It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

OOps ‘Hamilton’ Casting Call For ‘Non-White’ Performers/May have violated the Law..???

page: 6
24
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: JimSmith
a reply to: Darkphoenix77

Depends on the production. White people in Roots would be pretty damn awful. In a case such as that, the producers are absolutely right to make a casting call for black actors.


And I disagree completely.....that would be like me saying that I had a problem with Fox's adaption of the Rocky Horror Picture Show remake having the main lead be a black woman playing a transvestite instead of a white man as in the original. (which by the way I don't). You cast who you feel is best for the part regardless of ethnicity.




posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Darkphoenix77

The only time I really have an issue with a casting decision is if the character clearly is a certain gender or ethnicity in the piece he or she came from or if we are talking about history, so in that sense, I do find Hamilton to be something I'm not really into. It's history and history says those people are who and what they were, not a bunch of ethnic minorities.

People wouldn't cast MLK as a white man or Gandhi as Chinese would they?



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

The producers have to let all try out, and hire who they are looking for, if the specify ethnicity, religion etc they are opening themselves up to litigation.
The main thing is there would be a natural restriction on who would try out for an OJ part, most people have better things to do.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:28 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal




The producers have to let all try out,


No they don't. Obviously, you've never been to a casting call.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Darkphoenix77

The only time I really have an issue with a casting decision is if the character clearly is a certain gender or ethnicity in the piece he or she came from or if we are talking about history, so in that sense, I do find Hamilton to be something I'm not really into. It's history and history says those people are who and what they were, not a bunch of ethnic minorities.

People wouldn't cast MLK as a white man or Gandhi as Chinese would they?


I agree with you but it is discriminatory to not even consider it by excluding some from auditioning. I mean if Hamilton can be a black man then why not have a white MLK or Chinese Gandhi? It wouldn't be my kind of thing but if someone wanted to cast those roles for people of other ethnicities I say go for it.....

edit on 19-11-2016 by Darkphoenix77 because: typo



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Being to a casting call has nothing to do with it. The notice for auditions has to offer all the same shot.

www.nydailynews.com...


Such an audition notice almost certainly violates Actors’ Equity rules, which state that producers must “provide full and fair consideration to actors of all ethnicities.”

In addition, all shows must show a “commitment to a policy of nondiscrimination with respect to ... sex, race, color, creed, gender identity and/or expression, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, familial status, veteran status, or political persuasion or belief.”



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:46 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal



Being to a casting call has nothing to do with it. The notice for auditions has to offer all the same shot.


That doesn't mean they have to audition every one who shows up.

But, that's not true. They only need to say what they're looking for, like a "20ish black athletic type". They can't say what they're NOT looking for.





edit on 19-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Right, but the producers putting up an audition notice that has anything contrary to below is going to end up with trouble. I'm not sure about how the actual picking of who gets to sing or dance. But the audition notice better be right.


Such an audition notice almost certainly violates Actors’ Equity rules, which state that producers must “provide full and fair consideration to actors of all ethnicities.”

In addition, all shows must show a “commitment to a policy of nondiscrimination with respect to ... sex, race, color, creed, gender identity and/or expression, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, familial status, veteran status, or political persuasion or belief.”



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Darkphoenix77

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Darkphoenix77

The only time I really have an issue with a casting decision is if the character clearly is a certain gender or ethnicity in the piece he or she came from or if we are talking about history, so in that sense, I do find Hamilton to be something I'm not really into. It's history and history says those people are who and what they were, not a bunch of ethnic minorities.

People wouldn't cast MLK as a white man or Gandhi as Chinese would they?


I agree with you but it is discriminatory to not even consider it by excluding some from auditioning. I mean if Hamilton can be a black man then why not have a white MLK or Chinese Gandhi? It wouldn't be my kind of thing but if someone wanted to cast those roles for people of other ethnicities I say go for it.....


Well, we shouldn't have to even think about it, especially as it pertains to history. Fiction is a little looser.

You should be able to simply post a casting call for a play, tell what it is, and it shouldn't really be an issue. Why would I think I'd be cast as George Washington ... or Gandhi? I could be Queen Elizabeth though.

Fiction gets looser. It's a little more open to interpretation although I do think the author of a piece should be respected in their vision as much as possible.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 07:56 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko
I would imagine these laws were put in place becasue the discrimination was really bad once upon a time.

I found this funny that the actors said their piece about inclusion and all the other buzz words of the day. But the producers were in violation of the law with their racially insensitive audition notice. You just can't make this stuff up.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: windword

Right, but the producers putting up an audition notice that has anything contrary to below is going to end up with trouble. I'm not sure about how the actual picking of who gets to sing or dance. But the audition notice better be right.


Such an audition notice almost certainly violates Actors’ Equity rules, which state that producers must “provide full and fair consideration to actors of all ethnicities.”

In addition, all shows must show a “commitment to a policy of nondiscrimination with respect to ... sex, race, color, creed, gender identity and/or expression, national origin, age, disability, sexual orientation, familial status, veteran status, or political persuasion or belief.”


You are certainly taking this out of context. If the script calls for a black teenage skateboarder, that's what they're going to advertise for. They can't say "White teenagers need not apply".

That's not to say that other parts that aren't "specific" to ethnicity, body type, age, gender, etc., won't be open to consideration without discrimination.

