Fant4stic Michael B Jordan is "Flame On!" The Human Torch - Part 2

[the gael]

Interview with (gulp) Johnny Storm
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertai...tastic-dressing-human-torch-article-1.1960736

This left me with a strange and not very good feeling...

"It's something that we kind of willed to happen, which was really important to me and Josh (Trank)," he said of the vision he shared with the film's director. "We're lucky we had a studio behind us that really supported our ambition and our want for change. Now we have something really epic."

"We", "We", "me", I have the feeling that Jordan is way more guilty in this mess than we thought. I won't blame Teller or Bell for being miscast. It's Fox and Trank fault. I won't blame Kate Mara either for not doing what she was doing, it's also Trank and Kinberg fault. I thought the same for Jordan, until this...

We all thought that Trank choose Jordan before anything else for Johnny Storm, what if, indeed, it's the exact opposite ?
I remembered when Fox began to claim that Trank was directing FF(INO), Trank wasn't that much pleased. He debunked the news for weeks. He never seemed very enthousiastic. Could it be possible that, for having the role, Jordan pushed a reluctant Trank to be the director, then beginning this trainweck.

 

[CyclopsWasRight]

If Fox actually wanted to make money off the rights, they'd not be making a minimum budget film with no marketing.

1. Budget is unknown.
2. Movie isn't out for 12 months, that's 6 months before marketing usually starts.

So if everything that's loved about comic Johnny is translated perfectly onto the screen by MBJ is it really a bad thing? Just because he's black? Or am I totally missing the point here?

I think the point is that he doesn't look like Johnny from the comics. He could play a perfect characterisation of Johnny but that won't matter for some as he doesn't look like him.

Hopefully it'll be like Kingpin and Heimdall where good acting and characterisation trump looks.

 

[starscream22]

The blame goes both ways. There are some who stopped awfully quickly dismiss any argument against Jordan as racist, but there were some comments in the past that were blatantly racist and disrespectful, and as an African American I was hurt by those comments. To dismiss all those claims as petty is being as bad the people who dismiss all other comments as racist, and it is disappointing that not only a mod, but an admin would be so incredibly biased toward one side and not be open to the other side of the coin.

I expected better from you.

I'm black as well (not that my color should matter) and I support Kelly's comments. I'm sick of people milking the race card to get an edge in these forums.

My self esteem is not that bad that I need to take every non-black person on a guilt trip the moment something posted is misinterpreted or misunderstood.

If you really felt that bad about the comment you would've reached out in private instead of grandstanding.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I'm black as well (not that my color should matter) and I support Kelly's comments. I'm sick of people milking the race card to get an edge in these forums.

My self esteem is not that bad that I need to take every non-black person on a guilt trip the moment something posted is misinterpreted or misunderstood.

If you really felt that bad about the comment you would've reached out in private instead of grandstanding.

That's not the point of my post at all. The point of my post is that this debate should have been over in general so we can move forward talk about other topics when it comes to Human Torch. This is an argument that's dominated this thread for over a year. If you're sick of people milking the race card, aren't you sick of this debate in general? MBJ has been cast. There's nothing that can be done. You either love it or hate it, in between, don't know, or want to see more. Every opinion that's been said about his casting has been said. Let's move on.

Regardless of what side you're on, this is just a dead horse argument that's been beaten to the ground to the point in which nothing else about the character can ever be discussed. No one is going to be swayed by the other, and how many different times can people say "they hate this casting"? I hate Gal Gadot's casting, but you don't see me in the Wonder Woman thread complaining every day about it and throwing off conversations about it. My point to Kelly is that as a mod, there should have been order kept in this thread, but personal bias got in the way of it.

Now, I said all I needed to say in my past posts. However, to reiterate, my point is not to sway the other side, but to get away from this debate.

 

[starscream22]

That's not the point of my post at all. The point of my post is that this debate should have been over in general so we can move forward talk about other topics when it comes to Human Torch. This is an argument that's dominated this thread for one year. If you're sick of people milking the race card, aren't you sick of this debate in general? MBJ has been cast. There's nothing that can be done. You either love it or hate it, in between, don't know, or want to see more. Every opinion that's been said about his casting has been said. Let's move on.

Regardless of what side you're on, this is just a dead horse argument that's been beaten to the ground to the point in which nothing else about the character can ever be discussed. No one is going to be swayed by the other, and how many different times can people say "they hate this casting"? I hate Gal Gadot's casting, but you don't see me in the Wonder Woman thread complaining every day about it and throwing off conversations about it. My point to Kelly is that as a mod, there should have been order kept in this thread, but personal bias got in the way of it.

