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 🙄🙄

Why cant Anne be played by an actor with a disability?

I find that period of history fascinating so always up for a fresh version to watch! (Currently rereading The Other Boleyn Girl)

Theatres have been doing colour-blind and gender-swapped plays for years - there’s always a few people (and Daily Mail theatre critics) who are. There’s about it but most people just want to see talent on stage.

These stories have been told SO many times - switching things up casting wise is what makes new versions fresh and interesting.

We are hundreds of years past these events - surely we do t have to stick slavishly to portrayals of the characters? There’s plenty of “traditional” versions already out there if that’s what you want to see.

Also agree with PP that for too long actors of colour have been limited to stereotypical roles. Why shouldn’t Jodie tackle the character of Anne Boleyn if producers think she will be good in the role?

(I presume people complaining have never seen the musical SIX - best avoid 😂)

I can’t wait for this new version!

I don’t see any issue.

Yes, in an ideal world, when playing a historical figure, we’d have a doppelgänger of the real person. On the basis that that’s not possible, where do we draw the line on what is enough of a likeness and what isn’t? As long as the acting’s good (and to be honest , I’d never watch anything like this anyway), I think their physical likeness isn’t all that important.

Some of the best portrayals of historic figures, I stared out saying “he doesn’t look a bit like him”, and then they embodied them so much I thought they were the spitting image. Whether that’s a different size, shape, hair colour, skin colour, it really doesn’t matter.

OppsUpsSide

The next thing will be casting a woman as Henry.
Honestly, it’s just so much bullshit.
But yes, well done for them for garnering publicity whilst spectacularly missing the point.

Picsinred Next thing, a woman will be paying Peter Pan or a great big man taking the female comedic lead in annual Panto. What a mad, topsy turvy world that would be.

That's different though. Henry is real, Peter pan isn't.

@mooncakes

I don’t think it matters, it’s a drama not a documentary. Honestly who cares if the actor doesn’t look exactly like the historical figure they’re based on?

When Harrison Ford is cast to play Nelson Mandela would your answer be the same? Aother example of the hypocrisy that certain topics provoke.

@Raceless

OppsUpsSide

The next thing will be casting a woman as Henry.
Honestly, it’s just so much bullshit.
But yes, well done for them for garnering publicity whilst spectacularly missing the point.

Picsinred Next thing, a woman will be paying Peter Pan or a great big man taking the female comedic lead in annual Panto. What a mad, topsy turvy world that would be.

That's different though. Henry is real, Peter pan isn't.

The Widow Twanky's real though.

She's behind you.

Personally I can see through an actors skin colour and enjoy their performance. Watching Hamilton on broadway a lot of their cast weren't historically accurate but their performances were outstanding.

They should cast actors on their talent not their appearance.

I know somebody who worked with starkey at cambridge and hes not actually like he is on TV in real life- hes much, much worse.

Out of curiosity, is there a theory about why colour blind casting has been more acceptable on stage? Six and Hamilton but being prominent examples but also loads of examples in regional theatres etc.

Is it because film is designed to feel more 'real where stages make you feel you are watching theatre so you suspend disbelief?

@SlothMama

Personally I can see through an actors skin colour and enjoy their performance. Watching Hamilton on broadway a lot of their cast weren't historically accurate but their performances were outstanding.

They should cast actors on their talent not their appearance.

But if that’s the case then do that unilaterally. Its the woke gaslighting us all that’s causing the tension.

Isn’t this cultural appropriation? Frankly I think it’s ridiculous. The burning down of statues, rewriting of history. Where does it stop?

@user1471565182

I know somebody who worked with starkey at cambridge and hes not actually like he is on TV in real life- hes much, much worse.

Yes I have heard similar from people who have had the (mis)fortune to meet him at conferences. Fortunately I think many academics are prepared to call him out on his attitudes.

