casting ethics

Case Study: Casting Ethics and When Experts Prove They Are Untrustworthy…[Gift Link Added!]

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

I suppose because the Oscars (that nothing could make me watch again) are coming up, The New York Times, presumably with the help of its movie critics, published a feature called “When Casting Goes Wrong”[Gift Link], purporting to be their picks “from recent decades” of the worst cast movie roles. A new Oscar recognizes the process of matching actor and role—it’s a bad idea, but never mind. My problem is that the list of 14 manages to miss such flagrant, infamous casting botches that it forces me to doubt any future judgments of these alleged film experts.

True: of the films represented on the list that I have seen, the casting choices flagged were indeed terrible. However, the list somehow omitted what had to be the most inexcusable, bizarre, inept and offensive casting decision in Hollywood history: “Hyde Park On Hudson”’s casting of Bill Murray…BILL MURRAY!…as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt. I wrote about this 2012 fiasco here. An excerpt:

“There is no artistic or historical justification for having Murray play the iconic FDR. All I can hypothesize is that the producers knew that the movie would be a hard sell to anyone under the age of 80, so they decided, “Hey, Boomers love Bill Murray: they’ll pay to see him in anything!” The result is disrespectful to one of our most important leaders, ruinous to the movie (which has other problems), and the antithesis of artistic competence, integrity and responsibility.I watched this thing looking like the audience in “The Producers” after the completion of “Springtime for Hitler,” with my mouth in what Stephen King calls “a rictus of horror.”

“… [Murray] doesn’t speak like Roosevelt, sound like him, carry himself like him, or display his gravitas, power or personality. To me it looked like the actor wasn’t even trying…that, or the role was completely beyond his narrow talents. Did he do any research at all? To be fair, FDR was special, with a magnificent voice, an actor’s mastery of projecting the desired emotional messages, and physically imposing despite his disability. John Voight, an infinitely more talented actor than Murray, still flopped when he tried FDR in “Pearl Harbor” despite being covered in so many layers of latex that he looked a bit like him, or at least a rubber dummy of him…

“I was shocked to see that there were actually critics who praised Murray’s performance. This is one more bit of evidence that critics can’t be trusted. Presumably, these ignoramuses wouldn’t know FDR if he sat in their laps. One critic wrote that Murray “humanized” Franklin. I suppose one could argue that playing one of our most calculating, politically brilliant, ruthless, astute, complex, essential, influential  and towering American historical figures as a clueless, shallow, unengaged and ironic jerk is “humanizing.” I would argue that it’s just irresponsible and defamatory.”

Pages: 1 2

Presenting The Little-Known Progeny of “Bias Makes You Stupid”: “Bias Makes You Direct Stupid Versions of ‘Inherit The Wind'”

/ Jack Marshall / 2 Comments

I’m sorry to return to the topic of theatrical casting ethics so soon after my last deep dive (here), but The Arena Stage’s new production of the Lawrence and Lee classic “Inherit the Wind” has opened in Washington D.C., where that company is revered beyond all others. It is a travesty, theatrically and historically, and especially directorally, since the director, Ryan Guzzo Purcell, has apparently done no research into the history behind the drama or, in the alternative, has decided that virtue signalling and DEI sensibilities are more important than fairness to the authors and an unquestioned American classic.

I suppose, he could be just plain nuts.

“This classic courtroom drama, inspired by the 1925 Scopes “Monkey” Trial, explores profound themes of intellectual freedom, religious conviction, and scientific discovery. Witness the gripping narrative unfold in the nation’s capital,” the Arena says on its website. Right. That’s what the play is supposed to be about. It also is a fictionalized version of a famous historical event involving three famous and important American figures: Clarence Darrow, generally believed to be the greatest trial lawyer this nation ever produced (I know a little bit about him), William Jennings Bryan, the famous orator, statesman, and three-time loser as the Democratic nominee for President, and H.L. Mencken, the brilliant, acerbic, misanthropic writer who covered the trial for the Baltimore Sun. Lawrence and Lee, the playwrights, ethically decided that rather than falsely represent real historical figures whose words and characters they might need to manipulate for dramatic purpose, made it clear who their characters were based on and gave them suggestive but different names so there would be no confusing the fiction with fact. (I say “ethically” to contrast their conduct with the writers of “Death by Lightning”). Thus Darrow became “Henry Drummond,” Bryan became “Matthew Harrison Brady,” H.L became “E.K. Hornbeck” and Scopes became “Bertram Cates.” Nonetheless, the historical connection to the real figures is central to the show.

