Race & Ethnicity On TV

[Kromm]

46 minutes ago, phoenics said:

I call BS.  Exhibit Sleepy Hollow - which for the first two seasons, flat out refused to feature Nicole Beharie prominently in its promotion, choosing instead to feather Tom Mison, even though NB was definitely the bigger name and star. Tom was a complete unknown and NB had already starred in 42 and numerous other films.

It's usually NOT the case that the PR people are only featuring stars.  They routinely default to featuring the white characters, even when those aren't even the leads.  And the only time you see the PoC stars featured is if they have become big enough names to "cross over" to white audiences.  Let's just call a spade a spade and not fish for "reasons" why PoC aren't featured more in PR even when they should be.

And we've been running this "marathon" for a really long time - it's high time Hollywood caught the eff up and stopped using "but the PoC aren't famous enough!" nonsense.  How many times have we seen shows do the whole, "And introducing ... " <insert brand new white face here> in their promos?

Plenty.

This line of marathon vs sprint talk is just another way of stalling and creating rules that apparently ONLY the PoC stars/actors have to play by.

I don't have the power to "stall" or create rules for the TV industry. I am the peanut gallery watching from afar.

I believe it's case by case. Sleepy Hollow is another show with no recognizable star. You might rate Nicole Beharie as one, but most people wouldn't I think. But neither was the "other guy". So it was a show with no way to position itself as anyone's "vehicle". In THAT case someone made a decision, and it was probably a racist one. Two actors. Co-leads, at least theoretically, with no bigger celeb? And some knob leaves out the black woman consistently?  Of COURSE it's racist. 

But that doesn't mean EVERY case of white faces in an ad is racist. You can't take the general and apply it to every specific, as if it automatically applies. Apples to apples are shows with a disparity between marquee stars, people who's names are known to sell product or generate publicity, and shows where you can't hang a show on a name.  Matthew Fox was not enough of a name to sell all of Lost on, so he wasn't especially dominating in the ads. It's as simple as that. Again, this is no excuse for excluding faces of color when all things are equal.  But the point, although it seems I'm alone in being frank enough to say it and so seemingly project an assumption that I'm being some huge racist asshole, is that not all things ARE equal. And race is not always the factor that makes them unequal. You have a product, a show, and don't feature the better known stars disproportionately? If so, then you're being a fool, IMO. If that better known star was lets say... Sam Jackson (if he ever moves over to TV), then it's a black actor who's very name sells a show. If it's Halle Berry (when she came to TV for that crappy show she did), it was her face and name all over the ads. That's reality, just as much as Ted Danson and Kristen Bell being FAR bigger stars than the names and faces of Jameela Jamil, William Jackson Harper and Manny Jacinto. 

Edited October 13, 2016 by Kromm

[Ms Blue Jay]

Quote

But that doesn't mean EVERY case of white faces in an ad is racist. You can't take the general and apply it to every specific, as if it automatically applies.

Nobody is saying that or did say that.  You can't take someone's observation, and then take it to the point of senseless exaggeration, as if that invalidates it.

Quote

 

Matthew Fox was not enough of a name to sell all of Lost on, so he wasn't especially dominating in the ads. It's as simple as that.

Not as simple as that IMO.  Matthew Fox had enough name recognition from Party of 5 but the people behind the ads were very comfortable to use a full, multiracial cast of people, some unknown, to advertise the show.  Steve Carell had enough name recognition from 40 Year Old Virgin and Bruce Almighty but the people behind the ads were comfortable using white people, some unknown, to advertise the show.  We see things differently.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[Oracle42]

At this point, a lack of diversity or lack of minorities in the promos for a new show generally means it's a new show I'm not going to watch. 

Edited October 13, 2016 by Oracle42

[Kromm]

Can you flip the argument and argue that the commercials for Extant showed far too much Halle Berry and not enough of other people? Because my memory is that like 90% of the footage, the words and images in the ads, were of her, and only tiny tiny bits of the other actors were in those spots.

And nothing's WRONG with that. While the show actually had two other people on it with at least a little name recognition (Goran Visnjic and Camryn Manheim), their celebrity was dwarfed by hers. Ergo, it made perfect sense for ads to almost exclusively feature her. 

5 minutes ago, Oracle42 said:

At this point, a lack of diversity or lack of minorities in the promos for a new show generally means it's a new show I'm not going to watch. 

