Forum Home Forum Home > Topics not related to music > General discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Thoughts on "Hollywood whitewashing" if any?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedThoughts on "Hollywood whitewashing" if any?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Michael678 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 02 2013
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2466 		Direct Link To This Post Topic: Thoughts on "Hollywood whitewashing" if any?
    Posted: April 17 2016 at 06:13
I was heavily thinking about this story last night, and I wanted to know everyone's thoughts on this issue and "white-washing" in general in Hollywood movies.

http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2016-04-14/live-action-ghost-in-the-shell-film-posts-1st-photo-of-scarlett-johansson-as-the-major/.101051

Do you agree that it's an issue that needs to be looked at, or is it all hodge-podge bullsh*t to the nth degree?? Feel free to post them down below.
Progrockdude
Back to Top
Vompatti View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: October 22 2005
Location: elsewhere
Status: Offline
Points: 67458 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 17 2016 at 06:56
To whitewash is a metaphor meaning "to gloss over or cover up vices, crimes or scandals or to exonerate by means of a perfunctory investigation or through biased presentation of data". It is especially used in the context of corporations, governments or other organizations.
Back to Top
The Dark Elf View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13238 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 17 2016 at 09:07
I guess I'm not understanding the dilemma. So because Scarlet Johansson is not a "real cyborg" she shouldn't have the part?Wink

In other news, I am sick to death of political-correctness. I find it disconcerting every time I watch a Shakespeare play set in England during the 14th or 15th century and the Duke of Gloucester or some other royal is a person of color. When Laurence Olivier played Othello, he had to paint his face (it was unnecessary for James Earl Jones, obviously), so shouldn't the black actor apply white (peach or salmon?) make-up to at least give the impression of historical correctness? You say I'm overreacting? Then isn't this the same issue in reverse?

 
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20671 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 17 2016 at 09:22
^....'not a real cyborg'......LOL
She was probably chosen because she has shown she can be  a box office action star who can make them money....end of story.
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
King Only View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 19 2013
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Status: Offline
Points: 554 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 10:06
The movie studio needs a famous actress to make sure the movie is a hit. From the studio's point of view it is an investment and they want to make sure they make a profit.

I can't think of any Japanese actresses that are famous enough in the US/worldwide to play the lead role in a movie like this. So someone like Scarlett Johansson is an ideal choice. Apart from being good looking and well known she's also done some sci-fi action movies recently (Lucy, Avengers etc) and that's probably the same audience that the movie producers want to attract for Ghost In The Shell.
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20671 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 10:54
Originally posted by King Only King Only wrote:

The movie studio needs a famous actress to make sure the movie is a hit. From the studio's point of view it is an investment and they want to make sure they make a profit.

I can't think of any Japanese actresses that are famous enough in the US/worldwide to play the lead role in a movie like this. So someone like Scarlett Johansson is an ideal choice. Apart from being good looking and well known she's also done some sci-fi action movies recently (Lucy, Avengers etc) and that's probably the same audience that the movie producers want to attract for Ghost In The Shell.

Yep......'nuff said.


Smile
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
CPicard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 03 2008
Location: Là, sui monti.
Status: Offline
Points: 10841 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 11:50
Originally posted by King Only King Only wrote:

The movie studio needs a famous actress to make sure the movie is a hit. From the studio's point of view it is an investment and they want to make sure they make a profit.

I can't think of any Japanese actresses that are famous enough in the US/worldwide to play the lead role in a movie like this. So someone like Scarlett Johansson is an ideal choice. Apart from being good looking and well known she's also done some sci-fi action movies recently (Lucy, Avengers etc) and that's probably the same audience that the movie producers want to attract for Ghost In The Shell.


So, the audience cares more about the actors/actresses than the scenario/story of the movies? That must explain why the studios want Cumberbatch in every movie.

But the main problem is: why do the Hell movie studios need to do a "live" remake of Ghost In The Shell or Akira? To make the audience feel like they're watching a "true movie for adults" instead of a cartoon? To make the audience feel like at home: "Ah, it's an American movie, nothing strange from these Japanese weirdos"?
I'm slightly confused by this strategy.
Back to Top
King Only View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 19 2013
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Status: Offline
Points: 554 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 12:27
Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

So, the audience cares more about the actors/actresses than the scenario/story of the movies?

