What Gets On Your Nerves 2, The Thread Without a Witty Subtitle!

[Spuro]

How come men and white people don't need the "If the story calls for it it's okay, otherwise it's just forced," excuse?

Nah because back then having a strong female lead wasn't considered ground-breaking or revolutionary. Didn't fit the agenda.

https://chnm.gmu.edu/aq/arnold/arnoldwe ... ersext.htm

Linda Hamilton's arms became the talk of the summer of 1991, at least among women viewers of Terminator 2. Those arms became desirable and women were striving to duplicate them. One trainer at a Manhattan health club stated that after Terminator 2, "every woman who came to me wanted Linda Hamilton's arms" (O'Neill 1992: B1). During the following year, Hamilton's pumped-up arms had become an established icon...

.. The opening week of Terminator 2 found Linda Hamilton, director James Cameron and co-star Arnold Schwarzenegger featured on many major news and interview programs. While interviews with Cameron and Schwarzenegger typically considered issues like the film's record setting budget, the startling computer-generated special effects, or the recasting of Schwarzenegger into a “kinder, gentler” terminator, Hamilton’s interviews referred to her physical transformation and weapons skills, or more specifically, to her arms and the arms they carried.

Seems ground-breaking enough to me.

[miguelnuva]

Exactly. Just putting any person of color or woman at the helm just for praise is beyond stupid. If the story calls for it fine no big deal but to change it just for wokeness is dumb.

And how would one determine if a stroy calls for a man, woman or person of color?

Sure the character's gender can be known before hand bit when you get to the casting their are only a handful of roles when considering race.

[eabaker]

Nobody ever says, "Sure, putting a straight white man in the lead is fine, if the story calls for it."

And when we look back on strong female leads from the 80s and 90s, the same examples get cited again and again, precisely because they were exceptions to the rule that stood the test of time; they are not representative of the prevalent attitudes of pop culture at the time; and there was plenty of commentary on the emergence of such characters, albeit commentary that fewer people were paying attention to at the time, because it wasn't as instantly mass accessible.

[_JNavs_]

Nah because back then having a strong female lead wasn't considered ground-breaking or revolutionary. Didn't fit the agenda.

https://chnm.gmu.edu/aq/arnold/arnoldwe ... ersext.htm

Linda Hamilton's arms became the talk of the summer of 1991, at least among women viewers of Terminator 2. Those arms became desirable and women were striving to duplicate them. One trainer at a Manhattan health club stated that after Terminator 2, "every woman who came to me wanted Linda Hamilton's arms" (O'Neill 1992: B1). During the following year, Hamilton's pumped-up arms had become an established icon...

.. The opening week of Terminator 2 found Linda Hamilton, director James Cameron and co-star Arnold Schwarzenegger featured on many major news and interview programs. While interviews with Cameron and Schwarzenegger typically considered issues like the film's record setting budget, the startling computer-generated special effects, or the recasting of Schwarzenegger into a “kinder, gentler” terminator, Hamilton’s interviews referred to her physical transformation and weapons skills, or more specifically, to her arms and the arms they carried.

Seems ground-breaking enough to me.

And I'm proud of her for being a ground-breaker, you proved my point. Strong independent women who headlined films have always existed.

It wasn't revolutionary or ground-breaking because she was a woman, it was because she set herself apart from the masses to the point where they wanted to be her, both the men and the women. Now big companies wanna stroke themselves for having a female lead of all of their films. Without remembering that usually you have to have a good story and solid independent co-characters.

Everyone wanted to be Ripley, Sarah Connor, Leia, Laurie Strode, Buffy, countless video game characters, almost every horror film survivor, etc etc. Why recently some groups of women decided to strongly segregate themselves from the norm? Who knows.

How come men and white people don't need the "If the story calls for it it's okay, otherwise it's just forced," excuse?

They do, actually. If you're setting a story in Nigeria, are you going to have the main cast filled with a bunch of arian looking whites? Of course not that'd be stupid, always has been. Was the Last Samurai all white people? Or did it have one white dude learning the traditions and cultures of a race of people he fought against? It worked because it carried substance and nuance.

