Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hispanic is an ethnicity and not a race. Over 50 percent of US Hispanics consider themselves to be caucasian. Nicole Munoz’ ethnicity is Canadian and she is caucasian. Her Canadian ethnicity doesn’t mean that a Canadian has to play an older Lily nor does it make the character Lily Canadian anymore than it makes her Hispanic.
Race is such a fuzzy concept concerning differentiation of humans into groups, that it is rather useless, and there is no single clear definition in science, different from what most of you probably have been led to believe even at school. In biological taxonomy the term race plays by now not much of a role. As used for the differentiation of humans it has rather little to do with biological, genetic variation, with genotype and phenotype. Race is a social construct, one focusing to differentiate people on assumed genetic differences based on more or less visible differences in appearance, and it is very idiologically charged.
Ethnic group is the less narrow and taken as a less problematic term, as a group of people identified (or who identify with each other) on grounds of shared ancestral, social, cultural experience. Sometimes used aligned with nationality or people, but that is difficult seeing the changes of borders and national entities over time (like in Canada would have at least to differentiate between Euro-Canadians and aboriginal Canadians, First Nations, when talking about ethnic groups). Ethnic group is the term used usually by social scientist. But it has to be noted, that the distinction between ethnic groups is as wide open for debate, and that how outsiders, like social scientists or anthropologists identify people’s or individual’s ethnic group might differ from how these persons identify themselves.
The United States Census Bureau uses 5 categories for “race” (American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian, Black or African American, Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander, White) and for those not sure or not finding themselves in one of these, the additional category “some other” and a category for mixed. And there are 2 categories for ethnic groups (Hispanic or Latino, Not Hispanic or Latino). Quite confusing, but they stuck to it for a while to have a certain comparability of data over the years and decades. What is important, those are no scientific categories but of self-identification. The Bureau describes the category White for example as “person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa”, Black/African American as ” person having origins in any of the Black racial groups of Africa”. (source), which is a bit of a mix of “old” racial definitions and more modern regional approaches. It leaves though out anyone with origins in Middle or South America, which have a mix of ethnic origins as well, to make it more complicate. Thus the Census offers additionally to define as either Hispanic/Latino or not regardless the answer in the categories of “race. It was noted by the Bureau, that among those marking the category “some other” in “race” most defined themselves with Hispanic ethnic group. But also people with Arab background or people of mixed ethnic background find the existing categories of “race” not representing them. Hispanic as ethnic group might not be that good for discussing social issues though either, it indeed puts people with some very diverse backgrounds into one big box and is itself ignorant to social and ethnics issue in the societies of Middle and South America. I highly doubt that people would think of someone with a more obvious native ancestry background at first or of someone with more African ancestry when hearing the word Hispanic.
In other words: In biology race is no scientific proved classification as subcategory of the human species, and barely used anymore. In social science Hispanic/Latino is as much an ethnic group and social construct as is Black/African American. In political discussions it depends on what position you want to take, if someone thinks, that reactions to people perceived as Hispanic/Latino might very well have signs of racism, or if someone doesn’t see it as that.
If we would live in a post-utopian world, where such social concepts as gender and race would be things we’d known only from history books, I might agree, that it wouldn’t matter much. Aside of course that anyway it might be difficult to see in the chosen adult actor the teenage actor they first cast playing the character, because of difference in expected looks. But we don’t live in a post-utopian world. In our present world a lack of diversity, of representation is an issue on screen, in entertainment, behind and before the cam, in TV and movie business (and in other places, but let’s stick to screen for here)
The casting of adult Lily is remarkable – and not in a good sense. They have cast a different type in looks for young Lily than they now did cast for adult Lily, and yes, looks do still matter, despite that ethnic group is a social concept. Right, makeup can do a lot of wonders, but why make that effort.
The casting can be perceived as whitewashing. I don’t care that much, why the casting and show runners actually might have made the choice they made, if it was some time pressure or short term planning, lack of available actress, whatever. I think it is mostly save to assume they didn’t do it out of openly practiced racist reasoning, but racism is something working subtle, often enough not directly intended but nevertheless happening. It’s working as social bias likely no one is all free of, that’s why it is even more so important to become aware of where this social concept can take hold in subliminal ways.
