Black and Persian

[ancientlibrary]

The contrast deserves discussion. Basically,
Americans note black and white. They are not
so sensitive to the difference between different
European white peopleGÇöas Cyrus so insistently
calls the Bactrian Roxane, played by someone
of presumed Spanish ancestry. I think a black
Hannibal would be bad not so much because a
black person can't play Hannibal but because it
would stoke irrational ethnic feelings. .I find it rather sad that some find it necessary to
believe nonsense in order to find heroes of their
own skin color. First, there's a danger in
*needing* heroes of your own skin
colorGÇöheroism being a personal moral trait,
unconnected with skin color. My bosom does
not swell with pride when I hear about great
French heroes. But even if this were granted
there are plenty of authentic black heroes to go
around. .But, stepping back, what is the problem with a
black Hannibal? It's not the simple portrayal, but
the ugly myth-making and polemic that will
follow from it. The American racial scene can
get ugly. I'd be happy to declare every Greek
black and Jew Chinese as long as nobody
*cared* about these differences..In contrast with the racial politics of Hannibal,
nobody in Europe or America gives a hoot
whether Bacrians 2.5 thousand years ago
looked more like Persian children or booby
Hispanic models.

[Halil]

Well said, Tim. I remember there was (probably still is) a desire to make Cleopatra (the famous one) black because she came from Egypt (for Egypt read Africa) which had the same problems associated with it.Luis, no offense taken. I freely admit I know little about Hannibal apart from the basic stuff. My post was more to do with skin-colour casting decisions than with history, which I agree would be more meaningful propaganda-wise in the US than in Europe.I admire Denzel Washington's acting skills. If what you say is true about him, it's sad that a man of such quality would feel the need to alter history to feel better about himself.

[xxx]

Does it matter. Of course it does, but not necessarily for the reasons stated. In old Hollywood, film roles were denied to minorities, so while you would have a classic film like The Good Earth, you wouldnGÇÖt find anyone Chinese in the main roles. How many Native Americans got to play Indians? You get the picture. Minorities were typecast and few movies were made to appeal to anything but a white audience. For most movies which are fictionally based, it doesnGÇÖt matter who plays who (although if they are based on novels, plays, or old TV shows depending on the theme, say like To Kill A Mockingbird, or the new Miami Vice film with Farrell as Crockett and Fox as Tubbs, obviously it does).However, in the area of historical film we are dealing with another set of GÇÿrules.GÇÖ If you are doing a biography on George Washington Carver or Frederick Douglass, it would be absurd to cast a white actor to play the role. That Hannibal or Alexander happened thousands of years ago does not change that fact. There is a certain amount of credibility at stake. Dawson should not have been cast to play a Bactrian, but because she is a supporting character, Stone probably felt he could get away with it and that it wouldnGÇÖt GÇÿmatter.GÇÖ Or perhaps he felt he was emphasizing AlexanderGÇÖs lack of bigotry in bed or whatever. However, it is very doubtful he would have felt the same way about casting Alexander. As for Europeans, a white actor who does good accents and knows different languages can play just about any other European type caucasoid no matter what the country, an African can certainly play an African-American, etc. etc. despite certain noticeable differences, but a good actor can get past that. There are many fine actors from all over the world now, and with us being a global society so to speak, it is not wrong to question why casting directors intentionally cast actors who are not of the historical ethnicity (yeah, I can get picky and start with the well, how do you know because of migration patterns etc. etc. but thatGÇÖs too detailed for now). It is quite another matter of course, if for instance, I were to cast Alexander as an all African cast, or an all Persian Cast, or an all Indian cast etc. because then people would realize that it was all about the story and not about the actors or the ethnicities involved.Can Denzel Washington play Hannibal GÇô sure, and heGÇÖd even be good at it. Would I buy it? No, it would always be Denzel playing Hannibal rather

[xxx]

me believing Denzel became Hannibal and suspending belief for two or three hours. But of course, what would really matter is the box office as that is the God the film industry answers to, despite what the FCC thinks

[luisfc1972]

there are a lot of young and impressionable kids these days that watch movies. maybe its just me but i do see a problem only when it comes to historical figures. on the other hand, i couldnt care less if two chinese played bo and luke duke.

[Cyrus]

If it is not important then why about Alexander they should make his hair blonde and make a southern European similar to a northern European but about Bactrian Princess Roxane who was more probably a blonde, a black woman should play her role?!

[luisfc1972]

supposedly alexander was more a readhead than anything. i believe that because olympias his mother was from modern day Albania. anyhow, rosario dawson got the part because she slept with stone and the producer. by the way, rosario dawson was pretty bad as Roxanne in "Alexander". i find it funny how black puerto ricans claim they are "Latin". but that is besides the point.