Now, I said all I needed to say in my past posts. However, to reiterate, my point is not to sway the other side, but to get away from this debate.

Then why put Kelly on the spot? Why not blame MBJ for regurgitating the same race card fueled nonsense in every article instead of something legit? Filming wrapped 2 months ago as of yesterday and yet he's playing the "victim vs haters" role instead of showing real progress.

Again I found nothing wrong with Kelly's comment. If you want to lash out against the race card drivel then blame the source that's practically using it as a sales pitch now.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Then why put Kelly on the spot? Why not blame MBJ for regurgitating the same race card fueled nonsense in every article instead of something legit? Filming wrapped 2 months ago as of yesterday and yet he's playing the "victim vs haters" role instead of showing real progress.

Again I found nothing wrong with Kelly's comment. If you want to lash out against the race card drivel then blame the source that's practically using it as a sales pitch now.

I've explained why. I'm not going to explain that again. You want to know why, read my previous post.

And you know what, let's look at the article for what he said about race.

"I don't think about it. Can't make everybody happy," the 27-year-old "Fantastic Four" star told the Daily News about the backlash caused by him playing the Human Torch, which up until now has always been a white superhero. "I don't think anything about it."

There's no more mention of race in the article. Everything else talks about his enthusiasm about working in the film, his inspirations, and Creed.

For someone who says that color shouldn't matter and they're sick of the race card, you made a big deal about a non-existent usage of it in the article.

 

[Spider-Fan]

Parker, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to talk about this. If you want to discuss something else, then post what you want. Like it or not, this is an issue fans want to talk about. We have banned discussing this topic several times over time back when Jordan was only a rumor, but now it is official, it can't really be avoided.

Kelly has doen a fine job moderating this issue. It was far more chaotic in here when she wasn't an admin, and she has cleaned this place up nicely. This is a very delicate topic. Say what you want about you not talking about Gal Gadot's talent in the Wonder Woman threads, but I know people DO discuss it in there. Once again, just because you don't wish to discuss doesn't mean it is a topic that should be banned.

Furthermore, progress isn't made on issues like this when you ban talking about it or ignore it. People want progress to be made on this front? Then actual have constructive dialogue about this issue. It can be done.

 

[Joe Rockhead]

I think there's some misinterpreting the chain of events going on.

To start, the quote from the NY Daily News interview:

"I don't think about it. Can't make everybody happy," the 27-year-old "Fantastic Four" star told the Daily News about the backlash caused by him playing the Human Torch, which up until now has always been a white superhero. "I don't think anything about it."

I think if anyone is to blame for bringing the race card up, it would be the Daily News interviewer that likely asked Jordan how he's dealt with the original backlash on his casting.

He was just responding to their question. From there, it seems like he's bringing up the race card, but in reality, his was just a reaction to a question.

You're going to find that a lot with interviews.

I do think that there's sensitivity from both sides of the argument - on the negative side, there are certainly those who don't agree with his casting based on his race, but that doesn't mean that everyone who disagrees with his casting is basing their objections on his race.

At the same time, there are those with positive things to say about his casting that are using the race card to explain the naysayers attitudes, when that's not always the case either.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Parker, no one is holding a gun to your head and forcing you to talk about this. If you want to discuss something else, then post what you want. Like it or not, this is an issue fans want to talk about. We have banned discussing this topic several times over time back when Jordan was only a rumor, but now it is official, it can't really be avoided.

Kelly has doen a fine job moderating this issue. It was far more chaotic in here when she wasn't an admin, and she has cleaned this place up nicely. This is a very delicate topic. Say what you want about you not talking about Gal Gadot's talent in the Wonder Woman threads, but I know people DO discuss it in there. Once again, just because you don't wish to discuss doesn't mean it is a topic that should be banned.

Furthermore, progress isn't made on issues like this when you ban talking about it or ignore it. People want progress to be made on this front? Then actual have constructive dialogue about this issue. It can be done.

The problem is there's been a lack of constructive dialogue about the topic in the thread and having a mod point fingers and call one side petty for supporting MBJ isnt going to make this topic anymore constructive and is as narrow as calling everyone who disagree with the casting of MBJ racist. Simplifying the issue as the race card isn't constructive.

