Jodie Turner-Smith as Anne Boleyn

[Bitchysideisouttoplay]

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9071763/Director-TV-drama-Anne-Boleyn-says-best-person-role.html#article-9071763
Not and AIBU really but what does everyone think if this?
Personally I think if you are making a historical drama/film etc surely you should cast a person as close in looks to the historical figure.
Before anyone says I'm.being racist I'm not I had massive issues with the casting in the Tudors due to Johnathan Rhys Meyers being cast as Henry, he is short, not ginger and really does not look anything like Henry in portraits 🙄🙄

@fatherliamdeliverance

titbumwillypoo

I've not read the books or seen the film but Idris Elba and Clint Eastwood do share a lot of physical characteristics other than race, handsome, athletic, tall, masculine etc that might make Idris Elba a good fit if that description is to suggest that that's the kind of guy the character is.

Also, the character being discussed is fictional, not an actual known historic person like Ann Boleyn.

*Historical FICTION.

It's loosely based in history and the big events of the time, but the rest is made up. Why does it matter what race some of the characters are? Most of what they'll be saying is completely made up anyway.*

So you disagreed with those who complained when white actors were cast in roles of historical - or fictional - characters who were not white?

handsome, athletic, tall, masculine etc

The only thing Roland Deschain is of any of those is masculine. He's ugly, old, wiry and have no particular height that I remember being mentioned.

So you disagreed with those who complained when white actors were cast in roles of historical - or fictional - characters who were not white?

Because the roles they were cast in were meant to be historical biographies and as accurate as possible. Not a loosely based story.

In a way, it could work in a kind of artistic license kind of way.

Anne was considered dark and exotic (she was swarthy in a court of fashionably pale blondes, as well as being raised in the sophisticated and exciting French court). It made her stand out amongst the other ladies in a way that might not really resonate with us any more (where being tanned is now the accepted beauty standard). Could having a black actress help bring that point about to a modern audience? She isn’t necessarily beautiful but she stands out amongst the others because she is dark and different and more worldly.

It could be similar to how Sofia Coppola included a pair of Converse in the shopping/party segment of Marie Antoinette to remind the modern audience that she was just like any other teenage girl who loved clothes and fashion.

Because the roles they were cast in were meant to be historical biographies and as accurate as possible. Not a loosely based story.

That's simply not true.

Someone above mentioned 'The Mummy' and 'Prince of Persia' which are definitely not intended to be accurate! Also, Scarlett Johansson got stick for playing what was meant to be an Asian character in 'Ghost in the Shell'.

Obviously, you're perfectly fine with all of this?

IcedPurple but by giving established actors roles beyond the general stereotyped roles they would normally be offered will give lesser known actors opportunities as casting directors will be more likely to take a risk?

@titbumwillypoo

IcedPurple but by giving established actors roles beyond the general stereotyped roles they would normally be offered will give lesser known actors opportunities as casting directors will be more likely to take a risk?

Maybe, but I don't think it works that way. Hollywood is notoriously risk averse.

Wonder how people who feel if a film about a black person in history was cast as a white actor (such Nelson Mandela played by Brad Pitt for example)

Got to start somewhere.

I wish the TV powers that be would commission more original drama. More Tudor TV in the pipeline and another version of Black Narcissus on BBC for Christmas. The last three years have been soaked in Agatha Christie remakes of very variable quality.

The theatre is taking a drubbing. One good way to get the Arts sector back off its knees would be to cross-pollinate projects between theatre and television, giving some new scriptwriters a chance at television pay rates at the same time. The BBC funnel all their new writers through Doctors and Holby Cityas a kind of training ground. Must be awful for their creativity.

Thing is there was a black Tudor. So why not make a series about him? Why re write history. Makes absolutely no sense to me. Or celebrate black history as there is a lot of real events that took place that should be celebrated. Such as the richest man ever lived Mansa Musa. Or the Ghanaian Empire or Timbuktu! Surely it's better to represent black history as valid and fact than fantasyland.

It's loosely based in history and the big events of the time, but the rest is made up. Why does it matter what race some of the characters are? Most of what they'll be saying is completely made up anyway.

Because of context. If in the culture being depicted, the King of England marrying a black woman was a perfectly normal thing that that was so normal that no one ever mentioned it, even when Henry was coming up with reasons to chop off his wife's head, then it would be a culture so far removed from what the Tudor times actually were, that it would almost be pointless trying to even call it a depiction of the Tudors? If that makes sense?

I don't know, maybe her being black will be part of the plot in this particular drama? But then it's not really historical then is it? It would make an interesting story line though.

