MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > What do you think of the sudden trend of...

What do you think of the sudden trend of revisionist period pieces casting people of color as historically white people?


I assume Hamilton kicked this off. Feels forced and heavy handed to me, I’m all for diversifying casts but why forecefully inject minorities in historically white roles simply to be “inclusive?” It just seems silly and over the top to me, and is distracting.

I should mention I HATE musicals but found Hamilton tolerable. I still think the deliberately diverse casting is misguided and unnecessary. Make more films about all of the rich history of those other cultures, rather than putting them in the roles of colonial slave owners to make an edgy statement.

It also seems like EVERY single streaming series/show has a flamboyant gay male character who checks every box on the list of cliche stereotypes; gay best friend, gives relationship advice to female lead, strong feminine accent and “sassy” diva behavior. This has to be offensive to the LGBT community.

Likewise it seems like advertisements are really laying it on thick in their attempts to appear supportive of certain communities. Empty gestures and insincere virtue signaling are patronizing and to me worse than not doing anything.

reply

The desperate shoehorning in of black people into European history comes across as needy virtue signalling by middle class producers eager to show they are politically correct whilst knowingly lying and misrepresenting history in favour of a pretend historic diversity.

African history and mythology seems to be perceived by producers as lacking and uninteresting compared to European history, which is a shame, I’d love to see another version of Shaka Zulu for example, but instead they cast a black actress as Anne Boelyn in yet another tale about the Tudors. 🙄

reply

You bring up some very good points here that I had not thought of. Why aren’t producers interested, in the most part, in doing period pieces set in Africa? There are unlimited great stories to choose from too.

reply

What would be the political profit in doing period pieces set in Africa?

I mean: imagine you make a movie set in Africa, just black actors. And you have a story with mythological elements, or fantasy ones, or more realistic ones... how does that make white males feel guilty? As a show, it would be quite pointless.

The main goal in modern media is to make whites feel guilty, there's some religious belief in some white original sin, not to say guilty people are easy to control. Shows and movies enforce that feeling, the same as media. Great stories are secondary. The question is: how that show make whites feel guilty and make them accept to be replaced? If you can't answer that question, your idea is useless.

reply

The entire concept your describing sounds so sinister. I don’t watch many modern moves at all so it’s hard for me to judge. I can only say it would be nice if you were wrong.

reply

Or do something like Ran, which was based on William Shakespeare's King Lear but set in Japan, something similar could be done in African countries rather than demand the audience pretend Cleopatra was a Sub-Saharan African, or that Scotland was multicultural in the 11th century with its king and a black man.

reply

Well, it has worked before I have to admit. In the book Forrest Gump, Bubba was white but in the movie he was changed to African American. Another example is Shawshank Redemption. In the book Red was white but Morgan Freeman was cast and he gave an amazing performance. I admit though I didn't like it though in the show Once Upon a time where not only is Sir Lancelot cast as an African American but Merlin is too and drastically changed to be some young guy in his 20s instead of old like he always was. Then again King Arthur sucked in that show for wanting to kill all the main characters.

reply

No hard and fast rules, there are exceptions to everything. But my take on it is this.

It depends. If it's done for reasons of virtue signaling -- and when that happens it usually *is* glaringly obvious -- then no. Might be a good story, but the woke stench ruins it.

That's probably *the* single most important thing, IMO. And I'll add that it's nothing new. Hollywood has always had people who think just because they can spin good yarns they have important moral lessons to convey and presume to lecture the rest of us. And they've always been clumsy at it, thus the stench. This stuff is just the latest flavor of that horsecrap.

If it's a fictional character but using the non-White actor violates the historical context, no. If the movie is set in WW1, the US military must be segregated and you can't have Blacks and Whites serving together.

If the character is a real historical person, then absolutely not. There's a duty of truth owed to real persons, even if they're dead.

If it's a legendary character, questionable but possible. If you want to cast Denzel Washington as Hamlet or Macbeth, go for it. I really wouldn't give a shit. But understand, that is cultural appropriation. If you do that, let's hear no complaints from you if someone remakes Roots and casts an Asian or White as Kunta Kinte.[*]

If it introduces, alters, or eliminates a racial element in the work, probably not. (Of course, always will to some degree.) There's no reason you couldn't do Death Of A Salesman with Don Cheadle as Willy Loman. But if you do, Linda Loman should be Black too. Otherwise you're introducing an element (mixed marriage) not present in the original work.

