First thing's first: KEEP. THIS. SHIT. CIVIL. If you can't talk about race without resorting to childish insults and rude generalizations or getting angry at people who don't see it your way, leave the thread.
With that said, I bring you to what can hopefully be the general thread about race.
First, a few starter questions.
- How, if at all, do you feel your race affects your everyday life?
- Do you believe that white people (or whatever the majority race in your area is) receive privileges simply because of the color of their skin. How much?
- Do you believe minorities are discriminated against for the same reason? How much?
- Do you believe that assimilation of cultures is better than people trying to keep their own?
- Affirmative Action. Yea, Nay? Why or why not?
Also, a personal question from me.
- Why (in my experience, not trying to generalize) do white people often try to insist that they aren't white? I can't count the number of times I've heard "I'm not white, I'm 1/4th English, 1/4th German, 1/4th Scandinavian 1/8th Cherokee, and 1/8th Russian," as though 4 of 5 of those things aren't considered "white" by the masses. Is it because you have pride for your ancestry, or an attempt to try and differentiate yourself from all those "other" white people? Or something else altogether?
edited 30th May '11 9:16:04 PM by Wulf
2x Micheal Jacksons build wasn't the problem, do you believe that black people and white people have mutually exclusive builds?
As for skin, I can only take that excuse so far, because concealer and foundation is a thing that is readily available at every CVS I've ever been at.
It's not a film about Micheal, it's a film that he happens to be in.
edited 27th Jan '16 6:25:59 PM by SilentlyHonest
I would think that a black actor could do the job just fine; given that we can do pretty good work with makeup at this point. But yeah, any Jackson film was going to be awkward at best. The casting just makes it worse.
edited 27th Jan '16 6:36:51 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.No one, but I did not think bringing up that he is not really the best person to make a movie about was conductive to the topic.
No I just thought that that skin condition was rare, so the odds of finding some one with the generaly the same skin tone, same build, and black might be near imposible.
Makeup can only go so far.
I mean the dude they picked isn't exactly what I'd call good in the build area, skin area, or face area either.
Read my stories!Maybe they should just call in whomever made Gollum or the blue Avatars and make a CGI Michael Jackson. No wait, that's expensive. Maybe make a Photoshop Michael Jackson and drag the picture across the screen.
Anyways... haven't there been movies with Michael Jackson in the past?
I don't know if any have been released after his death which is part of the issue I believe, definitely before however. The thing is, those were made with the intent to make fun of him, and he was alive. Speaking ill of the dead is frowned upon to say the least.
edited 27th Jan '16 7:31:21 PM by SilentlyHonest
Okay, how is the intent of the portrayal and the actor portraying him both unrelated? A serious portrayal is meant to be taken seriously, with regard toward the person being portrayed, while if you're lambasting or lampooning someone what does it matter who portrays him, because it's by the very nature of the performance not meant to be taken seriously.
Just because it's comedy that doesn't mean you're supposed to not take it seriously. Comedy isn't a kind of free pass to "you can't judge me for what I do"-land. Making fun of someone can be taken too far, y'know. What do you think about making fun of a black historical figure by blackfacing a non-black actor? Or whitewashing the historical figure in question? It's a movie, a visual media, not a stand-up comedian narrating a joke.
And I mentioned comedy specifically because I remember seeing that kind of portrayal somewhere. There might have been non-comedy portrayals too.
I already mentioned an example of one of the times comedy isn't funny. I.E. making fun of the recently deceased, what I meant by not being taken seriously is that the person being portrayed in a comedic light is being made light of. Being portrayed in a way that they aren't made to be seriously. That's the entire point of Lampooning someone in fact it might be the actual definition. If so then your rude little attempt at scolding someone for asking you to explain your reasoning was uncalled for.
Now how is the intent of the Portrayal and the actor portraying him both unrelated?
edited 27th Jan '16 7:58:04 PM by SilentlyHonest
Maybe I'm just young but 6 years doesn't feel like too soon.