It's totally different to casting Idris Elba as James Bond (yes please!) for example, where the context would be far less relevant.

Never watched either, but I believe the actors in all 3 were chosen for their box office draw, not their acting skill or suitability for the role.

Never understood the issue with Scarlett being cast in Ghost in the Shell as Japanese anime is generally horribly white washed unless there's loads of big breasted blonde blue eyed Japanese school girls running around.

The case with all 3 of those though is that it's totally 100% normal to cast white people as non-whites, to the point that actors of color suffer, so I can understand why they want greater representation, especially in roles where the ethnicity of the character is clear.

In this case, it's not like there hasn't been a dozen white actresses play Anne Boleyn in a variety of realistic to unrealistic stories. Who cares if they decide to try something different in a loosely based historical drama. Plenty of roles out there for white women.

I think that now the aim is for actors with the same ethnicity to play real-life figures, and that's fine and should be the case all round.

I think, if anything, Jodie Turner-Smith's casting has put her at the centre of an unnecessary shit storm and it's completely over-shadowed the actual show. It's almost like the point of it has now become that they have cast a black actress as Anne Boleyn, rather than that it's a new twist on the tale.

Never watched either, but I believe the actors in all 3 were chosen for their box office draw, not their acting skill or suitability for the role.

And clearly you agree with this, since you have said that race is not relevant when casting works of historical fiction.

Plenty of roles out there for white women.

The huge majority of white actresses are underemployed. Jodie Turner Smith, by contrast, is a well-known actress not short for offers.

And clearly you agree with this

It depends on how accurate they want the work of historical fiction to be. I'm fairly certain the Mummy isn't a serious work of historical fiction so the number of shits I have to give about which generic box office superstar white man they stick in it are pretty few.

I'm also assuming that this is a very loose version of history, therefore, the number of shits I give are equally as few. I care more about whether she can act.

As for all these white women with no roles, they were hardly going to cast an unknown white woman. So whoever they went with wasn't going to be struggling. The point should be if the plots any good and if she can pull off what the character asks of her.

I'm also assuming that this is a very loose version of history, therefore, the number of shits I give are equally as few. I care more about whether she can act.

And you would of course say the same were a white actress to be cast as a historical black woman. Logically, you would have to.

As for all these white women with no roles, they were hardly going to cast an unknown white woman.

Why not?

Natalie Dormer was pretty much unknown when cast as Ann Boleyn in The Tudors.

And you would of course say the same were a white actress to be cast as a historical black woman.

Sure. If it was a loosely based historical story made purely for entertainment purposes and race had nothing to do with the plot, then I really don't care. However, the number of historical black woman we see depicted in dramas, no matter how loosely based or entertaining, is already close to zero, so I'm pretty sure it will be a long time before I have to give a shit about this.

Why not?

Money. If Anne Boleyn is the main character they will want to get an actress that people will want to watch. Natalie Dormer wasn't the main character of the Tudors. The guy who was was a big deal from Bend it Like Beckham, not an unknown.

I think Woody Allen would have been a better choice.

Why do people care about this shit? Was her race relevant to who she was in the grand scheme of things? Probably not. For example, if they cast Rosa Parks as a white woman, I would understand a huge backlash. But Anne Bolyn? Honestly couldn't care less what colour the actress is, as long as she can act in the role and does it justice, what is the problem?

A lot of these stories are hugely embellished anyway, calling them non-fiction is a bit of a stretch.

Well it’s got the production huge free publicity. Which was probably the cynical aim.

@GroundAlmonds

Well it’s got the production huge free publicity. Which was probably the cynical aim.

Well, just to say that I won't be watching it because the Tudors have been done to death and no matter how good this production might be, I'm just not interested any more. So to anyone 'in the bizz' reading this - please find some new, fresh historical periods/situations/characters to dramatise... and make some of them about our Black history please.

Well, just to say that I won't be watching it because the Tudors have been done to death and no matter how good this production might be, I'm just not interested any more. So to anyone 'in the bizz' reading this - please find some new, fresh historical periods/situations/characters to dramatise... and make some of them about our Black history please.

Completely agree.

Also anybody with any writing talent who is black, BAME, or otherwise from an underrepresented group should try writing scripts. The Sid Gentle production company launched an annual “new talent” competition last year. First year was for female writers. I heard a rumour next year was for writers of colour. So that’s worth keeping an eye on. Also the BBC Writers room is worth following for tips and opportunities. The basic problem is a lack of good scripts across the industry.