Comments
Follow Comments Sorted by time
guest_
· 4 years ago
· FIRST
I’m not going to defend the poster. Im not going to discuss “localization” or go in to the complexities of Chinese society and race in a largely homogenous nation- not discuss discrimination that China’s African population reports experiencing. What I will say is this- did Lucas film handle the marketing for the film... or did Disney? How much input did Disney have against say- the state media company of China who determines what can and cannot be shown, and can make changes as they see fit if one desires to show media in the country?
1
guest_
· 4 years ago
And here is where things can get complex- because the simple answer is: “well if they won’t let you show what you want- refuse to do business with them!” Leaving money asides- a huge global market- which we could argue that PRINCIPAL is more important than money! Well....
▼
guest_
· 4 years ago
What is worse: not releasing your film with a diverse and well represented cast because the poster is racist- so that people in that country don’t get exposed to positive portrayals of diverse characters... or showing the film so people can get to see the characters and get comfortable and even fond of different types of people- but releasing a poster that minimizes the diverse cast mates? This is a question that each person must come to an answer for themselves.
1
·
Edited 4 years ago
Show All
guest_
· 4 years ago
When you watch early and even older films with people of color- most of them in 2020 are VERY problematic. BUT- for the culture they were released to- many were very progressive- even controversial. It is unlikely that we would have even what diversity we have today in Hollywood if it wasn’t for early films that even if racist- got people of different backgrounds on the screen and created the first non “white” nationwide stars in media.
▼
guest_
· 4 years ago
Sidney Poitier was rejected in theater by audiences because he couldn’t sing well- and at the time- that was pretty much what black actors were used for. Song and dance. But he was able to get roles in films where he gained prominence and helped to make roads in the industry and in American culture and consciousness for Black actors. But- although many of Poitiers films were powerful and amazing films with progressive undertones- the culture shows through- these aren’t films that would be made in 2020 Hollywood by and large- and more over- many are somewhat exploitive- not so much or as blatant as the “‘sploitation” films of the 70’s- but certainly meant to gain attention through boldness.
wolfballoonsquad
· 4 years ago
Tl;dr
1
guest_
· 4 years ago
Tl:dr- we have to ask if Lucas Film had anything to do with the Chinese poster and wether she should be “@“ them at all- if it wasn’t the Chinese government media company in whole or in part, and if Disney was the one handling the China release. We also have to ask ourselves what would be Lucas films alternative? In a relatively homogeneous country with restrictive media- is it better to have people not see the film to take the “high ground”, or is it better to have what would be a “problematic poster” in the US- but get people to see the film and see positive portrayals of a diverse cast?
▼
guest_
· 4 years ago
Tl:dr PT II- TL:DR more detail continued (OPTIONAL): Often times in the US when out culture was more homogeneous and restricted- the only way to get exposure and give opportunity to open doors for more diverse casts and ideas was to “float” still “problematic” films to get them through production and to an audience. Without these early films which are often very problematic by modern standards- we wouldn’t have the level of acceptance and inclusion or opportunity we do today (even if it still is far from representative of the population.)
▼
