The complaints were totally about their looks.
In fact, [B]every single complaint[/B] about casting on any adaptation comes down to "that's not how X should look". Hell, look at the Sonic movie, the first thing people said when Carrey was cast as Robotnik was "He doesn't look like Eggman".
[QUOTE=The Cool Thatguy;4839701]They make minor decisions, but Harley sets the tone (hell, she decides where the 3rd act happens) to the point that she controls where the 3rd act happens.
It's fair to compare this t the first X-Men movie, where Wolverine was pushed to the forefront at the expense of everyone else, but not Guardians, who spent the majority of screen time together and interacting, from the second act on.[/QUOTE]
Of course Harley sets the tone: she's the bloody narrator!
Compared to GotG, we got a whole lot less whole-group banter in BoP. What we instead got was far more one-on-one interaction: between Black Canary and Harley, between Renee and Cass, between Cass and Harley, between Cass och Black Canary, between Renee and Black Canary. And the decisions to go to the amusement park were all made individually and with different reasons.
Is Harley the lead character of the movie? Absolutely. But I cannot say that the movie suffered for it.
[QUOTE=Dark_Tzitzimine;4840229]The complaints were totally about their looks.
In fact, [B]every single complaint[/B] about casting on any adaptation comes down to "that's not how X should look". Hell, look at the Sonic movie, the first thing people said when Carrey was cast as Robotnik was "He doesn't look like Eggman".[/QUOTE]
No the complaints were about their previous roles. People didn't like Pattison because of Twilight, they didn't like Keaton because of his comedic roles and they didn't like Affleck because he was in the Daredevil movie. No one said anything about Gustin and Miller's looks.
Hell, comic fans will ignore when a character looks nothing like their comic counterpart like Charlie Cox in the Daredevil series.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;4840173]Where are the complaints that Barry Allen has never been portrayed by a blonde man in any live action depiction? Most actors who played Jimmy Olsen aren't red heads but only Mechad Brooks got shit for not looking like the character.
Right, got their names mixed up. Sorry.
Except Storm and Vixen's race is actually important to their characters which is not the case for Black Canary.
Funny you should mention her because the character she played on Agents of SHIELD was originally white.
Two of the original Birds of Prey are present in this movie. The Avengers removed two of the founders and had Hulk who was only on the team for about two issues in the comics. The X-Men franchise leave out two or three of the original five as founders. Most Teen Titans adaptations focus the Wolfman/Perez team.
A poster is not the movie.[/QUOTE]
Well there are complaints.
If you think it's not so important, why change it?
Yeah because she looks more white.
The avengers didn't have the copyright at that time. And the X-Men were criticized for too much Wolverine.
The movie simply is focused on Harley, even the title was changed now.
[QUOTE=Dark_Tzitzimine;4840229]The complaints were totally about their looks.
In fact, [B]every single complaint[/B] about casting on any adaptation comes down to "that's not how X should look". Hell, look at the Sonic movie, the first thing people said when Carrey was cast as Robotnik was "He doesn't look like Eggman".[/QUOTE]
Why shouldn't cast resemble the looks? Especially if the image was well received?
Honestly do you really think most of the superhero movies require great acting? Or you can't find actor with both the looks and the acting?
[QUOTE=Slowpokeking;4840716]Well there are complaints.[/QUOTE]
Not from what I’ve seen. At least not for the reasons Smollet is getting.
[QUOTE]If you think it's not so important, why change it?[/QUOTE]
Because it isn’t important. How is that not clear?
[QUOTE]Yeah because she looks more white.[/QUOTE]
The original version of the character was based on Angelina Jolie whom Chloe Bennett does not resemble in any way.
[QUOTE]The avengers didn't have the copyright at that time. [/QUOTE]
Yes they did.
[QUOTE]And the X-Men were criticized for too much Wolverine.[/QUOTE]
Different problem entirely.
