The Twins: Racist?

[PyroChamber]

"Well, it tested great with the kids."

Man, **** the kids.

[protocida]

You have way too much hate in your hearts.

[Marvin]

i'm sure the kids are b1#ching about the twins as much as everyone else is

[Hunter Rider]

Don't know if I'd consider them racist, ppl are so touchy over PC stuff these days I tend not to give a **** unless it's done in an aggressive/hateful/violent way, but I will say I found the Twins a lot more annoying than Jar Jar.

[Da-Scribe]

I thought they were funny. A tad forced at times, but overall I enjoyed them. Nothing's more annoying than Jar Jar. Racial sensitivity aside, that voice drove me nuts.

[Episode29]

Originally Posted by Da-Scribe

I thought they were funny. A tad forced at times, but overall I enjoyed them. Nothing's more annoying than Jar Jar. Racial sensitivity aside, that voice drove me nuts.

Youssa is bombad!

[Da-Scribe]

Originally Posted by Episode29

Youssa is bombad!

*headbutts computer*

[DarKush]

The Guard,

You keep saying I generalize. Perhaps in some instances I have, so much of this conversation is about our opinions after all, but I've also tried to place my thoughts in a historical context to show you that I'm not making all this up. Are you telling me that you haven't generalized about any of your points?

Your responses pretty much amount to, that's not someone's intention (how do you know exactly?) or a kind of moral relativism that says we are all racists so no one is, now take that Dar Kush. And then you try to keep bringing this back to Bay after I've written pages of stuff about the history of cinema regarding negative black depictions to show that Bay may be part of a continuum, and not the whole show.

As for black roles, that's not what I mean. There are some roles, historical roles that should have black people in them, and the same for other groups. But what I'm getting at is there not being limits placed on roles, in Hollywood's or audience's minds on roles that black actors should try for, that are not race-specific. We have a ways to go in that regard.

As for Halle, I disagree with you. It was the buzz surrounding Halle that prompted Bryan Singer to place her in the film to begin with. She might not have been a megastar by that point. But if you look back at the X-films, the Scott-Jean-Wolverine triangle was at the center of those films. They let Cyclop's character slide by X3, but the three of them got more screentime and overall more development than Halle, even though Halle helped sell the pictures perhaps more than anyone but Hugh Jackman.

It's good that we have Will, Denzel, Sam, Jamie, Morgan, etc. It gives you about five or six people you can bring up, but despite the success of those black actors and many others, how many other white actors are on that level or above that level? Let's do a count? And how many black actors are carrying films compared to white actors? How many black actors are sex idols, an important facet of the Hollywood machine, compared to white actors? And how many of these actors, and particularly the younger actors, dominate the celebrity magazines and othe outlets that help burnish their careers and star potential? You admit there is inequality in Hollywood. I agree, but if there is inequality, what group(s) are benefitting and what group(s) aren't or haven't?

How many love scenes has any of these men had on screen? How many romances have they had? And for the movies that had love scenes how many were watched and supported by white audiences? I bring up love scenes because its an important part of being a movie idol, love and sex are a big part of many character's development, and there is still a reluctance to show black people doing such things. We've moved forward, but the idea of blacks as fully realized characters on screen, characters that don't just exist to help their white colleagues along on their journeys or adventures, we still have a way to go.

About comics....Comic companies already do bend over to satisfy subsets of groups, just like books, movies, and TV companies? Ever heard of the term genre? Or niche markets? Engaging an audience, finding new markets to sell to, is a part of capitalism. But I think the comic book companies, as the book publishers a generation before did, hurt themselves by largely ignoring the black market.

I mentioned the lesser known comic book films to show you that many of the obscure ones on the list might suffer from the same lack of mass audience familiarity that black heroes do, so you can't float that the black comics aren't that well known argument as a basis for it. Also, when you look at a lot of these films, under your reasoning many of them wouldn't have been made until after the heavy hitters were made. The facts, obviously, haven't born that out. There is a mix of time, opportunity, funding, etc. that have gone into these projects being greenlighted and it hasn't really gone along some kind of assembly line, until recently with Marvel films. DC just kept giving us more Batman and Superman, and neglecting everyone else on the silver screen.