Would Sucker Punch work if it was filled with men? Would the sexually abusive themes still resonate with certain audiences? Probably not. Since men are taught to hide pain, hide suffering, hide emotional turmoil by men AND women alike.

[eabaker]

And I'm proud of her for being a ground-breaker, you proved my point. Strong independent women who headlined films have always existed.

You contradict yourself here. If those characters always existed, the what ground was she breaking?

[_JNavs_]

Exactly. Just putting any person of color or woman at the helm just for praise is beyond stupid. If the story calls for it fine no big deal but to change it just for wokeness is dumb.

And how would one determine if a stroy calls for a man, woman or person of color?

Sure the character's gender can be known before hand bit when you get to the casting their are only a handful of roles when considering race.

Usually the very first line of a script introduces a character of specific gender. The first step is finding your characters. Race tends to not matter with audiences unless the character is pre-established.

Added in 1 minute 43 seconds:

And I'm proud of her for being a ground-breaker, you proved my point. Strong independent women who headlined films have always existed.

You contradict yourself here. If those characters always existed, the what ground was she breaking?

It was because she set herself apart from the masses to the point where they wanted to be her, both the men and the women.

People like Arnold or Linda had builds and personas that were strived for at the time, and even now. They were larger than life people.

[goji89]

Exactly. Just putting any person of color or woman at the helm just for praise is beyond stupid. If the story calls for it fine no big deal but to change it just for wokeness is dumb.

And how would one determine if a stroy calls for a man, woman or person of color?

Sure the character's gender can be known before hand bit when you get to the casting their are only a handful of roles when considering race.

Usually the very first line of a script introduces a character of specific gender. The first step is finding your characters. Race tends to not matter with audiences unless the character is pre-established.

The writer the setting the characters all pre determined before the casting. If they're white they're white and black if it calls for it. I don't understand the problem. I mean hiw far does it have to go? To make a movie and have every single race represented in a movie?

[UltramanGoji]

To make a movie and have every single race represented in a movie?

...Why not?

[_JNavs_]

And how would one determine if a stroy calls for a man, woman or person of color?

Sure the character's gender can be known before hand bit when you get to the casting their are only a handful of roles when considering race.

Usually the very first line of a script introduces a character of specific gender. The first step is finding your characters. Race tends to not matter with audiences unless the character is pre-established.

The writer the setting the characters all pre determined before the casting. If they're white they're white and black if it calls for it. I don't understand the problem. I mean hiw far does it have to go? To make a movie and have every single race represented in a movie?

Yeah you really can't start filming a movie when your script consists of

"______ goes to town and buys _______ a drink, this person is very wary of _______ because of their relationship with _______ who's actually half ______ and a supervillain"

Because then you spend so much time worrying about what the character is on the surface, that you're too stressed to even revamp the plot, the inner core of these characters, the themes. That example is a bit surface-level so I'm sure it'll draw criticism but my point stands, you need your characters ready to go, so that you can fix them or rewrite them as you go. Regardless of who or what they are.

Especially with pre-existing characters, say I'm an artist and a writer (which I am lol), and I make Johnny BeGood a rough going biker southern white guy who eats nails for breakfast. Then I sell my script, and they turn Johnny into a female, soft-spoken, easily offended "Jana BeNice" of Hawaiian descent.. and that's their headline whenever they wanna sell the movie to the public. Is it even still my character?

[goji89]

To make a movie and have every single race represented in a movie?

...Why not?

I meant to have every single race represented in one single movie. Unless it's an Avenger type of movie I highly doubt a single movie could achieve that while it being good.

[eabaker]

How many movies with a white character in the lead are ever criticized because "there was no specific reason for the character to be white?" Whiteness has historcaly been treated by the industry as a default. If a character's race isn't specified, it is almost always simply assumed that the character is white.

For any other group, there's this expectation that their race has to be integral to the casting. But for white actors, the standard is, "no specific reason they have to be any other race."

This has been changing gradually since the Civil Rights era, and since that era, people have been commenting on, some celebrating it, some decrying it.

However you feel about the issue, none of this new to "these days."

