Disney defends brown-face

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

22 minutes ago, 053Timo said:

Never said that. But this has nothing to do with racism imo

It's not racism, but it surely is poor casting done by Disney. And many should get behind that. That's the central idea behind this after all.

[River 127,558]

But I honestly see a lack of understanding the region, there are many "white", I mean not all the middle east people are dark tan skin, some are whiter, some darker, I'm darker than some Syrian people but some Turkish are darker than me.. it's a big mix..

So I honestly would prefer that Disney would just show white people that a bit tan in the movie and not to stereotype the middle eastern people to one type..

So idk this threads ends up to be more ignorant about the middle east than actually racism/defending it

[SychosSoChic 9,995]

6 minutes ago, Riley Benton said:

No no no, that’s not how life works, puddy pops. You don’t get to define what racism is and what it means. It has a definition:

rac·ist

ˈrāsəst/

noun

1. 

a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another.

 

You don’t get to accuse and tell people that they’re racist because they’re emulating a person of color for a role or admiration. If the makeup is to show stereotypes, imitate a certain way of speaking or acting, mocks the way a certain race is then yes it’s fair to call racist but you can’t just tell somebody they’re racist because of makeup they’re using for a role, or makeup they’re using to dress up as someone out of pure admiration just because you’re a hypersensitive crybaby whose sole purpose is to get offended and label people things they are not. That’s not how life works, sugar tits. So you’re gonna sit down and you’re gonna spin and realize that your first world problem of being outraged over something so stupid has to stop.

Don't worry fellow POC, Riley Benton here is going to define for us all what is racist and what isn't. On a personal level! From Gabrielle Union in Atlanta, to Nomfundo Hlubi in Mamelodi to Fateema Naaido in Mumbai, he knows your experiences personally, and he has all the answers to the racial issues you have, coz apparently none of them exist, unless our children are getting hanged from trees by people in white masks. Who knew?

Equal representation for racial and cultural minorities? Riley says it's not necessary puddy pup

Using actors that actually have a connection to the culture in the material? Riley doesn't think so sugar tits

Calling out racism and laziness where you non-white ass sees it? Silly SJW. Don't you know that all animals are equal? But some animals are more equal than others

 

[Economy 52,861]

28 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

It's not racism, but it surely is poor casting done by Disney. And many should get behind that. That's the central idea behind this after all.

I agree its poor casting but ppl on this site are saying its racist

 

hence why i said over-reaction

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

And yet now you're getting away from the real issue. There will always be someone overreacting or not reacting at all. Why can't we focus on the real issue instead of trying to place blame on others. We don't need SJWs for SJWs if that's the game people want to play. It's only fair.

[SKANK 14,288]

20 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

And yet now you're getting away from the real issue. There will always be someone overreacting or not reacting at all. Why can't we focus on the real issue instead of trying to place blame on others. We don't need SJWs for SJWs if that's the game people want to play. It's only fair.

 

Read the article, if you didn't already.

Disney didn't white-wash the core cast of the film, and they hired hundreds of racially appropriate extras. The people who were required to "brown up" were a limited number of specialist actors, like stunt men, who require specialist training.

“Great care was taken to put together one of the largest, most diverse casts ever seen on screen. Diversity of our cast and background performers was a requirement and only in a handful of instances when it was a matter of specialty skills, safety and control (special effects rigs, stunt performers and handling of animals) were crew made up to blend in.”

They may have been contractually obligated to use specific stunt performers or animal handlers. That doesn't seem unreasonable or offensive considering the lengths they appear to have gone to avoid offensive racial casting. 

 

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

4 minutes ago, SKANK said:

 

Read the article, if you didn't already.

Disney didn't white-wash the core cast of the film, and they hired hundreds of racially appropriate extras. The people who were required to "brown up" were a limited number of specialist actors, like stunt men, who require specialist training.

“Great care was taken to put together one of the largest, most diverse casts ever seen on screen. Diversity of our cast and background performers was a requirement and only in a handful of instances when it was a matter of specialty skills, safety and control (special effects rigs, stunt performers and handling of animals) were crew made up to blend in.”

They may have been contractually obligated to use specific stunt performers or animal handlers. That doesn't seem unreasonable or offensive considering the lengths they appear to have gone to avoid offensive racial casting. 

 

Yes, I already know that. No need to paste the same info back. 

[ARTPOP39 66]

THEY DID THE SAMe thING WITH COCO WHERE THE GRANDMOTHER IN REAL LIFE "THE INSPIRATION BEHIND HER WAS WHITE ASF" BUT IN THE FILM SHE IS BROWN ASF WTFFFFF?????

[SKANK 14,288]

15 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

Yes, I already know that. No need to paste the same info back. 

 

You were asking asking why people couldn't focus on the "real issue." I was explaining why. The "real issue" in this specific instance isn't the casting of this film, it's the Boy Who Cried Wolf reaction by Social Justice Warriors.  

