News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by treis on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @08:50AM (#31987585)
Because there's not wildly successful books with wildly successful movies about the amazing empires that ruled the African continent.

And it's hardly rewriting parts of LOTR to have a black actor portray Legolas. Everything is still the same except the color of the guys skin. You'll be fine.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by zpeti on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @08:59AM (#31987670)
Back around 2015, it was that, switching out characters as black. Fine.

2022 it's something much more sinister. It's the entire postmodern philosophy mixed with equity forced into stories. LOTR is about good and evil and the triumph of good. It doesn't dismantle what good or evil is, it doesn't question everything, it's just a great story.

Unfortunately modern writers cannot bring themselves to write stories like this anymore, everything has to be questioned, everything has to be changed, everything sacred has to be unsacred, everything beatiful has to become ugly.

It's hard to put it into words. But it is happening. People in the media industry really have lost all sense of good storytelling.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by treis on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @09:26AM (#31987949)
>Back around 2015, it was that, switching out characters as black. Fine.

That's what the GP is complaining about.

And I don't get why that rates a "Fine". What's wrong with race neutral casting?

> 2022 it's something much more sinister. It's the entire postmodern philosophy mixed with equity forced into stories. LOTR is about good and evil and the triumph of good. It doesn't dismantle what good or evil is, it doesn't question everything, it's just a great story.

You can't look at Tolkein's life and the LOTR and then just call it a great story. You can see the echoes of his personal experience in the work. It's no different than today.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by xdennis on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @02:26PM (#31991892)
> Everything is still the same except the color of the guys skin.

That's exactly what people mean when they say wokesters use people's cultures as skins, with no content.

If you wanted to add African representation, let's say Zulu, you'd add something specific to Zulu culture: people, language, songs, stories, etc. But instead they just change some skin colours in an existing story.

That's not representation, that's just skin.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by tomtheelder on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @04:53PM (#31993558)
I think the counterargument would be that casting people of different races isn't really supposed to be about culture at all. In theory it's meant to provide a sense of inclusion to those who might not look like the characters as they were intentionally written. As in: "LOTR is still for me, even if I don't look like a European."

I don't really want to get into the validity/efficacy of that. I just don't really have an informed opinion. But I do think that's the reasoning.

I think that wanting to have a more diverse cultural backdrop for the stories we tell is something I can definitely get behind, but I don't think it's really that related to having a more racially diverse cast for a story with a decidedly Anglo/Euro origin.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by bsaul on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @06:59PM (#31994778)
The problem is that racially diverse cast while keeping the same euro-centric stories is all they've been doing for the past 15 years, because all they really care about is looking "nice".

If they produced movies with original storylines more regularly, then every minority would naturally find something they could relate to, simply because author would naturally produce contents aligned with their time.

Instead of that, studios give the impression of beeing hostage of the "diversity mob" which demand its payback on every single content. It's just pathetic, and a missed opportunity for truely great and interesting content.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by chimineycricket on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @05:52PM (#31994207)
>"LOTR is still for me, even if I don't look like a European."

What? Is there a law that says I can't enjoy art that doesn't include my skin color? If there's a TV series about Nelson Mandela, would you be okay with a white actor playing him? What about Rosa Parks? It's for inclusion right?

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by treis on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @05:48PM (#31994168)
Yes, people want what you describe too.

What I describe means you don't effectively hang a "Whites Only" sign on one of the larger productions happening today.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by bsaul on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @01:50PM (#31991422)
"there's not wildly successful books with wildly successful movies about the amazing empires that ruled the African continent"

I guess that's the interesting problem the studios and equality advocates should try to solve. To me, what they're doing right now is close to an insult to the african-american community. It's like saying "there are really no original cultural production coming from your community, nor anything remotely interesting in your past writing about, so we'll have to recycle ours to make some room".

