Joe Wright to Helm 'Pan'

Well I'm not going to passively accept their choice. I think it was a bad choice. Positive portrayals of stigmatized groups in television and movies make a lot of difference. Not every movie HAS to do this, but this movie had a good opportunity to. Keep in mind that Native American extras walked off of Adam Sandler's movie because it was so racist. That is the climate of Hollywood right now.
Stigmatized groups? Well there does seem to be a lot of crime on the reservation on Longmire. :o

You can complain if you like, but its not your work and its not your money. I am personally quite happy about it, but if you aren't, that is your right. I'd probably come up with a better argument though. Especially with a film that seems rather diverse.
 
There is a lot of racism toward Natives where I live. Native women are murdered and go missing at a staggering, horrifying, and disproportionate rate and our government shows no signs of caring. The reservation I live beside is frequently mocked for its poor living conditions and crime. I think I have a very good reason for wanting positive representation of Natives. You're critiquing my argument when yours boils down to having a crush on Mara?
 
There is a lot of racism toward Natives where I live. Native women are murdered and go missing at a staggering, horrifying, and disproportionate rate and our government shows no signs of caring. The reservation I live beside is frequently mocked for its poor living conditions and crime. I think I have a very good reason for wanting positive representation of Natives. You're critiquing my argument when yours boils down to having a crush on Mara?
I think what you just described is a very sad situation. I also think that has nothing to do with this movie. You want a kids movie to fix a social issue, which just isn't possible. And yep, I have a crush on Rooney Mara. I think I made that rather clear from the start.
 
A kids movie can be a perfect resource in addressing social issues. Not fixing or solving. But one part of a movement that helps people while entertaining them.
 
A kids movie can be a perfect resource in addressing social issues. Not fixing or solving. But one part of a movement that helps people while entertaining them.
And who decides what the intention of the film is? Again, its not your art and its not your money.
 
According to that logic no movie should be criticized.
 
According to that logic no movie should be criticized.
You can criticize it. But this isn't exactly a question of quality of the cinematography, performance, writing, etc. You are turning this isn't a social argument, which has nothing to do with the film, director, actress or studio.
 
A discussion of society has nothing to do with a product of society (film entertainment)? The effects of art are well within the realm of criticism.
 
A discussion of society has nothing to do with a product of society (film entertainment)? The effects of art are well within the realm of criticism.
There is no effect. Did the 2003 film have effect? Has any Peter Pan film had an effect?
 
The Disney film perpetuated stereotypes. The 2003 film basically turned Tiger Lilly and the Native Americans into a cameo. This movie doesn't even feature Native Americans. Their effects are that they contribute to a lack of diversity in Hollywood and contribute to an erasure of Native characters and Native actors. These things don't exist in a vacuum.
 
The Disney film perpetuated stereotypes. The 2003 film basically turned Tiger Lilly and the Native Americans into a cameo. This movie doesn't even feature Native Americans. Their effects are that they contribute to a lack of diversity in Hollywood and contribute to an erasure of Native characters and Native actors. These things don't exist in a vacuum.
And how is this this film's problem? You have not explained this once. And the use of the history of Peter Pan actually hurts the argument.
 
It's a social problem that this film participates in. I'm sure it has no problem doing so, which is part of the problem.
 
It's a social problem that this film participates in. I'm sure it has no problem doing so, which is part of the problem.
So the studio should have cast a Native American actress because of a social problem, even if that goes against what they and director want to do?
 
The director obviously wanted to make a Peter Pan movie but was unable or unwilling to appropriately handle the Native American part of the lore so he chose to erase it and replace it with white people. I think that's a poor social and creative decision. But you're just asking questions now because your argument doesn't go beyond "Mara is pretty".
 
The director obviously wanted to make a Peter Pan movie but was unable or unwilling to appropriately handle the Native American part of the lore so he chose to erase it and replace it with white people. I think that's a poor creative and social decision. But you're just asking questions now because your argument doesn't go beyond "Mara is pretty".
See, it is great if you want to complain, but at least know what you are talking about. Joe Wright didn't write the script, and actually became attached later. The film was on the Hollywood Black List. By the way, have you seen the trailer? The tribe is clearly not all white. :funny:

My argument is this is a creative endeavor. Your is political correctness for political correctness sake.
 
So Wright had nothing to do with the casting? So the writers, director, casting director, etc all came together to erase a Native American character. Doesn't make much of a difference. I have seen the trailer, Tiger Lily seemed to be the only important character in the tribe. So what's worse, a tribe of all white people (when that wasn't the case in the source material) or a tribe of mixed races where only the white person is important?

My argument is that it was a missed opportunity for positive representation, to change the tide away from Lone Ranger and Exodus, and to exert some social responsibility in creative decisions. But yes, "political correctness" is so easy to stigmatize so of course you'll resort to that.
 
So Wright had nothing to do with the casting? So the writers, director, casting director, etc all came together to erase a Native American character. Doesn't make much of a difference. I have seen the trailer, Tiger Lily seemed to be the only important character in the tribe. So what's worse, a tribe of all white people (when that wasn't the case in the source material) or a tribe of mixed races where only the white person is important?

My argument is that it was a missed opportunity for positive representation, to change the tide away from Lone Ranger and Exodus, and to exert some social responsibility in creative decisions. But yes, "political correctness" is so easy to stigmatize so of course you'll resort to that.
So if they cast Lupita, the make up of the tribe would be fine? I don't know who came up with the short list, but it has 3 quality actresses and Joe Wright most likely picked the one he believed worked best in the role.

You say it is a missed opportunity, based on what? It certainly isn't the history of the character.
 
What does that question about Lupita have to do with anything? They didn't go with her, and this movie fits the long Hollywood tradition of giving priority to white actors in lead roles.

Now that the part of Tiger Lily is being beefed up to leading role status they cast a white actress. What a coincidence...
 
What does that question about Lupita have to do with anything? They didn't go with her, and this movie fits the long Hollywood tradition of giving priority to white actors in lead roles.

Now that the part of Tiger Lily is being beefed up to leading role status they cast a white actress. What a coincidence...
Because you just proved my point. It isn't about the race of the character, simply that the actress is white in the film. I am done, thank you. :yay:
 
If Lupita was cast we would be having a different conversation, but since you have nothing concrete to argue you have to resort to hypotheticals. I wanted a Native American to play the part, not Lupita. There's a reason white washing is a thing, and not black washing.
 
If Lupita was cast we would be having a different conversation, but since you have nothing concrete to argue you have to resort to hypotheticals. I wanted a Native American to play the part, not Lupita. There's a reason white washing is a thing, and not black washing.
Can you white wash a racial stereotype?
 
The production is very willing to change the role. They decided on empowering the character with a white actress, not a Native American actress.
 
The production is very willing to change the role. They decided on empowering the character with a white actress, not a Native American actress.
So they have to change the character based on your checklist? Again I ask, can you white wash a racial stereotype?

Pretty sure the character was already written before they cast. Considering they went prequel, the idea of making Tiger Lily a prominent character seems almost like an afterthought. Though that is a good point. They are giving a traditionally powerless female character, a backbone. And you said they don't care about underrepresented social groups.
 
Hopefully she is a well written female character. That doesn't justify white washing.

I'm going to sleep now. Luckily for you pretty Mara probably won't have much trouble finding future work. Unlike Native American actors.
 
Hopefully she is a well written female character. That doesn't justify white washing.

I'm going to sleep now. Luckily for you pretty Mara probably won't have much trouble finding future work. Unlike Native American actors.
She is quite pretty. A very good actress too. Also like that you avoided that question. :cwink:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"