Quite nice. And bold to cast racially indifferent.
The movie is a bit too rich for my taste but it has a cheerful air to it and that's nice in this age. I do hope Ianucci makes some political satire soon again though.
shareThe movie is a bit too rich for my taste but it has a cheerful air to it and that's nice in this age. I do hope Ianucci makes some political satire soon again though.
shareIf by "bold" you mean "idiotic", I agree.
So you are a racist! Good to know.
shareRight, that is the only possible explanation. It couldn't possibly be because having so many non-white characters in a period movie is an anachronism, or because a white character with a black mother takes me out of the movie just like seeing a cell phone would. It just HAS to be racism.
The clothes are period-appropriate, the decor is period-appropriate, the technology is period-appropriate, but the cast? No need at all for it to be period-appropriate. I am sure there is an alternate universe somewhere where this makes sense. In this one, not so much...
I have to agree. I hated it too and stopped the movie after ten minutes. It does make us racists, though.
shareNot sure what side you are on anymore...
I've been accused of being racist for objecting to forced diversity casting in historical movies.
Not wanting to see tons of non-white characters in a movie that takes place in 19th century England doesn't make me a racist.
Not wanting to see female marines in a movie about the invasion of Normandy in 1944 doesn't make me a misogynist.
Not wanting to see two men making out in the middle of Times Square in broad daylight in a movie that takes place in the 1930s doesn't make me a homophobe.
Not wanting to see Napoleon talking on a cell phone in a historical movie doesn't make me a Luddite.
Interesting. So you're a paedophile.
shareWhy cast racially different people for a period piece when the original book has them being ALL WHITE???
I mean:
David himself is Indian
Agnes is Black
Mr. Wicklow is Chinese
!!!!!!!!
This is ticking diversity quotas in a movie, and I CAN'T STAND IT!
Newflash, filmmakers: there were no such people in London in the 19th Century, certainly not to the extent shown here!
They were cast to play characters that are white. Because blackface is inappropriate, they were not made up to look white.
What's the problem?
The problem is they were set, by an author of the time, in which such races were practically non-existent on London streets, of the time. If they were around, they would be in very minor roles, certainly not the ones described in the book.
Revisionism is a BAD thing, especially in historical context.
What part of "they play characters that are white" don't you understand? They are not playing characters of color.
It's time to face the truth: we live in a colored world, time to embrace reality and stop the racist crap.
Face the truth that Victorian London wasn't as multicultural as portrayed. Or look it up if you’re ignorant of history. There’s nothing wrong with people who love literature and history wanting the time period portrayed as it was, and characters cast as they were written.
shareWould you have a problem with casting actors in their sixties to play characters who are in their teens?
Would you have a problem with casting male actors to play characters who are female?
Would you have a problem with casting overweight actors to play characters who NEED to be in good shape in the story (athletes, for example)?
If you answer "yes" to any of those questions, then please explain how in your mind casting non-white actors to play white characters makes sense, but my examples don't.
If you answer "no" to my questions, then please explain what possible purpose would it serve to do any of those things.
If your character is a supermarket cashier in a big western city in 2020, it could be played by pretty much anyone of any race, gender, age and body type, within reason - someone in their early teens wouldn't do. If your character has to be a male Japanese Olympic marathon runner, you have to look for a male actor of East Asian ancestry who is not much younger than 20-something and not much older than 40-something, and who has a slim body. Oprah Winfrey couldn't play that role, regardless of how fantastic a performance she could give in terms of conveying the emotions of the character.
This is really not rocket science.
They should have been .It's been done.An actor has to most of all look right.
shareBlackface is no different from putting on a false beard. Same goes for Whiteface An actor first of all.has to look right.
shareIn this day and age "bold" would be to cast time-and-place appropriate actors. Sorry, but this whole thing of race-swapping period pieces feels about as safe as can be.
shareI was totally irritated by David being Indian and no one mentioned it and got more irritated, when I realized that Tilda Swinton is the sister of his father, I got even more confused. I only finally realized its an artistic choice when Mrs Steerforth was introduced. Imo Iannucci should have make it more by earlier mix ups.
shareThe movie failed because of the diversity cast.
share