The female love interest isn’t attractive.
They should have had the Cuban lady from No Time To Die.
shareAna de Armas? Yes she would have been a great choice!
shareshe is a cutie...
share
MovieChat Forums > The Batman (2022) Discussion > The female love interest isn’t attractiv...
Ana De Armas was in the running for the role but the racist director wanted a black chick for the role, and so we ended up with someone who majority of movie-going audiences do not and will not find attractive for the role of Catwoman. Talk about a massive downgrade from Michelle Pfeiffer.
shareAgreed. PC culture dictates Black women have to be at the forefront of ever major role nowadays.
shareMost superheroes in mainstream films are white. Also go ahead and look at Selina Kyle in the Batman Year one comic book. She is black in that comic. I love your brand of people. If it ain't white it ain't right..
share70% of the adult population in the USA is White. In the entire Western world it's even higher. I don't care what comic books do, they even made Superman gay to be PC. In my mind the only true Catwoman is Michelle Pfeifer.
shareSo then you shouldn't have anything to fear. Most superheroes in mainstream media are white. Whenever a person of color gets hype you guys get threatened and all insecure. Michelle I liked but you act as if this character can only ever be done by her. The character existed before her and will exist after her obviously. Even if someone is different or not as good as her they can still be good.
shareWhenever a person of color gets hype you guys get threatened and all insecure
Nope, that's a straw man. What people have a problem with is replacement, not people of colour getting roles. Nobody complains when there is Black person playing a new character/superhero. If you would oppose White people replacing Blacks in their traditional characters like The Blade or Shaft, you should understand White people when they oppose replacement. share
Exactly. Black Panther was one of the most popular characters in Captain America: Civil War along with Spider-Man, and people, including Whites, flocked to see his movie, which made even more money than Spider-Man: Homecoming.
Black Panther was an original black superhero, and a cool one at that. People love him, and weren't happy when Marvel/Disney announced that he wasn't going to be recast for the sequel.
Look on the boards, plenty of racist stuff was posted about that film. Yes it made money but you see tons of whites were threatened by that. They are fine so long as their heroes and characters remain on top. Honestly the fact that you guys dislike Kravitz being cast makes me like it even more.
shareI did look on the boards, there weren't that many "racist" posts as you claimed. White's aren't the ones that are threatened, seeing as how they're not the ones screaming for color-washing characters for "representation" (attention) because it's easier than coming up with original characters, or promoting the supposed rich culture of their ancestral continent to the rest of the world.
People only say "skin color doesn't matter" when it comes to white characters, but if you were to white-wash black characters where their black skin doesn't matter, those same people would flip shit.
Exactly!
Very well said.
No one is threatened by anything you fucking idiot, we are just sick and tired of the double standards. Black actors can play characters that were traditionally white but going the other way and it’s “whitewashing”.
shareWhere did I oppose that? See you have made an assumption with no basis. The only time I care about a race swap is if the race is essential to the character. If the character's race isn't essential I don't care what race plays them. I care if the writing and performance is good. Also I'm calling bullcrap on your statement. Tons of people hated on black panther and called it an sjw and racist film.
shareThey hated on Black Panther because the movie (the ending in particular) implies it's White people's fault for the bas state of Black people around the world which is total BS. Leftist morons were even claiming that Wakanda is what Africa would look lie if the West didn't colonize it. Nobody hated on Black panther because it had a Black leading role.
The only time I care about a race swap is if the race is essential to the character.
So you're telling me there wouldn't be an outrage if the remake of The Blade would feature Tom Cruise? Race isn't essential to his character. But the same people who would be outraged by a White Blade, support a Black Spider man. Total hypocrisy. share
Wrong the movie doesn't even do that. It simply uses oppression as a metaphor in the same way X-Men used the Holocaust as a metaphor. Just because other people claim that's what wakanda would be doesn't mean that's what the movie was saying.
Straw man I didn't say that. However this hypocrisy goes both ways. The same people that get all pissed off about Catwoman being race swapped say nothing about Scarjo being in Ghost in the shell playing an Asian character. Or say nothing about how Whistler from Blade is based on Blades mentor Jamal in the comics who is black. Whistler in that movie is white and they basically gave him Jamal's story. Not a word is said. I myself don't care so long as race isn't essential.
Black Panther implies that there is oppression of Whites against Blacks. This is totally bogus and that's why the movie gets deserved hate. It's anti White slander. Holocaust is totally different, it's an actual even in history that nobody denies was oppression. Holocaust in X men is not a narrative like in Black Panther and talking about the Holocaust isn't slander against Germans.
The same people that get all pissed off about Catwoman being race swapped say nothing about Scarjo being in Ghost in the shell playing an Asian character.
Shifting races for practical (box office) reasons is different than shifting them for ideological ones. If there was some pragmatic reason they had to have cast a Black actor for the next James Bond I wouldn't mind at all. It would be understandable. But I do mind casting a Black James Bond for ideological reasons.
share
Oppression like the Holocaust did happen that's an undeniable fact. So nope wrong again. Blacks were enslaved, whipped, denied the right to vote etc. Your rhetoric is basically well that doesn't happen today. Okay if that is true it doesn't mean the movie can't use that as a metaphor. The Holocaust is over and X-Men still used it as a metaphor.
Also nope. The batman looks like it is shaping up to be a hit regardless of what your camp thinks. Sit back cry and we will enjoy your tears while eating popcorn and seeing a great film. You won't be affecting how much we enjoy a film.
Blacks were enslaved, whipped, denied the right to vote etc.
Whites never enslaved Blacks. Blacks were already slaves in Africa before White people arrived. Colonialism didn't make Africa poor. It's just a left wing narrative they're forced to play because they can't admit it's the African's fault for being poor. The movie isn't just referencing the past, but implying the oppression is still happening despite all the privileged Black people enjoy.
Also nope. The batman looks like it is shaping up to be a hit regardless of what your camp thinks. Sit back cry and we will enjoy your tears while eating popcorn and seeing a great film. You won't be affecting how much we enjoy a film.
That's not a counter argument against the points I was making. The Batman will perhaps be a good movie, we will see. One woke casting choice doesn't necessary make it a bad movie. I will watch it and will judge it according to it's quality. Nobody is crying about it. We are used to woke left wing Hollywood. share
That's irrelevant. Whites did own black people and had rights they did not. That is oppression no matter how you slice it. Nope it's using history as a metaphor just like X-Men did. You just don't like that piece of history and therefore get triggered because you probably have prejudice in you and don't like it being talked about.
Good spend your hard earned money. This film will succeed and your camp will cry about it. Sit back and be glad idiots like you that are closed minded dead beats don't run the show. The fact that you hate the casting of Kravitz makes me like it even more. Oh also Gordon is race swapped also. I am glad that will make you angry as well.
Of course it is relevant. Slavery was practiced in ever part of the world all throughout history until White people ended it, and now slavery is blamed exclusively on Whites. If Blacks want to complain about slavery, why don't they complain about Arab slavery which was worse and lasted longer than transatlantic slavery? Focusing only on Whites owning Blacks and never on anyone else is an anti White narrative. Black Panther pretends like oppression against Blacks is still a thing, despite the fact Blacks today are extremely privileged in America. Again, that is anti White. That's why the movie was hated.
And I'm still waiting on your argument on how is shifting characters for ideological reasons the same as shifting them for practical ones. You lost the argument about Ghost in the Shell.
If The Batman makes money it won't be because they cast a Black woman for Catwoman but because the script, writing and direction are good. Wokeness doesn't make anyone money. Movies make money IN SPITE of wokeness.
The fact that you like race swapping makes me think you're a brainwashed moron who hates his own race. You're the worst kind of scumbag.
Again no it is not relevant. Slavery runs quite deep and the fact that Black panther merely touches on it and uses it as a metaphor does not mean it is saying only white people did this. T'challa believes that both races can exist in harmony. The villain Killmonger believes in killing and oppressing people. Also no it uses it as a metaphor. By that logic X-men is saying that the Holocaust is still occurring because it uses it as a metaphor and was based in modern day. If it was anti white why does T'challa fight against Killmonger's cause? It is a Malcolm X vs Martin Luther king type of deal. Much like Xavier vs Magneto.
No actually I did not. The character Scarjo is playing is Asian. That was whitewashing. You have no retort to this that is logical. Nice try though.
I never said it will make money because of Catwoman being mixed. I said it will be a success despite you idiots getting your panties in a bunch.
Oh I love it when it makes idiots like you get upset. Catwoman's race is not essential to her character. Eartha Kitt played Catwoman back in the day and Catwoman/Selina Kyle was black in the Year One comic book. Just because she is typically white does not mean she has to be portrayed that way. She was black in Year One choke on it. Sit back and enjoy the slaughter of your ideology it is a beautiful thing. I think Kravitz will be my favorite Catwoman partly because I think she will be great but secondly because it makes people like you upset. That honestly makes me like her even more as the character it tickles me pink. You are the kind of scumbag that needs to be straightened out and I am glad to do that.
The movie Black Panther implies Black are still being oppressed by Whites despite the facts Blacks are extremely privileged in our society with all the affirmative action and diversity quotas etc. The false belief that Black problems today are White people's fault is literally killing people. Just look at the stats of Black on White crime. Movies that that are literally getting people killed by promoting this false narrative deserve much worse than some hate on the internet.
Yes you totally lost the argument with Ghost in the Shell. There is a difference between changing races of characters for practical reasons and ideological reasons. They did not make the main character White for ideological reasons. If Chinese make a remake of an American movie and have an all Chinese cast for Chinese audience, nobody would be accusing it of Whitewashing. You keep ignoring this argument, because you know it's a valid one.
I never said it will make money because of Catwoman being mixed. I said it will be a success despite you idiots getting your panties in a bunch.
We will see if it will be a success. And if it will it won't be because it's woke. Wokneess never helps a movie, it always hurts it.
Catwoman's race is not essential to her character.
If her race is not essential to her character, why change it then????? There are more White actresses in Hollywood than Black ones. It obviously is essential to the writers who decided to make her Black. It's part of an ideological agenda, it's insane I have to even argue for this.
I think Kravitz will be my favorite Catwoman partly because I think she will be great but secondly because it makes people like you upset.
You just proven the ideological agenda which you ironically deny. share
Nope it does not. I notice you keep ignoring my X-men comparison. You ignore it because you know it dismantles your point. The holocaust ended years ago but X-men uses it as a metaphor for storytelling. Black Panther uses the oppression of blacks as a metaphor for storytelling. It also takes place in modern day just like X-men did. If it supported the anti white narrative you are claiming then why is Killmonger the guy who believes in killing and oppressing whites the villain of the film? If the film supported that he would not be the villain now would he?
No I actually won that argument by a landslide. You made the exception for Ghost in the Shell because you are fine so long as white people are not race swapped. They made her white because Scarjo is a big name and star power. Which shows rather than casting the right actress for the part it was about who was a more bankable star. That is quite similar to casting to fill a diversity quota. Whistler from Blade was based on the character Jamal from the blade comic books. They even gave Whistler Jamal's backstory. In the comic book Jamal is Blades mentor and close friend. Jamal is black and they made Whistler white. Why no outrage about this?
Always hurts it? Hmm? Captain Marvel woke and made over a billion dollars. Black Panther woke and made over a billion. New Spider-man film woke and made over a billion. So no it does not always hurt it you are wrong. I believe it will be a success and it will make losers like you get all bent out of shape.
Why not change it? If it is not essential why is it a big deal if they change it? She was black in the Year One comic book which is a famous Batman comic by the way. I like how you conveniently ignore this.
Nope I just like that it makes you guys upset.
Again ignoring my point about the oppression narrative of Black Panther. I don't care about X men. The movie implies Whites are to blame for the failure of Blacks which is getting people robbed, beaten, raped and killed in the streets every day. Do you want me to quote FBI crime statistics? Movies that get people killed deserve much worse than few bad comments on the internet. They should be banned.
They made her white because Scarjo is a big name and star power.
That's precisely my point.
That is quite similar to casting to fill a diversity quota
No, it's not. Practical reasons are understandable and totally different from ideological reasons, which is what people have a problem with. Diversity quotas are pure ideology. Hiring someone for box office reasons is the same as hiring someone for their talent.
Always hurts it? Hmm? Captain Marvel woke and made over a billion dollars. Black Panther woke and made over a billion. New Spider-man film woke and made over a billion. So no it does not always hurt it you are wrong. I believe it will be a success and it will make losers like you get all bent out of shape.
And how much would these movies make if they weren't woke? I wager even a bit more. Do you want me to list you all the woke films that bombed due to their wokeness despite positive reviews from critics? From Ghostbusters to Charlie's Angels on.
Why not change it? If it is not essential why is it a big deal if they change it? She was black in the Year One comic book which is a famous Batman comic by the way. I like how you conveniently ignore this.