The exception to all of the above is if the casting is done for reasons of satire, parody, etc. I can only imagine a remake of Mandingo with all of the characters race-swapped; all Black roles played by Whites and vice versa.

[*] To be clear, Alex Haley was no William Shakespeare, and I'm not implying that he was.

reply

If the character is a real historical person, then absolutely not. There's a duty of truth owed to real persons, even if they're dead.

I'd add to that: if the character is a fictional one, but it's replacing a real historical person, then absolutely not.

That happened in the last Battlefield game, for example. They included Operation Gunnerside. However, since the real team were white males, they replaced the real people with females. This was the real team:
http://historycollection.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/BBC-The-Gunnerside-Team-Safely-Back-in-Britain-after-their-successful-mission-1024x576.jpg

Risk your fucking life for your country, just to be written off, because you're not politically correct anymore.

Or The Aeronauts, where they replaced Henry Coxwell with a female. Again, you risk your life, and when Hollywood makes the movie you don't even appear, because you committed the highest sin in the woke gospel: to be white and not to have a vagina.
https://moviechat.org/tt6141246/The-Aeronauts/5dfcade982f2821f90dbb4df/The-REAL-story-was-about-two-men-They-erased-Henry-Coxwell-and-replaced-him-with-a-woman

reply

Yep. It's rewriting history.

My pet peeve on this goes beyond the current topic (race and gender). So many in the entertainment industry believe that if a character was a real person who is now dead, they can do whatever they like with absolutely no regard for the truth. It's bad enough when movies like Donnie Brasco, Quiz Show, Searching For Bobby Fischer, et cetera portray real living persons and alter them drastically for dramatic reasons, but at least then those people can speak out and try to set the record straight. But the dead can't do that. So we see Jack Swigert (Kevin Bacon's character in Apollo 13) portrayed as almost but not quite up to the job, when the truth was that he was one of NASA's most qualified men as CM pilot and 13's prime crew considered themselves lucky to have him on their backup team. I mentioned Roots earlier, and I'll say that Tom Lea (Chuck Connors's character in the miniseries) got far shabbier treatment than he deserved. And how many times has Fred Noonan been (wrongly) portrayed as Amelia Earhart's drunken navigator?

But hey, it's show biz, folks! They're dead, so fuck 'em. Right? Nope, not to me.

reply

I wouldn't mind a black Pinocchio.

reply

Bad goy

Don't you know that noticing things is racist, goy?

reply

You hit the nail on the head.

We need to focus on Jewish actors portraying Christian historical figures.

I nominate you to do the foreskin checks.

reply

It's disgusting double standards. If you're not allowed to play a gay or trans person unless you are, then I'll kindly ask that black people do not play white characters/historical figures.

It's like Ariel is going to be black in the new Little Mermaid. Why???

reply

Anyone who says straight people can’t play gay characters is an idiot.

reply

Next it would be only Kryptonians should play as Superman.

reply

Indeed.

Seriously though, I feel the same way about straight and non trans actors playing gay and trans roles as I do about a black actor playing a character that may have been portrayed as white previously. Best actor for the role, simple as that for me.

It strikes me as interesting that this thread began about historical accuracy and then certain posters started complaining about the little bloody mermaid being portrayed by a black actor. It’s a mermaid for Pete’s sake! Who’s to say what skin tone a supernatural figure like a mermaid would have? Just as likely to be green, so who cares of the ethnicity of the actress portraying her?

At the end of the day this is hardly a new phenomenon. Did everyone suddenly have collective amnesia about The Wiz, like 40 frickin years ago? That was a retelling of a “white” story with a completely black cast. The universe didn’t collapse then and I hardly think it will now.

reply

And black Dr. Doolittle, and black Nick Fury, and black Princess and the Frog, etc.

That said, what would happen when a white guy is cast as Spawn or Blade or Black Panther... would the universe collapse? There might be some double standards here, but we wouldn't know. Nobody dared to try.

reply

I read that Hamilton's mother was half black and he was passing for white. A very common practice in those days.

Most people don't know history. An excellent start is "The Black Tudors" about black people in Europe during the time of King Henry VIII.
https://www.amazon.com/Black-Tudors-Untold-Miranda-Kaufmann/dp/1786071843

reply

The mother of Hamilton was half-British, half-French. Even the wokepedia says so
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rachael_Fawcett

The black Tudors.... well....
😂😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂😂

There's books like this, once in a while. I've heard of black Beethoven, black Mozart, black Julius Caesar, black Cleopatra, and some others I can't remember now.

