I guess there were no historical black figures with stories worth telling.
That's why in order to have inclusive casts, they have to blackwash so many white characters.
shareSad but true.
share
MovieChat Forums > Queen Cleopatra (2023) Discussion > I guess there were no historical black f...
It's crazy that you're using the word "blackwash" as if it didn't originate from the word whitewash, meaning that lots of films have whitewashed and still whitewash characters.
shareThere was a reason they did that in the past. The world was not so integrated back then. Hollywood did not have a large number of actors with the appropriate racial backgrounds to play those roles. Those stories just would not have been told without white actors playing the parts.
You say they still do it. What are some of the movies that have whites playing blacks or Asians today?
Its crazy that you think it is good to ignore genuine black stories in favor of casting a black person in a white role.
I would not complain if they made the story of Queen Ranavalona of Madagascar with a black actress, because the historical character was black, not a white Greek.
Aloha and Ghost in the Shell are the first movies that comes to mind.
Also, the main reason they did and do this was and is racism. Miscegenation laws existed because of racism too - otherwise, why would they need such laws when there apparently weren't even enough POC for this to matter?
We're no longer living in a time where stories can only be told with white actors as the leads, so why can't they be non-white? What harm does it do, when most people aren't grading films for historical accuracy? Also, telling stories with POC doesn't automatically erase POC's stories, and maybe they're sick of the perpetual slave narrative or the magical negro trope and want to see themselves in other roles, as whites have seen since the inception of film making.
This is kind of a weird take tbh, because if you reverse it, no one would argue that having a white lead in a film takes away from the historical truths of white people, and we should stop casting whites in anything unless it's reflective of their history. That's so silly.
"Aloha and Ghost in the Shell are the first movies that comes to mind."
Terrible examples (and I see you're just parroting Sandra Oh). The racially mixed character in the first movie was supposed to pass for a white redhead. The second is an Americanized version of a foreign story (which actually had a pretty diverse cast). It's kind of laughable that people seem to think that when Asians adapt Western stories they don't change the races. Besides the fact that the movie doesn't feature historical persons like discussed here, the Japanese director of the anime had the following to say:
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/mar/24/scarlett-johansson-ghost-in-the-shell-director-whitewashing
You folks really need to try harder. Real whitewashing is frowned upon by most these days. And excusing blackwashing by basically saying that two wrongs make a right is ridiculous. If it's about settling scores, then that's just racism. Anyone who hates whitewashing, should feel the same way about blackwashing.
I have made that point that Oshii made too.
Major was a complete cybor, basically a brain in a transferable jar. IN the various cartoon series it was commented on several times that she had changed bodies many times, at least once going undercover for many years as a man.
It's completely obvious they went with Johansson because she was a popular and competent actress and the story allowed for it. NOT because they somehow felt she needed to be white. That's utterly simplistic thinking.
shareThey're both valid examples, because they're both films about characters who are non white being played not white actors. Whatever reason there is for that doesn't matter by your definition, not mine. Why is it excusable when they're white but not otherwise? I have no idea what Sandra Oh has said on the subject, I loved her in Killing Eve, but I don't know her outside of her acting. Lumping us together because we happen to share similar beliefs is strange. We're also both women, so I guess "us folks" must be in some underground club conspiring together right? I mean, if we were in a club fighting against racism, I wouldn't be against that actually, that sounds pretty sick, Sandra Oh might be cool.
We're talking about western cinema, what other countries do is irrelevant. Also, other countries are proudly racist, is that something you want the west to aspire to? The director is entitled to his opinion, I don't agree with it in relation to this conversation.
I don't even know who you're referring to when you say us folks, we're all people who enjoy cinema, that's why we're here. I just don't think blackwashing is a real thing. I don't think telling stories using POC takes anything away from white people or POC, but judging from your response earlier, you've already made excuses for whitewashing, so it doesn't seem like even you frown upon it, let alone most people. I provided 2 examples and you've already invalidated them because a director was okay with it, coz directors aren't just people with their own bias apparently. Is that good reasoning, do you think? And why were you automatically looking to invalidate them, they're valid.
You're entitled to your opinion, but if that opinion isn't affected by racism, then why are you so bothered by seeing POC in films? Don't make up excuses about POC's stories being ignored, that's nonsense. What's the real reason?
"They're both valid examples, because they're both films about characters who are non white being played not white actors."
