It’s called “ACTING” for a reason, morons!

Simple definition of acting: the art or profession of performing the role of a character in a play, movie, etc.

Full definition of acting: the art or practice of representing a character on a stage or before cameras.

So there’s apparently a minor uproar about an upcoming movie “Ghost in the Shell,” because the very white Scarlett Johansson has been selected to play the lead character, who happens to be very Japanese.

The usual suspects have been pissing their collective panties about the casting, because WHITEWASHING! And SHUT UP, RACIST! Recommendations to replace Johansson with an array of Japanese actresses are floating around the Internet like turds in the proverbial punch bowl, and the social justice whiners have been circulating a petition, because *RACISM* and Asian actresses are just not getting their due! *RACISM*

“The original film is set in Japan, and the major cast members are Japanese,” reads the petition. “So why would the American remake star a white actress? The industry is already unfriendly to Asian actors without roles in major films being changed to exclude them.

“DreamWorks could be using this film to help provide opportunities for Asian-American actors in a market with few opportunities for them to shine. Please sign the petition asking them to reconsider casting Scarlett Johansson in Ghost in the Shell and select actors who are truer to the cast of the original film!”

headwallSee, because the entertainment industry isn’t really about entertainment. It’s not about making money. It’s apparently about providing opportunities for a specific race, because *RACISM* or something.

I swear, sometimes the lunacy is enough to make me want to slam my head into a wall until I can get the stupid to leave.

These idiots have a lack of comprehension about business that’s disturbing and indicative of the dumbshittery that is spewed forth by our universities every day. In their effort to promote their version of “diversity,” these cock nuggets basically want to erase Caucasian out of existence.

You don’t hear them bitching about the gloriously talented Lea Salonga – a Filipina playing a young French woman (Fantine) in Les Miserables or the beautiful Japanese actress and singer Kaho Shimada playing Eponine in the international version of the musical. I also don’t see them shitting their britches over Leslie Odom, Jr., who happens to be African-American, playing the role of the very white Aaron Burr. The social justice whiners didn’t screech when Will Smith was cast in the role of Deadshot in the new “Suicide Squad” movie, either, did they? But Deadshot isn’t black… SHUT UP, RACIST!

No, it’s only when Scarlett Johansson was cast in the role of Motoko Kusanagi that they clutch their pearls and accuse Hollywood of racism.

Ultimately, the movie business is just that – a business. It needs to draw an audience in order to make a profit. Movies cost a lot to make, and ultimately, studios pay a lot of money for actors and actresses who draw in audiences, because that’s how they turn a profit.

ghostThere’s a reason why Johansson was paid $10 million for the last Avengers movie. She’s an audience draw. Even a crappy movie like the 2014 abortion Lucy grossed $463 million. She’s well known. She’s popular. She’s a decent actress. She’s gorgeous. So yes, studios are going to want to cast an actress who will pull off the role and draw audiences to the theater! The best, most talented, and largely unknown Japanese actress likely won’t match the type of audience magnet that Johansson has become – no matter how much they look like a bloody drawing!

The entertainment industry is a balance. Studios need to offset the need to pay big bucks to actors who will pull movie goers into the theater to shell out $13 for a movie showing and another $20 for a bucket of stale popcorn and a drink, with actors who are so skilled, that audiences will suspend their disbelief about race or anything else and focus on the actual character being portrayed.

That’s what acting is. It’s getting into the mind of your character. It’s becoming someone else. It’s walking in the skin of another person – whether real or imagined. It’s empathy. It’s the ability to literally become someone else, regardless of skin color, gender, race, or any other physical trait.

Don’t like it? Don’t see it. Don’t spend money on it. It’s your choice. You have the freedom to make it.

But quit demonstrating your ignorance of the way the entertainment, or any other business works with silly accusations of racism, whitewashing, and other SJW buzzwords and pointless petitions that show your complete lack of understanding of acting and appreciation of acting talent.


