Sia defends her decision to cast Maddie as an autistic teen in movie Music

[River 113,889]

Anthony Hopkins literally was diagnosed with Asperger syndrome very late in his life and he's one of the best actors on the planet.

It's your stigma and ignorance talking honestly.

[Kadikaado 4,302]

22 hours ago, Hyoha said:

Why is Sia tackling the whole autism topic with this project? Is she or someone close to her autistic?

Because it's cool for famous people to pick a cause and pretend that they care about it.

 

22 hours ago, 4BLAiNE said:

As an actor myself - it is a very dangerous situation to start to insist that the only way a role can be considered ‘true to’ or ‘respectful’ to a condition / situation / sexuality, is for that role to be played by someone with said condition. 
 

The entire essence of performance is to tell stories of those we may not ‘be’ - but those we respect enough to research and portray in a way that is as true to representation as possible. I became an actor for that exact reason - because I wanted to be enlightened and informed by learning about people different to me - to make me less ignorant to their circumstances.
 

I think people need to watch this film before making any accusation of misrepresentation. By all means, criticise the portrayal if it isn’t accurate / respectful, but I feel this outrage is unfounded at this point.

 

22 hours ago, blzr said:

It’s Sia’s movie she can cast whoever she wants. 
 

And btw isn’t that what actors are supposed to do? Play something they aren’t? 

 The thing here is the same with trans actors, black actors, indigenous actors: there's not enough roles for everyone and all the roles go to neurotypicals that play a terrible caricature. Kier Gilchrist does an ok job in atypical, but Freddie Highmore is appalling, there's no difference between his Norman Bates and his Autistic character, they just give him whatever mentaly troubled character available.

 

 I am an autistic person and I wasn't 100% sure about Sia before, AFTER seeing how she managed the things attacking autistic people all I can think of her is that she wants to exploit the autism cause. Autism has been trending lately, lots of people are self-proclaiming they are autistic, autism has been gaining attention in media with several shows lately.

 

And yes, you can do a show with people with disabilities, "Colegas", a movie made with a cast of Down Syndrome is a proof. Giving up after one actor so she can work with her comfort actor just proves she never truly was concerned about autistic people, it's all to feed her ego.

 

  Also nobody here would defend Sia if she was using black face/indigenous face/ casting cis people to play trans characters. People care about some minorities more than others.

[Bradley 58,723]

22 hours ago, Adarsh said:

I know Ryan Murphy is not the perfect filmmaker when it comes to diversity

Wait, if Ryan is not a good example then really no one is.

[Guest Adarsh]

4 minutes ago, Bradley said:

Wait, if Ryan is not a good example then really no one is.

I know, I love him for it but I just wanted to be careful and didn’t want to fight with the people who accuse him of casting the same looking white guys in every show 

[FrederickSpears 2,090]

22 hours ago, Hyoha said:

Why is Sia tackling the whole autism topic with this project? Is she or someone close to her autistic?

No, she just wants to make money off of people she doesn't even care about.

[FrederickSpears 2,090]

3 minutes ago, Adarsh said:

I know, I love him for it but I just wanted to be careful and didn’t want to fight with the people who accuse him of casting the same looking white guys in every show 

HOT white guys tbh 

[Bradley 58,723]

4 minutes ago, Adarsh said:

I know, I love him for it but I just wanted to be careful and didn’t want to fight with the people who accuse him of casting the same looking white guys in every show 

I mean he literally has a show with an all-trans cast. He also frequently incorporates trans-, queer, disabled and ethnic minority actors in his more mainstream shows like AHS. Ryan Murphy is the definition of diversity, I understand you had good intentions, but I don't think you needed to make that disclaimer. Murphy deserves that.

[uo111 5,251]

7 hours ago, Mer Boy said:

This is not true.

My job is to support people with autism when they are working (in a diverse range of settings including studios). Someone with autism could've worked in this production if they had the right support (which can easily be found imo).

Many people with autism have the cognitive capacity to consent btw. Please don't assume that someone is incapable of consenting to things because they have autism. 

It’s great that you work with autistic people but can you provide an example of this? 

If there are severely, literally mute, autistic actors, then I agree Sia could’ve and should’ve done better.

