“What we realized was, it has to be a systematic approach,” of asking for diverse crews and artists, he said in an interview with Charles Duhigg, a reporter for The New York Times.“The Oscar issue was symptomatic of a problem; it wasn’t the problem,” Mr. Abrams added. “The Oscars is the last stop on the train. The first stop is what gets made.”Mr. Abrams, a writer, producer and the director of “Star Wars: The Force Awakens,” sent a memo last week to studios and agents announcing a new policy at his production company, Bad Robot, requiring that any lists of writers, directors, actors and others to be considered for a project should “be at the very least representative of the country we live in. Which roughly breaks down to: 50 percent women, 12 percent black, 18 percent Hispanic, 6 percent Asian.”
“I think the better stories are going to come from the more inclusive voices,” he said. “I think that audiences will go to see these movies. The bottom line will increase, will benefit from this inclusivity.”
In the end all this is about is people having trouble identifying with people who aren't of their race, regardless of context, class, or all the other things that matter more about how similar a character is to you.
Quote from: eggsalad on March 03, 2016, 10:24:04 AMIn the end all this is about is people having trouble identifying with people who aren't of their race, regardless of context, class, or all the other things that matter more about how similar a character is to you.Being able to relate to a character in a movie is pivotal -- in Episode VII, Finn was the audience character. In the original trilogy it was Luke, and in the prequels it was Obi-Wan. It's a commonly expressed opinion among minorities that seeing a bunch of white people is far less relatable than it would be with a more diverse representation in Hollywood.
Minorities should reevaluate how they judge and enjoy movies.
The issue has come to a head because over the past two years some films with a particular emotional resonance were passed over. The original “Rocky” (1976) won three Oscars, and Sylvester Stallone was nominated (though he did not win) for both acting and writing. Critics and fans alike have heaped praise on 2015's new addition to the Rocky franchise, “Creed”, which sees a black fighter as the hero. But the star and the black director, Michael B. Jordan and Ryan Coogler, will have to make do with fans' appreciation and more than $100m at the box office: the film's only nomination went to Mr Stallone, this time for Best Supporting Actor. “Straight Outta Compton”, a hit film about a black hip-hop group with a black director and producer, was nominated only for its screenplay, the writers of which were white. “Beasts of No Nation” delighted our reviewer, and fans of its star, Idris Elba, hope he will be the next James Bond. It also brought a horrifying phenomenon, child soldiering in Africa, to Western audiences. But the Academy ignored it. All this happens in the shadow of last year's nominations, in which “Selma”, a film about the civil-rights movement which our reviewer found “remarkable”, was nominated but did not win Best Picture, as many thought it should. Neither its director, Ava DuVernay, nor its star, David Oyelowo, were recognised by the academy.Fingers are pointing at the Academy’s 6,000-odd voting members, 94% of whom are white. Spike Lee, whose “Do The Right Thing” is considered one of the great movies not to have won an Oscar, has lamented “another all-white ballot”; Don Cheadle, who got a Best Actor nomination in 2004 for “Hotel Rwanda”, has joked dryly about parking cars at the event. It is possible that the only black actor onstage will be Chris Rock, who is hosting. He has already said that the Oscars seem to have become a white equivalent of the Black Entertainment Television awards.These years are far from the first whitewashing in Oscars history: no actors from ethnic minorities were nominated in 1995 or 1997, or in an extraordinary streak between 1975 and 1980. Throughout the 20th century, 95% of Oscar nominations went to white film stars. It is an embarrassing anachronism that the prevalence of white Academy electors has been allowed to continue into the 21st century, a trend that the Academy's (black) president, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, has vowed to end.Could the “whiteout” be a statistical glitch? If the data were random, such a glitch would be hugely unlikely. A 2013 survey of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), an American union for film performers, suggests that 70% of its members are white. If all of the Guild’s members were equally likely to receive Oscar nominations, regardless of race, then over a two-year period 28 out of 40 nominations would be of white actors. The chances of no single person of colour being nominated across two ceremonies would be exceptionally small—even during a 15-year span, the odds of seeing at least one sequence of back-to-back whiteouts are around one in 100,000.
