But it isn't the job of Marvel Comics to ' represent society' and the FF isn't some kind of touchy feely let's all play PC game. It's a work of fiction and like all such works should have the integrity of its characters respected.
Not significant? The FF banner for many years proclaimed it as 'The World's Greatest Comic Book' and they were always spoken of as Marvel's first family.
Actually, I'm going by look. The Rock, happens to look very close to Black Adam, therefore his ethnicity makes no difference in this case. Unfortunately, Mr Jordan in the current FF is never going to pass as a blonde white guy. ;-)
Othello isn't real either, yet the character is a roll specifically for a black actor. As Shakespeare wrote it. Why do you think he did that? Just by chance, or did he actually intend Othello to be black? The point being, film makers should respect the writers whose work they are using.
Well, the whole point is that Othello is defined by his etnicity. As is Black Panther. Now, someone could do a white Othello. But he would have to be a white Othello in a non-white society. Because the story hinges on ethnicity.
There is nothing about Nick Fury, Perry White, Mercy Graves or Johnny Storm that defines them as quintessentially white.
By all accounts, the new Fantastic Four movie is riddled with problems which have nothing to do with the ethnicity of the actors.
Agreed. If you saw my original post, one of the main things that has put me off this movie is the dire attempt at Doctor Doom. I just don't get what is wrong with the film makers and how they show him. I mean, the movie adaptations of Magneto and the recent TV adaptation of Kingpin in Daredevil (being the other two long lasting iconic villains of the Marvel universe) have been really good.
But when it comes to Victor Von Doom, they just can't or won't get it right. I'm thinking it's can't, as the Iron Man movies have shown us armour can be done properly, and look very good on screen.
Well, the whole point is that Othello is defined by his etnicity. As is Black Panther. Now, someone could do a white Othello. But he would have to be a white Othello in a non-white society. Because the story hinges on ethnicity..
A white Othello would be an entirely different story, would it not?
You actually support my argument. Surely, for all those roles, there were actors who could have been hired that were non-white. I find it quite offensive that these role's were not given to non-white actors. Especially Mr Cucumberpatch, whose work leaves me absolutely cold.
This offends you ?
What type of idiot are you that gets offended at movie casting ?
The point being, film makers should respect the writers whose work they are using.
Nonsense. Film makers have the right to interpret their choice of material however they see fit, regardless of where it came from and what it entails. And rightly so.
Except for how they have been shown in comics, for the majority of their lives on the printed page. Why not respect that?
Why is ethnicity the thing that bugs you about comics adaptations? Captain America's kid sidekick Bucky became the same age as Cap, if not slightly older. Hardly any of the Marvel superheroes use secret identities in the cinematic universe. Over in the DC cinematic universe, Lois Lane is ginger and she knew Clark Kent's secret from very early in their relationship. Metropolis and Gotham are now neighboring cities, separated by a bay. Batman is a good 20 years older than Superman.
The movies always make massive changes to the source material. Yet you're fixating on a relatively minor issue.
By all accounts, the new Fantastic Four movie is riddled with problems which have nothing to do with the ethnicity of the actors.
Agreed to a point. Nick Fury is traditionally a white man but very few people kicked up a fuss when they saw Samuel L Jackson playing the role. Skin colour didn't affect the plot and Jackson is bloody cool Slightly different in this case because they had to alter the family genetics because of their casting decisions - Sue and Johnny are supposed to be brother and sister rather than adopted siblings. But ultimately it made no difference to the quality of the movie - not one bit. Michael is a good actor in a bad movie.
That said, I'm not sure the team creating this movie actually understood the Fantastic Four. I read the comics for several years in my teens (in the 90s) and this movie had absolutely no similarities to those comics. I read a review that suggested the team making it seemed embarrassed by the source material and that's how it felt. The Fantastic Four are the lynchpin of Marvel comics. Whenever there's a large event it's normally them in the center of it (and Doom as the lead bad guy). How on earth can the studios keep screwing them up?
Nonsense. Film makers have the right to interpret their choice of material however they see fit, regardless of where it came from and what it entails. And rightly so.
Only when they understand why people liked the source material. Joss Whedon understands comics and his version of The Avengers was wildly popular because he understood why people liked the Avengers in the first place. He made some changes, mostly relatively minor, but ultimately left the core of the comics in place (plus he's the only one in Hollywood to really understand how to make the Hulk interesting). Russell T Davies did the same with Doctor Who.
