It can be stupid to necessarily assume that someone's chosen for reasons other than merit, but when things like diversity initiatives exist it's reasonable to consider the high likelihood. The reality is that if the casting was merit-based, you just wouldn't end up with a perfectly diverse cast every time, like you frequently see in media today, simply because minorities are minorities. This is what was happening before when casting was more merit-based, minorities didn't make the cut anywhere near as often because there was a significantly smaller pool of them to choose from, thus the likelihood of finding someone right for the part was lower.
I agree that non-merit-based casting can exist in other forms too like only getting roles because of your looks or name, but I oppose those methods as well, two wrongs don't make a right. At the very least, however, if you get a role because of your star power it tends to suggest you've at least enough merit to have earned the name.
I agree that Catwoman is perhaps one of the silliest examples of woke outrage, but in the case of Ariel in The Little Mermaid that actually was a problem, mainly because the actress had virtually no chemistry with the male lead (which happens often, with a few exceptions interracial couples seem to have less chemistry, and I think I know why), didn't have much acting talent, and really only had singing ability. All of her mermaid sisters were of different races, which made no sense, and they even had to awkwardly shoehorn in an explanation for why the Prince's parents were multiracial and he was white. Top it all off with Javier Bardem's bizarre casting and the whole thing felt forced and strange. The Beauty and the Beast remake sucked, but it had nothing to do with the cast, that was fine.
We don't even have many new movie stars anymore, why do you think that is?
reply
share
moviefanatic505 (6124)
3 days ago
I'm not totally buying that either. Yes diversity quotas exist. Thing is though of course the world is going to change. The world is more diverse than before. Therefore there are going to be more races to choose from than back in the 60s or 70s.
No getting role because of star power isn't merit based. Chris Pratt wasn't the best choice for Mario, he got that off his big name not on merit. Becoming a star also doesn't necessarily mean you are all that talented. You just happened to become a star. Sometimes does it mean you got it off merit? Yes but not always.
Nope the cast in beauty and the beast wasn't good either. Emma Watson wasn't a good Belle. It's not due to her acting ability she's got some acting talent. The best qualified person would be someone who can act and sing. It's the fact that you kneecap yourself because you are going beat for beat the same. Therefore hard to leave your own mark. Case in point the Disney Star wars. Adam Driver is a talented actor. Kylo Ren is a poor man's Vader. They gave him nothing to work with. I could make the argument about her the other way. Yes the chick who played Aerial singing was the selling pont over acting. Emma Watson couldn't sing whatsoever. The auto tune made that clear. So she wasn't the best choice for her role either yet no one complains.
It's a different era. You no longer need a big name to sell your film. Advertising exists everywhere with the Internet, where as back in the day only prole who went to movies or watched TV saw ads. Now people see it all on their phones. I personally prefer it. Ledger wasn't the star Nicholson was. He was a more inspired Joker because it wasn't coasting off starpower. Nicholson was good but Ledger was better in my book.
reply
share
Kevinology (35)
a day ago
An increase in diversity doesn't change the fact that minorities are still minorities (for now), the pool will necessarily be significantly smaller which means the chances of a diverse cast having as much merit as a merit-based cast is always going to be much, much lower. Especially when you factor in the different races/sexualities/identities, now it's not even PC to hire a non-trans person to play a trans person, so you're left with a choice of like three trans actors who might barely make the cut of an acceptable performer for your film/show.
Why wasn't Pratt the best choice for Mario? If not him, who? The voice actor who essentially voiced what today would be considered an offensive Italian stereotype? I agree that being a star doesn't always mean you earned it, but the vast majority of the time it does. How many actual movie stars in recent history do you believe didn't earn the name, can you point to a few?
Emma Watson was fine as Belle, her singing wasn't great but how many solo performances did she have to deliver? One? The most important parts were her acting, her beauty, and her chemistry with the Beast, all of which were adequate. Adam Driver had plenty to work with, his character was probably the best thing about the sequel trilogy. The worst part was, once again, the diversity hiring. They hired a token black guy they had no future plans for, they didn't know what to do with him in TLJ, so they hired a token Asian girl he had no chemistry with and forced them together.
Advertising exists everywhere because companies are forced to increase their advertising budget to compensate for a lack of big stars and DVD sales they can no longer rely on. Even then, movies that reach cinemas are not doing as well as they used to, which is why people are talking about the death of cinema. Companies are taking fewer chances because of this and relying on sequels and franchises, ironically feeding into the problem.
reply
share
moviefanatic505 (6124)
a day ago
It doesn't but you are going to see more diversity than back in the 60 or 70s. That's unavoidable. Lots of people are angry and bitch and moan that Hollywood isn't like it was in the 70s.
Pratt wasn't the right choice for many reasons. Why blow so much money on getting a huge name like him? Mario is a brand and big regardless of who is voicing him. Why not cast more so based on who you think has an inspired voice that you could hire cheaper and spend more money on the project? He got hired because of his name period. He's also hot right now. Pay attention to when someone gets hot. They place them everywhere because they are a hot ticket. Tom Holland was casted as Nathan Drake because of his trend of being many places due to Spiderman. Do I think Holland was a great pick for Drake? Not at all. One too young, second his build is far too lean and scrawny. You want someone along the lines of Glen Powell. The rock is a star do I think he earned it? No I do not. What's a role he did that you are like man only he could play that role? Arnold had the terminator. Sly had Rambo and Rocky. Jessica Alba was one also. Hot? Yes, that talented of actress? No.
I disagree on Emma Watson as Belle. Her acting was fine but you could find just as talented of an actress who could sing much better. It doesn't matter if it was one song, that's part of the performance. And there are other performers who could could have done it better. I disagree completely about Adam Driver being the best thing in the sequel trilogy. Everything about the character was derivative of Vader. Finn actually had the most potential in the entire cast. His story was original. A storm trooper turned good. What character is that ripping off? Rey is a great value Luke and Kylo is a great value Vader. They did nothing with Finn but he's a better character than both Rey and Kylo full stop. Much more story potential since he's original. Disney had no vision. They kept pulling it in too many directions.
Well mcu bud. That's the decline of cinema. Once studios saw that the connected universe thing was a thing they saw it was more about quantity than quality. The dark knight being what we aspired to do was much better. Aspire to be a fresh unique film rather than a corporate toy commerical. The Batman is going back to basics by being awesome. A unique vision and style, no sequel baiting with great cinematography, music and characters. The penguin only furthers this also. Reeves gets Batman like no other film director has before. No MCU film matches the cinematography, music or how much was done in camera. No overuse of cgi. You know kind of like why dark knight was so good... The Batman gets the fundamentals missed by the MCU. MCU needs to be bland. Why? So they can churn them out in droves. Dark knight or the batman are meticulously crafted. They aren't cookie cutter.
reply
share