Quote from: eggsalad on March 03, 2016, 10:32:24 AMMinorities should reevaluate how they judge and enjoy movies.It's not a conscious act, for the most part. It's the same reason a lot of people dislike anime, foreign films, "black" comedies (and I'm speaking racially, not about dark humor), etc. There are movies that you undoubtedly don't relate to; if you're a white person, you probably relate to the vast majority of feature films; if you're not, you likely relate to a smaller number of those films. And in terms of staffing, it really is demonstrable that minorities are underrepresented in Hollywood.SpoilerQuoteThe issue has come to a head because over the past two years some films with a particular emotional resonance were passed over. The original “Rocky” (1976) won three Oscars, and Sylvester Stallone was nominated (though he did not win) for both acting and writing. Critics and fans alike have heaped praise on 2015's new addition to the Rocky franchise, “Creed”, which sees a black fighter as the hero. But the star and the black director, Michael B. Jordan and Ryan Coogler, will have to make do with fans' appreciation and more than $100m at the box office: the film's only nomination went to Mr Stallone, this time for Best Supporting Actor. “Straight Outta Compton”, a hit film about a black hip-hop group with a black director and producer, was nominated only for its screenplay, the writers of which were white. “Beasts of No Nation” delighted our reviewer, and fans of its star, Idris Elba, hope he will be the next James Bond. It also brought a horrifying phenomenon, child soldiering in Africa, to Western audiences. But the Academy ignored it. All this happens in the shadow of last year's nominations, in which “Selma”, a film about the civil-rights movement which our reviewer found “remarkable”, was nominated but did not win Best Picture, as many thought it should. Neither its director, Ava DuVernay, nor its star, David Oyelowo, were recognised by the academy.Fingers are pointing at the Academy’s 6,000-odd voting members, 94% of whom are white. Spike Lee, whose “Do The Right Thing” is considered one of the great movies not to have won an Oscar, has lamented “another all-white ballot”; Don Cheadle, who got a Best Actor nomination in 2004 for “Hotel Rwanda”, has joked dryly about parking cars at the event. It is possible that the only black actor onstage will be Chris Rock, who is hosting. He has already said that the Oscars seem to have become a white equivalent of the Black Entertainment Television awards.These years are far from the first whitewashing in Oscars history: no actors from ethnic minorities were nominated in 1995 or 1997, or in an extraordinary streak between 1975 and 1980. Throughout the 20th century, 95% of Oscar nominations went to white film stars. It is an embarrassing anachronism that the prevalence of white Academy electors has been allowed to continue into the 21st century, a trend that the Academy's (black) president, Cheryl Boone Isaacs, has vowed to end.Could the “whiteout” be a statistical glitch? If the data were random, such a glitch would be hugely unlikely. A 2013 survey of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG), an American union for film performers, suggests that 70% of its members are white. If all of the Guild’s members were equally likely to receive Oscar nominations, regardless of race, then over a two-year period 28 out of 40 nominations would be of white actors. The chances of no single person of colour being nominated across two ceremonies would be exceptionally small—even during a 15-year span, the odds of seeing at least one sequence of back-to-back whiteouts are around one in 100,000.
Those are the Oscars.
I don't know about you, but when I have trouble relating to a character, it's not because of race. I don't relate to Chris Tucker because of his style of humor, not because he's black.
White people having difficulty identifying with black humor has nothing to do with race of the presenter and entirely to do with the fact that black comedy exists as a genre because it is literally a different style that has to deal with black American culture.
Quote from: eggsalad on March 03, 2016, 10:54:39 AMThose are the Oscars.The Oscars are a statistical representation of the industry, and no statistics rebut the premise of the article.QuoteI don't know about you, but when I have trouble relating to a character, it's not because of race. I don't relate to Chris Tucker because of his style of humor, not because he's black. QuoteWhite people having difficulty identifying with black humor has nothing to do with race of the presenter and entirely to do with the fact that black comedy exists as a genre because it is literally a different style that has to deal with black American culture.So you don't like Chris Tucker's humor because it's related to black American culture, which you don't identify with. That's my exact point.
nothing about John Boyega's performance brought in black American culture. he's just black.
the fact that a person thinks that just because Boyega's black means that he is instantly more relatable than any white person, means that person is racist.
I'm not sure why you keep bringing up Jon Boyega, but black people enjoying seeing a black guy in Star Wars isn't racist in the slightest.
Is it really such a difficult concept to realize that a black person could relate more to another black person than a white person?
And again, the idea of relatability isn't even the crux of the discussion; the real purpose behind Abrams' actions is to confront head-on the tendency for a majority-white leadership in Hollywood to favor white actors and staff members.
Acting like his quality as a character has more to do with him being black than the fact he's just written better than Anakin or Obi-wan is placing undue emphasis on race and therefor is racist.
