white sex bomb vs mature black woman - The Girl with All the Gifts (2017) Discussion

[–] Frantastic_Miss_Fox 9 years ago

I am so pissed off about the casting of Helen Justineau. I like Gemma Arterton but this is so wrong. It is clearly stated in and throughout the book that Helen is a black woman in her 40's. How did they get it so wrong?! I'm happy to see more diverse casting, so usually I would be thrilled that they'd gone in that direction with Melanie and Keiran but in this case, I don't understand it. The characters were already diverse so why did they switch all the characters' races? And why couldn't they let Helen be a mature black woman. It's racism and ageism and I am so mad right now!

reply

[–] cbreedon 9 years ago

You guys need to tone down this week's outrage machine. Movies made from books change characters, plots, etc. all the time.

reply

[–] Frantastic_Miss_Fox 9 years ago

Movies made from books change characters, plots, etc. all the time.

Yes, they do, but that doesn't mean that people aren't allowed to be upset or annoyed by it.

reply

[–] writerchick89 9 years ago

I agree, and I don't get why they make those choices. I don't know much about movie making, but it really does bug me when people change things up when the book had it perfectly fine. And for me, the guy they have playing Sarge, not at ALL what I pictured as I read the book. And Glenn Close? Also nothing like I was picturing the doctor, whats-her-name.

Of course I don't know if I'll get to watch this or not. Does anyone know if they'll bring it to the states?

Fiction is a lie, and good fiction is the truth inside the lie.--Stephen King

reply

[–] bob_mc1 8 years ago

White washing is such a dumb term. Imagine using black washing for Melanie, the SJWs would go nuts.

It is a fictional book, you can see why characters have been changed for the film though. Popular actress for lead, black kid to keep diversity quota etc.

reply

[–] flatulatte 8 years ago

Actually casting a black girl as Melanie makes perfect sense as she even states that her name comes from Latin (I think meaning Dark). As far as whit washing in this case goes Meh.

If you want to get outraged over something imaginary, what about life washing?

What aren't there enough hungries out there to portray a zombie in films. Do we always need to cast Breeders as hungries? well do we?

Do you know how hard it is for the Living impaired to get a foot in the door (so to speak) as a professional actor. Just cause you have a working circulatory system you think you are better than us humpf

Hell is other People

reply

[–] bob_mc1 8 years ago

I don't think zombies have an acting Union. They should get one, lol.

reply

[–] elladeon 8 years ago

Casting a black girl makes no sense for a character described as having pale blond hair and the fairest skin she has seen. Ditto a black actor for a red haired Irishman.

It actually messes up the contrast in another way. Selkirk kept crying throughout the book and could barely look at the kids because they looked like the walking dead. They weren't living children; they were dead children. The contrast of a vibrant black woman (Justineau) and a deathly-looking zombie child (Melanie) was a contrast between life and death.

reply

[–] neutralneutrals 8 years ago

It's great that a black child is being given a starring role, do you see many black girls starring in sci-fi/fantasy films? This is great for the child and us because she is talented and deserves the limelight.

There can be multiple creative interpretations of characters(OMG Hermoine is played by a black actress OMG) and the casting choice made sense to the director, therefore your opinion is null. She's not Rapunzel, long blond hair is not part of her identity(Although growing up I had a Rapunzel book where the girl was black and had braids--shocking right?!). You ought to be more concerned with her acting ability than her skin color. She's ALSO still pale, she's a light skinned black child and they did a great job with her makeup in the previews.

It's disturbing to me how much this seems to bother certain people. A person of any race can be a zombie or look 'deathly' with makeup and special effects--All zombies are zombies haha. Are these people familiar with the genre?!

I'd love to see a brown Justineau, but very rarely are the two starring roles given to poc, much less black women--lest it be a "black film" and reach a smaller audience.(An unfortunate reality)

reply

[–] milo44 8 years ago

I truly hope that I live to see the day when no one complains ... but I have a feeling .. that that will only happen when there is only one human left , Maybe that will be me .. lol .. I agree with your comment .. nicely said .. As far as the movie goes .. I was somewhat disappointed .. I didn't get to see the start of it .. so I was excited to watch it again and realized that I didn't miss much of it .. I was hoping that it would explain how the world got that way .. And then I got a real sickening feeling when I realized that this was the first time Direct TV raised their prices .. $10.99 for a three day rental .. I don't see anyone wanting to watch this movie for three days .. just watching two times was hard to do .. I had no options at all .. Now I think it's cheaper to go to the movies instead of PPV .. My PPV days are over , unless it's a block buster . Well ... peace to ya .

