So no black man can ever play a character that is thought to be White? So say...Denzel could never play Hamlet?
What about Clark Kent's story, outside of the fact that he was drawn as White, has anything to do with his skin color? He is an alien he can be any color. I get the argument with Bruce Wayne but Clark is the ultimate immigrant nothing about that makes him have to be White. The sum total of the arguments against this is that back when he couldn't have been drawn as anything but White, he was drawn as White. Tradition dictates we keep it that way because it is "pure" and how it has always been. Well that is illogical. Times change, norms change and there is nothing wrong with characters changing with them. Should we list all of the things that were "traditional" in the 1930s that aren't now? Should we stop progress just because change rubs people the wrong way? (no I am not saying Black Superman = The Civil Rights Movement or anything I am just making a point)
Again I get that it is the nature of the internet to be cynical so you all just assume this is pandering...but if it was pandering it would be farther along than it is and they would be pumping the story way more than they are. This hardly registers outside the comic community so WB aint getting much traction out of this. In fact the only people outside of us who are even talking about it are the people whining about it being pandering and trying to ape Black Panther or whatever dog whistle comment gets them the most clicks. (I am not saying anyone here is doing that for the record) I just don't think that is what is driving all of this or we wouldn't be able to escape the story. I mean we are hearing about this as much as we heard about the fake Frosty the Snowman film...this should be a much bigger deal if they are doing this for the press and to satisfy the SJWs on Twitter.
Much like the Ray Fisher drama (the other reason people seem to think this happening) I just don't think anyone cares. Most moviegoers are going to be entertained they don't get hung up on the details. When Joker was announced and we found out he had a full origin people around here and on Twitter went nuts! THE JOKER DOESN'T HAVE AN ORIGIN!1!!11! TODD PHILLIPS DOESN'T GET JOKER!1!1 All sorts of whining and complaining about how this proves WB doesn't get how these properties work, the movie is a joke and will fail. (originally it was pandering to Scorsese) Then people saw it and 90% of the viewers didn't care about any of it even if they didn't like the film. The movie stands on it's own.
That will be the case here. If the film comes out and if it is with a Black Actor people will judge it based on it's own merits.
Now, as I said to titansupes in another thread, I am not saying WB is being only altruistic here. I just don't think this was their grand plan. I think they took pitches for Superman and none of them were great. (cause people seem to just not get Superman these days) I think they hold MBJ in the highest regards and want to work with him as much as possible and so they took his pitch as well. I think when Coates became serious about it they gave it more weight and since they would get a lot of positive press and progressive applause for it that put it over the top. I think they lucked into a very good situation and are taking advantage of it. I don't think that is a bad thing...
Who knows if it will happen, or if it will work. It might not. The color of the skin of the actor has zero to do with it.
As for whether making him Calvin Ellis or Val-Zod would be better...honestly I think it wouldn't change much when it comes to the press or the average filmgoer. In fact you would probably get more people confused and saying "why make up a new guy just have Clark be Black!" followed by clickbaiters saying this shows WB is racist because they couldn't just let a Black Man be Clark Kent. (which again is just ridiculous)
Just my $.02 worth way less than that with inflation. YMMV.
I ask about the motivation which to my cynical self reeks of a desperate PC-SJW cry for acceptance in a changing world.
If you take the characters as written and described and portrayed traditionally then no, a person of color should not play Kal-El/Clark Kent unless it is an alternate universe and everything will be altered. Maybe Perry White will be white again in this alternate reality?...
If an alternate reality, MAYBE it can be interesting but it will create yet another hole for themselves because no matter how great the actor and film it will still not fulfill the audience desire to see a GREAT traditional Superman film.
There are long and colorful histories for these characters that live in the minds of the audience. They are beloved AS IS. By all colors. I have watched many YTs of many persons of color outraged by this potential news. Not because a black actor couldn't do the role justice, but because Clark Kent is and was written as a white character... just like Bond.
Hancock was fun. A superman-type character, and it worked well... who happened to be black.
The question really is where it stop.? Will George Washington be changed to a person of color.? Is it ok to change every character ever written just to make a social point in a vain attempt to reach a different or more diverse audience.? I didn't hear any persons of color rooting against Cavil as Superman because he was white. They loved him. They don't see the color, except the Red and Blue... and Black... ; )
Is it now okay take a historical story like Roots and remake it with a white Kunta-Kinte.?.. ( not that that was a true story) Or a MLK Jr. film staring RDJ ( without the make-up) ?
To be clear, I am all for diversity and opportunity. There are MANY characters to go around and more that could be written if there was some creativity out there.
We have to wait to see what really will happen here. Will it be a For all mankind story where everything is altered in a weird twilight zone like story changing and confusing history.?. I just don't see it solving WBs problems and I am not alone in seeing this as a desperate and embarrassingly overt attempt to attract and appease an audience that will never materialize IMO.
As for what you said above: "saying this shows WB is racist because they couldn't just let a Black Man be Clark Kent. (which again is just ridiculous) "
IMO people will say, " what's wrong with WB that they think they can prove that they aren't racist by making Clark Kent black... To me this is just a weak move. I think black actors deserve better.
Just food for thought. I could be wrong....
I take your two cents and give you a penny change...