37 responses

  1. This whole thing has been annoying me since I first heard of it. Scarlet Johansson is a big draw. She’s a star. She was actually pretty great in Lucy (for all the reasons that it could be termed an “abortion” none of those reasons had anything to do with her acting). Getting her on board might well have been the difference between having the movie or not having the movie at all.

    But the part of it that gets me is… “the industry” doesn’t make decisions primarily on the US market anymore and yet the detractors act as if this is about the US market. Moving the movie out of “Neo-Tokyo” and into “Neo-New York” and casting Johansson are choices made in reference to the global movie market. “Overseas” sales, where we’re told that movies actually live or die these days, are more important than domestic sales for anything in the category of “blockbuster”.

    “Lucy” wasn’t a US production movie. I wonder how many people noticed that. None of the other actors (oh yeah… Morgan Freeman was in it), setting, story, production… none of that was American. The plotting and writing had a definite non-American vibe. (Anyone who watches a lot of foreign action films knows what I mean.) Had Johansson not been the star of that movie it might never have shown in theaters here at all.

    This hyper-correctness and worry is an American thing. For any Japanese who wish they’d have cast their favorite Japanese actress there are 10 who are going “whoo-hoo, we are taking over America,” and the Chinese don’t care or it they do they don’t like the Japanese anyhow, and the Indian market cares even less, and most of Europe thinks we’re insane.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Agreed. She’s a damn good actress. Lucy was just a horrible movie. It had so much potential too!

      I’m waiting on the wailing and teeth-gnashing about Aaron Burr being played by a black man. Nope?


      1. Sciencewise, it was using a bad premise, but for the functions of storytelling, it was an okay premise. What I did like was they took the HUMAN option for Lucy, and as a movie overall, it was very enjoyable. I absolutely hated Transcendence’s anti-human, anti-tech vibe by contrast, which ruined what was otherwise an entertaining movie at the end.

        Personally, I liked the acting and the role she accepted. Scarlett has to work to keep from being shoehorned into Black Widow entirely, and she does a LOT of different roles.


  2. Wait… their finally making a “Ghost in the Shell” movie?!? That thing has been in limbo for years! BTW i thought Scarlett Johansson was a good choice for Motoko, her acting as Black Widow was good, so i think the transition to Motoko will be fine.

    PS; I hope the movie is actually good, the last live action movie adaptation of an anime series was “Dragon Ball Evolution”, and that was absolutely terrible, i mean top 10 worst movies of all time bad!

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Yeah I thought it worked as a decision. With Motoko’s body type (which was originally a sex-bot? I can’t remember properly atm) it makes sense to put Johansson (who is sexy) in the role and she has the intensity pretty well done. Besides, manga-based Motoko had a somewhat quirky sense of humor and personality off duty and I think Johansson can pull that transition off.

      Besides, I imagine that Shirow himself wouldn’t mind her playing Motoko.


  3. Is it a bunch of white people complaining? Then yell at them for committing cultural appropriation for watching a Japanese show.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. LMAO! I have no idea. I think that’s probably the case, and they’re offended on the Japanese people’s behalf because they need something to feel offended about.


      1. I look at it this way: I was proven thoroughly wrong about Michael Keaton as Batman. Ever since then, I have been careful about making comments about who is cast in what role.


    2. It probably is. I mean, they didn’t bitch about Edge of Tomorrow, which was originally a Japanese light novel and then manga called All You Need Is Kill.

      I’ve been enjoying Tom Cruise’s recent roles. He’s been playing them well.


  4. I seem to remember this whitewashing argument, about a recent movie “Aloha” (which I thought was very good, btw). People were complaining because Emma Stone and the other ensemble of actors were primarily caucasian, and because Stone’s role was supposed to be 1/4 Hawaiian. A couple points:

    (a) It is common for people at Air Force bases to look this way (Ok, perhaps not as attractive, since it’s not Hollywood, but still). Since the Air Force, or any other branch, draws from a large group of people when stationing them at various bases, it would be unreasonable to expect those stationed at Hickam to all be native Hawaiian (they don’t staff with locals, after all)

    (b) I didn’t have an issue with Stone’s character being 1/4 Hawaiian. I think you can be 1/4 anything and look relatively caucasian, since that is quite a bit of racial dilution

    (c) Actors in Hollywood for big budget movies tend to get recycled, so we see them multiple times based on talent, not race. The same is true of Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, and numerous others. So I don’t think it’s any “agenda” against a specific race on Hollywood’s part. It’s based on talent, name recognition, and charisma.