So now black comic properties are languishing because there isn't passion behind them? Can you prove that? There are quite a few people working in the industry that I can name that probably have the passion you say is lacking for black comic properties: John Singleton has expressed interest in Luke Cage, Wesley in Black Panther, Reginald Hudlin (one time exec at BET, filmmaker and outgoing writer of the Black Panther comic book), Denzel has expressed interest in doing a hero film, Dwayne McDuffie (co-creator of Milestone comics, writer for JL/JLU cartoons, Ben 10).

Some of the problems surrounding the lack of black hero movies, such as the tangled up Luke Cage project, and Wesley's aborted attempts to launch Black Panther have befallen a lot of movies, but the continued lack to try again might have some roots in the concern or 'conventional wisdom' that a black hero film would be too risky. And the main question for me is why is that?

In closing, this thread was created to discuss whether the twins in RoTF were racist or racially offensive. That generally means this is going to be an issue about racial topics. I never said that all of the issues concerning blacks are racial. I believe I even said it in my last post to make it clear. However, there are some issues that are, or are the lingering remnants of past racial discrimination.

I know other people have adversities, and others have had racial adversity, but does that lessen the racial discrimination faced by blacks? And should it not be talked about in a thread that was created to see if the posters thought the twins were black stereotypes? Sticking our heads in the sand and acting like these things didn't happen and sometimes still don't, won't erase the fact that they did happen, or arm us with all the information to address when racial issues flare up.

One more thing...In the recent Newsweek, Raina Kelley wrote an article entitled "The Roots of Racism" (http://www.newsweek.com/id/203695) in which she mentions the results of a test conducted last year. Here are her words:

"So, I was actually excited to read about a new study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in which researchers from the University of Washington confirmed the validity of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). The IAT made a lot of news late last year when results showed that 70 percent of those who took it harbor an unconscious preference for white people over black people. And no, I'm not talking about 70 percent of white people—I mean people of all races who took it, including African-Americans."

You can debate the test findings if you want, but it reminds me of Dr. Kenneth Clark's famous doll tests used to show the debilitating psychological effects on black children that attended segregated schools and that research was used in the Brown v. Board of Education decision. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_Clark_(doll_test)

That was fifty years ago, and if these negative images still linger, what could be the cause of that? Could it be aided by the media and an overrepresentation of negative black images?

As I said before, the point of my posts was to put out there that the idea of the twins being racist could be a possibility, based on negative images from other films and in other media. It's not something that would be left-field for me. I also expounded on that to talk about possible implications of that negative imaging. I saw the thread trending toward a blanket dismissal of the idea, without most people even saying why they didn't think it was racist at all. You've at least provided counter-arguments, fleshing out your ideas more than most, so I appreciate the dialogue. We need more dialogue and not tit-for-tat, but at the same time I feel this is starting to devolve into a tit-for-tat situation and I have little more to say about the matter...unless of course your reply brings me back out onto the field .

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Originally Posted by Da-Scribe

I thought they were funny. A tad forced at times, but overall I enjoyed them. Nothing's more annoying than Jar Jar. Racial sensitivity aside, that voice drove me nuts.

Agreed, I didnt find them annoying at all, I thought they were funny and likable, and the way young Autobots caught up in something beyond their comprehension, but who really shine through in the end.

[The Guard]

You keep saying I generalize. Perhaps in some instances I have, so much of this conversation is about our opinions after all, but I've also tried to place my thoughts in a historical context to show you that I'm not making all this up. Are you telling me that you haven't generalized about any of your points?

Have I?

Your responses pretty much amount to, that's not someone's intention (how do you know exactly?) or a kind of moral relativism that says we are all racists so no one is, now take that Dar Kush.

...what?

And then you try to keep bringing this back to Bay after I've written pages of stuff about the history of cinema regarding negative black depictions to show that Bay may be part of a continuum, and not the whole show.

Where did I try to bring anything back to Bay?

As for black roles, that's not what I mean. There are some roles, historical roles that should have black people in them, and the same for other groups. But what I'm getting at is there not being limits placed on roles, in Hollywood's or audience's minds on roles that black actors should try for, that are not race-specific. We have a ways to go in that regard.

