The Batman has Hollywood Diversity done right.(spoilers)

[Castle]

Finally got my second rewatch of the movie, I got to say I enjoy it a lot more. I think I went in the second time a lot more relaxed, without holding my standard to what I felt were impossible in the first place. Its a good movie of quality and the film making was quite impressive though I still have my nit picks that I will leave on the spoilers thread as this thread is more about a different topic.

I remember on this forum there was once a long conversation about how Hollywood can get diversity right as well as wrong and one of the hot topics was when Hollywood race or gender bends an established white or male character. I must say, some of that worked well in this movie.The Batman got the diversity tick box right n every way.

Black Commissioner Gordon? Yes, but the character was a lot more. for me he was the best character in the movie and I loved his relationship with Batman, they felt more like equals through out the film unlike the Nolan films where Batman can act a little trollish with Gordan. Gordon is also not really defined by him been Black, infact I dont even think it was mentioned. Gordon is a very capable cop in this film that could keep up with batman and the criminals. you see Gordon as a character beyond the fact the character race was changed from the establish comics cannon. This is how to succeed in diversity. I hope the sequels expands more on Gordon.

Black Catwoman? check. Although we know there have been many black actress that played Catwoman in the past. Selina in this movie is actually bi-racial but she still see herself as a black woman. I bet this is so, since she cant pass for anything else. she talks about the issue of white privilege and she knows the obstacle she faces as a black woman but at the same time, the movie does not give any vibe that she wants to be saved or she sees herself as a helpless victim , who is out to hate on every white male. You watch this film and understand why she captures the heart of Batman. Selina is tough, flawed and human. She has empathy and a good heart and that is what shines through. This is what great modern female characters are about regardless of their race.

The mayor. A black woman was running for the Mayor's office in Gotham city and she was just that. she seems like a good candidate and knows what Gotham is all about. what Gotham needs. I will not say she was a primary important character in the film, but she had a presence in the film that was needed. Her race is barely mentioned either. she just happens to be a person running for mayor who seems very capable for the job. it is just normal that she just happens to be black and a woman.

We also had other background black characters. the new casters of Gotham. They had at least 3 scenes. one was a white man and the other was a black woman. I will call them reoccurring secondary characters in this film. Overall the movie gave Gotham a good diversity feel. Anyone can see themselves living in Gotham. As a person of colour I freaking loved this movie for getting diversity i feel is best. This movie succeeds in diversity in a way that the star wars Disney sequels failed so miserably at it.

[80sbaby]

Ok so the whole idea that there's a "right way" to do diversity is bs and generally said by those who see any change or diverse casting as a bad thing, unless it was done before they stared with the franchise of course. Anything new is automatically seen as a bad thing, often before even seeing the final product (which is why I say it's a bs complaint.)

There was nothing wrong with the diversity in Star Wars. The issue was the writing. That's the difference between that and the Batman. Diversity in and of itself isn't bad, it's how it's written but that's also true of any character.

And lastly, my biggest problem with complaints against diversity point to poorly made films, like the last Fantastic Four film for example, and say dumb things like "forced diversity" was one of it's problems. This simply isn't true (Michael B. Jordan was actually the best thing about the film.) It was bad because it was a bad film, period. If all the characters were white, that would not have improved the film at all. When a movie starring a straight, white male underperforms, nobody points to the fact it had a white lead as the cause. Only when it's a minority or female lead film do their race/ethnicity/sex get pointed to as a cause for it's failure. And that, again, is bs.

[Castle]

Ok so the whole idea that there's a "right way" to do diversity is bs and generally said by those who see any change or diverse casting as a bad thing, unless it was done before they stared with the franchise of course. Anything new is automatically seen as a bad thing, often before even seeing the final product (which is why I say it's a bs complaint.)
.

thankfully that is not me or is hardly my intention as I dont really dwell much on bs.

There was nothing wrong with the diversity in Star Wars. The issue was the writing. That's the difference between that and the Batman. Diversity in and of itself isn't bad, it's how it's written but that's also true of any character.