I didn’t understand pointing out the issue people have with this casting as saying, the show runners did it all on purpose even, but they obviously didn’t care enough about it to stay closer to the looks of young Lily in their casting. Ignorance is here problematic on its own, doesn’t have to be plain open racism.
Not to mention it could have given an actress with Hispanic self identification, who sure is used to some stupid typecasting and would be happy to get a different role, a chance to play a different role, and I am sure there a plenty good ones. They struggle enough to get good jobs. It’s no just about representation on screen, it is as much about more diversity in the cast and crew.
[adrotate group="5"]¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
The writers seem pretty liberal with the sob stories, not just the females.
Most certainly not just the female villains get sob stories on this show, but particular they get weak ones. And in general it has become repetitive stuff IMO.
as a mentally ill person i just feel uncomfortable with this stuff.
I love “Crazy” villains but they can be really problematic in the way they’re presented.
I agree. It too often leaves a bad taste.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
We don’t know, if Cruella was born evil, just that she started to do evil things at an early age. With her we got kinda the classical fictional crazy psychopath, though a lack of empathy doesn’t turn someone automatically into a crazy serialkiller. Isolating and locking her up might have been not a good choice to change her to the better. But maybe there was no way to ever change her to the better. We can’t tell. As Cruella herself said to the Author, she has no answer to the why, she just already as little girl wondered, why no just splash into the dark and have fun instead of struggling against being drawn into it.
It’s not about evil being born or not in my eyes, it’s more that we sometimes just can’t explain why people do the things they do. No science, and certainly not magic, can give all the answers. As I don’t think that all what we do and how we behave is just nurture I doubt it’s all nature, let alone some higher power or fate.
But of course could now say, finally the writers of the show gave their mantra of “evil isn’t born it’s made” the boot. They somewhat did that already IMO with Zelena, despite the weak attempt of a sob story for her. Not sure if the writers though realized that they did that.
And it’s ironic that of all villains the villain Emma kills now is the one with no sob victim backstory (aside of Cruella she sort of killed cursed Dragon-Maleficent and nearly killed Pan). How silly is that?! Particular seeing that bringing Emma to kill Cruella was made sound like something Rumple planned to push her over the brink and get her closer to become dark. Ridiculous. Anyone around who thinks Emma burdened herself with an inexcusable guilt by killing Cruella while convinced she had to defend the live of her son? Even if Cruella was not able to take the live of another, she was not defenseless and sure no innocent bystander, she was threatening Henry. These writer so suck at writing gray.
If they had it made ambiguous. Either they should not have used Cruella being killed now for this looming and likely stupid Emma-turning-probably-dark plot, or they should have given Cruella a sob victim story. Let her be a wronged child with some well meaning but still rather heartless, rigorous mother (I had rigid Prussian culture informed grandmothers, I know something about that), which somehow could have made her obsessed to safe every child in a weird way from seemingly bad mothers.
So, while this was a nice change to the repetitive weak sob story they’ve given particular the female villains on this show so far, it was likely an idiotic idea in the bigger story arc at this point.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Unless you’re Peter Pan. Probably the most evil character this show has ever had.
Pan was evil but I wouldn’t say pure evil, besides that I found Pan not that threatening evil as the characters, particular Rumple said he were. It was told on the show, that Pan was given / sold as child to a blacksmith to work, so they laid some seed for some sob childhood trauma for this evil doing guy as well. He never wanted to grow up because he never really had a childhood. He never was taught proper relationship skills. And additionally Pan probably was a psychopath, who with such bad influence and trauma around him could become only a reckless guy playing with lives of other people. Not pure, born evil.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Remembering how they handled the Wizard of Oz I have no high hopes for Chernabog being more than a one-off, maybe a second appearance. Pure evil doesn’t exist on this show.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Sounds like a Young adult novel, and that’s the audience the whole show seems to cater to by now. Well, enjoy if you likes that.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Also, it seems that typewriter guy was actually killed, which they didn’t make clear last week.
Yeah! I didn’t catch that either! I asked my brother where he was, and he was like “Umm…he died” :0
Peggy nailed him with a knife onto the van’s top, and he went with it the over the edge. But when we see the van sinking into the water, there was no one on the top anymore. Seeing what the explosion-implosion did though very unlikely he surived, but never know.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
Flynn: Who are you?
