The Minority Report! Diversity In The MU.

[Kieran_Frost]

Might I remind people what transpired in the Voodoo series. The Main character was whooped like a racehorse.

Did you even read the series? He took out Dormammu, a vodhu priestess, took down Doom, and fort a month long battle against an entire army of magical characters.

[Kieran_Frost]

[Kieran_Frost]

Voodoo is BACK!!!!

Sooooooooooooooooooo HAPPY!!!

This year is a let-down for LGBT representation, but last year was so over-the-top with how good it was that I'm actually kinda willing to give them a pass for this year, as long as some LGBT characters show up in ongoings again soon.

I agree last year was excellent BUT I also agree with Nexus, it was merely the best year for LGBT rep; that doesn't mean it was flawless. We still have never had an LGBT Avenger. We've still never had a gay on-going solo series. We still have never had an LGBT person leading a major team. Progress is great, and I applaud Marvel for last year, but there are still major "1sts" we've yet to achieve, let alone see the progress stick. After the greatness of 2013 for LGBT across the board, we are back to it being pretty much "an X-thing".

Yes, Daken slept with that trickster god guy, but his meanigfull relationship was with the female cop. And the most obvious relationship prospect in Loki is with Verity. Not getting started on Mystique.

Agreed. Even in the LGBT solo series, the main relationships are always hetrosexual.

I disagree. Strongly. In the strongest possible terms, in fact.

It's not Spider-Man that people care about, it's Peter Parker. Fantastic Four didn't succeed based on monster and alien stories, they succeeded based on the interplay between the characters. While it's true that not every book needs to have a strong character focus, and that some can be about crazy **** happening and superheroes punching it into submission, the majority are always going to be, first and foremost, about the characters. The adventures they go on are an avenue to explore who they are. Even how they fight should say something about who they are.

I wouldn't waste your time; despite the fact you speak 100% truth, but I applaud your determination.

[aja_christopher]

The numbers may speak for themselves, but what they say is actually mostly irrelevant. Your comment indicates a basic lack of understanding of the issue. You think the push for diversity is all about numbers. "Get 20% black characters, 10% LGBT characters, 15% Jewish characters." You think there's actually an end goal. That there will be a point where everyone just nods and says, "Yep, that should do it. We've got exactly the right demographics in the comics. Pack it in, guys! Our job is done!"

But that's not the point at all. There is no end point. It's not about reaching some specific goal. It's an ongoing process. A never-ending effort to promote a wide variety of characters from all sorts of different backgrounds.

I wonder if Mr. Harrison wouldn't mind making us a list of "minority" creators vs. the number of "minority" titles in the Marvel Universe, seeing as he is so concerned with making sure there is "enough" representation.

I think a lot of us would like to see those numbers speak for themselves as well.

[Trident]

I wonder if Mr. Harrison wouldn't mind making us a list of "minority" creators vs. the number of "minority" titles in the Marvel Universe, seeing as he is so concerned with making sure there is "enough" representation.

I think a lot of us would like to see those numbers speak for themselves as well.

I don't think Meg's post delivered the correct attitude but even still that is a little harsh.

Choosing creators/employees is a little more complicated than adding and creating diverse characters. People claim that these companies don't have enough diversity in their halls, which to a certain extant is true, but without being apart of the hiring process no one can claim that someone isn't hired based on negative implications or why there are not as many diverse creators aboard their staff.

Choosing employees is about finding the right person to push your companies goals and that isn't bound by race.

[aja_christopher]

The battle continues...

Still not sure why so many of these media outlets are counting chickens before they hatch, but at least it puts the pressure on both Marvel and DC to deliver.

Meanwhile, Sony's talk about a female-centric Spider-film is all but forgotten -- PR wars at their finest...

-----

"Women, Blacks, Gays: Warner Bros. Catapults DC Ahead of Marvel in Superhero Diversity Race"

"Gal Gadot's “Wonder Woman,” Ray Fisher's “Cyborg”, Jason Momoa's “Aquaman” and Ezra Miller's “Flash” mark milestones for the genre

While all eyes have looked to Marvel to produce a female-led superhero film, Warner Bros. and DC Comics catapulted ahead in the race on Wednesday with the announcement of a solo “Wonder Woman” film, starring Gal Gadot. The film is set to release in 2017. Additionally, Warner Bros announced “Aquaman,” starring Jason Momoa, will be released in 2018 and gave the greenlight to a solo “Cyborg” film, to be released in 2020, starring African-American actor Ray Fisher.