I already explained why they're not valid. The first character is supposed to look entirely white, even though she's not. Maybe it would've been nice if they had found a mixed race actress who fit that role (good luck!), but a completely white actress does not change the essence of that character
As for the second example, the director explained that there is no particular race or identity tied to that character. She's a cyborg, so could be ANYTHING. Unlike you, he actually understands the original character. It's not just his opinion, it's about FACTS.
"We're talking about western cinema, what other countries do is irrelevant"
It's completely relevant as it shows that it's completely normal to adjust a foreign story to one's own culture. It's not black-/white-/yellowwashing. There is no logical reason why an Americanized version of a Japanese story should have an all-Asian cast. It also shows the hypocrisy of folks like you when you only complain about Western cinema (quite a generalization!). If you think the Japanese have the right to whine about "whitewashing" Japanese characters, then why aren't you whining about white characters being race-swapped in foreign cinema? Why are you denying whitewashing exists?
"I don't even know who you're referring to when you say us folks"
Folks who keep excusing blackwashing. If that doesn't exist, then neither does whitewashing, especially based on your invalid examples.
"you've already made excuses for whitewashing, so it doesn't seem like even you frown upon it, let alone most people"
False insinuation, since those weren't even examples of whitewashing. Try harder
"then why are you so bothered by seeing POC in films?"
Total strawman. Thanks for exposing yourself as a troll.🍆
Sandra Oh is a complete nutcase, which says enough...
Your explanations are completely unsound.
Imagine telling Pacific Island kids that the reason they made Moana white instead of how she currently looks is because she's meant to look white. The director of Aloha made up a bs story because he wanted Emma Stone as his lead and for no other reason, which is why she was the first person cast. And her character is supposed to be part Chinese, part Hawaiian. You know what actor is part Hawaiian, part Chinese? Jason Scott Lee. No resemblance to Emma Stone as far as I can see.
Ghost in the Shell is a well known Japanese property because of the manga and the anime. But even if you don't value how intrinsically Japanese it is, they took a human character that was originally Japanese and made that character white for no reason. They literally changed her name from Motoko Kusanagi to Mira Killian and made Motoko an entirely different character who doesn't even feature in the film. Her becoming a cyborg doesn't negate this. The director is again talking bs, and he also isn't the originator of the Ghost in the Shell property.
"If blackwashing doesn't exist, neither does whitewashing" - you've already admitted whitewashing exists, you just don't care given the reasons you've supplied. We don't need any excuses for why a POC is playing Cleopatra, she's been played by a variety of actresses of various ethnicities, all of them white, so it literally doesn't matter if one of the actresses happens to be an African-American woman in the same way that one woman of colour playing Catwoman changed no one's life and took nothing away from white women. But since this isn't about POC, please direct me to your threads against Elizabeth Taylor, Angelina Jolie and Gal Gadot playing Cleopatra. Oh, those don't exist?
Seems to me like racism doesn't matter to you unless you feel white people are being oppressed by non-whites, which isn't happening and your feelings aren't correct. Stop hiding behind internet buzzwords and be honest.
"The director of Aloha made up a bs story because he wanted Emma Stone as his lead and for no other reason"
You clearly haven't even seen the movie. You just jumped on the bandwagon. Try harder, trollboy.
"You know what actor is part Hawaiian, part Chinese? Jason Scott Lee. No resemblance to Emma Stone as far as I can see."
Yes, let's cast him as a female love interest who passes for white... Your generalization of mixed-race people is racist, by the way. Try harder, trollboy.
"But even if you don't value how intrinsically Japanese it is, they took a human character that was originally Japanese and made that character white for no reason."
It's an American adaptation, not a Japanese one. That's a good enough reason. Try harder, trollboy.
"you've already admitted whitewashing exists, you just don't care given the reasons you've supplied."
That's a blatant lie. Your examples were simply not examples of whitewashing. Try harder trollboy.
"in the same way that one woman of colour playing Catwoman changed no one's life and took nothing away from white women."
Uhm, Catwoman is not a historical person. Nobody tried to rewrite history. I won't complain about those 3 other actresses, because Cleopatra was white like them. Duh. Try harder, trollboy.
"Seems to me like racism doesn't matter to you unless you feel white people are being oppressed by non-whites"
Another strawman, because all of your arguments suck. Try harder, trollboy.