    1. Agreed. But the SJWs don’t care about that. They want what they want – diversity at the expense of everything, including quality, talent, profit, etc. They will destroy the entertainment industry the same way they destroy universities and everything else. They’re termites.


      1. scott2harrison

        They ARE the entertainment industry, so good riddance. Perhaps something worthwhile will grow from the ashes.


  5. I agree with you, and I am definitely looking forward to seeing Scarlet as (I assume) the Major. Hopefully it won’t be a dreadful piece of SJW you-go-grrl tripe, but it probably will be. They can’t help themselves.

    However I have no sympathy for the Hollywood types. They have spent the last few decades foisting SJW-ism on America. Now they can stew in it themselves.


    1. This is largely why I have zero sympathy with the Catholic Church trying to get out from under Obamacare mandates. The Conference of Bishops supported the fucking piece of shit when it was being argued over, and now that we have had it foisted on us, they want a carve-out.


  6. Give me a few moments while I try to muster up something close to me caring…

    Nope. Got nothin’.

    Liked by 3 people

    1. Did you check inside the sock drawer? My capacity to care hides there for some reason.


      1. My capacity to care used to be with my socks. Then it went in the wash with the socks and I haven’t seen it since


        1. I could only find half of mine!


  7. Most of the time I find myself agreeing with you. But not this time.

    First: when the studio wanted to cast an American child to star in the _Harry Potter_ franchise, J. K. Rowling insisted upon Brits playing Brits. Will you be accusing her of racism?

    Second: you say Hollywood is motivated by profit. If so, with Asia in general and China in particular now being the biggest market for movies, how does (mis)casting Scarlett make financial sense? If then-unknown Daniel Radcliffe can succeed as Harry, why can’t a (possibly) at-present unknown actress of Asian descent do the same as Maj. Kusanagi?

    Third: Hollywood does not think nearly as long-term as some seem to believe. Spider Robinson said it far better than I in his essay, _Re-cutting The Crown Jewels_, where he accuses Hollywood (accurately, I believe) of performing a smear campaign against Heinlein combined with short-term profitability being somehow MORE important to Hollywood than creating a DECENT adaptation of _Starship Troopers_. A decent adaptation that would have made MORE money for a LONGER period of time, and quite possibly spawned a MASSIVELY popular franchise instead of fizzling out. Instead, they went with the cheap shot. How is that long-term thinking of profitability?



    1. First: when the studio wanted to cast an American child to star in the _Harry Potter_ franchise, J. K. Rowling insisted upon Brits playing Brits. Will you be accusing her of racism?

      1 – I didn’t say they WERE racist. I said they were ACCUSED of being racist.

      2 – It’s HER story, so it’s her choice.

      Second: you say Hollywood is motivated by profit. If so, with Asia in general and China in particular now being the biggest market for movies, how does (mis)casting Scarlett make financial sense? If then-unknown Daniel Radcliffe can succeed as Harry, why can’t a (possibly) at-present unknown actress of Asian descent do the same as Maj. Kusanagi?

      You cannot claim miscasting here. a) You don’t know what kind of job Johansson will do. b) The character has a completely cyborg body. She could really be played by anyone. So if that is the case, why not go with a sure thing that will draw audiences?

      Third: Hollywood does not think nearly as long-term as some seem to believe.

      Which is why casting a sure thing makes complete sense. They know that in the short term she will be a financial boon. She will draw audiences, and more likely than not, she’ll do a great job with the character.

      Sorry, but in that last paragraph you proved my point more than you proved yours.

