TCTTS said:
FL_Ag1998 said:
If the sole reason for the diversity of the cast is to reap bigger profits, then that's
1) still racist no matter how politely and softly its phrased because its still built on the assumption that non-white people can only relate to people who look like them, and
2) sad that for some extra money in their pockets (supposedly due to appealing to a more diverse audience) filmakers and execs have decided not only to alter stories along racial lines but in the process promote racism by telling their audience "We view you primarily by your skin tone and in turn have made assumptions about what you like based purely on your skin tone." Because that's literally the argument they're making - "Hey black people, we know if we cast a couple of black people in this movie you'll flock to see it, so we cast a couple!".
AGAIN, there is NO assumption that non-white people can ONLY relate to people who look like them. That's an argument/framing that YOU'RE injecting. Like I just got done saying...
Quote:
Also, it's not that Nolan believes people CAN'T "relate to other human beings based on whether they are the same skin color as themselves," it's that he believes the movie has a better chance of connecting to more people if more types of people are reflected back to the audience.
There's a difference.
And there IS a difference.
As for your second point, that's... literally how capitalism works. For the most part, every company wants the maximum amount of people/demographics to buy their products. It's why various commercials/products cater to as many different people - and types of people - as possible. But for some reason it's suddenly bad when Hollywood does it?
To your point about capitalism, clearly it works by bringing in as many customers as possible. But there are also many examples of brands who have damaged themselves and some who have completely faltered and died by trying to expand their appeal to wide customer bases, and in the process losing the original customer base that they built that brand on. Its not always a good thing for a company to try to grab every single market possible. That's actually not strategic thinking.
And this is movie-making, not burger-making or computer-making or phone-making or anything else. McDonald's isn't watering down their product by prioritizing diversity in their advertising. But I believe that hollywood (lumping it all together for the sake of the argument) does in fact water down their product when they
unnecessarily prioritize diversity in casting some of their products. Not every product movie of course, as most movies truly aren't affected by the race of the actors. But some characters and plotlines are absolutely affected by it.
Will it pay off in more tickets sales? Maybe. So, bravo for the beancounters at the studios I guess and the bonuses of the execs, it's just a shame for the integrity of the product. Because I truly do separate art (movies tv shows, etc) from consumer products and wish the hollywood execs would too, I guess.
Finally, take a look at some of the long-running franchises who decided in the past decade or so to prioritize racial and sexual diversity in their storytelling to bring in a wider audience, only to end up flaundering horribly and jeopardizing their future....Star Trek, Doctor Who, Star Wars, hell, Lord of the Rings, for some examples.
