- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Q: Why no diversity in your movie cast? A: It's about Denmark in the 1750s.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 5:03 am
Posted on 2/12/26 at 5:03 am
Stupid press asking stupid questions. They live in a world where facts don't matter, only the approved narrative matters.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.
13
Posted on 2/12/26 at 5:05 am to TrueTiger
This is the way. Laugh in their face. Call them out. Everyone is sick of it.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 5:05 am to TrueTiger
love me some Mads 
Posted on 2/12/26 at 5:13 am to TrueTiger
People are sick of this shite. It looks ridiculous and adds nothing to series and movies.
Same thing here:
Same thing here:
Posted on 2/12/26 at 5:17 am to ibldprplgld
my ex wife watched Bridgerton, it think that is the show, and she asked if I wanted to watch it with her. I looked at it, there was a black queen in an interracial marriage in like 1700s England and I just told her no and kept walking.
the diversity shite in movies drives me crazy. there is a check box of at least one black, one gay, on weirdo that you question in every friend group.
the diversity shite in movies drives me crazy. there is a check box of at least one black, one gay, on weirdo that you question in every friend group.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 5:39 am to Warfarer
shite, I had this exact same interaction last weekend myself.
We watched the Cops marathon instead
We watched the Cops marathon instead
Posted on 2/12/26 at 6:25 am to TrueTiger
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. If you listen to the full clip, it's not what you think.
quote:
Danish-Reporter:"Are you worried about the conundrum that *Parasite*, with an all-South Korean cast, might be eligible for Best Picture in Hollywood, but an all-Nordic cast might not be, 'cause of their new inclusion rules, even though they both have the same level of diversity?"
Posted on 2/12/26 at 6:31 am to Warfarer
quote:
my ex wife watched Bridgerton, it think that is the show, and she asked if I wanted to watch it with her. I looked at it, there was a black queen in an interracial marriage in like 1700s England and I just told her no and kept walking.
Brigderton is something different, as it's not pretending to be a historical drama and declares itself to be in an alternative version of history. The diversity in Bridgerton has the same suspension of disbelief a typical action movie or superhero movie requires.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 6:34 am to TrueTiger
Imagine being from a race so insecure you have to shoehorn yourself into every era, time period, and civilization for validation.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 6:42 am to bignuss18
quote:
We watched the Cops marathon instead
See? You DO enjoy programming that prominently features non-white culture.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:04 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Brigderton is something different, as it's not pretending to be a historical drama and declares itself to be in an alternative version of history.
There are no "alternative " versions of History. There is only History unless of course you are one of those severely warped brained myrmidons who continue to push and support these sick efforts in hope that more mindless stooges will accept these demented lies. You know, such as a man is or can become a woman or the fallacy of the "alternative" history 1619 project.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:09 am to kbmaverick
quote:
There are no "alternative " versions of History.
I think the point is it's not presented as history at all. It's based on a fiction novel.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:13 am to kbmaverick
quote:
There are no "alternative " versions of History.
Every fictional setting is an alternative version of history, my dude.
The comments you failed to quote should have informed you of this fact.
quote:
unless of course you are one of those severely warped brained myrmidons who continue to push and support these sick efforts in hope that more mindless stooges will accept these demented lies. You know, such as a man is or can become a woman or the fallacy of the "alternative" history 1619 project.
You seem a bit broken.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:15 am to Warfarer
Queen Charlotte who is played by a black woman on Bridgerton, MAY HAVE been black but not all historians agree on this.
This post was edited on 2/12/26 at 1:04 pm
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:18 am to SlowFlowPro
This is why second hand commentary on X from random dipshits is worthless.
My biggest criticism of that reporter is that he was too meek to ask the real question: what do you think of the double standard in Hollywood?
That paraphrase in the X post was garbage fodder for dumb dumbs.
My biggest criticism of that reporter is that he was too meek to ask the real question: what do you think of the double standard in Hollywood?
That paraphrase in the X post was garbage fodder for dumb dumbs.
This post was edited on 2/12/26 at 10:09 am
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:24 am to kbmaverick
quote:
There are no "alternative " versions of History. There is only History
do you think Star Wars really happened a long time ago in a galaxy far away?
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:27 am to Jorts R Us
quote:
My biggest criticism of that reporter is that he was to meek to ask the real question: what do you think of the double standard in Hollywood?
He's apparently Danish (or of a different Nordic background). What he did is the American equivalent of pulling his dick out and pissing on the crowd
quote:
That paraphrase in the X post was garbage fodder for dumb dumbs.
Sad what's happened to people like OP, who used to be quality posters and not subject to the mind virus.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:28 am to Nutriaitch
quote:
o you think Star Wars really happened a long time ago in a galaxy far away?
Perhaps in that universe, blaster shots can melt steel beams
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:30 am to TrueTiger
That's the closest I've heard thus far to someone confronting such a moronic question with "How fricking stupid are you to think this is a worthwhile question?" After that, the reporter just needs to be hammered over and over with how ridiculous the question is.
This sort of thing isn't going to stop until the people being interviewed become willing to consistently push back on that silliness.
This sort of thing isn't going to stop until the people being interviewed become willing to consistently push back on that silliness.
Posted on 2/12/26 at 7:31 am to TrueTiger
This is from 2023.
However, there is some nuance to the whole "diversity for diversity's sake" issue.
On the one hand, particularly black folks really into the modern era of cinema (1970s and 1980s) were largely relegated to domestic servants (or otherwise subservient characters), clownish comic relief or criminal roles. And that is if they got any work at all. I understand and accept this was largely reflecting their restricted role in society of that same era.
On the other hand, this drive for diversity at all costs - whether it serves the story or not - whether it is valid, logically, or not, sort of goes the other way. It makes it seem this is a check box and the actors are not being cast on merit.
Did Denzel nail MacBeth? Sure. One of the best actors of his generation. But, it was still stunt casting. Would I rather Denzel Washington or Morgan Freeman play Ike instead of Shia Labouef? Absolutely. It would still be stunt casting.
Diversity for diversity's sake is silly and counterproductive. It allows people to dismiss a project out of hand, rightfully so, as the filmmakers are obviously not serious about the merit of the project and intend to use the "diversity" of the cast to blunt criticism.
Not every lead character has to be white. Not every criminal has to be black. Not every cast needs to have at least one of everything.
#Moveon
However, there is some nuance to the whole "diversity for diversity's sake" issue.
On the one hand, particularly black folks really into the modern era of cinema (1970s and 1980s) were largely relegated to domestic servants (or otherwise subservient characters), clownish comic relief or criminal roles. And that is if they got any work at all. I understand and accept this was largely reflecting their restricted role in society of that same era.
On the other hand, this drive for diversity at all costs - whether it serves the story or not - whether it is valid, logically, or not, sort of goes the other way. It makes it seem this is a check box and the actors are not being cast on merit.
Did Denzel nail MacBeth? Sure. One of the best actors of his generation. But, it was still stunt casting. Would I rather Denzel Washington or Morgan Freeman play Ike instead of Shia Labouef? Absolutely. It would still be stunt casting.
Diversity for diversity's sake is silly and counterproductive. It allows people to dismiss a project out of hand, rightfully so, as the filmmakers are obviously not serious about the merit of the project and intend to use the "diversity" of the cast to blunt criticism.
Not every lead character has to be white. Not every criminal has to be black. Not every cast needs to have at least one of everything.
#Moveon
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News