Discussion Diversity In the New Saga [See OP Warning]

Aphra's facial appearance seems rather nebulous at this point. In some artwork she looks a bit like Olivia Wilde or Kelly Macdonald, and in others she does look more east Asian. I think I had suggested Alia Shawkat because there is no strong consistency at this point, and she seems to possess the charisma of the character, if that's even possible to determine from new character in this format.

 

Look at Chewie. How much articulation is in his face? Not very much but we still know when he is happy, sad, angry. We can still feel empathy for him. It's all in how you act.

 

The problem is, they kind of made the controversy bigger than it needed to be. The more that I think about it, I don't understand why they chose to market it that way. Did JJ's obsession with mystery boxes/"twists" bleed into the marketing department or something? It was just counter-productive on multiple levels:

1. The idea of essentially going "hey the main Jedi hero of this trilogy is a woman, isn't that a nice change of pace," seems like a ridiculously obvious marketing idea to run with. You'd instantly get a lot of people excited, or at least interested, in the film just by that notion alone (and also gets some good press/PR out of it as well). I would have RUN with that as a marketing tactic, not tried to hide it (and not very well since even the CHILDREN in my theatre started to figure out that Rey was the main hero like 5 minutes after she first shows up onscreen). It makes little sense.

2. You could have STILL marketed the idea of "oh and the other main hero in the film, is a Black guy. So progress there as well." But you wouldn't be essentially tricking people into thinking that he would be the new Jedi hero, so that backlash is largely avoided. Now some people might have still been disappointed about his portrayal in the movie. But they would have at least not been annoyed that you pulled a pointless "bait and switch" on them for no good reason.

3. People who had issues with Finn in TFA might have been more willingly to give them the benefit of the doubt on his growth/character arc, IF they weren't also so annoyed/upset that you teased them with something cool, and then took it away.

4. Etc.

Again, I don't why they did it this way. It just caused more issues than were necessary.

 

Keep in mind how they also marketed Luke. Having a voice over of him in the second trailer with the only flashback scene of him
touching Artoo. JJ tried to get the maximum number of Luke fans to pay to go see the movie before pulling the rug from under them, when they're already in their paid movie seat.

At least we had MSW to give us a heads up.

Marketings' job was to get the maximum number of fans to go see the movie. Black Jedi wanting fans. Female lead wanting fans. What Luke is doing now fans. The whole enchilada.

Whether people were disappointed after seeing it is irrelevant, marketing just cared about the maximum number of butts to pay to see it.
And seeing as how it got the highest domestic gross, I'm sure they feel they've succeeded.


Now if you REALLy want to talk about marketing, look how the Asian marketing treated Finn. And I'm not talking about that to bitch, but to actually compare their marketing of TFA to the USA.

Edit: keep in mind this was after Terminator: Genesys spoiled its biggest twist in its own trailer. I'm not sure if anyone would want that for Star Wars.

 

The problem that I see with her argument is that it's kind of reactionary. You know how you "get experience," you're given the chance to. The Russo's had never directed anything on the scale of the last two Captain America movies. Yet Marvel gambled on them, and it paid off. Colin had directed one extremely small-budgeted film, and yet the studio gave him a shot with JW. Chris Nolan had never made anything on the scale of his Batman films, and yet Warner Brothers went with him anyway. Heck even GL himself had never made anything on the scale of ANH when he made it.

With KK;s comments, she's essentially saying that "well OTHER studios and OTHER divisions should give them shots FRIST. And then if they do well, then maybe we'll hire them in the future." And when they hold up "we want to diversify SW" as one of their big things, basically taking this approach seems to contradict that. Many would argue "well if you're so committed to it, then why don't YOU take the initiative and hire them/give them shots FIRST, because that's how all of these other filmmakers got their shots. People took chances on them.

Also the other problem is that other studios tend to be reluctant to hire female directors for these types of films as well. So by this logic, that basically means that people have to wait even longer for it to happen. Someone's got to make the first move in this regard.

 

I can think of at least a half dozen women directors that could direct a SW film now and are already experienced: Kathryn Bigelow, Catherine Hardwicke, Ava Duvernay, Jodie Foster, and Patty Jenkins.

And three of them have even worked with ILM before(Bigelow on K-19, Duvernay on Selma, and Hardwicke on Twilight). And they've all directed big fx films or are in the process of directing one('cept for Foster but she could do it anyway).

There's no need to hire an unknown or less experienced woman. Just hire one period.

 

Nope, its enough for secondary character, not for a lead.
I would love to see Ahsoka movie but I dont think we are ready to make good believable movie with alien as a lead (same with Yoda move, not yet).