Well, I think most moviegoers care about both. But it's a fact that it's very hard to have a hit if you don't have a famous star in the leading role. And they need the film to be a hit because these kinds of movies are expensive to make. You need to recoup at least a hundred million dollars before you even start making a profit.

Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

But the main problem is: why do the Hell movie studios need to do a "live" remake of Ghost In The Shell or Akira? To make the audience feel like they're watching a "true movie for adults" instead of a cartoon? To make the audience feel like at home: "Ah, it's an American movie, nothing strange from these Japanese weirdos"?
I'm slightly confused by this strategy.

Japanese creators and companies are happy to sell their intellectual property to Hollywood studios because they get a ton of cash. These remakes only happen after the original Japanese creators give permission and get paid. They only care about money. Come over to Japan sometime and you will see what I mean. They use anime characters to sell junk food, pachinko slot machines, video games, sexualized products like mousepads with breasts etc. Japanese anime creators and companies have zero integrity (except for maybe Studio Ghibli).

And it wouldn't necessarily be better if it was made in Japan with an all Japanese cast. I mean look at the live action Attack On Titan movies or the live action Kiki's Delivery Service movie. All Japanese staff and cast and the movies were terrible.

I don't think many American moviegoers know or even care if it's originally from Japan or not. They just want to see attractive actors and actresses, lots of action scenes and cool special effects.
Back to Top
Michael678 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 02 2013
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2466 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 12:50
Originally posted by King Only King Only wrote:

Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

So, the audience cares more about the actors/actresses than the scenario/story of the movies?

Well, I think most moviegoers care about both. But it's a fact that it's very hard to have a hit if you don't have a famous star in the leading role. And they need the film to be a hit because these kinds of movies are expensive to make. You need to recoup at least a hundred million dollars before you even start making a profit.

Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:

But the main problem is: why do the Hell movie studios need to do a "live" remake of Ghost In The Shell or Akira? To make the audience feel like they're watching a "true movie for adults" instead of a cartoon? To make the audience feel like at home: "Ah, it's an American movie, nothing strange from these Japanese weirdos"?
I'm slightly confused by this strategy.

Japanese creators and companies are happy to sell their intellectual property to Hollywood studios because they get a ton of cash. These remakes only happen after the original Japanese creators give permission and get paid. They only care about money. Come over to Japan sometime and you will see what I mean. They use anime characters to sell junk food, pachinko slot machines, video games, sexualized products like mousepads with breasts etc. Japanese anime creators and companies have zero integrity (except for maybe Studio Ghibli).

And it wouldn't necessarily be better if it was made in Japan with an all Japanese cast. I mean look at the live action Attack On Titan movies or the live action Kiki's Delivery Service movie. All Japanese staff and cast and the movies were terrible.

I don't think many American moviegoers know or even care if it's originally from Japan or not. They just want to see attractive actors and actresses, lots of action scenes and cool special effects.

And that's the unfortunate thing about this whole thing: there isn't any creative/artistic/economic risk involved, and there isn't as much room for new talent to become big superstars as there was back in the day. Of course everything's about the money, but it should not get too much in the way of creative freedom and deliver something legitimately good. Besides, I'm not bothered in seeing what might be yet another piece of sh*t live-action adaptation (because history shows it to be the case). So, if I see from now on any debate on a movie in regards to 'whitewashing', 7 times out of 10 the movie looks to be sh*t to me, personally.
Progrockdude
Back to Top
A Person View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 10 2008
Location: __
Status: Offline
Points: 65760 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 12:58
Scarlett Johansson is not a good actor.
Back to Top
King Only View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 19 2013
Location: Tokyo, Japan
Status: Offline
Points: 554 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 13:19
Originally posted by A Person A Person wrote:

Scarlett Johansson is not a good actor.

Well honestly, for this character not a lot of acting is really needed. The character is not very emotional, she has a very cold personality. But the role will have a lot of physical challenges (although I guess they will use stunt doubles and CGI for that).