You're right, I mustn't have seen the movie, I didn't realize they cast Emma Stone as a Hawaiian man. You see how this argument works? He is Hawaiian and Chinese, he can't pass for white. Even Kristen Kreuk, who's half Dutch and half Chinese can't pass for white. That's my whole point of having an actor play a Hawaiian Chinese when they're not remotely close to appearing Hawaiian Chinese, it's a bs reason to excuse why they're white in the first place.
I'm mixed race by the way, so I think I have some leeway about my "racist" mixed race views. Also, I've passed for white most of my life, so we do exist. Emma Stone doesn't represent what any of us look like though.
So an American adaptation can take liberties with race except when it comes to removing white people as the leads, they're not allowed to exclude those?
I thought you were the person that wrote "There was a reason they did that in the past. The world was not so integrated back then. Hollywood did not have a large number of actors with the appropriate racial backgrounds to play those roles. Those stories just would not have been told without white actors playing the parts" which is dumb reasoning for racism in cinema. I concede I was mistaken, but my point still stands.
And you're right, Cleopatra is a historical person, but no one who's seen any iteration of her has believed her to be anything other than the Egyptian queen. No one thinks she's actually from Israel because of Gal Gadot, or British American like Elizabeth Taylor, just like no one who watches Catherine the Great now thinks Catherine was probably from Conyers, Georgia.
I'm barely trying dude, but at least get one thing right: trollgirl.
"You see how this argument works?"
No, because Stone could not pass for a man. Unless that would be the point of the character...
"That's my whole point of having an actor play a Hawaiian Chinese when they're not remotely close to appearing Hawaiian Chinese"
And that was the entire point of the character. You really need to stop talking about things you know nothing about. Also, stop generalizing mixed race people. You seem to be a hypocrite, by the way. You have a problem with Stone playing mixed race, but not this woman playing a white person???
"So an American adaptation can take liberties with race except when it comes to removing white people as the leads, they're not allowed to exclude those?"
Never even said or suggested that. Americanizing a fictional story is something completely different than changing history, be it a person or context.
" I concede I was mistaken, but my point still stands."
None of your points stand. And the other poster's point is correct. Whitewashing happened because not enough actors of other ethnicities were available. Not ideal, but we can't change it retroactively. You trying to excuse current blackwashing because of something that happened in the past is idiotic and racist.
"No one thinks she's actually from Israel because of Gal Gadot, or British American like Elizabeth Taylor, just like no one who watches Catherine the Great now thinks Catherine was probably from Conyers, Georgia."
We can't really believe Cleo is Caucasian while watching this documentary when she's being portrayed by a black woman and they actually argue she was black, now can we?
"at least get one thing right: trollgirl."
Thanks for being so honest to admit you're trolling! But I did get it right...trollboy.🙂 Now go shave your momma's armpits, D-feet.🍆
[deleted]
"Its crazy that you think it is good to ignore genuine black stories in favor of casting a black person in a white role."
It really is crazy, isn't it? But that's the point, they want to rewrite history.
If that's the case, wasn't history already re-written when Elizabeth Taylor, Angelina Jolie and Gal Gadot were all cast as Cleopatra, among other actresses who weren't Egyptian, Macedonian or Iranian?
Also, who do you mean by "they?"
They were white like Cleopatra, I never said the actress portraying her had to have the same ethnicity. Why, do those movies insinuate Cleopatra was Northern European or Israeli???
"Also, who do you mean by "they?"
Trolls like you who excuse blackwashing and obviously racism against white people. Beduh.🍆
So you acknowledge multiple white women have played Cleopatra and no one has yet mistaken Cleopatra for the ethnicities of any of the actresses, but one woman of colour playing her will somehow be different because "duh, they're not white stupid" - how do you not recognise this view as racism?
share"but one woman of colour playing her will somehow be different"
Lololol, get outta here troll boy! Of course it's different, especially when the documentary tries the argue Cleopatra was black instead of Caucasian, which is what's actually racist.
"The world was not so integrated back then"
Yes, it was. All humans are related because there was trade, contact and intermarriage between all humans.
"Hollywood did not have a large number of actors with the appropriate racial backgrounds to play those roles."
