Eternals The Eternals General Disscussion and Speculation thread

[THORin]

I just can't see Marvel casting a guy with hairy shoulders as Herc. Sorry but that's not gonna happen.

The explanation doesn’t seem to...explain. WHY is Marvel not going to cast a man with body hair as Herc? Do you mean what @Speed Force was saying, that you can’t see them specifically casting someone hairy, or do you actually mean that Marvel won’t cast someone hairy, for a reason?

why am I continuing this conversation?

 

[Abudefduf]

Who was talking about hairy shoulders here?

You must have missed how this whole discussion started... I shared my (hairy-chested) fancast, our friend Silvermoth said he wasn't "bear" enough... what was I supposed to think at that point? Bears have fur all over their bodies.

The explanation doesn’t seem to...explain. WHY is Marvel not going to cast a man with body hair as Herc?

For the same reason they (and other studios) refuse to cast muscular women as superheroines, because that's how Hollywood works. When was the last time you watched an action movie starring a very hairy man?

 

[pixen]

As a gay man I can honestly say nothing annoys me more than the idea that a gay man (or woman) must portray a gay character (or the implicit reverse suggestion).

Always happy for better representation - but I have no problem with a straight actor portraying a gay character, or a gay actor portraying a straight character. That seems more progressive?

That’s fine but other gay men might feel different and thats ok.

 

[Lilbaz]

Pretty much, except I wasn't even talking about any specific part of the body. I just can't see Marvel casting a guy with hairy shoulders as Herc. Sorry but that's not gonna happen.

Not sure. In lord of the rings they cast people with hairy feet.

 

[Lilbaz]

That’s fine but other gay men might feel different and thats ok.

Ok forget about the discrimination angle. If only gay people can play gay roles then you will probably get a situation like rub and tug. Where people complained about scarlet Johansen playing a transgender man. She dropped out because of it. Now the film can't get financial backing because they can't get a star name to attach to it. So it won't be made. How is that progressive?

How can you be all about tolerance and acceptance when you are excluding people from even being considered for the role based on who they have sex with? It is hypocritical and what we are trying to overco

 

[Silvermoth]

I think it’s a shame that we encourage actors to come out and then when they do we don’t give them roles to play. So really, if a straight person plays gay I don’t mind (as long as they don’t constantly carry on about how “brave” they’re being).

That said though if Chris Evans wanted to play gay I would support it. Very much. Chris Evans please play gay.

I was talking more the one with the braces. Looks like a gay stereotype from the 80's.

Like this?



Because honestly I love it. It’s so delightfully 21 jump street.

I... really don't want to talk about body hair. I just don't see Marvel casting a very hairy dude as Hercules, that is all.

Well, it is 2019. Anything can happen. I think as soon as we have more hairy leading men more studios will be prepared to portray them

You must have missed how this whole discussion started... I shared my (hairy-chested) fancast, our friend Silvermoth said he wasn't "bear" enough... what was I supposed to think at that point? Bears have fur all over their bodies.

For the same reason they (and other studios) refuse to cast muscular women as superheroines, because that's how Hollywood works. When was the last time you watched an action movie starring a very hairy man?

Yes I stand by this, hairy like a bear and as gay slang type bear. I endorse furry Hercules.

Also, Henry Cavill was hairy and remember when people used to say “oh they’ll never make movies about super heroines, it just doesn’t sell”. It doesn’t til it does.

 

[pixen]

Ok forget about the discrimination angle. If only gay people can play gay roles then you will probably get a situation like rub and tug. Where people complained about scarlet Johansen playing a transgender man. She dropped out because of it. Now the film can't get financial backing because they can't get a star name to attach to it. So it won't be made. How is that progressive?

How can you be all about tolerance and acceptance when you are excluding people from even being considered for the role based on who they have sex with? It is hypocritical and what we are trying to overco

This is a conversation that wont end it seems...