That's kind of a loaded question. I don't have an endless knowledge of all the roles available to black actors. To my eyes, there's something a limit on roles out there, period, at least in mainstream cinema. Now, you start getting into independent film, and you'll find more diverse, varied characters for the most part, at least in my experience.

Are you asking me if people are saying "Well, a black person should only play these types of roles"? No, I, based on my limited experience in Hollywood, don't think they are, at least, in general (see what I did there?). I think those types of roles are what sells to the mainstream, or what studios think the mainstream public wants because the movies with those roles in them have been generally (I did it again!) successful, so that's what types of roles creators keep "coming up with" and putting in films.

As for Halle, I disagree with you. It was the buzz surrounding Halle that prompted Bryan Singer to place her in the film to begin with. She might not have been a megastar by that point. But if you look back at the X-films, the Scott-Jean-Wolverine triangle was at the center of those films. They let Cyclop's character slide by X3, but the three of them got more screentime and overall more development than Halle, even though Halle helped sell the
pictures perhaps more than anyone but Hugh Jackman.

You disagree with me on what? That creators clearly weren't that interested in Storm compared to the other characters until X3, and even then not so much. It's pretty obvious that they weren't. I never said Halle had no buzz prior to X-MEN, but she wasn't the megastar she became yet.

Jean got some development, because its inherent to her character. She becomes Phoenix, and then Dark Phoenix. But what development did Cyclops get, exactly, over the course of three films? He lost his girl, but that sort of just happened to him. The only real development he ended up getting was recognizing he would have to take over if Xavier died, learning to get along with Wolverine (sort of) and then losing it when Jean died, sinking into obsession a bit, and deciding the X-Men weren't that important anymore.

Of course Cyclops and Jean got more screentime than she did. They were both part of a very visible love triangle involving Logan, and they're frankly, more important characters than Storm is to the X-Men mythology.

It's good that we have Will, Denzel, Sam, Jamie, Morgan, etc. It gives you about five or six people you can bring up, but despite the success of those black actors and many others, how many other white actors are on that level or above that level?

That's like saying that "It's good that we have Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Tom Hanks, Leo Decaprio, Hugh Jackman", and whoever else is a megastar because I'm able to toss out their names.

What does "level" mean, exactly?

Let's do a count?

Yes, let's. Throw out a number you'd be happy with. What percentage of roles for blacks or superstars who are blacks would it take for you to feel Hollywood is "fair" in regard to race?

And how many black actors are carrying films compared to white actors? How many black actors are sex idols, an important facet of the Hollywood machine, compared to white actors? And how many of these actors, and particularly the younger actors, dominate the celebrity magazines and othe outlets that help burnish their careers and star potential? You admit there is inequality in Hollywood. I agree, but if there is inequality, what group(s) are benefitting and what group(s) aren't or haven't?

So throw out a number you'd be happy with.

How many love scenes has any of these men had on screen? How many romances have they had? And for the movies that had love scenes how many were watched and supported by white audiences? I bring up love scenes because its an important part of being a movie idol, love and sex are a big part of many character's development, and there is still a reluctance to show black people doing such things. We've moved forward, but the idea of blacks as fully realized characters on screen, characters that don't just exist to help their white colleagues along on their journeys or adventures, we still have a way to go.

So the issue is that every black character in cinema doesn't get developed or get a sex scene? Or that there aren't as many as there are white ones?

About comics....Comic companies already do bend over to satisfy subsets of groups, just like books, movies, and TV companies? Ever heard of the term genre? Or niche markets? Engaging an audience, finding new markets to sell to, is a part of capitalism. But I think the comic book companies, as the book publishers a generation before did, hurt themselves by largely ignoring the black market.

Right. That's comics books.

I'm talking about movies. We're talking two different animals here. Studios make movies for the general public. Now, they may put elements into their movies that draw many different subsets of the population, but studios do not, in general, only seek to attract some miniscule portion of the population like "black comic book fans".

Comic book fans are already only a tiny part of the general population. A studio deciding to aim their film at an even smaller portion of the population, black comic book fans, just doesn't make good business sense.

I mentioned the lesser known comic book films to show you that many of the obscure ones on the list might suffer from the same lack of mass audience familiarity that black heroes do, so you can't float that the black comics aren't that well known argument as a basis for it.