"A man that wouldn't cheat for a poke don't want one bad enough".

reply

[–] filho2109 8 years ago

bob-mc1....at ease soldier, there are a lot of derogatory and dumb terms to describe when something is made more 'black' or more 'ethnic'. You can rest easy now.

by the way...as far as dumb terms go, SJW is up there.

And just how is the term 'white washing' more offensive than believing poc only get film roles to fill the 'diversity quota'? if you're comfortable being offensive, why are you whining about the term white-washing? Come on boss, if you're gonna give it, you gotta be able to take it.

also, for future reference - if you are going to accuse imaginary people of complaining about a hypothetical nonsense, you probably don't want to start off by actually complaining about real nonsense.

reply

[–] I_Created_U 8 years ago

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Gotta love though how proud they all seem to be and how original and unique it seems to make them feel to throw the term around just like every other conservative on the internet and in the real world lately. Some people have ideas, the others have catchphrases, i suppose.

Not to mention, what does it say about a person's intelligence and education to come to the conclusion that being a social justice warrior is somehow an insult? Hello?

"You like slavery? You like your kids stupid and working at the coal mine or prostituting themselves? You like working 7 days a week, 16 hours a day for a dollar? You like your women uneducated, unallowed to vote and submissive? You hate sick days, holidays and paid leaves? You like being exploited and bullied by the rich and mighty of this world? No? So, why don't you go sit in that corner while grown-ups are talking, please? Much appreciated."

The obvious cluelessness, ignorance, lack of clairvoyance and insight they continuously proudly display is the most potent force for any liberal worldview if ever I've seen one.

People who don't like their beliefs being laughed at shouldn't have such funny beliefs

reply

[–] BigRich 8 years ago

I agree, and I don't get why they make those choices

Because the movie is based on the source material.
The creators of this movie have the liberty to change things at the expense of pissing off a few purists.

Hell, I'm black and I ain't mad at the change. The book is still readily available and no one changed that. This is the movie version and I hate to say this, but get over it.

_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

reply

[–] leesjshez 8 years ago

I'd rather they tried to stick with what is in the books, but it's got to be said, even under that chunky wool jumper, Gemma Arteton's rack looked really impressive. So I guess the topic title is bang on.

reply

[–] mkohary 8 years ago

The author of the book and the author of the screenplay are the same person. While it's true the characters are described a certain way in the book, their respective skin colors have absolutely no impact on the either the story or the characters, not even in subtextual form, and are hardly mentioned after the introduction, so what difference does it make?

reply

[–] TheNazMan 8 years ago

Right so it's only ok to change the demographic of a character if it's a white male. Got it. I'll remember that the next time some fat feminist defends Ghostbusters or the push to cast a black man as Bond.

reply

[–] BigRich 8 years ago

I am so pissed off about the casting of Helen Justineau. I like Gemma Arterton but this is so wrong. It is clearly stated in and throughout the book that Helen is a black woman in her 40's.

Probably because 28 Days Later had a black female lead, as well as The Omega Man. I Am Legend had a black male lead (that they changed from the source material) and the remake of Dawn of the Dead had a black male lead (that survived, too), as well as Night of the Living Dead.

I'm black and I'm not mad at the changes. It's fantasy/fiction, not based on real life.

reply

[–] bushd0 8 years ago

Why don't your worry about African-American people or any African people believing in god? That is pure white-washing. White people forced their religion upon them yet a change of ethnicity in a character makes you flip your lid ?

reply

[–] neutralneutrals 8 years ago

In modern day America religion is a choice, although I see your point from a historic frame of reference. This seems like a huge sidetrack from the issue of people being butthurt over a black girl being cast.

reply

[–] Bliskin 8 years ago

I think you missed the point. People weren't but hurt over a black girl being cast in a white role, they're butt hurt about a white women being cast in a black woman role.