That's not the answer to the question. My question is if her race isn't important why DO change it? It's easier to find a White actress than a Black one. It's obviously important to the people who made this choice. Origina Catwoman in the first comic was White. They only changed her to Black in later comics. share
You do not care about X-men because it undermines your point. Also no the movie does not imply that. By that logic the X-men film is implying the Holocaust is still going on. It is using it as a story metaphor nothing more. Movies do not kill people people kill people sound familiar? Movies should be banned? My goodness you sound just like those people who believe in censorship. I do not believe in censorship of any kind actually. You sound like those old ladies who says videogames make kids kill. No an unstable home and and an unstable mind is what causes those things. Black Panther itself is not to blame for killing people as I would say the same thing for guns not being responsible for killing people. Bad logic here man.
Hiring someone for box office reasons is not the same as hiring someone for their talent. Megan Fox gets hired because they know she is eye candy even though she is an awful actress. Scarjo was hired for star power which to me is just as offensive as hiring someone for a quota. Also way to side step my Whistler point lol. You ignored that because that one undercuts you even worse. Why was Whistler given Jamal's back story and race swapped? You can't even make the box office draw logical conclusion on that one. Why was Whistler race swapped?
No way to gauge that actually. Ghostbusters, and Charlies Angles were not well made films aside from being woke. Black Panther, new Spider-man and others are well made films. If your film is well made it can make money regardless if it is woke or not.
Yes the original is white but Eartha Kitt played her way back in the day. So on average she gets played by white most of the time. Therefore you can sit this one out and relax since we got to break it up a bit. I am sure she will return back to white next go around do not worry. So since she was black in some comics she can be adapted to that without it being political I am glad we agree.
Are you and idiot? Every day Black people commit robberies, rapes, home invasions and aggravated assaults against Whites. How much of that is due to the narrative of White oppression? (which is totally bogus btw).How many idiots in the hood saw Black Panther and thought to themselves: "Boy this is what we would have if it weren't for those pesky White people". Twitter was full of these morons who actually believed Wakanda is what Africa would have looked like had Whites not colonized it. Meanwhile the real Wkanada actually exists. It's called Liberia, it has never been colonized and it's one of the poorest countries in Africa.
Eye candy is a practical reason. People want to see pretty women in movies. There is nothing wrong with hiring women for their looks. It's a practical reason.
Scarjo was hired for star power which to me is just as offensive as hiring someone for a quota
Then you're an idiot who doesn't understand that movies cost hundreds of millions to make and have to make a return on investment.
I can't comment on your Jamal character because I'm not familiar with it. For all I know it could all be BS. I'd wager Hollywood has never replaced a Black character for a White one for ideological reason. Practical reason are totally different and are justified. If they had to make Black James Bond for some practical reason, I wouldn't mind it at all. It's the ideology that I (and others) mind.
No way to gauge that actually. Ghostbusters, and Charlies Angles were not well made films aside from being woke. Black Panther, new Spider-man and others are well made films. If your film is well made it can make money regardless if it is woke or not.
There were PLENTY of movies with good critic reviews that totally bombed because they were woke. share
Which leads to my original point now doesn't it? Was it Black Panther that caused these crimes or was it an unstable home life and an unstable mind? I watched Black Panther and never have committed a single crime. You are taking extremists and attempting to apply it to the majority. You have no statistical basis to even claim that Black Panther causes all this black on white crime. This was happening long before Black Panther was released. Poverty, unstable home life and an unstable mind breed crime. Not films, videogames or guns. So no I do not believe it should be banned that is an ignorant way to think.
Then it is practical to hire Kravitz because as it stands she is pretty.
Your movie should be able to sell itself. Ghost in the Shell is a popular anime. You should not need big stars to sell your film. Avatar was an original idea it was a huge box office hit. Who was a big mega star in that film? It is one thing when the actor is big and suits the part. Case in point Jack Nicholson for Batman 1989. Not only was he a big name but he was well suited for the part of the Joker back then. Scarjo is not fit for the role she is playing whatsoever in Ghost in the Shell she is there because of who she is not because she is suited for the part.
Then you are an ignorant idiot who does not know cinema. Plenty of whitewashing has occurred. Remember the movie the Last Airbender? That was whitewashing. Why was Nicola Peltz hired to play Kotara? Any logical reason? So then answer this question is it possible for Catwoman to not be white and it not be political? You are basically saying that if Catwoman is race swapped from white it has to be political.
And this proves nothing. Plenty of great films bomb in the box office. I care about them releasing a good film rather than just simply having their eyes on making money. I proved my point though woke movies can make money even if they are woke.
Nope, the narrative of White oppression is the single most underrated cause of Black on White crime. Blacks are constantly bombarded with ideas about racism, White privilege, systemic racism, institutional racism, slavery, Jim crow, colonialism etc. They are constantly told White people are the reason everything has gone wrong with hem. It's no wonder they commit so much crime against Whites. Black Panther isn't the author of that, but it re enforces that narrative.
Then it is practical to hire Kravitz because as it stands she is pretty.
Yes if they hired her just exclusively because of her looks and talent I wouldn't not mind it even the slightest. It's the hiring of Blacks due to the ideology that I mind. But since Hollywood nowadays openly espouses wokeness it's perfectly logical for me to assume she was hired because she is Black.
I can't comment on weather or not Scarjo was fitting for the role. The point is the people who did the casting thought she was. She was hired because the makers thought she would make them money, not because there was an Alt Right ideology taking over Hollywood. If there was some popular new right wing ideology and caused Black characters to be replaced by Whites, every Black person would oppose it.
Then you are an ignorant idiot who does not know cinema.... So then answer this question is it possible for Catwoman to not be white and it not be political? You are basically saying that if Catwoman is race swapped from white it has to be political.
Name me one case of so called "Whitewashing" that you can demonstrate was done for ideological as opposed to practical reasons.
If it wasn't part of a larger pattern you see in other modern movies and if there was no woke ideology in our culture, then I wouldn't have thought much of casting a Black woman. But there is.
So even when I clearly show you that wokeness caused otherwise good movies to bomb, you still think it's irrelevant? share
Nope it's as I stated before. Poverty an unstable home and mind is what leads to most crime. You said Black Panther should be banned. Yeah because you know censorship works so well... Black Panther does not reinforce anything that's hog wash made up by right wing zealots.
See I love this it's guilty until proven innocent. However it goes deeper than that. It's guilty no matter what. Nothing can convince you Kravitz was hired for a legit reason. Therefore you abd other closed minded idiots won't give her a fair shake. Even if she's good it won't matter for idiots like you.
I can comment on if she was as I've seen ghost in the shell. She was not fit for the job. Your camp does not care about whitewashing, they only care when their race gets race swapped. I proved my point by pointing out Whistler in Blade. Not a peep from them.
Hollywood is left there is no denying that. If the right controlled the media there would be more examples of them catering to their crowd. Check out films such as gods not dead. Thing is I believe Airbender was race swapped and whitewashed for ideological reasons.
Wokeness is not always what determines box office. Dredd released in 2012 was well received and not a woke film box office dud. So I don't know what you are getting at? Can a woke film that's well received bomb yeah just like any other well received film...
Poverty is not the cause of crime. During the great depression there was no spike in crime. Likewise the best predictor of crime across US is not levels of poverty, but share of Black and brown people.
My comment about censoring was tongue in cheek. I was making a point that Black Panther incites hatred against Whites with it's false oppression narrative which you haven't even contested. If the shoe was on the other foot the movie blamed Blacks it would have been a scandal and probably really banned.
So the woke left openly say they want diversity for the sake of diversity and I'm the bad guy for assuming that they hired diversity for the sake of diversity? Imagine if a company said they wanted to hire only White people because they have a White nationalist ideology, and you were called irrational for asuming they hired a White guy because he's White. Unbelievable.
No you haven't proved anything. You keep avoiding my point about changing races for practical reasons and how it's totally different from doing so for ideological reasons. Blackwashing is done for ideological reasons, while Whitewashing is done for practical ones. That's totally different.
I believe Airbender was race swapped and whitewashed for ideological reasons.
And what ideology would that be? Are the producers of that movie closet racists? Do you really believe that? Don't make me laugh. share
Nice cherry picking of what I said. I said poverty, unstable home and unstable mind cause crime. All three of those play a part in crime that's undeniable.
No you realize your comment was dismantled so now you are backpedaling. If it had a hatred against whites narrative then why is Killmonger the villain? You don't contest that because you know I'm right. It isn't anti white you and other ring wing idiots interpret it that way. You ignore my X-Men comparison also because that dismantled your point also. Contest both of those and do not side step. Also I wouldn't care if it did that I don't believe in censorship. You are part of that camp not me.
Do you know Matt Reeves personally? Do you know for a fact he hired Kravitz for ideology? If so prove it. No generalizations I want proof.
No you are being hypocritical. Either it's acceptable to race swap or it isn't period. Can't have it both ways. I don't care about race swapping so long as the characters race isn't essential. If it's not essential have at it.
I will prove they are racists as soon as you prove Matt Reeves is racist against whites deal? Also answer my question about Airbender. What was practical about race swapping those characters and whitewashing them? I will wait.
And that unstable home (single mothers) was caused by the liberal welfare state aimed at Blacks as well as liberal attitudes towards family, authority, religion, sexuality and drugs. Thanks liberals.
Just because a movie has a Black villain doesn't mean it's not anti White. Imagine a shoe on the other foot. Does having a bad White guy in the movie automatically always absolves it from being racist? No. If the movie's narrative was to blame Blacks for the problems of another race, that would be a racist movie. So is why is a movie that blames Whites for the problems of Blacks not racist against Whites?
Again with the idiocy. The burden of proof is not on my side just like if a company openly espouses White nationalist ideology and then hires a White guy, the burden of proof wouldn't be on people who say they hired him because he was White. They openly admit their ideology. It's more than rational to think they hired her because she was Black. And even she wasn't hired for ideology, she would be an exception because there is A PATTERN of hiring Black women in accordance with intersectional ideology. It's everywhere now.
So a movie made by White people in a majority White country aimed at a majority White audience isn't rational to have White leading characters? If Chinese made a remake of Superman for Chinese audience and cast a Chinese guy, nobody would complain. But it's only a problem if White people do it. Again a double standard where only Whites can be racist and guilty of Whtiewashing, but it's OK to Blackwash even if done for purely ideological reasons.
And the drug war has caused more harm than good. It ruins lives of families, targets poor people and minorities. Thanks conservatives.
That wasn't the movies narrative. Again it used it as a storytelling metaphor. That's like saying X-Men is anti German because it uses the Holocaust as a storytelling metaphor. Your baseless assumption is dismissed.
So then there can be an exception. Which means that if you jump to the conclusion while it may be somewhat justified you could possibly be wrong. You and your people don't generalize though it's worse it's guilty until proven innocent. However it's not even that it's guilty no further questions. So there is no proving innocence.
Strawman I never said that. I said I get upset when the race is essential to the character. You said you care when it's done for ideology. Why was it practical to do that with Airbender? We're those kids big stars no! Did they look like the characters no! So how was that practical? That's whitewashing.
The drug war is arguably necessary. No country in the world has legalized hard drugs. It doesn't "target" minorities, it's just that minorities are more likely to sell drugs. The drug war helps keep drugs off of minority neighbourhoods. If it was so bad the Democrats would have banned it already.
The analogy with the holocaust is a false equivalence. The holocaust is a true narrative, while the White oppression against Blacks is a false narrative. Whites never enslaved Blacks, 40% of Africa used to be slaves before the White man arrived, during slavery there were Black slave owners and White slaves. Black slaves worked less hours per day than free White farmers. Academic studies show colonialism helped Africa. The countries that were never colonized (Liberia, Ethiopia) are the poorest. The holocaust narrative isn't getting people killed. There is no epidemic of Jewish on German hate crimes.
The burden of proof is on your side, because there is a trend in Hollywood to cast most intersectional groups (particularly Black women). If there wasn't the burden of proof would be on my side.
Why was it practical to do that with Airbender?
Because it's an American movie made primarily for Western audience. Just like a Chinese remake made for Chinese audience would feature a majority Chinese cast. There is only a controversy when White people do it. The Japanese recently made a remake of Cube, a Canadian movie. Guess What? It features a 100% Japanese cast. Did anyone complain of Yellowwashing? No. Double standard against White people. share
Incorrect Portugal legalized all drugs and other countries have as well. The drug war is completely unnecessary. It only makes things worse. Remember the prohibition of alcohol? Did that stop people from drinking? This is America's philosophy. Hey these drugs can ruin your life so lets charge you with a felony throw you in prison and ruin your life to protect you from ruining your life. Drug addiction should be treated as a mental problem not a legal one.