Sure I can.

Also, when you look at a lot of these films, under your reasoning many of them wouldn't have been made until after the heavy hitters were made. The facts, obviously, haven't born that out. There is a mix of time, opportunity, funding, etc. that have gone into these projects being greenlighted and it hasn't really gone along some kind of assembly line, until recently with Marvel films. DC just kept giving us more Batman and Superman, and neglecting everyone else on the silver screen.

I never said that's the only reason the films haven't been made. There is a combination of reasons, which I think I pointed out already. BTW, taking a page from your rationale, you can't say the black superhero movies haven't been made because they're black heroes, because oh look, three BLADE movies got made.

So now black comic properties are languishing because there isn't passion behind them? Can you prove that?

No, do I need to? Can you prove anything you've said?

Generally when a hero is not well written, it's one of two things: A lack of a desire to work on said character by talented writers, which amounts to a lack of passion, or a lack of talent across the board, which...just doesn't seem realistic.

There are quite a few people working in the industry that I can name that probably have the passion you say is lacking for black comic properties: John Singleton has expressed interest in Luke Cage, Wesley in Black Panther, Reginald Hudlin (one time exec at BET, filmmaker and outgoing writer of the Black Panther comic book), Denzel has expressed interest in doing a hero film, Dwayne McDuffie (co-creator of Milestone comics, writer for JL/JLU cartoons, Ben 10).

That's great. Interest doesn't get a movie made. A lot of creators and artists have mentioned "interest" in things over the years that haven't panned out.

Some of the problems surrounding the lack of black hero movies, such as the tangled up Luke Cage project, and Wesley's aborted attempts to launch Black Panther have befallen a lot of movies, but the continued lack to try again might have some roots in the concern or 'conventional wisdom' that a black hero film would be too risky. And the main question for me is why is that.

Except that Marvel is still looking at BLACK PANTHER and LUKE CAGE. There's no lack of trying again involved, those films just aren't priorities.

You're asking me why your own theory might be true? I don't know, it's your theory, not mine.

In closing, this thread was created to discuss whether the twins in RoTF were racist or racially offensive. That generally means this is going to be an issue about racial topics. I never said that all of the issues concerning blacks are racial. I believe I even said it in my last post to make it clear. However, there are some issues that are, or are the lingering remnants of past racial discrimination.

I know other people have adversities, and others have had racial adversity, but does that lessen the racial discrimination faced by blacks? And should it not be talked about in a thread that was created to see if the posters thought the twins were black stereotypes? Sticking our heads in the sand and acting like these things didn't happen and sometimes still don't, won't erase the fact that they did happen, or arm us with all the information to address when racial issues flare up.

No, of course it doesn't lessen the discrimination and adversity faced by blacks.

But implying "It's because of race, isn't it?" every single time you see a disparity seems counterproductive to me.

One more thing...In the recent Newsweek, Raina Kelley wrote an article entitled "The Roots of Racism" (http://www.newsweek.com/id/203695) in which she mentions the results of a test conducted last year. Here are her words:

"So, I was actually excited to read about a new study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology in which researchers from the University of Washington confirmed the validity of the Implicit Association Test (IAT). The IAT made a lot of news late last year when results showed that 70 percent of those who took it harbor an unconscious preference for white people over black people. And no, I'm not talking about 70 percent of white people—I mean people of all races who took it, including African-Americans."

An "unconscious preference"?

I'm not going to debate the test findings, because I know squat about the test or the testing groups. Here's my issue with such a test. Of course "stereotypes" exist. People may well think one thing immediately. My issue is this: I believe that people, by and large (another generalization!), are capable of getting beyond that, and reasoning out an actual element of society, not just going through life thinking "Gang member" every time they see a black man, and not moving beyond that, despite their experiences.

For instance, if someone says "Indian", and I automatically think "Attacking cowboys and making weird noises" because that's the stereotype I saw a lot as I developed as a young child, I, because I have experience beyond that stereotype, am able to quickly think of both positive, negative and more diverse images of Indians and many ideas surrounding them than that single thought or idea that came to mind.

That was fifty years ago, and if these negative images still linger, what could be the cause of that? Could it be aided by the media and an overrepresentation of negative black images?

