Its called acting for a reason. A long time ago female characters were played by male actors and this was the norm, it was quite controversial for a woman to even act on stage.
I am very much in agreement with the thought that having a big name actor play a transgender in a movie would have done more to advance the cause of transgender people than this dummy spit we have now.
If this movie ever gets made now it will be a shitty shoestring budget and probably won’t even get a decent run in the cinemas if at all.
Well done SJWs you killed a movie about a minority you profess to care about. Goddamn hypocrites.
12 Likes
10 Likes
What do you think happened to cause that to change?
Females began playing females and everyone realized that’s how it should have been all along.
Change doesn’t occur in a vacuum. It’s absolutely possible that because of this controversy, the next movie with trans themes may actually be cast with trans actors, when it otherwise may not have been.
16 Likes
No, you merely implied that there is something wrong with attempting to make Hollywood more diverse and reflective of our society, and that the “natural order” is just that, and the cream naturally rises to the top. None of that is correct. We live in a society shot through with hierarchies and oppression.
11 Likes
I don’t understand this. Would a continuation of black face have been a positive step forward for African Americans? Would the continued trope of the flamboyant gay man as the ONLY depiction of gay men been great, because, at least they are being represented?
I think plenty of people understand why certain actors get certain roles, and it many times has little to do with talent and more to do with power plays behind the scenes. Hollywood is a business that isn’t tied to actual talent in acting.
So, should we just keep casting Mary Pickford and Charlie Chaplin over and over again in films, since we know they were bankable stars?
Yet, trans actors can’t barely get roles of trans characters, much less get in the room for non-trans characters.
Yes. Asexual, with all that making out with Lt. Uhuru. This is part of the point, actually, that Quinto, an OUT gay man, is playing a role. That would not have happened with out years of activism that helped to shift the culture, both behind the scenes and in society at large.
I’m sorry, but if you don’t think that gay men can have sex appeal to the opposite sex, then you’re just blind here. Plenty of gay men are very appealing to women - the aforemented Quinto is a great example. Sex appeal has little to do with sexual orientation.
It has been. More trans actors are showing up in TV shows, in part because people are making decisions behind the scenes to actually cast them. The process of “normalizing” trans actors has already begun and I think that casting cisgendered folks to play major leads is seemingly myopic and bigoted to many of us at this point. Hence this discussion over Scar Jo playing a trans man.
Maybe some do. He’s really not that great of an actor. No matter the role, he plays the same guy. This is less about his talent and more about the fact that he’s good enough to be an action star, and still attractive enough to bring in a broader audience. But it’s not about his talent. I’ve seen him in enough films to be able to say that he’s just not a great actor.
I don’t see why not. And as I and others noted, there are plenty of mediocre actors who get steady work in blockbuster films. There is no reason why trans actors need to be so incredibly superb that they are the next Laurence Olivier, considering that plenty of actors manage to get by with relatively modest amounts of talent (and powerful friends all over hollywood). Hollywood acting isn’t always about being great at the craft, it’s often about being a bankable star - see Tom Cruise.
Indeed. I hope that I haven’t overstepped my bounds. I just find it incredibly frustrating that people find the status quo acceptable, and that somehow hollywood is about pure talent instead of who you know.
12 Likes
I honestly don’t see how anyone can think that’s a real thing. It’s like saying that Elvis becoming a superstar off what was previously associated with black musicians was empowering for the black musicians, because “at least their music was getting heard.” Well, no, actually, black artists kept getting screwed as Elvis and other white rock stars got rich off the culture that was developed within the black community. Years later, black artists were still trying to claw back royalties owed to them, and I mean well into the 80s and 90s.
8 Likes
And yet, Scar Jo was going to have one of those few roles. That’s the problem here (or was). A break out role like this could open doors to OTHER kinds of roles.
7 Likes
9 Likes
Another point I see here is Hollywood’s systematic fucked upedness in casting trans roles, period. This is a movie about a trans man… Why was casting looking for an actress? Same with roles about trans women – they’re too often played by men (see Tambour in Transparent).
Maybe it is acting, but under that makeup would still be a woman (in this case). This plays right into the prejudice that trans people are just playing dress up, that they’re not “not a real…” It’s refusing to accept people for actually being who they are.
Further, is the storyline that a cis actor or actress taking on a role like this is being “brave”. Because at the end of the day, they take their make-up off and go home. Nobody’s going to beat them up when they wait for the bus, nobody’s going to hurl slurs or mock them at the coffee shop, and like any other role, it will be over, relatively quickly. It doesn’t require special bravery, and pays better than most jobs.
