TomOpus

Nice backpedaling. Trump much?

B5Erik

OK, fair enough. A handful of them did exist.

Still pretty rare, and still statistically insignificant, but historically very significant so I do stand corrected.

It's going to be damned hard for the writers, producers, and directors to pull this off without it seeming like an agenda driven, politically correct, social justice motivated movie rather than just solid storytelling.

If they can pull that off then they will have earned a lot of respect. It won't be easy.

dex14

Trevor

I never expect my entertainment to be historically accurate, either "real" history or perceived. It keeps things much more fun and less stressful.

B5Erik

...have to be believable.

Will The Rocketeers be believable? I don't know. We'll see.

I just love the original (it's one of my all time favorite movies), and I hate when Hollywood makes changes just for the sake of making changes (as opposed to making changes to improve the story). I firmly believe in the old, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it," philosophy. The Rocketeer wasn't broken. At all.

Trevor

So every film should be silent, black & white, and full of racism.

Sean O'Hara

Because the movie is set in 1946. If they write a script then decide a black actress is best for the lead, they'd have to go back and do a complete rewrite from the ground up because every aspect of the story would change. This is the sorta decision you make at the beginning, because it dictates every aspect of what you're doing.

(Besides, do we really need a casting session for this? The moment I read "black female Rocketeer," only one name came to mind -- Rosario Dawson.)

We're talking about a film series where the Nazis planned to invade America via jet pack, a zeppelin exploded over Los Angeles, and a Erroll Flynn expy truncated the Hollywoodland sign a full decade before it was changed in real life. But a black woman with a rocket pack, that's crazy talk!

Bass Reeves says, "Hey."



I assume you were equally outraged by The Gods of Egypt, Noah, and every movie that's ever had a white dude play Jesus.

B5Erik

I was outraged that Gods of Egypt was apparently such an awful movie...

B5Erik

No, but movies that are great don't need to be significantly changed when they're rebooted.

Silent movies were broken - you couldn't hear the actors talk. B&W movies were broken - you couldn't see the colors. Movies filled with racism were broken as that kind of thing is not just unacceptable, but inhumane.

You can make a silent movie as an artistic choice, or a black & white movie, but that's not changing an existing character or story, it's part of creating a new one.

Nice try, though.

majorjoe23

No they don't. To counter that thought, every action hero ever. The summer's biggest movie is about a 100-year-old frozen soldier who wears a flag fighting a billionaire in a mech suit, teamed up with a guy who shrinks and a teenager who is part spider.

That's insane, but the writing and acting make people buy it. Black female pilot doesn't involve suspending anything close to the same level of disbelief.

Sean O'Hara

And this is where you lose all credibility as a film connoisseur.

B5Erik

I didn't say they were bad. At all. I love B&W movies - but you can't see the color, so from a TECHNICAL standpoint they were incomplete.

But you go on with your bad self and try to make this personal. Attack the messenger kind of thing...

Sean O'Hara

The Man Who Shot Liberty Vallance is incomplete? Schindler's List? The Man Who Wasn't There? All black and white films shot by directors who had the option of using color. They chose B&W because they believed it was aesthetically superior for what they wanted to accomplish. Calling it "technically" inferior is nonsense.

Trevor

They're recasting a human role with another human; race and sex shouldn't matter.

fujishig

I think we all know Rocket Dog is next. Then the outrage will come.

Double_Oh_7

If you want to make a movie about a female African-American pilot, good on you. But you don't have to call it Rocketeer. Can you imagine the outrage if they remade, say Shaft, with a white actor?

Supermallet

How often do you think true color blind casting happens in Hollywood? Unless someone like Will Smith or Dwayne Johnson shows an interest in a role, and that role hasn't specifically been written for a particular minority, it's going to go to a white person. Same with gender, how often do you think Hollywood casts a woman in a lead role that isn't specifically written for a woman? The only one I can think of is Alien, Ripley was originally written as a man.

The fact is that currently in Hollywood, if these things aren't consciously decided, the chance of the role going to a minority is slim to none.