I don't know. Do you?

As I said before, the point of my posts was to put out there that the idea of the twins being racist could be a possibility, based on negative images from other films and in other media.

I still don't see how the Twins themselves qualify as "racist".

It's not something that would be left-field for me. I also expounded on that to talk about possible implications of that negative imaging. I saw the thread trending toward a blanket dismissal of the idea, without most people even saying why they didn't think it was racist at all.

The idea is being dismissed because people know what racism is, and racism doesn't just equal presenting a stereotype.

[DarKush]

The Guard,

How can you assume that people know what racism is? Obviously there is some debate about that. Of course, unless everyone should just accept your defintion. As for the twins, the stereotypes they might display could be a product of racist attitudes or beliefs about black people.

You asked can I prove anything that I say. I've provided more background information on most of my points that you have. Most of your answers amount to shrugging your shoulders and saying something to the effect of "Gee, that's the way things are" or "Life isn't fair."

I'm starting to get tired of you twisting my words. I never said black hero movies weren't made. In fact, I listed the ones that were before (though I forgot Undercover Brother). Please reread my posts before accusing me of saying things I didn't. But I did express concern that fears of marketability, perhaps on racial attitudes or preconceptions-conscious or unconscious-might also factor into the reason we haven't seen more of them.

I never said that most of the things discussed happen solely because of race, but that race might be a factor. And owing to our history, it was not one I would just dismiss out of hand. How many times do I need to repeat this?

I provided a list of black people who probably display the passion, not to mention the experience, to do hero films with black heroes in response to you saying there was a lack of passion. Then you just say that interest isn't enough, but you're one that brought up the issue in the first place. When I provided names you tried to deflect it.

Are you telling me that Hollywood doesn't do some form of demographic targeting? I'm sure that they would like to get maximum audience participation for every movie, but some movies are made for certain audiences (i.e. horror). And there are even TV shows and movies targeted to the black audience. Tyler Perry has built his media empire primarily on black consumers.

(Let me say this, just because the target audience might be black, doesn't mean these products are exclusive only to black audiences. I think that's part of the problem, a feeling that if the product is considered 'too black' then white audiences or international audiences won't support it. This happened with Todd McFarlane's Spawn film. They wanted him to make one of the main characters white to avoid the dreaded tag of being a black film. I would like, one day, for black people and their experiences to be seen as just as universal and normative as white people and their experiences have been portrayed).

As for the 'miniscule' (your word) black comics audience, I had some ideas about why I think that audience hasn't grown (perhaps because it has never been fully cultivated), but I never asked for movies specifically for that audience. I want to see black hero movies that everyone goes to see, just like many black people support hero movies with white heroes. I would hope one day that the idea of having black hero movies is not something that might be seen as too risky. We've had a couple but I would like to see more. Also, you still have not proved that there is a model for when or why certain comic properties get made as opposed to others. If race isn't a factor, then what is? And if popularity or the character isn't interesting enough is your answer, why is it that almost every black character mentioned isn't interesting to you?

It's not a question of people automatically thinking 'gang member' when they see a black man walking down the street for example. It's more an issue of if you give a person several photographs and ask them to pick out the likeliest gang member and they pick out the black one. I think films that use racial stereotyping, perhaps even as punchlines, don't help racial understanding, don't help 'reason out' lingering prejudicial racial attitudes.

I'm getting tired of dancing with you. You've agreed that there is inequality in Hollywood, yet you seem to have no problem with it. I do. Let's boil it down, you don't think the twins were racist. I don't know because I haven't seen the film, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were based on what I've read about the film in particular and what I've seen in the past and to some extent the present with negative racial imaging in Hollywood. Let's agree to disagree and move on with our lives.

[El_Citrus]

I won't say the Twins were racist, but they were very racially insensitive, and annoying. Jazz in TF1 was a cool, hip hop transformer, while these two were annoying negative stereotypes that were highly more annoying than funny. The exaggerated features, the line about being uneducated, and the dialect was just really insensitive and made for two annoying characters that I hope are killed quickly in TF3 by Megatron, as he said to Sam, "Slowly. Painfully."

