Ghost in the Shell Film will cost co. $60 million in debt

[Eros92 2,513]

lol at people still complaining about the "whitewashing"

the Japanese arent even upset about it and don't get what the big deal is.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/scarlett-johansson-ghost-shell-japanese-885462

 

Like the whole thing is stupid. Say if they made a live action Sailor Moon movie, you really wanna look me in the face and say they should cast someone Japanese to play Usagi who is portrayed CLEARLY as Caucasian....  

[Pacify Him 9,073]

Don't be bothered, Queen! 

The GP just has no taste

The SJWs are cancer to the society

[Edonis 28,950]

23 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

 

Only thing is, it's not like every audience member will actually research the nationality, race and ethnicity of every actor they see portrayed on film. They're just characters to them. As long as they look and sound like the type of person they're trying to be, the audience isn't going to think twice about how much of this person is real and fake. It's calling acting for a reason. The whole point of acting is pretending to be someone you're not and have it be as convincing as possible. I mean, where do you draw the line? Can married parents only play the roles of married parents? Can only real racists and homophobes play the roles of racists and homophobes? Can only genuine serial killers play the roles of serial killers? Extreme, I know, but you get my point. To what point is not just simply acting?

I see your point but I still hold to my statement that if a film contains characters from a specific ethnic or racial background it would be best to look for actors and actresses with a similar background for the reasons I mentioned previously. It's not the same as someone who is married, racist, homophobic, etc; those are characteristics of a personality that good actors and actresses could channel within their performance. You can't channel skin color, etc. Like I said it's kind of complicated and a sensitive issue. In some ways I'm glad that GitS opened up a discussion like this. It allows for people to really delve into the boundaries that movie makers can cross and experiment with. 

[Gagged 165]

for ****s sake. it's an anime character from japan. it’s so annoying how POC can’t be protagonists without geeks calling it “politically correct” or something. that’s how they see us, we’re only allowed to be secondary characters in any media otherwise it’s “stop trying to make political statements!!!!”

[Edonis 28,950]

17 minutes ago, HarleyQuinzel said:

lol at people still complaining about the "whitewashing"

the Japanese arent even upset about it and don't get what the big deal is.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/scarlett-johansson-ghost-shell-japanese-885462

 

Like the whole thing is stupid. Say if they made a live action Sailor Moon movie, you really wanna look me in the face and say they should cast someone Japanese to play Usagi who is portrayed CLEARLY as Caucasian....  

Her name is Usagi Tsukino though 

How many Caucasian women do you know named that? 

But regardless of namesake, I'm assuming you're knowledgeable with Japanese anime and manga. Obviously Japanese people don't normally have colored hair unless it's dyed or whatnot, but, the character has been discussed as a Japanese woman. There's even a live action drama of Sailor Moon where the character's hair color changes when she transforms. It's obviously debatable but I think it should be noted that hair color and appearance doesn't immediately mean white lady in anime and manga. Add to the fact that there are actual white characters in the series as well; they tend to be even paler in skin color, different eye shape, etc. It's not as noticeable but it's there. 

[Edonis 28,950]

20 minutes ago, MetalliGa said:

Don't be bothered, Queen! 

The GP just has no taste

The SJWs are cancer to the society

But it didn't flop from the SJWs sis. The movie was just boring 

And that anime is way too niche for a Hollywood live action movie 

[shoful 13,304]

I really wanna see this. I love scarlett 

[Pacify Him 9,073]

4 minutes ago, Edonis said:

But it didn't flop from the SJWs sis. The movie was just boring 

And that anime is way too niche for a live action movie 

I guess I'll have to wait for it to go on Netflix then

[StrawberryBlond 14,888]

20 hours ago, Edonis said:

I see your point but I still hold to my statement that if a film contains characters from a specific ethnic or racial background it would be best to look for actors and actresses with a similar background for the reasons I mentioned previously. It's not the same as someone who is married, racist, homophobic, etc; those are characteristics of a personality that good actors and actresses could channel within their performance. You can't channel skin color, etc. Like I said it's kind of complicated and a sensitive issue. In some ways I'm glad that GitS opened up a discussion like this. It allows for people to really delve into the boundaries that movie makers can cross and experiment with. 

