HorrorMovieFans.com

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:#OscarsSoWhite

has nothing to do with actors playing as disabled.

#OscarsSoSighted

if you get that trending, i'll give you a dollar.

"Who loses his sight" was all I needed there. How would you get Anna really blind person to play themselves before becoming blind?

showa58taro wrote:"Who loses his sight" was all I needed there. How would you get Anna really blind person to play themselves before becoming blind?

Acting. The problem is you are assuming a sighted actor can play a person who becomes blind better than a person who actually became blind. See why disabled folks have a point?

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:"Who loses his sight" was all I needed there. How would you get Anna really blind person to play themselves before becoming blind?

Acting. The problem is you are assuming a sighted actor can play a person who becomes blind better than a person who actually became blind. See why disabled folks have a point?

disabled actors should get more roles. but alec baldwin should not get shit on for playing a blind guy.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:"Who loses his sight" was all I needed there. How would you get Anna really blind person to play themselves before becoming blind?

Acting. The problem is you are assuming a sighted actor can play a person who becomes blind better than a person who actually became blind. See why disabled folks have a point?

disabled actors should get more roles. but alec baldwin should not get shit on for playing a blind guy.

He was a producer as well as the actor.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:"Who loses his sight" was all I needed there. How would you get Anna really blind person to play themselves before becoming blind?

Acting. The problem is you are assuming a sighted actor can play a person who becomes blind better than a person who actually became blind. See why disabled folks have a point?

disabled actors should get more roles. but alec baldwin should not get shit on for playing a blind guy.

He was a producer as well as the actor.

so, there's a chance that it wouldn't even have gotten greenlit without his involvement? are you arguing that the movie shouldn't have been made if the lead had to be a sighted actor? i'm not sure what your point was in that?

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

showa58taro wrote:"Who loses his sight" was all I needed there. How would you get Anna really blind person to play themselves before becoming blind?

Acting. The problem is you are assuming a sighted actor can play a person who becomes blind better than a person who actually became blind. See why disabled folks have a point?

disabled actors should get more roles. but alec baldwin should not get shit on for playing a blind guy.

He was a producer as well as the actor.

so, there's a chance that it wouldn't even have gotten greenlit without his involvement? are you arguing that the movie shouldn't have been made if the lead had to be a sighted actor? i'm not sure what your point was in that?

A movie about Rosa Parks is more likely to be greenlit if Rosa is played by Tom Cruise rather than a relative unknown black actress. As long as we are in agreement this is the same thing and equally ok, I have no objection.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:
A movie about Rosa Parks is more likely to be greenlit if Rosa is played by Tom Cruise rather than a relative unknown black actress. As long as we are in agreement this is the same thing and equally ok, I have no objection.

like i said before, more disabled actors should get roles. casting a white guy as black is not the same as casting a person without disability as a disabled person.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:
A movie about Rosa Parks is more likely to be greenlit if Rosa is played by Tom Cruise rather than a relative unknown black actress. As long as we are in agreement this is the same thing and equally ok, I have no objection.

like i said before, more disabled actors should get roles. casting a white guy as black is not the same as casting a person without disability as a disabled person.

Because skin pigmentation is difficult to replicate, but having no legs is easy!

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:
A movie about Rosa Parks is more likely to be greenlit if Rosa is played by Tom Cruise rather than a relative unknown black actress. As long as we are in agreement this is the same thing and equally ok, I have no objection.

like i said before, more disabled actors should get roles. casting a white guy as black is not the same as casting a person without disability as a disabled person.

Because skin pigmentation is difficult to replicate, but having no legs is easy!

this is a great argument. we should stab out alec baldwin's eyes for daring think that he could play a blind guy.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:
A movie about Rosa Parks is more likely to be greenlit if Rosa is played by Tom Cruise rather than a relative unknown black actress. As long as we are in agreement this is the same thing and equally ok, I have no objection.

like i said before, more disabled actors should get roles. casting a white guy as black is not the same as casting a person without disability as a disabled person.

Because skin pigmentation is difficult to replicate, but having no legs is easy!

this is a great argument. we should stab out alec baldwin's eyes for daring think that he could play a blind guy.

What would you say about Tom Cruise playing Rosa Parks?

Zombie, you are like 95% there! With my help, 100%!

Foo wrote: What would you say about Tom Cruise playing Rosa Parks?

i think you know the ridiculousness of that comparison.

Foo wrote:Zombie, you are like 95% there! With my help, 100%!

i'm not sure that i wanna be there.

FWIW, Rosa Parks was light skinned and Tom Cruise is half italian. It can work!

*epic announcer voice* "This Fall...Tom Cruise...in a Michael Bay production...*EXPLOSION!*...*Tom Cruise runs to the front of the bus*...ROSA...(Tom Cruise shouts) My ass ain't movin!"

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote: What would you say about Tom Cruise playing Rosa Parks?

i think you know the ridiculousness of that comparison.

Well, once you remove the gender identities from the equation, it is not so bad.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote: What would you say about Tom Cruise playing Rosa Parks?

i think you know the ridiculousness of that comparison.

Well, once you remove the gender identities from the equation, it is not so bad.

i can't have a mind of my own. (buzz)feed me what i must believe, mr. foo.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote: What would you say about Tom Cruise playing Rosa Parks?

i think you know the ridiculousness of that comparison.

Well, once you remove the gender identities from the equation, it is not so bad.

i can't have a mind of my own. (buzz)feed me what i must believe, mr. foo.

I do it in more subtle ways!

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote: What would you say about Tom Cruise playing Rosa Parks?

i think you know the ridiculousness of that comparison.

Well, once you remove the gender identities from the equation, it is not so bad.

i can't have a mind of my own. (buzz)feed me what i must believe, mr. foo.

I do it in more subtle ways!

not really.

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:

Foo wrote: What would you say about Tom Cruise playing Rosa Parks?

i think you know the ridiculousness of that comparison.

Well, once you remove the gender identities from the equation, it is not so bad.

i can't have a mind of my own. (buzz)feed me what i must believe, mr. foo.

I do it in more subtle ways!

not really.

It is next level. Does not appear to be subtle, but is subtle.