[DemonicFoil]

Am i the only one who didn't find them that annoying, i thought they were funny and i was able to look at them as transformer versions of teenage mutant ninja turtles.

[Lunar_Wolf]

Originally Posted by DemonicFoil

Am i the only one who didn't find them that annoying, i thought they were funny and i was able to look at them as transformer versions of teenage mutant ninja turtles.

I liked them.

[The Guard]

How can you assume that people know what racism is? Obviously there is some debate about that. Of course, unless everyone should just accept your defintion.

I don't assume everyone knows what racism is. Obviously many don't. But there is an accepted meaning and definition of racism in our culture, is there not?

You asked can I prove anything that I say. I've provided more background information on most of my points that you have. Most of your answers amount to shrugging your shoulders and saying something to the effect of "Gee, that's the way things are" or "Life isn't fair."

Uh...no. Most of my answers to not amount to that. My final post yesterday amounted to that.

As for the twins, the stereotypes they might display could be a product of racist attitudes or beliefs about black people.

They might be. Don't know. Don't particularly care.

I'm starting to get tired of you twisting my words. I never said black hero movies weren't made.

Which words did I twist? I never said you said that. I was using your line of reasoning, take what someone says, and try to invalidate it. You know, the way you ignored half my explanations about why certain films were made before black superhero ones?

In fact, I listed the ones that were before (though I forgot Undercover Brother). Please reread my posts before accusing me of saying things I didn't.

Where did I accuse you of saying things you didn't? Please quote it so I can see where I erred.

But I did express concern that fears of marketability, perhaps on racial attitudes or preconceptions-conscious or unconscious-might also factor into the reason we haven't seen more of them.

"Might" seems to be a common theme with you. I mean, I guess be concerned, if you want to be, over something that might or might not be true.

I never said that most of the things discussed happen solely because of race, but that race might be a factor. And owing to our history, it was not one I would just dismiss out of hand. How many times do I need to repeat this?

It's difficult to get that from your earlier statements, because the element of race is pretty much all you talk about, or accept, in the arguments. When I say "but there is a lot of inequality in Hollywood", you just kept going on and on about race and other areas of inequality. So why would I believe you saw anything but race?

I provided a list of black people who probably display the passion, not to mention the experience, to do hero films with black heroes in response to you saying there was a lack of passion. Then you just say that interest isn't enough, but you're one that brought up the issue in the first place. When I provided names you tried to deflect it.

I'm sorry, people who "probably" display the passion and experience? I'm not suggesting that there aren't capable people out there, but there's an obvious lack of passion for these heroes, compared to say, better known heroes. The films haven't been made, have they? Those names you give, they haven't exactly gotten involved on a deep level, as Snipes did with BLADE, or those films would stand a much better chance of being made, wouldn't they? People being "somewhat interested" doesn't equal the level of passion needed to see a film through its development process. Wesley Snipes talking about Black Panther every once in a while, that doesn't get the movie made. Someone hammering out a subpar script or two in the mid nineties, that doesn't get the movie made. A creator saying "Gosh, I wish there was a Black Panther movie, there's so much potential there", that doesn't get the movie made.

Are you telling me that Hollywood doesn't do some form of demographic targeting?

No...where did I remotely suggest that?

I'm sure that they would like to get maximum audience participation for every movie, but some movies are made for certain audiences (i.e. horror). And there are even TV shows and movies targeted to the black audience. Tyler Perry has built his media empire primarily on black consumers.

Maybe Tyler Perry should do a black superhero movie then.

Darth...you broadening this argument isn't going to help you defeat my points about studios and comic book films. It's bad business to aim a comic book movie at any one subset of the population. It's just simple numbers.

(Let me say this, just because the target audience might be black, doesn't mean these products are exclusive only to black audiences. I think that's part of the problem, a feeling that if the product is considered 'too black' then white audiences or international audiences won't support it. This happened with Todd McFarlane's Spawn film. They wanted him to make one of the main characters white to avoid the dreaded tag of being a black film. I would like, one day, for black people and their experiences to be seen as just as universal and normative as white people and their experiences have been portrayed).

Ok.

