What is /pol/'s opinion on the diversification of Hollywood movies?
Is it a good thing to have more colored peoples take on important roles?
I think it should be no ones business but the person who writes the screenplay. If the film is going to have a huge loss because of it then so be it.
I don't have a problem with a powerful or based conservative black / beaner role. It happens.
But why are they pushing the mixed marriage, coal burning meme so damned hard these days. I just watch 4 minutes of commercials and I swear 1/3 of the pairs were race mixed. There is no way in hell that happens at that frequency in real life. Not even remotely. Not even among liberal LBGTs. So why push it so hard?
It's just a bunch of entitled rich people who are trying to see who's the hippest. This week's fad: diversity in movies.
i think it's good when they are not stereotyped. they just play a person who is a person. not "that black guy" or "that asian girl" - that shit is stupid. the less we focus on race, the less it will matter. something stupid liberals fail to see.
fuck, i hate leftists.
>>73556604
It feels like the US is 50% black.
Very few good movies have been made since circa 1968, with the exception of Clint Eastwood and Mel Gibson movies.
If they are trying to be diverse, why not use Latinos and Asians?
If there isn't racemixing, I'm bored.
People generally want to see stories that are about people like them. They like to have as much in common with the protagonist as possible. Most of the audience is white. This is why most roles are written with whites in mind. It's not prejudice. It's simple demographics and economics.
>>73556604
Just more cucking nothing new.
>>73557590
this too. they are a very small % of America, highly over represented in the media bc cuck
Diversity for the sake of diversity is bad.
Picking the best person for the job is good
>>73557678
Typical swedecuck :) at this point, your level of cuckery is almost endearing.
>>73556604
I never had an issue with black (or other minority) entertainers. Honestly I don't think anyone did except a diehard clique of loudass klan types. What's problematic though is the forced shoehorning of minorities into entertainment products to the point where their production value suffers.
Look no further than the comic industry to track the decline. In the 90s, the X-men were basically everything positive about diversity: they promoted a lot of different people from different backgrounds coming together to achieve a common goal. They dealt with the real world issue of prejudice in a fun, fictionalized way. They were pro-liberty.
Now what do we get in the 2010s? Established, longtime characters randomly becoming black, female, or muslim for no conceivable narrative reason, as if the writers were throwing darts at diversity flash cards before they sat down to work. Real life themes take a backseat to the author soapboxing about minorities directly in the comic with no veil of fictionalization at all.
So yeah, I'll watch a spy movie starring Idris Elba but fuck making a nigger James Bond. Same goes for casting Scarlwtt Johanssen as the GitS chick when there's perfectly hot Asian actresses. Let characters be them fucking selves.
>>73556604
for now, yet i hope it would end once Trump is elected, that way liberals can't complain about "black people are never in the movies!".
>>73556604
I haven't watched a movie in years. If I watched anything, it certainly wouldn't be anything new. Who watches that shit? Retards. There's nothing you can do to help them.
>>73556905
Jack and Jill made $150 million without counting product placement revenue. It's literally an advertisement dressed up as a movie. An amoral, free market in the entertainment industry is not the way to go.
>>73556604
HOW DARE YOU LAY YOUR HANDS ON MY MOMMY YOU FILTHY APE
