Any time someone invokes the word "woke" in protest of lazy writing in movies and television, someone who wants to shut the conversation down will say, "What is woke?," as though they've never heard the word before. How do you respond to this sort of disingenuous attempt at redirection?
shareWoke means different things to different people, so when someone rightfully asks what is woke, they are asking the person what do you mean by woke.
shareInsincere pandering.
If you have to have certain boxes checked, because you want to look progressive, that's woke.
Serious question: how can you tell if someone is insincere and are just pandering? How can you tell that they cast someone just because they want to look progressive? A film could have a diverse cast or be deemed progressive because they were the best actors for the role. I thought Halle Bailey did a great job in The Little Mermaid and was an excellent choice. Is it pandering and checking boxes because she is black or was she selected because she is talented and the best choice for the role?
shareYou bring up a problem Hollywood has created for itself (and for audiences, regardless of their political leanings). In the 1980s, nobody ever batted an eye at a woman or "person of color" cast as a lead or in a prominent role in a movie. It was special when Duane Jones (I think that's his name) was cast in Night of the Living Dead in 1968 because his immutable characteristics instantly turned that role political. It was unintentional, however, as Romero said many times, Jones was simply "the most qualified actor for the job." Hmmm. So, the 1970s opens the doors for all ethnic groups, all genders, etc., to have a place in the movies. And by the 1980s, it's not uncommon for (what would eventually be termed) "diverse" casting. That lasted well into the 1990s and early 2000s. It's only in the last fifteen years or so that "race" and gender have become such a big deal again (as they were in the segregated 1950s). The problem now for filmmakers is that if they want to cast an actor simply because he or she prove the most fit to play the part, should that actor be from a "protected class," it's a Boy Who Cried Wolf situation and those who are vehemently against wokism will dismiss the movie without even watching it. This stuff is not good for the movies and everyone who loves movies should be concerned.
share>This stuff is not good for the movies and everyone who loves movies should be concerned.
I think that movies have serious problems way being 'wokism', which sure, exists (although is not necessarily a predictive of failure: The Little Mermaid as mentioned was very successful).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQF82Kj-v0E&t=3786s
This is a good video on it. "Woke" isn't even in the top 10 of problems.
You’ve activated the Skavau-bot 👆🏻 by mentioning Woke. Its job is to now gaslight you into believing that Woke isn’t a thing.
Notice how it instantly tries to divert away from the issue, and even puts Woke in quote marks as if it isn’t an established phenomenon, which it clearly is.
How did I "divert" away from the issue?
I put "woke" in quotation marks because people hold different positions on where 'woke' begins and ends.
If you can't win an award because you don't check boxes - what is that?
If the story is best told with an all Asian cast, why throw in some black or white actors?
I would agree that there shouldn't be a requirement of checking boxes to win an award, but it is ultimately up to the body governing the award. I have no objection to an all Asian cast or an all black cast or an all white cast, but it is possible to have a diverse cast with different races because the actors were best for their individual roles. Diversity doesn't necessarily mean that actors were thrown in because of race.
shareBut now you can't help but look at a movie nominated for an Oscar and ask yourself, who in the cast checked which box?
If I were that actor who merely represented a box checked, I'd feel pretty disappointed in myself.
Further proof that awards are meaningless.
I have never asked who checked which box while watching a movie. I just try and appreciate and enjoy the film and performance.
shareYou're willfully missing the point.
If the people making hte movie want a chance to win awards, then when they are making the movie, they will be asking who checkes what boxes.
That has a number of issues. And it is a good part of what defines "woke".
Have you considered the possibility that the boxes are being checked organically? Maybe someone is a fan of a particular actor and wants to work with them and it has nothing to do with checking boxes. You are assuming that the filmmakers are casting actors to check boxes, but it is more likely that they are a fan of the actor and want to work with them.
shareExcept that we as a society, for decades now, have been talking about how we are "Celebrating diversithy" and "fighting to increase inclusion".
So, you have a society as a whole publicly stating that they are aiming to "increase representatiation", ect.