As for the 'miniscule' (your word) black comics audience, I had some ideas about why I think that audience hasn't grown (perhaps because it has never been fully cultivated), but I never asked for movies specifically for that audience. I want to see black hero movies that everyone goes to see, just like many black people support hero movies with white heroes.
I would hope one day that the idea of having black hero movies is not something that might be seen as too risky.

Yes, one would hope that the general population would want to see something like BLACK PANTHER, LUKE CAGE, BLACK LIGHTNING or THE FALCON in numbers big enough to make it worth a studio shelling out over 100 million dollars (or more), but quite honestly, that just seems like kind of a long shot to me.

I'm pretty sure the main reason there's risk involved is that they're more obscure heroes, not just that they're black. If the character was called WHITE PANTHER, there would still be some risk issues, because a big budget movie about a pseudo Tarzan/pseudo Phantom jungle warrior is still kind of risky.

That said, hardly anyone outside of comic book fans known who Black Panther is. And let's face it, through he predates the organization, "Black Panther" has a very different connotation to the general public than a jungle dwelling superhero.

We've had a couple but I would like to see more. Also, you still have not proved that there is a model for when or why certain comic properties get made as opposed to others.

Here are the existing superhero movies (not simply comic book movies) since BLADE came out in 1998, which I believe started the trend of new superhero movies along with X-MEN.

Here are the known heroes, which I define as characters the general public knows about, or well known superhero lore.

SPIDER-MAN
SPIDER-MAN 2
SPIDER-MAN 3
X-MEN
X2
X-MEN: THE LAST STAND
WOLVERINE
SUPERMAN RETURNS
BATMAN BEGINS
THE DARK KNIGHT
IRON MAN
IRON MAN 2
THE FANTASTIC FOUR
THE FANTACTIC FOUR: RISE OF THE SILVER SURFER
THE HULK
THE INCREDIBLE HULK
CATWOMAN
IRON MAN animated movie
BATMAN animated movie
SUPERMAN: DOOMSDAY
WONDER WOMAN animated movie
GREEN LANTERN animated movie
BATMAN: MYSTERY OF THE BATWOMAN
BATMAN BEYOND: RETURN OF THE JOKER
ULTIMATE AVENGERS: THE MOVIE
ULTIMATE AVENGERS 2
TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES
DRAGONBALL

Now, Iron Man's iffy, but I feel enough people knew about him before the movies came out (he had a popular animated series in the 90's) and you can potentially add TRANSFORMERS and TRANSFORMERS: REVENGE OF THE FALLEN to the mix, as they're generally considered superhero fare, and are very well known.

And here are the obscure heroes, characters that I imagine most people have never heard of prior to the films, though some of these are debatable.

WATCHMEN
CONSTANTINE
DR STRANGE animated movie
BLADE
BLADE II
BLADE TRINITY
THE PUNISHER
PUNISHER: WAR ZONE
GHOST RIDER
HELLBOY
HELLBOY II
HELLBOY: BLOOD AND IRON
HELLBOY: SWORD OF STORMS
DAREDEVIL
ELEKTRA
THE SPIRIT

Now, sure, there have been some random superhero movies like HANCOCK, SKY HIGH, or adaptions of things like 300, ROAD TO PERDITION, etc, but I'm talking known quantities here.

I think it's pretty obvious that out of existing concepts more known heroes have gotten made than obscure ones. However, I have noticed that as they run out of existing, well known heroes, they're starting to develop unknown heroes more and more JONAH HEX is on the way from WB, and Marvel is developing every damn concept they have. I think it's a matter of time until we get some black superhero movies.

If race isn't a factor, then what is? And if popularity or the character isn't interesting enough is your answer, why is it that almost every black character mentioned isn't interesting to you?

I don't recall saying race isn't a factor, only that there are larger factors than race at work here.

It's not that the black characters aren't interesting at all. It's that they're not as interesting compared to some other, well known heroes. For instance, I don't find John Stewart as interesting as Hal Jordan. I don't find Black Lightning as interesting as say, Storm. I don't find Luke Cage interesting at all, frankly, as he's pretty much a gimmick that borders on exploitation. Black Panther's pretty interesting, though. I imagine he'll get a movie before the others do.

I'm getting tired of dancing with you. You've agreed that there is inequality in Hollywood, yet you seem to have no problem with it.