Because white-washing is a problem but black-washing doesn't exist - apparently.

I don't know the books but can you think of a British 'mature black woman' with the same level of box office appeal as Gemma Arteton? I can't. Perhaps Naomi Watts if you drop the 'mature' but still not as big a pull as Gemma.

I think the little girl was great and can understand why she was cast regardless of her colour.

This was a fantastic surprise of a film for me.

reply

[–] BigRich 8 years ago

Can you think of a British 'mature black woman' with the same level of box office appeal as Gemma Arteton?

To name a few (and they're 40 and over, not 30 y.o. like Gemma):

Naomie Harris
Thandie Newton
Marsha Thomason
Sophie Okonedo
Marianne Jean-Baptiste
Carmen Ejogo

I don't know about you, but Gemma Arterton isn't that big a box office star, or has an abundance of "box office appeal", at least not in the U.S. IMHO, she's on par with the women I listed above.

I highly doubt anyone on this board can click those links and say they've never seen these actresses before, or that they aren't attractive in their own right.

_
Every person that served can be called a veteran, but not every veteran can be called a Marine.

reply

[–] Bliskin 8 years ago

I meant Naomie Harris not Watts. But again, like I said, not mature.

Thandie Newton has the pull for me but not in general, I can't think of Cinema movie that she was front and centre as a lead and draw.

Sophie Okanedo isn't mature enough either nor is she a star pull power.

The other three I don't know of, so again they would lack the star power.

*"I don't know about you, but Gemma Arterton isn't that big a box office star, or has an abundance of "box office appeal", at least not in the U.S. IMHO, she's on par with the women I listed above."*

She is a star in my opinion, well known and definitely above and beyond the pull of the acress' you've listed excepting maybe Naomie Harris.

2 out of the 3 I recognised on sight, but if the name didn't sell me then they failed the 'star power' test.

*"or that they aren't attractive in their own right"*

Did we bring looks into this? But in your opinion they are attractive - it's a subjective thing. Dibs on Thandie please.

---------------------------------

This is a belated response because of.... well... junk mail reasons that I don't fully understand.

reply

[–] filho2109 8 years ago

Naomi Watts is black? What?! heheh. I just knew it all along....

In any case, doesn't matter the race of the actress. Fictional character after all. That said, yeah, there are a lot of mature black women with box office pull who could have played the part (didn't have to be British given the flexibility to change things about the character). But all that matters is that Gemma Arteton got the role for any number of reasons...talent, track-record, availability etc...

reply

[–] Braindead09 8 years ago

Maybe all the black middle aged actresses like Octavia Spencer, Angela Basset that one from Empire, etc were either tooo expensive for the budget or just busy on their prime time US television series.

reply

[–] rapadake 8 years ago

They all acted fairly well, I thought.

I'd have no problem with the film being remade with reversal of colors either. Fresh interpretations are always good.

although Farteton is starting to get on to be playing a young sex bomb. Actually she looked well old even with all the makeup considering she was playing a school kid 6 years ago. She could play her own mom in the next St Trinians movie mhua!

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

fresh interpretations?!? a unique way to describe white washing, sexism, and ageism. can't speck on the acting. won't watch.
maybe if it's on netfix one day, just to see.

reply

[–] rapadake 8 years ago

I'm just saying I don't mind several interpretations of a work.

Its tyou who is closed mind, saying you wont see this one interpretation of it.

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

yes, objecting to white washing, agesism, and sexism is being close minded.
meanwhile white men scream as if they're being burned unless they are center stage.

reply

[–] rapadake 8 years ago

let me spell this out to you.

YOU - scream at a white woman being cast, but support a black woman being in the role.

ME - support either black or white in the role.

reply

[–] rapadake 8 years ago

let me spell this out to you.

YOU - scream at a white woman being cast, but support a black woman being in the role.

ME - support either black or white in the role.

Who is the more accepting?