These issues have been fought by unions TO DEATH, believe me. For example, there was a huge fight over the question "Should handicap people get preference for handicap parts. Should only blind actors, deaf actors, play those parts." Nope. But also, productions can't discriminate against a blind person, a deaf person playing the role because it inconvenient to work with a handicap person. The courts spoke, the discriminating producers lost!


edit on 19-11-2016 by windword because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: Darkphoenix77

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Darkphoenix77

The only time I really have an issue with a casting decision is if the character clearly is a certain gender or ethnicity in the piece he or she came from or if we are talking about history, so in that sense, I do find Hamilton to be something I'm not really into. It's history and history says those people are who and what they were, not a bunch of ethnic minorities.

People wouldn't cast MLK as a white man or Gandhi as Chinese would they?


I agree with you but it is discriminatory to not even consider it by excluding some from auditioning. I mean if Hamilton can be a black man then why not have a white MLK or Chinese Gandhi? It wouldn't be my kind of thing but if someone wanted to cast those roles for people of other ethnicities I say go for it.....


Well, we shouldn't have to even think about it, especially as it pertains to history. Fiction is a little looser.

You should be able to simply post a casting call for a play, tell what it is, and it shouldn't really be an issue. Why would I think I'd be cast as George Washington ... or Gandhi? I could be Queen Elizabeth though.

Fiction gets looser. It's a little more open to interpretation although I do think the author of a piece should be respected in their vision as much as possible.


And I agree with you, the original vision should be respected in my opinion, but to exclude auditions is still discriminatory. My point was that if they can have a black man play Alexander Hamilton then they can't complain if some other guy wanted a white man to play MLK and by extension excluded black men from auditions.

I'm just saying let everyone try out and then choose who you want based on talent and the vision of the writer/producer.

edit on 19-11-2016 by Darkphoenix77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: TheBulk

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: watchitburn


How about they just cast the best performers and the mix of skin tone will be what it will be?


Yes, let's fill 'The Color Purple' or 'A raisin in the Sun' with all white actors. LOL

Try to make some sense.
you just said that the rationale for not hiring White actors was to replace actors who were normally white. So what's wrong with doing it the other way?


Nothing. If a director comes up with an idea for an all white 'The Color Purple' cast, with an idea behind it, sure, why not?


I hope you aren't white, there'd be plenty of black people asking you why assume it's ok.

Remember #OscarsSoWhite? There were all kinds of ideas, but some didn't like the lack of diversity and their complaints had nothing to do with acting merit.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:21 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

If there is more to this that is will negate the statement show me, I am open to it.


You are certainly taking this out of context. If the script calls for a black teenage skateboarder, that's what they're going to advertise for. They can't say "White teenagers need not apply".



As long as the producer doesn't violate the law in reference to the advertising of the part, we agree.


That's not to say that other parts that aren't "specific" to ethnicity, body type, age, gender, etc., won't be open to consideration without discrimination.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:25 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Here is the problem, the city itself has ordinances that prohibit a discriminatory casting call.

When they put out a casting call, they do just that. As far as I know, they don't put out calls for just one character or another. They cast the whole thing at once.

So, sure, there might be a part for a black, teenage skateboarder, but that part is likely only one in the play.
edit on 19-11-2016 by ketsuko because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:36 PM
link   
a reply to: seasonal




If there is more to this that is will negate the statement show me, I am open to it.


I can't. I'm speaking from experience from long ago, 1970's-80's, when these laws weren't yet set in stone like they are now. I worked in Hollywood with a production company led by a black actor friend, who happens to now be a super super famous producer......who was deep into lobbying and legal pursuit of actors' equality. His specific thing was black actors with white features getting preference in black casting. That company was cutting edge, pushing the envelope that helped to open up Hollywood for ethnic and other nondiscriminatory roles. But, I've worked with several production companies throughout the 70s and 80's that dealt intimately with challenging and calling out stereotypical and discriminatory practices. I've seen the changes first hand.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Darkphoenix77

I believe that the lead is a different race than Hamilton was. Is this OK?
I couldn't care less, if it is entertaining people will flock to it.





And I agree with you, the original vision should be respected in my opinion, but to exclude auditions is still discriminatory. My point was that if they can have a black man play Alexander Hamilton then they can't complain if some other guy wanted a white man to play MLK and by extension excluded black men from auditions.

edit on 19-11-2016 by seasonal because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

So this would be the reverse of what you and your now producer friend fought against?





But, I've worked with several production companies throughout the 70s and 80's that dealt intimately with challenging and calling out stereotypical and discriminatory practices. I've seen the changes first hand.



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: seasonal
a reply to: Darkphoenix77

I believe that the lead is a different race that Hamilton was. Is this OK?
I couldn't care less, if it is entertaining people will flock to it.



I don't disagree with this, you just pick who's best for the part.


edit on 19-11-2016 by Darkphoenix77 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 19 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




Here is the problem, the city itself has ordinances that prohibit a discriminatory casting call.


Kinda. They made a mistake in asking for "non-white" actors. What they should've said, and what they changed it to say was "actors of color", or something like that, I don't remember the wording. It wasn't that they were looking for a certain type, it was that they advertised what they weren't looking for. That was exclusionary. They are not guilty of discrimination.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join