Can Diversity Casting cause more harm than good?

[hyped78]

The biggest harm I see is when a studio thinks diverse casting is enough by itself, and forgets to get a good script or behind the camera staff to go along with it. Then, when the final product isn't good, they take one of two routes: they either blame audience bigotry, or decide that it isn't possible to make money with a lead from whatever group that film was based on.

I think that's a great point, totally agree. Are you thinking of any specific movie/ TV show examples where that has happened or are you thinking in a general way?

On the point of box-checking/tokenism, I'd agree it's weird to see a group of 5 friends and there's one white person, one black, one latino, one East Asian, and one flamboyant gay guy (and where's the lesbian representation?). It's easy to be cynical and say, "OK, I see what's going on."

If I had one complaint it would be overrepresentation in the diversity mix of black and Jewish/Hebrew people. Latinos, East Asians, Native Americans, etc. have far fewer opportunities and are subject far more often to the old stereotypes and side roles (and this with at least the Latino population being larger than the black and Jewish/Hebrew populations in this country).

"it's weird to see a group of 5 friends and there's one white person, one black, one latino, one East Asian, and one flamboyant gay guy" - good point. There's been some recent controversy about Friends and the HBO Special but, in reality, aren't there a lot of groups of friends who are six white people? Or six black people? Or six latinos? I think in some cases we've gone to the other extreme - from no representation (which is wrong) to overrepresentation/ representing for the sake of representing.

I totally agree with your point about Latinos, East Asians and Native Americans not having enough representation in US movies and TV shows.

I see little to no harm. Perhaps you could ask the OP what their definitions are, as they went to the trouble to make the thread and poll?

Yes. @QuinnFillory - can you please clarify what you mean by "Good" or "Bad" in this context?

[Moon Ronin]

I think there can be two points of "harm". One would be to the production and the second would be to the actor/actress. I would have to say that a example of both was AMC+'s Anne Boleyn. The lead role is played by a black woman Jodie Turner-Smith and as we all know Anne Boleyn was not black. Looking past past the trolls the writing was done well and the acting was above par. So why did it fail if the writing, acting, all of what people are looking for was done very well? It would be that a black woman was cast as quite possibly one of the most famous women in English history along with a very diverse cast of the high royal court of early 1500s Great Britain. Now Jodie Turner-Smith is a great actress but was miss-cast as Anne Boleyn and being miss-cast can hurt an actor/actress.

On another note, casting such as the village of Emond's Field in Amazon's The Wheel of Time adaptation was very diverse. Being a small village on the outskirts that is far removed from the rest of the world it really would be full of people who looked alike. This takes away from when the group goes out in the world, all of the cities seem to have the same demographics as their little village and makes the world look small and a mono so city. It kind of takes away from the journey out of the comfort zone to experience exotic locations and introduce new cultures.

[hyped78]

I think there can be two points of "harm". One would be to the production and the second would be to the actor/actress. I would have to say that a example of both was AMC+'s Anne Boleyn. The lead role is played by a black woman Jodie Turner-Smith and as we all know Anne Boleyn was not black. Looking past past the trolls the writing was done well and the acting was above par. So why did it fail if the writing, acting, all of what people are looking for was done very well? It would be that a black woman was cast as quite possibly one of the most famous women in English history along with a very diverse cast of the high royal court of early 1500s Great Britain. Now Jodie Turner-Smith is a great actress but was miss-cast as Anne Boleyn and being miss-cast can hurt an actor/actress.

On another note, casting such as the village of Emond's Field in Amazon's The Wheel of Time adaptation was very diverse. Being a small village on the outskirts that is far removed from the rest of the world it really would be full of people who looked alike. This takes away from when the group goes out in the world, all of the cities seem to have the same demographics as their little village and makes the world look small and a mono so city. It kind of takes away from the journey out of the comfort zone to experience exotic locations and introduce new cultures.

I haven't watched either of those. I dislike casting historical figures as "race swaps" - e.g. you shouldn't cast a black actor as JFK and you shouldn't cast a white actor as Obama.

On non historical figures I don't care - as long as the actors/ actresses are good and a good fit for the role and diversity doesn't feel "forced"; by "forced" I mean the example that CSTowle gave on "it's weird to see a group of 5 friends and there's one white person, one black, one latino, one East Asian, and one flamboyant gay guy".

What I also don't like is quotas - I have no problem with a movie or TV show being 100% white or 100% black or 100% latino as long as it's done right, but having representation quotas just for the sake of having them is, in my opinion, not the correct way of doing things.

[CSTowle]

I think there can be two points of "harm". One would be to the production and the second would be to the actor/actress. I would have to say that a example of both was AMC+'s Anne Boleyn. The lead role is played by a black woman Jodie Turner-Smith and as we all know Anne Boleyn was not black. Looking past past the trolls the writing was done well and the acting was above par. So why did it fail if the writing, acting, all of what people are looking for was done very well? It would be that a black woman was cast as quite possibly one of the most famous women in English history along with a very diverse cast of the high royal court of early 1500s Great Britain. Now Jodie Turner-Smith is a great actress but was miss-cast as Anne Boleyn and being miss-cast can hurt an actor/actress.

