Jump to content

AndyK

Rub & Tug | Now a TV Series. ScarJo found dead in a ditch! | Trans Rights are Human Rights

Recommended Posts



The funny thing about this "controversy" is that even if they did cast a trans actor it wouldn't have even gotten a fraction of the media attention its getting now. The same people saying they're upset on twitter are the same people that wouldn't have supported the movie in any form.

 

 

Edited by iHeartJames
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This will be as bad (or worse) than the crappy Nina Simone film starring...Zoe Saldana.

Will open and close and be forgotten in the blink of an eye, and ScarJo will go back to playing bland, useless sidekicks in Marvel movies.

Or maybe...she will come full circle and play Rachel Dolezal in a biopic of the infamous white woman who falsely claimed to be a black woman.

Talk about a perfect role.

 

 

:hahaha:

Edited by StevenG
Link to comment
Share on other sites



2 minutes ago, StevenG said:

This will be as bad (or worse) than the crappy Nina Simone film starring...Zoe Saldana.

Will open and close and be forgotten in the blink of an eye, and ScarJo will go back to playing bland, useless sidekicks in Marvel movies.

somebody's pressed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, baumer said:

I thought acting was about playing a character and that was done by actors. I don't know I guess maybe I must be mistaken.

 

This controversy is the epitome of ridiculous. 

Let's see them make a Friday the 13th film in which, say, Demi Lovato plays Jason Voorhees; I would love to see your reaction to that.

Casting Scarjo as a trans man who also happens to be fat and ugly is just as ridiculous an idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



21 minutes ago, StevenG said:

This will be as bad (or worse) than the crappy Nina Simone film starring...Zoe Saldana.

Will open and close and be forgotten in the blink of an eye, and ScarJo will go back to playing bland, useless sidekicks in Marvel movies.

Or maybe...she will come full circle and play Rachel Dolezal in a biopic of the infamous white woman who falsely claimed to be a black woman.

Talk about a perfect role.

 

 

:hahaha:

AliG.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, iHeartJames said:

The funny thing about this "controversy" is that even if they did cast a trans actor it wouldn't have even gotten a fraction of the media attention its getting now. The same people saying they're upset on twitter are the same people that wouldn't have supported the movie in any form.

 

 

Not necessarily. It would probably have gotten a fraction of the budget (and potentially have a lot more trouble getting green lit) without a big name attached, but the ones complaining probably would've just not known about its existence until it opened or debuted at some film festival like Tangerine or A Fantastic Woman. Only a big star vehicle would get any attention during pre-production.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites



9 hours ago, StevenG said:

Let's see them make a Friday the 13th film in which, say, Demi Lovato plays Jason Voorhees; I would love to see your reaction to that.

Casting Scarjo as a trans man who also happens to be fat and ugly is just as ridiculous an idea.

 

Quick, name a trans actor who can headline a movie, who can open one, and give the studio confidence enough to sink millions of dollars into it.  You can't because there isn't one.  That's why A-list actors get roles like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, baumer said:

 

Quick, name a trans actor who can headline a movie, who can open one, and give the studio confidence enough to sink millions of dollars into it.  You can't because there isn't one.  That's why A-list actors get roles like this.

 

when you make a point without realizing it

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



10 minutes ago, ChipMunky said:

 

when you make a point without realizing it

Yes a point, there is no doubt there is a point to be made, it is about trying to make the good one, the good read on the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



Maybe from now on we should only cast people who have experience in the roles they are taking. So we should all be mad at Sylvester Stallone and Robert De Niro for playing boxers. We should be really upset at Ellen Bernstyn for playing a drug addict. We should all be incredibly pissed off Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway for playing bank robbers and Bonnie and Clyde. In fact nobody in Hollywood should really be getting the roles they are getting Because unless they do research they don't have any knowledge of the roles they are taking on. Yeah I feel really comfortable with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



33 minutes ago, ChipMunky said:

A major studio pumped $200 million into a movie starring DANE DEHAAN.

 

Don't come in here with bullshit about people not wanting to see a movie without an A-List actor.

Not an MPAA studio, and by a studio run by the movie director and giant budget SCI-FI with an IP adaptation, that is a totally different beast, he did sold almost all of it before doing it (and that the part people take about, he would have not done it if is intl/local market pre-sales didn't got that big).

