So not just content being racist, you've now moved on to ablelist language?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Scarlett Johansson Says She Has the Right to Portray ‘Any Person’ She Wants
- Thread starter T'Chakku
- Start date
Alright, I'm going to change that before I get into trouble. Totally forgot the connotation it carries.
If you truly believe this, you are really living in blissful ignorance.
"I have a problem with her being black and not white, but I'm not being a racist."
Asperger's Syndome
Sonic
Racism
This alt account's journey in this thread has been fun.
Alright, I'll apologize for the ablelist, I forgot for a moment. I maintain all my other points though, the racism is merely a loud yet small part of the equation.
Already edited out the ablelist language. If I feel I'm being offensive I'll always apologize, but I don't feel my line of argument is in favor of racism, merely reasonable frustrations of fans.
And give me a sec, I'll post another pic if you want to prove I'm not some white dude with an alt account.
I Honestly don't even know how to articulate what i want to say. I'm genuinely curious as to what exactly people you think people are 'arguing in good faith' in regards to ariel. 'Man, I use to love ariel. But now that she's black, i just can't enjoy her character, or relate to her. I won't see this film. They ruined her design'.
You're comparing what is essentially a 90's corporate mascot to racism and vitriol that's been directed to an actress, who has not been seen in costume yet and that somehow her being black completely ruins the character, or film. I don't know what to say.
And nice with the autism insults. And stop with the 'I'll prove IM BLACK!'. It doesn't help legitimize your arguement, if anything it really shows just how much the point is missing you entirely.
You realize proving you are real only makes the whole thing sadder? Like at least if you were a troll you could always fall back on the idea that you don't actually believe all the stupid bullshit you are posting.
I think for fantasy/fiction roles sure, she should be allowed to play whatever role she wants. As should ALL actors. but if its based on a true story or set in certain historical settings where it doesn't make sense then nah.
What ALWAYS happens threads like these...
"I have a problem with a radically different color palette to a beloved character of mine", it's not racist. Ariel isn't even real, she's a Mermaid.
And here's another pic for those of you accusing me of being some white dude using black face.
"I have a problem with a radically different color palette to a beloved character of mine", it's not racist. Ariel isn't even real, she's a Mermaid.
And here's another pic for those of you accusing me of being some white dude using black face.
I'm VERY tempted to use this as my Avatar pic now.
Many thanks, now-banned alt account.
The fact she is still using "political correctness" tells me all I need to know
It's as simple as, if the character had physical or racial characteristics that are integral to the plot or who the character is, that shouldn't change. Nothing about Ariel fits the bill. As long as she's attractive and charming and can sing, she's probably good.
There are white male characters that I personally believe qualify, (like James Bond, since he's a physical representation of the old-school British government and is now a representative of a bygone era) but I also would love to see an Elba Bond-like character, or even an alternate universe or "modern reboot" Bond. Integral aspects of the character would change, so I can see people having a preference there, but so be it.
Ariel is nowhere near as complex in this regard. Who cares if she's black?
There are white male characters that I personally believe qualify, (like James Bond, since he's a physical representation of the old-school British government and is now a representative of a bygone era) but I also would love to see an Elba Bond-like character, or even an alternate universe or "modern reboot" Bond. Integral aspects of the character would change, so I can see people having a preference there, but so be it.
Ariel is nowhere near as complex in this regard. Who cares if she's black?
Of all the MCU actors I feared would one day be revealed to be pieces of shit assholes, she was at the bottom of the list. Life is full of surprises...
Last edited:
Omg, I totally forgot about this. Was Damon appropriating an Asian character too?
No.
Him and some other white guy play european soldiers who wind up in china for some reason I can't remember and wind up fighting monsters.
I don't know if appropriating is the right term so much as he's not really necessary to the story other than to make the film more palatable to audiences. The woman on the left should have been the main character.
You're banned now, but no one's even accused you of being a white guy lmao"I have a problem with a radically different color palette to a beloved character of mine", it's not racist. Ariel isn't even real, she's a Mermaid.
And here's another pic for those of you accusing me of being some white dude using black face.
You're really shit this.
You do know that she also starred in pretty good movies outside of the MCU?
can we talk about David Salle, interviewer for a sec because the shit he says is getting stuck in my craw real hard.
as if has made the interview available online, finally: https://www.asifmag.com/story/scarlett-johansson-david-salle-collaboration-with-as-if-magazine
Immediately I notice that this is the point where this stops being an interview entirely. Salle is soapboxing for this entire segment, and Johansson for her part is just kind of nodding quietly and not offering a bit of resistance to what is clearly a frustrated rant about women, minorities, and victims of sexual violence within the art community at large and the film-making community specifically. He's terrified that old institutions are being torn at for no reasons, instead of for the fact that time after time we find them being run by sexually and physically abusive old white rapists. He's prioritizing the sanctity of art over the safety and well-being of minorities in the system who have time and again fallen victim to structural discrimination and a class of well-connected and endlessly enabled super-predators with their hands on all the money. And he brushes this reaction against such people as 'biological' while mocking it as 'whacky hysteria.'