On another note, casting such as the village of Emond's Field in Amazon's The Wheel of Time adaptation was very diverse. Being a small village on the outskirts that is far removed from the rest of the world it really would be full of people who looked alike. This takes away from when the group goes out in the world, all of the cities seem to have the same demographics as their little village and makes the world look small and a mono so city. It kind of takes away from the journey out of the comfort zone to experience exotic locations and introduce new cultures.

On WoT, in the books the people of the Two Rivers are described as darker-skinned and Rand stands out due to both his height and his coloration of hair and skin, red hair and pale skin being far outside the norm. The other thing to know about that world is that it was broken and the people scattered. Some (like the Aiel) were cut off from most of the world and are understandably alike. Others, like the Two Rivers, are isolated but not completely cut off from the world and so more diversity is to be expected.

Outside of the topic, but I'm a big fan of the book series and I have hopes for the show (roller coaster of bad to really good to bad again, but hoping for better come season 2).

[Catlady in training]

Just to clarify, by "diversity casting", do you mean any film/series/etc. that has a diverse cast, or specifically those where there's a change from the source material/history to make it more diverse? I thought it's the second, but from the comments here, it seems like it was meant to be the first one?

[Moon Ronin]

On WoT, in the books the people of the Two Rivers are described as darker-skinned and Rand stands out due to both his height and his coloration of hair and skin, red hair and pale skin being far outside the norm. The other thing to know about that world is that it was broken and the people scattered. Some (like the Aiel) were cut off from most of the world and are understandably alike. Others, like the Two Rivers, are isolated but not completely cut off from the world and so more diversity is to be expected.

Outside of the topic, but I'm a big fan of the book series and I have hopes for the show (roller coaster of bad to really good to bad again, but hoping for better come season 2).

I didn't say that the people of Emond's Field needed to be white but all looking from the same culture as the town is very old and even with the breaking the people would begain to look the same over time. Which would make Rand al'Thor kind of stand out and he really didn't on the show. Of the Two Rivers its put in the books as "I doubt there is another place men live that is more isolated from the rest of the world" so the place is an out the way backwater having the town so diverse makes it look like a local theater production and not a major production.

I'm a huge fan of the books too! The way Robert Jordan wrote it there is so much room for diversity that could really add to visuals and emersion of the show and they didn't take advantage of that aspect and makes the world seem smaller than it really is. I was really disappointed with the series and hope that the 2nd season is better.

Just to clarify, by "diversity casting", do you mean any film/series/etc. that has a diverse cast, or specifically those where there's a change from the source material/history to make it more diverse? I thought it's the second, but from the comments here, it seems like it was meant to be the first one?

I think more push back comes form the latter, though the example the article gave from the OP of House of the Dragon is not a good one. The Velaryons though were around during A Game Of Thrones they were never featured in it. So having Steve Toussaint paly Corlys Velertyon is no big deal and I personally think he is doing an awesome job on the show. The books describe the Velaryons as quite the same Targaryens but the movieverse and the bookverse are two different things.
The second example though of the Amazon's the rings of power (I seem pick on Amazon) is a better one. Watching the press with the actors and staff of the series that Tolkien's work needs to be modernized to reflect the world today. A bunch of the interviews with Sophia Nomvete puts the spot lite on her race and gender as her most important aspect in being cast. And no she is not the first female dwarf ever on film. I can't judge the show just yet because I've not seen and hope that it does end up being a good show.

[Jackalope89]

Another point on the Wheel of Time; Robert Jordan does go out of his way to describe pretty much every group of people. The Two Rivers folk (show sadly just yeeted the other 3 villages and their surrounding farms and such), Aiel (always described as tall, light eyes, and light colored hair like red), Andoran, etc. And yeah, other than a few merchants every year, and the rare villager that decides to up and leave, its been pretty isolated for around 2,000 years (with the only ways in being a small ferry and through treacherous mountain passes). Only the Aiel have been isolated longer, at about 3,000 years. So, yeah. Narrative wise, isolated groups would end up resembling one another more and more.

Its why I'm having mixed feelings going forward with the series. Because Jordan, whom is actually infamous for his incredible amounts of detail, did describe how the people varied.

[nx01a]

The biggest harm I see is when a studio thinks diverse casting is enough by itself, and forgets to get a good script or behind the camera staff to go along with it. Then, when the final product isn't good, they take one of two routes: they either blame audience bigotry, or decide that it isn't possible to make money with a lead from whatever group that film was based on.

It's really lazy executives causing that problem in the end though.

And even without that we'd still have all in angry incels launching hate campaigns over something stupid.

Exactly! A 'minority' won't turn a crap project into a financial or critical success.
Diversity isn't an issue unless the diverse talent is subpar talent.

[Mister Mets]

The article is interesting in that it's looking at this from a different angle, considering whether it's fair for a black actor to be called to play a role that doesn't reflect blackness in modern life.