[JesseBabe 836]

I think it's clear Sia knows she could have done more and simply chose not to do so based on her response to the valid criticism. I find it hard to believe that out of all the actors on the spectrum, she couldn't find one person who fit the role of the main character in her movie, but just so happened to pick the person she's been working with for years who dances in all her music videos . 

[Economy 49,125]

On 12/16/2020 at 6:39 AM, 4BLAiNE said:

As an actor myself - it is a very dangerous situation to start to insist that the only way a role can be considered ‘true to’ or ‘respectful’ to a condition / situation / sexuality, is for that role to be played by someone with said condition. 
 

The entire essence of performance is to tell stories of those we may not ‘be’ - but those we respect enough to research and portray in a way that is as true to representation as possible. I became an actor for that exact reason - because I wanted to be enlightened and informed by learning about people different to me - to make me less ignorant to their circumstances.
 

I think people need to watch this film before making any accusation of misrepresentation. By all means, criticise the portrayal if it isn’t accurate / respectful, but I feel this outrage is unfounded at this point.

I have always said that. Acting is acting and most stories are fictional. You don't need an actor or actress to be just like the fictional character in real life all the time

 

What I do get is that some groups of ppl have a harder time making it in the industry and efforts should be made to include such people in the industry and that I understand

 

But even then there's always logistics involved. Who's available at the time and at the area where a project is taking place? Did anyone who fits a certain character even audition?

 

We as viewers don't have a lot of these details and I think it's reaching to instantly make assumptions that a production company just wanted to exclude someone

 

But again the idea of trying to include marginalized groups is sound and I applaud such efforts. I'm just saying WHEN they aren't included ppl shouldn't automatically jump straight to conclusions and drag the production claiming discrimination if they don't even know all the facts

[MJHolland 12,725]

On 12/16/2020 at 6:39 AM, 4BLAiNE said:

As an actor myself - it is a very dangerous situation to start to insist that the only way a role can be considered ‘true to’ or ‘respectful’ to a condition / situation / sexuality, is for that role to be played by someone with said condition. 
 

The entire essence of performance is to tell stories of those we may not ‘be’ - but those we respect enough to research and portray in a way that is as true to representation as possible. I became an actor for that exact reason - because I wanted to be enlightened and informed by learning about people different to me - to make me less ignorant to their circumstances.
 

I think people need to watch this film before making any accusation of misrepresentation. By all means, criticise the portrayal if it isn’t accurate / respectful, but I feel this outrage is unfounded at this point.

I think it’s part accurate representation, but it’s also about opportunity which your post ignores. 
 

Actors with Down Syndrome don’t get non-down syndrome roles 99.9% of the time. They can basically only get roles playing characters with Down Syndrome. 
 

So every time a person without it gets put in this kind of role, they’re taking one of the very few opportunities away from a very marginalized group. 
 

It sounds like they tried to cast someone for this role with DS so I’m not judging too much. Just wanted to contribute that for thought.  

[sampool 5,560]

On 12/16/2020 at 3:15 PM, bionic said:

So there are no autistic actresses who are capable of dancing? In the entire world? Really?

 

why not just admit you wanted the role to be played by your protege (this is same girl from Sias music videos) and move on

But Sia is actually being considerate, there’s a level of disrespect of hiring an autistic person to portray a certain characteristics of autism they may not relate to, it’s awkward for them to portray that (knowing that ‘image’ is supposed to be them) when it’s far from who they are, but one case of autism to another differs and the image in Sias mind is extreme but still true. 

[4BLAiNE 1,240]

Thank you for the direct replies @Ziggy @PunkTheFunk @Economy @MJHolland @Kadikaado @ALGAYDO
I don’t post often, but the whole reason I posted here was because I wanted an interesting discussion about this. It’s something very close to home for me.

I must preface this though, and say that my post had absolutely nothing to do with defending my skill or career @Ziggy. I brought up the fact I’m an actor because I think it is pertinent to acknowledging that I may possess further knowledge of the training / process that goes on behind the scenes, which someone else may not have, which I think is fair?

To everyone to sum up my own thoughts:

I’m fully aware of the historical implications in terms of representation. I do believe we are seeing an incredibly different approach and amount of diversified casting these days, and if the role warrants it, I’m obviously 100% in support of it (as I would hope, most logical people would be). It is undeniable that we have seen a history of filmmaking that has been geared towards telling only a portion of stories, and I do definitely feel this has been shifting in recent years (remember there is more to it than just the commercial Hollywood scene we often refer to). 