DC also made history by casting out LGBT actor Ezra Miller to play superspeedster “The Flash,” getting his own solo film in 2018. Miller, who confirmed to Out Magazine that he was “queer” in 2012, becomes the first openly gay actor to lead a major superhero comic book adaptation on the big screen.

Diversity in superhero films has been a hot-button issue in the film community. Fox caused controversy when it cast black actor Michael B. Jordan to play Johnny Storm, aka the Human Torch, in its upcoming “Fantastic Four” reboot. When TheWrap spoke to Jordan at Cannes in 2013, before he was officially cast as the Human Torch, the actor expressed a desire to carry on the push for diversity on screen.

“It is my responsibility as a young filmmaker, a young actor to bridge a gap between generations,” Jordan said. “I feel there's a void – after Will (Smith) and Denzel (Washington) and a few other names, …there's a big age gap..."

For the most part, it's the lack of diversity in superhero films that's been scrutinized. Actors such as Jessica Chastain — herself at one time in negotiations for a role in Marvel's “Iron Man 3” — have called out the studios for their lack of lead characters featuring anyone outside of white males.

“Where is the Scarlett Johansson superhero movie? I don't understand it, why is it taking so long for this?” Chastain asked TheWrap rhetorically, referencing Marvel and Johansson's Black Widow character, who has featured prominently in several films but has yet to lead her own.

“This woman clearly shows that people want to go see her in the movies. ‘Lucy,’ didn't it beat ‘Hercules’ by a lot opening weekend, when it was made for a lot less? She shows that she kicks ass, she's a great actress.”

Marvel chief Kevin Feige has addressed the issue on several occasions, and has always maintained it's a matter of timing.

“I hope we do it sooner rather than later,” he told Comic Book Resources in August of a potential “Black Widow” film. “But we find ourselves in the very strange position of managing more franchises than most people have — which is a very, very good thing.”

All of Wednesday's DC news also comes ahead of any official announcement from Marvel regarding its long-rumored “Black Panther” film.

“In terms of Black Panther, it's absolutely in development,” Feige said of the potential film back in 2013 while promoting “Thor: The Dark World. “When you have something as rich as Wakanda and [Black Panther's] backstory … I don't know when it will be exactly but certainly we have plans to bring him to life someday..."


marvel v dc.jpg

http://www.thewrap.com/women-blacks-...iversity-race/

[aja_christopher]

I don't think Meg's post delivered the correct attitude but even still that is a little harsh.

Choosing creators/employees is a little more complicated than adding and creating diverse characters. People claim that these companies don't have enough diversity in their halls, which to a certain extant is true, but without being apart of the hiring process no one can claim that someone isn't hired based on negative implications or why their are not as many diverse creators aboard their staff.

Choosing employees is about finding the right person to push your companies goals and that isn't bound by race.

How is it "harsh" simply to ask him to compile a list of "minority" creators vs. characters: he's the one who asked when it will be "enough" so shouldn't he be the one to do a bit more research on the subject before trying to form an opinion (or criticize the opinions of others)?

Sure, it's complicated to hire the right people sometimes... but so is writing "AXiS" or planning out "Secret Wars" or a "Captain America/Iron Man" crossover for the big screen. And given their success with Ms. Marvel, why wouldn't they be actively seeking out more creators who can actually write from the perspective of their "minority" characters more effectively?

As someone who is black, has studied cinema and screenwriting at USC, draws and writes comics (and has been reading them for decades) and applies to these entertainment companies (Sony, Warner/DC, Paramount, Universal, Disney/Marvel, etc) on a weekly basis without response, I refuse to accept the excuse of "complicated" -- the bottom line is that they just aren't trying hard enough. Nepotism rules the entertainment industry and the same (usually) white male writers and directors get hired over and over again to write different stories and direct different films... "minority"-centric or otherwise.

Regardless, I'm not making any "claims" on why they aren't hiring more diverse creators, I'm just pointing out that we should look at those numbers as well when discussing "diversity". After all "minorities" have always been allowed to entertain the masses (sports - blacks, martial arts movies - asians, sex symbols - women, etc) but we've rarely been the ones behind the scenes calling the shots.

