This reminds me most of the lobbying before shooting of "Sum of All Fears" which, in the book, featured primarily Arab antagonists. But this lead to much teeth-gnashing, cries of stereotyping, et cetera, and the producers backed down and made the antagonists Nazis, because, well, Nazis just don't have the lobbying power that any other group has.
Of course, that was pre-9/11, even if the movie wasn't released until well afterwards.
It's infuriating on two fronts -- first being simply that in a movie-book translation, generally introducing as few changes as possible is the best course of action. That's another reason I'm glad JJ Abrams' Superman script won't see production, because, well, damn (Lex is a what? And I thought Smallville was bad).
Secondly, creators of fiction need antagonists, and they need to be able to create antagonists with the idea that not everyone interpreting the text will immediately assume that whatever subgroups the antagonists belong to are therefore evil by association. That is, they should be able to assume that the interpreters are not patent idiots. Just because the movie's nemesis is an albino lefthanded Episcopalian parakeet-owner should not lead anyone without significant cerebral damage to assume that southpaws are similarly (ahem) sinister (that was unintended, but too good to take out).
This just seems like a cry for attention ("Look! We exist! We have a press release and everything!"), which is sad, because it demeans subgroups who might have a beef about their portrayal in the media. As for albino assassins, though, it never occurred to me before, but I'll be watching the snowbanks extra careful now.
no subject
Of course, that was pre-9/11, even if the movie wasn't released until well afterwards.
It's infuriating on two fronts -- first being simply that in a movie-book translation, generally introducing as few changes as possible is the best course of action. That's another reason I'm glad JJ Abrams' Superman script won't see production, because, well, damn (Lex is a what? And I thought Smallville was bad).
Secondly, creators of fiction need antagonists, and they need to be able to create antagonists with the idea that not everyone interpreting the text will immediately assume that whatever subgroups the antagonists belong to are therefore evil by association. That is, they should be able to assume that the interpreters are not patent idiots. Just because the movie's nemesis is an albino lefthanded Episcopalian parakeet-owner should not lead anyone without significant cerebral damage to assume that southpaws are similarly (ahem) sinister (that was unintended, but too good to take out).
This just seems like a cry for attention ("Look! We exist! We have a press release and everything!"), which is sad, because it demeans subgroups who might have a beef about their portrayal in the media. As for albino assassins, though, it never occurred to me before, but I'll be watching the snowbanks extra careful now.