When was the last time there have veen actual constructive conversation on this topic? When was the last time there was "progress" made in this topic in this thread? Its been rinse, wash, repeat with heated insults of racism and social justice warrioring. There are few people left in this thread because of the exhaustion of the topic.

My suggestion is this: why not make a separate thread discussing this issue? There you can have people discuss the matter and have this thread discuss other aspects?

 

[TheComicbookKid]

"We", "We", "me", I have the feeling that Jordan is way more guilty in this mess than we thought. I won't blame Teller or Bell for being miscast. It's Fox and Trank fault. I won't blame Kate Mara either for not doing what she was doing, it's also Trank and Kinberg fault. I thought the same for Jordan, until this...

We all thought that Trank choose Jordan before anything else for Johnny Storm, what if, indeed, it's the exact opposite ?
I remembered when Fox began to claim that Trank was directing FF(INO), Trank wasn't that much pleased. He debunked the news for weeks. He never seemed very enthousiastic. Could it be possible that, for having the role, Jordan pushed a reluctant Trank to be the director, then beginning this trainweck.

Isn't this kind of a normal statement? Don't actors and directors usually go back and forth about the character?

Would you prefer he just said "IDK, i just walked on set said my lines and left. I don't care."

 

[Spider-Fan]

The problem is there's been a lack of constructive dialogue about the topic in the thread and having a mod point fingers and call one side petty for supporting MBJ isnt going to make this topic anymore constructive and is as narrow as calling everyone who disagree with the casting of MBJ racist. Simplifying the issue as the race card isn't constructive.

When was the last time there have veen actual constructive conversation on this topic? When was the last time there was "progress" made in this topic in this thread? Its been rinse, wash, repeat with heated insults of racism and social justice warrioring. There are few people left in this thread because of the exhaustion of the topic.

My suggestion is this: why not make a separate thread discussing this issue? There you can have people discuss the matter and have this thread discuss other aspects?

Because the convervastion will end up in both threads, so instead of watching people in 1 thread about the race issue, all you're doing is making 2 threads you have to police. Making a 2nd thread won't fix anything. We've tried it on similar hot button issues, and it 99% of the time never works and creates more problems.

As far as lack of progress on this conversation, that is largely the fault of everyone who posts here. Both sides. People for the race change are insulted as apologists, and people against it are racists. Everyone sees black and white, and thus they don't take the time to discuss the various points of view. We as moderators can't control posting IQ. That is up to the poster making his post. We can only try and guide the discussion and try to stop things from crossing lines. But, if you don't give people the opportunity to debate the issue at hand, what hope is there for any progress on either side? Answer is none.

As for Kelly singling anyone out, I don't think she does. What I see Kelly do in here is punish those who deserve it, and question the opinions of people who cross lines and act like the other viewpoint is invalid. Which, I don't see any harm in.

 

[RAE072]

2. Movie isn't out for 12 months, that's 6 months before marketing usually starts.

False. Patently false. Big budget movies often start marketing well before freaking 6 months before the film comes out.

Unless you count the Ninja Turtle movie. But that sucked anyway.

Hell even the Peanuts animated movie released their TEASER March of this year. And the movie comes out November of NEXT year. That's a year and 8 months out, and it got everybody talking about it and excited for it.

So false.

And 12 months? Was it moved again? If it's still coming out in August next year that's 10 months.

 

[MakeMinesMarvel]

Man MBJ is going to kill this role cant wait for FF! Flame On!

 

[The Question]

Most people here are more dissapointed with the casting of Miles Teller than Jordan, but if Jordan talks about race - instead of the real concerns with the production - he can effectively deflect and avoid any discussion of those real concerns.

Folks have plenty of concerns about the film that are absolutely worth discussing, but I think that race is undeniably a factor and, for some people, undeniably a major source of their contention, and it's only natural for Jordan to talk about it in an interview, especially when it's the interviewer who brings it up.

There is also a matter of priorities.

Minority entertainers and public figures have to deal with a lot of crap coming at them from every point on the political spectrum. They've got bigots who raise a ruckus every time they try to do anything, they've got well meaning but naive moderates talking down to them and telling them what's what when they've really got no business doing so, and they have social justice activists telling them that it's their job to be role models and leaders in whatever community or communities that they belong to, and regardless of whether or not that's true, it's still an enormous amount of pressure. Most of these folks only ever wanted to pursue careers in creative fields, and yet time and time again they find themselves sitting at the intersection of a ton of political and social issues regarding how our society sees and treats minority groups and how they are represented in popular media.

