Dinklage as Cyrano!?! He's a fine actor, but Cyrano was famous for having a huge nose, not being a dwarf... It's as if they made a movie about Rapunzel, but instead of having unnaturally long hair, she had huge boobs.
shareWell, the main theme of Cyrano de Bergerac is that he considers himself as physically unattractive, so he gives up before even trying. Cyrano is actually attractive, and it's not clear whether the problem it's lack of self-esteem, or that's just an excuse to rise barriers for other reasons. At the end, it seems that he wasn't as much in love with Roxane as he wished to think. The character can't be explained through simple lack of self-esteem, it's a more complex layered one, with elements of self-denial and fear of success, which is what makes the character so interesting and the work so good.
With Dinklage, the main theme doesn't change. Dinklage is a very attractive actor even though he's a dwarf. In my opinion, he's a good cast for Cyrano, even though a bit old. He would have been perfect 10-15 years ago.
There's much bigger issues. Having the (sadly) usual woke diversity template in an historical setting, that's a problem.
Yup
shareHow do you feel about Zoe Kravitz being cast as Catwoman? Not trying to pick a fight, genuinely wondering
shareEartha Kitt played Catwoman in 1966 already.
And then there was that awful movie with Halle Berry. It’s been done before. So I don’t think there would be backlash about Zoe being cast.
For me the ultimate Catwoman will always be Michelle Pffeifer. She had the best costume and the look.
I personally think Zoe would be great, she has the sex appeal.
For me the worst was Anne Hathaway by far, while she is pretty I don’t see her as femme fatale which is the quality all the others had since the beginning, being black or white.
I know you didn’t ask me. But I couldn’t help to chime in.
Zoe Kravitz as Catwoman in an already diverse USA?? I don't see a problem with that.
Zoe Kravitz as a 16th century European noble woman? Well, I can see more than a problem with that.
I think it's to a point where it can feel difficult to let almost anything like that slide anymore without having an urge to comment on it or become somewhat frustrated by it.
When I saw the poster for this film, for instance, I, as well, kind of instinctively found myself rolling my eyes at the casting. Which is a bit strange, really, as I have no strong feelings about this particular story. And this seems like it's probably a small, forgettable movie that most aren't going to see anyway. I doubt I would've thought twice about this sort of thing just a few years ago. Now, though, this sort of blatant hamfisted diversity is so constant that it's like every tiny instance of it has a straw-that-broke-the-camels-back effect on my impulses lol. I suspect that the feeling may be mutual for others.
Exacerbating the situation even further is the knowledge that if this type of race-switching were to occur in the other direction (place a white character in a place/time period where it wouldn't make historical sense, or casting a white person as a character who is already established as being a person of color), there'd be a passionate uproar over it, boycotts would happen, people may be fired, etc. Even if it was just the smallest, most insignificant part. Just mention being annoyed by something like this or Cat Woman, however, and people instantly begin vilifying you and treating you like an evil bigot, with seemingly zero attempt at trying to understand how this double standard could be bothersome for reasons other than racism.
That being said, I think Cat Woman is black in the Year One comic of Batman (which I hear this new film is loosely based on). So it seems like maybe that should get a pass lol.
The real problem is that Cyrano was supposed to be a very good and deadly swordsman. The reality is no dwarf is ever going to be a good swordsman when the reality is the reach of a swordsman is critical and a dwarf with arms nearly 1 foot shorter than the opponents is doomed. And when you see the fight scene with Dinklage taking out a group of assassins in a sword fight it just makes you want to laugh.
The wokeness of the film is not even near the top of the list of reasons that this film fails. The musical numbers in it are total crap. As if they weren't sure if they wanted pop music or Les Miserable type songs.. so they went somewhere in between and created garbage.
The part that doesn't make sense is making Christian black. So now both Cyrano and Christian are physically marginalized which defeats the whole purpose of the story.
But of course, this is 2021, so Christian being black will be dealt with as if it was totally common for a 17th century French nobleman to be black.
The change doesn't affect the story in any way. An intelligent, literate fellow who is self-conscious about a significant physical defect is too shy to approach the object of his affection. Does it matter if it's a huge nose, big floppy ears, crossed eyes, a harelip, or that he's really, really short? They all work the same in the context of the story.
Your crass Rapunzel example is somewhat different, as her hair served a story purpose-- it could act like a long rope.
Yes it does matter. It’s about a man with a big nose and a white French nobleman. This was written in 1897. This movie has nothing to do with Cyrano
shareYou are pointing out aspects of the story that aren't central to its meaning. James Bond is described in the novels as having a scar running down his cheek, yet that was never included in a film. Why? Because it doesn't matter.
The story of Cyrano de Bergerac centers around a man with a physical deformity who loves a woman, yet ends up writing love letters to her for another suitor. THAT is the meat and potatoes of the story. Making changes to the peripheral aspects of the story is mere window-dressing. You are caught up in meaningless details that don't affect the story one bit.
[deleted]