Larry Underwood was never black in the book.why does Hollywood have to care about diversity so much?!
shareHE WAS NEVER ANYTHING BUT WORDS IN THE BOOK...WHY DOES IT MATTER TO YOU SO MUCH THAT THE CHARACTER MUST BE WHITE?
shareThey're trying to please anyone who isn't white or straight. It's all virtue-signaling, basically saying "Look at us! We're inclusive! Now please don't sue us." The people who write these crap films think ticking off diversity boxes is a shortcut to character development. Talk about stupid and shallow.
share$$$ is the main reason...everybody in the tent!
By having the all white cast (like the orginal had) would mean less eyes watching it, the less eyes= less ratings which = less money.
Maximum appeal to maximum amont of groups... sometimes however, this philosophy can be taken to far.
There is that, but I tend to think more in terms of what AmeriGirl26 said in that it is a lot of virtue signalling in Hollywood today. What they are saying in essence is, 'see how inclusive, diverse and how VIRTUOUS we are!'.
But, I also hear that 'woke' films also don't don't usually do too well at the box office.
Judge Farris was black (played by the late, great Ossie Davis) and I'm pretty sure that Mother Abigail was black in the original movie.
And how can we forget Kareem Abdul-Jabbar shouting "BRING OUT YOUR DEAD!"
Red wasn't black in the Shawshank novella either, but it worked out fine.
share
2 No one is saying that it can't 'work out'. What some of us are saying is 'why'? A great many 'woke' movies are, from what I hear, not big box-office draws, so, other than virtue signalling, what is the point?
A better question is "why not?" Who cares what race the character is? Unless you're making a movie about a real person, it really isn't an issue most of the time.
share2 The change has been made so the logical question remains one of 'why do it?' What is the purpose of changing a character's ethnicity and why does it usually happen that the ethnic change is White to Black, and not the reverse?
I can't see the point, so I still ask 'why?'
Other than virtue signalling by the film makers there is almost never any point to it.
If you don't care then why change it???
shareIf race isn't an important factor, then just cast who think is best.
shareSometime race IS an important factor.
If it's not, I agree, choose the best. I'm legend: the original character (in the book) was white. You'll never see me complaining that they chose WS. Same for I Robot.
But in some cases race IS important and changing it changes a LOT of the context and not only.
It's entirely a case of textbook virtue signaling. The filmmakers trying to get the quota up of black characters into the movie. For those who've read and liked the book it'll definitely hurt the feel of the movie. I think of that horrible Rob Lowe "Salem's Lot" version when they changed the genteel old white man Matt Burke into a openly gay black man lusting after his former male student.
share2 Quite so. While I didn't think the Rob Lowe version was all that, bad, and Andre Braugher did a very good portrayal, I still didn't see the point of changing not only Matt Burke's ethnicity, but his sexual orientation.
Another thing that irritates me as well, is Hollywood's seeming obsession with villains being neo-Nazis, KKK, or White supremacists or other right-wingers. The US is almost always the bad guys, rarely the Marxists or Islamic terrorists. The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. Hollywood is obsessed with it.
I suspect that Larry’s mom isn’t going to accuse him of sounding black in this version.
share