The writers of Fantastic Four just didn't get it, they interpreted the source material without understanding why people liked it. Fantastic Four should have more in common with The Avengers than The Dark Knight.
Nate is hung up on race, to a perculiar degree. He thinks dark skinned black/pacific actors are fine to play Black Adam as he only sees two shades of people: us, and them.
Reading this thread is a testament to how far we haven't come in terms of colour-blind casting.
Non-white actors passively still have to 'represent', that is to justify their presence and casting in certain roles ; producers and casting directors second guess the potential prejudice inherent in a mass audience, and unfortunately, some comments on this thread prove their jaundiced judgements correct.
For those of us performers of "ethnicity", who happen to have a dark skin albeit with a British upbringing, it is a daily professional battle against a dreary and dehumanising set of cliches and prejudices foisted upon us. Not by the public, but Casting Directors and Producers who project their own unacknowledged conservatism and racism onto an imagined racist audience.
Ironically, some posters here have proved them correct.
Regarding Nick Fury, it could easily be argued that his race was not changed for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, given that the comic book version of Nick Fury that the MCU version of Nick Fury was based on was himself black... and not only that, he looked like Samuel L. Jackson
Regarding Nick Fury, it could easily be argued that his race was not changed for the Marvel Cinematic Universe, given that the comic book version of Nick Fury that the MCU version of Nick Fury was based on was himself black... and not only that, he looked like Samuel L. Jackson ;-)
That's the funny thing. Nathanbrazil is treating the comics like sacred texts which should never be contradicted. Yet the long-running comics themselves have so many universes and so many retcons that it's impossible to faithfully adapt one set of comics without directly contradicting another set.
Only when they understand why people liked the source material.
I'm sure that plays a part in some instances, but it's not something to make a rule of. You still compromise the film makers artistic license with that.
Also, what people liked about the source material simply might not work on screen, but there is still something about that source material that could form the basis of something that would work on screen.
From various sites - aintitcool.com thru to variety - the director Josh Trank had an agreement that he'd make a fairly simple but emotionally deep film on the million dollar sets. He'd been given free run on previous debut hit 'Chronicle' for 20thCFox and this seemed a no brainer.
However there are other things going on that kicked the productiin out of control.
Newscorp want to sell 20th Century Fox - the whole studio - to Disney (Disney is now owner of Marvel comics and Star Wars - two entities Fox built up) and Fantastic Four was cut off from base camp because, in three years, Disney will probably do its own. So this FF film is one the director will only take half the credit of and, aftr discovering the studio didn't care, the director wound up turning up high on set and then leaving the set.
He was paid for cursory promotion in a contract that means he can't publicly declaim the film until after 2015 but there it is.
But it isn't the job of Marvel Comics to ' represent society' and the FF isn't some kind of touchy feely let's all play PC game. It's a work of fiction and like all such works should have the integrity of its characters respected.
Not really sure about that.
Back in the day Stan 'The Man' Lee would actively promote the company to outside press by saying that they created the first black superhero (Black Panther) and the first African American super hero (Falcon). Also those who knew him have said Kirby was an advocate for more diversity.
Diversity in it's cast of characters is a big part of their current company initiative with more non straight white male characters being put in positions where they can sell where arguably they couldn't otherwise.
Not significant? The FF banner for many years proclaimed it as 'The World's Greatest Comic Book' and they were always spoken of as Marvel's first family.
That's really more of Stan's bombast but I suppose in the sixties you could argue it was "The Words's Greatest Comics Magazine" but other than some notable runs it hasn't really been that for a long time.
In the 80s and 90s it was the X-Men and Spider-Man, in the 2000s it was the Avengers that were the priorities both in the real world of publishing and in the fictional world. They generally had respect for being the comic that kick started everything sadly I think it's that reverence that has kept it stagnant.
Actually, I'm going by look. The Rock, happens to look very close to Black Adam, therefore his ethnicity makes no difference in this case. Unfortunately, Mr Jordan in the current FF is never going to pass as a blonde white guy. ;-)
Othello isn't real either, yet the character is a roll specifically for a black actor. As Shakespeare wrote it. Why do you think he did that? Just by chance, or did he actually intend Othello to be black? The point being, film makers should respect the writers whose work they are using.