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

accepting of white washing and marginalizing black women? you.
ditto old women, don't forget the ageism, and sexism. sexism because an older man would not have been replaced by a younger.
the character from the book was black, and dark skinned to boot, and middle aged.
maybe you should rad the book, maybe you should listen to viola davies.

reply

[–] rapadake 8 years ago

why am I marginalising black women? I haven't said that there shouldn't be a version of GWATG made with a black woman, I said it would fine to make one with a black woman in the lead.YOU ALONE have ruled out a color.

I don't think a character can ONLY BE black, but the character needs to be THAT character. YOU need to look beyond the colour and at the character.

Its you who is cutting options. Only you.

Arteton wasn't even really that good. Shes already too old, with fading skin and reddening face tone, mid30s best, to play a WSB.

But in one way that works - in the book the character is 40something, I think? A 40something year old black woman would look 30something...or even (ironically) looking younger than Farteton does at 30.

Whitewashig surely means a large amount of roles were made white. This is only ONE role. Its a stretch to call it whitewashing, especially in lieu of the child lead being black and not white.

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

it's not just the amount of roles, it's the significance of roles.
yes, black women age well, what's your point?
also ageist and sexist.

reply

[–] rapadake 8 years ago

you clearly don't read anything I write, if you just wrote that.

A 30 year old white woman looks tha same age as a 40something black woman (this meaning the casting of a 30 year old was right to approximate a 40something woman who just looks younger due to her skin). Theres nothing ageist about this fact.

You don't deserve replies anymore, you are a nutjob waiting to blow up. Goodbye, have fun starting a fight with yourself instead.

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

well dear, stop sending your inane, useless,misinformed replies then. you're actually an idiot.
and miss j is older than 40s.
and black women aging well is neither here nor there though i'd love angela basset in the role.

reply

[–] Ithilfaen 8 years ago

There is no arguing with a fool, friend.

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

and don't forget;promotion. in promotion arterton will be young and pretty, just like zoe saldana when she did nina simone.
promotion is very important.

reply

[–] huwdj 8 years ago

If you always cast according to the description in a book I suspect films would generally get even whiter. So getting cross when it goes the other way is perhaps a little short sighted? But then I've not read the book so have no investment in the characters who might be brilliantly written and live on in the reader's mind.
But I do think "white sex bomb" is unfair. Gemma Arterton played the part without makeup, or at least any you could see, and in the baggiest of thick army sweaters and combat trousers. She has also previously complained of being stuck with this label and picks projects and plays to move away from it. Having said that *points gun at own feet* she still looks great in the film.

I have always believed in the kindness of strangers

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

there's still more diversity to be found in books, or there's no specification of ethnicity.
arterton won't be promoting without make up.

reply

[–] huwdj 8 years ago

'more diversity to be found in books', I don't think that's right, but maybe we're reading different types of books and I need to expand my range - something to think about.
You're certainly right about the makeup but I'm guessing everyone, including the guys, would be wearing some.

I have always believed in the kindness of strangers

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

for promotion? not the same kind of make up.
it's hard enough to find diversity in books but then film adaptation white wash. it's infuriating. also do all sorts of things to make it glossier, less realistic , and so on.

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

for promotion? not the same kind of make up.
it's hard enough to find diversity in books but then film adaptation white wash. it's infuriating. also do all sorts of things to make it glossier, less realistic , and so on.

reply

[–] thebigmouth 8 years ago

The symbolism works better if Justineau is white and Melanie is black. IMO anyway.

TV: http://ihatemydvr.blogspot.com
LOST:http://eyemsick.blogspot.com

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

have you read the book?

reply

[–] thebigmouth 8 years ago

Yes.

TV: http://ihatemydvr.blogspot.com
LOST:http://eyemsick.blogspot.com

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

that's strange then.

reply

[–] thebigmouth 8 years ago

Why? I don't think "because that's how the book was" is a very persuasive argument personally. And because all they did was reverse the racial dynamic between Melanie and Ms. Justineau, I don't think you can really characterize it as "whitewashing."

I feel like the theme of enslavement and exploitation is clearer if Melanie is black and Ms. Justineau white. Same with the children inheriting the Earth. Today's minorities are the future.

I do see what you mean about ageism, but I think flipping their races makes sense.