As for casting a gay actor in a gay role in the Eternals, it won’t hurt because it’s more or less an ensemble film. Casting a gay actor in a gay role won’t tank it... So why not try it out and try and cast a gay actor for a gay role? I’d rather Marvel try and do it than not try at all.

 

[Lilbaz]

This is a conversation that wont end it seems...

As for casting a gay actor in a gay role in the Eternals, it won’t hurt because it’s more or less an ensemble film. Casting a gay actor in a gay role won’t tank it... So why not try it out and try and cast a gay actor for a gay role? I’d rather Marvel try and do it than not try at all.

Perfectly happy for a gay actor to play the role or any other role. But if you will only consider openly open gay actors you are excluding straight actors and also gay actors that want their private life to be private. This limits the talent pool available. Meaning that it makes it more difficult to get a suitable actor which makes it harder to get the film made. Fine for the MCU as but maybe not for other films.

 

[pixen]

Anyways... I really hope that they manage to find a great gay actor and get Constance for Sersi and then whatever actors for the rest of the film. I can’t deal with trying to talk about why it could be important to try and cast a gay actor for the role anymore.

 

[MahvelBaby!]

did Chloe Zhao get interviewed at the Captain Marvel premiere? she was listed as a guest.

 

[Web-Head]

did Chloe Zhao get interviewed at the Captain Marvel premiere? she was listed as a guest.

Doesn't look like it. Seemed like a lot of the guests didn't get interviewed.

 

[metaphysician]

Starfox is one of the Eternals of Titan

I don't know if anything has been said one way or another, but. . . . I really, really hope they don't use Starfox. He suffers the unavoidable problem that his primary power and schtick is basically "living date rape drug", and his personality plays directly into it. There is no way to not make him epicly problematic, without erasing everything about him and starting from scratch. At which point? Just use a different Eternal.

 

[metaphysician]

This is what I don't understand. I thought in fact it was the opposite that hairy chests were preferred by women and thought more manly and rugged. Look at people like Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan or Henry Cavill. And all the movie stars of the past (not the women obviously).

But whether you have it or not is neither here nor there. Some people naturally don't grow it and some do. I don't see the big deal at all.

I don't think anyone's asking for an Austin Powers type rug.

I suspect the fact that hair on men is of interest to women, is *why* the concept is semi-taboo. . . at least in male-dominated circles. Its a form of sexualization, and a lot of men are not comfortable with the idea of men being sexualized.

 

[Dark Raven]

I suspect the fact that hair on men is of interest to women, is *why* the concept is semi-taboo. . . at least in male-dominated circles. Its a form of sexualization, and a lot of men are not comfortable with the idea of men being sexualized.

It doesn't really make sense to me. If you have it, you have it. If you don't, you don't.

To me, it's like if you have a rocky voice or a soulful voice or an operatic voice. If you have a rocky voice, then you should make use of it and not try to have a soulful voice. Equally, if you have a soulful voice, then you're not going to probably have an operatic voice. Whichever one you have, you should capitalise on it. Someone like Bryan Adams is not going to sound like Luciano Pavrotti.

Of course, if you are one of these rare people like Russell Watson who has three voices (a rock voice, an operatic voice and a regular singing voice) then you should just envy him for his versatility and ability to switch between them!

If you have chest hair, then wear it well and be proud of it and don't try to shave it off. If you don't have chest hair, then also be proud of it, and don't try to grow some or stick a rug on your chest.

 

[Web-Head]

I don't know if anything has been said one way or another, but. . . . I really, really hope they don't use Starfox. He suffers the unavoidable problem that his primary power and schtick is basically "living date rape drug", and his personality plays directly into it. There is no way to not make him epicly problematic, without erasing everything about him and starting from scratch. At which point? Just use a different Eternal.

Nothing has been said. The thing is they could easily change the characters up since they're not known. MCU Star Lord and even Iron Man/Stark are pretty different than their comic book counterparts.

I don't care one way or the other if they use Starfox and change him up.