Again irrelevant. White people did have rights that blacks did not. That is a form of oppression. So it is not a false narrative it is a true one. Also that is not getting people killed the only thing getting people killed is people with an unstable home life and an unstable mind. Black Panther is not the cause of black on white crime. Guns do not kill people people kill people.
I already said that can be a trend but you just shot yourself in the foot. Your mentality is guilty no questions asked. It goes even further than guilty until proven innocent. Nothing will convince you Kravitz was cast for a legit reason. I do not even care, I know the movie will be a hit despite what morons like you think. The fact that it burns you up makes me like it even more.
Ha nope! Look at how many people get pissed off when white people are race swapped. I hear all the time white people getting pissed off when their is race swapping so no absolutely false this goes both ways.
The war on drugs is a controversial debate, but the only reason it's claimed to be part of racial oppression is because Blacks and Hispanics are more likely to deal drugs. I wonder why Asians never complain about war on drugs if racism is really a factor.
No it's not oppression. Exclusion is not oppression. No ethnic group owes "inclusion" to any other ethnic group. The only thing that is oppression is denial of sovereignty. Whites built America and they owed nothing to Blacks except self determination. Historical racial discrimination was a form of civilizational self defence of White people. Whites paid a tremendous price for giving civil rights to Blacks raining from all the crime, higher taxes, city destruction, affirmative action etc. You say TBP is not getting people killed as if you magically know what's on the minds of every Black person committing crime. The narrative of White oppression is definitely part of a motivation of Black on White crime and that movie is part of that narrative. If an ethnic group is constantly told they have and are still being oppressed by another group, that creates hate.
Nothing will convince you Kravitz was cast for a legit reason
Blame woke leftist who openly admit they cast Blacks because of their skin colour. If there was some racist White nationalist ideology popular in Hollywood, it would be very logical to assume it is the reason Whites are cast roles due to their skin colour. It's ridiculous I even have to argue this.
Of course White people get pissed off when they are replaced for political reasons. If Blacks were replaced for ideological reasons they would get pissed off too. But only Whites get replaced for political reasons. share
I did not just say only racism is a factor in the war on drugs I said that is a part of it. They believe in the war on drugs and no good comes from the war on drugs. In fact it makes things worse. No lots of actors or rich people were smoking weed back in the day, they just had the money or connections to make the law look the other way. Where as a poor person gets the book thrown at them. The war on dugs is a failure. However your right wing zealots will not give up the ghost.
Yes it is oppression. Once again do you know the definition of oppression?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppression, then look at the dictionary.https://www.google.com/search?q=oppression&oq=oppression&aqs=chrome..69i57j0i433i512l2j0i131i433i512j0i512l6.1624j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 Prolonged cruel or unjust treatment or control. Not having the right to vote is unjust treatment. You say I know what is on their mind when you are directly telling me what they are thinking. I said an unstable home and an unstable mind. That is a broad spectrum. You claimed it is because they have this hate whites narrative. So I can't claim a broad spectrum but you can claim to read their minds with that specific point? Hypocritical bud.
So then if I have a bad experience with most cops in my life then it justifies me treating all cops badly? That is basically the mentality you are taking. Well since it happens often I am not going to be convinced there are legit casting decisions when it is race swapped to black. Do not see the movie then it will be a success with or without you. I honestly am glad it irks you good, the more enraged you get the more attention the movie will get.
Only whites get replaced for ideological reasons? LMAO! Absolutely false. Aww you feeling targeted even though there are mainly white people in leading roles? You saying racism has never occurred in Hollywood against blacks? Want to double down on that? You know Kravitz auditioned for The Dark Knight Rises and she was specifically denied because of her skin color. Look it up.
FYI, it's OvertonPendulum who posted a link to white supremacist propaganda
http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/
Go to his post about black IQs in the The Wire page to see for yourself. Just letting you know so you feel ok with wasting less energy debating this guy. He's made up his mind, he's indoctrinated himself thoroughly
Wow this guy is even more ignorant than I thought. I appreciate the heads up. Sad human garbage like this still exists. I thought we were out of the 1800's racist mindset. I guess not...
shareNo prob. I "protected" him for long enough. I feel bad for doing so. He's a full-blown white supremacist, I've known this about him for a couple of months
Just avoid debating this child. It isn't worth the aggravation
Yeah I was going to keep on but after reading this I will not continue. He is a joke.
shareIt's not White supremacist propaganda. It's a well know undeniable fact Blacks have lower IQs.
shareLMAO. Ok little buddy. Where's that source on gay guys molesting children? Is that also "well know" undeniable facts?
shareRead up the gender stats of child abuse victims and do the math yourself.
shareAnother refusal to provide sources for purported statistics
You're having a full-blown meltdown right now
Google "child sex abuse gender stats"
20% are male. And males are less likely to report abuse than females.
Lol keep going you moron.
shareI thought it was 25%
And I don't expect you to know much about math or stats or even percentages, but those numbers do not mean that 25% of all homosexuals are pedophiles or molestors. Must I interpret your own data for you?
It's not White supremacist propaganda. It's a well know undeniable fact Blacks have lower IQs.
And with that I will go ahead and place you on ignore. We are done here. share
Go ahead. The less nonsense I hear from your brainwashed liberal mind the better.
shareNot a liberal actually I just do not subscribe to racist rhetoric you are trying to pedal. Who was the one who wanted censorship of Black Panther? I thought censorship was a leftist thing?
shareIf the races were reversed for Black Panther the movie would be banned. And why haven't you put me on ignore yet???
shareMeltdown
shareIt is rather amusing seeing you fail so maybe I won't lol. Irrelevant you wanted Black Panther banned you are no better than the extreme leftists wanting censorship.
shareI did not want Black Panther banned I made a point that if the races were reversed the movie would be banned.
shareThe data on this site is completely legit you moron. The site is totally apolitical.
shareProvide sources for said "data"
Data does not magically manifest itself from nowhere and nothing. There is methodology involved in gathering data
You either have sources for good data or you don't. I'm not here to teach you, child
I'm sorry that I had to expose you, but you were out of control. Now redeem yourself with sources for your data, or continue with your meltdown
Research it yourself. Just because you don't like what the data says does not mean it's false. If it showed Black Baltimore IQ of 100 you wold not contest it and dispute sources.
shareWe've had this conversation before
I HAVE researched it myself. I am white, just FYI. I'm a straight, cis white male. I also just happen to be educated in science and scientific methodology
You're not consistent in terms of your sources or your methodology
I HAVE tried to research it myself. La Griffe Du Lione contains no external sources to explain its own calculations. I don't know how else to explain this to you
Well you're pretty dumb for a guy educated in science and scientific methodology if you don't know the Black average IQ is 85.
shareAgain, we've had this conversation before
You were unable to provide a legit source for your claims. Black people's IQ included
Racism is not a factor. Blacks and Hispanics are just more likely to deal drugs. You haven't answered me why don't Asians complain about war on drugs. If the war on drug is really that bad why haven't the minority loving Democrats abolished it? Because it's more complicated than you liberals portray it to be. Drugs are bad and blanket legalization isn't the answer.
I don't care about the far left wing Wikipedia's definition of oppression. Everything is oppression to them. Whites existing is oppression. The only historical oppression Whites engaged against Blacks is denial of sovereignty. Had Whites moved Blacks back to Africa or some Caribbean island after the civil war, nobody would be accusing Whites of oppression. But since they gave them citizenship and all the rights and privileges since then, now Whites are called racists and oppressors. The better we treat Blacks the more we are blamed. You haven't even challenged me on the tremendous cost Black people were and still are on America.
Can't read what they're thinking? Watch this guy and tell me what he's thinking and where did he get these ideas from:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/6ErI5Sgvvqsv/
Of course there are unstable minds to blame for crime. But those unstable minds come from genetic predispositions (which come from Africa) and the broken families that came from the liberal welfare state and attitudes towards religion, sex, drugs, family and authority.
Again no arguments against my White nationalist ideology analogy. You can't argue with me here, because you lost.
Yes only Whites roles get switched for ideological reasons. Name me a single movie where a Black role was given to Whites for ideological reasons. Past racism was due to practical reasons and even if it was due to ideology past discrimination doesn't justify more discrimination in the present.
You know KRavitz auditioned for The Dark Knight Rises and she was specifically denied because of her skin color.
And a White guy auditioned for some Black role and got denied. Your point being? The role was White so she got denied for practical reasons, not ideological ones. You never hear me complain that a White guy was denied the role of Shaft. share
Ah, so this is where Overton said changing races for practical reasons is preferable to ideological reasons. Whatever you linked me to, it wasn’t this. Notice he never said or implied that whitewashing was good and colorwashing was bad. So you lied, again.
As for ScarJo in Ghost in the Shell, Major Kusanagi isn’t Japanese, she’s a robot who’s worked in various countries under various aliases. Japanese fans were asked what they thought of the casting, and they liked it, saying she looked just like the character. They were surprised when they were told that some western activists were complaining about it. Practical casting or not, she wasn’t race-washed, she’s a light-skinned robot, so they cast a bankable light-skinned actress.
Which translates into it is always ok when it is whitewashed and never okay the other way. So no I did not lie. Also he has countless threads on here. This is not the only place he discusses it. Let me ask a simple question. Is claiming another race to be more intelligent than the other a racist claim? Yes or no?
Nope she is actually supposed to look Asian. Scarjo does not look Asian. This is coming from someone who knows the source material so no wrong actually.
Overton literally said he’d be ok with a black James Bond if it was done for practical reasons. So no, you lied, and then you lied about lying.
The Major isn’t Asian, nor is she meant to be Asian. She’s a robot, more accurately a cyborg, that lives and works in Japan. The author never stated what her race was. You don’t know the source material at all, you’re just pretending to know while making stuff up.
Nope read over more of his threads. You cherry picked. Also he is simply attempting to say he is okay with that when in reality he is not. You never answered my question. If you claim a race to be smarter than another race is that racist?
This is a quote from him.
The only thing illogical to the Republican party is the false belief that races are equal and that race doesn't matter. It is complete bollocks.
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/61f889437c822f38e57b4488/Whoopi-Goldberg-Jews-Its-not-about-race-just-two-white-groups?reply=61f96efc7c822f38e57b4bca
Tell me that is not racist. I dare you.
Wrong also. Sorry that is not going to work I know the source material buddy. share
Yours is a nonsensical argument.
The vast majority of comic book characters, and all the beloved classic ones from long ago, are all white. They were created in an era when every character in a comic was white. The hero, his love interest, his friends and co-workers, his boss, his butler, whoever. All the villains were white, too. The only black characters who showed up were low-level street thugs and purse-snatchers, existing only to take a white fist to the face.
Look at the Silver Age Marvel roster-- Spider-Man, Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, Hulk, Daredevil, all of the Avengers, X-Men, and Fantastic Four, and nearly all their supporting cast, were white. Their race had no impact on the stories; they were white by default. Only after the Civil Rights Movement did the occasional token black character show up, and their stories were just about always tied to their being black.
So sure, when every character is white, it's easy to say "my problem is replacing whites with blacks!" when in truth, your problem is with black actors in those roles.
Would it make one bit of difference if Bruce Banner were a black scientist who had the accident and became the Hulk? Would it alter the story in any meaningful way? Of course not. Same with just about all the heroes. What makes them interesting is their origin, their powers, and their adventures. Where there ancestors came from is immaterial, and only matters if you have an issue with race.
If a character's race is integral to his story or his essence, keep the race the same. A white Black Panther ruling an African nation makes no sense. A black being selected to become Captain America in 1941 would make no sense. But a black Spider-Man, Iron Man, or Hawkeye? Who cares? It changes nothing.
So if Whites never allowed minorities to live in their country, there would be no pressure to change the races of those characters, but since Whites are so good to allow minorities to live in their countries, they now have to be replaced? That's the reward Whites get for embracing multiculturalism. If Whites didn't embrace multiculturalism nobody would call them racist just like nobody calls Japan or China racist. The more anti racist Whites become, the more they are called racist.
Would it make one bit of difference if Bruce Banner were a black scientist who had the accident and became the Hulk? Would it alter the story in any meaningful way? Of course not. Same with just about all the heroes. What makes them interesting is their origin, their powers, and their adventures. Where there ancestors came from is immaterial, and only matters if you have an issue with race.
You've just proven my point. If their race doesn't matter, then why are they being changed??? It obviously matters to people doing the changing. If the race didn't matter, they wouldn't be changing it. (It's not done for practical reason. There are more White actors available for casting than Black actors.) But if the races matter, then it should matter to Whites. If it's good for minorities to have more representation, it's bad for Whites to have less representation. You can't have it both ways.