I think these are two mutually exclusive arguments. Putting aside that Caucasian actors have played Othello (Olivier being a famous example) the characters race is part of the character's story. Brabantio doesn't want his daughter involved with a Moor and one of the many reasons Iago hates Othello is implied to be race.
It's really whether the character's race is important to their story or appeal. In the case of Othello it is, in the case of Johnny Storm it's not.
Nor do I think author intent in this case is a good defense. Would Martin Goodman have published Fantastic Four had any of the team not been white? This wasn't too long after EC stopped publishing comics because it portrayed a black astronaut as the protagonist.
I doubt the thought of making the team other than white Americans was just automatically off limits in their heads. Had it not been that way maybe they would have made one or more of the F4 non white. We'll never know.
Also given the Marvel Method were the artist basically comes up with most of the story and the writer simply puts in the dialogue (and even then Kirby would put in his own) it often mean the authors would be at odds. There are many times in early F4 issues that the dialogue contradicts whats depicted in the art sometimes in ways that alters the characters significantly. Do the F4 kill their villains for instance? The art in the very first issue says yes the dialogue says no and instead the Moleman blows up his own base. So which of the authors do we listen to?
Now all this being said Fox's Fantastic Four is horrible but the casting of a black actor to play Johnny Storm is not a reason.
Ironically, some posters here have proved them correct.
On, do give up with the poor me rubbish. Many non-white actors, directors, musicians etc, etc do VERY well. Using ethnicity as an excuse weakens your argument, and makes people wonder how skilled you are. Could it possibly be that you didn't get a job because someone else was a better choice?
Now all this being said Fox's Fantastic Four is horrible but the casting of a black actor to play Johnny Storm is not a reason.
Well, I believe it is part of the reason, A small part. The major parts being the appalling portrayal of Doctor Doom, and an impenetrable script.... based only on the clips that I've seen and reviews I've read.
That's the funny thing. Nathanbrazil is treating the comics like sacred texts which should never be contradicted. Yet the long-running comics themselves have so many universes and so many retcons that it's impossible to faithfully adapt one set of comics without directly contradicting another set.
No sir (or madam) I've never said anything in comics is sacred. What I did say was that I believe the writers and artists work should be respected, in other words faithfully reproduced.
As far as I know there has never been a black Torch in any Marvel comics alternative reality, or a Doctor Doom that looks like a Terminator reject. But if there were, I'd have no problem with THAT version being brought to film, just as long as it was made clear it wasn't supposed to be the original.
No sir (or madam) I've never said anything in comics is sacred. What I did say was that I believe the writers and artists work should be respected, in other words faithfully reproduced.
As far as I know there has never been a black Torch in any Marvel comics alternative reality, or a Doctor Doom that looks like a Terminator reject. But if there were, I'd have no problem with THAT version being brought to film, just as long as it was made clear it wasn't supposed to be the original.
Ah, so Nick Fury is somehow different to you because the Marvel Ultimate universe had a black Nick Fury before the movies?
Why should comics be the only medium that's allowed to make alterations? Both the Ultimate comics and the modern movies are adapting 50+ year-old characters for a new generation.
Of course, the "original" Nick Fury was depicted on screen by David Hasselhoff. But no sane person would ever prefer that version.:D
No sir (or madam) I've never said anything in comics is sacred. What I did say was that I believe the writers and artists work should be respected, in other words faithfully reproduced.
As far as I know there has never been a black Torch in any Marvel comics alternative reality, or a Doctor Doom that looks like a Terminator reject. But if there were, I'd have no problem with THAT version being brought to film, just as long as it was made clear it wasn't supposed to be the original.
So you would be OK with a black Superman as it is shown in more than one of the alternate DC's universes that some versions are black.
No sir (or madam) I've never said anything in comics is sacred. What I did say was that I believe the writers and artists work should be respected, in other words faithfully reproduced.
In other words, you want the work of the writers and artists to be held sacred. Glad we cleared that up.
As far as I know there has never been a black Torch in any Marvel comics alternative reality, or a Doctor Doom that looks like a Terminator reject. But if there were, I'd have no problem with THAT version being brought to film, just as long as it was made clear it wasn't supposed to be the original.