TV: http://ihatemydvr.blogspot.com
LOST:http://eyemsick.blogspot.com

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

ok.

reply

[–] thebigmouth 8 years ago

Still don't see what's strange about it.

TV: http://ihatemydvr.blogspot.com
LOST:http://eyemsick.blogspot.com

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

didn't i explain in my earlier posts?

reply

[–] thebigmouth 8 years ago

Nope. I understand why you think it was a bad choice -- and you make some good points. But I still don't see what my having read the book has to do with anything.

TV: http://ihatemydvr.blogspot.com
LOST:http://eyemsick.blogspot.com

reply

[–] tle_mgr 8 years ago

What is that?

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

what is what?

reply

[–] Jimmy_Rustle 8 years ago

You sound like you should just stick to posting on tumblr. I'm gonna go ahead and assume you have an account there, right?

I used to do drugs. I still do, but I used to, too.

reply

[–] remembervhs 8 years ago

"whitewashing" occurs because studios want to make money and people like watching movies with characters who look like them. therefore it makes sense for movies that are mostly marketed to white people to cast white actors.

this isn't racism, as i would define it. and if you want to call it racism, then it's the viewers who are racist. studios would but happy to cast more black people if it didn't affect the return on their investment.

personally, i'd rather live in a world where people don't care about the skin color of the actors in the movie they are watching. i'd also like to live in a world where actors who aren't incredibly attractive get more leading roles. also, a world where people don't kill each other for dumb reasons. some day...

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

sure it is. it's institutional racism.
would you be ''colourblind'' if nobody looked like you?

reply

[–] remembervhs 8 years ago

you can say it's racism and point to some definition. it sure isn't racism based on the definition of that word that i'd use.

there's no way to change people's subconscious preference to watch actors who look like them. but one thing that definitely won't change it is accusing some subset of the population of being "institutionally racist" on the basis of which movies they watch.

by the way, black people have the preference of watching movies with actors who look like them too.

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

well, black/asian and so on people rarely get to see themselves, certainly not much in non stereotypical ways, and at length
, and with lines.
of course they're thirsty.
ditto women.

reply

[–] Bliskin 8 years ago

well, black/asian and so on people rarely get to see themselves

To be fair you're obviously making this statement from a white majority country. If you live in a Black or Asian majority country you would be going to see people who looked like you on screen.

You have to remember that Hollywood is the American nations film industry, it just happens to do well globally. The British one is the same, it makes films tailored to our ethnic makeup because all the studio cares about is money. (BTW 3.5% of our population is black).

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

ditto all of europe. that doesn't make it better. not am i only addressing racism but also sexism, and agesim.
and i'm not giving them money for this, or the like. pity that people do.

reply

[–] Bliskin 8 years ago

ditto all of Europe????????? I don't understand.

The path you're heading down will end in you telling me that Olympians shouldn't have to run or swim fast because the slow people might want medals too.

Young pretty people will always be a larger draw. They are what everyone dreams of being and the movies are about escapism.

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

making films white.
i'm glad you're supporting the status quo.
olympics analogy doesn't work.

reply

[–] Bliskin 8 years ago

But Europe is mostly white. Why wouldn't they cast white actors more?

Japanese cinema is almost entirely Japanese people. Play spot the black guy in a Bollywood movie and you will lose.

Our film industries are the only multicultural ones and minorities are over represented as is. What do you want to see? 50% of all roles going to black people?

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

not nearly as white as film/tv make it appear. ditto the usa, ditto books generally.
reasonable/realistic representation of all poc, woman [ that would actually mean 50+%, explain why there are fewer women than that in most film/tv] , as well as normal looking and old people.
there are of course more old men than women in film/tv, for all the obvious reason.s

reply

[–] Bliskin 8 years ago

I would honestly say that 50% of people are female in TV/film. Perhaps your specifying lead roles in which case, sure, there are less - but not by much. Nowadays it's evening out rapidly.

My points on minorities (non-white) stand, they are over represented at this moment in time.

As for normal looking or old people? My Olympics analogy stands plus if people don't want to see them, they won't earn money so the studios wont put them in. But just to add, most of the good looking and young people are normal and old. Makeup does wonders!

reply

[–] sabelmouse 8 years ago

lol!

reply