Unfortunately I think the final result will be closer to the Resident Evil movies rather than the original Japanese movies and TV shows. But hopefully I'm wrong.
Back to Top
A Person View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: November 10 2008
Location: __
Status: Offline
Points: 65760 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 13:26
Originally posted by King Only King Only wrote:

Originally posted by A Person A Person wrote:

Scarlett Johansson is not a good actor.

Well honestly, for this character not a lot of acting is really needed. The character is not very emotional, she has a very cold personality. But the role will have a lot of physical challenges (although I guess they will use stunt doubles and CGI for that).

Unfortunately I think the final result will be closer to the Resident Evil movies rather than the original Japanese movies and TV shows. But hopefully I'm wrong.

It's going to be based on the TV show I think, so it will need more emotion than the film. I don't think ScarJo can do cerebral nonemotional types as proven by Lucy.
Back to Top
Icarium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34086 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 13:37
Scarlett Johansen could motion capture a role for a film about granite rocks or ice bergs
Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23104 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 07 2016 at 14:35
This isn't a new thing though...but I guess one could've hoped to see Hollywood start casting actors that actually fit the given story.
Take the movie Troja for instance. None of the actors look like they're from the Mediterrenean sea, and the one playing Helene, the most beautiful girl in the world at the time, looks like a British sock model.
Hollywood casts movies to earn money just like every other movie cartel....they're just getting increasingly poorer at it as time goes by.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
Equality 7-2521 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 11 2005
Location: Philly
Status: Offline
Points: 15784 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 08 2016 at 08:57
Originally posted by A Person A Person wrote:

Originally posted by King Only King Only wrote:

Originally posted by A Person A Person wrote:

Scarlett Johansson is not a good actor.

Well honestly, for this character not a lot of acting is really needed. The character is not very emotional, she has a very cold personality. But the role will have a lot of physical challenges (although I guess they will use stunt doubles and CGI for that).

Unfortunately I think the final result will be closer to the Resident Evil movies rather than the original Japanese movies and TV shows. But hopefully I'm wrong.

It's going to be based on the TV show I think, so it will need more emotion than the film. I don't think ScarJo can do cerebral nonemotional types as proven by Lucy.


And disproved by Under the Skin.
"One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. "
Back to Top
Meltdowner View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 25 2013
Location: Portugal
Status: Offline
Points: 10279 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 08 2016 at 09:10
I don't understand why people are complaining now, when that was announced one year ago Ermm There are two really good seasons of Stand Alone Complex, I don't think a movie is necessary.
Back to Top
Icarium View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34086 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 08 2016 at 09:12
I think Scarlett did a decent Kaa voice
Back to Top
Michael678 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 02 2013
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2466 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 08 2016 at 09:42
Originally posted by Meltdowner Meltdowner wrote:

I don't understand why people are complaining now, when that was announced one year ago Ermm There are two really good seasons of Stand Alone Complex, I don't think a movie is necessary.

I think there was, but I'm not entirely sure since I don't know when they first announced Johansson is playing Kusanagi so...
Progrockdude
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 08 2016 at 11:18
Originally posted by Icarium Icarium wrote:

I think Scarlett did a decent Kaa voice

Not even close to Sterling Holloway, though.  Only Idris Elba and Kingsley fared well among the voice overs imo.  
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20671 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 08 2016 at 12:13
Originally posted by CPicard CPicard wrote:


So, the audience cares more about the actors/actresses than the scenario/story of the movies? That must explain why the studios want Cumberbatch in every movie.


 
He's doing Dr Strange currently......Depp turned down the role from what I have read.
Personally I like Cumberbatch...an excellent actor , but certainly he nor anyone else is right for every part.
 
But as someone mentioned above this is all about the money...so they are not going to hire a nobody for the lead role unless they have a well known supporting cast to carry the film and they hope the newcomer will become a star.
 
Big budget action / superhero films are all about fantasy anyway....do we really want to see ordinary looking people in them...? Look at all the Avenger films, etc...these are box office draws....it's that simple.
Even Deadpool, an unconventional 'hero' film has Ryan Reynolds and not some average acting Joe.
It's a no brainer.
 
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.391 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.