Iron Man 2 — Page 2

V said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

V said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

But I was pissed off about Samuel L Jackson being Nick Fury. I think it's racist to change the race of a character, at least if the character is well-established, important and popular.

 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does.  I think Denzel Washington would be an outstanding Two-Face, but people like you would never get past that he's not the same color as the character from the comics. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

And why are they not using the classic character that was important for so long instead of some recent invention?

 

They did. 

 

 

And he was terrible.  The Ultimate version of Nick Fury is not only black, but is modeled after Jackson.  They couldn't have chosen a better candidate. 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does. 

I'm sorry but that's absolute bullshit. Characters should be kept faithful to what they are. Black characters should not be made white and white characters should not be made black, etc. There's nothing racist about insisting on some faithfulness to the source material.

And so what if an attempt at doing the original Nick Fury went wrong before. That hardly proves it has to go wrong. With a different actor and a different script it could be quite different. 

And if they want to do Marvel they should do proper Marvel, not this "Ultimate" bullshit.

 

 

Being truly faithful would be getting the core of the character right, whether or not the actor is the same race.  It's the inside that counts, not the outside.  And if you want them to be your idea of faithful, that's exactly what they're doing by casting Jackson- black actor for black character.  But you still can't get past the fact that the Ultimate Fury is black.  You want Fury to be white because that's the only way you will accept him. 

Just because the original Fury was white doesn't mean they're chained and bound to making the character white in the movies.  The original Hulk had gray skin, the original Batman killed criminals, and the original Wolverine was a highly-evolved wolf but all those characters changed over time, just like Fury.  Doesn't matter if the Ultimate Fury's been around for a much shorter time, it's a version of the character than Favreau chose to go with.  And rightfully so, because the Ultimate Nick Fury is basically Sam Jackson as a comic book character, and Jackson playing him in the movies is pretty goddamn faithful. 

I don't have any problem with the Ultimate Fury being black. Don't make assumptions about me based on not knowing a thing about me. But I do have a problem with Marvel films being based on this new-fangled Ultimate stuff. It should be quite understandable that I would want Marvel movies to be based on the classic stuff I grew up with and not some new stuff I don't care about.

As it is, I came to this thread not having a clue that there was any such thing as a black SLJ-based Ultimate Fury and when I was told about it I wondered why are they using this new Ultimate stuff instead of the classic stuff?

I'd heard some things about this Ultimate stuff before (though not about their Nick Fury) and I haven't been positively inclined towards it. My attachment is to the original Marvel, not some new-fangled thing that popped up after I quit reading Marvel when Marvel stuff was getting shittier.

Being truly faithful would be getting the core of the character right, whether or not the actor is the same race.  It's the inside that counts, not the outside. 

A person's race is part of who they are. If you want to be faithful to the material you keep major details like race or gender consistent. I don't think it would be right to cast a white man as Storm and by the same token I don't think it would be right to cast a black woman as Spiderman. Not that Tobey Maguire is any use in the role.

And if you want them to be your idea of faithful, that's exactly what they're doing by casting Jackson- black actor for black character. 

Sure. If you want to do the Ultimate Fury instead of the classic one. But I still can't see why they want to do the new Ultimate stuff rather than the classic stuff that made the legend. It's kind of like choosing the SE over the OOT.

Just because the original Fury was white doesn't mean they're chained and bound to making the character white in the movies.  The original Hulk had gray skin, the original Batman killed criminals, and the original Wolverine was a highly-evolved wolf but all those characters changed over time, just like Fury. 

They're bound and chained to keep to something like what's in the comics. And I think they should base the movies on the classic stuff that made the legend rather than new-fangled Ultimate stuff. As far as I can tell, Fury didn't change into Ultimate Fury. Rather, Ultimate Fury is a separate character from a splinter line of Marvel. They had a choice whether to go with the classic stuff that made the legend or go with a new thing. I'd prefer the classic stuff. I don't know this SLJ Fury, but I grew up with the original Nick Fury, so it shouldn't be hard to understand me preferring to see him portrayed on the big screen rather than the character I don't know. And not portrayed on the big screen by Hasselhoff.

Doesn't matter if the Ultimate Fury's been around for a much shorter time,

But it does matter. The original Fury is the one that made the legend. He's the Original.

C3PX said:

Ziz said:

When the Ang Lee Hulk came out, everyone was crying "too much talking, not enough action".  When the Ed Norton Hulk came out, everyone as crying "too much action, not enough character development".

Ya can't win.

Yeah you can, just make a movie that isn't shit. As easy as that. Unfortunately, both Hulk films were shit. No reason they had to be shit, but they were. No reason they couldn't have won, but they didn't.

 

 

I agree. Those were really crappy films. It may be that Hulk is something that's hard to do right. It's not standard superhero stuff. Hulk was never a favorite of mine, but I'd still like to see it done right. But most superhero films don't seem to be done right.

Vaderisnothayden said:

 

I'm sorry but that's absolute bullshit. Characters should be kept faithful to hat they are. Black characters should not be made white and white characters should not be made black, etc. There's nothing racist about insisting on some faithfulness to the source material.

 I'd agree, if being a white dude was somehow pivotal to Nick Furies character.

Superman should probably be white, as he's fundamentally representing a kind of nostalgic Mid-west view of America. A black Superman would probably change that archtype and effect audience perceptions.

Spider-Man is a geeky teenager, and (although he's probably too well know to do it) there's nothing pivotally "white" about being a geeky teenager, and I think a black Spider-Man would work just fine.

I'm not sure what (if anything) Nick Fury represents, but it never struck me that whiteness was an important part of it. He's a sneaky spy with an eyepatch who gives lots of exposition. He could be Hindu and still be just great at that.

ps.

I think Hasselhoff's protrayal of Fury is underrated. He did a good job as a jaded spy. It was when the film required him to be funny and ironic about it that he, and the entire abomination of a movie, didn't work.

I remember when the "Spawn" movie came out, and Spawn's buddy, a black dude in the comic, was played by a white man in the movie because the studio didn't want two black male leads, afraid that would make it a niche movie.

Consequently the movie presented an interracial marriage, which I have no problem with, but it seems odd that if they're afraid of racist people not seeing a movie with two black actors, an interracial marriage is ok.

And I think Lando would have made a great Two-Face, regardless of race.

V said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

V said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

V said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

But I was pissed off about Samuel L Jackson being Nick Fury. I think it's racist to change the race of a character, at least if the character is well-established, important and popular.

 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does.  I think Denzel Washington would be an outstanding Two-Face, but people like you would never get past that he's not the same color as the character from the comics. 

Vaderisnothayden said:

And why are they not using the classic character that was important for so long instead of some recent invention?

 

They did. 

 

 

And he was terrible.  The Ultimate version of Nick Fury is not only black, but is modeled after Jackson.  They couldn't have chosen a better candidate. 

No, its racist to say that every comic book character should only be played by actors of the same race.  Skin color doesn't matter, talent does. 

I'm sorry but that's absolute bullshit. Characters should be kept faithful to what they are. Black characters should not be made white and white characters should not be made black, etc. There's nothing racist about insisting on some faithfulness to the source material.

And so what if an attempt at doing the original Nick Fury went wrong before. That hardly proves it has to go wrong. With a different actor and a different script it could be quite different. 

And if they want to do Marvel they should do proper Marvel, not this "Ultimate" bullshit.

 

 

Being truly faithful would be getting the core of the character right, whether or not the actor is the same race.  It's the inside that counts, not the outside.  And if you want them to be your idea of faithful, that's exactly what they're doing by casting Jackson- black actor for black character.  But you still can't get past the fact that the Ultimate Fury is black.  You want Fury to be white because that's the only way you will accept him. 