When personality, class, circumstance, and a whole host of other, more behavior defining aspects exist? I'd say if all those criteria are met,
I'm just refusing to recognize the idea that "I can't relate to white people" is a premise for any action.
That's just backwards. It should be most qualified,not special treatment.
To clarify the title, the article specifies that those considered for roles or jobs should be proportional, not necessarily resulting in total proportionality.
The fact that Egg is on about minority representation not mattering in the context of race makes me chortle, tbh
Quote from: Cindy on March 03, 2016, 12:37:24 PMThe fact that Egg is on about minority representation not mattering in the context of race makes me chortle, tbhwhy fam
Quote from: Ghost of Reach on March 03, 2016, 12:17:22 PMThat's just backwards. It should be most qualified,not special treatment.QuoteTo clarify the title, the article specifies that those considered for roles or jobs should be proportional, not necessarily resulting in total proportionality.
Quote from: HurtfulTurkey on March 03, 2016, 12:20:25 PMQuote from: Ghost of Reach on March 03, 2016, 12:17:22 PMThat's just backwards. It should be most qualified,not special treatment.QuoteTo clarify the title, the article specifies that those considered for roles or jobs should be proportional, not necessarily resulting in total proportionality.Still defeats the point of having the best qualified staff. That should be the only concern. not SJW nonsense.
Quote from: eggsalad on March 03, 2016, 12:46:30 PMQuote from: Cindy on March 03, 2016, 12:37:24 PMThe fact that Egg is on about minority representation not mattering in the context of race makes me chortle, tbhwhy famBecause would you not agree that more representation of women and trans individuals in mainstream media would be beneficial?
Nobody is doing that, and I have no idea why you keep saying anybody is. The sole reason I brought up Finn in my first reply was to demonstrate a recent film's use of an audience character.
They're not, though. The average black American (or Asian, or Latino, etc) has a significantly different experience than an average white American.
Quote from: Cindy on March 03, 2016, 12:57:03 PMQuote from: eggsalad on March 03, 2016, 12:46:30 PMQuote from: Cindy on March 03, 2016, 12:37:24 PMThe fact that Egg is on about minority representation not mattering in the context of race makes me chortle, tbhwhy famBecause would you not agree that more representation of women and trans individuals in mainstream media would be beneficial?Sure. Would #hollywoodsocis be appropriate, though? Encourage meaningful and good portrayal by seeing movies made with thought and avoiding movies full of annoying tropes. I'm not going to look at every movie without a trans person or woman main character and say "this would be better with these demographics somehow included", that's not how art works.And just because a character is trans does not mean I am going to be able to relate to them better than someone who's cis.
Quote from: eggsalad on March 03, 2016, 01:11:04 PMQuote from: Cindy on March 03, 2016, 12:57:03 PMQuote from: eggsalad on March 03, 2016, 12:46:30 PMQuote from: Cindy on March 03, 2016, 12:37:24 PMThe fact that Egg is on about minority representation not mattering in the context of race makes me chortle, tbhwhy famBecause would you not agree that more representation of women and trans individuals in mainstream media would be beneficial?Sure. Would #hollywoodsocis be appropriate, though? Encourage meaningful and good portrayal by seeing movies made with thought and avoiding movies full of annoying tropes. I'm not going to look at every movie without a trans person or woman main character and say "this would be better with these demographics somehow included", that's not how art works.And just because a character is trans does not mean I am going to be able to relate to them better than someone who's cis.But in a setting where it doesn't matter - I.E., Star Wars - wouldn't you argue that it is because of that exact reason that minorities should strive to be included?White men being the "default" is the current problem.
Quote from: Ghost of Reach on March 03, 2016, 01:02:51 PMQuote from: HurtfulTurkey on March 03, 2016, 12:20:25 PMQuote from: Ghost of Reach on March 03, 2016, 12:17:22 PMThat's just backwards. It should be most qualified,not special treatment.QuoteTo clarify the title, the article specifies that those considered for roles or jobs should be proportional, not necessarily resulting in total proportionality.Still defeats the point of having the best qualified staff. That should be the only concern. not SJW nonsense.No it doesn't. The article specifies that those considered for the roles should be proportional, not necessarily resulting in total proportionality.That means they're still scouting for the best qualified cast--they're simply going out of their way to give minorities a fair shake. That's ALL it is. Whether or not they actually make the cut isn't the subject.
-they're simply going out of their way to give minorities a fair shake. - That's already in play.
JJ Abrams now requires proportional representation of minorities on his staff