      Liked by 1 person

    2. Ugh. You HAD to remind me of that fetid pile of dingo shit: the movie titled Starship Troopers. Which cannot justly be considered an adaptation of the book of the same name. It’s not even close enough to qualify as parody.

      I hope there is poetic justice for Verhoeven someday.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. scott2harrison

        You are far far too kind to the movie. It not only trashed Heinlein’s most translated novel, it trashed the infantry. My god it used the standard Hollywood battle where everyone charges at everyone with no tactics whatsoever. Gaaaahhhh!!!

        Liked by 2 people

        1. You’re right, I was far too kind. Unfortunately my imagination failed me this morning when I tried to really express how I feel. I mean, it’s a crime to nuke something from orbit. It’s even a crime to drop a big bag of steaming shit from orbit.

          It is by FAR the worst, most fraudulent adaptation of a book I’ve ever seen (not that I consume a lot of Hollywood). About a million times as irritating as 2010 (which was turned into pro-Commies-in-Central-America propaganda as that was the Leftshitstain cause du jour).


    3. I think that casting Johannson in the role was *absolutely* about the movie market in China. Honest to dog, you’re not suggesting that Chinese and Japanese are the same because they’re both Asian, are you? I’ve no doubt that modern times have softened the sentiments but in Chinese film the Japanese are the villains.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Responding to myself because I saw this today:

        “It’s a shame they didn’t choose a Japanese person to tell such an interesting story. But at least they didn’t cast a Chinese actress, like they did in Memoirs of a Geisha,” said Ai Ries Collazo, another manga fan. “[Zhang Ziyi] actually did an amazing job, but it was like: really? Again, can’t they find a Japanese actress? Though casting an Asian actress would probably have gone down better in America.”

        “But at least they didn’t cast a Chinese actress.”

        The article is on point. Americans are outraged. Japanese are bemused. Even ones who think “hey, it would have been nice…” don’t really care. And *at least* they didn’t cast a Chinese actress.


        1. All of this is so ridiculous! Precious ever-offended snowflakes are the only ones screeching about this shit. Everyone else is like, shrug.


  8. There can be some validity to complaining about miscasting regarding race &/or gender. For example is a straight up biographical endeavor, Morgan Freeman wouldn’t be believable as G.W. Bush, nor would Alec Guinness have been a good choice for Malcolm X. (Though if done right those combinations could work…).

    Another example – Cumberbatch seems to be an alright actor, but he’s no Khan, in part because Khan was from North India. Montalban pulled it off, but Abrams retconning plot to explain ethnicity just sunk it for me.

    I’ve no direct opinion on Ghost in the Shell’s casting decision (though a quick glance showed that some very non-asian names were doing voice-overs of the animated predecessors to no apparent outcry). I’m not a big fan of Japanese cartoons so it’s not anything near & dear to me.

    But the SJW demands that a character has to be X race/gender/whatev because diversity just gets on my damn nerves. (& don’t get me started on Wendig’s Star Wars novel…)

    See folks that embrace the progressive culture or political ideology (which focuses on the collective) tend to be all about the group rather than the individual. So aside from one of the limited circumstances where race/ethnicity/nationality would be important to casting, they feel that checking off the aesthetics box is mo’ better important than the talent of the individual concerned.

    In plays out in other venues as well – in Colorado when the committee met to replace state senator Hudak (may she never find convenient parking again) the first thing they agreed on was her replacement had to be a woman. Not someone who had any actual merit – the first & foremost criteria was her sex.

    To progressives individuality just doesn’t matter. It’s all about group identity. Talent, ability, character development or even story is inconsequential as long as the right boxes are checked next to appearance. (Again, see Wendig’s SW novel)

    Johansson is cute, & she’s a decent actress as you’ve said. But she is a progressive (she stumped for obama for example) so it’s kinda funny to see them eat their own. & odds are most of the folks bitching don’t even watch anime or read manga. Now, if they were protesting that a non-cyborg was cast in the lead role, maybe they’d be on to sumfin… 🙂


    1. I will disagree on Cumberbatch. I think he made an amazing Khan! He’s such an incredibly strong actor, that he could be playing Kunta Kinte in Roots, and I wouldn’t even blink an eye! YMMV

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Yes. Check out Alec Guinness playing Prince Faisal in Lawrence of Arabia and tell me who could have possibly done a better job. He WAS an Arab for all intents and purposes. Racist to do that today however. We would have missed a superb performance. Thank God for no PC at that time.