Of course you can't channel skin colour, but what does nationality have to do with anything? You were saying that Armenians should have been cast as Armenian characters. But Armenian isn't a race, although, of course, there will be darker skin and an ethnicity change, meaning they won't look "white," necessarily. But do you have a problem with white people playing different nationalities as well, then? Are you fine with British whites playing American whites and vice versa? Does nationality not matter so long as everyone is white?

But I still support the concept of keeping race intact wherever possible. What needs to be focused on is promotion more than anything. A movie with an unknown Asian lead could still sell if it's just promoted correctly. Films starring A-list white actors have flopped before, most often the reason being that promotion wasn't the highest priority, likely because a big name is expected to sell based on name recognition alone. Movies with female leads are particularly notorious for a lack of promotion. A lot of studios think a movie starring women and aimed at women is a niche market, so they really restrict promotion. I always remember when I was younger that the only times I saw chick flick movies advertised was in the pages of my teen magazines, never on billboards, buses, etc. yet action movies aimed at men were advertised everywhere. But, as we've seen with some real runaway success stories of chick flicks recently, it can come down to good promotion (and a good script), just like any other film. Honestly, I didn't see GitS advertised or talked about until a week before it came out. That's a problem.

20 hours ago, Gagged said:

for ****s sake. it's an anime character from japan. it’s so annoying how POC can’t be protagonists without geeks calling it “politically correct” or something. that’s how they see us, we’re only allowed to be secondary characters in any media otherwise it’s “stop trying to make political statements!!!!”

I don't think that's quite what was happening here. I don't think anyone would have complained if it was an Asian actress, that's the character, after all. The whole point of the scandal was people saying it was politically incorrect. And the fact is that sometimes, white roles have been given to POC to make a politically correct statement. But whites aren't allowed to be offended by that without being called racist. It's the double standard that annoys us. Yes, white washing's bad but it should be considered just as bad when it's done in reverse to whites as well. Equal rights, not better rights.

[Edonis 28,950]

19 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Of course you can't channel skin colour, but what does nationality have to do with anything? You were saying that Armenians should have been cast as Armenian characters. But Armenian isn't a race, although, of course, there will be darker skin and an ethnicity change, meaning they won't look "white," necessarily. But do you have a problem with white people playing different nationalities as well, then? Are you fine with British whites playing American whites and vice versa? Does nationality not matter so long as everyone is white?

But I still support the concept of keeping race intact wherever possible. What needs to be focused on is promotion more than anything. A movie with an unknown Asian lead could still sell if it's just promoted correctly. Films starring A-list white actors have flopped before, most often the reason being that promotion wasn't the highest priority, likely because a big name is expected to sell based on name recognition alone. Movies with female leads are particularly notorious for a lack of promotion. A lot of studios think a movie starring women and aimed at women is a niche market, so they really restrict promotion. I always remember when I was younger that the only times I saw chick flick movies advertised was in the pages of my teen magazines, never on billboards, buses, etc. yet action movies aimed at men were advertised everywhere. But, as we've seen with some real runaway success stories of chick flicks recently, it can come down to good promotion (and a good script), just like any other film. Honestly, I didn't see GitS advertised or talked about until a week before it came out. That's a problem.

So I think mentioned when we first starting discussing this that Armenians are considered "white". Technically that is true but...it's a bit more complicated than that. 

Armenian people are categorized as "white" really only by the US census for the same reasons that MENA people were considered white: to avoid getting forced to do basically slave labor in the 1800's similar to the way East Asian people were sent to work in railroads, etc. They appealed with MENA people to courts to be counted as "white citizens" so they could avoid being put into forced labor. 

But the reality of things is that Armenian people are relatively racially diverse (just like MENA people). There are those who are closer looking to "white people" and those that have similar color to middle eastern people. Because of the mixed racial diversity (due to the fact that they are a group that's faced heavy diaspora) it is true that casting Armenian people would normally be fine with casting regular Anglo Saxon actors. I personally wouldn't have a problem with that. The issue in the case of the film I mentioned is that it's a historical film partially based on actual people...and they cast a Hispanic actor for a role that was an ethnic subgroup in the Armenian population. Even then, most people, including you and I, wouldn't think a minute about it. However, film makers who are making a film about a historical event pivotal in Armenian history whose plot is dependent about the racial identities of the people, should know about these things. It's ignorant for a docrector to think otherwise. So that's basically it about that situation. And no I wouldn't care if American actors played British characters, etc. (Even though I'm sure there are people out there, somewhere who cares. Idk why). But when it comes to racial identities, eh. It could be a bit more difficult. 