When a film, which otherwise has been celebrated for it's racially sensitive casting, required a handful of white actors to play specialist roles, it's not something to be outraged by.

Spare your outrage.

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

Just now, SKANK said:

 

You were asking asking why people couldn't focus on the "real issue." I was explain why. The "real issue" in this specific instance isn't the casting of this film, it's the Boy Who Cried Wolf reaction by Social Justice Warriors.  

When a film, which otherwise has been celebrated for it's racially sensitive casting, required a handful of white actors to play specialist roles, it's not something to be outraged by.

Spare your outrage.

Where's my outrage? Because I'm actively talking with other members about why this shouldn't be about SJWs... Why are you making this about them? Why? 

The real issue is that Disney could've done better. Am I to expect white specialists in Black Panther? 

I'm not outraged by this. The only people making such a fuss are the anti-SJWs being SJWs about SJWs. 

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

4 minutes ago, SKANK said:

 

You were asking asking why people couldn't focus on the "real issue." I was explain why. The "real issue" in this specific instance isn't the casting of this film, it's the Boy Who Cried Wolf reaction by Social Justice Warriors.  

When a film, which otherwise has been celebrated for it's racially sensitive casting, required a handful of white actors to play specialist roles, it's not something to be outraged by.

Spare your outrage.

It would be wise if you knew where I was coming from. Because clearly you didn't understand my point as you tried to make it seem like I was completely uneducated on why Disney casting did this in the first place. And the only concerns I had here were the ones where people were being attacked for having their opinions turned into "SJW". I don't get why we can't discuss things without having that excuse come up. So let people have their voice. I don't see why you'd need to be here if you don't like the subject matter to begin with. 

[SKANK 14,288]

6 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

I don't see why you'd need to be here if you don't like the subject matter to begin with. 

 

I was here to respectfully share my opinion and engage you in conversation. Judging by your overreaction that doesn't seem possible, which unfortunately only serves to prove my point about Social Justice Warriors.

So, I'll politely dip out of the conversation. Have a good night.

 

[Florian 20,017]

31 minutes ago, ZacharyMark said:

The real issue is that Disney could've done better.

I really think they couldn't.

After the first spark of criticism about the main cast it would be dumb for Disney to paint faces except if it was the last options.

Making a movie isn't easy, you have tight budget, tight deadlines and limited schedule. On top of that the specialists field isn't that wide. You don't have many tiger trainer in the UK. Among them you need to pray to have one with the good ethnicity. Also flying a tiger and his trainer from another country is crazy expensive and can be dangerous for the animal.

When the big majority of the cast shows diversity it sounds quite unfair to call out Disney for a few very specific people.

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

1 minute ago, Florian said:

I really think they couldn't.

After the first spark of criticism about the main cast it would be dumb for Disney to paint faces except if it was the last options.

Making a movie isn't easy, you have tight budget, tight deadlines and limited schedule. On top of that the specialists field isn't that wide. You don't have many tiger trainer in the UK. Among them you need to pray to have one with the good ethnicity. Also flying a tiger and his trainer from another country is crazy expensive and can be dangerous for the animal.

When the big majority of the cast shows diversity it sounds quite unfair to call out Disney for a few very specific people.

Maybe not Disney. Just the crew involved. 

I do also want to share a quote from Kal Penn who is a man of color in the industry:

"I love @Disney so much. But when a PR person says they decided to put 100 people in Brownface in 2018 because not enough of us are qualified, that’s bs, someone just didn’t want to spend the $ to do it right. Let’s all expect more & do better this year"

I just don't know how this would've turned out if the movie was set with a cast of all darker skinned folks. Do you? So yes, I do think that Disney(the team, if that's who you want to talk about) could've done better. I mean, even animated movies aren't 100% reflected in racial casting. What's the excuse there? Again, it just seems lazy. 

You cannot not explain how this is not an unfortunate event. But hopefully it also means that more people of color will be enlightened to join such areas of expertise in the future. Hiring white actors to be used in the background is fine, but I'd rather have them not paint brown face on them. I don't care if I may see a white actor when I go see the film, but the whole idea is just cringe. Again, would they do black face? Is this only convenient because the crew can get away with this just because brown people don't have too dark of skin?

Thank you for the precise and honest response by the way!

[derpmonster 22,412]

7 hours ago, LePetitMonstr said:

Wouldnt it been easier to hire people that are ethnically from that region

Also, Im a little confused. Where is this outrage whenever darker skinned people bleach their skin?

There's no outrage because of social context. People have used putting on dark skin as a way to either mock or take the place of poc as in this case. Meanwhile when dark skinned people lighten their skin, they either do it to fit in or just as a benign action. "Whitewashing" is something a lot of people have to do whereas brown/black face is an easy choice that one can go back and forth from and use for only their benefit while still caring nothing about how it impacts other people and their jobs.