Jolie and Pitt, with 'Heart'

CelineChic said:
I also can't believe they picked Angelina to play a afro-cuban woman. I wish they would have chosen a lesser known more attractive actress.

What has the hollywood come to when the role of a minority is played by I white woman?

Yep, I agree too. Casting Angelina in this role seems inappropriate to me.
 
^ Ha, Hollywood "whitewashing" - so true! The arrogance of the Jolie-Pitts is astonishing.
 
CelineChic said:
It still makes her a visible minority and still make Angelina white.
Her only being half afro-cuban doesn't change the fact that there are several talented bi-racial and black actresses who could have played Marianne.

So it would be acceptable (to you) if they casted a black woman to play a mulatta than it would be for a white woman? Are you detecting the inconsistency in your argument?

I wonder who Ugly Jolie slept with to get this part?

Gee, I wonder. Hmm? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CelineChic said:
This isn't the first time that this type of stupidity has occured in Hollywood, even in minor roles

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06228/713723-254.stm

I can't wait to see a movie where Brad Pitt plays Nelson Mandela...

Ha I love you..Karma and Zoe is breath taking! Geez..Should be a crime to be that gorgeous.:woot:

Mariane Pearl is acutally a mulatta (black/white).
LMAO And so is Emanuela De Paula, But yet she was praised in the "top black models" thread as black...hmmm
 
Last edited by a moderator:
they got the hair down, but angelina can't seem to pull off the posture and facial expression.
the real mariane looks friendly and nice, angelina looks a little hostile. her head is also tilted in a distinctly angelina way
 
kissmesweet said:
Honestly... she looks pretty convincing in that picture, but I think she's one of the most overrated actors around. She isn't that good.

can't help but agree.... and her obsession with the image of the angelina with good virtues is quite tiresome and ridiculous as well.... :rolleyes:
 
Retro said:
So it would be acceptable (to you) if they casted a black woman to play a mulatta than it would be for a white woman? Are you detecting the inconsistency in your argument?

Yes it would be acceptable to cast a black woman. You seem to lack comprehension of my argument. By casting a white woman they're taking away acting opportunities from talented black and bi-racial actresses who already have very little roles because of their ethnicity. No inconsistencies in my argument.
 
At first i had to admit I was rather :huh:. how will angelina pull off looking like Mariane Pearl, although, she'll portray her exceptionally well, as far as acting is concern.

I have no doubt her acting will be another Oscar calibrating performance. She is not an overrated actor. I she's a true thespian. Very gifted and very believable in her roles she partake. Brad made the right choice (in the mother of his biological child and most definitely in the role of Mariane Pearl - and to think this role was supposedly for Jennifer Aniston??????????? I'm sorry Aniston Fans but the girl cannot act for dear life. Let alone improvise a French Accent! :doh: )
 
Last edited by a moderator:
smartarse said:
I have no doubt her acting will be another Oscar calibrating performance. She is not an overrated actor.

but then again, the oscars have very questionnable standards.... :innocent:
 
^ true that! Example, the year when Cate Blanchett was running against
Gwyneth Paltrow for best actress in a leading role and Gwyneth F*cking
Paltrow won! Cate should have won that Oscar! She perfected the
role as Queen Elizabeth in Elizabeth. I'm usually not into watching
award shows, because it's purely crap! But I purposely watched it that
year because I heard that Cate Blancett was nominated for Best Actress
in a Leading Role for Elizabeth.
 
But you don't know what criteria the Academy has to go by either. The degree of difficulty the actors assessed to achieved certain points of their character. You don't know what the Academy deemed artistic besides the obvious. :innocent: It's so easy to say the role of Cate Blanchett's Elizabeth is better compared to Gwenyth's Shakespeare because it is not the only role in which the movie they are currently being viewed that the Academy looks for. It's more indepth.

Getting back to Angelina... have you seen Beyond Borders? An independent film she did with Clive Owen. Then another role she took on in Taking Lives. She's a diversed actress - a true thespian. And no doubt she will have an Oscar Caliber performance in this film. Besides the last say on the character is the person being portrayed, Mariane Pearl. She obviously saw talent, passion, desire and herself in Angelina to give approval.


Kimkhuu said:
but then again, the oscars have very questionnable standards.... :innocent:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:shifty: Good to hear Angelina's coming out of the closet...
as a black girl and as a thespian...