For a lot of folks, entertainers and audience alike, that's a more interesting and more important issue than the state of affairs with a superhero movie, especially when most people outside of the pre-existing fan community don't care wether or not this particular movie turns out to be good. It's only natural that it's what's going to get talked about the most.

 

[Mr.T]

I'll just post my worthless 2 cents on this subject. Sue and Johnny should've both been cast as African American. If Fox & Trank wanted to do it right, why not do it RIGHT. What's wrong, they can't bare to see an interracial romance between a African American Sue & White Reed on screen? I think it would've gone over with fan's alot better had they also cast a black Sue. I know blacks are limited by the superhero genre due to the fact that most created throughout history have been white. Change race, but try to stay somewhat true to the source material. If they would've done it this way, you pretty much throw the race issue out the window, IMO. How could anyone complain then?

 

[The Question]

I'll just post my worthless 2 cents on this subject. Sue and Johnny should've both been cast as African American. If Fox & Trank wanted to do it right, why not do it RIGHT. What's wrong, they can't bare to see an interracial romance between a African American Sue & White Reed on screen? I think it would've gone over with fan's alot better had they also cast a black Sue. I know blacks are limited by the superhero genre due to the fact that most created throughout history have been white. Change race, but try to stay somewhat true to the source material. If they would've done it this way, you pretty much throw the race issue out the window, IMO. How could anyone complain then?

I think there's something to be said for portraying an interracial family as not being a big deal in popular media, but ultimately I do agree with you, casting a black Sue Storm would have been a really good call. I do kind of wonder why they didn't. It seems like the first thing you'd think of after casting Jordan.

 

[RAE072]

I do kind of wonder why they didn't.

Because Trank cast his friend in the role. It wasn't to be progressive or any of that. If it was, they WOULD have cast a black Sue. As it is, the white woman adopted by the black family still ends up with the white guy.

He cast his friend in the role at the expense of anybody else who might have been good in the role and at the expense of truly being progressive.

 

[The Question]

Because Trank cast his friend in the role. It wasn't to be progressive or any of that. If it was, they WOULD have cast a black Sue. As it is, the white woman adopted by the black family still ends up with the white guy.

He cast his friend in the role at the expense of anybody else who might have been good in the role and at the expense of truly being progressive.

I don't really see how that explains why they cast a white actor as Sue. I'm not sure how Trank casting his friend in a role prohibited them from casting a black actor as Sue.

And, like, directors cast their friends in roles without auditions all the time. It's normal. No one complains when Wes Anderson does it.

Also, casting your friend in a role and casting a black actor for a part originally written as a white man in order to be progressive are not mutually exclusive.

 

[RAE072]

I don't really see how that explains why they cast a white actor as Sue. I'm not sure how Trank casting his friend in a role prohibited them from casting a black actor as Sue.

And, like, directors cast their friends in roles without auditions all the time. It's normal. No one complains when Wes Anderson does it.

Also, casting your friend in a role and casting a black actor for a part originally written as a white man in order to be progressive are not mutually exclusive.

Did you read my post at all? I don't think you did.

It didn't stop him from casting a black actor as Sue. He/they probably never intended to cast a black actor as Sue. Just like they probably never intended to cast JUST a black actor as Johnny, but instead cast Trank's friend in the role and then had to work around the fact that he was black. People calling it a progressive move don't realize that.

I don't care if a director casts his/her friend in the role. I care if the director casts his/her friend in a role at the expense of the story, movie, or the pre-existing character.

They are not mutually exclusive. However, here, they definitely are. That's the reason why the white woman(Sue) will still end up with the white man(Reed) even though the white woman is the member of a black family. They could have easily just cast a black woman as Sue, which would have been ACTUALLY progressive. Instead they copped out in order to accommodate Trank casting his friend.

 

[The Question]

Did you read my post at all? I don't think you did.

Actually I did. I may have, however, misunderstood what you meant. It happens sometimes. It's not a big deal.

It didn't stop him from casting a black actor as Sue. He/they probably never intended to cast a black actor as Sue. Just like they probably never intended to cast JUST a black actor as Johnny, but instead cast Trank's friend in the role and then had to work around the fact that he was black. People calling it a progressive move don't realize that.

That seems like a distinction without a difference to me. How does the fact that Jordan is friends with Trank negate the progressiveness of his casting?

And that still doesn't really answer the question. They cast a black actor as Johnny, but then did not cast a black actress to play his sister. While interracial families are a thing, it seems odd to me that they it wouldn't have at least occurred to them, and if it did, I wonder why they didn't go in that direction.