 

Yes, I've noticed that with virtually every film they make sure to keep the white male as a priority. Did you think they were going to do the Miles Morales version of Spiderman? And btw I'm pretty sure the main villain role won't be as much in the spotlight nor get as much attention as the role Zendaya is playing. Same for RDF too.

1920s NYC was diverse only in that numerous races lived in the same city and perhaps even visited some of the same clubs from time to time . But it wasn't necessarily integrated in the way you seemed to suggest. White folks may have loved themselves some jazz and tried to emulate black people in a stereotypical manner when they wanted to get loose for a few hours, but black and white people weren't hanging out much and IR dating was far less common then than it is now. So in other words TPTB of that movie could have easily cast a white actress for Kravitz' role and it would not have seemed odd nor would the box office have been affected. You make it out as if it no big deal that Kravitz got the part. Really? Ten years ago she wouldn't have. Also she is not the only person of color in the film. Carmen Ejogo, another black actress, also has a sizable part. No men of color though.

What are you arguing for? More of these types of movies with women of color? We're getting them (are getting now). Are you asking for less white actors in the casts overall in films like these? Less white women? I' not sure exactly what you are seeking.

Like? What are the long-established trends that I listed? Race-bending lead female parts from white to women of color? Redoing a title'lead character but this time changing it from an adult white male to a teenage black girl? Putting out genre films in which out of an ensemble cast there isn't a single white female actress but there are multiple roles for women of color? Please provide evidence that these are long-established trends or that all of these examples should be obvious. If it should be so obvious then why isn't Hollywood doing more of that racial bending to benefit men of color on screen? How about making Steve Trevor of Wonder Woman an Asian guy or something? Would that qualify as obvious too?

Also I disagree with your point that Uhura is not really a main character in the Trek films. But playing devil's advocate who is to say the female lead in this Han Solo movie will have a role that's any bigger? And if she doesn't then does that discount all the hand-wringing some of you are doing regarding the casting of Clarke? I mean after all if it isn't a TRUE leading role then there is no real progress in your eyes regardless of who was picked to play the role, right?

I wouldn't have even included these examples if one or two people on an earlier page had not mentioned genre films in general, not just SW.

You go tell them that. All of these ladies have referred to themselves as "black" at one time or another and for sure whenever there is a juicy role for a character that is a well-known black woman, fictional or otherwise, these ladies sure seem to audition for the part. But, yes, Hollywood appears to prefer black actresses who are clearly mixed or least bi-racial. Hell, a page or so back someone posted the picture of another "black" actress who almost won the role of Rey and she too is clearly mixed. So there is a type although they are still women of color regardless.

And in those cases Asian actors/actresses got screwed out of opportunities. Hollywood goes out and balances it with casting black actresses I guess. Go figure.

See one reason why I don't have an issue with Clarke's casting is because her character, as you put it, is not locked in in terms of audience expectations. This is why I despise the casting of Donald Glover. He is no Lando as far as I'm concerned.

 

Really? Donald Glover seems like the perfect fit for a young Lando. Has the charm, swagger, and flair of the character. I think he'll be fantastic as Lando.

 

When has Glover ever been known for swagger? What role? Billy Dee Williams in his day was considered a true leading man. He was called the black Clark Gable for a reason. IMO not enough people want to give him credit for how sexy and effortlessly charming he was in ESB. They tend to dismiss it by complimenting him on his (ugh) pimp-like skills as if admitting otherwise opens up some door of insecurity. I've noticed that SW fans tend to not refer to BDW as good-looking as much as they do Harrison or Oscar or Hayden. They fall back on the word "charming" instead as if the choice is safer. But as a heterosexual male I'm not afraid to say it....Billy Dee Williams was one handsome dude, a guy with leading man looks who was only stifled in his career because his peak years took place during a time in which Hollywood rarely had any use for a black male lead.

Now with that bit of a mini-rant out of the way Glover in no way is ever going to be considered that type of suave, smooth, ladykiller. Never. He's good-looking enough and has his share of female fans. But he also is just as much viewed as lovably goofy or cuddly. He is also pretty short to boot. Then again so is the guy playing Han in this film so maybe that has something to do with it (thankfully the even shorter Clarke won't tower over them). Glover is probably the better actor. Maybe. But he doesn't have the natural swagger than BDW had. Perhaps he can fake it on screen.

 

I was talking about the argument in general; I don't see that it is useful to point out anyone here in particular.

