Why a Brown Boyfriend?
-
nestafan2 — 17 years ago(August 15, 2008 05:22 PM)
When did white women dating men of color became an anomaly? How exactly is it "weird" to see this on screen? It sounds like the poster meant to say it's not unusual to see a white woman with a black man, but it is unusual to see a white woman with an Indian man. Who knows? But if the thread starter is "brown", how was this movie pairing a shock?
Truth is the weapon we fear the most. -
johndeckbose — 17 years ago(August 15, 2008 07:43 PM)
Very simple. To show that Foster's character is not a racist.
If there was anything that pointed to that notion, it would make her character unsympathetic, as she guns down, mostly, people of color.
And while this seems simplistic, let me just relate a Hollywood casting anecdote. When Steve Martin wanted to do a remake of "Cyrano de Bergerac" (which became "Roxanne"), Hollywood types were concerned that Darryl Hannah couldn't play the part of a brainy scientist type.
The solution, they said, was to have her wear glasses.
In the philosophy of the Hollywood studio, glasses were all that was necessary to make a previously ditzy actress seem cerebral.
So, giving Jodie Foster a boyfriend "of color" assuaged all concerns that her character might be seen as racist. -
bilko-1 — 17 years ago(August 26, 2008 11:06 AM)
"this could be the stupidest post I've ever read."
You clearly don't read many posts on IMDB!
I think that this is an interesting question, as it is quite unusual to have a relationship of mixed races in a mainstream Hollywood movie. Those posts that suggest that it is related to the fact that non-whites make up the majority of those that are gunned down in the film could be correct. On the other hand it could be completely random. New York is certainly a "melting pot" and I think that the film reflected this very well. I would have thought that it would be important to resist any racist overtones that may appear and I think that this was handled admirably. The trick is to do it an an unselfconscious way and some may argue that this was not achieved. I still maintain that this was a worthwhile post and would question the intelligence of the poster who ranked it as stupid. -
Vashti13 — 17 years ago(August 26, 2008 06:46 PM)
Johndeckbose and Bilko-1 give thoughtful answers to a genuine question that most respondents shrugged off with derision.
None of the casting was accidental. Hollywood (especially for big-budget/big-name movies) NEVER does anything accidentally. So the original poster (IMO), was asking a question alluding to the meaning of the very careful and deliberate casting choices.
And when you are this careful and deliberate in making some choices then why are you? The reasons for -those- choices are as meaningful as the reasons for the other choices that could have been madebut most are pretending they are not.
That's the essence of having a real and productive discussion about race/gender. And I, for one, appreciate the considered and courteously-stated questions and responses. I think JohnDB nailed it pretty closely. I think the discussion could be extended even further, but I certainly wouldn't given the tone of this board. But thanks, you three! -
Lady_Groan — 17 years ago(September 07, 2008 07:11 AM)
I think the bigger issue here, isn't, "Why would they cast a non-white actor" but, "Why would they cast someone who clearly has no chemistry at all with Jodie Foster?" Naveen Andrews might be a good actor, I don't know. I'm not familiar with his body of work.
Race aside, they did not make a believable couple. They made an awkward-to-watch couple.
"How much time do we have?" -
Howlin Wolf — 17 years ago(November 14, 2008 09:17 AM)
I think the bigger issue here, isn't, "Why would they cast a non-white actor" but, "Why would they cast someone who clearly has no chemistry at all with Jodie Foster?" Naveen Andrews might be a good actor, I don't know. I'm not familiar with his body of work.
Race aside, they did not make a believable couple. They made an awkward-to-watch couple.- Especially since she
did
appear to have a good on-screen rapport with Terrence Howard
It's made from bits of real panther, so you know it's good
- Especially since she
-
FranLovesBetteD — 14 years ago(October 11, 2011 04:50 AM)
"I think the bigger issue here, isn't, "Why would they cast a non-white actor" but, "Why would they cast someone who clearly has no chemistry at all with Jodie Foster?" Naveen Andrews might be a good actor, I don't know. I'm not familiar with his body of work.
Race aside, they did not make a believable couple. They made an awkward-to-watch couple".
Utterly agreed. I'm not familiar with his body of work either, but I don't think he was a good choice to play Jodie's boyfriend. He looked like he doesn't take showers too often and acted rather bland, and I'm afraid I couldn't feel sorry for the character once he was gone.
Animal crackers in my soup
Monkeys and rabbits loop the loop -
citizen_cris — 17 years ago(September 27, 2008 10:24 PM)
i thought they had pretty good chemistry.
in terms of why was he cast? well there are probably several reasonsi mean, rest assured, nothing is done by accident in a film.
to me i think it makes the film a more authentic view of new york city which is, after all, a melting pot of different cultures. erika bain's radio program is all about experiencing the beauty of new york city and what makes it such a unique and wonderful place, unlike any other. i think her relationship is a reflection of that. to me, it just made sensethe casting and everything else.
well and also naveen andrews is a fantastic actor and extremely easy on the eyes.
"It would seem that we're through with the past, but it's not through with us."
