Batwoman (2019)

[JamesonAnders]

Because visuals is a big part on screen, so it matters on screen. Also in stage or musical it's different. I don't mind a black actor playing Cesar or white actor playing Othello in stage acting.

Usually no, and any competent actor have no problem to carry it out as well.

Which Caesar? And how would you feel about it if the role showed Caesar treating people of color the way he actually did?

As someone who played Othello, I can assure you it's a very uncomfortable experience, despite the fact that Shakespearean theater is in a completely different level of discussion than Batwoman, and the two concepts are not at all referential

[Frontier]

Because visuals is a big part on screen, so it matters on screen. Also in stage or musical it's different. I don't mind a black actor playing Cesar or white actor playing Othello in stage acting.

I think it matters for sexuality as well.

Usually no, and any competent actor have no problem to carry it out as well.

I think LGBT people would probably disagree.

Then you shouldn't have problem with wanting a straight actor to play a character who is somewhat defined by his straight love to a woman. THAT is exactly how LGBT actors were blocked. You think it's inequality, then the last thing you need to do is copy and paste it to create more inequality.

I don't view letting an LGBT actor play an actual LGBT character as an instance of inequality.

I don't see a problem at all, countless examples came both sides where ppl can play their roles very well when they have different sexuality than their character.

But ideally LGBT actors should be able to play characters that actually represent them on the small screen.

[Slowpokeking]

Which Caesar? And how would you feel about it if the role showed Caesar treating people of color the way he actually did?

As someone who played Othello, I can assure you it's a very uncomfortable experience, despite the fact that Shakespearean theater is in a completely different level of discussion than Batwoman, and the two concepts are not at all referential

Any Caesar in plays, by your logic all the Asians should close their Shakespearean classes and plays. Bad try here.

[Slowpokeking]

I think it matters for sexuality as well.

So were those who blocked LGBT for straight roles.

I think LGBT people would probably disagree.

There are tons of examples. Dumbledore, Broke Back Mountains and tons more. Many straight ppl also think LGBT could not play straight well.

I don't view letting an LGBT actor play an actual LGBT character as an instance of inequality.

So letting a straight actor play a straight character and block LGBT actors, is not inequality?

But ideally LGBT actors should be able to play characters that actually represent them on the small screen.

Yes, they should be able to play if they fit the role better than others, not by specialty.

[JamesonAnders]

Any Caesar in plays, by your logic all the Asians should close their Shakespearean classes and plays. Bad try here.

The lack of cogent response suggests it wasn't quite so bad. But bye

[titanfan]

I think LGBT people would probably disagree.

As a gay man, I don't really care, and it often depends on the role. If a straight man or woman can play a gay man or woman well, I don't care. There are several popular actors/actresses from my gay soaps that were straight. Besides, someone will point out that gay men have been excluded from straight roles because they were gay. Neil Patrick Harris killed it as a straight male womanizer for example.

That said, the role of "Batwoman" is arguably more than in front of the camera. Ideally the actor/actress would be able to do gay media, be sent to do pride parades, be a spokesman for diversity for the network, etc. That's why for this particular role, I think they are looking for an lgbt actress.

[Slowpokeking]

That said, the role of "Batwoman" is arguably more than in front of the camera. Ideally the actor/actress would be able to do gay media, be sent to do pride parades, be a spokesman for diversity for the network, etc. That's why for this particular role, I think they are looking for an lgbt actress.

It should be about the character on screen. Otherwise straight roles could use the same excuse to cast out LGBT actors. A role is a role, it shouldn't be anything else off the screen.

American Sniper is even about a real person who had strong political opinion, Bradley Cooper was picked as well. Ppl who booed him for political reason was also treated as nonsense, as it should be.

[Immortal Weapon]

It should be about the character on screen.

But it isn't when it comes to Batwoman. The fact that she is a lesbian is often use to market her.

[Slowpokeking]

But it isn't when it comes to Batwoman. The fact that she is a lesbian is often use to market her.

1. If a character is defined by his/her sexuality, then his/her characterization usually need further work.
2. Pick a good actor to portray her well as the lesbian, that's all. Even real ppl don't need the actor to have the same sexuality to play.

[Frontier]

1. If a character is defined by his/her sexuality, then his/her characterization usually need further work.

You don't think being a lesbian is an important part of Kate Kane's character?

2. Pick a good actor to portray her well as the lesbian, that's all. Even real ppl don't need the actor to have the same sexuality to play.

But they might prefer it. And it's possible for a lesbian to portray a lesbian well.

[Osiris-Rex]

She's a Batman villain what reason do we really need?

I don't really care if the next batwoman is really gay or not just be a good acter that's all that matters.

It matters to the people producing the show. It is their show, they get to decide.

Straight actors will still have more opportunities than their counterparts; not getting the role of Batwoman won't change the fact they have a fair shot at a bunch of other roles (the various amount of female superheroes, for instance). There aren't many leading roles for lesbian so, why not allow to play one?

If it were based upon skill, this discussion wouldn't be had; straight actors, ones that fit a certain standard of masculine or feminine, especially, won't struggle to find work.

It wouldn't make much sense if Supergirl cast a cis actress to portray Nia Nal (and I am aware the character wasn't always trans) when there are so few roles for trans women to portray now.

Blocking doesn't go both ways because it's never in favor of LGBT actors, to begin with, so until that stops, I'm just finding myself a bit unsympathetic to a straight actress not being able to get this ONE specific role. Especially in comparison to a lesbian or WLW actress who is afforded fewer opportunities

Nia Nal has always been trans. The character was created for Supergirl, never existed before. Are you confusing Nia Nal with Nura Nal? One is Dreamer and the other is Dream Girl.

Nonsense, any competent actor got no problem to play gay/lesbian/Transgender. And again, a good character is not defined by his/her sexuality. There are usually far much more than that.

Would you have a white actor still playing Asians simply because the white actor was a higher profile actor, such as John Wayne playing Genghis Khan, David Carradine in Kung Fu.

1. If a character is defined by his/her sexuality, then his/her characterization usually need further work.
2. Pick a good actor to portray her well as the lesbian, that's all. Even real ppl don't need the actor to have the same sexuality to play.

But have a lesbian play a lesbian already gives them a starting point. So some of the work is already done. Less work to go from there than the work trying to justify a straight playing a lesbian.

[Immortal Weapon]

1. If a character is defined by his/her sexuality, then his/her characterization usually need further work.
2. Pick a good actor to portray her well as the lesbian, that's all. Even real ppl don't need the actor to have the same sexuality to play.

Kate has plenty of depth as a character. Her sexuality plays a role in the type of person she is. Part of her origin has her dishonorably discharge from military because of DADT.

[thefinalguy]

Nia Nal has always been trans. The character was created for Supergirl, never existed before. Are you confusing Nia Nal with Nura Nal? One is Dreamer and the other is Dream Girl.

Yes I was actually. Thank you I wasn't sure if Nia was a direct rip from the comics or an original character. I just knew the character was supposed to have ties to the Legion.

Also, the two major female couples in the Arrowverse (Ava&Sara and Anissa&Grace) are played by four straight women. There was clearly nothing standing in their way of getting those roles so I don't see why, again, this one specific role going towards a lesbian actress is an issue.

[Caivu]

Part of her origin has her dishonorably discharge from military because of DADT.

(Honorable discharge, but yes.)

[Slowpokeking]

You don't think being a lesbian is an important part of Kate Kane's character?

I don't think it should be her most important point, nor does it have anything to do with the actor's sexuality.

But they might prefer it. And it's possible for a lesbian to portray a lesbian well.

It's no different than prefer a straight actor for a straight character.