This whole casting thing however, especially in the wake of the Oscar's controversy feels like a mistake.
Well, not a mistake, just idiotically blind to the point you have to wonder if someone actually might be doing it on purpose.
The Blog The ArtI will say about it does seem an odd choice — even the actor involved, Joseph Fiennes, said he was 'shocked' to be cast as Michael Jackson
note .
![]()
![]()
![]()
Sorry if I came off as rude.
Okay, I didn't say at any point that the content of the portrayal and the actor portraying are unrelated. I asked for examples of depictions of Michael Jackson in the past, regardless of content, because the current controversy is that there is a white actor playing him, not the content of the portrayal. And even if the content of this portrayal also is controversial, it's a separate issue.
A priori, I think that, if a white actor portraying him now is problematic now, it should have been in the past. There might be specific contents that mix things around, but in general, any given portrayal of Michael Jackson by a white actor by the industry is more likely to be problematic due to that than not (in probability space out of all possible events that could happen).
Like, given Michael's skin condition I don't really think it's a big issue to have a white actor portraying him in his later years, whether it's a serious portrayal or not. Which, by the way, the movie we're talking about doesn't seem to be. And if you have a problem with the movie for not being serious this "close" to his death, well, it's not a matter to discuss in this thread.
@Tangent: I'm reminded now of a book I read once. I can't remember if I was required to read it for school or not, but I do remember it was a... juveline book. It wasn't for young children, but it wasn't for late teens eithers. I don't even remember the name. Anyways, it's about a black kid who runs away from home in order to find a radio host that supposedly knows the secret Michael Jackson used to turn white. In the end [SPOILER ALERT (if it wasn't obvious)], the kid discovers the radio host is paraplegic, and learns the lesson that he doesn't need to give two shits about what other people think of his appearance to follow his dreams. Or something like that.
Sorry for the doublepost.
A news article about Whoopi Goldberg's comment on the Oscar's Controversy happened upon me, except in Portuguese. The ones I've found in English seem to be focusing on "[the Academy] can't be racist" because "I won once." Given the difference in how both articles depicted what her said, I'm going to quote it here in full. Source: this random website
.
Italicized emphasis is theirs. Bolded are mine.
For the second consecutive year, all 20 acting nominees for Hollywood's most prestigious prize, the Academy Awards, are white. Speaking on US daytime talk show The View, Goldberg argued that the blame lies with film-makers who fail to cast non-Caucasian actors rather than those who vote for the annual awards.
"I won once. So it can't be that racist," Goldberg said, referring to her Best Supporting Actress win in 1991 for her performance in Ghost. "Even if you fill the Academy with black and Latino and Asian members, if there's no one on the screen to vote for, you're not going to get the outcome that you want."
"You need directors and producers who will say, 'Hey, what about so and so?' They need to be aware that the picture is not complete [without non-Causasian actors]," Goldberg added.
She also suggested that high-profile figures who have announced they will be boycotting next month's awards ceremony, such as Will Smith and wife Jade Pinkett Smith, are fighting the wrong battle.
"You wanna boycott something? Don't go see the movies that don't have your representation," said Goldberg, who hosted the Oscars four times between 1992 and 2002. "That's the boycott you want. To me, we have this conversation every year. It pisses me off."
Meanwhile, Ian McKellen has also shared his views on the ongoing debate about Hollywood diversity, suggesting that the film industry "disregards"
gay people too.
edited 28th Jan '16 10:34:59 AM by Victin
In all fairness, there is something of a point there.
A lot of uncomfortable things about yourself aren't that hard to acknowledge provided the fact that you have any degree of honesty and self-awareness ("i have a drinking problem", "i am unhappy in my marriage", etc). Actually having the strength and resolve to do something about them is an entirely different matter.

Making a Michael Jackson movie still seems kind of Too Soon in general.