Johansson does herself no favors in the properly sourced interview, which the Daily Mail (surprise surprise) took every step to not only make it sound worse for her, but completely shrug off the enthusiastic participation of the male interviewer setting art itself up as the victim in the modern climate of culturally aware criticism. Apparently to people like him, all this is happening in a vacuum for no good reason. He's just paying some weaselly lip-service to 'sure it should be happening but not too much now.'
as if has made the interview available online, finally: https://www.asifmag.com/story/scarlett-johansson-david-salle-collaboration-with-as-if-magazine
Immediately I notice that this is the point where this stops being an interview entirely. Salle is soapboxing for this entire segment, and Johansson for her part is just kind of nodding quietly and not offering a bit of resistance to what is clearly a frustrated rant about women, minorities, and victims of sexual violence within the art community at large and the film-making community specifically. He's terrified that old institutions are being torn at for no reasons, instead of for the fact that time after time we find them being run by sexually and physically abusive old white rapists. He's prioritizing the sanctity of art over the safety and well-being of minorities in the system who have time and again fallen victim to structural discrimination and a class of well-connected and endlessly enabled super-predators with their hands on all the money. And he brushes this reaction against such people as 'biological' while mocking it as 'whacky hysteria.'
Johansson does herself no favors in the properly sourced interview, which the Daily Mail (surprise surprise) took every step to not only make it sound worse for her, but completely shrug off the enthusiastic participation of the male interviewer setting art itself up as the victim in the modern climate of culturally aware criticism. Apparently to people like him, all this is happening in a vacuum for no good reason. He's just paying some weaselly lip-service to 'sure it should be happening but not too much now.'
I actually had heard about his religious bullshit around GotG 1 so he was always high on my list.
So less misleading, but more that she had time to think about the answers/someone fed her what a proper response should have been.
I will say she plays a perfect alien, I totally bought her emotionless performance in Under the Skin. She should play more characters where she doesn't have to emote.
I mean, I don't like it but I understand it. I feel like a good number of them probably feel like Scarlett but haven't had their buttons pushed or their privileges checked or threatened. I think ScarJo actually meant well until people rightfully called her out. Whenever people face push back against their privilege they go into defense mode like she did and back themselves into double down corner. Maybe not everytime but it has to be like 90/10 lol. They want to have their cake and eat it too but that's not how it works in this instance when where millions can watch you and hear your words.
She's still a woman in Hollywood and unlike men who don't have to worry about being old, women have that clock ticking which is still the shitty Hollywood machine at work. Dudes can turn down shit all the time because ageism isn't going fuck their chances at landing roles. At the same time she is pretty high profile so I don't think abundance vs scarcity is a problem for her. ScarJo fucked up by going full on #TeamWhite and letting her ego get out of hand and control her here.
It doesn't matter if the film is out, Ariel fans already know she's going to be changed from her original design to a radically different one. Why did Sonic fans think the new design was terrible? Because it was so drastically different from the OG game design, that's the point. The most Sega would do is restore his design to the one fans remember from the games, in live action form. Ariel's pale skin tone was without a question a core part of her design, like literally any other fictional characters with recognizable color palettes.
Sonic fans would get mad if Sega made him Red even more than they already did with the small changes they gave him. Why? Because it's drastically different to what they remember, for no justifiable artistic reason. If Disney fans as a whole made as big a stink about say Princess and the Frog then they'd just be racist, but Ariel fans angry that the character they remember is being drastically changed design wise are within their right to be upset without being labeled racist, ala Sonic fans that were outraged. It's a matter of drastic design change, when fandoms are know to go off over petty changes all the time.
Yes absolutely racists latch onto this to engage in their culture wars, but I maintain they're a minority of fans who are otherwise arguing in good faith. And here's another pic to prove I'm not some white dude using black face.
Ah, the good ole' "I'm allowed to say absurdly stupid shit about race, equality, and inclusion because I'm black" post.
Do more harm than good, brehs.
At least she doesn't sell comments to people for Best Value ™ prices
Or is Anthony Mackie
User Banned (1 Month): Sexism; Prior severe infraction related to bigotry.
On top of this she's not even the hottest person in the MCU anymore. So she needs to reevaluate.