Jacob: I am the Librarian
Flynn: Librarian? Barbarian.(from the final episode, Stone as Librarian alternate universe) And then Bairds reaction to the kiss… One of those moments it took me a while to stop laughing. Good thing I can rewatch the episodes.
Great final, wrapping up the season but giving enough to think about to wish for more. Nice how the artifacts and adventures of all episodes came into play in the end. Mythology, Greek mythology, Arthurian Legend, sci-fi elements, alternate universes, magic – woven together in an enjoyable way, what can a geek can ask more for on Sunday primetime slot?
Interesting, in an interview Rebecca Romijn mentioned that Sunday primetime had been once the Disney Anthology hour (in the 1970s and 80s, NBC), family hour, and she sees the show quasi following those footsteps, family entertainment of the lighter fantasy kind. I had no idea (didn’t grow up in the U.S., in Germany Sunday primetime traditionally is crime time), sheds a bit of a new light for me on why OUaT has that time spot as well.
All characters have grown on me over the season, but Baird is a little bit my fav, so of course liked that she was the one one jumping through the alternate universes, but it made sense that it was the Guardian and not one of the librarians. (There were a few in other places calling in the beginning Rebecca Romijn a bad actress – come again?! some comical skills, good timing, go watch the movie Godsend to see she can do serious as well. And totally ridiculously a few judged her as being a bit out of shape – seriously? Wish I would look that good out of shape).
Funny sidenote: Rebecca Romijn’s husband Jerry O’Connell was the lead in the show Sliders, so the alternate universe hopping it’s kinda in the family (Sliders was a show about a team jumping between alternate universes, for those not knowing) And, what a coincidence, that he played the younger Dulaque aka Sir Lancelot now in the final. Rebecca and Jerry might have to do some explaining at home, why dad stabbed mom… ;-). Just one thing, Jerry should work on British accent.
Applause to cast and crew, that was a fine season. Really hope they get the chance do more seasons.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
The fun for me in entertainment is good story telling and interesting characters, not watercooler like office gossip of who is into who or who would look good with who. Actually it tends to take a lot of fun out of things for me, because it takes stories and even more so discussions and fandoms over. But YMMV.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
I couldn’t care less who Peggy Carter’s future husband might be, not any time soon. To me first and way more importantly Peggy Carter is an a-kicking, smart, interesting person, lead character of the show. I watch the show for her not for some future romance. We know she got married (well, if you watched the movies that is), so no need to worry she might die as bitter old spinter. But not one of the guys so far shown would in my opinion qualify as good enough to become Penny’s husband one day, either they have to improve significantly or the writers have to find some guy who really can offer Peggy something and take her as the great woman she is – but they can do that in season 4 or so on my behalf, not wishing for romance any time soon.
Most certainly don’t get any vibes from her and Jarvis, they are work partners, maybe will be friends, but no romance material there IMO. I find them as friends way more interesting than any kind of romantical development could be. As I find it a lot more interesting, if Angie is an ally or a pretender, and what about new neighbor Dottie (was she the one who killed that guy from the boat and Agent Krzeminski?). Or who is behind Leviathan and what are they up to (not Hydra but very much alike it, a foe to SSR and Hydra I think; after the Nazis were defeated, after WWII, the communist threat was the new thing, possible some secret organization equal to Hydra emerged there). This is Marvel cinema univers, spys spying on spys spying on spys, secrets having secrets, double, triple and more agents. Of course there is at least one mole in the office.
And I love this show for its costumes and props and music. It happens that I marvel just at that, the love for detail, and then have to rewind to pay attention again to the story. 1940s, big band sounds, groups like the Andrew Sisters, and hats (so considering to go to the nearby milliner and look if they have something close to Penny’s red fedora – ah, never mind, Stetson has it, so just need some extra money). Not to mention some noir style.
Hayle Atwell is doing her own stunts. She was quite sorry to have hit some people (though it’s not like even best trained stuntmen and -women don’t hit each other and get some bruises at times). Fighting looks really good for that.
¯\_(?????? ?)_/¯
