05-30-2020, 11:16 AM
Racism rears it's ugly head over Fisherman's Friends film
|
05-30-2020, 11:22 AM
05-30-2020, 11:25 AM
(05-30-2020, 10:20 AM)steviedm Wrote:(05-30-2020, 09:55 AM)Pipkins Wrote: Agree he's a decent actor This is exactly as I see it.
I loved this bit - "...is potentially the best-known of the group."
I suppose 'potentially' I could be better known than all of them and also created the world in 7 days! You've got to wonder about the character of a man who infers all the actors who he worked with for x number of months were racist. That's a pretty nasty accusation to infer. I suppose the other six could 'potentially' be racist, but another 'potential' scenario could be that he turned out to be a wanker and nobody could give a toss about him. In this sort of scenario, I always wonder whether the director who cast him will think twice about casting another BAME after this negative publicity. I'm sure it doesn't help. If he wants racism to be treated seriously, then he should also treat accusations seriously and not just make them without foundation. You just can't do that with serious crimes - you have to have evidence. Having said that, putting everyone in the photo but the black man is asking for trouble! In hindsight, they should have left out his name.
05-30-2020, 11:27 AM
(This post was last modified: 05-30-2020, 11:38 AM by cornishbaggie.)
(05-30-2020, 11:14 AM)baggpuss Wrote:(05-30-2020, 09:31 AM)Duffers Wrote: Noel Clarke is the only name on there I know. James Purefoy and David Hayman aren't exactly unknowns. (05-30-2020, 11:25 AM)fuzzbox Wrote: I loved this bit - "...is potentially the best-known of the group." See this is the problem I have with alleged racism, he had a very small part in the film, all the characters on the poster were involved with the band, which after all is what the film is about, I presume his name was added to the poster as a nod to the fact he is a well known actor, so if a white actor with a small part had his name on the poster because he is well known but not his picture, is that still asking for trouble or does that only apply if he is black.
05-30-2020, 12:10 PM
They could have added an inset photo of him or just put him in somehow to signify his character's status.
05-30-2020, 12:18 PM
Fisherman's Friends were gopping, the Izal Medicated bog paper of the sweets world. Utter shite.
05-30-2020, 12:19 PM
I wonder if he'll be involved in the sequel?
Fisherman's Friends Reunited.
05-30-2020, 12:59 PM
James Purefoy of:
Rome (series one and two) A Knight’s Tale, Solomon Kane, Resident Evil, (ok forget that one) And three BBC ‘classics’ serials. Acting on TV and cinema screens since 1990 That James Purefoy? Who isn’t as famous as a short term Dr. Who assistant and director of a few low budget independent Brit movies. I wonder why Ciaran Hinds and Philip Glenister weren’t even mentioned on the poster for Calendar Girls, let alone in the publicity photo. Sexist, I call it. Mr. Clarke is a pretty good screenplay writer, more than competent director and passable actor but this has meant he has gone down in my estimation as a person. Pity. (05-30-2020, 11:27 AM)cornishbaggie Wrote: See this is the problem I have with alleged racism, he had a very small part in the film, all the characters on the poster were involved with the band, which after all is what the film is about, I presume his name was added to the poster as a nod to the fact he is a well known actor, so if a white actor with a small part had his name on the poster because he is well known but not his picture, is that still asking for trouble or does that only apply if he is black. I'm not saying it deserves trouble. I'm saying it's asking for trouble. A big difference. As I said, personally, I think you have to be very sure before you accuse somebody of racism because, in my view, it's a serious crime. If you're not careful, you take the horror out of the accusation, people ignore it and dangerous racists (a tiny minority of people) can get away with serious crimes. The only thing I would add - which I'm sure you won't like - is that it is very easy for a white male to become tired of such issues and dismiss it as over-sensitive rubbish, because they themselves have never experienced regular racism. Imagine you'd been at a bus stop and been spat at by laughing car drivers as they go past. Maybe the week before you'd been chased around a town at night by a group of lads you've never seen before. Perhaps you've experienced years of drunken otherwise good people telling you that 'you're really actually alright'. Is it possible your perspective might be different? What would you see the next time something goes against you? You would like to think you would see it for what it was, but occasionally do you think it's possible you might get angry and see it for something it probably isn't? Because, let's face it, some times you would have been right. How would you feel if your thoughts then got dismissed as over-sensitive bollocks? Again, you might be strong and laugh self-deprecatingly and see it for what it is. But sometimes, in your weaker moments, is it possible you might just wrongly see another bunch of sneering white people who have never had to go through what you did, telling you not to be bloody stupid. What I'm saying is people going on about non existing racist events is annoying (probably even more to me than you!) , but maybe look deeper and see that the root cause for it isn't just an argumentative black guy. So yes leaving out the black guy out is perfectly reasonable, but is it surprising some people may see it for what it's not and get offended? That's why it's asking for trouble. Showing a bit of tact and diplomacy doesn't mean you're in the wrong, it just shows your capable of...erm...tact and diplomacy! Of course, there's people of all colours who just love to get offended, regardless of 'offence'.....! |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)