Yes the writing of the star wars movies 7-9 were not good, reason why it made the diversity of the film look forced and superficial because they gave poorly written storylines to their POC and female characters that they kept hyping up as the main leads. Remember the shirt Kennedy wore that the Force was female? https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/when-...zabeth-english

Rey turned out to be the most poorly written female force user in any of the films and Finn, well let me just say that even John Boyega knew what was up with the ''diversity'' and how they got it wrong.

John Boyega Met with Disney Exec for ‘Honest’ Discussion About ‘Star Wars’ Sidelining POC Characters
https://www.indiewire.com/2020/11/jo...ms-1234596487/

And lastly, my biggest problem with complaints against diversity point to poorly made films, like the last Fantastic Four film for example, and say dumb things like "forced diversity" was one of it's problems. This simply isn't true (Michael B. Jordan was actually the best thing about the film.) It was bad because it was a bad film, period. If all the characters were white, that would not have improved the film at all. When a movie starring a straight, white male underperforms, nobody points to the fact it had a white lead as the cause. Only when it's a minority or female lead film do their race/ethnicity/sex get pointed to as a cause for it's failure. And that, again, is bs.

Have not really seen the F4 2015 in full concertation so I cannot comment on that. Be that as it may, the bottom line is that Hollywood has said they are more dedicated in making their movies more diverse. The Batman I feel is the very first time they have done the best at showing that since the call for change somewhere around 2018 for a blockbuster film that already had established white central male characters like Bruce Wayne.

The Batman has many things to be proud and thankful for. good story, good film making and a variety of multiple colourful characters that are more than just defined by the color of their skin. This year of 2022-2023 film season, if any studio will want to push for their comic films for Oscars. The Batman is likely going to be the biggest best bet because not only will it have enough artistry as it is very director driven and the story taken seriously. it will also score quite high in Oscar diversity check box rules that the Academy made to have more inclusion.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/09/m...diversity.html

The Oscars’ New Diversity Rules Are Sweeping but Safe

Some may see this as bs. I call it real progress of substance for Hollywood.

[godisawesome]

I think I would argue that, had LFL had less self-sabotage and blatant bias post-TFA for the ST, they’d have indisputably proven better at diversity, actually.

When TFA came out, Rey, Finn, and Poe were all written well enough and engaged with enough of the audience to be a major statement of success in representation. Similarly, Rogue One remains probably their most popular film under Disney (because the ST “ate itself”) and was also exemplary in representation. And the Disney+ shows have followed trend in being especially more diverse than your average Hollywood production. When those films and shows alone are taken as context, Disney’s LFL has shown you can make original characters who aren’t white dudes and print money.

…It’s just that they clearly crapped their pants and regressed hard as hell in TLJ and TROS, and didn’t do themselves any real favors in Solo.

Boyega showed himself a worthy male lead for a film that made $2 Billion at the box office… and got punished for not being Adam Driver. Ridley showed she could be the main character of a $2 Billion film when intelligent focus was put on her… and the most LFL though about her afterwards was “How can we use her to put focus back on Adam Driver?” Isaac won himself a major role through sheer charisma as a competent veteran officer… and LFL’s only idea afterwards for him was “Let’s deconstruct the hot blooded Latino archetype with him!”

Similarly, Newton and Glover were clearly bigger stars at the time Solo was filming than Ehrenreich, and Glover even stole all his scenes… but Newton was used as cannon fodder and we still don't have a Lando show.

The Batman did it well for the same reason TFA, RO, and the Disney p+ shows have - because the directors made sure to respect the characters played by POC or women… but by that same token, if anyone grabbed The Batman’s version of the characters and had the same attitude Rian Johnson and LFL had at the time, then it would also be a crap shoot.