Whites don't owe minorities representation. They are free to make their own characters and make their own movies. Whites aren't stopping them from doing so. share
You sound even more unhinged than usual lol. Work yourself up into a little fit, did ya?
shareYour first misconception is that whites "allowed minorities to live in their countries." The US is known as the melting pot for a reason. It was a vast, mostly empty land to which people from all over the world came. It exists as a bastion of freedom, where people persecuted in their homelands can come, or people looking for better opportunities can come, and it's not a white country, and never has been.
Race not mattering to the story is different than race not mattering for any reason. As the films are being made for an American audience first, and a global audience second, it makes sense to represent all Americans in the films. Since Bruce Banner's race is inconsequential to the story, it can be any race. Why not have a black actor in the role? Why do you care at all what color Banner's skin is? As long as he gets blasted by gamma rays whilst saving Rick Jones, or in an experiment, or in some manner, and turns into a big green monster when he's angry, it's all good.
Wrong. The US was founded as a country for White people. Multiculturalism came very late in US history in 1960s.
If they are replacing White characters with Blacks there must be a reason for it. They aren't doing it for practical reasons as there are more Whites available for casting than Blacks. They are doing it because they think that representation is good for Black people. But if more representation is good for Black people then less representation must be bad for Whites. You can't have it both ways. If this was done against any other ethnic group it would be an outrage. Imagine if the next Shang Chi was cast by Tom Cruise. Race isn't essential for his character after all. As long as he has his ten rings and is able kick ass what's the difference?
The United States dates back to 1776, at which point it was a collection of people from all over the world. Remember slavery? Do you think the white Americans "allowed" them to move here, or were the brought here against their will? Do you know where Mexicans came from? Do you have any concept of history at all?
The US has been a collection of people from all over the world since its inception, and prior to that, the land that is now the US was the same. From the point at which Columbus discovered the new world, it ceased to be a land populated only by American Indians/Native Americans, and became a destination for people from everywhere.
Whites built America. The notion that Blacks did it is a PC version of history designed to give Blacks some positive role and to distract us from the fact how much they are a burden to the country. The US was founded for White people. The first immigration act of 1790 was enacted to give immigration rights only to "free White people". Blacks might have been brought in the US against their will, but that does not give them the right to live in the same country as Whites. Whites have a right to self determination as anyone else. Blacks are a tremendous economic, political, social and crime burned to the country. White people could have easily chosen to secede from Black people pushing them to a much lower living standard. So yes, Whites allow minorities to live in their own country and are doing them a huge favour by doing so. Not to even mention all the privileges like Affirmative Action and diversity quotas.
The argument "race being essential to someone's character" is a catch 22. The definition of race being essential to a character is weather or not that character is White or not. If he's White, then race isn't essential to his character. If he's not White (Black or Asian) then race IS essential to his character. Any minority character's race is essential, because that race is minority. Minorities get have their identities (and thus characters), while Whites not. That merely follows the double standard in the general society.
"I want rights and self determination for my people" said a proud Black man
"I want rights and self determination for my people" said a proud Hispanic man
"I want rights and self determination for my people" said an evil racist White man
Shang Chi's race isn't actually essential to his character. The only thing that makes it essential is that he is Asian and Shang Chi movies is for Asian people because Asians are a minority and thus get have their own movies. That is why Shang Chi's race will never be changed. But White people don't get to have their characters since they aren't allowed an identity that's why our characters are changed. A double standard against Whites.
“If it ain’t white, it ain’t right.”
That’s rich coming from the same people who support black-washing everything, even historical figures.
Where did I support race swapping historical figures? Catwoman's ethnicity is not an essential part of her character. Go ahead and look at Batman Year One. Also you ever heard of Eartha Kitt?
shareWho actually said "if it ain't white, it ain't right"? People get mad if characters are White-washed, Black-washed, Asian-washed, Hispanic-washed, etc, whether their skin color is essential or not.
I didn't care for her design in Year One, and last I checked, Eartha Kitt didn't play Selina Kyle, but some other Catwoman, just like Halle Berry did.
Would you be ok if black characters like Falcon, Blade, Spawn, or Cyborg were White-washed? Their skin color isn't essential either.
I wouldn't care nope. So long as race isn't essential. Now what you got?
shareIf that's true, good for you, that already makes you better than most of your peers who typically support color-washing of White characters, but not the other way around.
We already established that "if it ain't white, it ain't right" is bs, and I noticed you keep walking around all the counters to your strawman argument. I'll say it again: White people and non-white people have complained whether any character is color-washed, regardless if their skin color is essential or not. I'll add that there are a few exceptions to this, if the actor/actress is popular and likable, and hasn't said anything to antagonize the audience.
With all that said, do you still wanna pretend that this is about White's feeling threatened? And that it isn't actually you libeling other fans who have legitimate criticism? Ball's in your court.
Nope plenty of your camp is fine so long as they are not the ones race swapped. Again if the characters race is not essential it can be changed. Characters change and go through updates over time. Some key elements remain but in Catwoman's case race isn't essential. Gal Gadot isn't white yet people like her as Wonder Woman. Kingpin was played by Duncan I think Vincent from the tv show was a better kingpin. Largely because a better script and direction and Vincent is a great actor.
There is no legitimate criticism of Kravitz being cast. Keaton does not look like comic book Bruce Wayne but he's well received in the role. If he can do that so can Kravitz. You want to pretend like there isn't racism going on? Really? Anyways sit back and let the rest of is enjoy the film. If you don't like it don't see the film. I honestly think I already like her better than Michelle because your camp hates it so bad. It tickles me pink.
Nope, that's not true. As a POC person in "my camp", and one of many POCs that have openly spoken up, I can say that we have criticized color-washing for any character, White or non-White. I already mentioned exceptions, so bringing up Gal Gadot and MCD only supports my argument, not yours.
Keaton was widely criticized before the film came out, and I personally don't care for him as Batman. He's better at playing Joker-like characters, that's where his acting shines.
I honestly think I already like her better than Michelle because your camp hates it so bad. It tickles me pink.
lol Thanks for finally admitting that you really do support color-washing White characters out of spite after all, like the rest of your camp. If there's racism going on, it's the double standard from you guys. If it's white, it ain't right, that's your motto. share
Nope. I am going off generalizations just like you. Just like I'm the exception in my camp you are the exception in yours. Nope it's all or nothing. Either it's okay to race swap or it's not period. The only time it isn't is when the race is essential to the character. Case closed.
Yep Keaton was but guess what by many he's considered a good Batman. Batman 1989 was a cultural hit. You disliking him doesn't mean he isn't liked in the role. This undercuts your point.
Nope I just get tired of people getting mad when the race isn't essential to the character. I like Vincent as kingpin better than Duncan. So nope this contradicted your baseless assumption of me as well. I should by your logic prefer Duncan since he's in my camp of ethnicity.
The fact is this was ever about White's being threatened and more about fans in general, White and non-white, who care about faithfulness. Some changes are inevitable when making adaptations, but most people draw the line at race, gender, and sexuality, with very few exceptions, and even then, those exceptions were on a case-by-case basis.
Michael Keaton was eventually accepted as Bruce Wayne, meanwhile Ben Affleck to this day has had mixed reception. And don't even get me started on Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. As you can see, Whites cast as Whites have been criticized, which undercuts the implication that people will blindly accept any White actor for any White character as long as they're White.
There are people like you that don't care as long as the race isn't essential, that's fine, but others care whether it's essential or not, and don't support any color-washing for any character if they can help it.
No I believe your camp is pissed that their character is swapped. I already told you about Whistler not a word was said. Go over to the westside story board and look at how many gloat that it didn't get lots of money. They get mad at that movie because of politics. Oh don't insert politics well... That story is political there is no way to avoid it. The first one was political also.
Didn't say they wouldn't get criticized. However if Kravitz was bad you know damn well she would get more flak than a white actress that was bad. She has to be stellar and even then people won't like her.
I don't care what they want. I care if the movie is good period.
Nope, my camp has been pretty consistent with its complaints, which is more than I can say for your camp. People *did* complain about Whistler in Blade. The new West Side Story brought that hate upon itself. There’s political and then there’s woke.
If a white actor played a POC role and did a bad job, they’d get more flak than if a POC actor was bad at the same role. It goes both ways.
Nope, your camp is quite hypocritical. Show me them bringing up Whistler. Also no it didn't bring anything on itself your camp was ready to hate on it from day 1.
Which proved my point. Kravitz will be judged more harshly. Simply because your camp is prejudice.
Nope, your camp has double standards, mine doesn't. Your camp supports color-washing of white characters due to an anti-white prejudice, while my camp condemns color-washing of any characters.
West Side Story was not only marketed as a woke remake, but they didn't bother putting in subtitles to get back at English-speakers, even though they aren't the only ones that can't understand Spanish. What's hilarious is that it still wasn't considered woke enough. I repeat, it brought the hate on itself.
I remember people asking who the hell is Whistler when Blade first came out, and what happened to Jamal, this was before movie-rating sites and message boards became prominent. But here are a couple of links to articles acknowledging Whistler was the product of white-washing:
1. https://brill.com/view/book/9781848883833/BP000004.xml?language=en
2. https://www.comicbookmovie.com/blade/the-harder-they-fall-star-delroy-lindo-joins-mahershala-ali-in-marvel-studios-blade-movie-a189711
Nope show me the Whistler outrage. Find me endless posts of people complaining about that. I noticed you side stepped because you can't find it. Also I don't belong to a camp. I said from the beginning I don't care of a character is race swapped so long as it's not essential to the character. Comprehend what you read.
You don't understand the definition of woke. The definition of woke is alert to injustice in society, especially racism. That's the dictionary definition. Which means the first one is woke also. You can't argue the dictionary definition. That also means Schindler's list is woke as well.
See this proves my point. If you bring this up to your camp most at least will side step it. Most superheroes are white, yet we can't say a word. They however are allowed to say wah white people are being targeted. Where as before if we said that about Whistler we got called race baiters and playing the race card. The batman will be a great film and honestly I can't wait for it to piss off your camp. They will see it with their hard earned money. I will laugh and say good I'm glad you guys are getting upset good. It's a new world your racism is not welcome. Honestly I think Kravitz will be my favorite Catwoman and top the rest. The fact that your camp hates her casting makes me love it even more. Without the outrage I think Hathaway or Michelle is my favorite but because of it she's starting to shoot to the top.
It was 1998, kiddo. Blade did ok for its time, but financially speaking it wasn't nearly big as other superhero movies before and after, and Jamal/Whistler certainly aren't as popular as other comicbook characters, so you won't find as much internet documentation of outrage. But people complained, hardcore Blade fans complained. I linked you articles, and we're in a time where your camp complains more than ever about white-washing, and you're still in denial about it. You're not the only one that's tried to invalidate other people's criticisms by using strawman arguments. If we're gonna claim we're in camps, then don't pretend you're not in one too when you clearly use their talking points.
And it seems it is you who doesn't know what woke means. It has nothing to do with being alert of injustice, it has everything to do with forcing a certain group of people to conform to others' demands, all while belittling themselves. That's what wokeness is, that's what it's always been. There's being aware of injustice, then there's wokeness which tries to make innocent people feel bad for who they are, for things they didn't do. The original West Side Story wasn't woke, and neither was Schindler's List.
Most superheroes are White because they were made by White people in a White-dominant country. When they bothered to make POC superheroes, it still not enough for you. Your camp wants to color-wash White characters to tip the scales, instead of making more original POC characters or promoting POC culture without being woke about it. Look at Japan, they make their own characters, their own superheroes, and they're doing just fine and have found worldwide success. Western writers should take note.
We'll see how well The Batman does, but any success won't be because of Catwoman. The MCU Spider-Man movies did well because of Tom Holland, not Zendaya as black MJ.
No I don't use their talking points. I said I don't care about a race swap so long as it isn't essential to the character. You accused me of only getting upset of it's whitewashed. You asked if they changed Blade or other black characters to white would I be upset? What was my answer? I don't care either way so long as the race isn't essential to the character. Nice try though you aren't the first to try and twist words.
Lol now you arguing against the dictionary definition. You realize I directly cited the dictionary definition correct? Read the dictionary definition and realize you are uneducated. Probably should learn the dictionary definition before using buzzwords.
Ha nope Black Panther was a good character as was Creed. Creed got critical acclaim and was a black character.
Wrong. Zendaya as mj is nothing more than a love interest the damsel in distress. Catwoman has mass appeal because she is an action character. Early screenings and buzz is saying Kravitz is a standout among the cast. Batman is of course the main pull but you are a fool if you think Catwoman doesn't have mass appeal. MJ doesn't have that kind of appeal. It's like Vicky vale. Is she a love interest yeah but not an action character Catwoman is. So nope false try again.
Yes you do use their talking points. Claiming that people say "if it ain't white, it ain't right" is one of their strawman talking points. You said that, don't deny it.
Modern dictionaries also incorrectly state fascism is a right-wing doctrine when it's not, as history has proven. Many left-wingers like Stalin, Mao, and Hitler were fascists. I stand by what I said about wokeness.