As for the other stuff regarding female leads and hiring actors who are people of color, I agree. 

[StrawberryBlond 14,888]

2 hours ago, Edonis said:

So I think mentioned when we first starting discussing this that Armenians are considered "white". Technically that is true but...it's a bit more complicated than that. 

Armenian people are categorized as "white" really only by the US census for the same reasons that MENA people were considered white: to avoid getting forced to do basically slave labor in the 1800's similar to the way East Asian people were sent to work in railroads, etc. They appealed with MENA people to courts to be counted as "white citizens" so they could avoid being put into forced labor. 

But the reality of things is that Armenian people are relatively racially diverse (just like MENA people). There are those who are closer looking to "white people" and those that have similar color to middle eastern people. Because of the mixed racial diversity (due to the fact that they are a group that's faced heavy diaspora) it is true that casting Armenian people would normally be fine with casting regular Anglo Saxon actors. I personally wouldn't have a problem with that. The issue in the case of the film I mentioned is that it's a historical film partially based on actual people...and they cast a Hispanic actor for a role that was an ethnic subgroup in the Armenian population. Even then, most people, including you and I, wouldn't think a minute about it. However, film makers who are making a film about a historical event pivotal in Armenian history whose plot is dependent about the racial identities of the people, should know about these things. It's ignorant for a docrector to think otherwise. So that's basically it about that situation. And no I wouldn't care if American actors played British characters, etc. (Even though I'm sure there are people out there, somewhere who cares. Idk why). But when it comes to racial identities, eh. It could be a bit more difficult. 

As for the other stuff regarding female leads and hiring actors who are people of color, I agree. 

Would you think the same if it were a historical film based on a group of white people who'd been discriminated based on their identities? Like I said, Mel Gibson played William Wallace, he was leading the Scots who were getting mistreated for their nationality. Yeah, there were some people who wished a Scottish actor was cast but at the end of the day, our people enjoyed the film, so that put that notion to rest. National identity can be just as important as racial identity. Being Scottish at this particular moment in time when independence talk has been at the forefront, I sure know it. As a European as well, I'm also aware of how much weight your nationality can have. Some white Europeans have been discriminated against equally as much for their nationality as some people of colour have. And of course, nationality holds a lot of weight for people of colour as well. I remember when it was announced that Disney's Mulan was going to have a live action adapation and some Asians said that they hoped they'd cast a Chinese actor and a Japanese actress wouldn't suffice because Asians are not interchangeable and have had to put up with playing the wrong nationality when they are lucky enough to be cast.

[Edonis 28,950]

6 minutes ago, StrawberryBlond said:

Would you think the same if it were a historical film based on a group of white people who'd been discriminated based on their identities? Like I said, Mel Gibson played William Wallace, he was leading the Scots who were getting mistreated for their nationality. Yeah, there were some people who wished a Scottish actor was cast but at the end of the day, our people enjoyed the film, so that put that notion to rest. National identity can be just as important as racial identity. Being Scottish at this particular moment in time when independence talk has been at the forefront, I sure know it. As a European as well, I'm also aware of how much weight your nationality can have. Some white Europeans have been discriminated against equally as much for their nationality as some people of colour have. And of course, nationality holds a lot of weight for people of colour as well. I remember when it was announced that Disney's Mulan was going to have a live action adapation and some Asians said that they hoped they'd cast a Chinese actor and a Japanese actress wouldn't suffice because Asians are not interchangeable and have had to put up with playing the wrong nationality when they are lucky enough to be cast.

Of course I would lol. I haven't indicated at all throughout our discussion that would say otherwise. People should realize that while it is trendy and cool to talk about white people as a collective whole, there really isn't a collective racial identity even in that group. Even genetically there are variations amongst "white people" which is why there are groups classed as Anglo Saxon, Caucasian, etc. It's not a popular thing to talk about, but comparing someone who lives in the US who is Anglo Saxon White to someone who is Bosnian for example, is no where near the same. Race itself is complex as hell, and I personally think if a movie is going to cover a topic, especially concerning something historical, those things should be kept in considerarion. Make no mistake, I don't intentionally discriminate groups of people or over generalize groups of people. There are ethnic and racial minorities in every group and that's something a lot of people (on both sides of the discussion) need to understand prior to engaging in discussions (most of the time, arguments. Let's be real) about these topics.