AND you have an industry where important awards are now being given out, based on "boxes checked,
AND we often hear major players such as the head of Disney, talking shit about "diversity" and blah, blah, blah, ect.
So, it's actually pretty reasonable to conclude that all that stated intent is being put into action.
There are talented actors of all backgrounds, so I don't think it is reasonable to assume that an actor is only cast because of diversity. Do you think someone like Denzel Washington only gets roles because he is black?
shareNo. He's a good actor.
But would The Banshees of Inisherin be able to win an Oscar now with it's cast?
Would they have to throw in some token character to quality for an Oscar now?
The diversity rules for the Oscars is for the best picture category only and there are several criteria. A film only has to meet two of four criteria. It is not just based on the cast or characters and includes things like the crew, department heads, production, distribution or financing company. It would be very easy for most films to meet these requirements.
shareThat is true.
shareSo, society/hollywood/studios formally and openly state their intentions to "increase divesity"
and then we see it happening, over and over.
and then you come at me for "assuming" that they people are doing what they said they would do and we can see them doing?
"ONLY CAST"? come on dude. No one is saying that they are grabbing the first random black guy that comes by.
They still have huge pools of want a be actors to draw on, even after they dismiss all the ones that don't check tthe right boxes.
That they are likely to be able to find a qualified actor who checked the right boxes,
is not the point.
THe point(s) are, that that is a big part of what "woke" is, and it is morally wrong. And it often does lead to the actor not being the BEST possible choice for the role.
So if a filmmaker want to make a film focused on black people or gay people because it interests them, that is woke and morally wrong? If a filmmaker wants to work with a famous, award winning actor who happens to be black or gay, that is woke and morally wrong? I disagree with this idea that they are primarily focused on checking boxes.
shareTwo scenarios.
1. A filmmaker wants to make a movie. He has a creative vision and a script. His creative vision is of a group of black guys, having an adventure with heavy elements of comedy.
2. A filmmaker wants to make a movie. He has a creative vision and a script. His creative vision is of a group of guys, having an adventure with heavy elements of comedy. He also wants to see the movie industry have more diversity and representation. AND he wants to win some awards to boost his resume. So he directs his casting call to check a bunch of boxes, both because he believes in diversity and because he wants to appeal to award committees that require it.
Are you really unable to grasp the difference between the two scenarios?
To be clear, the first one does not bother me at all. The second one is racist discrimination.
Clearly, I see the difference, but I don't believe scenario 2 is very common. A more likely scenario would be his vision is a group of guys having an adventure and he casts the best or most popular actors that he can get, regardless of race. Some people are assuming that just because the film has a diverse cast that it was just to "check boxes".
shareReally? You think that all that talk in society in general and hollywood in particular about "increasing diversity", even REQUIRING it,
is what? Just shit talk?
You can talk about and agree with diversity in films, but that doesn't mean that a filmmaker is going to force diversity at the detriment of the film. If I was making a film, I would not specify the race of the characters in advance, but I would have an open casting call and select the best for the roles, regardless of race. You can have a diverse cast in an organic way, without it being forced and without pandering or checking boxes.
shareThat doesn't seem to be what we have been seeing from them.
What films were ruined or damaged by forced diversity or wokeness in them?
shareThe idiot black lesbian valkyrie definetely damaged the recent thor movives, imo.
shareI enjoyed all the Thor movies. I don't think her character damaged the films in any way. The most recent Thor movie was a lot of fun. If the character was a straight white woman, but the rest of the film was exactly the same, would it really have made a big difference?
shareThat character could have been FANTASTIC.
A hot blond bi-sexual, last of her kind, who fought against teh Goddess of DEATH, and survived?
If they wanted "to put a chinck in it", that would have been a great place to start,
good actress could have started a film franchise all of her own.
Instead? She was... meh. AND really a BLACK LESBIAN? Pretty hamfisted wokeness.
Yes, hurt the movie.
I disagree. Perhaps you aren't a fan of hers or you didn't like her performance, but I don't think the fact that the character was gay and black hurt the movie at all.
shareA NORSE mythology figure, being black? Of course it undermined the story and immersion into the story.