Nonsense. The U.S. is a nation of immigrants. Racism and white supremacy kept nonwhites out of Hollywood movies. If you were paying attention, then you would know that black people made their own "race film" movies because of white discrimination.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_film
Whitewashing movies is a part of racism and white supremacy. Jesus wasn't a blond-haired, blue-eyed WASP, but that's how he's portrayed. Early Ancient Egyptians were black and brown Afro-Asiatic people, but only white Europeans played them. One third of cowboys were Mexican, black and a few Native-Americans, but all cowboys portrayed as white in early movies. Adam and Eve also portrayed by white actors, but they were in Africa and before whites appeared 8,000 years ago.
Cleopatra wasn't white. Numerous historians say that she was melanated - likely light brown. Nobody knows who her mother was and her half sister was part black since they ran DNA test on her. It was common for male rulers to marry Nubian and other black Egyptians at that time.
Ancient people, including Egyptians, didn't think about race the way you do. Modern racism is only 500 years old.
These movies fail even now. Do you honestly think they would have done better in the 1950s?
shareThe initial statement was:
I guess there were no historical black figures with stories worth telling.
Did you have to switch to white-/blackwashing because you have to admit that the op was just right? share
The OP is ignorant. Most historians have said that Cleopatra wasn't white.
How many black history books do you own?
This is what bugs me. I'm fascinated with African history but all everyone seems to talk about is how Africans slaughtered each other and the winners sold their brothers and sisters into slavery. Like is that all Africans are about? Of course not but that is how their history is portrayed.
We have at least 12,000 years of what we understand to be our history of Human civilization. Surely there is enough African history there not to need to re brand and race swap existing Western history?
Like what was going on in Africa during King Arthur's reign, the building of Stone henge etc.
What about ancient African architecture? (aside from stuff in Egypt). What are the stories of ancient African structures? There has to be some right?
Surely they'd want to celebrate this kind of stuff and shout it from the rooftops but nothing. Instead, we just get "diversity" in period dramas...Yawn.
There is plenty of interesting African history, but you need to make an effort to learn about it.
Have you ever made an attempt to go the library and take out African history books?
But have you asked the question why people need to make such an effort to learn about it?
Take Netflix for instance, unlimited funds pretty much. Why aren't they making original stuff about Africa?
I've looked for interesting looking African history books but it's chore filtering out all the slavery stuff which I have no interest in.
There are black characters they could use but this isn’t really about representation. It is about colonization.
shareThis guy would make for an interesting movie:
Mansa Musa, the king of Mali in the early 1300s.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2022/11/04/richest-person-ever/10391344002/
The richest person ever is thought to have been an emperor with an accumulation of wealth often described as “unimaginable” or “incalculable.” The title goes to 14th-century African emperor Mansa Musa, and his wealth has been estimated to be the modern day equivalent of $400 billion.share
Musa ruled the Mali Empire beginning in 1312, at a time where gold and salt resources helped the empire expand and flourish. Musa and the empire owned almost half of the Old World’s gold, BBC reports. Musa is credited for funding and encouraging literature, education, architecture and the arts.
According to History.com, Musa showed the true size of his wealth on a pilgrimage to Mecca, surrounded by tens of thousands of soldiers and slaves carrying mass amounts of gold. He left behind gifts of gold as he crossed through Egypt, a gift generous in thought but not in actuality. The precious resource actually decreased the value of metal and had a disastrous impact on the economy for over a decade.
An early example of quantitative easing, too.
share
The king reportedly left Mali with a caravan of 60,000 men.
He took his entire royal court and officials, soldiers, griots (entertainers), merchants, camel drivers and 12,000 slaves, as well as a long train of goats and sheep for food.
It was a city moving through the desert.
A city whose inhabitants, all the way down to the slaves, were clad in gold brocade and finest Persian silk. A hundred camels were in tow, each camel carrying hundreds of pounds of pure gold.
It was a sight to behold.
And the sight got even more opulent once the caravan reached Cairo, where they could really show off their wealth...
So lavishly did he hand out gold in Cairo that his three-month stay caused the price of gold to plummet in the region for 10 years, wrecking the economy.
I agree. There are many interesting African and African-American historical figures who would make interesting movies. But, it needs to be "commercial". The reason Cleopatra movies are made a zillion times is because Hollywood believes it'll make a profit so that's what they'll fund.
Mansa Musa would require a large budget to make it look good. I was disappointed a little with "The Woman King" when I realized how massive the sets should have been and how many more people should've been in it.