I was saying I don't tend to like either side. Moderation has a way of going out the window. Debates and discussions on this topic have a way of being meaningless because people react rather think about what others are saying; very difficult to effectively communicate when people are SO emotional about something. Not that it isn't important to discuss, but on the internet it is especially troublesome because you are typing, and typed words are so easily misunderstood that things just go in circles. When I type something, and someone addresses everything I typed in a way that totally misunderstands what I am saying, one attempt to clarify is pretty much all I give; after that it is a waste of time. This is for interesting and entertaining discussion, not going around in circles yelling at each other. There is enough of that everywhere else.

 

For me it's pretty simple, as a filmmaker as well as a moviegoer, I think great characters and the actual plot come first, and then diversity concerns. That being said, with their budget, there are great actors of all races, both genders, and all backgrounds, so there's no particular reason that a cast shouldn't be fairly diverse if it makes sense for the movie. If those are the best actors for the roles. I'm loving the Rogue One cast, I think it's awesome. I'm also a huge Hong Kong action / Asian martial arts fan, so I mean... that's amazing to me to tap into that a bit. Couldn't be more excited.

I will say as a filmmaker I'm frustrated to live in a world where this has to be a constant thing. I don't think it's fair to ask everyone to think so hard about this, because it really puts a damper on the quality of a production. Here in Portland, it's a very white, very not-diverse city whatsoever, so when I was casting my short film up here my casting director, who was an Asian woman, brought up that we should think about diversity for the roles. The problem is there are very few talented actors up here in Portland, so to be honest my only concern was finding the best actors and if they're all white, well, that's just what was available. We ended up casting a half-Asian guy for one role, who in my opinion was good, but not great, mainly because we had so little diversity anywhere else. Even my casting director admitted there is almost no ethnic community of actors up here, which frustrates her, but she said that's the reality. At the level of these Star Wars movies, though, the cool thing is they can audition literally anyone and there is plenty of diversity of great actors, so I don't see the problem with being able to do both -- great actors and diversity.

I'm certainly excited for Rogue One and Felicity Jones is a fantastic actress, but to be honest if a girl isn't Force-sensitive it's a lot less believable that she's some great hand-to-hand fighter and she's a small, very attractive girl. I know this has been a thing since Buffy and Alias and a lot of other girl power shows, but it's far more believable when you have a movie like The Hunger Games where she's a fantastic shot with a bow and arrow. There are no reasons that girls can't be amazing shots with a gun, bow and arrow, etc. There are tons of real world examples. There are very few girls who can fight hand to hand in history and they look like Ronda Rousey, they don't look like Felicity Jones. To me, that kind of takes me out of the film a bit. I know we live in a PC world where we all have to say men and women are just as capable of being great warriors, but that's just simply not true. I used to spar against 2nd and 3rd degree black belts who were women, and one 4th degree, and even before I had my black belt (just a month or two before, though), I could easily beat them because I'm a lot stronger and a lot bigger. Their SKILL was way ahead of mine, accuracy of kicks, knowledge of defense tactics, but the reality is when they landed a kick it didn't hurt me. When I didn't land a kick, but they blocked it, it STILL hurt them because they're just a lot smaller. It's not a sexist thing, it's a physical strength thing that is the way men and women are built. Without a lot of testosterone, women can't even come close to the strength of men. And, of course, testosterone makes women look manlier.

I love Alias, one of my absolute favorite shows, but it does require that suspension of disbelief (same with Buffy, which I also love, but at least she has super powers, basically). I mean she kicks a guy who is a solid 200 pounds of muscle, and the dude flies through the air like he's the weight of a small hamster. It's very fun to watch, but very unrealistic. In combat, size matters a lot, and the amount of skill you have to have to overcome a size disadvantage is immense. The same was true of me with less skilled sparring partners who were guys. I had a heck of a time with the biggest dude, even though I outranked him, because when he kicked me it just hurt a lot. My only way to avoid that was to avoid his kicks entirely by being faster than him, which takes a LOT more skill to master, and I was only slightly more skilled.

I just worry that sometimes with these movies, they're going all rah-rah girl power for the sake of it, rather than saying, ok, this character is such and such way, does it make sense for them to be a guy or a girl? If they're in hand-to-hand combat scenes taking out 10 Stormtroopers, probably not gonna be a 110 pound small girl. As I said though, it's fun to watch, so whatever, I'll get over it and probably love her character, but I do prefer there be some basis for the strength whether it's superhuman vampire slayer, Force-sensitive Rey, etc. A girl doesn't have to take out 10 Stormtroopers to be strong, either, she can be strong in plenty of other ways, so sometimes I worry they're catering to male fans who just like to watch a "hot chick" in an action role. If it's really just about having a strong female protagonist, why isn't someone like Gwendolyn Christie playing Jyn Erso? She's very unattractive, so guess what? They put her under a freakin' helmet! I mean think about it. The last thing I want to hear from Disney is how much they care about female protagonists. They care about box office dollars and guys like hot chicks, girls like hot chicks, and so the girls who actually look like, yeah, this chick could kick some butt, they give them a pretty weak role (Captain Phasma was a disappointment so far, let's hope that changes). That's the part that annoys me the most. I don't care if the lead actress is "hot," I'd rather have her fit the character and story.