 

No one is saying it is about people not wanting to see a movie without an A-list actor (at least certainly not me), it is about the difficulty to pre-sales/co-finance a smaller movie that is not in a well establish commercial genre/proven high concept without one.

 

And I am not saying it is logical for them (intl buyer, investor), but it is far to be a rational business in general and even less at that level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites





2 hours ago, baumer said:

Maybe from now on we should only cast people who have experience in the roles they are taking. So we should all be mad at Sylvester Stallone and Robert De Niro for playing boxers. 

De Niro has a 2W 1L fighting career I think (and he worked a while has a night shift cab driver in NY), he was quite the Daniel Day Lewis of is time. It is quite easier to get an close too experience to a profession (well boxing is a bit of a near life long commitment to have your body working really efficiently like those champion) 

Edited by Barnack
Link to comment
Share on other sites



1 minute ago, Barnack said:

Not an MPAA studio, and by a studio run by the movie director and giant budget SCI-FI with an IP adaptation, that is a totally different beast, he did sold almost all of it before doing it (and that the part people take about, he would have not done it if is intl/local market pre-sales didn't got that big).

 

No one is saying it is about people not wanting to see a movie without an A-list actor (at least certainly not me), it is about the difficulty to pre-sales/co-finance a smaller movie that is not in a well establish commercial genre/proven high concept without one.

 

And I am not saying it is logical for them (intl buyer, investor), but it is far to be a rational business in general and even less at that level.

 

Who did Moonlight star?

 

The Witch?

 

Pick one of the dozens of no-name horror hits every year. Movies get financed without stars every day. Hiring a transgender actor to play a transgender man would have been the smart, logical business decision. Hiring a white, blonde, cis female to play a transgender man is... not a good look.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



18 minutes ago, ChipMunky said:

Who did Moonlight star?

 

The Witch?

 

Pick one of the dozens of no-name horror hits every year. Movies get financed without stars every day. Hiring a transgender actor to play a transgender man would have been the smart, logical business decision.

I think we are miscommunicating (I am probably unclear) when I said in my message:

 well establish commercial genre/proven high concept 

 

It did include horror (mostly horror even), it will include nice IP also.

 

The Witch was a 4m movie bought after the fact after it played well at Sundance no ? Is distribution was not financed before it proved itself to be a great movie if I remember correctly.

 

Moonlight was a 1.5-4m movie and yes had A24 on board before the movie was shoot after Brad Pitt company got involved.

 

At those price, we will find many, I have not read this script so I do not know what it look like in term of budget, but a period mobster movie we are use to a certain level of production design. Even on the smaller scale a movie like Legend was 20-25m net. That the kind of movie I am talking about

 

1) Not a proven commercial genre/high concept

2) Not a big name director (Besson being that and obviously Nolan/Cameron not needing a cast to get greenlight)

3) A not obvious zone budget wise, 25-60m type, that you cannot just easily bury it/direct tor video it, if it does not work small horror movie style and not big enough to sell it on it's spectacle/trailer either.

 

Of all the people vocally complaining about the situation (some in the industry) why do you think they themselves didn't picked up the spec script and didn't not got it made with a trans actor ?

 

18 minutes ago, ChipMunky said:

Hiring a white, blonde, cis female to play a transgender man is... not a good look.

That is such an iconic female world sex-symbol (voice and body), hard to see how they would pull it off artistically (even without any controversial issue. it does seem odd on it's face). But then many thought the same of Robbie, a classic 10/10 beauty playing someone that had her life defined by not matching her world beauty and class criterion and they ended up making it work.

 

Edited by Barnack
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Regarding your last point, hiring Robbie to play a blonde, white woman, whether she was "poor and ugly" or not, isn't the same thing as this.

 

I highly doubt this film will cost more than $20 mil, due to the subject matter. In fact,  Scarlett will probably be a big chunk of the budget. Why couldn't she have just cast herself as a female co-lead? That would give the film it's star, and still would let them be able to cast an appropriate gendered actor.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



4 minutes ago, ChipMunky said:

Why couldn't she have just cast herself as a female co-lead?

Have you read the script and find there was a nice role in there for a co-star to go into that endeavor of creating work for herself because there is almost nothing outthere made by studio anymore for her to get cast in, to ask that question ? If there is, that a good question to ask here, if not..... that is a moot point.

 

You want to create material a great role with an arc and many notes usually.

Edited by Barnack
Link to comment
Share on other sites



Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Guidelines. Feel free to read our Privacy Policy as well.