|
|||||||||||||||||||
Great Debate: Is Blackface Back?By Scott Gwin and Stuart Wood: 2007-06-07 00:01:26
On June 22nd you can see Angelina Jolie in A Mighty Heart, as the wife of murdered journalist Daniel Pearl. To play Mariane Pearl, a woman of mixed race, Jolie artificially darkens her skin. She’s not the first to do it of course, just the most recent example, but is this acceptable? Is darkening your skin to play someone of another race no different than wearing a wig and putting on a prosthetic nose, or is it latent and unintentional racism? In order to sort through the artistic implications, CB critics Scott Gwin and Stuart Wood face off to make sense out things by debating each other to the death. Who’s right? You decide.
NO WAY. BEWARE THE RETURN OF FU-MANCHU!. -- Stuart Wood Blackface was a style of theatrical makeup which was originated in the United States by a KKK member and was once used by white players to create racist stereotypes of African Americans. These stereotypes embodied by blackface characters played a significant role in cementing racist images, attitudes and perceptions worldwide even after the practice died off in the mid 20th century. So what does it mean when today, white actors and actresses deliberately darken their skin to take on roles as different ethnicities? Is it just a harmless make-up gimmick to allow them to play a role, or is it a disturbing marginalisation of actors of color to allow another white player to get a prime role? I think it’s less about finding the right person for the right role and more a sliver of latent, acceptable racism. Race is a sensitive issue at the best of times. Is it really a good idea for caucasians to have their own type of “blackface” just so they can go Oscar hunting without ever really considering the kind of social message it’s sending out? Because lets face it, the only reason many actors take on these roles is the whiff of Oscar’s golden musk. And if they do win an award it will just send out the kind of message that it’s the right thing to do gain kudos. It’s already well established that changing your appearance it earns awards (Charlize Theron, Monster; Nicole Kidman, The Hours), but where do you draw the line between what’s an acceptable alteration and just an offensive slap in the face to another race? There are many truly great mixed actors out there who could quite competently play a role in a movie of this sort without the questionable make up job and grey area ethics behind it. Why should ethnically diverse actors be denied prime roles so another already successful white actor can use their power, influence and make up bag to cheat their way closer to an industry trophy? That’s what troubles me. Watch out folks because we’re edging close to being only one small backwards step away from the return of Fu-Manchu and the Golliwog.  YES, IT’S FINE. BRING ON THE OOMPA LOOMPAS! -- Scott Gwin Having an actor change his or her appearance to play a part is a long standing tradition which dates back as long as people have been acting. Make-up and effects are used all the time to make people look different than they are in real life. Hair color is altered so that brunette actresses can play blondes. Limbs are removed so that actors with legs can play amputees. What’s so sacred about skin color that it can’t be altered as well? Nothing really, unless you plan to let political correctness rule your art. In our current culture of crazed political correctness most people are so darned afraid to offend anyone that the thought of having someone play an ethnicity not their own is absolutely unacceptable. When I look at certain performances, like Mickey Rooney's hideous turn as Mr. Yunioshi in Breakfast At Tiffany's, I can see where there could be concern. But just because there are a few examples of someone screwing something up doesn't necessarily mean you shouldn't do it at all. Are you going to cancel the entire comedy genre just to keep the Wayans’ brothers from making anymore movies? "Why not just cast someone of that ethnicity instead of changing someone’s skin color," you ask. There’s much more to playing a role than just looking the part. Thousands of really bad Elvis impersonators have proven that time and again. If you have an excellent actor who meets all your criteria except for a few superficial features, why the heck wouldn’t you use make-up to adjust those features? Then you're able to use an actor who you feel would do far better with the role than anyone else would? Sure, there are times when having an actor change their skin color just doesn't make sense. Only an idiot would cast Shia LeBeouf for a remake of Roots and try to make him look like Kunta Kinte. But so long as your choice is reasonable, it's totally acceptable to cross-cast ethnicities and use a little make-up to make it believable. After all, without allowing that choice we'd never have any Oompa Loompas.
Read previous Great Debates by clicking here. Go where it all began, Great Debate in our Music section here.
ARCHIVES
MOVIE NEWS l MOVIE REVIEWS l MOVIE PREVIEWS l DVD REVIEWS l DVD NEWS l TELEVISION l GAMES l CELEBRITY l TECHNOLOGY l MUSIC l PAGES l MESSAGE BOARDS | TAG CLOUD This site is operated by Cinema Blend LLC. For advertising inquiries, contact Gorilla Nation. CinemaBlend.com is a private, independently owned website which is intended only as entertainment. The views expressed on this website may or may not reflect those of its owner. Don't take us too seriously. Made in Webta Labs 
|
|