All that being said, I'm happy about more female protagonists because I think it's fantastic for the franchise and the fan base, to broaden the appeal of Star Wars. Ultimately, that's the goal.

 

You want civil? I'll give you civil--a Galactic Civil War.

 

For me i prefer to judge a film within the merits of the film and not what the marketing is promising me.

I learned my Lesson with Godillza 2014

Though i still wish people would understand that lesson with Iron Man 3 vncredleader

 

Oh yeah the whole entitlement about trailers and the IM3 reveal thing is a major pet peeve of mine. I will fight people on that film I think it is dang near perfect.

 

Already sensing it with Vader and how much he is or is not in this film. And the film is not even out yet.

 

Once a character has been introduced as a particular ethnicity and gender that should never be changed unless the story is clearly in the "what if" or "alternate reality" category. It comes across as lazy and pandering because the audience instinctively knows that it's being done from a "meta" motive. It also violates the integrity of the character, which does matter to a lot of people.

 

The cursed child play is not a continuation from the film series, and so there's only the text of the books to go on. While acknowledging that original illustrations and JK Rowling's OK-ing of the cast implies Hermione was written, or assumed to be, white by default, race is by no means integral to her character, and there's no reason that the character doesn't translate to being black.

 

This. So much this. I agree with mostly everything you said but this part is really spot on, and it's a great concern for me aswell. Jyn Erso is not a realistic character, and there's no excuse for this since she is a non-Force-sensitive female human in the GFFA. Sadly, it's just like you said, that there are too many guys both among the creators and the audience who want to live out their fanboy dreams of having a hot chick kick ass. Casting a small, non-muscular girl in a very kick-ass physical role would be equivalent to casting a small, non-muscular guy in the same role. But you never see the latter one happen, only the first one. We see the same problem with Wonder Woman. Even though Gal Gadot is tall, just like Wonder Woman should be, she is far from muscular, just like Wonder Woman should be. Obviously, they will never cast this kind of woman since a thin Wonder Woman is "more sexy". Yet you see Thor with his big muscles, hmmm I wonder why they didn't cast a more thin male actor for Thor?

 

That's exactly right, like Gal Gadot is absolutely gorgeous, so she gets cast, but is she actually really buff and strong? Hahaha, not even close. I doubt that chick can bench 75 pounds to be honest. But superpowers, and stuff. So yay, she is Wonder Woman.

You're totally right though, it's not a girl or guy thing, it would be equally ridiculous if they cast a small, hipster like dude with no physical prowess. We'd still be thinking uhh... this dude has that physical strength? How exactly? I mean even martial arts stars are usually muscular, not like The Rock obviously, but they have densely packed muscle in a small frame.

 

In a franchise with magical space-wizards, laser swords, a mystical energy field that allows you to control/moves things with you mind, midichlorians, etc, "realism" went out the window a long time ago. I have ZERO problems buying Jyn Erso doing what she does, nor have I met anyone outside of (lets face it often hypercritical) fan boards who have a problem buying it either. Because, IT'S A MOVIE!! Also it helps that I happen to know multiple women who are not particular big or physically imposing, but who could beat down people who are bigger than they are (I've seen them do it in fact).

Also Bruce Lee was not a particular tall or heavy guy, yet he was one of the toughest guys around and inspired men and women who are much bigger and heavier than he was. Be it fighters, power-lifters, nutritionists, etc.

Also the notion that there have been "very few women throughout history who can fight hand to hand," and "they all look like Ronda Rousey" is such a ridiculous over-exaggeration based off of ZERO evidence that it lack all credibility. Sorry, but what evidence do you have to back up such a claim?

People tend to only bring up the "realism" thing in specific situations, and it doesn't sound all that convincing as a result.

 

He doesn't need to be known for swagger outside of a role, he's an actor so he'll act like he has swagger. It could also be the case that they're showing young Lando before he was all put together and Glover's previous comedic skills could be put to good use in that case. Also, height doesn't matter in movies, Tom Cruise is short and they use camera tricks and whatnot to make him look taller than he is. I guarantee attention won't be drawn to their height in the Han Solo movie.

 

I completely agree with the people who say that it's horribly unrealistic when people with a smaller frame are able to overcome ostensibly stronger enemies.

We all remember, for example, the annoying, unrealistic, not at all enjoyable part of Back to the Future when George punches out Biff.