 

I think, however, comparing race to roles that deal with underlying mental conditions is not entirely fair. A character is an amalgamation of their personality, their physical traits, their circumstance, environment, culture. All of these elements (should) form the decision on which actor plays the part. When one looks at the physical appearance of an actor looking to be cast, there are certain elements to that, that are absolutely unchangeable, or generally unchangeable (age is a good example of this - generally one won’t cast a 20 year old as a 60 year old on film). When talking POC , that forms part of the unchangeable physical characteristics of the person and cultural implications of the character, and therefore, yes, absolutely should be played by someone of that race. The problem has been, that big budget franchises (in particular) in Hollywood (which is a major, but only part of the entire world of performance), works very heavily off a star system where big names have historically gotten roles they weren’t necessarily right for, due to the need to sell the film. I don’t agree with casting this way, but it has been a reality of that system.

 

I’m talking in the broader sense of casting, there is usually a very careful consideration (especially these days) into making sure all of those elements are as truly reflected in the actor cast as possible. If someone with a disability can’t physically be ‘altered’ to fit the role of an abled body character for example, that isn’t down to trying to exclude or discriminate against them - it’s purely down to them not fitting the unchangeable elements to that character. Something like autism is a very tricky one, because there is an incredibly broad spectrum of person who has autism - and we cannot say that someone who is autistic will generally ‘display’ physical conditions that would distinctly set them apart. It leaves the room open, as we have seen, for actors who don’t necessarily have the set conditions, to give a portrayal that is respectful and accurate, and ultimately does bring the general public into understanding the condition more. Filmmaking will never directly ‘help’ any of the people with these conditions, but what it does do, is bridge the gap and try to educate people on the stories and lives of those who are different to us. I find this can be incredibly resonating in helping people learn about each other more, and history has undeniably shown that even when highly skilled, able bodied actors have portrayed roles like this, it has brought more attention and understanding to complex issues. On the flip side, there are many instances where it hasn’t been dealt with respectfully, and that is a major problem as well. 

 

I think, further to that point, we need to remember that being something does not always translate to portraying it well on film. This may sound counter-intuitive, but it often proves true. I understand many of you who are not performers may not understand this, but the skill based and technical requirements alone to portray something accurately to a camera become hugely important as well. I’m sure, logically, you feel you would play yourself best in a biopic about you, but I can guarantee you, unless you’re a trained actor, that wouldn’t be the case. On the flip side, I’m also not denying for a second there are incredibly talented, skilled people on the spectrum of any disability out there, and I am in full support of having roles for them to compete to be cast in, like any of us would.

 

I don’t know why Sia would’ve chosen to cast Maddie (I don’t think she’s given us any reason in her past to believe she’s intentionally uncaring / disrespectful / ignorant towards this topic) but I feel no need to defend her either. My stance is just that the film should be viewed in its entirety before being completely torn apart and criticised on the portrayal. It may very well be true that an autistic person on the spectrum could have been a better and more powerful casting choice here (and I personally would have loved to have seen that myself), and we should be continuing to write compelling, powerful, layered roles that allow themselves to be played by, and portray, a greater and greater variety of person, but I also don’t believe it’s healthy either to seek to take down any and all projects that cast actors that are not 100% within the situation or condition that the character is, off a trailer alone.

 

I think we need to remember both of these can be true at once - the beauty of, and need to, continue to write more characters that reflect a greater variety of person (which therefore becomes inclusive to any actor on the spectrum of disability both mentally and physically - as well as culturally) and the beauty of an actor’s ability to portray something they aren’t. Both of these are vital to creative expression, I feel. 

[4BLAiNE 1,240]

I know - I’m SO sorry my post is so long! I know we don’t do that here often. Apologies - I just wanted to make sure I have a full reply to everyone. And concluded my feelings 

 

Super interesting chat everybody - as I say, I don’t often post so in depth here, but I enjoy taking about topics like this

[President Biden 5,898]

On 12/16/2020 at 10:29 PM, JusKeepBreathin said:

Actually in Glee he had an actor in a wheelchair that didn't have any disabilities. 

was talking about the girl