I already acknowledged Black Panther was a success, and an example of original POC characters. I also mentioned Japan and the success of their characters. Thanks for proving my point that original POC characters work despite your camp wanting to color-wash White characters.
Zendaya played a black-washed MJ, Kravitz is playing a black Catwoman. MJ has as much mass appeal as Catwoman does, both are major love interests of the superhero main character, regardless of how much action one has over the other. Nobody trusts early buzz anymore, so nope, bad example, try again.
Oh I did say it because a lot of the times that is the reason your camp hates it. They will deny it but do not lie tons of people are secretly prejudice and get bent out of shape at the sight of a mixed person being successful or portraying a role.
Sorry you don't have authority over the dictionary.
See but again you proved my point yet again. Your camp will say Black Panther was only successful because of the marvel brand and that people were shamed into seeing it. They say that if you didn't see it you were considered racist. People said that to me on these boards... Don't pretend your camp isn't full of crap and corruption also buddy. Go woke go broke ever heard that? That's your camps slogan. Well guess that's not true considering how successful the new spider flick is lol
Nope not a person on earth would tell you MJ has as much appeal as Catwoman. That's a lie and you know it. Action heroes will always hold more mass appeal than the simple love interest. That's like saying Lois lane is as popular as Catwoman. Catwoman wins that by a landslide. Don't believe me look at polls and what sells etc. Tons more cosplays as Catwoman etc. If the early buzz is correct you will be proven wrong. So nope you failed again. This is too easy. Want to stop or keep on burying yourself?
Wrong, no one in my camp has a problem with POCs being successful. Not. One Person. My camp has actually promoted the success and independence of POCs, and it was my camp that propped up Black superhero films like Black Panther, Blade, and Hancock while your camp pretended that Black Panther was the first time a superhero movie starred a Black superhero.
I might not have authority over the dictionary, but that doesn't change how woke-ists speak and behave. They're not about alertness, they're about making straight White people look bad. All races and both genders suffer from injustices, yet they only focus on, and exaggerate, what White people and men have done to others. Their actions have shown what wokeness really means.
You're only proving my point again by using strawman arguments. Hancock wasn't a Marvel movie, and it was successful. Black Widow, Shang Chi, and Eternals are Marvel movies, and they weren't successful. lol Spider-Man: No Way Home definitely isn't woke, not by your definition or mine. It succeeded because it had three Spider-Men, along with five of the previous villains. Any color-washed characters present were just carried over from the previous movies for continuity's sake, and NWH didn't have any woke messaging about racism and feminism and stuff. Besides, MJ and Ned were removed from Peter's life. Try again.
I'm not talking about Lois Lane, I'm talking about Mary Jane Watson. Both MJ and Catwoman have mass appeal, it doesn't matter if they can fight or not. Men generally like both types of women, and men especially LOVE red-heads.
You're getting desperate now, kiddo. The more we talk, the weaker your arguments get. I've effortlessly refuted everything you've thrown at me and now you're just repeating yourself because you're running out of arguments. Just take the L before you embarrass yourself further.
Oh yes they do have a problem with people of color being successful. Go visit the black panther boards. Also false I watched Blade when it came out and always loved blade and blade 2. Blade, X-Men and Spiderman are what catapulted superheroes back into a profitable brand again. You are making ghost arguments I never made.
How many marvel movies have been financial failures? Black widow was released in the pandemic as was shang chi. Spider-Man had been the only movie to gross a billion in a while. Meanwhile Black Panther and Captain Marvel both are woke films and both raked in tons of money. So the go woke go broke obviously didn't apply lol. I accept your concession you helped me on this point thank you.
Nice attempt at a backpedal. You originally said MJ had just as much mass appeal as Catwoman. I never denied MJ having mass appeal, however Catwoman had wider mass appeal than MJ. Yes she's got the red hair but Catwoman is more of an icon and a large part is her being an action character. Your backpedal is dismissed.
Nope you actually side step and backpedal. I suggest you quit now while you can. If Kravitz gets acclaim once the film is released it's going to undercut you so bad it won't be funny.
Nope, they don't have a problem. I already said I visited the Black Panther boards, you're exaggerating how many people didn't like the movie, and lying about why most of them didn't like it. I never said Blade didn't help catapult superheroes, but since each of the three Blade movies made less than $200 million, it's correct to say they weren't as popular as Batman, X-Men, and Spider-Man. It's ok if you loved them, I did too.
Fast and Furious 9, No Time to Die, and Spider-Man all came out during the pandemic, and they were massive hits. Demon Slayer, a Japanese cartoon, came out when the pandemic peaked in 2020, and it managed to make $500 million, becoming the highest grossing anime film of all time. So you can't use the pandemic as an excuse, try again.
Black Panther wasn’t that woke, aside from a few things, while Captain Marvel had that a lot of empty seats in many theaters, despite tickets supposedly selling out. Another point refuted. Try again.
I didn't backpedal at all, I didn't change anything I said about MJ and Catwoman and how popular they are. I'll say it a third time since you forgot already: they're both super popular, being a fighter has nothing to do with it.
More and more of your posts are relying on straight-up lying, kiddo. You really are desperate, aren't you? I'll still be here when The Batman comes out, I'll be man enough to admit when I'm wrong. But until then, I'm standing by what I said. And like I said, even if The Batman is a success, it won't be because of black Catwoman.
And you are lying attempting to pretend your camp are saints. Never made the claim blade was as popular as those other heroes I said he played a part in making superheroes profitable. Ghost argument dismissed.
None of those cracked the billing dollar mark. How often were movies cracking a billion before the pandemic? It wasn't seen as that high of an achievement. Spider-Man is the only one to do that. Hmm? I wonder why that is? I didn't say there weren't hits I said the pandemic affected box office results. So nope my point stands.
Captain Marvel made over a billion dollars worldwide... You realize you can look up the results of box office results online correct? That's a bigger hit than f9 or no time to die. So nope the point stands smart guy.
Both are popular I never denied that. What I denied was your claim that she was as popular as Catwoman. Being a fighter is a huge part of it. So again wrong!
I doubt you will be here. Most you idiots disappear when proven wrong. Oh or you will be here under a sock account.
I never said my camp was full of saints, I *did* say they’re not the racists you’re pretending they are.
Not all Fast and Furious films or James Bond films made a billion dollars even before the pandemic. My point still stands that they were big successes despite pandemic times.
You can also look up the empty theaters Captain Marvel had despite tickets supposedly selling out. I’ll also add that home media sales underperformed, and the sequel is taking focus away from Captain Marvel, something even Brie Larson complained about.
You said I backpeddled about MJ and Catwoman when I didn’t. So you lied and were wrong!
More and more points refuted. Every single time. What else you got? I’ll still be here, kiddo, I’m not the type to run away. Will you still be here if you’re wrong?
Oh I've encountered plenty and a lot of them are human trash.
I never said there weren't successes during the pandemic, I said it affected box office and it did. Your point gets dismissed here.
Do not believe you. I look at box office results and the fact is it made a billion. I hated the film but it proves your point wrong. Woke film made tons.
Nope you did backpedal. You said MJ was just as popular as Catwoman. Both are popular but Catwoman is more popular. You lied!
Yep I will be here. I will eat crow if I'm wrong where I doubt you will.
Don’t worry, I’ll be here.
shareNo retorts about captain marvel or MJ being as popular as Catwoman huh? I accept your concession.
shareWe're just going in circles at this point, kiddo. I keep refuting all your points again and again, it's so easy to do. Repeating yourself won't change that. Although I never said Captain Marvel was as popular as MJ or Catwoman.
shareI didn't say that. You said MJ was as popular as Catwoman.
shareBut I didn’t say anything about Captain Marvel being as popular as either of them. Can’t concede to an argument I didn’t make, and I won’t concede about what I *did* say about MJ and Catwoman’s popularity.
shareYou denied captain marvel being a box office hit. I did not say you said Captain Marvel was as popular as Catwoman. Do not twist my words. I was commenting on it being a hit in the box office.
sharehttps://moviechat.org/tt1877830/The-Batman/61cacc734622f95f764a2bc5/The-female-love-interest-isnt-attractive?reply=61cdc576a8e1e32d6e3c6b00
https://moviechat.org/tt0306414/The-Wire/61ae23c6fdd46b348b1f5580/Guess-what-the-average-IQ-of-Baltimore-is
Blacks have a lower average IQ than whites. These are his words. Yet yeah you say your camp is not racist? If that is not racist then what is?
How about we stop getting mad about ANY race playing a character?
shareBecause then it's not THAT character.
How is it not that character?
shareUnless you want a lecture on the modern leftist agenda to destroy straight white males' place the in the world, I would not keep asking cyguration these sorts of questions. It's just a TEENY little obsession of his
shareCharacters are defined by traits. Traits are how we identify with those characters.
Established traits are what we use to signify the legacy of such a character.
Batman is a straight, white male, billionaire, in shape, martial arts expert, highly intelligent, loves to use gadgets and psychology to figure out and take down criminals.
Superman is a straight, white male, grew up on farm, tall with dark hair, blue eyes, a commanding but calm voice, physically fit and statuesque.
If you take away these traits from either of those characters, it's no longer those characters. Batman who can't fight is no longer Batman. Batman who isn't buff or white is no longer Batman. It's someone else.
Superman who is no longer statuesque, who is no longer white, who no longer has dark hair or is even a male, is no longer Superman.
Characters can evolve, but their traits must fit in line with what majority of fans identify with them.
When you start diminishing or changing those traits, then it's no longer that character, especially when those traits have been defining aspects of said character for 30, 40, or 50+ years.
Once those traits have been undermined for creative subversion, then it's only that character in name only, but not by what fans have identified with them for however long that identity has been established.
There are two major things people get upset over in these situations and neither one of them have to do with racism (i.e., "If it ain't white it ain't right").
1. People dislike having the appearance of established characters drastically changed. There would be just as much annoyance if Superman was made into a skinny blonde. Heck, I remember when The Dark Tower movie was in production, for instance, and Russell Crowe was in talks for the role of the main character. Fans were throwing a fit over how he was too short and stocky for the part (the character was supposed to look like a tall, slender, blue-eyed Clint Eastwood-type). No one thought twice about these people being upset. But when the role was given to Idris Elba (who was even further off the mark) and fans complained, even the filmmakers themselves acted like they were just racist for acting like this mattered. But racism wasn't what was motivating their frustration (as evident with their equal frustration over Crowe). They just didn't like that the characters weren't looking how the characters were popularly known to look.
2. People get upset, as well, because they know WHY these changes occur. In an era where people are hamfisting diversity into everything humanly imaginable, regardless of if it makes sense, it's apparent that casting choices such as these are rarely done because this person was the best for the part or because it served the story better. 9 times out of 10 it was done due to real-world politics and virtue signaling. It's as palpably obvious and distracting as a shoehorned piece of product placement.
Now, in this case, if the movie is based on that particular comic and the character actually is black in that comic (I've not read it since I was a kid, so I don't remember) I'd probably give this movie a pass haha. But some people's knee-jerk frustration would still be explained for the same non-racist reasons (most haven't read the comics and this isn't how they see the character).
1. People care about appearance of the character and I do understand it. I just feel it is ignorant to think that just because they do not look like them does not mean they will be bad. My example is Michael Keaton looks nothing like his comic book counterpart in Batman/Bruce Wayne. He is short Batman is tall, he is really slender Batman is bulkier than that. In the end though he turned out to be a well received Batman once people saw the movie. Ben Affleck looks almost like a spitting image of a comic book Bruce Wayne and Batman. He is tall, bulky strong jaw etc. Did I think he was an amazing Batman/Bruce Wayne? Honestly not really. I did not think he was bad I mean obviously the script let him down a bit but I would take Keaton or Bale over him any day of the week. Appearance is nice but it is not the end all be all. Now the case where everything lands perfectly is like Christopher Reeve as Superman, JK Simmons as J Jonah Jameson, Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury, Mickey Rourke as Marv etc. Those land the look and the appearance. Appearance is great but it is not everything. BVS Dawn of Justice was an awful film it did not matter that Affleck looked like a comic book Batman.
See but that is just it they will not listen. You cite them the Year One comic and they still continue on in their knee jerk outrage. In Year One Catwoman is black.
I kinda liked Affleck's Batman. Especially during the fight scenes. Reminded me of the Arkham games. I recall him getting hit once after landing hit after hit, near the end of BVS, and I thought, "Damn, there goes the combo". lol
*ahem* But anyway. The only point I was trying to make was that, in my opinion, I don't think criticisms like these should so quickly go to implications of racism as the motivation. Which, granted, when the topic has to do with race I understand how the conversation can easily head that way. It's just that, in my experience, people's biggest issues are simply the ones mentioned in my previous post, though. It's not them preferring one race over another, thinking one race is better than another, not liking a race, or being against equality in a general sense. Seems like suggesting this is the case only serves to make people angrier, fight harder, get more defensive, and marry more into their arguments because now they're annoyed at being misportrayed as racist when that perhaps isn't the actual root of their frustration. It seems better to me to try and be a bit more understanding and give people more of the benefit of the doubt when it comes to things like these (even when they're dicks about it lol).
