Boycott Boots

An Irregular migrant is the legal term for someone who enters through "irregular means" - usually someone who enters illegally and then claims asylum at the earliest opportunity. This comes from the Refugee Convention which prevents punishment of refugees who sometimes enter a country without paperwork.

An illegal immigrant is one who enters illegally, then doesn't claim asylum *or* one who enters legally then breaks the terms of their visa by not leaving when they should. This is a far, far larger category than asylum seekers, but by conflating them the previous government stopped people wondering how they didn't know the whereabouts of an estimated 1 million people (many from South East Asia). Some high profile "illegal immigrants" would include Stephen Yaxley-Lennon for entering the USA on a false passport and Elon Musk, who allegedly broke the terms of his student visa - also in the USA.

 

I've explained my own views on this clearly, consistently and I hope logically, yet have had people maneuvering, looking for an opportunity to cast me as 'racist'. Done subtly, looking for an opportunity. Has made me lose a bit of respect for one or two posters actually. People should feel free to discuss individual situations where black people are present without worrying that they will be automatically tarred with a racist brush.

 

As I said to you previously, I haven't been "manoeuvring" or "looking for an opportunity". I simply was wondering why you were OK for some actors to play historically inaccurate roles but not others - that's all.

You've literally just said people should "feel free" to discuss situations - which is what we are doing.

I still can't get my head round why it's OK for an American to play a Brit, but not why it's OK for a Brit to play a Brit.

That's all.

 

I think this avenue of considering actors casting is really quite interesting and its provoking me to think about it more and trying to consider films I like and the importance of such casting.

I suppose if you strip it back and think what is the ultimate role of an actor? They have to portray a part and make you believe them. For it to be authentic, real. To make you feel something. And perhaps the greatest of actors would define an ultimate performance to be able to make you feel those things when the actor in question is completely unlike the character they are portraying.

If that logic applies, gender, race or any other characteristic shouldn't block an actors path to play a role.

The question comes to physicality. And whether that physicality becomes a block to portraying a character that is believable and allowing an audience to see beyond it.

I'm thinking of particular examples. Will Smith springs to mind in Ali. I can't think of a better person to have played that role. Not just physically and because of his colour, but his character and personality. Ali was an actual person, so I think it is important to translate that too. If you cast... I don't know... Say... Matt Damon, it just wouldn't translate. So I do think there is merit in depicting a character to the closest physicality as possible if they were real and especially if they were iconic.

But as I think, there are going to be some difficulties in casting completely accurately to cover such physicality, particularly in the realm of disability. I'm thinking of the theory of everything where Eddie Redmayne played the part of Hawking. There were times I felt a little awkward that an able bodied actor was playing the role. But then the story does cover his life before his illness onset more restrictively so could someone wheelchair bound physically play the role? I suppose there have been imposed blocks historically on who was considered an actor and only now are we seeing greater opportunities.

If however a character is fiction, I don't think it matters who the actor is (though there may be some caveats). If you think of superheroes, many if not all characters were created by white people in very different times. Would it matter if a superman, spiderman, batman were played by a black actor now? I can't see why it would.

Where we have problems is Hollywood and historic casting and assessment of performance that has created some unwelcome precedents that are stubbornly not being broken down as quickly as they should.

But interesting to think about it and consider it with specific films and characters in mind.

 

Given that both Marvel & DC have embraced change over the years and the multiverse concept, there are already black and brown Spidermen, Supermen, Captain America, Batman, etc. There are currently at least 50 different versions of Spiderman and Superman - including female, black, brown, etc.

A brown actor playing Miles Morales would be no different to a white actor playing Peter Parker or an actress playing Penelope or May Parker. There have even been at least 2 British Spidermen - Billy Braddock and Zarina Zahari...

 

It's interesting I guess.

I suppose it boils down to how far you can suspend your disbelief. I genuinely wouldn't have a problem if Will Smith plays Bobby Robson in a biopic. Or alternatively if Keannu Reaves played LeBron James.

I might be a massive hyprocit though because I don't think I could watch Ricky Gervais being cast as Princess Diana though. Maybe that's my line!

 

You've quoted me out of context there, whether or not deliberately I dont know. I said we should feel free to discuss situations where black people are present without bring tarred with a racist brush.
I cant my head around why its ok for an American to play a Brit and not for a Brit to play a Brit either. I never suggested that myself anyway though but I agree with you. If it works, fine.