How is this movie seemingly all white in Southern California ???

Yeah, I kind of wondered that myself. But keep in mind that the Mexican population wasn't allowed a voice until Prop 227(ESL)passed in 1998. Before that, Mexican families were basically kept out of mainstream in California. It's different now though fortunately, and kudos to California for their excellent progress on immigration. The movie portrays very well the SB scenario in the late 1970's. Much like the movie The Graduate portrayed Berkeley and Santa Barbara in the 1960's.

Do you think most middle class white people in 1979 hung around with blacks? If white people make a film, they are going to make it according to their vision aren't they. Not the vision of whiny black people who believe whatever white people do is subject to black approval.

P.S. The movie sucked anyway. So don't worry about it.

Because it's Hollywood, the most racist sexist industry in the world yet filled with liberals. Go figure.

Warlock: What, like you're a big fan of the Fett?
McLane: No, I was always more of a Star Wars guy.

Who would even THINK of such an utterly witless remark? Who cares? The movie was great. The acting was great, the story was great, the dialog was great. And there WERE black people in it, but since you've already made it your "deciding factor not to indulge in this movie" of course you wouldn't know that. What on earth do you expect? Rosa Parks sitting in the back seat of the car in every scene so you could rejoice in solidarity when she finally gets to ride in the front? Or perhaps Mexicans wearing sombreros performing in the punk rock clubs? It's not 1954, you know. You can rest assured that there is diversity without having to relentlessly jam it into every artistic expression.

Santa Barbara 1979 are you serious? It is all white because Santa Barbara in 1979 was all white. You cant just throw historical facts out the window. Even so, there are people of color in this film albeit few.

"Your set up is getting tired, roll ze film"

As people have already remarked, there were tiny roles for a couple of people of color. There was the black man whom Dorthea met outside a bar/party and invited to one of her "family" dinners, and also one of the 2 firemen who put out the fireball of her car was Latino; he was also invited to dinner, and attended. But, I have to agree, this was a movie about a particular area of Southern Cal, Santa Barbara, in 1979, and is an autobiographical story, so has little to do with issues of diversity and inclusion. I'm sure it was quite true to the times, and to the white middle class characters who populated the life of the writer-director. I thought it was a very fine film, though slower than most would like. Definitely about character development, not about action. Like 'Moonlight', it was focused on those with whom the main characters would interact with on a mostly daily basis. I didn't wonder "Where are all the white people?" when I saw 'Moonlight'. I celebrated that the casting and character development were extraordinarily true to the place and time. Moonlight was my favorite film of 2016, though that doesn't make some other great films, which may have featured mostly -- or all -- white casts, less good because they featured few of any non-white characters.

Don't expect white people to stop making films about their experiences, and don't expect every film to celebrate the grand diversity of peoples in this country; some will, some won't. The landscape of filmmaking is changing, and continues to be more diverse and spectacular. If a filmmaker purposely omits the spectrum of people who made up a place and time and experience, then that may be something to complain about. Otherwise, please see films based on their actual merits, and not solely on your standards for what seems right in 2017.

I am guessing you are a person who lives in present day Southern California with no inkling of the area's past. From an individual born in a Los Angeles suburb (Torrance) in 1974 and was a witness to all the awful drug wars of the 1970s/1980s (You kids nowadays have no inkling of how bad the violence was back then), let me tell you how ridiculous this comment is.

1) Los Angeles is one of the most racially divided cities in history. Despite the tolerance of many of its citizens even during my childhood in the 1980s, there is a reason that there is a Korea Town, Little Tokyo, Little Ethiopia, Little Armenia, Filipino Town and so many other cultural variants. Certain races and cultures were ONLY ALLOWED to live in certain regions of the city. These were not created for tourist reasons. These areas were created because this is where these people were forced to live 50-70 years ago and despite what we like to think, people usually like to live near people of their own race back in those days. Many of these areas (Little Saigon is another good example of this) were created because of this human need to protect one's culture and identity.

2) Santa Barbara is a historically white area about 90 miles north of Los Angeles. If the movie wants to be historically accurate, you are not going to find a lot of people of color in that region during that time.

3) The problem I have always had about this "racial diversity" issue in Hollywood is that the argument is vaild when addressing the industry. But going after INDIVIDUAL directors is where I draw the line. Hollywood needs to hire more black, Asian and Hispanic directors as well as actors. It does seem to be improving if ever so slowly. I have no problem with keeping the pressure on the industry in terms of this problem. But getting upset about Tim Burton not casting people of color in MISS PEREGRINE'S HOME FOR PECULIAR CHILDREN or attacking Martin Scorsese because all the main characters in his movie are white is ridiculous. A good director reflects the world that he knows. If you force a person that did not grow up with a specific culture to write about it, all you are going to GET IS TERRIBLE FILMS. And that is where we are heading right now. It is like making Mexican born Alfonso Cuaron do a film about the oil industry in Alaska. The movie will likely suck because his experience has nothing in common with the people who live there. So please focus your arguments on the real problem (The corporations and the industry) instead of picking out individual people who have a specific or unique vision. It will not make the industry better.

I hope you didn’t also refuse to watch Moonlight and Fences because of their lack of racial diversity. Supporting racial diversity in movies doesn’t mean only watching movies in which multiple races are represented. It also means supporting movies that explore the experiences of people of one race, when that’s more honest.