[_JNavs_]

To make a movie and have every single race represented in a movie?

...Why not?

I meant to have every single race represented in one single movie. Unless it's an Avenger type of movie I highly doubt a single movie could achieve that while it being good.

Ehh, yes and no.

A story can certainly include tons of races, like say it's a story set in NYC, then I'd call BS if it's anything BUT every race. We're incredibly diverse here. However while I say that, I will add sometimes storytellers forget to include a white or a latino when telling an urban story. Power did this extremely well if any of you have seen it.

[eabaker]

Yeah you really can't start filming a movie when your script consists of

"______ goes to town and buys _______ a drink, this person is very wary of _______ because of their relationship with _______ who's actually half ______ and a supervillain"

Depends on the story, really. For example, O'Bannon and Shusset intentionally crafted the story of Alien so that all the characters were gender-swappable.

[_JNavs_]

How many movies with a white character in the lead are ever criticized because "there was no specific reason for the character to be white?" Whiteness has historcaly been treated by the industry as a default. If a character's race isn't specified, it is almost always simply assumed that the character is white.

For any other group, there's this expectation that their race has to be integral to the casting. But for white actors, the standard is, "no specific reason they have to be any other race."

I disagree here, it's been extremely prevalent on journalism websites, which always end up being the talk of the town on social media before, during, and after release. If a white male is heading a new film there will no doubt be about a dozen "Welp, Here's another white guy heading a film, here's why I hate it".

I Am Legend is a perfect example of it being done right, Will Smith nailed the suburban dad with pup turned badass vampire killer. But I believe in the book he was white? Who cares Will still kicked ass perfectly. The story only focused on a father protecting his family, so there's infinite ways you could cast for that.

Added in 1 minute 49 seconds:

Yeah you really can't start filming a movie when your script consists of

"______ goes to town and buys _______ a drink, this person is very wary of _______ because of their relationship with _______ who's actually half ______ and a supervillain"

Depends on the story, really. For example, O'Bannon and Shusset intentionally crafted the story of Alien so that all the characters were gender-swappable.

Huh that's actually really cool. I'd assume names included? Since Ripley is a gender neutral name.

[goji89]

...Why not?

I meant to have every single race represented in one single movie. Unless it's an Avenger type of movie I highly doubt a single movie could achieve that while it being good.

Ehh, yes and no.

A story can certainly include tons of races, like say it's a story set in NYC, then I'd call BS if it's anything BUT every race. We're incredibly diverse here. However while I say that, I will add sometimes storytellers forget to include a white or a latino when telling an urban story. Power did this extremely well if any of you have seen it.

Not everyone has diverse group of friends. If a story is about a group of African Americans that really don't know whites, or any other race and this is their story are you to include every race just for the sake of saying "Look everyone is included". It's a story that is being told and if the story calls for it fine but if it doesn't it should be fine as well.

[_JNavs_]

I meant to have every single race represented in one single movie. Unless it's an Avenger type of movie I highly doubt a single movie could achieve that while it being good.

Ehh, yes and no.

A story can certainly include tons of races, like say it's a story set in NYC, then I'd call BS if it's anything BUT every race. We're incredibly diverse here. However while I say that, I will add sometimes storytellers forget to include a white or a latino when telling an urban story. Power did this extremely well if any of you have seen it.

Not everyone has diverse group of friends. If a story is about a group of African Americans that really don't know whites, or any other race and this is their story are you to include every race just for the sake of saying "Look everyone is included". It's a story that is being told and if the story calls for it fine but if it doesn't it should be fine as well.

That makes sense as well, and I think that comes back to where we agree. Art shouldn't have to justify why 3 white friends are the central characters of a film regardless of location, it all comes down to What is the story. But outside of them, side characters could be any race, clerks, waiters, business men etc

[eabaker]

How many movies with a white character in the lead are ever criticized because "there was no specific reason for the character to be white?" Whiteness has historcaly been treated by the industry as a default. If a character's race isn't specified, it is almost always simply assumed that the character is white.

For any other group, there's this expectation that their race has to be integral to the casting. But for white actors, the standard is, "no specific reason they have to be any other race."