But not to the Arena Stage. The actor playing Bryan/Brady is made to resemble Colonel Sanders for some reason, in a Kentucky Fried Chicken goatee and a white plantation suit. Bryan was famously a Mid-Westerner, so this appearance is jarring, especially since the play has a long running bit about the court calling Bryan/Brady by the honorific title,”Colonel.” This choice is approximately as disorienting as casting a character based on Abe Lincoln with a jockey. Knowing that Brady is Bryan is important: a major speech by Brady’s wife laments the pain the character suffered from being defeated in three runs for the White House. Bryan is the only man since 1844 to run for the office three times. In the classic movie version of the play, Frederick March played Brady taking pains to evoke Bryan’s speaking style, his posture, expressions and body language. His performance was finger-lickin’ good.

Pages: 1 2

“Too White A Christmas”: Additional Ethics Observations

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

As promised, I am adding some of my own concerns to Curmie’s post two days ago on the controversy regarding the lack of “diversity” among the ensemble in a Sacramento production of the meh Broadway musical, “Elf.” I know many out there in EA Reader Land don’t give a rip about casting ethics. Ethics Alarms has posted on it often, because I believe, as with a lot of ethics issues in particular industries and areas of the culture, it has larger significance than only where the controversy arose.

Curmie covered most of the ethical issues in this kerfuffle well, as he always does, but I have some pointed conclusions that I think bear emphasis.

The whole episode illustrates what’s fatally wrong with DEI in general and the Left’s obsession with it. It has become an ideology unmoored to the real world. The mission of a theater director or producer must be, first and beyond all else, to put on the best production possible. We can argue about other priorities, but not that. Putting on the best production possible means, without exception, casting and staffing the production with the most talented, experienced, reliable professionals the production can afford. The entire discussion Curmie explores among four theater professional reveals the crippling mission confusion and ideological fanaticism that has infected if not most of the entertainment business, far too much of it.

Continue reading →

Curmie’s Conjectures: Too White A Christmas?

/ Jack Marshall / 8 Comments

by Curmie

[Curmie raises so many casting ethics issues that fascinate me in this post that I’m going to announce right now that I’ll post a veritable “Part II” tomorrow, although it will be “Jack’s Conjectures”, or something. Not that I disagree with anything the esteemed Ethics Alarms featured columnist writes here, because I don’t. Here’s a clue about one issue I’ll be covering which Curmie only hints at: for a cast to be sufficiently “diverse,” do the BIPOC members have to obviously LOOK like they are “of color”? I’m thinking of performers like Jennifer Beals, the late Olivia Hussey, and Jessica Alba—JM]

Jack and I exchanged a couple of emails about this story, which I first saw on the OnStageBlog back around Thanksgiving, when this was still news.  I’m pretty sure both of us wanted the other to write about it.  So, a little late, here we go…

The case involves the casting of the Christmas-themed musical Elf at Broadway at Music Circus in Sacramento.  OnStageBlog’s founder Chris Peterson often gets what Curmie’s grad school mentor would call “foam-flecked,” and his editorial here is no exception.  But he does have a point.  Sort of.

The company came under criticism when they announced the cast list for Elf; although a number of the leads were non-white, the entire chorus (seen above) looks pretty vanilla, white-passing if not literally white. Actress (or is she a “social media manager for major hotel brands”?) Victoria Price is one of those who led the charge, pointing to the difference between the Broadway ensemble and the one in Sacramento, and noting that any comments critical of the casting were being deleted.  (I assume she’s telling the truth about this.)

Tony nominee Amber Imam joined the fray, writing that Price’s criticism of both the casting and the removal of negative comments was “absolutely right.  A show that takes place in NEW YORK CITY cannot… CAN NOT have an ensemble that LOOKS LIKE THIS!!!  Do better.  Have you learned nothing?????”