(Interestingly, I’d argue that even Adam Driver caught some weird consequences from LFL favoring him over John Boyega; Drover played an even better “incel madman” than Paul Dano did on The Batman, but LFL mostly just wanted him to be handsome and get everything served to him, so all of Driver’s work was wasted.)

[AnakinFlair]

I'm normally annoyed by color blind casting of characters that have been a certain race for 60+ years. But this time, I thought it was done very well. Jeffrey Wright knocked it out of the park, and Zoe Kravitz was great.

[j9ac9k]

Funny how diversity is so much more comforting when there's still a straight white guy as the main character/top dog. As much as Roddenbury liked diversity, he knew at least that much back when he cast the original Star Trek.

[WebLurker]

Interesting to see Zoë Kravitz not only get cast in a major role in a Batman movie but also be warmly received in it when, according to her in a recent interview, she'd tried to audition for The Dark Knight Rises (she didn't specify what role), but got rejected out of hand just for being black.

[Scott Taylor]

Funny how diversity is so much more comforting when there's still a straight white guy as the main character/top dog. As much as Roddenbury liked diversity, he knew at least that much back when he cast the original Star Trek.

During the movie I had serious flashbacks in a couple of places to those buddy cop movies that join a white guy and a black guy as partners. Usually the black guy is troubled and streetwise while the white guy is play-it-by-the-book. However in this case, Batman essentially was playing the black guy role. Unwelcome at crime scenes, looks different, is kinda offputting, etc.

But yah I see what you are saying and this movie followed that mold.

[godisawesome]

Funny how diversity is so much more comforting when there's still a straight white guy as the main character/top dog. As much as Roddenbury liked diversity, he knew at least that much back when he cast the original Star Trek.

That's one of the reasons why I think LFL started off on a better foot with TFA, and continued to have a better handle of it in RO and the Disney+ shows, than The Batman really has - though I still think The Batman does a decent job, it's more of a bare minimum to still qualify situation.

I also think some of the people who support only certain types of diversity do so because it still ends up favoring the white male characters they want to be the star - like how many Kylo Ren fans are all about running out the "TLJ is a diverse movie!" banner while steadfastly ignoring or even being racist to John Boyega whenever he points out his characters handling, or how *some* Barry Allen fans were supportive of a black Wally West who they were likely, if quietly, certain would be a non-factor in comparison to Barry.

And there is that annoying point where it feels like, even though the Bat Family has multiple non-white dude characters, some of whom have had massive success, WB seems tepid at best towards them most of the time.

[phonogram12]

Ok so the whole idea that there's a "right way" to do diversity is bs...

This is really all that should be said about the topic at this point. But the fact that there are still people that need to read the rest of the post says a lot about how much they have to grow as people.

[Username taken]

This is really all that should be said about the topic at this point. But the fact that there are still people that need to read the rest of the post says a lot about how much they have to grow as people.

Ok so the whole idea that there's a "right way" to do diversity is bs and generally said by those who see any change or diverse casting as a bad thing, unless it was done before they stared with the franchise of course. Anything new is automatically seen as a bad thing, often before even seeing the final product (which is why I say it's a bs complaint.)

There was nothing wrong with the diversity in Star Wars. The issue was the writing. That's the difference between that and the Batman. Diversity in and of itself isn't bad, it's how it's written but that's also true of any character.

And lastly, my biggest problem with complaints against diversity point to poorly made films, like the last Fantastic Four film for example, and say dumb things like "forced diversity" was one of it's problems. This simply isn't true (Michael B. Jordan was actually the best thing about the film.) It was bad because it was a bad film, period. If all the characters were white, that would not have improved the film at all. When a movie starring a straight, white male underperforms, nobody points to the fact it had a white lead as the cause. Only when it's a minority or female lead film do their race/ethnicity/sex get pointed to as a cause for it's failure. And that, again, is bs.

This just about sums it up.

And the forum needs a like button for posts like these.

[skyvolt2000]

This is really all that should be said about the topic at this point. But the fact that there are still people that need to read the rest of the post says a lot about how much they have to grow as people.