[QUOTE]The movie simply is focused on Harley, even the title was changed now.[/QUOTE]
Harley is in the movie. She is not the only one who gets any focus or development. You’re doing more to downplay the other characters than this movie actually is.
[QUOTE=Slowpokeking;4840720]
Honestly do you really think most of the superhero movies require great acting?[/QUOTE]
The really good ones do. These movies are made for a general audience who care more about good acting than whether the character on screen looks like the comics (never mind that no human being ever has or ever will resemble a comic character).
[QUOTE=Agent Z;4840730]Not from what I’ve seen. At least not for the reasons Smollet is getting.
Because it isn’t important. How is that not clear?
The original version of the character was based on Angelina Jolie whom Chloe Bennett does not resemble in any way.
Yes they did.
Different problem entirely.
Harley is in the movie. She is not the only one who gets any focus or development. You’re doing more to downplay the other characters than this movie actually is.
The really good ones do. These movies are made for a general audience who care more about good acting than whether the character on screen looks like the comics (never mind that no human being ever has or ever will resemble a comic character).[/QUOTE]
Yes there are, The 2015 Human torch got even more because the swapping.
If you think it's not important, why change it? Simply for tokenism? Even black fans complain about it.
What does it have to do with ethics? She looks quite ok for the role. Star Sapphire was based on Elizabeth Taylor as well. Weak argument.
They didn't.
And X-Men were also criticized for focusing on Lawrence's Mystique as well.
Yes she is, she is the focus from the beginning, most of the posters solely has her, the title is now changed to Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey. Denying that is kinda of weak.
Most of them no, and it's easy to find actors with both the resemblance and the acting. Superman requires to be tall and handsome, we got Reeve.
I still don't get it why some ppl are denying that this movie was made for Harley Quinn instead of a real BoP movie from the beginning. It still stands because of Robbie's Quinn.
[QUOTE=Slowpokeking;4840745]Yes there are, The 2015 Human torch got even more because the swapping.[/QUOTE]
That is actually an example of what I mean. He got crap for not looking like Johnny despite being the best actor in the film.
[QUOTE]If you think it's not important, why change it? Simply for tokenism? Even black fans complain about it.[/QUOTE]
Tokenism doesn’t mean what you think it means. Tokenism would be if Dinah was the only racial minority in the movie and got no development. None of this is true for the movie.
[QUOTE]What does it have to do with ethics?[/QUOTE]
Um, nothing? When did I start talking about ethics?
[QUOTE]
She looks quite ok for the role.[/QUOTE]
You can’t pull the “they have to resemble the character” argument and then ignore it when it is convenient for you. If having Dinah played by a black woman is a betrayal of the character then having Bennett play Quake should face equal criticism.
[QUOTE]And X-Men were also criticized for focusing on Lawrence's Mystique as well. [/QUOTE]
Lawrence’s Mystique didn’t get nearly as much focus as people complained about.
[QUOTE]Yes she is, she is the focus from the beginning, most of the posters solely has her, the title is now changed to Harley Quinn: Birds of Prey. Denying that is kinda of weak.[/QUOTE]
Maybe actually try watching the damn film instead of whining about posters and titles.
[QUOTE]Most of them no, and it's easy to find actors with both the resemblance and the acting. Superman requires to be tall and handsome, we got Reeve.[/QUOTE]
For someone who is such a dedicated superhero fan, you sure are doing a lot to downplay them and act like they shouldn’t have any standards when it comes to movies. You may not care about the acting but the people making these films and the ones paying money to see them do.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;4840761]That is actually an example of what I mean. He got crap for not looking like Johnny despite being the best actor in the film.
Tokenism doesn’t mean what you think it means. Tokenism would be if Dinah was the only racial minority in the movie and got no development. None of this is true for the movie.
Um, nothing? When did I start talking about ethics?
You can’t pull the “they have to resemble the character” argument and then ignore it when it is convenient for you. If having Dinah played by a black woman is a betrayal of the character then having Bennett play Quake should face equal criticism.
Lawrence’s Mystique didn’t get nearly as much focus as people complained about.