God, I love true thespians...:P
 
smartarse said:
But you don't know what criteria the Academy has to go by either. The degree of difficulty the actors assessed to achieved certain points of their character. You don't know what the Academy deemed artistic besides the obvious. :innocent: It's so easy to say the role of Cate Blanchett's Elizabeth is better compared to Gwenyth's Shakespeare because it is not the only role in which the movie they are currently being viewed that the Academy looks for. It's more indepth. quote]

It's more in depth? Like, um, Gwyneth's believeable English accent? :blink: :innocent:
I almost forgot, her uncanny resemblance of a man?!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
smartarse said:
But you don't know what criteria the Academy has to go by either. The degree of difficulty the actors assessed to achieved certain points of their character. You don't know what the Academy deemed artistic besides the obvious. :innocent: It's so easy to say the role of Cate Blanchett's Elizabeth is better compared to Gwenyth's Shakespeare because it is not the only role in which the movie they are currently being viewed that the Academy looks for. It's more indepth.

Getting back to Angelina... have you seen Beyond Borders? An independent film she did with Clive Owen. Then another role she took on in Taking Lives. She's a diversed actress - a true thespian. And no doubt she will have an Oscar Caliber performance in this film. Besides the last say on the character is the person being portrayed, Mariane Pearl. She obviously saw talent, passion, desire and herself in Angelina to give approval.
Oh i beg to differ!There is a vast money system within the Academy.The studio that pays the most in oscar promotion is usually the one to win.Case in point:Miramax.In 2003 Chicago won quite a bit of awards.Now i LOVED that movie but even i raised an eyebrow when it won best picture.Miramax is infamous for paying quite a bit to make its movies front runners in the oscars.The academy also has alot of prejudices as well.If a certain actor disses them, no matter how much they deserve an oscar, they will never get one(Johnny Depp anyone?)There are times when they get it right but sometimes they are far out.As for being a diverse actress?A true thespian?Hmm i dont think so.Cate Blanchett,Kate Winslet,Rachel Weisz and Reese Witherspoon are true accomplished thespians(I picked them specifically because they are in her age bracket)I would not qualify Angelina on their level yet.:judge:
 
^ That is why I DON'T LIKE awards shows! :ninja:
 
Since there was a bit of a discussion about Jolie playing a mixed-race woman....

Jolie's new movie comes under fire

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](uk.news.yahoo.com)
Updated: 2006-10-12 15:28[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
xin_3110031215357131153834.jpg
It seems film bosses have come under fire for casting Angelina Jolie as a mixed-race widow.

The raven-haired beauty plays a young mum whose journalist husband is kidnapped and killed in the upcoming A Mighty Heart, which is based on the true story of Mariane and Daniel Pearl.
Make-up artists apparently darkened the star's skin for her to play the role, a move which has angered campaigners.
They claim the part should have gone to a mixed-race actress.
"I had assumed that the days when white actors took on the roles of black people had long passed away," the Daily Star quotes one protester as saying on a website.
"You can't tell me that Halle Berry or other women of African descent wouldn't have been a better choice," said another.
The movie started shooting in India this week.
It tells the story of Daniel Pearl, who was snatched and beheaded by Islamic terrorists in 2002, and his wife Mariane, who was pregnant when her husband was abducted.
Mariane has said she is thrilled the Tomb Raider star is playing her in the film. "I'm delighted Angelina Jolie will be playing my role. I deeply admire her work," she said.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/entertainment/2006-10/12/content_706950.htm
[/FONT]
 
I really don't know on what to think of the whole argument. I understand why they picked her - she's known for having a political agenda and her doing this film will bring attention to who Mariane is and the whole story behind it two-fold. Hollywood has always done things like this, where they cast a very large and well known actor to do a role where you know he doesnt belong, but the big name itself will bring in the crowds to the theaters. That doesn't make it right, but that's how the game is played. I think it's more about money than racial inaccuracies on the producer's part.

They butchered the Roman movies that came out last summer - anyone remember Alexander and Troy? There are so many movies where having an unknown or smaller independent actor would've made the the story jump - I focus on the movie and the character other than the very familiar face attempting to portray a character.

Honestly, I don't think they care for any other color when their eyes see green.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,527
Messages
15,188,000
Members
86,409
Latest member
torchburnaway
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->