It's funny how they always pick the good guys 😄. They create a theory about black Julius Caesar, instead of black Caligula or black Nero. If you can choose, pick the best!!! It'd be fun to have a theory about a black Hitler, though 😂😂😂

reply

> I've heard of black Beethoven, black Mozart, black Julius Caesar, black Cleopatra, and some others I can't remember now.

Heard those too. I've also seen claims that the secret power behind Wall Street is a black woman who is a trillionaire (that's not a typo), and that blacks in ancient Africa traveled in airplanes.

reply

"blacks in ancient Africa traveled in airplanes."

WE WUZ AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERZ

reply

You sound like a racist.

reply

Wow, you're not as dumb as everyone says.

reply

I'm glad you're finally confirming that you are a racist.

reply

Never denied it, shill.

Now you can collect your good goy shekels.

reply

Most racists don't admit the truth even to themselves.

reply

And most shills don't even realize they're useful idiots.

reply

Most posters who have nothing of substance to contribute resort to insults and trolling.

reply

>Most posters who have nothing of substance to contribute resort to insults and trolling.

Psychological projection is a defense mechanism by which a person subconsciously denies his or her own attributes, thoughts, and emotions, which are then ascribed to the outside world, usually to other people. Thus, projection involves imagining or projecting the belief that others originate those feelings.

reply

You already admitted that you're a racist troll which means you have nothing of substance to contribute.

reply

Where did I ever say I was a troll?

You just don't like that I present facts you can't refute, so you whine.

reply

All racist posters are trolls.

Nothing factual about your ignorant stereotypes based on your severe lack of knowledge.

reply

Thank you for your input Shlomo.

How many shekels did that post earn you?

reply

You must be an anti-Semite, too.

reply

You're two for two

Now go be a shill elsewhere

reply

Link(s)?

reply

> Link(s)?

I saw both of those several years ago, and if I saved the URLs I doubt I still have the bookmarks.

As I recall, the trillionaire black female titan claim had an entire domain devoted to it. The claim seemed to be entirely in earnest, although one can never be absolutely sure of such things, per Poe's Law. But it was clear that many of those commenting in the site's guestbook accepted the claim as true.

As for blacks and airplanes, see "controverial ideas" here -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saqqara_Bird

What I saw was a news article stating that some black schoolteachers were, as a result of this "theory," teaching black schoolchildren that blacks in ancient Africa flew in airplanes. I've forgotten which paper it was but it was one of the larger and established ones, something like NYT, WaPo, etc.

Sorry I don't have more information for you. If you Google and find anything, let me know.

reply

Wikipedia has a tendency to twist the truth when it comes to "controversial" subjects. I've repeatedly read deliberate misrepresentations by them.

The Saqqara Bird article is no exception. It only appears someone in Ancient Egypt may have tried to understand flight by observing birds, not that they had planes. It sounds reasonable. It's irrelevant if it works since they may have been looking for answers to the mystery of flight. Leonardo DaVinci did the same thing and none of his contraptions worked. Artists tend to be very curious. Or it could be just a toy.

Without a link, I"m going to assume the class is only teaching that Ancient Egyptians were trying to find a way to fly. If true, good for them! Curiosity is a beautiful thing. It leads to discovery.

"the secret power behind Wall Street is a black woman who is a trillionaire"

Nope. That's not what I read.

First of all, there are no trillionaires. It appears you're referring to Suzanne Shank who has done over two trillion dollars in transactions. All the articles I've just read only point out someone who has succeeded in finance on Wall Street by running an extremely successful company. It's meant to inspire those who wouldn't normally choose that career path. She is very impressive.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/cherylrobinson/2018/06/01/how-this-female-engineer-pivoted-to-become-a-top-wall-street-leader/?sh=5134b91c4b0e

BTW, I actually do save URLS. LOL!

reply

> That's not what I read.

This is what you read (what I said that you replied to):

"I've also seen claims that the secret power behind Wall Street is a black woman who is a trillionaire (that's not a typo), and that blacks in ancient Africa traveled in airplanes."

> First of all, there are no trillionaires.