They cant really do stuff like the pirating age ever since the big cuts in TV budgets, unlless Netflix or somebody does it. Have a look how much was spent on the Hornblower series, it'l make your hair stand on end (but it was a bloody brilliant series)

didnt he quit/get sacked after his latest racist outburst?

@Cherrysoup

This is ridiculous, she’s the wrong ethnicity and given the recent pearl clutching over white actors portraying those of colour, I’m actually amazed that this is happening. Bonkers.

"The recent 'pearl clutching' over white actors playing those of colour" is because of historical 'whitewashing' which has been going on for eons. The backlash is necessary.

This is Hollywood trying to compensate for that.

@Userzzz

Isn’t this cultural appropriation? Frankly I think it’s ridiculous. The burning down of statues, rewriting of history. Where does it stop?

History has always been 'rewrriten'. Read a book about Henry VIII from the 1600s and it will be very different from one from last year.

But in this case it is more about the interplay between history and historical fiction/drama (which is rarely accurate).

Those looking for some more interesting stories beyond the usual royal or religious old arse, Garrows's Law was a really good series- dealt with African slavery, highwaymen, abortion and all that sort of thing in the 1780s period.

I like the "colour blind" (is that an appropriate term) hiring of actors and there has been a lot more of it recently. The David Copperfield film was great and there was another similar one recently, but I can't remember what it was. Both were well done and the colour of the actors made no difference to the enjoyment. It may be a short term trend, but I have no problem with it. In fact, I think it's a positive thing.

I don’t really care. It’s not like Scarlett Johansson and Natalie Portman were wildly historical accurate with their beautiful hair and Hollywood teeth!

It’s not like there’s a dearth of good roles in serious and historical dramas for white actors. We’re not exactly hard done by

This is Hollywood trying to compensate for that.

Then say that.

I watched a recent documentary about South Africa and the new laws prioritising jobs for black people. Even the white South Africans who are living in shacks in the park due to unemployment understood the need to redress the balance. Many of them were pretty stoic about it.

I think if those people who like to lecture just said it plainly they’d be less issue. ‘We are redressing the balance’. Good for you say most normal people.

White people have been cast in roles that should have been people of colour forever. Jesus for one. Cant say I care much.

Also black actors aren't putting on white face are they, so very different from the issue of white men putting on makeup to play a black person. Black people aren't usually playing a caricature of a white person, which is often the case when a white person plays a non white character.

@terrywynne

Out of curiosity, is there a theory about why colour blind casting has been more acceptable on stage? Six and Hamilton but being prominent examples but also loads of examples in regional theatres etc.

Is it because film is designed to feel more 'real where stages make you feel you are watching theatre so you suspend disbelief?

Theatre is usually a bit more experimental. They're less likely to do a production where historical accuracy is important, as you can't recreate a certain era using a theatre set. You get a lot more creative licence in a stage version versus a movie.

@VestaTilley

I agree, OP.

I can understand why colour blind casting happens, but I really don’t think it’s right in period/historical programmes. It seems to be all about making the audience feel good about themselves, and not actually depicting something even vaguely realistic.

The great BBC period dramas of the 1990s would never be made now, and what a shame that is.

It’s not historically accurate to depict scores of people who wouldn’t have been present at a given historical moment. It actually ignores the massive racism that existed at that time, and patronises the viewer.

I think they’ve probably done it to boost ratings by causing controversy anyway.

I quite agree with this. Personally, I'd love to see shows (plural) where black people are in major roles/lead characters without the show or any of their scenes being about their skin colour or ethnicity.

Nothing would change in Game of Thrones, for example, if Arya Stark and her family or Daenerys or Cersei were black.

Alas, even in fiction the 'sensitivity of race and colour' HAS TO be brought in and some would say it wouldn't work because racism and reality. Hello, 'tis fiction: Flying dragons, White walkers and all that.

They should do those rather than try to change history or rehash what's already been done.

It strikes me as odd that it seems OK to cast a black actor in a white role, whilst a white actor can't be cast in a black role (such as Othello). Isn't equality supposed to work both ways?