A lesbian? In a comic book movie aimed at an audience that is primarily MALE? You think having a female character that is NOT open to men is not a minus? LOL. AND, again, it's ham fisted wokeness undermining immersion into the story.
So you are okay with mythological figures, superheros, and completely unrealistic characters and stories, but black people undermine the story? Most normal people can enjoy a superhero or action movie regardless of the skin colour of the characters. And female characters in movies don't need to be open to men. They are fictional characters. You can't hook up with them in real life. It only undermines immersion if you dislike back people or lesbians. I enjoyed the story and the film and many others did too.
shareIt is NOT "black people" that undermine the story.
It is one thing to disagree with me. It is another to misrepresent what I said.
If someone did a movie with characters based on...say... Chinese mythology, how many of them would you expect to be WHITE?
It depends on the story. A film based on Chinese mythology could have some white supporting characters and it wouldn't bother me.
shareDon't play dumb.
Chinese gods are going to look CHINESE.
As well they should.
Ditto, black Norse mythology characters is almost certainly woke shit.
Call it what you want, but my argument is still the same. It did not hurt the film in any way and it would not have changed the story if the character was white.
share
Sure it did. it was bad casting. Every fan who saw that, had to suspend disbelief AGAIN, and pretend to not notice the woke shit.
A hot blond starlet, could have taken that role and made it shine.
It could have been and should have been kick ass.
AND, somewhere there is a white actress that got fucked, so that the studio and director could check some boxes.
The role could have changed her life.
I'm going to have to disagree with the claim of bad casting. And there is no guarantee a hot blonde would have done a great job. A white actress might have done a poor job in the role. There is no way to know how good or bad another actress would have done in the role.
shareClearly when I used the word "could" I was not saying that a hot blond would "guarentee" a great job.
You know how you know that? Becuase I clearly stated it.
Sure there is no way to know if another actress would have done better.
BUT, she would have had advantages that the black chickif didn't.
First of all, she would have made SENSE as a valkyrie, instead of NOT making sense. That would have helped sell her character.
Second of all, if she was sexier and not A LESBIAN, a significant portion of hte male fan base would have liked that.
Again, incredible patience and leniency from you Corbell.
This woke drone is dropping all the fallacies it can to gaslight you into not noticing woke, much like a Holocaust denier.
It’s there, it’s shit, it’s ruining Hollywood, and it’s dying.
What fallacies did he use? It was a debate about a character in a film, and whether it hurted it or not. One of Corbells main claims was that men are somehow put off by lesbians (is he an idiot?)
Is that your sole purpose on this forum now? To cheerlead ideological allies of yours who argue with people about TV and film regarding 'woke'?
How about the idiocy of not understanding the term "could"?
shareI didn't comment on that part, just the notion that men might object to lesbians in media.
shareSkavau, do you find attractive women attractive, sexually speaking?
Yes
shareThis is one PART fo my point re the hypothetical hot blond valkyrie. Sexy and of a type that would be open to the idea of male companionship. That is a superior basis for a POPULAR character than a less attractive unfriendly black bitch.
shareHave you considered that straight men may not find black women inherently unattractive as compared to a white blonde woman?
Also, it's a superhero film. It's not that deep. I question someone's entertainment interests if they watch films just to get turned on.
I said nothing about black women being inherently unattractive. I was referring to the one specific black woman. DId you really not get that? Oh wait, you're doing that shit talk thing again. Go fuck youreself.
shareOkay. So this black women you think is unattractive.
It could just as easily work if they swapped her out for another more attractive black woman then.
I'll give my position. If we had a sort of Chinese version of Game of Thrones. Not a literal copy and paste, but a medieval fantasy set in a fictional world - but rooted in Chinese history - I would expect the whole cast to be Chinese (or be able to pass as Chinese)
But if it's something as commodified as the MCU, I wouldn't really give a shit. I don't understand the complaint in the context of the MCU, probably the most bastardised and commercialised franchise on earth.
You know, I agree that racewashing is stupid in many cases.