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by jl6 on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @09:38AM (#31988064)
I didn’t think Legolas was in this new series at all?
Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by hef19898 on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @09:15AM (#31987830)
If they had a black Legolas in LotR and Hobbit, sure, why not. Since they didn't, well, having a black Legolas just destroys continuity. But who am I complaining about missing continuity, after all we have the latest Dr. Strange with the sole purpose of including the Fantastic 4 and X Men into the MCU without invalidating the entirety of the MCU so far.
Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by treis on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @09:59AM (#31988273)
>Since they didn't, well, having a black Legolas just destroys continuity

Again it's just skin color. Little bit dramatic to call that destroying continuity.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by hef19898 on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @10:24AM (#31988529)
Well, any actor not closely resembling Orlando Bloom would be a continuity issue for me. That has nothing to do with skin color, just with not retconning characters physical appearances. Because personally I don't like that. E.g. Heimdall in the MCU should look like Idris Elba in every movie he shows up in.
[dead]
Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by treis on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @10:29AM (#31988602)
>How about the repeated obsession with female characters who can easily beat up men?

The thing you complain about is in the source material. Remember? "No man can kill me", "I am no man", stab stab stab.

>But watching these women beat up men is laughable tbh. Maybe ask some famle survivors of domestic violence how they feel about this.

How is that any different than tiny weak Hobbits killing giant spiders and otherwise being the heroes of the story?

Weak actually being strong is a repeating theme across the fanatasy/superhero/comic genre. And since they're primarily written by physically weak nerds the motivation is obvious. Now that women are being included in the process they're doing the same thing for the same reasons.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by zpeti on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @10:34AM (#31988669)
Storytelling, that's how. Which doesn't exist.

What you'll notice is that in better storytelling, there will be an explanation of why the hobbit can beat the giant spider. Outsmarting it, being invisible with a ring, whatever. Good storytelling means you make the impossible seem possible.

Now, all we have is token women who we all know are there because they are women, beating up men in ridiculously impossible ways, with no explanation of how. It's just that the writers want you to know that women are strong grrrrr. Because feminism. Well, it makes for terrible cinema.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by hef19898 on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @10:50AM (#31988876)
We see a ton of bad story telling, agreed. How women are protrayed is not among the reasons.

Disclaimer: I have been handled pretty easily by women in BJJ and kickboxing / boxing drspite being 20 kg heavier and a head taller. And I am not un-trained. Get over it, competent and strong women do exist.

Edit (because I have to get of my chest): The latest Dr. Strange is propably the best example of bad story telling I've seen in a long time. I quit the MCU after Black Widow (I like the character and Scarlett Johansson) and swore to maybe watch the next Thor, max. Until I saw Dr. Strange was already free on Disney+, and I needed some distraction. All that bad film did was making me not watch any MCU film ever again...

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by bbarnett on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @12:54PM (#31990672)
So many have said that film was bad, but I just watched it.

I've seen a lot worse. Didn't seem bad here.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by treis on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @11:53AM (#31989763)
> there will be an explanation of why the hobbit can beat the giant spider

Please give me a timestamp in this scene when that happens:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfJirrzRQ60&ab_channel=TheLo...

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by thaumasiotes on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @01:55PM (#31991495)
Sam is using a magic item. Compare the summary from the LOTR wiki:

> Using the Phial of Galadriel, they managed to at first fend her off. The light of Eärendil's Star shone from the Phial, causing unbearable stabbing pain to Shelob's darkened senses, but she returned to attack Frodo, poisoning him with her stinger in a surprise attack just as they reached the exit of the cave on the Mordor side. Her venom paralyzed Frodo, and she then wrapped him in her web.

> Sam then assaulted the creature using Sting and the Phial of Galadriel in order to rescue his master. In a pitched battle, Sam managed to stab one of her eyes and injure her leg, but she held the upper hand. However, when she tried to use her stinger to inject Sam with venom, he dodged at the last moment and was able to stab her in the abdomen with Sting. This wounded her enough that Sam forced her to retreat using the Phial of Galadriel.

Re:Amazon spending $465M on season 1 of The Lord of the Ring... by notahacker on Tuesday July 05, 2022 @01:58PM (#31991556)
tbf Tolkien himself tries to explain it as a mixture of desperation and loyalty to Frodo, a super elven sword and the spider impaling herself in an ill-fated attacking move. Doesn't really come across in the film. :)

I'm not sure where good storytelling comes into men in films dodging bullets and beating up dozens of assailants or why the stylised violence suddenly becomes less believable because the person winning against improbable odds is female though. Or where the Tolkein original plotline involving a woman with a broken arm defeating a Nazgûl lord so strong it's prophecied no man can kill him in a swordfight fits into woke propaganda trends :D