        Liked by 1 person

  9. The fact that Scarlett is in this movie is almost a guarantee of success. Shut up already you crybullies.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Wait, they’re complaining about this, but staying silent about not using an Eastern European as Baron Mordo? What about changing the Ancient One from a Asian male of extreme age to a sexy white female? [] If one is going to cry miscasting when they change the race or gender, they ought to be equal about it, right?

    I think I can live with Mordo, but changing the Ancient One like that? I may have second thought about seeing the movie. (irc, Dr. Strange learned the mystic arts in the Orient, not Great Britain.)


    1. I’m pretty sure there won’t be silence on the Ancient One casting. I’d heard of it already and I don’t pay attention so…

      I think there is a difference between complaining about casting… we all wish we were casting director and movies always get it wrong, right? But complaining about casting and making it out to be a question of morality seems… lame. And self-aggrandizing. And lame.

      If the idea is to open up casting for more people of color, then an across the board “cast whoever seems good” would seem to open more roles to people of color than demanding a strict adherence to a character’s established race does. But what we’ve seen happen is that the theorists of morality in casting want to have it both ways. Norse gods can be Asian or African but an ancient Asian holy man can’t be a white woman.


      1. This is my shocked face. o-0.

        Although, Cumberbatch does make a yummy Stephen Strange – from the stills I have seen. That may be enough to get me to rent the movie despite the casting of a white woman as the A.O. (Maybe) I hope he can pull of the intensity I remember. (granting that it has been nearly 30 years since I last read comics, so that could have changed.)


  11. Odd timing, in that I just posted this on FarceBark yesterday, provoked by a link via Larry Correia:

    Dear Other Cultures,

    I’m gonna Appropriate the fuck out of you.

    I suggest you just lie back and enjoy it.

    Sincerely, Me

    Liked by 1 person

  12. The whole concept of the confluence of acting and politics, brings to mind a quote from Hal Lilywhite’s book Freedom or Serfdom?: The Case for Limited, Constitutional Government and Against Statism, and quoted at Joe Huffman’s site:

    Actors are good at acting, at pretending to be what they are not. They earn their living in a fantasy world, and I fear that many of them lose touch with reality. Their talent does not include any particular wisdom; if it did we would see fewer Hollywood stars in the news for all the wrong reasons.

    Acting is playing make believe. If I don’t have a problem with a Jewish actor playing the part of Romeo, nobody who possess critical thinking skills, should have an issue with this. But, I see the salute part of my previous sentence…..and acknowledge that it doesn’t apply to leftists.


  13. As usual, I am late to the party. But I still like to poke the corpse, just in case there is a little life there. The way I see it, it matters not who complains or cries about the person acting in the movie. The person or studio footing the bill and expecting a return on their investment is the only shareholder who has any business deciding the person or persons who will be working on the film, either on camera or off. Period. Neither the SJW’s nor the rest of us bemused observers should have any impact on what boils down to a split between an artistic and a financial decision made by the ones writing the check.
    Kind of like it’s my ball, so we play by my rules. You want to make the rules, get your own ball.
    A similar type of issue came up a number of years ago when George Lopez had his first tv show. After it was cancelled, several of the other actors from it made it known on the news shows that they felt that Latino’s were discriminated against in the entertainment industry. I felt the same way at the time. If you don’t like it, get your own ball and make the rules. In other words, band together and put your money where your mouth is. Start your own production company. Be proactive with your careers instead of looking for someone to give you something.
    Funny how liberal types are the same no matter how high up on the food chain they go.


%d bloggers like this: