Channing Tatum to star as merman in gender-reversed 'Splash' remake

Deku Tree · #21

I watch a good bit of The Fifth Element every time I find it on TV.

Calamity Panfan · #22

the feminazis have gone too far this time

I REALLY HATE POKEMON! · #23

"this time"

Deepfake · #24

But I thought they were already making Aquaman

I REALLY HATE POKEMON! · #25

aquaperson

#26

No, it's Aquakin.

My pronouns are *waves hitting the shore*/*whale sounds*.

No, I'm not gonna stop making fun of the ridiculous nonsense I see on tumblr. You can't make me.

By the way, I can't wait for this to be the new thing. People violently defending/attacking movies not for quality but by the color of the protagonists skin and what their crotch holds. It's already happening with Suicide Squad and I bet Rocketeer and Splash No EVERY MOVIE that gets mainstream attention will be the same regardless of quality.

It will continue for years.

Y e a r s.

I can't stop or the flames will consume my soul.

Deepfake · #27

Except racism in casting results in poor representation all the time, and not being a biased piece of crap doesn't inversely make your movie worse. It is not ignoble to care about both the quality of the casting and the quality of the entertainment simultaneously.

This isn't some place to take shots at trans people for having to clarify their gender, if you have a bone to pick take it up somewhere other than VGF. There are a lot of ways to take the above post, so I'm not going to take any action other than saying don't keep poking the nest. Please be mindful of others, though.

#28

Not my intention, but okay. Not the time or place.

It's just that when people put the race and gender of the main character over the quality of the film ALL the time to the point that they want it to be what makes a film succeed or fail, that's ridiculous. It's not the reason a movie is good or bad, or at least not the main reason. When Wonder Woman is the best part of Dawn of Justice that doesn't suddenly erase the movie's flaws in the same way that focusing on Furiosa in Fury Road doesn't make that movie bad because it's not focused only on Mad Max.

Not saying it's never an issue, but it's not ALWAYS an issue either.

I REALLY HATE POKEMON! · #29

[QUOTE="He Who is Without Skin, post: 1604262, member: 25415"]Except racism in casting results in poor representation all the time, and not being a biased piece of crap doesn't inversely make your movie worse. It is not ignoble to care about both the quality of the casting and the quality of the entertainment simultaneously.[/quote]

Quality of cast has nothing to do with diversity, it has to do with talent. A director should be concerned with who is best for the role, not their agenda.

[quote="He Who is Without Skin]This isn't some place to take shots at trans people for having to clarify their gender"]

I don't think he was taking shots at trans people, just some of the more ludicrous things idiots say (idiots come in all flavors).

#30

Not the time or the place.

If I want to talk about how bad Tumblr is I'll make a topic about it.

Deepfake · #31

Thank you for understanding, Tazy.

^^ I do not mean quality of casting simply in regard to you as the audience, I also mean quality as in the state-of-the-industry awareness. Sexist and racist undercurrents affect fairness in casting decisions all the time, and sexist or racist decisions can and do affect the final outcome of a film project to that project's detriment. It is not simply a matter of forcing more diverse cast on a film which innately lacks that cast, it is also a matter of failing to cast those best able to fill a role based on what the casting director or executives believe to be the market's bias.

Beside that, there is a difference in a work of non-fiction, where there is a responsibility inherent to be mindful that Bill Murray would be an inadequate choice to portray the biographical role of Michael Jordan, in a film based on Jordan's life. The same cannot be said for an adaptation of Splash wherein Tatum plays the role of the fantasy creature. You having expectations for such a role serves to illustrate your own personal bias rather well. Retreads of past franchises are not necessarily a wise place to remix casting decisions liberally, however. That said, I doubt that you or many others have any strong preferences for the casting decisions of a Splash remake.[DOUBLEPOST=1470549891,1470549668][/DOUBLEPOST][QUOTE="Classic Panfan, post: 1604249, member: 29448"]the feminazis have gone too far this time[/QUOTE]
nothing is sacred rip in piece america

I REALLY HATE POKEMON! · #32

He Who is Without Skin, post: 1604348, member: 25415 wrote:^^ I do not mean quality of casting simply in regard to you as the audience, I also mean quality as in the state-of-the-industry awareness. Sexist and racist undercurrents affect fairness in casting decisions all the time, and sexist or racist decisions can and do affect the final outcome of a film project to that project's detriment. It is not simply a matter of forcing more diverse cast on a film which innately lacks that cast, it is also a matter of failing to cast those best able to fill a role based on what the casting director or executives believe to be the market's bias.