I disagree here, it's been extremely prevalent on journalism websites, which always end up being the talk of the town on social media before, during, and after release. If a white male is heading a new film there will no doubt be about a dozen "Welp, Here's another white guy heading a film, here's why I hate it".

Considering the sheer number of movies produced every year with white men in the leads, I think you're mistaken in thinking that anything close to all of them receive that kind of scrutiny in any serious way.

I Am Legend is a perfect example of it being done right, Will Smith nailed the suburban dad with pup turned badass vampire killer. But I believe in the book he was white? Who cares Will still kicked ass perfectly. The story only focused on a father protecting his family, so there's infinite ways you could cast for that.

And it stands out, because the approach they took is still the exception and not the rule. That's changing, and Will Smith has been a pretty important figure in that change.

Yeah you really can't start filming a movie when your script consists of

"______ goes to town and buys _______ a drink, this person is very wary of _______ because of their relationship with _______ who's actually half ______ and a supervillain"

Depends on the story, really. For example, O'Bannon and Shusset intentionally crafted the story of Alien so that all the characters were gender-swappable.

Huh that's actually really cool. I'd assume names included? Since Ripley is a gender neutral name.

I think the names were all different in their drafts, but don't quote me on that.

[Spuro]

And I'm proud of her for being a ground-breaker, you proved my point. Strong independent women who headlined films have always existed.

It wasn't revolutionary or ground-breaking because she was a woman, it was because she set herself apart from the masses to the point where they wanted to be her, both the men and the women.

It was ground-breaking because she was a woman with a muscular, masculine build. IE, she defied traditional perceptions of Hollywood Beauty and gender roles. And it generated a lot of discussion. We saw something similar recently, with the character of Abby in The Last of Us Part 2, and her muscular body. People were in such disbelief that they accused her of being trans.

Now big companies wanna stroke themselves for having a female lead of all of their films. Without remembering that usually you have to have a good story and solid independent co-characters.

Which big companies and which films are you referring to? Because this seems like hyperbole.

Disney? It took them twenty-one films to make an entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe with a female lead. They have a more even track record with Star Wars, but they still went with a white male lead for Solo, the Mandolorian, and Star Wars: Rebels.

Warner Bros? They only made three DC films with female leads. The three Monsterverse films so far have all had male leads.

Universal? Fast and the Furious (to my knowledge) has had nothing but white male leads. I think the only exception is Tokyo Drift.

20th Century Fox? Four of X-Men's five main stars (Wolverine, Prof. X, Magneto, Mystique, and Deadpool) are men.

Dreamworks? How to Train Your Dragon's protagonist is male. Kung Fu Panda's protagonist is male. I think the protagonist of the Croods might be female, but I don't follow that franchise.

The Planet of the Apes, Spiderman, John Wick, Mission Impossible, Pacific Rim, Mad Max; all franchises with male leads.

You are overreacting. Yeah, big corporations like to ride trends without putting thought into their products or really caring about the ideals they push in their films. Yeah, we get shit films from time to time like the Star Wars sequels, or the live action Beauty and the Beast remake, or Ghostbusters 2016. But the problems in those films have nothing to do with the presence of a female in the lead role.

They do, actually. If you're setting a story in Nigeria, are you going to have the main cast filled with a bunch of arian looking whites? Of course not that'd be stupid, always has been. Was the Last Samurai all white people? Or did it have one white dude learning the traditions and cultures of a race of people he fought against? It worked because it carried substance and nuance.

Would Sucker Punch work if it was filled with men? Would the sexually abusive themes still resonate with certain audiences? Probably not. Since men are taught to hide pain, hide suffering, hide emotional turmoil by men AND women alike.

Arguably, Sucker Punch still doesn't work as it currently is, but YYMV.

You know what I remember? People being upset over news that King of the Monsters would be about “a relationship between a mother and daughter.” They called it woke, they called it pandering, they decried that it was catering to SJWs.

You know what I don't remember? People criticizing Godzilla 2014 because the Brody family, who lived in Japan, weren't Japanese.