I do disagree with this approach. In work set in a different world, racial relations may be different and that's worth exploring. It's quite limiting to suggest that the view of race in the 21st Century be shared by fantasy and sci-fi characters, and coded the same way (IE- white characters can discriminate; black characters can't be privileged.)

Actors like the ability to play people dissimilar for themselves. I suspect Javier Bardem is not a Texan assassin, and that Daniel Day Lewis has never beaten anyone to death in real life. There's also an implication that it's okay for white actors to play very different roles, but BIPOC actors should reflect their own experiences.

It's also dangerous to make assumptions in a Game of Thrones spinoff about what's going to happen to a particular character.

I think there can be two points of "harm". One would be to the production and the second would be to the actor/actress. I would have to say that a example of both was AMC+'s Anne Boleyn. The lead role is played by a black woman Jodie Turner-Smith and as we all know Anne Boleyn was not black. Looking past past the trolls the writing was done well and the acting was above par. So why did it fail if the writing, acting, all of what people are looking for was done very well? It would be that a black woman was cast as quite possibly one of the most famous women in English history along with a very diverse cast of the high royal court of early 1500s Great Britain. Now Jodie Turner-Smith is a great actress but was miss-cast as Anne Boleyn and being miss-cast can hurt an actor/actress.

On another note, casting such as the village of Emond's Field in Amazon's The Wheel of Time adaptation was very diverse. Being a small village on the outskirts that is far removed from the rest of the world it really would be full of people who looked alike. This takes away from when the group goes out in the world, all of the cities seem to have the same demographics as their little village and makes the world look small and a mono so city. It kind of takes away from the journey out of the comfort zone to experience exotic locations and introduce new cultures.

To be fair, plenty of well-received projects flop.

It could be that it didn't fit AMC's brand or that the actress isn't that famous.

[Moon Ronin]

Daniel Day Lewis has never beaten anyone to death in real life.

You don't know what he does with all of those Oscars he won

To be fair, plenty of well-received projects flop.

It could be that it didn't fit AMC's brand or that the actress isn't that famous.

An to be fair Anne Boleyn is sort of played out as a character. But, it depends on how much stock you but in online reviews, it seem pretty oblivious why a large about didn't like and/or didn't watch the series

[DanMad1977]

Why change existing characters?

Why not invent new characters that are black, asian, gay, lesbian and so on? Hollywood seems to be lazy these days. Invent new franchises.

[Mistah K88]

Why change existing characters?

Why not invent new characters that are black, asian, gay, lesbian and so on? Hollywood seems to be lazy these days. Invent new franchises.

Didn't they do that in Star Wars and someone like Finn (a nameless Stormtrooper mind you) was still met with vitriol by "fans"? Same with Rose Tico, Reva Sevander, etcetera.

[CSTowle]

The reason they didn't create new characters in the comics is because the fandom widely rejects new things until they become established (even your early '90s creations Deadpool and Harley Quinn took a decade or two to catch on). But make something "Superman X" or "the new Wolverine" and suddenly they're selling at multiple times what they would have if you'd called them X-23 or Mon El. That's before you factor in a different race or gender or sexual orientation.

It's true that Disney could create new and diverse IP, but they already own everything Marvel did and that includes the variants on established brands. And the people who love popcorn C-C+ level blockbusters with endless quips and special effects also aren't big on trying new things (why most of the last 15-20 movies have been "Guardians of the Galaxy" clones), so it's easier to say "get that young black female Iron Man" or "let's do a show with the young female Hawkeye" and expect people will buy into it than to make up a character (and also have the headache of someone perhaps thinking they have a claim to it and suing, when they already own the Marvel IP that's established).

[DanMad1977]

Didn't they do that in Star Wars and someone like Finn (a nameless Stormtrooper mind you) was still met with vitriol by "fans"? Same with Rose Tico, Reva Sevander, etcetera.

Don't you think that its a very loud and noisy minority? I don't know anyone in real life who is offended of Finn. And almost everyone of my friends has seen Star Wars.

[DanMad1977]

The reason they didn't create new characters in the comics is because the fandom widely rejects new things until they become established (even your early '90s creations Deadpool and Harley Quinn took a decade or two to catch on). But make something "Superman X" or "the new Wolverine" and suddenly they're selling at multiple times what they would have if you'd called them X-23 or Mon El. That's before you factor in a different race or gender or sexual orientation.

It's true that Disney could create new and diverse IP, but they already own everything Marvel did and that includes the variants on established brands. And the people who love popcorn C-C+ level blockbusters with endless quips and special effects also aren't big on trying new things (why most of the last 15-20 movies have been "Guardians of the Galaxy" clones), so it's easier to say "get that young black female Iron Man" or "let's do a show with the young female Hawkeye" and expect people will buy into it than to make up a character (and also have the headache of someone perhaps thinking they have a claim to it and suing, when they already own the Marvel IP that's established).

Sounds plausible. Why invest money in something you don't know if it works, when you can have it the easy way?