The company’s CEO Scott Klier issued a response that made the situation much, much worse: “cover-up worse than the crime” worse.  Here’s part of it:

“Inclusivity has been and remains my casting and staffing goal for every production. I fell short of that goal for ELF. There is an uncomfortable truth here: Our industry as a whole has largely failed to attract, train and foster the artists necessary to meet today’s demand, and I fear this conversation will continue until it does. It will unfortunately take time. The painful reality of ELF’s casting process was that both the casting submissions and audition attendance revealed few candidates of color and, while those few were undoubtedly talented, they did not meet the dance, music and acting criteria set by our team.”

Hoo boy… Claiming inclusivity as a “goal” and then going 0-for-15 at fulfilling it?  Blaming other people while admitting the decision was yours?  Admitting there’s a “demand” and then ignoring it? 

Continue reading →

Look! Another Racial Casting Controversy!

/ Jack Marshall / 11 Comments

I love this one: it involves one of my favorite actors and one of my favorite historical figures.

Denzel Washington has lapped Sydney Poitier as the most successful and, in my view, most versatile and best black Hollywood star in film history, so one would think his casting to portray any historical figure would be seen as a boon to that figure’s fans. In this case, you would be wrong. Denzel is playing the Carthaginian general Hannibal in a Netflix historical epic, and Le Monde reports that in Tunisia, Hannibal’s old stomping ground, Hannibal’s admirers are furious. The casting has even been debated in the Tunisian parliament. Tunisian MP Yassine Mami railed about “the risk of falsification of history” while calling on members to join him in “defending Tunisian identity”.

Continue reading →

“Dr. Who” Ethics: Isaac Newton Was Indian? I Did Not Know That!

/ Jack Marshall / 13 Comments

In the latest “Dr. Who” adventure on the BBC (if you don’t know about this long-running cult scifi show, google it), Sir Isaac Newton is played by an actor of Indian heritage:

This raises several issues, most of which Ethics Alarms has delved into before:

1. Does it matter? As Curmie declared in his Comment of the Day regarding my post about another BBC production in which Anne Boleyn was played by a black actress…yes, it does, but it depends on the context and the objective of the casting. The major consideration in any non-traditional casting is whether it works, meaning that the casting isn’t distracting, that it adds something to the work beyond being just a gimmick. (The black Anne Boleyn was a gimmick.) In Curmie’s opinion, almost nobody was likely to see the black actress in the role and think, ““I didn’t know Anne Boleyn was black.” I am less certain of that assumption in the case of a brown Isaac Newton.

Continue reading →

More Weird Tales Of “The Great Stupid”: One “Jewface” Casting Controversy Wasn’t Stupid Enough; Woke World Insists On Another One

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

The most recent nut-ball casting ethics lunacy that finds something anti-Semitic about prosthetic noses makes my brain hurt. It is such fanatic political correctness and woke “gotcha!” extremism that led to this recent post, in which I mused about owing vile radio talk show host Michael Savage an apology for condemning his claim years ago that liberalism is a mental disease.

Everything I wrote about the complaints that casting eminent non-Jewish actor Bradley Cooper as composer Leonard Bernstein and having him wear make-up (including a fake nose) to look more like Bernstein applies to the wacko criticism of casting Helen Mirren as Golda Meir in “Golda” (that’s Hellen on the right above) and having her outfitted with a big nose. In fact, you could just read the Bernstein post substituting “Golda Meir” for “Leonard Bernstein” and “Helen Mirren” for “Bradley Cooper.” In fairness, Mirren requires more make-up than Cooper because she is an attractive woman, and Golda was anything but (big nose notwithstanding, Lenny was a handsome man), and it would take a prosthetic nose to make almost any actress be a credible Golda Meir on screen. Mirren is perhaps the most distinguished actress in her age range right now, and a complex and historic figure like Meir deserves no less for her film biography. Never mind, though: what matters in these days of woke madness isn’t good acting or good movies, but racial, ethnic and gender spoils, all executed with the integrity of Calvinball.