I don’t care how good a job she may or may not have done. The fail happened when the agency decided the part should be played by a woman, rather than actually considering the identity of the person to be portrayed.
10 Likes
… aaand Rock’n’Roll is racist now. Well, I get it, it has to be, hasn’t it. I’m not saying that is wrong. Every cultural product will mirror the society it came from, and its conflicts. It’s just… I like to have some nice things left without thinking too much about them? Like, can you enjoy being on a boat while migrants drown in the Mediterranean? How to enjoy reading about ancient Roman history without being repulsed by them being genocidal imperialists who built their whole society on slavery? Can I like Scarlett Johansson without being an anti-transgender bigot? Many people give a shit about any of these things and seem to be pretty happy. How do I care about any of this without spoiling it for me?
Damn social justice warriors ruined things by making it possible for you to watch Scarlett Johansson and her to have a career.
Did you really want to watch young boys in dresses playing her roles? Do you long for those nude scenes?
10 Likes
Oh the humanity!
12 Likes
were you this upset when you learned that thomas “all men are created equal” jefferson owned slaves?
7 Likes
Just because you infer something, doesn’t mean I implied it. My point was that that’s what actors do, play people they are not. If you make being transgender this weird exception, where non transgender actors can’t play it, you are doing just that… Making it a weird exception.
I’d suggest that all men and women are on a spectrum where they all have masculine and feminine traits. Of course some people try to hide this, because there is an us and them mentality. It’s perfectly normal, and maybe we should start treating it as such. Not as a weird exception where actors can no longer play certain characters because they don’t have a certain personality trait. Stop making it weird.
I believe you’ve confused weird with reasonable. But thanks for endless speaking for trans people uninvited.
8 Likes
only talking about myself again because you asked: the answer to that is “I had a WTF moment, but no”, since I am not an American, and while I have a keen interest in your history and politics, they are not, by far, connected to my life as closely as some of your cultural exports are.
Black face was bad for two reasons. 1) It was used to caricature black people and 2) it ignored a ton of highly qualified black actors.
We understand there are factors in addition to acting talent going on. But I really think you’re underselling what actors actually do. It’s a real job, success isn’t completely merit based, but still some people are really good at it and some people bad. At the top these are incredibly talented people and it’s asking a lot that a very small pool of trans actors can produce people to act at that level.
Yeah I forgot about that part 
Though I think the point still stands, I think part of what they tried to do with that relationship was had Spock play against type with a relationship you don’t expect. So using a gay actor brings in someone who lacks a lot of their own heterosexual fame. His being gay probably contributed to what the filmmaker was trying to do.
Films are expensive, I’m not sure you’ll find a producer willing to make that bet. Start casting trans actors in prominent supporting roles and figure out what works. To be honest another factor that hasn’t been discussed yet is that a huge portion of audiences will be prejudiced, some will refuse to go because they don’t want to see “that” and others will go to see the weird person playing lead.
There’s a big social benefit just for exposing people to that, but as a filmmaker it’s a very expensive risk to take and I’m not sure how many people you’ll find to take that risk.
Yeah, but he plays that guy really well.
And he had more variety early in his career, part of his type-casting now is that everyone likes his type and there’s not a great reason to break his image.
He’s also good enough at self-promotion to bring a bit of attention that way.
But even if you think he’s not a great “actor” I think you’ll find that you spend a lot of time watching him while he’s on the screen. I think there’s very, very few people who can be that telegenic on screen.
- I’m not saying the status quo is acceptable, I’m just proposing what I think it a more realistic path to change it.
- I’m also not saying that Hollywood is about pure talent. I’m saying that for the lead roles you do need a very rare confluence of things, including talent. And it’s unrealistic to think that you can find that collection of qualities in a very tiny community.
Now, I think you could make a big budget Hollywood film with a trans actor in the lead role if you find the right actor and design the role for them. But I don’t think that’s what happened here.
The movie was released in 2009 - Quinto came out in 2011.
“Black face was bad for two reasons. 1) It was used to caricature black people and 2) it ignored a ton of highly qualified black actors.”
The transitive property applies here. This is why trans people complained about previous depictions and lack of opportunities for trans actors.
edit:
This is why trans people complained about how this character was planned to be depicted - noted above. And the last one with a big name star - Jared Leto.
11 Likes
Not in my opinion, you haven’t.
You’re doing the same thing I have been; arguing for people to quit making piss poor excuses for maintaining the status quo, as if its written in stone.
13 Likes