Just because the original Fury was white doesn't mean they're chained and bound to making the character white in the movies.  The original Hulk had gray skin, the original Batman killed criminals, and the original Wolverine was a highly-evolved wolf but all those characters changed over time, just like Fury.  Doesn't matter if the Ultimate Fury's been around for a much shorter time, it's a version of the character than Favreau chose to go with.  And rightfully so, because the Ultimate Nick Fury is basically Sam Jackson as a comic book character, and Jackson playing him in the movies is pretty goddamn faithful. 

I don't have any problem with the Ultimate Fury being black. Don't make assumptions about me based on not knowing a thing about me. But I do have a problem with Marvel films being based on this new-fangled Ultimate stuff. It should be quite understandable that I would want Marvel movies to be based on the classic stuff I grew up with and not some new stuff I don't care about.

As it is, I came to this thread not having a clue that there was any such thing as a black SLJ-based Ultimate Fury and when I was told about it I wondered why are they using this new Ultimate stuff instead of the classic stuff?

I'd heard some things about this Ultimate stuff before (though not about their Nick Fury) and I haven't been positively inclined towards it. My attachment is to the original Marvel, not some new-fangled thing that popped up after I quit reading Marvel when Marvel stuff was getting shittier.

Being truly faithful would be getting the core of the character right, whether or not the actor is the same race.  It's the inside that counts, not the outside. 

A person's race is part of who they are. If you want to be faithful to the material you keep major details like race or gender consistent. I don't think it would be right to cast a white man as Storm and by the same token I don't think it would be right to cast a black woman as Spiderman. Not that Tobey Maguire is any use in the role.

And if you want them to be your idea of faithful, that's exactly what they're doing by casting Jackson- black actor for black character. 

Sure. If you want to do the Ultimate Fury instead of the classic one. But I still can't see why they want to do the new Ultimate stuff rather than the classic stuff that made the legend. It's kind of like choosing the SE over the OOT.

Just because the original Fury was white doesn't mean they're chained and bound to making the character white in the movies.  The original Hulk had gray skin, the original Batman killed criminals, and the original Wolverine was a highly-evolved wolf but all those characters changed over time, just like Fury. 

They're bound and chained to keep to something like what's in the comics. And I think they should base the movies on the classic stuff that made the legend rather than new-fangled Ultimate stuff. As far as I can tell, Fury didn't change into Ultimate Fury. Rather, Ultimate Fury is a separate character from a splinter line of Marvel. They had a choice whether to go with the classic stuff that made the legend or go with a new thing. I'd prefer the classic stuff. I don't know this SLJ Fury, but I grew up with the original Nick Fury, so it shouldn't be hard to understand me preferring to see him portrayed on the big screen rather than the character I don't know. And not portrayed on the big screen by Hasselhoff.

Doesn't matter if the Ultimate Fury's been around for a much shorter time,

But it does matter. The original Fury is the one that made the legend. He's the Original.

I wondered why are they using this new Ultimate stuff instead of the classic stuff?

Because they can.  Favreau believes that Jackson can play the comic book version of himself and would rather not take a chance with someone else.  If a character is directly moddled after an actor, then shouldn't that actor play the character?  It would be missing a huge opportunity.

A person's race is part of who they are. If you want to be faithful to the material you keep major details like race or gender consistent. I don't think it would be right to cast a white man as Storm and by the same token I don't think it would be right to cast a black woman as Spiderman. Not that Tobey Maguire is any use in the role.

Gender is a different issue.  If it were Nikky Fury, then your arguement for a male one would be a better one. 

But it does matter. The original Fury is the one that made the legend. He's the Original.

Nick Fury is hardly a legend.  You think the average movie goer knows who the hell Nick Fury is?  If he were this great character, he would have gotten an adaptation by now other than small roles in the Spider-Man cartoon and a DTV movie starring Hasselhoff.  He's a supporting character that's never taken off on his own.  Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, those are comic legends because everyone knows who they are, even if they haven't seen any of the movies or read any of the comics. 

 

 

I wondered why are they using this new Ultimate stuff instead of the classic stuff?

Because they can.  Favreau believes that Jackson can play the comic book version of himself and would rather not take a chance with someone else.  If a character is directly moddled after an actor, then shouldn't that actor play the character?  It would be missing a huge opportunity.