I mean, granted, it's always possible that racism is a root cause for this. But, in my opinion, I don't think it is most of the time. And as a somewhat disillusioned liberal who personally finds himself frustrated over wokeness (for lack of a better word) in movies/TV these days, I can understand where many are coming from in these types of instances; even if I don't agree with them on this specific topic.
She wasn't black, she was half-Cuban.
Meaning Ana De Armis would have been 100% accurate casting for the character.
Too bad she did not get the role. What you want and what you get in life are two different things. I can't wait for the Batman honestly I think it is going to be great. I predicted Dune to be a quality film and it was. I am not going to let a moron like you dampen my cinematic experience.
shareThe first Catwoman was in Batman #1 from 1940 and she was white. You can't start bringing in these recent woke warrior comics to try and prove a character was white, black, gay or whatever because the recent pandering comics are complete shit simply used to placate cunts like yourself that want to have a tantrum if they don't see enough gays or blacks.
shareDoes not matter how she was originally. Characters go through changes overtime. Eartha Kitt played her and she was black in the Year One Batman comic which was in 1987. That is one of the best received Batman comic books of all time. Catwoman's race is not essential to her character. Times are changing buddy. There is no place for racists like you. Honestly the fact that you hate it makes me love the choice even more. I think Kravitz is shaping up to be my favorite Catwoman.
shareWhat the hell are constantly going on about "Year One Batman" comic for? Do you have the hots for Frank Miller or something? Year One wasn't the beginning of Batman it was just another hack that had no idea of his own trying to use an existing character to generate some cash.
shareBatman Year One is one of the best received Batman comic books of all time. It does not need your stamp of approval to be considered a great comic book. Just like how Kravitz does not need your stamp of approval to play Catwoman. I could care less if he originally created him the fact is he gave us a very well received Batman comic book. You will be watching the film and you will spend your hard earned money and even if you do not this film will be a hit with or without you.
share[deleted]
Nope I love tons of Batman comics including the Long Halloween, Dark Victory, Hush etc. Aww is someone salty that I could find a comic where Catwoman was actually black as opposed to white? Do not worry the movie will be a success without you. Remember when you said there would be no sequel to Dune? How did that prediction pan out for you?
sharecyguration admitted that he is going through some psychiatric trauma recently. Stop encouraging his rebellion. He stopped taking his Seroquel, but I think he is better off taking it as prescribed
Oh he's a racist idiot is all. If it isn't white it isn't right, that's his motto.
shareHe just needs to stop being encouraged by assholes to stop taking his medicine tbh. He's experiencing psychosis and OvertonPendulum is just making things worse. Seroquel would set him straight
I'm related to cyguration. He's my "brother". He's just very confused
Sounds like you are uncomfortable with having a woman of color for this role. That is why you are so against Ana De Armas for the role.
shareNope I wouldn't have cared if an ethnic woman got the role. Its why I am excited for Kravitz as Catwoman. Armas was actually my second pick if Kravitz hadn't gotten it.
shareWhy do you spell black with a capital letter?
shareBecause it's an ethnicity.
shareStill doesn't make snse to capitalize it, would you capitalize caucasian?
shareEthnicities don't make sense to capitalize? Wouldn't you capitalize German?
shareI was about to jump the bandwagon and ask the same thing about the B but then I saw you did the same with the White ... ok, that makes sense (I mean it doesn't, for me, but you are consistent).
shareThe irony is the woke warriors want to claim they want the demographics of films to represent the demographics of the country... Well if that's true according to the cast of The Batman for major roles they only needed Jeffery Wright to meet the quota since blacks are between 12 and 13 percent of the population... And where is the token Asian? Seems like the woke warriors in Hollywood only see things in black or white.
shareYep, almost no Asians and very few Hispanics. According to demographics there should be twice as many Hispanics in Hollywood roles as Blacks. But Hispanics aren't as high on the intersectional pseudo oppression scale so they don't matter.
shareEveryone has a right to voice their opinion so I respect yours of not being happy with her casting. To me I appreciate that they at least kept her fit, had her wear an outfit during the club scenes to show off her figure. She looked much better when she had the red hair wig on. Not denying at all that Ana de Armas would have been the ultimate choice for Catwoman alongside Pattinson. At end of day it could have been worse I guess.
shareRemember though idiots like you say that Catwoman is white. Ana De Armas isn't white either. So why are you keen on her being cast? I believe you are the racist one actually. If it isn't white it isn't right, that's your mentality.
shareAna De Armas is White moron.
shareUm no she isn't idiot! She is a Cuban Spanish actress. Are you blind?
shareI see there's another moron who failed geography. Where is Spain?
shareShe isn't white bud. Get your eyes checked.
shareYes she is. She even has green eyes. Spain is in Europe and Spaniards are White. It's American mestizo Mexicans that are mixed race. You are really ignorant.
shareShe is white.
shareNope. Anyways I'm glad you guys are pissed off. Sit back and enjoy the fact that you won't get your way. Kravitz will be great and you will be spending your hard earned money on the new Batman film. Even without you it's going to make tons of money.
shareI'm not pissed off, it's just funny how ignorant can americans be :D
https://www.npr.org/2020/02/09/803809670/why-labeling-antonio-banderas-a-person-of-color-triggers-such-a-backlash
https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2020/01/16/inenglish/1579172122_964523.html
The genetics are clear: Spaniards, in majority, share the genetic background of western europeans.
And btw, I have zero issues with Kravitz being in the movie, I bet I will enjoy her performance ...
Go to Cuba or Spain moron and you'll see a racial diversity. Hell go to Mexico and you'll find Racial diversity... Do you no understand that the country you are from doesn't define your race? Charlize Theron is from South Africa do you think she is black?
shareI do not speak to racist idiots like yourself. Go back to spreading misinformation about the vaccine. That is your job now be gone.
shareFunny how the little cunt can't start ranting like this every time he is shown to be an ignorant cunt. Now go to school and try to learn something before you spout off on forums and show your ignorance.
shareCareful your foul language got you into trouble last time. Remember when you spouted off a racial slur because you got mad I was exposing you? Racist idiots like you are nothing but trash. I am happy the Batman will be a huge success. It will tickle me pink to see you racist idiots squirm.
shareYou've confused me with yourself. I haven't gotten in any trouble for calling you out as an ignorant cunt. You've once again completely ignored the fact that I proved you were an ignorant cunt when you decided that the country of origin defines a person's race. It doesn't and you know it cunt boy.
shareAna De Armas has Cuban parents and is Hispanic and/or Latina. You might be the White moron?
shareLatino is a culture, not a race, moron. She is of Spanish heritage and Spanish people are White.
shareHer parents are of European origins.
Btw, neither Hispanic neither Latino are races you moron.
lmfao I'm dying here. We actually have people who are so racist against black people, they're actually calling Ana De Armas white.
shareOh I know dude! Isn't it pathetic?
shareShe is white. She might have been born in Cuba, but she's of Spanish descent, as in from Spain, the European country.
shareHonestly, it's a bit more complicated than that when you consider the nuances of race and how it's been conceptualized. European doesn't automatically equal "white". And what's considered to be white isn't set in stone. I'm sure you're aware of all that. And that's a whole different topic to discuss what people consider as white and those they differs between different countries too.
But my shock and amusement is more of how people are willing to play around with these concepts to suit their agenda. (I don't actually think she's entirely of Spanish descent, but that's just my own suspicions based on the bio that's been presented about her. She only traces Spanish lineage through one side. We just don't know what the other side is.)
Most of the people who regularly talk about race on here aren't particularly educated on the topic and they also don't discuss things in good faith
They want to be outraged
They want to be outraged
I need to shift my expectations of this website to acknowledge this unfortunate reality.
I don't mind shitposting but I do have to realize that yeah, some ppl are just looking to vent here about stuff they have nowhere else to vent about it seems. share
There are different categories. Most just seem to be generally annoyed by liberals and they use this place to vent. I doubt that they think critically enough about most of what they talk about to even make arguing with them worth the effort
Were Eartha Kitt and Halle Berry also a part of a leftist agenda?
One poster (not gonna name names) posted a link to something that was basically white supremacist propaganda. So there are a few that seem to actually be indoctrinated in that shit
The excuse I get thrown my way about Eartha Kitt is she didn't play Selina Kyle only Catwoman. Then I point to the year one comic and they go well that's not how she traditionally looks. It's like talking to a wall.
shareYeah, they're all way too committed to a specific narrative, I think that they can't ever admit that something like a film casting choice is not part of an evil conspiracy because they've already spent so much time ranting about it. It's like the sunk cost fallacy. Plus the peer pressure of all of their other buddies on here that echo the same bullshit...they wouldn't want to admit that some things are nuanced in front of their buddies!
I think Zoe Kravitz is a good fit for this universe because, even though I don't think she's an amazing actress, she's sort of a chic hipster like Robert Pattinson
I think you are correct. I think they have dug themselves so deep into that way of thinking it would hurt their pride too much to admit they were wrong. It is humiliating when you have committed that hard to believing that.
I agree. See I always say this, sometimes it is not about being the best actress or actor to fit a part. For example I think Arnold Schwarzenegger is a very limited actor. Would I say he is any sort of chameleon or thespian actor? Heavens no but he was born to play the Terminator. Some actors are perfectly carved for certain roles. For Catwoman you need to have an edgy sexy femme fatale look. Which she has. Also though you never know she could blow you away with a performance. She has never had the chance to be in a meaty role of this caliber before.
Yeah, I have only seen Zoe in a couple of things, she might be totally capable of putting on a great performance
There's absolutely nothing wrong with this casting, but it's the next big movie and the next big opportunity for these disturbed losers like cyguration and OvertonPendulum to rant about how oppressed they are
Yeah I have seen her in minor roles. She was in Mad Max Fury road as one of the wives, a minor role in X-men First Class and she was in the tv show big little lies and High Fidelity.
See that is why I like the casting for this new Batman film. If you noticed there a lot of unconventional choices. Pattinson, Dano and Kravitz I feel are there because they fit the roles not because of their star power. Matt Reeves did great work directing on his two Apes films, the cinematographer Greg Fraser is the same one as Rogue One, the Mandalorian and Dune. Which means we are in for a visually breathtaking movie. The action looks well choreographed also. Looks like the fight scenes will be better handled than Batman films of the past. As much as I adore Nolan's vision I always found his fights to be a bit lackluster. Anyways yeah exactly it is the opportunity for these idiots to get on the microphone and whine about how oppressed they are.
Funny thing is, I actually DONT have faith in her performance so far, but of course I'm gonna keep an open mind about it. But it's so tired reading these stock, superficial criticisms about her casting. I do like your point about the unconventional choices. Looking at it now, yeah all three castings are odd. Hell, Colin Farrel as the penguin too? I don't have a lot of experience with Matt Reeves, but the trailers so far seem fascinating, and I am an RPat fan, so I'm really looking forward to seeing where all this goes, as a movie. Politics be damned.
shareOh and I totally can respect that. Look I do not care if people do not like the movie I like you get tired of these superficial criticisms. Also you know damn well that even if it is good they are so married to their ideology that they will hate it regardless. Their mind is made up before even seeing it. You ought to check out Matt Reeves's films. Mainly check out the Apes films. He did Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and War For the Planet of the apes. The last two in the trilogy. I thought they were both directed greatly. I honestly feel the apes trilogy succeeded and was better in every way than the new star wars trilogy.
shareI've had virtually no interest in the apes movie until your star wars comment. lmao, okay, maybe I should check them out :D Cause jesus christ, I just saw rise of skywalker a few weeks ago lol
shareThe sad thing is of course Star Wars made way more money because of the bankability of the Star Wars name. The apes trilogy was far better and the example of how to do a reboot correctly. See people complain about lack of quality but then reward the wrong things. The Apes trilogy should be the one to make the money to show we as people care about quality.
shareFrom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ana_de_Armas
"She is of Spanish descent." so white.
And since you are saying that people are racist against black people ... do you imply that she is black???
Why are so many idiots on this forum?
And since you are saying that people are racist against black people ... do you imply that she is black???
No, I didn't imply that. share
She is 100% white ...
shareZoe Kravitz barely looks black, and it's hard to say whether the majority of the audience will find her attractive or not. Most my friends thinks she is ok looks wise. I find her fairly attractive, but not necessarily hot. Maybe a 6.5 or 7 tops
She's no Michelle Pfeiffer of course.