How often has Lois Lane been ginger in the comics? How often has Bucky Barnes started out as slightly older and a lot more muscular than Steve Rogers? How often has the Joker been a gangster called Jack Napier?
EVERY ADAPTED WORK MAKES ALTERATIONS! This is not a shocking new trend, but something that's almost as old as fiction itself.
No sir (or madam) I've never said anything in comics is sacred. What I did say was that I believe the writers and artists work should be respected, in other words faithfully reproduced.
You really don't undestand this film lark, do you.
That's the funny thing. Nathanbrazil is treating the comics like sacred texts which should never be contradicted. Yet the long-running comics themselves have so many universes and so many retcons that it's impossible to faithfully adapt one set of comics without directly contradicting another set.
How often has Lois Lane been ginger in the comics? How often has Bucky Barnes started out as slightly older and a lot more muscular than Steve Rogers? How often has the Joker been a gangster called Jack Napier?
EVERY ADAPTED WORK MAKES ALTERATIONS! This is not a shocking new trend, but something that's almost as old as fiction itself.
Indeed.
Just look at all the times both Marvel and DC have changed things, especially DC with its love of "Crises".
Hell, and both of them have had *major* universe-changing events this year, with Secret Wars and Convergence.
Comments
There is nothing about Nick Fury, Perry White, Mercy Graves or Johnny Storm that defines them as quintessentially white.
Agreed. If you saw my original post, one of the main things that has put me off this movie is the dire attempt at Doctor Doom. I just don't get what is wrong with the film makers and how they show him. I mean, the movie adaptations of Magneto and the recent TV adaptation of Kingpin in Daredevil (being the other two long lasting iconic villains of the Marvel universe) have been really good.
But when it comes to Victor Von Doom, they just can't or won't get it right. I'm thinking it's can't, as the Iron Man movies have shown us armour can be done properly, and look very good on screen.
A white Othello would be an entirely different story, would it not?
Except for how they have been shown in comics, for the majority of their lives on the printed page. Why not respect that?
This offends you ?
What type of idiot are you that gets offended at movie casting ?
The movies always make massive changes to the source material. Yet you're fixating on a relatively minor issue.
Agreed to a point. Nick Fury is traditionally a white man but very few people kicked up a fuss when they saw Samuel L Jackson playing the role. Skin colour didn't affect the plot and Jackson is bloody cool
That said, I'm not sure the team creating this movie actually understood the Fantastic Four. I read the comics for several years in my teens (in the 90s) and this movie had absolutely no similarities to those comics. I read a review that suggested the team making it seemed embarrassed by the source material and that's how it felt. The Fantastic Four are the lynchpin of Marvel comics. Whenever there's a large event it's normally them in the center of it (and Doom as the lead bad guy). How on earth can the studios keep screwing them up?
Only when they understand why people liked the source material. Joss Whedon understands comics and his version of The Avengers was wildly popular because he understood why people liked the Avengers in the first place. He made some changes, mostly relatively minor, but ultimately left the core of the comics in place (plus he's the only one in Hollywood to really understand how to make the Hulk interesting). Russell T Davies did the same with Doctor Who.
The writers of Fantastic Four just didn't get it, they interpreted the source material without understanding why people liked it. Fantastic Four should have more in common with The Avengers than The Dark Knight.
He's a walking, talking copy of the Daily Mail.
Non-white actors passively still have to 'represent', that is to justify their presence and casting in certain roles ; producers and casting directors second guess the potential prejudice inherent in a mass audience, and unfortunately, some comments on this thread prove their jaundiced judgements correct.
For those of us performers of "ethnicity", who happen to have a dark skin albeit with a British upbringing, it is a daily professional battle against a dreary and dehumanising set of cliches and prejudices foisted upon us. Not by the public, but Casting Directors and Producers who project their own unacknowledged conservatism and racism onto an imagined racist audience.
Ironically, some posters here have proved them correct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Nick_Fury
When she was with the other classmates she looked like their Mum
Also, what people liked about the source material simply might not work on screen, but there is still something about that source material that could form the basis of something that would work on screen.
However there are other things going on that kicked the productiin out of control.
