Originally Posted by LordofhouseEl
Wow just wow, I normally agree with you on a lot of your posts but lately find myself disagreeing with a lot of the things you state. How is MOS anymore better than Avengers in terms of diversity? Hell I would say the role of Nick Fury was more relevant than that of Perry White and the general. You talk about white washing? What about krypton? A race of highly evolved beings who are God like on earth, funny there was no black kryptonians in site. A minority could take offence to that saying what only the white man can come from an advanced race. Also I am sure minorities don't care about whether a Caucasian person comes from Western Europe or Eastern Europe because all they see is a white person so your remarks as to even the Caucasian cast being diverse falls short. And MOS pushed the American military agenda more so than Avengers ever did. All those ads about the military and the likes how did you miss that. At the end of the day neither movie is racist but if you want to pick on one for something might as well do the other.
Every movie and every major production of any kind produced in a racist society will inevitably be contaminated by racism, sociology 201, maybe sociology 301. I don't think we should be immature about it, we should be open to discussing it and exploring it without getting defensive, as you are.
The fact that Krypton has no minorities is probably a plus, regardless of whether they intended it that way. It makes sense that a genetically engineered society, that believes itself to be "perfected", would have less genetic diversity. In contrast, the genetic diversity we have on EArth is precisely because of evolution, people with ancestries that are geographically distinct will appear different, as different geographies select for different traits, in addition to the genetic drift effect.
It also makes sense when constructing a foreign society to have a consistent look. In Troy
, all of the Greek characters are Germanic/Wasp-looking, and the Trojans look southern european. In Star Trek, Klingons are always played by Black actors, and you never see an east-asian Vulcan. Why do you think that is? It makes sense to have a consistent look for a foreign culture, particularly one with a genetic belief system like Krypton's, and that includes reduced racial diversity. With that said, though Krypton is genetically homogeneous within the movie, Ayelet Zurer and Antje Traue are foreign actors in real life, Snyder had the courage to hire them, Whedon did not.
Your comment about different kinds of whiteness is flat out incorrect. I'm a minority, it matters very much. There are in fact different kinds of whiteness, and that applies to every other race. Italian, Greek, Scandinavian, etc are all different and located at different heights of the inequality ladder. There are also different kinds of black and different kinds of Asian. In the US, forms often ask if a person is "white, asian, hispanic, or black" because those are the only four choices. That's incorrect, there's in fact a significant difference and gradation levels within those artificial and fake groupings. Look up the list of America's white presidents. They're not just white. They're wasps.
MoS is more racially diverse than TA based on its cast. You don't have to agree that MoS is a better movie (lol). But in this one particular and important metric, MoS does a lot better. Here are the cast lists:
As for the military, MoS played a relatively complex role. The leadership was shown as having mixed feelings to Superman, though the rank and file grew to like him. The movie ends with Superman crashing a predator drone. That's not an American military agenda. This is a stark contrast to the Avengers, who are military assets and all have explicit ties to the US military except for Thor, who leads the military on Asgard. In general though the military and government in the MCU is totally lacking in complexity. It's shallower than we find in any of MoS, the Nolan films, or the X-Men movies, which is ironic.