I find her fairly attractive, but not necessarily hot. Maybe a 6.5 or 7 tops
Which is kind of the rub, right? Because Catwoman is a femme fatale who uses her sex appeal to get what she wants, even from someone as stolid, stoic, and hardened as Batman.
If the average guy isn't drooling over Kravitz -- and, as you point out, put her in the barely-above-average category -- why are we supposed to believe Batman would fall over himself for her? It's hard to indulge in the character or the story when a pivotal element of that character is missing.
I mean, I'm still of the mind that Charlize Theron should have played Catwoman in The Dark Knight Rises over Anne Hathaway, because Hathaway -- while she tried hard -- still lacked the sex appeal of someone like Theron. Theron still isn't Pfeiffer quality, but she comes awfully close. share
Yuck.
shareANYONE would be a major downgrade from Michelle Pfeiffer in terms of looks.
If this was a racist demand, it's curious that Kravitz has such white features (she is, of course, a mix).
I find her reasonably attractive - not as much as her mother was at her age, but not at all bad.
Catwoman is the one character I can think of whose race has been constantly swapped over the past 55 years.
Her race was only swapped with Eartha Kitt and Halle Barry, both of whom were NOT playing Selina Kyle.
Selina Kyle has consistently -- in all canonical media -- been portrayed as white.
If this was a racist demand, it's curious that Kravitz has such white features (she is, of course, a mix).
This is an interesting observation. I guess it was a compromise on Reeves' part? Maybe the studio made it known she couldn't be too black? He had already stated he wanted someone black/POCker for the role, even though most people would have preferred Ana de Armas for the role:
https://heroichollywood.com/robert-pattinson-batman-catwoman-poc-matt-reeves/ share
Selina Kyle has consistently -- in all canonical media -- been portrayed as white.
Wrong in Batman Year One she is not white.
Thank God you are not the director of the film. Your taste in cinema is trash. share
Canonical media...
Year One is a Fran Miller spin-off, just like The Dark Knight Returns, where Batman miraculously defeats Superman in hand-to-hand combat.
Doesn't matter. Batman Year One is one of the most popular and well received Batman comic books of all time. Therefore you are free as a film maker to interpret Batman on that manner. See you have how you want it to be and won't give any deviation a chance. Every artist deviates from the mainstream source material in some way. Was Joker Bruce Wayne's parents killer? Nope. However in that interpretation it works. We judge it as a film first not by what we want to see.
shareWhich really has nothing to do with the fact that Selina Kyle has always been white in canon.
In Elseworld stories they've made Bruce Wayne Asian, dead, and the Joker. We don't use those stories as a depiction of canon, though.
And it does matter because most movies are taking elements of canon and projecting them to a mainstream audience, so of course a lot of people will be confused seeing a black Selina Kyle. It doesn't gel at all with what the average person expects from her character.
Again irrelevant. As it stands Batman Year One is considered one of the best comics of all time.
Name me any of those comics that were well received like year one.
We don't love in the 1800s anymore you seemed to think so. People will pay money to see this new Batman film. What will be your excuse if it's successful critically and by mass audience, and a box office hit? Think you will be right with this prediction? You have been wrong on average rather frequently.
As it stands Batman Year One is considered one of the best comics of all time.
Argumentum ad populum. If we're going by that standard than Michelle Pfeiffer should always be emulated as Catwoman because she's considered the most popular and beautiful iteration of the character.
Name me any of those comics that were well received like year one.
Dark Knight: Metal - The Batman Who Laughs.
People will pay money to see this new Batman film.
Of course; it's Batman. Millions of people paid money to see that stinker BvS: Dawn of Justice.
What will be your excuse if it's successful critically and by mass audience, and a box office hit? Think you will be right with this prediction?
Millions of people liked that gosh awful Star Wars sequel trilogy even though it was a chore to sit through, was incoherent, inconsistent, and had no structural character or plot arc.
share
No actually many people consider Anne Hathaway to be a great Catwoman as well. You pulled up a poll of a small amount of people to try and prove your point. Hamil's Joker is iconic but so is Heath's, so is Nicholson's, so is Pheonix's. All of them were different also. Which shows there are multiple ways to interpret a character.
And with that said you are free to interpret Batman that way. The one who has the issue with that is you. You have how you want it portrayed and will not tolerate a deviation. That is an entitled attitude. It is also not how film making works. Burton, Nolan, Paul Dini have taken some sort of liberations with the character. It is about if it is well executed or not.
BVS Dawn of Justice got critically panned by critics and users and did not make as much as TDK or TDKR. Both those films beat it in every conceivable way. Not just in box office but in reception whether it be critics or users. So while BVS made money initially it failed to reach the heights of TDK or TDKR in terms of reception by audiences or critics. Batman Begins did not make a whole lot of money in the box office but was well received by critics and audiences. Look at the scores as proof of this.
Nope actually Last Jedi got panned by users as did the Rise of Skywalker. The only one that good reception by fans was Rogue One and the Force Awakens. What will your excuse be if it is successful across the board? A movie does not need your stamp of approval in order to be considered great by other people.
. . .this could continue as a REALLY interesting conversation, if people could keep it civil. . .
You both make some good points. As a person who's FAR nerdier, and has WAY more comics than both of you combined, I'll just add:
1) "Dark Knight: Metal - The Batman Who Laughs" wasn't *nearly* as critically or commercially successful as Year One
2) TDK/TDKR didn't beat BVS Dawn of Justice "in every conceivable way." They were better received and (probably) made more money. . .but all three films were INCREDIBLY polarizing. And I'd say the casting/photography in BVS is WORLDS better than Nolan's films.
Carry on. . .
No across the board TDK trilogy was considered better than BVS. It beat it in every way when measuring reception. It made more money, got better critical reception and reception by users. Also no the casting of Eisenberg as Luthor was a horrible miscast. Cavill has about as much charisma as a toilet seat and Snyder can't tell a compelling narrative to save his life. You are in the minority in thinking BVS is better in any way than the Nolan films. The only thing I can give BVS is that warehouse fight. Although that was done with the aid of cgi. Nolan's films also utilize practical effects way more than BVS did. Which used so much cgi it became a video game practically. In the end BVS will go down as one of the worst blockbusters in cinema history. That movie cost a truck load to make and was a gigantic creative failure.
shareFWIW, Affleck is my favorite Batman/Bruce Wayne so far, and it isn't close.
Cavill is a miscast for me, but (ducks ahead of time) not as bad as Bale as Batman/Wayne.
Eisenberg was *horribly* miscast, but that's the only Real problem I have w/the casting in the film. Everyone else is pitch perfect (JL aside).
Compare that with Nolan's films, and you have real problems with Bane, Talia, "Robin," etc.
"You are in the minority in thinking BVS is better in any way than the Nolan films."
Nah. The fight choreography, photography, and principal casting is, on balance, clearly better in BVS. Snyder is by no means my idea of a brilliant storyteller, but there Are things he does really, Really well.
I can't stand Affleck as Wayne and honestly I can barely stand him as an actor. He is average at best. He is a better director than he is actor. He looks like the character but there is more to a character than looks. Cavill has a great look for Superman but unlike Reeve he has no charisma at all. Affleck has the physique but it ends up in him looking good only for still shots, once he has to act I think it's garbage.
No Bane was actually one of the high points of tdkr. He was iconic in the role. People remember lines from him quote him etc. No performance in bvs touches or begins to approach heath ledgers performance also. The line people remember from bvs is MARTHA!! Why did you say that name?!!! Pretty bad when a scene that is most remembered is a scene that is mocked for how awful it is. Affleck sucks as Batman I'm glad he is gone he sucked.
Fights is all I can give you. In terms of cinematography absolutely not! Tdk and batman begins got nominated for best cinematography at the Oscars bvs did not score a single nomination. Watch the vehicle chases in tdk trilogy all done with practicality. Snyder uses cgi and green screen and did tons of lens flares for the batmobile chase. You can have an opinion but as a whole thinking bvs is a better film than any of tdk trilogy is a minority opinion. There are certain things I like better about Batman forever than the Burton films but I would never claim it to be a better film. I know I'm on the minority in preferring it in areas.
One of my biggest gripes with the Batman big-screen portrayals is that nobody's really nailed the Bruce Wayne vs. Batman thing. To be honest, nobody's really even paid much attention to it. I know, I know: a lot of that is because of recency bias. But it's a BIG part of the reason I don't rate many of the films all that highly: it's such an important part of the character.
Affleck (in my humble opinion) did the best at playing to the two diametrically opposed facets.
And his fight scenes are Clearly the best.
Practical vs CGI is not a concern for me: all I care about is the eye test.
Acting? Shrug. There's no "right" answer. Either a performance speaks to you, or it doesn't. I will agree that his recent directorial output is better than his roles.
Nolan attempted to do this. As much as crap as people give Bale for the voice he at least portrayed Batman and Bruce differently. That is different than lets say Clooney or Kilmer, who both play it the same way the whole time. No difference between Clooney's Bruce or his Batman. Keaton actually attempted to play it differently also. His Batman voice is obviously better because he speaks more in a whisper and he barely speaks. The best Batman portrayal is honestly still the Conroy Batman in the animated series. The voice is great and that series captures every element that is Batman. Where as others get pieces of it correct. Now of course voice is different from actually physically acting but still.
Affleck also I do not qualify as really portraying it differently. His voice is altered heavily in post production when he is Batman. Thus making it sound like a voice changer and you can tell that is not his voice. So to me that actually takes away from the performance. I find the voice to be awful in it's own right because of how fake it sounds.
Fight scenes are the most stylized. See the thing where people get confused is Nolan is not going for stylized fights but more realistic ones. Now hold on before you attack, am I saying Nolan does even this well? No even if you take away style his fights are not shot well especially in BB, they are overedited. So can I say that Snyder accomplishes fights better? Yes but that is due to the editing team, and the cgi work that has nothing to do with Affleck.
Eye test is important to me as well. The vehicle chases in BVS look like a damn cartoon! It looks awful. Now am I opposed to cgi? No but when Nolan proved you can do vehicle chases with practical effects that is how you should do it.
Yeah if his acting worked for you great it did not for me. I can give him appearance and physique that is as far as I can go though.
And just make Lucius Fox a white man and the SJW crowd would shit their pants. The double standard only proves their own racism.
FYI: don’t pay moviefanatic505 any mind, he’s trolling you. He’s on a mission to go to every single board on this forum and say the opposite of whatever I would say. It’s very pathetic not to mention immature.
And just make Lucius Fox a white man and the SJW crowd would shit their pants. The double standard only proves their own racism.
Yup, it's ridiculous. And they have all sorts of mental gymnastics they leap through to defend why white characters can be race-swapped but why black characters can't.
FYI: don’t pay moviefanatic505 any mind, he’s trolling you. He’s on a mission to go to every single board on this forum and say the opposite of whatever I would say. It’s very pathetic not to mention immature.
Ah, I've noticed the similarities in your names, but I'll remember the lowercase 'm' in the handle means he's moseying for a trollin'. share
Yeah their excuse is this: Well black people for so long were held back so it’s OK for them to take over traditionally white roles but it’s not Ok the other way, and they are too stupid to realize that that logic is by definition racist.
shareYup, it's ridiculous. And they have all sorts of mental gymnastics they leap through to defend why white characters can be race-swapped but why black characters can't.
Funny how come nothing is said by people such as yourself about Tiger Lily being white washed in the movie Pan? Rooney Mara portrayed her she is white and Tiger Lily is not portrayed as white typically. This shows your hypocrisy actually.
share
Funny how come nothing is said by people such as yourself about Tiger Lily being white washed in the movie Pan?
Why assume he even watched that movie? Let alone that he had no problem with the white-washing? That's quite a poor and desperate strawman argument. By the way, Pan bombed, meaning not a lot of people watched it, and therefore likely didn't even know about a white-washed Tiger Lily. The few that watched it did criticize the casting choice, and Rooney Mara already publicly expressed her regret for playing that role, so there's no use in bringing that up for whatever point you're trying to make. share
Why assume they haven't? The first sight of a black race swapped character gets brought up the second it happens. I find it mighty funny that the whitewashed roles quietly creep under the radar. Your guy Overton flat out said white people are better than black people. Yet you claimed I was exaggerating and that people were not racist on here. GTFOH!
shareWhen did Overton say that?
You mention one example of white-washing from a movie almost nobody saw or remembers, and you actually think that means people don’t care? I’ve got a movie for you: The Last Airbender. On top of being an overall bad movie that more people saw, it was criticized for white-washing. Based on your logic, that alone destroys your entire argument, even if we ignore that the few people who did watch Pan criticized the white-washing. Yes, you are exaggerating because you know your argument is weak.
