this post was submitted on 07 Feb 2024
1111 points (97.0% liked)

Comic Strips

12720 readers
2281 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Source: Alzwards Corner

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

I would say it's similar to the shock of a character played by another actor, but slightly different.

Unfortunately we were raised in a society where skin colour says more about a person, than the differences of a person's face within that group.

Yet, there is more variation within groups than between them. This is no doubt a failure of the way my brain works, and regrettably I'm not the only one.

So when ethnicity-swapping happens, my brain defaults to "but what is the significance?", and even when I remind myself that it doesn't matter, it's too late, my indoctrination has already kicked in and I'm taken out of the movie.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago (1 children)

You know, I get what you're saying. It definitely is ingrained in our society that skin color says more about a person. I also think it's not wise to say we should just ignore it altogether.

The way my mind deals with it, honestly, is to create a new character with a slightly different personality. Instead of asking why they did it in the first place, I just try to acknowledge that it's not the same character I'm expecting. If it's a remake of something, it probably won't be the same story I'm expecting either.

It's like a multiverse thing. The problem only comes if you're comparing the old to the new. So I try to avoid that.

But it isn't wrong to say that your perception of a character changes with their skin color, because society conditioned us like that. It's up to you to create a new perception though. It really only becomes wrong when you say that a character's skin color breaks your perception of them because it's unacceptable. Does that make sense?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Absolutely makes sense. Going back to the Hannibal example, Mickelson and Hopkins, both very different styles of character. One is creepy, the other is captivating, both are great.

Interesting thought experiment is the James Bond scenario with Idris Elba. There's no good reason why Bond can't be black. Yet, I feel like it should be explained with "James Bond is the codename we assign to 007".

Though, I also feel this should have been explained at one point earlier in the franchise, so even mentioning it in the first "black Bond movie" to address it and move on is taking me out of it.

There really is no winning scenario.

You can't make "008 - Bames Jond starring Idris Elba"

You can't ignore it.

You can't address it.