Don't be ignorant. Jennifer Lopez could pass for white if she stopped trying to get so damn dark.
The woman is naturally white.

She was his daughter-in-law not his daughter.

She plays his DAUGHTER-IN-LAW!

how ignorant to assume every latin person is mexican she is PUERTO RICAN There are people in this world that look nothing like there relitives so in terms of that yeah, it's beleiveable.

This film is so overrated.
The plot has been done in movies at least 100 times.
Bo-ring.
The only thing it does establish is that RR is a great actor and
MF is an amazing supporting actor who is not afraid of being that
(Million Dollar Baby, Shawshank Redemption, Levity, so many others).
Hats off to both of them.

This message has been deleted.

thank you bluesky

This message has been deleted.

Oh I get it now..the guy that wrote the screenplay lives in your town in Wyoming, and whatever else you said.it's so clear!
Nice vanity post, angel. "Hey look, I live in the butthole of the west, but there's guy here that wrote a movie!" Wow. Congratulations. You should be proud of having absolutely no connection with anything impressive, except geography.

You guys are SO STUPID! Read the plot. Robert Redford is Jennifer Lopez's father IN-LAW. Seriously, people. THe guy that wrote the screenplay, Mark Spragg, lives in my town in Wyoming.

Is J-lo a Mestizo? If she is then Redford could have been her dad b/c he is of white euro decent and the mom could've been amerindian. However, morgan freeman playing her mom, thata a wasa a joke.

Hail to the King, baby.

This message has been deleted.

I bet he feels like a dumbass right now

have you ever thought that maybe its the roles that she is trying out for. i seriously doubt all the hollywood types are making these movies simply to perpetuate some "social structure". hollywood is about making money, nothing more, nothing less. that entails getting the best talent you can at a certain price. if anyone is to blame then it is JLo for taking the parts. maybe she is the one trying to make a statement, not hollywood.

This message has been deleted.

"I read the book, and it never mentioned that she was of a white race. You almost assumed she was white."
I seem to remember a reference in the book that Jean's ancestors were coal miners in Cornwall - or something like that - giving the impression of a caucasian background. But as you said, ethnicity wasn't an important factor in the character and I think she did a fine job.
Ebert and Roeper just reviewed the film again (for the 3rd time on thier show) it was Roeper's Video Pick of the Week and Ebert made the comment that "sadly Jennifer Lopez gives some of her best performances in movies that most people don't see."

when she began she did alot of indies low budget projects , now shes getting back into the indie stuff to get acclaim.the blockbusters never tend to get acclaim.

we kinda changed topics there.

I wouldn't exactly call JLo queen of the indy films, but what does that have to do with her ethnicity or the ethnicity of the character she plays? Nothing.

And how many of J.Lo's roles have been "just for the art"? Even if you can name three, it does not compare to the others that she made and likewise made her. TO get to this point in her career she has done sleeper films that lead up to her commercial films. now most of her movies are commercial, because they are the ones that have made her worth over $100 million.

This message has been deleted.

What a quagmire this thread turned out to beLet me ask you guys a question to ponder for a bit, why is it that you can sit through a movie with aliens or werewolves or catastrophic natural disasters and yet the race of someone's daughter-in-law can cause this much heated debate? IT'S A MOVIE!!! ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN!!! In movie land, Robert Redford could play a purple man with a lime-green daughter-in-law. And for those of you who think film should be "an accurate depiction of reality," we do have those, but they're called "documentaries."
David Lynch once said that we should look at films in terms of dreams rather than reality. Film begins in the mind as a thought and then it is developed through imagination. Reality is bound by rules and restrictions, whereas the imagination and dreams are free from all that and in that sense are infinite. Film should be looked at as a visual interpretation of someone's imagination or a group of imaginations working together.

This message has been deleted.

This message has been deleted.