Black-washing appears to be criticized more because companies essentially advertise it, like they’re proud of it. Nobody advertises white-washing.
https://moviechat.org/tt0306414/The-Wire/61ae23c6fdd46b348b1f5580/Guess-what-the-average-IQ-of-Baltimore-is
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/61d2b31d67fe9966dc7f0cb4/What-REALLY-caused-the-2008-financial-crisis?reply=61d3fbc9655133736f4da55e
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/61f889437c822f38e57b4488/Whoopi-Goldberg-Jews-Its-not-about-race-just-two-white-groups?reply=61f96efc7c822f38e57b4bca
Two threads of him saying white people are better than blacks. Also for good measure the third thread is him saying not all races are equal. That enough proof that he is a racist idiot? Or do I need to provide more proof?
No I know last Airbender got called out. However by you and others it would have been csalled out worse if it was reversed. If they had been white and then race swapped your camp would come unglued even more. Overton literally said there is no such thing as whitewashing. Which shows hypocrisy.
Oh no whitewashing gets advertised plenty. That is a lie and you know it.
The first two was just him mentioning IQ studies, while the third was him calling out Whoopi Goldberg's dumb comment about Jews and the holocaust. Not exactly proof.
You assume it would be worse if it was the other way around with no proof, just a bias on your part. All color washing has been condemned, it only seems color-washing whites is more condemned because companies promote it more, like they're proud of it. When they push something radical, expect equal push-back.
Feel free to list examples of when white-washing was promoted as proudly (if at all) as color-washing, I'm actually curious. Because I've never seen it, ever. White-washing has happened, but nobody was ever proud or spiteful about it like they are with color-washing white characters.
The first two was just him mentioning IQ studies, while the third was him calling out Whoopi Goldberg's dumb comment about Jews and the holocaust. Not exactly proof.
He also went on to say whites are better than blacks in those two threads. What is the definition of racism? Do you know? Or do I need to link you to the definition? He did not just point out IQ studies he very proudly said that whites are better than blacks. He then proceeded to link it to a white supremacist website. Yes that is proof.
You assume it would be worse if it was the other way around with no proof, just a bias on your part. All color washing has been condemned, it only seems color-washing whites is more condemned because companies promote it more, like they're proud of it. When they push something radical, expect equal push-back.
No different than how people assume Kravitz was cast because of her race. It is a pretty safe assumption. Also look at Overton's posts he literally said there is no such thing as whitewashing. WTH?
Just because it is more discreet does not mean they are not proud of it. You know Whistler from Blade was a whitewashed character correct? Jamal is Blade's friend and mentor in the comic books. They gave Whistler Jamal's backstory in the comics in the 1998 film. Jamal was black in the comics. Not a word was said about that why not? share
If anyone needs a refresher on racism, it's you. Statistics aren't racist just because you disagree with them. What white supremacist site did he supposedly link to? If you're talking about "La Griffe du Lion", there's literally an article on there called "Why Most Serial Killers Are White Men." Not very white-supremacist, is it? Or do I need to link you the definition to that? If it's something else, show me the link, because so far I haven't seen anything that was racist or white supremacist and I'm not about to look over the whole thing if you're just wasting my time with strawman arguments and mis-labelling. Show me real proof.
If he really said "there's no such thing as whitewashing", though, then I won't defend that because he's wrong. Again, IF he said that. Feel free to give me a direct quote for which ever link he said that in, and I'll "control F" to see if you're telling the truth.
As for Whistler, he's not that popular of a character with mainstream audiences, and the Blade movies didn't gross that much money when compared to other superhero movies of that time. Low viewership + low popularity = not much word said. It's not that people were ok with it so much that people just didn't know about it, same with Tiger Lily in Pan. So if anything, you just proved my point that white-washing isn't advertised like color-washing is. Another example that proves my point is The Ancient One from Doctor Strange, a lot more people criticized the white-washing and gender-bending of that character - who was an old Asian man in the comics - because they knew about it. Doctor Strange had more marketing and made more money than all three Blade movies combined, so more people knew about Ancient One than Whistler.
I did not say statistics were racist because I disagreed with them. Again comprehension is not your thing is it? When you flat out say that white people are better than black people that is a racist comment. The definition of racism is prejudiced against or antagonistic toward a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized. That is the dictionary definition. I am not holding your hand I showed you proof and you denied it.
https://moviechat.org/tt1877830/The-Batman/61cacc734622f95f764a2bc5/The-female-love-interest-isnt-attractive?reply=61cdc5c3a8e1e32d6e3c6b06
There he claims that whitewashing is fine because it is for practical reasons. Race swapping the other way is not because it is for ideological ones. So basically it is fine because there are more white people. That is what it translates into.
That argument would hold up if it were not for other big films. Doctor Strange, Last Airbender etc. From where I sit even though they are called out they would get called out way more if it was the other way around. I can't wait for the Batman to come out and be a hit. Honestly Kravitz is my favorite Catwoman already just because it irks you guys. The fact that you people hate it makes me love it even more. THank God you are not in charge of making films. I bet they would be terrible.
First you claimed he said there’s no such thing as whitewashing. Now you’re claiming he said whitewashing is good, color-washing is bad. Which is it, kiddo?
“That is what it translates to.”
And there it is, you just admitted he didn’t actually say that, you’re just putting words in his mouth. Not surprising. Oh well, you tried. Better luck next time, slick 😄
I originally claimed he said there is no such thing as whitewashing which he did say. I am not going to dig through all his threads to prove my point. I then showed you he is fine with it happening so long as it is for white people. So either way my point still stands. He said both actually.
Nope he did but I am not going to dig through it for you to refute it. Either way I am glad morons like you do not make films. I honestly think people like you are scumbags.
Zoe Kravitz looks great in the trailers!
shareIt's true.
Sure the activeness of an actress doesn't matter for many roles. However in the case of Catwoman Batman is pretty much besotted by her and she uses that to her advantage time and time again.
But having watched the latest trailer it's pushing believability to think Batman / the billionaire Bruce Wayne would have some kind of irrepressible magnetic draw towards this particular woman. I'm hoping it's not a major part or indeed used in the story as it will take me out of being absorbed in the movie...
Well said.
If the average guy is already looking elsewhere when Kravitz pops up on the screen, why would billionaire playboy Bruce Wayne give a double take?
It makes no sense.
With Michelle Pfieffer it made all the sense in the world because she is drop-dead gorgeous, and any man would double-take her in her a heartbeat. It made sense WHY Batman let her get away with what she did because, as you mentioned, he was besotted by her -- he let the wrong head do the thinking for him because he was infatuated. You could glean as much just from the trailers from Batman Returns.
Kravitz has no noticeable sex appeal at all, and is essentially diversity stunt-casting.
Nope wrong this will be a hit. I am glad it will be and I will keep on counting your failed predictions. Remember how you said Dune would not be a success? Keep on showcasing your ignorance of cinema.
shareHis entire justification for Zoe being diversity stunt-casting is that he personally doesn't find Zoe sexually attractive. lmao
shareNope.
Director wanted a POC for Catwoman, so Kravitz was going to get it for diversity reasons, not because majority of people actually desire to see her as Catwoman:
https://heroichollywood.com/robert-pattinson-batman-catwoman-poc-matt-reeves/
I do not trust a word you say. You also claimed Dune would be a failure. Well that was an epic fail.
shareWhatever dude, the news already reported Reeves was stunt-casting for diversity-driven Catwoman. Note that the article was published BEFORE Kravitz was hired, and it's not hard to find other articles mentioning Reeves wanted a POC Catwoman.
Remember, the facts don't care about your feelings.
Yeah you are correct facts do not care about feelings. So you need to man up to being wrong about Dune failing. Dune was a success that is a fact. Choke on it.
Once you are honest that you are not an all knowing God you claim to be about cinema you will gain credibility. Otherwise I will not believe what you say. I know cinema better than you do. I was right about Dune and you failed miserably.
He's a closed minded idiot man. He thinks he knows everything. I can give you a lost of failed predictions this fool has made.
sharePerhaps Batman won't have your specific taste in women, and will instead share the opinion of the many others who do find the actress extremely attractive? Or is that unfathomable to you?
shareand will instead share the opinion of the many others who do find the actress extremely attractive? Or is that unfathomable to you?
Laws of attraction.
Someone who has traveled the world, lives among the wealthy, and has acquired a finer taste in things -- for the purpose of keeping up appearances -- maintains a certain level of aesthetic standards. This is not only evident in the facade (as a rich playboy) but also in the alter ego (as Batman).
Wayne has developed a personality themed around intricate details and finer functionality of both the abstract (persona) and the concrete (his guise).
Even within the world that Reeves has setup, Batman illustrates his hurt through aesthetics (re-purporsing the parts of the gun that killed his parents into the Bat-symbol on the chest of his suit). It's not only functional, but symbolic. And what's more, is attuned to both a representation of his rage, and an indication of utilizing trauma as a weapon of fear.
His utilities, his outfit, even his car are themed both visually and mechanically around ideological aesthetics. There is no such thing as Batman indulging acedia.
It stands to reason that if his taste in objects (i.e., utilities and the qualitative nature of his playboy presentation) are of very high and specific standards, that it should follow his taste in people -- both behaviourally and aesthetically -- would be equally as complex (which is precisely why ALL previous Batman iterations were drawn to the psychologically damaged but very strikingly beautiful Selina Kyle; she was a diametric yet captivating juxtaposition to his own damaged life). share
If this movie succeeds what will you say? I bet you have excuses lined up already. Oh yeah remember how you said Pattinson refused to work out? Turns out it was a joke buddy. Also I think Kravitz is stunningly beautiful.
shareAgain, it all comes down to you personally not finding her attractive. It isn't a stretch to say that the overwhelming majority of men consider her to be beautiful. The notion that Bruce Wayne would become enamored of her is hardly a stretch. And if you really can't accept that a woman you aren't attracted to could ensnare Batman, realize that looks are but one of many qualities in a woman that attract men, and plenty of wealthy men with a taste for "the finer things" fall in love with women who aren't 10/10 drop dead gorgeous beauty queens. I'd go so far as to say the more intelligent a man is, the less important looks are to him, and if Batman is defined by anything, even more than his wealth, it is his intellect.
shareIt isn't a stretch to say that the overwhelming majority of men consider her to be beautiful.
It absolutely is, because even according to beauty lists, she's nowhere near the top, not even in the top 20, and not even in the top 100. An "overwhelming majority of men" do not consider her to be beautiful, because there is no factual quantity to verify that claim, and what quantitative polls do exist, the overwhelming majority seem to disagree with that sentiment.
The notion that Bruce Wayne would become enamored of her is hardly a stretch.
It sort of is, because what qualities, prima facie, does she possess that a billionaire playboy vigilante would find charming or enticing he couldn't find or get elsewhere (even for a price)?
I'd go so far as to say the more intelligent a man is, the less important looks are to him, and if Batman is defined by anything, even more than his wealth, it is his intellect.
That's a double-edged sword with a two-pronged condition: 1) yes, intelligent men are more attracted to intelligent women. 2) It doesn't detract from the fact that Bruce would still want a woman who is likely as intelligent as she is attractive, given that he still values his own looks and has an eye for culture and aesthetics.
Beauty is oftentimes gauged by three factors: symmetry, form, and appurtenance.
Kravitz may have the symmetry (a sharp jaw line), but her form is lacking (especially since she's not tall, not curvaceous, nor buxom), and her appurtenance is sullied with off-putting tattoos, an unflattering pixie cut, and a lack of refined adornment. That's what makes it hard to take her seriously as a catch to which Bruce/Batman would be smitten. share
Absolutely false. Catwoman looks stunning in the new trailer. I am very on bored. She looks gorgeous to me.
shareGet your eyes checked Zoe Kravitz looks stunning as always. Don't worry this movie doesn't need your support to be considered a good film.
shareWhile I agree that de Armas would had been a great Catwoman I have nothing against Zoe, she is attractive as well
shareI wonder if these white supremacists who whine about woke and pc every time they see POC in a movie threw a tantrum when Hallie Berry was announced to play her.
shareWhite supremacists are just as annoying as the SJW peeps, I swear. Just looking for stupid shit to get pissed off about.
shareWhy do you think I am a white supremacist?
shareAnyone who doesn't worship at the altar of Fentanyl Floyd is a White supremacist in their eyes.
If you aren't burning down and looting your city, you're a White supremacist.
If you aren't pumping toxins into your veins every six months, you're a White supremacist.
If you aren't kissing the feet of Dementia Joe, you're a White supremacist.
If you aren't cheering for popular characters to be race-swapped or subjected to gay-conversion, you're a White supremacist.
The list just goes on and on. They even consider black people who got off the Demonrat's ideological plantation as White supremacists, such as Larry Elder and Candace Owens. That lets you know how deranged these people are.
A person like you would like Candace Owens. That lady is a joke.
share