I never said there were. I said that someone else had made the claim. The site did not claim that the (unnamed by them) woman had handled trillions. It claimed that she was a trillionaire. It is an absurd claim, and I said so in the site's guestbook at the time, as did several other people. But some will believe whatever they want to.

> Without a link, I"m going to assume

... with no evidence to support your assumption ...

> the class is only teaching that Ancient Egyptians were trying to find a way to fly. [...] It appears you're referring to Suzanne Shank who has done over two trillion dollars in transactions.

No, the news story and the web site were as I've stated them to be. For all I know the teachers got their ideas from Wikipedia (which I don't consider reliable, but it's convenient to point to). Given an excuse, you're going to assume whatever makes you feel good.

> BTW, I actually do save URLS. LOL!

Oh.

reply

"I said that someone else had made the claim."

I know what you wrote, but without a link there is no proof backing it up. Therefore, I'm going to assume you misread it or have a false memory.

"the news story and the web site were as I've stated them to be. "

Once again, no proof. It doesn't have to be the original, but I want a source which backs up what you wrote. I prefer to read it for myself.

reply

> I'm going to assume you misread it or have a false memory.

It's impossible for one person to know with certainty what's in another's mind, especially on the Internet. But from what I've seen you write elsewhere, I'm very confident that if the site I could not provide a link for had asserted things supporting your political philosophies you would not make this assumpton.

Furthermore, you not only disregard things you don't like, you invent things to take their place then accept those inventions:

I"m going to assume the class is only teaching that Ancient Egyptians were trying to find a way to fly.


You simply believe whatever you choose to believe. I'm not going to waste my time attempting to convince such a person of anything. What follows is not an attempt to do so but is for the benefit of anyone else reading this.

I know the trillionaire claim happened. But the information about Shank, if accurate (I haven't looked at the link) lends credibility to this. It's quite plausible that some might misunderstand the story, then put their incorrect ideas on the Internet.

As for students being taught that ancient African blacks flew airplanes, here is another article discussing this: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg13518291-600-pharaohs-flying-machine-runs-into-turbulence/

reply

Your link's author took the original document out of context. The African-American Baseline Essays is basically presenting Ancient Egyptian science and religion from their worldview which gives a very good understanding of Ancient Egyptian culture along with their many achievements and contributions.

There is no mention of an airplane in the original text. It discusses only gliders and mentions the possibility of it being a small model glider from several sources including the Egyptian Ministry of Culture which had established a special research committee to study it.

Link to "The African-American Baseline Essays " Yes, I read all 140 pages! The glider info is on pages 52-54
https://www.pps.net/cms/lib/OR01913224/Centricity/Domain/179/pdfs/be-af-sc.pdf

If something makes no sense, then I question it. I already know trillionaires don't exist, therefore the veracity of your comment became suspect.

Your comment about blacks flying airplanes is also incorrect. See above link.

What I did is called critical thinking skills.

"I haven't looked at the link"
I'm going to assume you were afraid to learn your statement is inaccurate.

Anyway, the baseline essays are interesting to me and I found more for Asian-Americans, Native-Americans and Hispanic-Americans which I intend to read. Yes, I did bookmark the link.
http://www.pps.k12.or.us/depts-c/mc-me/essays-5.php

reply

You forgot to mention the Black Prince, who was obviously black because he was called that, absolutely nothing to do with his armour! Honest! 😂

reply

Yes, people who pass for white tend to lie. That's the whole point!

During the 1700s, European men normally left their wives in Europe while they worked in the Caribbean which was an inhospitable place at that time. Realistically and historically, children born to a European man living there would normally have a black or mixed-raced mother. Add to the fact that Hamilton was illegitimate too and the possibility he was racially mixed is very strong since European men rarely married black women in the 1700s.

Along with others, John Adams called Hamilton a "creole bastard" and Abigail Adams said he was a "vain, ambitious man aspiring to govern when it was his duty to submit". Newspapers record his repeatedly being called a "mustee" aka: mixed race.

Obviously, you don't read books nor know history. Your earlier comment about the "Spanish Princess" is ignorant since many Moors lived in Spain. Both Catalina and her husband were black as portrayed in the series.

Furthermore, black trumpeter John Blanke was employed by both King Henry VII and King Henry VIII.

There were always blacks in Europe and vice versa. You have to move away from the old TV shows and movies and open a book now and then.

reply

Obviously, you don't read books nor know history. Your earlier comment about the "Spanish Princess" is ignorant since many Moors lived in Spain. Both Catalina and her husband were black as portrayed in the series.

