Cast is diverse and weird...
And it looks like there might be music involved in this film:
Cast is diverse and weird...
And it looks like there might be music involved in this film:
Originally posted by dadudemon
They did.So where's your argument, now?
The advisor, the first person who walked off, specifically hadn't, as has been specifically pointed out to you specifically multiple times.
So, lie on your part.
Also, again, some of the problems they walked off over like the tipi weren't in the script.
Be serious, what's left of your argument knowing that they had access to and read the script (and access was available since 2012 with only minor edits since then)?
That the movie makers were still being jerks to their culture and ignored even straightforward advise on how to fix minor problems.
I have asked repeatedly what difference foreknowledge even makes, and you've dodged the question repeatedly.
You're looking for a scapegoat to write them off, you're not actually addressing what's supposed to be bad about them having a problem with how their cultures are presented, bringing it to the creators, and then when they're brushed off and ignored, leaving.
They're... still in the right! And no amount of calling them SJWs will change that.
Also, I didn't bother reading your PM which was probably frought with more rage, weird accusations, and insults. I just deleted it.
"If you think that it's perfectly ok to offend them, then what's the problem with them offending you? It's not that you're ok with everyone being offended, you're *against* them offending you by drawing attention to this. It's one-way, that.
If it's ok for you to have a problem with them for walking off, then it's ok for me to have a problem with you for being against them walking off. If you don't like how I'm talking to you, well, then, that's an acknowledgement that you *do* care and want the right to be offended on behalf of others."
Basically, taking you to task for being so overly-sensitive. Oh yea, and on dodging my *one* single question after I'd answered *six* of your, on why you had a problem.
You said you'd already answered, and referred to the times you said that you had a problem, but when it comes to 'why,' you still dodge that like it was a flaming turd.
Is it so hard to explain your reasons, rather than simply re-state your stance? Bring some substance into your arguments, don't simply state you dislike something, then leave out your reasoning entirely.
2% of the the population, 0.3% of the movie roles.
So, there's a very practical reason to fight this kind of stuff too.
Originally posted by Q99
2% of the the population, 0.3% of the movie roles.
What percent of movie roles are Native American roles? Of that percentage, what percent of those roles are filled by actual Native Americans?
What percent of the Native American population seeks out movie roles? And what constitutes "Native American" from that number if such a number exists?
Is the issue you outline a symptom of the lack of movies that have Native American-specific roles or is the issue you outline a symptom of subversive racism against Native Americans?
Lastly, does walking out on a set from a movie which is satirizing racist - specifically, racism against Native Americans - portrayals from old films, help fight against potential racist bias for Native American actors?
Originally posted by Q99
The advisor, the first person who walked off, specifically hadn't, as has been specifically pointed out to you specifically multiple times.
Are you moving goals posts? Yup. You are.
Originally posted by Q99
Also, again, some of the problems they walked off over like the tipi weren't in the script.
Are you ignoring the most often cited reason - the reason being "problems with the script - on purpose?
Originally posted by Q99
I have asked repeatedly what difference foreknowledge even makes, and you've dodged the question repeatedly.
Has anyone else in this thread seen how I answered this question about 5 times, already?
Originally posted by Q99
You're looking for a scapegoat to write them off, you're not actually addressing what's supposed to be bad about them having a problem with how their cultures are presented, bringing it to the creators, and then when they're brushed off and ignored, leaving.
Yeah, I directly addressed why this is a problem over a dozen times, now: you keep ignoring it.
Originally posted by Q99
They're... still in the right! And no amount of calling them SJWs will change that.
Misplaced and even hypocritical self-righteousness is not very cool, imo. You consider that being in the right. I consider it what it is: a SJW ploy to get 15 minutes of fame.
Originally posted by Q99
"If you think that it's perfectly ok to offend them, then what's the problem with them offending you? It's not that you're ok with everyone being offended, you're *against* them offending you by drawing attention to this. It's one-way, that.If it's ok for you to have a problem with them for walking off, then it's ok for me to have a problem with you for being against them walking off. If you don't like how I'm talking to you, well, then, that's an acknowledgement that you *do* care and want the right to be offended on behalf of others."
Basically, taking you to task for being so overly-sensitive. Oh yea, and on dodging my *one* single question after I'd answered *six* of your, on why you had a problem.
You said you'd already answered, and referred to the times you said that you had a problem, but when it comes to 'why,' you still dodge that like it was a flaming turd.
Is it so hard to explain your reasons, rather than simply re-state your stance? Bring some substance into your arguments, don't simply state you dislike something, then leave out your reasoning entirely.
Too many words where you show you ignore what I've said and you demonstrate that you don't even have a halfway decent comprehension of my perspective. Congrats on being a brick wall.
You have a right to get offended. I have a right to think your reasons for getting offended are stupid or even naive.