Continue reading →

Insufficient Mockery Alert #1: The “Jewface” Controversy

/ Jack Marshall / 14 Comments

Jonathan Turley likes to begin his posts on oft-visited topics (like speech suppression on progressive college campuses) by reviewing all of his past posts on the matter. If I started this post like that and listed all of the ridiculous, hypocritical, wokey, DEI-inspired casting ethics controversies EA has highlighted, there would be no room for the post itself. But I will supply a sampling…

Let’s see: a black actress can play Anne Boleyn, and James Earl Jones can play the Celtic King Lear, but a white actor is engaged in racism by playing Othello. Hmmm. Gay Hollywood actors (most of them are, after all) can play straight characters, but Tom Hanks apologized for playing a gay character (and winning an Oscar for it) in “Philadelphia.” Lou Diamond Phillips simultaneously asserted that as a Filipino actor he is entitled to play anyone—after all, he has made his living playing Hispanics, South Americans and Native Americans— then in the same interview said “I happen to agree that casting Caucasian people in what are supposed to be ethnic roles is not kosher.”

Yes, it’s Calvinball! The minority communities, supported by progressive DEI fanatics, make up the rules as they go along—whatever keeps whites, heterosexuals and non-disabled actors out of roles. Back in 2019, I designated this “the dumbest casting controversy yet”: that was when Bryan Cranston was criticized for playing a quadriplegic without being actually paralyzed from the neck down. Well, the DEI maniacs have gone way, way beyond that, and conveniently, the most recent ridiculous Calvinball installment is relevant to today’s nonsense.

Continue reading →

I Know It’s Too Easy But I Can’t Resist: “An Irish Actor Playing Oppenheimer Proves Once Again That Jews Don’t Count” May Be The Most Hilariously Confused Casting Ethics Rant Yet

/ Jack Marshall / 29 Comments

There is only one ethical way to cast a play, musical or movie: pick the actor whose portrayal will most entertain the audience and realize the full potential of the script. Casting is not the place (if anywhere is) for political correctness, quotas, “diversity,” or affirmative action.

Ethics Alarms is full of discussions of this issue, most recently here, in the post just last week about how Disney decided it was offensive to cast seven little people as the Seven Dwarfs in “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.” Hollywood and Broadway are completely confused and hypocritical in this area, because the people who run both places are 1) desperate to be seen as progressive and to signal their virtue at every opportunity, 2) terrified of being branded as non-woke, giving extreme activist groups representing various tribes and interests groups the upper hand in their bullying efforts, and 3) not very bright, frankly.

This is why a Samoan-African American actor was found insufficiently black to play folk legend John Henry, but a black woman was cast as red-headed fish-girl Ariel in “The Little Mermaid,” and the Founding Fathers ended up being portrayed by black, Asian, and Hispanic women and “non-binary” performers in the revival of “1776.” Tom Hanks now says only gay actors should play gay characters, but a director who refused to cast a gay actor as a non-gay character would be run out of the business. It is, as I have written here before, Calvinball.

All of which brings us to the head-exploding essay by Malina Saval, editor in Chief of Pasadena Magazine, titled “An Irish Actor Playing Oppenheimer Proves Once Again That Jews Don’t Count.”

Continue reading →

Saturday In The Great Stupid Continues: The “Waiting For Godot” Catch-22

/ Jack Marshall / 7 Comments

I love this dispatch from The Great Stupid! It has everything…

  • It involves a theater production…
  • It’s woke academia at its worst…
  • Copyright and artistic integrity principles are at issue..
  • Diversity, Equity and Inclusion mania is at its core…
  • It’s another “It isn’t what it is” (Yoo’s Rationalization) classic….
  • It didn’t happen here, but I could easily see it happening here, and…
  • It’s really, really, really stupid.

A bit of background: Samuel Beckett, the late Irish novelist and playwright of Theater of the Absurd fame ,best known for his minimalist drama and “Waiting For Godot” in particular, was a cantankerous old coot who didn’t trust directors (with good cause, say I), and directed them in his texts to change neither lines nor character, or risk legal action. Edward Albee was similarly strict on this point, having seen what happens to plays in the public domain (like Shakespeare’s works) when far less talented “artists” decide to make them “relevant.” So if you are going to produce a Beckett play, it’s Beckett’s way or the metaphorical highway.

Oisín Moyne, a fellow countryman of Beckett, was directing “Waiting for Godot” in the Netherlands and auditioned only men for the all-male cast of characters, as he was legally and artistically obligated to do. the college production been in rehearsals since November and was due to be presented at the University of Groningen’s Usva student cultural center in March. (Don’t ask me how or why it would take more than three months to rehearse this play, which primarily involves two guys sitting around talking, but never mind.) Continue reading →