(05-24-2023, 11:42 AM)NYC4jags Wrote:

(05-24-2023, 11:12 AM)NewJagsCity Wrote: I am with you on some of this.  I'm not bent over fictional characters changing race / color in movie remakes. And if the race of a historical character is ambiguous, then a fresh racial take is sometimes interesting. If nothing else, it opens up discussion on who these people were and what their places in history were.  But if it's clearly obvious historically (ala Hamilton), then it's just nonsense, IMHO.  That being said, I do look forward to someday seeing a biopic of David Duke played by Denzel Washington or MLK played by Richard B Spencer.  Or even Julius Caesar played by Don Cheadle.  Because the way the Roman Empire absorbed conquered peoples, there had to have been a black Caesar at some point in their history.  They just couldn't find any black marble to immortalize them.

Yes, it can definitely be taken too far. 

The Hamilton thing being a broadway musical written with the intent of blending multi cultural modern music with historical figures makes it an extreme outlier.

But we can certainly point to plenty examples of just plain old "bad casting" or someone taking an intent to include every race imaginable and empowering the women in the story to an extreme  - that they actually hurt the story.

"The Last Black Man On Earth" - Starring - Tom Hanks

I always think of that Dave Chapelle skit with Mooney. [BLEEP] was hilarious as a kid. This was during that year when Tom Cruise was featured in "The Last Samurai". Which was somewhat funny because it had plenty of Japanese actors and characters in it. 

Goes back to that white savior complex that the left likes to casually ignore while whitesplaining to minorities. I find that just as offensive as blatant racism. You're essentially saying you can't do anything on your own without a white person's help or interjection. 

It's like trying to watch a bunch of helicopter parents cut up their adopted teenaged "child's chicken tenders or steak at a restaurant.

---