[goji89]

G.I Jane....thats groundbreaking right?
Lol.

[_JNavs_]

And I'm proud of her for being a ground-breaker, you proved my point. Strong independent women who headlined films have always existed.

It wasn't revolutionary or ground-breaking because she was a woman, it was because she set herself apart from the masses to the point where they wanted to be her, both the men and the women.

It was ground-breaking because she was a woman with a muscular, masculine build. IE, she defied traditional perceptions of Hollywood Beauty and gender roles. And it generated a lot of discussion. We saw something similar recently, with the character of Abby in The Last of Us Part 2, and her muscular body. People were in such disbelief that they accused her of being trans.

Now big companies wanna stroke themselves for having a female lead of all of their films. Without remembering that usually you have to have a good story and solid independent co-characters.

Which big companies and which films are you referring to? Because this seems like hyperbole.

Disney? It took them twenty-one films to make an entry in the Marvel Cinematic Universe with a female lead. They have a more even track record with Star Wars, but they still went with a white male lead for Solo, the Mandolorian, and Star Wars: Rebels.

Warner Bros? They only made three DC films with female leads. The three Monsterverse films so far have all had male leads.

Universal? Fast and the Furious (to my knowledge) has had nothing but white male leads. I think the only exception is Tokyo Drift.

20th Century Fox? Four of X-Men's five main stars (Wolverine, Prof. X, Magneto, Mystique, and Deadpool) are men.

Dreamworks? How to Train Your Dragon's protagonist is male. Kung Fu Panda's protagonist is male. I think the protagonist of the Croods might be female, but I don't follow that franchise.

The Planet of the Apes, Spiderman, John Wick, Mission Impossible, Pacific Rim, Mad Max; all franchises with male leads.

You are overreacting. Yeah, big corporations like to ride trends without putting thought into their products or really caring about the ideals they push in their films. Yeah, we get poop films from time to time like the Star Wars sequels, or the live action Beauty and the Beast remake, or Ghostbusters 2016. But the problems in those films have nothing to do with the presence of a female in the lead role.

They do, actually. If you're setting a story in Nigeria, are you going to have the main cast filled with a bunch of arian looking whites? Of course not that'd be stupid, always has been. Was the Last Samurai all white people? Or did it have one white dude learning the traditions and cultures of a race of people he fought against? It worked because it carried substance and nuance.

Would Sucker Punch work if it was filled with men? Would the sexually abusive themes still resonate with certain audiences? Probably not. Since men are taught to hide pain, hide suffering, hide emotional turmoil by men AND women alike.

Arguably, Sucker Punch still doesn't work as it currently is, but YYMV.

You know what I remember? People being upset over news that King of the Monsters would be about “a relationship between a mother and daughter.” They called it woke, they called it pandering, they decried that it was catering to SJWs.

You know what I don't remember? People criticizing Godzilla 2014 because the Brody family, who lived in Japan, weren't Japanese.

I'd argue Star Wars has made a similar issue with casting a brunette white girl as the face (or close to)
of every one of their recent outings, Daisy Ridley, Felicity Jones, Gina Carano, Emilia Clarke. What happened to all the varying alien species? Why didn't Boyega get his chance at co-protag? All 3 films were focused ONLY on Rey (even Kylo became an afterthought)

DC has done decently with the whole women lead thing, considering WW84 is the first of the DCEU to receive a sequel.

KOTM had 2 female leads, with the husband being somewhat of a key side character. GvK seems to continue the trend. I don't think I ever saw anyone claim "pandering" about KOTM, I think even extreme folks like the Quartering were okay with it considering it was a family dynamic, mother, daughter and separated father.

The X-Men had Mystique as one of the head leads in every single film in the rebooted universe. Before her was Kitty Pride and Jean Grey.

Dreamworks tends to have badass female co-protags.

Pac Rim was 65% about Miko

POTA was about apes to be fair, it was supposed to mirror the Fall of Caesar. Which it did perfectly.

The focal point of every Spiderman film is always either MJ or Gwen Stacy (minus the Disney ones)

Mad Max had Furiosa

I'd say overall it was an almost even split in every film.