Newscorp want to sell 20th Century Fox - the whole studio - to Disney (Disney is now owner of Marvel comics and Star Wars - two entities Fox built up) and Fantastic Four was cut off from base camp because, in three years, Disney will probably do its own. So this FF film is one the director will only take half the credit of and, aftr discovering the studio didn't care, the director wound up turning up high on set and then leaving the set.
He was paid for cursory promotion in a contract that means he can't publicly declaim the film until after 2015 but there it is.
Not really sure about that.
Back in the day Stan 'The Man' Lee would actively promote the company to outside press by saying that they created the first black superhero (Black Panther) and the first African American super hero (Falcon). Also those who knew him have said Kirby was an advocate for more diversity.
Diversity in it's cast of characters is a big part of their current company initiative with more non straight white male characters being put in positions where they can sell where arguably they couldn't otherwise.
That's really more of Stan's bombast but I suppose in the sixties you could argue it was "The Words's Greatest Comics Magazine" but other than some notable runs it hasn't really been that for a long time.
In the 80s and 90s it was the X-Men and Spider-Man, in the 2000s it was the Avengers that were the priorities both in the real world of publishing and in the fictional world. They generally had respect for being the comic that kick started everything sadly I think it's that reverence that has kept it stagnant.
I think these are two mutually exclusive arguments. Putting aside that Caucasian actors have played Othello (Olivier being a famous example) the characters race is part of the character's story. Brabantio doesn't want his daughter involved with a Moor and one of the many reasons Iago hates Othello is implied to be race.
It's really whether the character's race is important to their story or appeal. In the case of Othello it is, in the case of Johnny Storm it's not.
Nor do I think author intent in this case is a good defense. Would Martin Goodman have published Fantastic Four had any of the team not been white? This wasn't too long after EC stopped publishing comics because it portrayed a black astronaut as the protagonist.
I doubt the thought of making the team other than white Americans was just automatically off limits in their heads. Had it not been that way maybe they would have made one or more of the F4 non white. We'll never know.
Also given the Marvel Method were the artist basically comes up with most of the story and the writer simply puts in the dialogue (and even then Kirby would put in his own) it often mean the authors would be at odds. There are many times in early F4 issues that the dialogue contradicts whats depicted in the art sometimes in ways that alters the characters significantly. Do the F4 kill their villains for instance? The art in the very first issue says yes the dialogue says no and instead the Moleman blows up his own base. So which of the authors do we listen to?
Now all this being said Fox's Fantastic Four is horrible but the casting of a black actor to play Johnny Storm is not a reason.
Exactly what I explained, if you can be bothered to read.
No idiot at all, just someone expressing an opinion without being insulting, unlike yourself.
On, do give up with the poor me rubbish. Many non-white actors, directors, musicians etc, etc do VERY well. Using ethnicity as an excuse weakens your argument, and makes people wonder how skilled you are. Could it possibly be that you didn't get a job because someone else was a better choice?
Well, I believe it is part of the reason, A small part. The major parts being the appalling portrayal of Doctor Doom, and an impenetrable script.... based only on the clips that I've seen and reviews I've read.
No sir (or madam) I've never said anything in comics is sacred. What I did say was that I believe the writers and artists work should be respected, in other words faithfully reproduced.
As far as I know there has never been a black Torch in any Marvel comics alternative reality, or a Doctor Doom that looks like a Terminator reject. But if there were, I'd have no problem with THAT version being brought to film, just as long as it was made clear it wasn't supposed to be the original.
Why should comics be the only medium that's allowed to make alterations? Both the Ultimate comics and the modern movies are adapting 50+ year-old characters for a new generation.
Of course, the "original" Nick Fury was depicted on screen by David Hasselhoff. But no sane person would ever prefer that version.:D
So you would be OK with a black Superman as it is shown in more than one of the alternate DC's universes that some versions are black.
How often has Lois Lane been ginger in the comics? How often has Bucky Barnes started out as slightly older and a lot more muscular than Steve Rogers? How often has the Joker been a gangster called Jack Napier?
EVERY ADAPTED WORK MAKES ALTERATIONS! This is not a shocking new trend, but something that's almost as old as fiction itself.
Indeed.
Just look at all the times both Marvel and DC have changed things, especially DC with its love of "Crises".
Hell, and both of them have had *major* universe-changing events this year, with Secret Wars and Convergence.