 

[Dark Raven]

As a gay man I can honestly say nothing annoys me more than the idea that a gay man (or woman) must portray a gay character (or the implicit reverse suggestion).

Always happy for better representation - but I have no problem with a straight actor portraying a gay character, or a gay actor portraying a straight character. That seems more progressive?

Well, I don't think it just applies to sexuality but also to race. Certainly at least in the past, but even still prevalent now, you still get certain races only being able to get parts as some small supporting character with a particularly ethnicity. For example, Asians often can only get parts in big Hollywood movies as an Asian whose first language isn't English (and then they have to put on an accent). And these are usually in very small roles or not the main character. Or if they do get a role in a film, they have to do martial arts.

It's only a little more recently that you get people like Henry Golding playing roles that don't have any colour attached to them (like his role in A Simple Favor). But it's still very few and far between. It's not like he's the only Asian (and he's even only half Asian) in Hollywood. Do you ever see other full Asians as romantic leads and not having to do martial arts or have some plot revolving around cultural clashes or where the Asian has difficulty with the English language?

Perfectly happy for a gay actor to play the role or any other role. But if you will only consider openly open gay actors you are excluding straight actors and also gay actors that want their private life to be private. This limits the talent pool available. Meaning that it makes it more difficult to get a suitable actor which makes it harder to get the film made. Fine for the MCU as but maybe not for other films.

That was the case with Batwoman. That's how we ended up with an actress like Ruby Rose in the role, because they were seeking someone who was openly gay, which ruled out many other actresses. They didn't even want a bisexual actress. They had to be fully gay. And then it felt like she was merely cast because she was gay, and not because of her acting abilities. And let's face it, she's not exactly a great actress. Her Kate Kane came across as very wooden in that crossover episode. She hardly feels like someone you'd want to really follow in a series.

 

[pixen]

Let’s be honest... It’s the CW, there are more talented lesbian actresses, they just won’t do TV/won’t do CW.

 

[Silvermoth]

I’m just so glad Bryan singer isn’t directing this

 

[Web-Head]

Top Marvel Executive: ‘The World Is Ready’ for a Gay Superhero in the MCU

 

[CB Fan]

Hollywood has no problem casting a straight male to play gay but is hesitant to cast a gay man that’s out to play a straight male. There are some exceptions but they are just that, exceptions. So it’s bullsh*t when straight actors are able to audition and secure both gay and straight roles and gay actors are not even considered for a straight role and have to compete with straight actors for the gay roles.

Most of the time Hollywood cast on popularity well you can’t get very popular if you aren’t being given a real chance to show what you got. That’s why it matters that this role as a gay character in a huge movie go to a gay actor. Ideally everyone would be able to audition for everything but that ain’t gon happen until Hollywood starts to be as progressive and inclusive as it likes to think it is.

 

[pixen]

Hollywood has no problem casting a straight male to play gay but is hesitant to cast a gay man that’s out to play a straight male. There are some exceptions but they are just that, exceptions. So it’s bullsh*t when straight actors are able to audition and secure both gay and straight roles and gay actors are not even considered for a straight role and have to compete with straight actors for the gay roles.

Most of the time Hollywood cast on popularity well you can’t get very popular if you aren’t being given a real chance to show what you got. That’s why it matters that this role as a gay character in a huge movie go to a gay actor. Ideally everyone would be able to audition for everything but that ain’t gon happen until Hollywood starts to be as progressive and inclusive as it likes to think it is.

Thank you!

 

[MahvelBaby!]

Already seeing frowny faces on facebook articles...it has begun! lol

 

[pixen]

That’s too bad. Bring it on Marvel!

 

[Zarex]

The rumor going around* is that the gay actors vying for the lead role in Eternals are going to have to "prove it" during the audition process.

*(Which I just made up)

 

[Dark Raven]

Rumor on the street is that the gay actors vying for the lead role in Eternals are going to have to "prove it" during the audition process.

And how exactly do they prove that? It's not Bryan Singer directing is it?