About the Spanish Princess, here you have a thread I wrote explaining the historical sources and why the series was bullshit. Educate yourself:

https://moviechat.org/tt8417308/The-Spanish-Princess/5d25d0df22723612242bac83/About-the-blackwashing-and-the-historical-sources

---

Regarding the black Hamilton, black Tudors, black Beethoven, black Mozart, black Julius Caesar, the flat Earth and other bullshit, I'm not gonna waste time with that non-sense.

reply

"Her ethnicity is unknown, she could have been Arab or Black**."

You're extremely confused!

Your article link never mentions "Arabs". Only Moors or "Moorish". I have no idea what a "Moorish" is and it's an odd term.

A Moor and Arab are not the same thing.

It's common knowledge she and her husband were Moors. Even your link refers to them as Moors, therefore your writing that no one knew their "ethnicity" is incorrect. Moors were black. That's common knowledge, too.

BTW, you're using the term "ethnicity" interchangeably with "race". They're not the same thing.

Of course, there were blacks (Moors) in Europe. Your own article mentions this. They were not all slaves. Your own article mentions a favorite musician in King Henry VIII's court whom I mentioned in an earlier comment.

Hamilton was a West Indian. There were and are practically no 100% Europeans in St. Kitts. Odds are he and his mother were mixed race ( quadroon or octoroon). He was repeatedly called such by other people like John Adams so the possibility is realistic.

You have no objection when cowboys in old movies and series were all portrayed as white when 30% were either black or Mexican. Biblical films routinely portrayed people as WASPs which is laughable.

Take your racist double standard and shove it, KKX.

reply

It's common knowledge she and her husband were Moors. Moors were black. That's common knowledge, too.

The term "moor" is a derogatory term that refers to Muslims, frequently to Muslim invaders in Europe. In ancient times the term meant the black inhabitants of Mauritania (in Latin, 'maurus'), but during the Middle Ages it became an insult used to refer to Muslim invaders.

Etymology != meaning.

The original meaning was abandoned, to the point the term "moro" has 12 entries in the Royal Spanish Academy dictionary (considered the official one), and not a single one of them refers to blacks, not even as a secondary meaning:
https://dle.rae.es/moro

Even your link refers to them as Moors, therefore your writing that no one knew their "ethnicity" is incorrect.

"Moors" weren't a ethnic group. Again: it was a derogatory term to refer to Muslim invaders. Most Muslim invaders in the Iberian Peninsula were Arabs, there was a significant amount of Berbers and very tiny percentage of blacks. The same than the Christian Crusaders weren't an homogeneous ethnic group, neither were the Muslim invaders.

Your article link never mentions "Arabs". Only Moors or "Moorish". I have no idea what a "Moorish" is and it's an odd term.

It's not an odd term. It's an English adaptation of the Spanish term "morisco", which refers the Moors that stayed in the Iberian Peninsula after the Reconquista.
https://dle.rae.es/morisco

BTW, you're using the term "ethnicity" interchangeably with "race".

In the context of the Muslim invasion of the Iberian Peninsula, it can be considered interchangeable.

---

Regarding your fantasies of a black Hamilton, again, that's not even serious debate. It's just a woke fantasy.

reply

I suggest you visit a museum or read a book.

Moorish troops with captives, Cantigas de Santa Maria, 13th C. AD
https://images3.imgbox.com/0b/53/7ZFyaHPt_o.jpg

The Moorish Chief 1878 Eduard Charlemont, Austrian
https://philamuseum.org/collections/permanent/102792.html

You can't handle the truth. Hamilton was a West Indian immigrant. Illegitimate. And according to John Adams, his wife and others: mixed-race.

reply

Interesting. I'd always just assumed that "moor" was a contraction of "moreno" (brown.)

reply

It seems that it's related, but in the opposite way. It's "moreno" the one that comes from "moro/moor"

http://etimologias.dechile.net/?moreno

reply

It's part of a fairly brazen agenda by a certain group of people.

Some might say six million.

They say it's all just 'colorblind casting' but if they cast Ryan Gosling as Martin Luther King, buildings would be burnt down. There is a very clear anti-white agenda in every facet of media.

reply

Where the hell did your 6 million figure come from?

reply

It's a number near and dear to 'those people'.

reply

Ah an antisemite and a racist, what a gem

reply

Yeah

And

reply