Edit: What's interesting is that the new CEO of Warner Entertainment as of 2013 is an underrepresented "minority" himself (Japanese -- and also a co-USC alumnus) so it could be that he is more open to "minority" leads in his films. Might be a coincidence, but also might not.

[Vic Vega]

I don't think Meg's post delivered the correct attitude but even still that is a little harsh.

Choosing creators/employees is a little more complicated than adding and creating diverse characters. People claim that these companies don't have enough diversity in their halls, which to a certain extant is true, but without being apart of the hiring process no one can claim that someone isn't hired based on negative implications or why their are not as many diverse creators aboard their staff.

Choosing employees is about finding the right person to push your companies goals and that isn't bound by race.

There are no creators of color of color who can push Marvel's goals other than Greg Pak and the dude
who writes Ghost Rider?

A reasonable assumption can be made that Marvel and DC are currently drawing their talent from acclaimed creators of Indy comics.

So one might wonder how they managed to miss the creators of works like Miranda Mercury, Rat Queens, Five Weapons, Molly Danger and Genius for example.

[Trident]

How is it "harsh" simply to ask him to compile a list of "minority" creators vs. characters: he's the one who asked when it will be "enough" so shouldn't he be the one to do a bit more research on the subject before trying to form an opinion (or criticize the opinions of others)?

Sure, it's complicated to hire the right people sometimes... but so is writing "AXiS" or planning out "Secret Wars" or a "Captain America/Iron Man" crossover for the big screen. And given their success with Ms. Marvel, why wouldn't they be actively seeking out more creators who can actually write from the perspective of their "minority" characters more effectively?

As someone who is black, has studied film, draws and writes comics (and has been reading them for decades) and applies to these entertainment companies (Sony, Warner/DC, Paramount, Universal, Disney/Marvel, etc) on a weekly basis without response, I refuse to accept the excuse of "complicated" -- the bottom line is that they just aren't trying hard enough. Like film, nepotism rules this industry and the same writers get hired over and over again to write different books... "minority" or otherwise.

Regardless, I'm not making any "claims" on why they aren't hiring more diverse creators, I'm just pointing out that we should look at those numbers as well when discussing "diversity". After all "minorities" have always been allowed to entertain the masses (sports - blacks, martial arts movies - asians, sex symbols - women, etc) but we've rarely been the ones behind the scenes calling the shots.

As someone who does hiring on a regular basis and has little information on the steps Comics Companies take when they do their own hiring, all I will say is this.

I'm going to get the best candidate for the job regardless of skin color or background. In this day in age where the bottom line is held above all else, to our detriment I might add, there are more companies thinking along the same lines than ever before. If someone walks in to my office tells me they can do X,Y,&Z for my organization and if they have the credentials to back it up, along with there being a spot open, they will be hired.

With the comic industry I would imagine the hiring process plays a lot more on what is happening at any given time. That includes plan already set by the company, what is happening in the world around them, what the executives want, and so on. Which plays heavily on finding the right candidate's who are guaranteed to deliver. I would also imagined that these companies get thousands of applications a day. If someone truly wants to work within that organization, they are going to have to make an outstanding effort to standout amongst the herd of applicants before they are even considered.

I think it's fine to look at the halls of marvel's company to see how "diverse" they are but we should be fair in our opinions on why that is since we have no idea why certain creators are hired or not hired within their company. If anything we should do more praising than bashing considering that the Editor in Chief of Marvel is of Mexican decent, there will probably be more inclusion for that fact alone.

So one might wonder how they managed to miss the creators of works like Miranda Mercury, Rat Queens, Five Weapons, Molly Danger and Genius for example.

Could be as simple as there work wasn't what the company wanted at the time. How do we even know that some weren't asked but turned down the offer do to the restrictions or other reasons that come with working for marvel?

But again, this is all i'm going to say on the topic for now.

[Kieran_Frost]

How is it "harsh" simply to ask him to compile a list of "minority" creators vs. characters: he's the one who asked when it will be "enough" so shouldn't he be the one to do a bit more research on the subject before trying to form an opinion (or criticize the opinions of others)?