Of course, IF they choose to go with the Ultimate stuff. But I don't think they should go with the Ultimate because I think marvel films should be based on classic Marvel.

Gender is a different issue.  If it were Nikky Fury, then your arguement for a male one would be a better one. 

The actor cast for a part should look like the character. This applies to hair color too. Personally I prefer if they get actors with the right hair color to play parts. No blonds playing brown haired, etc. Dyeing doesn't solve the problem, because you can see when somebody's dyed (I can make exceptions when the character is red-headed (meaning I'd tolerate dyeing in those cases), because red hair is rare, but otherwise I prefer if they get the right color hair). Age, height and build should also approximate the real character or at least give a vague impression of doing so. There are so many actors out there with so many different appearances, it should be easy enough to find someone who looks right for a part.

Nick Fury is hardly a legend.  You think the average movie goer knows who the hell Nick Fury is?  If he were this great character, he would have gotten an adaptation by now other than small roles in the Spider-Man cartoon and a DTV movie starring Hasselhoff.  He's a supporting character that's never taken off on his own.  Superman, Batman, Spider-Man, those are comic legends because everyone knows who they are, even if they haven't seen any of the movies or read any of the comics. 

A lot of "average movie goers" read comics at some point when they were younger or had siblings who did. If so, they probably came across Nick Fury, because he appeared all over the place in Marvel comics. He was one of Marvel's more recognizable characters. Nick Fury is a legend among comic readers, a long-lasting classic character who appeared in multiple titles and was a major fixture of the Marvel universe.

TheBoost said:

I remember when the "Spawn" movie came out, and Spawn's buddy, a black dude in the comic, was played by a white man in the movie because the studio didn't want two black male leads, afraid that would make it a niche movie.

 That was racist. They should have kept him black.

ABC said:

C3PX said:

On the contrary my dear friend! I believe the "r" is quite UNnecessary. FInk!

 Ion Man ? Mmmhh... Why not.

__

Still, here again a new american cinema shit. (Is that racist?... Don't mind. Oh! About that, what about the US law wich obligates Hollywood & Co to have at least one black man/woman to appear in the films... I don't call that racism, I call that Hypocrisis).

Fools !

 Is there actually such a law or did you just mean that figuratively?

Vaderisnothayden said:

ABC said:

Still, here again a new american cinema shit. (Is that racist?... Don't mind. Oh! About that, what about the US law wich obligates Hollywood & Co to have at least one black man/woman to appear in the films... I don't call that racism, I call that Hypocrisis).

Fools !

 Is there actually such a law or did you just mean that figuratively?

Wow.  Seriously?  Of course it's a law.  The problem is, finding a black man/woman who can act and looks like an actor is difficult.  A man/woman is kind of rare anyway, and most of them don't want people to know of their condition.

Except that the Spider Man movies are total horse shit.

ABC said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

ABC said:

C3PX said:

On the contrary my dear friend! I believe the "r" is quite UNnecessary. FInk!

 Ion Man ? Mmmhh... Why not.

__

Still, here again a new american cinema shit. (Is that racist?... Don't mind. Oh! About that, what about the US law wich obligates Hollywood & Co to have at least one black man/woman to appear in the films... I don't call that racism, I call that Hypocrisis).

Fools !

 Is there actually such a law or did you just mean that figuratively?

 I couldn't say if it's a "real" law from the outside or if it is imposed by the companies to the filmmakers, what may look the same. So yes, I mean it. I forgot to precise it has to happen in the firsts -or seconds- roles, it's not just about a minor character you would almost not see in the background.

Are you judging this only by deduction based on the films that come out or are you working off some information (inside or otherwise) that informs you that the studios have such a rule?

I've always hated the implication that Lando is some kind of token.

The plot clearly required someone who can out-smooth Han.

Who in the blue hell is smoother than Billy D?

The answer is NO ONE.

If you want someone light years smoother than young Harrison Ford, Billy D. Williams is pretty much your only option.