I don't care if a director casts his/her friend in the role. I care if the director casts his/her friend in a role at the expense of the story, movie, or the pre-existing character.

And that has not happened here.

They are not mutually exclusive. However, here, they definitely are. That's the reason why the white woman(Sue) will still end up with the white man(Reed) even though the white woman is the member of a black family. They could have easily just cast a black woman as Sue, which would have been ACTUALLY progressive. Instead they copped out in order to accommodate Trank casting his friend.

This is where you lose me. In what way is casting a white actress to play Sue accommodating Trank casting Jordan?

 

[RAE072]

How does the fact that Jordan is friends with Trank negate the progressiveness of his casting?

It doesn't. Not casting a black actor as Sue negates any perceived progressiveness.

If they wanted to go that route, wanted to actually BE progressive, all they had to do was make the Storm family black. But nope. Can't have the white male lead end up with a black female character/lead.

Making two previously white characters black and then having one of them end up romantically involved with the white lead would have been HUGELY progressive.

Making Johnny black and keeping Sue white was just a director casting his friend and then reworking and dancing around the character and the other character directly related to him unnecessarily.

THAT would have been progressive. Actually progressive. Instead it's a huge copout that Sue is just a white woman adopted by a black family who will now end up with presumably the only other human-looking, white male on the team.

And that still doesn't really answer the question. They cast a black actor as Johnny, but then did not cast a black actress to play his sister. While interracial families are a thing, it seems odd to me that they it wouldn't have at least occurred to them, and if it did, I wonder why they didn't go in that direction.

See above. That's the only explanation for them not making the entire Storm family black.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

It doesn't. Not casting a black actor as Sue negates any perceived progressiveness.

There is no gauge on what constitutes or negates progressiveness.

A black male lead superhero is progressive.

A black man cast as the loving father of two children and the leader of a government think tank instead of relying on the white man adopts a black kid stereotype is progressive (white Sue doesn't mean they aren't still a family).

A black man getting a job based on favoritism instead of race is progressivet:t:t:

The only thing that matters is that Trank made Chronicle and that landed him FF. He gets to make his choice. It's his movie and his cast. Hoult wasn't the best person to portray Beast/Hank but he'd worked with Singer right before. JLaw isn't anything like Mystique but she's proven herself to be a capable actress and Singer wanted her.

Sue being black or not black doesn't matter. She's more than just Reed's girlfriend.
If it's just about showing an interracial relationship among the leads then MBJ's Johnny banging a white woman will be fine. lol


EDIT: Not having a black Sue is a missed opportunity, but that has nothing to do with Reed or Johnny.

 

[Orba]

I'm personally in the camp of feeling that they should have gone the whole way and made Sue coloured also if they were making Johnny coloured.

But I don't think that the fact that MBJ was cast can be called progressive, its just a Director giving a friend a role in his film. If the film were really trying to be progressive and picking actors purely on talent irrespective of race then you have to ask why the cast is so white. If you look at all the actors and actresses that have been connected with this film they are virtually all white, the only exception I can think of is that Samira Wiley was rumored to be up for the role of Sue at one point. If they were trying to be progressive then you would expect to see a far more diverse group of actors and actresses being considered.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

But I don't think that the fact that MBJ was cast can't be called progressive, its just a Director giving a friend a role in his film.

If you don't think a black actor getting a role not based on race in Hollywood isn't odd then you haven't been paying attention to any movie not made with Will Smith or Denzel Washington.

Answer: There aren't any.

How many Scorses movies is Leo the best actor for? Oh wait they're friends.
I guess Nolan cast Michael Caine cause he is the best actor? Oh wait they've worked together.
How did Fincher cast the GWTDT... oh wait he worked with her on the Social Network.


Edit: Obviously I'm exaggerating somewhat. But the reality is that some roles are cast cause the director knows that person fits their vision. Fincher went to bat for Mara to get the GIRL role cause he wanted her. She wasn't some Oscar contender like JLaw.

Trank got the director chair so he gets to choose.

 

[Orba]

Oh I know there are plenty of Directors who have a group of regulars they use in most of their films like the Coen brothers, Nolan used virtually the entire cast of Inception in Dark Knight Rises. I think the problem is that it normally when it happens it is with characters who have never had their appearances defined in any medium and so they have a lot more freedom. With this you have a character whos appearance has been well defined for over 50 years, even in UFF they never tried to change the formula.