To a certain point there is no right way to do diversity. The issues that we see when this comes up is because for far too long diversity was showcased the way Scott Taylor pointed out. Along with other ways that fell into the preaching and lecturing pit.

We get a white lead show, movie or comic. Black person ONLY gets a main storyline for racism, interracial relationships or thug life family member or the sidekick for whatever the white lead does.

Then when we attempt to veer from that-here comes the complaints.
Then when we want a diverse cast-here comes the complaints.

And lastly, my biggest problem with complaints against diversity point to poorly made films, like the last Fantastic Four film for example, and say dumb things like "forced diversity" was one of it's problems. This simply isn't true (Michael B. Jordan was actually the best thing about the film.) It was bad because it was a bad film, period. If all the characters were white, that would not have improved the film at all.

You would have seen hit pieces screaming no one can do the FF right and Marvel needs to get the movie rights.

And I would wonder what would those detractors say if Marvel tossed out that same cast with a better script?

[Powerboy]

Funny how diversity is so much more comforting when there's still a straight white guy as the main character/top dog. As much as Roddenbury liked diversity, he knew at least that much back when he cast the original Star Trek.

I haven't seen the movie yet but that thought did occur to me, that they didn't take the ultimate step and make Batman black. That's not to withhold credit for what they did but they balked at the ultimate step.

Makes me wonder if they intend to do Superman as black.

I've noticed there's this Conservative phenomenon now where the very existence of a non-white or a female character or the very mention that racism or sexism even exists is "woke". That is not to say there isn't stuff that is done horribly like "The Last Jedi" take on, I guess, animal rights. But I've seen that "representation in comics even remotely in comparison to numbers in the population" invokes that "woke" remark as if it were a bad thing.

[Castle]

HMM, Is too bad I cannot find that epic thread again on this forum because I seem to recall many agreed that, there was never really a need to change an established character's race like Batman, Superman. So I dont see how batman remaining white in this film makes it less diverse.

However what this movie does well in diversity is that it can set up a future spin off movies where the mantle of Batman can be played by anyone. The relationship Batman has with Gordon, I will not rule out Gordon's son becoming Batman in the future.

Batman does not really have to be a person of color because he was created as white man, but Gotham has to be a diverse city where Batman's race as a white man is not the common norm or lets him carry on with ignorance about racism and this movies did that.

[Castle]

Interesting to see Zoë Kravitz not only get cast in a major role in a Batman movie but also be warmly received in it when, according to her in a recent interview, she'd tried to audition for The Dark Knight Rises (she didn't specify what role), but got rejected out of hand just for being black.

this story was taken out of context. in fact Zoe has had to correct the media and accuse them of trying to start drama.

https://people.com/movies/zoe-kravit...-knight-rises/

https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...-b2031672.html

Zoë Kravitz clarifies comments about being rejected from Dark Knight Rises role because she was too ‘urban’

Zoe in quote

“I wanted to AUDITION for a small part in the film and was told (I do not know who said this but this is how it was worded to me ) that they were not going ‘urban’ on the part. This is something I heard a lot 10 years ago – it was a very different time.”

“I was NOT told I was too urban to play Catwoman in The Dark Knight Rises''.

She added: “Although I’m very glad that we are attempting to evolve – let’s all calm down – as well as fact check before we write things that are untrue.”

Thankfully I was one of those who had enough wisdom to know there was something more when I first heard this story, because the way the media portrayed the story made no sense to me. Zoe was still basically a child. she was like 23 in 2012 and she could pass for a 16 year girl. there was no way she was ever auditioning for catwoman opposite Christian Bale who was already a man.

what Zoe said was that she audition for a small role but they say they were not going urban. she never said it was catwoman and she also never said it was Chris Nolan, because some started to accuse Nolan of racism. Zoe has however clarified her comments that it may have been a casting director who said that, which still kind of sucks especially when a black woman already had a small part in batman begins as a secretary with darker skin than Zoe.