Dancing?

Which problem am I supposed to have? That talented young black actors don't get guaranteed breaks In Hollywood? I'm sorry, I think that's a strange distinction to make. Let me be frank here. There is inequality everywhere in this world. Hollywood is probably the best example of it. You can't generally get into Hollywood unless you're incredibly attractive, know someone, or sleep your way in, or some combination of the three. Rarely does any amount of talent you have over other talented people have much, if anything, to do with success there.

Blacks potentially have less opportunities than whites in Hollywood.

Fair enough.

Of course I have a problem with that.

What would you like me to do about it?

It pales in comparison to the problems I have with things that actually matter than whether someone gets to be a superstar or not. Starvation. Abuse. Crime. Poverty. Ignorance of all kinds.

What do you want me to do, type in boldface, "I have a problem with that"?
If you wanted to know if it bothered me, and to what extent, you could have, I don't know...asked.

I do. Let's boil it down, you don't think the twins were racist. I don't know because I haven't seen the film, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were based on what I've read about the film in particular and what I've seen in the past and to some extent the present with negative racial imaging in Hollywood. Let's agree to disagree and move on with our lives.

Again, I don't see how anyone could look at The Twins and come away with "racist", unless you don't know what racism is. Fair enough, we'll agree to disagree.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by DemonicFoil

Am i the only one who didn't find them that annoying, i thought they were funny and i was able to look at them as transformer versions of teenage mutant ninja turtles.

How dare you? Last time I checked Turtles weren't wannabe gangsters. Turtles have way more class. Not even Michaelangelo comes close to the stupidity level of the Twins.

[dark_b]

Originally Posted by Nathan

How dare you? Last time I checked Turtles weren't wannabe gangsters. Turtles have way more class. Not even Michaelangelo comes close to the stupidity level of the Twins.

there was a little of Mikey inside the twins. they were a little like TMNT. we can not denia that.

[dark_b]

so did they mention racism from TF2 on the TV? or is it only on the forums and from some critics?

[DemonicFoil]

I don't know but for me it seem like they did not push the boundaries of whats considered to be racial or stereotypical, yeah maybe the gold tooth and can't read bit might of been a stretch depending on how you look at it but from what i saw on the big screen was harmless humor. I mean it's not like they pulled a kramer,lol, i think in bayformers all the bots are meant to have various personalities no matter how ridiculous it might seem, not saying that's a good thing but I look at it like this:

1.)They were put in there for hit or miss humor

2.)They were put in there to impress the kiddies

3.)They were Michael Bay's idea so now the viewers have to deal with it if they choose to watch the film.

[Jake Cassidy]

They should've taken the vehicles and designs (slightly tweaked) and made them Decepticons Runabout and Runamuck instead. Just a thought.

[Nathan]

Originally Posted by dark_b

there was a little of Mikey inside the twins. they were a little like TMNT. we can not denia that.

As I said before, I don't remember the Turtles to be wannabe gangsters. And Michaelangelo is more of a geeky kid with his comics and video games.

[Mexico]

I didn't hear about anyone getting pissed over a dumb redneck towtruck in the movie Cars.
So if Reno Wilson was okay with doing the voice for the character of Mudflap, then who cares? If he can do it, then I'm sure you can get over it too.

[Marvin]

Originally Posted by Mexico

I didn't hear about anyone getting pissed over a dumb redneck towtruck in the movie Cars.
So if Reno Wilson was okay with doing the voice for the character of Mudflap, then who cares? If he can do it, then I'm sure you can get over it too.

excellent,
however, rednecks aren't a visible helpless minority..


bruno comes out in a few weeks, I wonder if all the pc people will still have their panties in a bunch in the face of all the bigotry
no matter how good the intentions

[Krimasen]

Funny thing is that when I saw the Twins, I saw pink and white (and later red and green). I do not recall once seeing black or brown, so I don't understand all the "outrage" over these character (robots, last time I knew). Another thought that I don't think has been mentioned is that perhaps the robots picked up their personas from watching TV and using the internet (kinda like how Optimus learned English by using the world wide web).

[portland2002]

The twins are racist cariactures ... Bay and Spielberg should just retire ... they've lost their abilities as competent filmmakers.