Mattrek Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 (edited) I can't believe how you're missing the point, man. What does your exemple got to do with racism? Your exemple applying to the same SOC casting call: A-type: Male 6 foot or taller, arms must be 22inchs, tan, light colored eyes, 6 pack abs, high IQ, well dressed. Light skinned. Straight hair. Well-educated. Top of the hot crop. B-type: Male 5 foot 11 and taller, fair pale skin. Brown eyes. straight hair. Graduated. Fit. C-type: Male 5 foot 10. Brown and medium skin and Dark eyes. Curly hair. Average body size. Middle Eastern accepted. D-type: Male 5 foot 7 and taller.(Must be under 6 foot though). dark skinned and dark eyes. Curly, dread, bald. Chubby. poor. high school drop-out. How do you not see that I'm making an arbitrary hierarchy in my casting call based on skin color unfairly linked to social status putting them into sub-groups, ranking them into an attractivity ladder by correlation otherwise known as "racism". Like you can't be dark brown, dark eyed, be 6 foot tall with 6 pack abs, graduated and A-type? Your skin tone defines your hotness, social status and abilities in life? I agree that casting call was definitely too far, but how else would you classify the different groups? If they put 1,2,3,4 would that be better? That still would put a ranking. I'm not sure that they meant it as D) is the worst of the bunch we don't really care about them, more as D) that's the 4th group of different types of people we need. If the order was backwards would that have changed it? I'm honestly asking, no snark intended. Edited August 16, 2015 by Mattrek Loves Del Toro 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashrendar44 Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 (edited) What I'm saying is in casting you have to treat everything the same. Age, Race, height, skin tone, eye color, weight, its all the same. Its nothing personal. You have to also understand that these descriptions are for what they invasion that person to look like. So you want people to be closish. For example my movie, I don't remember exactly what we said but I did specify Brunette/dark hair for my leading lady, guess what I had 4 blondes come in still and I ended up casting one! My leading lady is a blonde even though I said the role was for a dark haired girl. She was the best actress and had everything else I wanted for the role even her eye color. And yeah I mean in general, I agree the SOC casting call was surprising and over the top, it definitely went to far. You just contradicted your own statement proving that casting call criterias are arbitrary prejudiced crap when facing reality. So you see how they just pushed a racial agenda hooked in a certain mentality that skin tone dictates and ranks your worth in american society. I agree that casting call was definitely too far, but how else would you classify the different groups? If they put 1,2,3,4 would that be better? That still would put a ranking. I'm not sure that they meant it as D) is the worst of the bunch we don't really care about them, more as D) that's the 4th group of different types of people we need. If the order was backwards would that have changed it? I'm honestly asking, no snark intended. The problem is there is a clear hierarchy. It's not: a) We want x. b ) We want y. c) We want z. It's: A-type: We want x. Light skinned, straight hair. Top, flawless. B-type. We want y. You're not worthy of the A-type even if you're size A, 5"10 and don't even try to cheat by straightening your curly hair or pretend you're an A-type with a straight weave, we only base our criteria on your skin tone and your natural hair condition. C-type. We want z. Don't dream it, you're too dark-skinned to be an A-type and a B-type, girl. We also automatically assume that you're poor and homely because you can't be poor and light-skinned/straight hair. The key word is "type" associated with a letter that reads like a grade, grouping into a dubious hierarchy all related to the others, that clearly shows an exclusive ranking with a strange fixation based on a skin tone ladder. Edited August 16, 2015 by MADash Rendar 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattrek Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 You just contradicted your own statement proving that casting call criterias are arbitrary prejudiced crap when facing reality. So you see how they just pushed a racial agenda hooked in a certain mentality that skin tone dictates and ranks your worth in american society. The problem is there is a clear hierarchy. It's not: a) We want x. b ) We want y. c) We want z. It's: A-type: We want x. Light skinned, straight hair. Top, flawless. B-type. We want y. You're not worthy of the A-type even if you're size A, 5"10 and don't even try to cheat by straightening your curly hair or pretend you're an A-type with a straight weave, we only base our criteria on your skin tone and your natural hair condition. C-type. We want z. Don't dream it, you're too dark-skinned to be an A-type and a B-type, girl. We also automatically assume that you're poor and homely because you can't be poor and light-skinned/straight hair. The key word is "type" associated with a letter that reads like a grade, grouping into a dubious hierarchy all related to the others, that clearly shows an exclusive ranking with a strange fixation based on a skin tone ladder. Ok gotcha, so if they didn't have the types and just the descriptions you'd be fine with it? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrFanaticGuy34 Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Still at 88% on RT, Critics-wise and 96%, Audience-wise. Legs and amazing WOM will carry this thing. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dashrendar44 Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Ok gotcha, so if they didn't have the types and just the descriptions you'd be fine with it? Fine, I don't know but the racist hierarchy wouldn't be so blatant. First, I would exclude the skin tones hierarchy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJohn Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 One of the few cases where I will actually have to illegally download it if I want to see it. I don't think this is coming out here on DVD at all. But I am curious about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJG Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 One of the few cases where I will actually have to illegally download it if I want to see it. I don't think this is coming out here on DVD at all. But I am curious about it. It's Universal so it's coming out illegally in about 2 weeks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gokira2012 Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 I see no Black people were shooting in movie theaters this weekend over S. O.C., the white supremacist controlled media really showed their hand by telling people to put extra security in the movies because blacks were gonna do gang shooting, while white people are the ones that actually shoot up movies 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 the white supremacist controlled media Oh boy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 I see no Black people were shooting in movie theaters this weekend over S. O.C., the white supremacist controlled media really showed their hand by telling people to put extra security in the movies because blacks were gonna do gang shooting, while white people are the ones that actually shoot up movies Wasn't the extra security specifically intended to prevent incidents like that? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gokira2012 Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 Wasn't the extra security specifically intended to prevent incidents like that? The only ones shooting up movies are White people 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eddyxx Posted August 16, 2015 Share Posted August 16, 2015 I can't believe how you're missing the point, man. What does your exemple got to do with racism? Your exemple applying to the same SOC casting call: A-type: Male 6 foot or taller, arms must be 22inchs, tan, light colored eyes, 6 pack abs, high IQ, well dressed. Light skinned. Straight hair. Well-educated. Top of the hot crop. B-type: Male 5 foot 11 and taller, fair pale skin. Brown eyes. straight hair. Graduated. Fit. C-type: Male 5 foot 10. Brown and medium skin and Dark eyes. Curly hair. Average body size. Middle Eastern accepted. D-type: Male 5 foot 7 and taller.(Must be under 6 foot though). dark skinned and dark eyes. Curly, dread, bald. Chubby. poor. high school drop-out. How do you not see that I'm making an arbitrary hierarchy in my casting call based on skin color unfairly linked to social status putting them into sub-groups, ranking them into an attractivity ladder by correlation otherwise known as "racism". Like you can't be dark brown, dark eyed, be 6 foot tall with 6 pack abs, graduated and A-type? Your skin tone defines your hotness, social status and abilities in life? Why do you keep mentioning class in your hypothetical casting call. The casting call for SOC didn't say anything about class. The word poor was referring to their body shape. As in poor shape. The casting call was extremely sexist but classism had nothing to do with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxmoser3 Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Up To The Minute interviewed Ice Cube and his son they talked about the movie, real life, and other stuff 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 I see no Black people were shooting in movie theaters this weekend over S. O.C., the white supremacist controlled media really showed their hand by telling people to put extra security in the movies because blacks were gonna do gang shooting, while white people are the ones that actually shoot up movies Yep, because there has never been a shooting at a film directed at black people before. Gang violence is real. Racism in America is real Rodney King is real Crypts bloods are real. Of course there was going to be concern about this movie inciting violence 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 (edited) It was a valid concern, I think, especially with the film's thematic content Edited August 18, 2015 by tribefan695 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avatree Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 (edited) Doesn't matter what race anyone is - if a movie which has the core message of "Fuck the police" is doing well at the box office, then there is serious cause for concern. ESPECIALLY given how many cinema-related shootings there have been recently. Edited August 18, 2015 by Tree-5000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 (edited) One thing I feel stupid for missing as a baseball fan is the White Sox cap Eazy E wears didn't exist until the early 90s Edited August 18, 2015 by tribefan695 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BK007 Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Doesn't matter what race anyone is - if a movie which has the core message of "Fuck the police" is doing well at the box office, then there is serious cause for concern. ESPECIALLY given how many cinema-related shootings there have been recently. It is reflective of the state of the country and its government and institutions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 Doesn't matter what race anyone is - if a movie which has the core message of "Fuck the police" is doing well at the box office, then there is serious cause for concern. ESPECIALLY given how many cinema-related shootings there have been recently. That's not the core message of the movie at all. You really need to see it first before you make uninformed comments like this. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theultimatebiu Posted August 18, 2015 Share Posted August 18, 2015 I said this exact same thing you just did yesterday when they were showing the CNN Headline over it and Cmasterday nearly had a fit over it as well as other people.. The theatre I go to has security, whether it's this movie or any other movie.. I see nothing wrong with the way they reported that yesterday on CNN or FOX that causes such a knee jerk reaction around here to the point where 9 times out of 10, the thread is ultimately locked because of it.. The CNN storyline was so stupid it almost dropped my IQ by 10 points. It was ignorant. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...