It's not harsh; it's a very fair question. It's only "harsh" if Mr Harrison is offended by the very idea of the topic being brought up/to be confronted with the unpleasant reality of white privilege or straight privilege or male privilege; which are certainly factors in why the industry is "coincidently" mostly straight, white men. And I have no idea what he thinks (neither does anyone else, so until he comments, it's all guess work on whether he was offended).

Not to beat a dead horse: but we saw EXACTLY the same indignity in the "Should Hickman out his Avenger" thread. Some are offended by the very question being asked, because (I assume) it makes them briefly face some harsh truths about the privileged they have (and the opportunities so often denied to others). People don't like realising they have advantages, they don't like realising that perfectly nice, respectable people can (even subconsciously) discriminate against someone on the basis of their skin, or gender or sexuality. It happens. And it's an ugly truth, but one people MUST accept, if they ever want to grow.

A straight, white male might not understand why it matters that DC is kicking Marvel's ass in diversity when it comes to films and TV (though in comics Marvel wins by a landslide). They don't get what it's like to "see someone like them" for the first time in a superhero film, because they have been spoon fed "someone like them" in every superhero movie from year dot. In every film. In every comic. They don't get why someone like Wiccan&Teddy mean so much to LGBT readers, because for the first time they had a young, happy gay couple who are not defined by their sexuality, but neither are they in denial or shamed by it. They don't get what it's like for a Muslim female to see someone like her as a solo star for the first time ever. They take too much for granted, they do not appreciate what they have, and they don't want to face the reality they (possibly) contribute to the problem.

[Trident]

Not to beat a dead horse: but we saw EXACTLY the same indignity in the "Should Hickman out his Avenger" thread.

Lol

You are not going to let that go are? That thread was closed because the question was answered and it was running in negative circles. Sure some of the people who posted may not support LGTB characters or people. However, by in large the thread was filled with people who did and agreed that for that title it was not a major issue to "out"( hate that term by the way) the Avenger. Let it go buddy.

[Kieran_Frost]

You are not going to let that go are? That thread was closed because the question was answered and it was running in negative circles. Sure some of the people who posted may not support LGTB characters or people. However, by in large the thread was filled with people who did and agreed that for that title it was not a major issue to "out"( hate that term by the way) the Avenger. Let it go buddy.

I thought the thread stayed very positive. One poster came in and name called, but all of us shot it down. To this day I have no idea why it was closed, because it was far more positive than many other threads (that stay opened). Oh well, yet another instance where talking about the issues of LGBT rights in comics get shut down for being "too controversial." Still, it's a comparison worth noting: some take offence to very real questions being asked, because it shatters their "ideology" into dust.

[Trident]

I thought the thread stayed very positive. One poster came in and name called, but all of us shot it down. To this day I have no idea why it was closed, because it was far more positive than many other threads (that stay opened). Oh well, yet another instance where talking about the issues of LGBT rights in comics get shut down for being "too controversial." Still, it's a comparison worth noting: some take offence to very real questions being asked, because it shatters their "ideology" into dust.

If that is the way you choose to see why the thread was closed that is your business.

[aja_christopher]

I think it's fine to look at the halls of marvel's company to see how "diverse" they are but we should be fair in our opinions on why that is since we have no idea why certain creators are hired or not hired within their company. If anything we should do more praising than bashing considering that the Editor in Chief of Marvel is of Mexican decent, there will probably be more inclusion for that fact alone.

And Steve McQueen won an Oscar for Best Picture last year -- does that mean that we now have equal representation in film both in front of and behind the camera?

I refuse to "praise" someone for occasionally doing the right thing while -- mostly -- doing it wrong. Ironically enough, if it weren't for these film properties Marvel might still be struggling with bankruptcy, so I don't see where "hiring the best candidates" fits into this given their track record of losing money with their -- mostly -- "non-diverse" comic book staff.

Truthfully, they are just lucky that Robert Downey Jr. is such a great actor -- if not for Iron Man who knows where they might be right now.

Feel free to make all the excuses you want for Marvel with respect to their hiring practices -- that still won't change the fact that they might be doing a good job on paper but they are still failing to practice what they preach behind the scenes.

[Kieran_Frost]

And Steve McQueen won an Oscar for Best Picture last year -- does that mean that we now have equal representation in film both in front of and behind the camera?

THIS!!! Kathryn Biegelow won Best Director (the first female to achieve that) in 2009. Let's list all the females nominated for Best Director since that happened...


.....


*insert tumbleweed*