If you're not speaking in reference to the audience then I believe you're focusing on the wrong things. I'm not a director but the quality of the final product is what is most important to the creators, I would think. Of course, if there is a role a minority actor can fill as well as a white actor can then obviously he should be considered. Is there evidence that this isn't the case, or is an assumption based on what I assume is the fact that white actors are hired more often?

The "market's bias" issue you brought up seems complicated. I'm sure the executives have done their research and know the market best, but even if they're right I don't know if it would be a good enough reason to hire based on that data alone. On one hand it's their product at stake and so they should have a say in its production, but on the other it would be clearly unfair to others. I'm not entirely sure where I'd stand on that.

He Who is Without Skin]Beside that wrote:
I now oddly want to see Bill Murray in that role, and am saddened that it will never be. I do agree, however. Also, while it's true that a Splash remake doesn't exactly make me concerned one way or the other, I think that this should be done well and for the right reasons, preferably. Although I won't be watching it either way so my say shouldn't have much weight. I should note I don't have a problem with gender swapping roles as an idea in itself. There are a few I'd actually like seeing.

He Who is Without Skin] nothing is sacred rip in piece america[/quote][/quote] ikr wrote: splash[/i], more like trash

#33

^ A movie where where Bill Murray plays Micheal Jordan would be really hard to pull off. You'd need a team a' geniuses to keep out of the Metropolis of Cringe.

I've actually thought about this quite a bit and found that a lot of it has to do with casting directors playing it safe with already established actors and actresses. It's why there's a lot of movies about "Well, I'm over 50 now" these days when before it was "If you're showing any sort of age you lose top billing and we don't care about you anymore."

When Tom Cruise is the main character of "The Great Wall" it's not because they don't think an Asian can play his part, so much as it's the belief that Tom Cruise sells tickets on his name alone. That's why Samuel L. Jackson and Morgan Freeman wind up everywhere. Their names get more notice then most. On very rare occasions a role will be given to someone new like Daisy Ridley or Chris Pratt but then they start getting the same treatment. Remember Jack Black and how he was in everything for a while? Same issue, except that when the bad films he was being thrown into didn't sell he wasn't considered any more. Same thing happened to Brandon Fraser and Will Smith. It's the search for stars that can sell a movie rather than the other way around.

But, hey, I'm also willing to buy that some high up on the chain of command hate minorities too. I actually wouldn't be surprised if someone like Micheal Bay would rather chew off his own arm before he gives top billing to a non-white guy.

Bomby · #34

Channing Tatum's face is too small for his head.

#35

[QUOTE="He Who is Without Skin, post: 1604234, member: 25415"]Yeah, that was a good experience man. I literally thought that opera part was the future of music when I saw it in theater, I was totally sold.[/QUOTE]
Good old Luc Besson.

Sh*t, man, speaking of, I wanna see 'Leon---The Professional' in-theatre at some point, too. It could happen. That'd be rad, man.

I REALLY HATE POKEMON! · #36

[QUOTE="Tazy Ten, post: 1604380, member: 19345"]I actually wouldn't be surprised if someone like Micheal Bay would rather chew off his own arm before he gives top billing to a non-white guy.[/QUOTE]

Didn't he do both Bad Boys films, and Pain & Gain? Several of his other films have substantial roles for minorities as well. But maybe he's on record as stating otherwise or something, I dunno. All I know is he likes explosions.

Deepfake · #37

[QUOTE="Bomby, post: 1604382, member: 17840"]Channing Tatum's face is too small for his head.[/QUOTE]
I have a cousin whose face is too small. The problem is real.