Maybe actually try watching the damn film instead of whining about posters and titles.
For someone who is such a dedicated superhero fan, you sure are doing a lot to downplay them and act like they shouldn’t have any standards when it comes to movies. You may not care about the acting but the people making these films and the ones paying money to see them do.[/QUOTE]
Yeah and of course the actor needs to resemble the character.
No, tokenism is about unnecessarily race swap. Again answer the question, if you think it's not important, why do you make the change?
Of course not, she looks white enough, and looks fine to me. Maybe not the best cast but not a problem. But I won't want her to play Mulan.
She still did, especially in DotFP, you can't hijack it without suffering backlash, simple.
It's a lost cause already and many ppl complained about it.
I do care about acting, but most of the superhero movies don't need GREAT acting it's true. They are blockbusters, and there are tons of actors who look fine and can act. Many of the legendary actors have great looks.
You know why this movie still holds off? Because Robbie's resemblance and good acting, she is a very good actress and she fits Harley perfectly.
I don't know why didn't she go to the Joker route, make a R rated drama movie to explain Harley Quinn origin. She surely has the skill to do so.
You know what we are clearly just going in circles at this point. For the sake of my sanity and to avoid saying something that will either get me banned or this thread locked, I am going to bow out. Have a nice day.
Same here, I think it's pointless to continue, have a nice day.
[QUOTE=Agent Z;4840761]Tokenism doesn’t mean what you think it means. Tokenism would be if Dinah was the only racial minority in the movie and got no development. None of this is true for the movie.[/QUOTE]
True, but Dinah is traditionally a white character. So its a valid question, philosophically if nothing else, if you change the race of a white character and little else about the character, does that still count towards diversity?
It's because of that, and the other cast members, that make me feel as if the directors were trying to pretend to be diverse without doing justice to the characters themselves.
Renee Montoya isn't a member of the BoP in canon, and without her Question persona, is strictly a supporting character. She'd be great in a noir series, or detective story, but her story as 'disrespected Lesbian cop' simply is too weak to hold much water in a super hero movie. Cops have been bucking the system in movies for so long that it was a cliche in the 80s, and stopped being interesting long before then.
And of course, Cassandra Cain. There is no interpretation of Cassandra that would be supported by this movie. None whatsoever. Hell, I can't think of a single issue or appearance that would justify it. I can't help but wonder if a bare bones interpretation was immediately discarded simply because she'd overshadow Harley in action scenes.
So I take the celebration of the diversity of this movie with a grain of salt. Because while it has it in fact, I don't feel it has it in spirit.
Given that, ya know, the whitest girl ever is the main character.
[QUOTE=The Cool Thatguy;4841503]True, but Dinah is traditionally a white character. So its a valid question, philosophically if nothing else, if you change the race of a white character and little else about the character, does that still count towards diversity?
It's because of that, and the other cast members, that make me feel as if the directors were trying to pretend to be diverse without doing justice to the characters themselves.
Renee Montoya isn't a member of the BoP in canon, and without her Question persona, is strictly a supporting character. She'd be great in a noir series, or detective story, but her story as 'disrespected Lesbian cop' simply is too weak to hold much water in a super hero movie. Cops have been bucking the system in movies for so long that it was a cliche in the 80s, and stopped being interesting long before then.
And of course, Cassandra Cain. There is no interpretation of Cassandra that would be supported by this movie. None whatsoever. Hell, I can't think of a single issue or appearance that would justify it. I can't help but wonder if a bare bones interpretation was immediately discarded simply because she'd overshadow Harley in action scenes.
So I take the celebration of the diversity of this movie with a grain of salt. Because while it has it in fact, I don't feel it has it in spirit.
Given that, ya know, the whitest girl ever is the main character.[/QUOTE]
And that's why I think Harely shouldn't be the main character in a BoP movie, to not let her being outshined by other heroines you got to chop them down.
If you want to focus on her, use a bunch of villains/antiheroes like Ivy would work much better.