As for B5Erik's nonsense, I cannot believe that someone is genuinely trying to manufacture outrage over this. I assumed The Rocketeer would be an obscure enough property that no one would freak out over it, but clearly I was wrong.

Shaft's race is an integral part of the character. Changing his race would make him just another generic detective. What about The Rocketeer requires that the character be white?

Ranger

Love the original. Saw it in theaters when I was 8. Ahh, those were the days.

Not sure about a reboot. But it could work out.

majorjoe23

Not only that, but this film features the original Rocketeer (but I assume not the original actor, he'd be too old) mentoring this new Rocketeer. Wasn't that one of the things the "it's not because I'm a sexist" people were saying would have made the Ghostbusters remake acceptable? She's not replacing him, she's carrying on his legacy.

RoboDad

It absolutely should not. But, apparently it did matter to the filmmakers. The only question is, why?

It could be that the story led to the choice. And that would be fine. But, it could also be that they wanted to make a social engineering statement. And that would be anything BUT fine.

Unfortunately, there is insufficient information in the announcement to know which of those scenarios is correct. And, while there are some who are willing to give Hollywood the benefit of the doubt, there are many who, based on past history, are skeptical of these choices.

Supermallet

Sounds like Secord has Luke Skywalkered and disappeared, and the new Rocketeer has to find him. But yes, it's not a recast, nor is it a reboot since it is actually a sequel.

So if you're agreeing that race and gender shouldn't matter, then why does it matter if the filmmakers decided there aren't enough lead roles for minorities and chose to make the lead of this movie a minority as a result? Why is that an invalid reason? It's not like this is Othello, where the race of the lead is a major component of the story.

RoboDad

Because that is a horrible reason to do anything. You can never undo what was done in the past. All you can do is do the right thing (which is to be completely colorblind) going forward. IF this was a colorblind decision, then I'm all for it. If not, then I'm really not that interested.

Brian T

It's an outrage that there's absolutely no other source material whatsoever -- nothing published, anywhere, ever, not even real life histories like the ones linked throughout this thread (oops, shhh) -- created by black people that could be made into new, potentially popular, even franchisable movies about black characters played by our unquestionably talented black actors (or Asian-Americans actors, and so on) except those conveniently already famous ones that were originally created eons ago largely by white people that became movies and franchises about white characters played by white people (and enjoyed by people from all ethnicities, for shame). It's such a barren wasteland out there for source material, what else is a minority group or the Hollywood executives pandering to them to do?

Supermallet

Why is that a horrible decision? I already discussed "true colorblind" casting in an earlier post, it almost never happens. Why is it so important that filmmakers not have any ideological reasons behind their decisions? Should films not be political, not have viewpoints? Why exactly is it so offensive and horrible to make a conscious decision to cast a black woman in this role? Why is it so offensive and horrible that the filmmakers decided in advance that they want to cast a black woman in this role? Surely you're not going to argue that this takes away roles from qualified white male actors, right?

Franchises are easier to sell to the public. They're a known quantity. If it were just as easy to have a hit with an unknown property as it is with a franchise, we'd see a lot more original movies.

And even if that were the case, I ask again what is wrong with casting minorities in established franchises? Because right about now it's sounding like the reason people liked these franchises is because the stars were white and male. And I know that isn't the reason, but we go through similar arguments every time a decision like this is made, so it's starting to come off that way.

B5Erik

A sequel without Cliff Secord, from what I've read so far. He was a huge part if why I love the original.

For me it is a matter of stretching credibility too far. If it were set today, or even in the 1970s, I'd have zero problems with the concept. But they're taking an unlikely scenario and making it even more unlikely - and not because it makes for a better story, but rather because they have an agenda and want to start meeting self imposed quotas.

I can't wait for Wonder Woman, and am really hoping to see a Black Widow movie. I am also really looking forward to Black Panther as well. Original projects with diversity.

But as we saw with Ghostbusters, going gender bender concept first, script second doesn't make for a good movie. This concept doesn't make for a better story, just a more politically correct one.