But crying about historical authenticity or mythological authenticity in a capeshit movie is absurd to me.
>A lesbian? In a comic book movie aimed at an audience that is primarily MALE?
Yeah men have never been into lesbians. Lmao okay
Since when was serious, deep romantic relationships ever a major part of the MCU anyway?
Ignoring them is the best response. It's hard to keep from replying, but if you engage with the brainwashed, it generally leads nowhere.
shareWoke = Fascism + Hypocrisy
shareWoke is many things, but I have no idea how it is fascist. You are a fascist though.
shareGreat way to make a word powerless.
_______________________________________________
Curent MC Posters with B1cKsurN Derangement Syndrome
Skavu
Keelai
robocat893
ThaiStickers
TrentnQuarentino
Satan2016
TVfan supports the state shutting down all "mainstream" media outlets and wants to persecute LGBT people.
He is a fascist.
I direct you to my thread: https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/659378fb788f7a7612b2d2ff/TVFan-is-an-anti-american-authoritarian-who-rejects-the-first-amendment-and-who-wants-to-persecute-LGBT-people
Explain how he wants to persecute LGBT people...
_______________________________________________
Curent MC Posters with B1cKsurN Derangement Syndrome
Skavu
Keelai
robocat893
ThaiStickers
TrentnQuarentino
Satan2016
It's literally in my thread.
https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/65757dacbf40d504a2a62c37/Russian-court-bans-LGBT-movement?reply=65758412bf40d504a2a62c65
TVfan endorses the Russian "LGBT propaganda" and "LGBT extremism" laws that combined ban any and all LGBT expression, culture, and activism entirely.
Woke = Fascism disguised as manners.
George Carlin figured this out decades ago but they called it "PC" back then.
How is it fascism?
You suggest I am making a word powerless by calling TVfan a fascist. Yet calling woke fascist is not?
Calling anything fascist in 2024 makes it powerless.
shareThis makes no sense. Why would it make it powerless? What circumstances have to be in order for it to not be powerless?
Would you call an actual neo-nazi a fascist? Would that be an accurate description?
Nazi is also a word that has been stripped of it's power. You may as well just say 'poopy-head' now because they have the same effect thanks to the left.
_______________________________________________
Curent MC Posters with B1cKsurN Derangement Syndrome
Skavau
Keelai
robocat893
ThaiStickers
TrentnQuarentino
Satan2016
Information-Police
THE WORD NAZI SHOULD NOT HAVE ANY POWER.
shareThat's not an answer. Would you call an actual neo-nazi a fascist? Would that be an accurate description?
shareThis topic has been beaten to death, and we have defined woke quite well on this board.
shareThe black community started using it to mean that you were someone who was aware of the Man's bullshit. You weren't going to get played for a fool. Something like that. It's what I read, anyway.
shareThat ship sailed a long time ago!
shareAnd a pussy was a cute little cat and being gay meant you were happy and carefree.
shareHow do you respond to this sort of disingenuous attempt at redirection?
I understand your point. The problem is, once the question, "What is 'woke'?" is asked, the conversation is bound to head in a different direction. "Wokism" thrives in the, "It's just an idea" arena where there is no precise definition. It's an abstract concept and the people who invented it and foisted it on the rest of society want to pretend it's not a real thing any time it's questioned. That is a problem.
shareTo be fair, many reactionaries who deride "wokism" also draw the line at different points. I have pointed out successful 'woke' TV shows and films (or shows characterised as such by many) and I am sometimes met in response with "That's not woke", but there would be commenters literally a few lines up complaining about the very examples I gave as being *woke*.
shareWho's the people who invented and foisted it but pretend it's not a real thing? The people who support wokism, or the people who criticize it?
And do you agree that it's an abstract concept with no precise definition?
A person who is in a state of delusion finding injustice in everything but their own behavior. A cancel culture marked by authoritarian and fascist tendencies. A culture aligned with communist ideologies.
>A culture aligned with communist ideologies.
"Woke" has been capitalist brushed for some time now. I assume you've heard wokewashing as a term before, right?