle is going to solve racism.
Yeah, we all remember how welcoming the British public were with Meghan Markle.
I mean, that's the worst of both worlds to me. If you're gonna do a colorblind casting, ok. If you're going to go with a sort of "fantasy" world loosely based on 19th century England, ok too. But to go with something SO ahistorically ridiculous like early modern Europeans being totally cool with creating a multiethnic society just because the king had a black wife, c'mon that's ridiculous. Reality is if a king did that back then he'd probably find himself murder by his brother and no one would give a shit.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I think its more about actors getting roles than progressive elements in the story really. Hollywood has a casting and paying problem separate from the decisions around which stories get told and how, which is of course also a problem
Also though fwiw I disagree with your point because these aren't really effective historical accounts, they are stories and stories are more reflections of their tellers than their subjects. Like, most of the shit in period pieces is hollywood invention anyway, why not be inventive away from white supremacy rather than in favor of it in that case
But why keep telling those same stories about the same four or five white people. It's just like Henry VIII (and wives), Mary Queen of Scots, Shakespeare, Queen Elizabeth and Queen Victoria. There's like a billion stories about these people.
I get that it's good to actually boost the amount of roles available for POC but why not also boost the stories of real POC at the same time? Hell, it might even get people to learn about these people and such.
It just reinforces that the only stories worth telling in history are rich white people, no matter who plays them.
I haven't seen anything about Shakespeare the person
I think its common all over to have historical fiction based on the powerful. In India we've got historical fiction about kings fighting kings
deleted by creator
It is sort of making the best of a bad situation, true. But its still a sign of progress. Definitely easier to cast black people than getting people to stop making or watching things about Henry VIII, even if that's the ideal
Yeah it's stupid, and not for the reactionary reasons.
So the characters are just gonna pretend she's white basically. And now the production can't really acknowledge or explore anything related to race or ethnicity because the characters are all colorblind.
If it's a really abstracted film, it can be cool to cast people differently and it can serve the point of the work in various ways, but really doesn't do anything in a serious context like this.
To me it kind of feels like splashing multicolored paint on random people and having them walk around like that. "Race makes me uncomfortable, let's make it not exist"
It can definitely be done badly, as in Hamilton and I guess Brigerton (I can think of other examples for sure) where it ends up overwriting and disguising racist history, but the alternatives are saying either just don't make these stories, make them but don't cast black people in them, or cast black people but every scene they have to be victims of brutal oppression. I think each of those would end up being more racist than just not being upset because of black people being treated 'white' where you might as well just substitute 'normal' because that's what that means in a filmic context
This actress might bring a specific take particular to her identity into this role, the movie might use it to make some race-related point, even as limplib as 'black women can be as regal as whites', or she might not and it could be totally race blind, either way its just a movie and ultimately the content is less important than the labor question of whether black people get a fair amount of roles
I think "don't tell these stories" is close, more like "don't tell these stories so damn much"
It would be cooler if filmmakers used it to familiarize people with mom European parts of history.
the alternative is the mainstream arts establishment reinterpreting the biographies of problematic (for the mainstream) figures to support the mainstream. the real solution is to divest from these kinds of prestige arts productions entirely, although that's easier said than done I guess.