Totally fair. There's a cost to marketing to people based on celebrity: not everyone prioritizes it above all other factors.

But enough do that from a pure business standpoint it certainly makes sense it's the default behavior. 

[Oracle42]

I get that Kristen Bell and Ted Danson are the "big draws" but if they're not the only thing that the show is about, how effective are the promos? Fans of those actors are probably tuning in anyway

Edited October 13, 2016 by Oracle42

[Minneapple]

On 10/11/2016 at 10:08 PM, phoenics said:

Well, Supergirl aired last night and the writers very poorly axed (we think permanently) the interracial pairing of James and Kara.  This left a very "Saved by the Bell" Zack and Lisa hack job taste in my mouth.

I'm actually glad they ended it because they had zero chemistry; in fact Kara and James were awkward and painful to watch. I'm hoping they do something more interesting with Jimmy this year, give him a purpose other than being Kara's love interest. 

As for The Good Place, I totally understand why all their promotion has featured Kristen Bell and Ted Danson. Quantico at least is a bit of a different story. Priyanka Chopra is a big Bollywood star who presumably brings a lot of South Asian viewers to her show. I imagine if The Good Place gets more than a season, the other actors will get their face on promotional material as well, but at this point they are total unknowns (but kudos to the casting department because they are all fantastic, particularly William Jackson Harper, who plays Chidi; I love him).

[Ms Blue Jay]

I'm a minority who likes to see other visible minorities represented onscreen.  I like to see people like myself represented onscreen just like anybody else would.  Just like white people might.  Just like women might want to watch television shows that have women on them. It's a very simple concept that I think is missed when people defend the status quo.  

The issue is that South Asian viewers would want to see Priyanka Chopra, but those same viewers would be disinterested in The Good Place's Jameela Jamil, who is Indian?  I don't agree.  And again I don't agree the issue is about who is known versus unknown.  There are shows that had no problem advertising themselves using unknown actors front and centre before the shows even aired - Jane the Virgin, The Office, LOST, Fresh off the Boat, you will find more.

Modern Family is another show like LOST, The Office, The Good Place in that it starred somebody who had already been a major player of another television show.  But MF had no problem sticking a bunch of unknown actors in all of its promotion to join him.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[Kromm]

1 hour ago, Minneapple said:

As for The Good Place, I totally understand why all their promotion has featured Kristen Bell and Ted Danson. Quantico at least is a bit of a different story. Priyanka Chopra is a big Bollywood star who presumably brings a lot of South Asian viewers to her show. I imagine if The Good Place gets more than a season, the other actors will get their face on promotional material as well, but at this point they are total unknowns (but kudos to the casting department because they are all fantastic, particularly William Jackson Harper, who plays Chidi; I love him).

"The Good Place" unfortunately is getting somewhat shitty ratings (the episodes following The Voice did fairly well but the ones airing in its regular Thursday night slot after "Superstore" have not). So it's unlikely to get renewed, but even if it does it's unlikely to make William Jackson Harper a star.

That said, he's getting a lot of good ink when critics write about the show. He will go into whatever his next show is up a few rungs on that invisible Hollywood ladder. A little higher on the call sheets, a little better paid, and a little quicker to get cast overall.

And Jameela Jamil has such big comedy chops (and it helps that she's also beautiful) that I could easily see her coming out of one season of The Good Place landing a bigger role next time. She literally wasn't an actress before this show--she was a model and a Radio DJ in the UK.  Well... now she isn't anymore. She's not going to have any problem getting acting work after this. Not even a little. 

Edited October 13, 2016 by Kromm

[Minneapple]

I'm hoping The Good Place gets a second shot. It's such a quirky show with an offbeat kind of humor. And it truly is diverse, AND the nonwhite characters aren't just props or tokens.

Quote

The issue is that South Asian viewers would want to see Priyanka Chopra, but those same viewers would be disinterested in The Good Place's Jameela Jamil, who is Indian?  I don't agree.  And again I don't agree the issue is about who is known versus unknown.

No, the issue is that nobody knows who Jameela Jamil is but Priyanka was a big star who had her own development deal with ABC. Thus the big starring role and her face everywhere.

I'm a woman of color too. In fact ethnically I am similar to Jameela. And I also like seeing men women of all colors represented on TV. But in this case we disagree, which is fine.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Minneapple

[possibilities]

Maybe the ratings are so low because of the lopsided promotion. Couldn't hurt to try a different approach. The show has many saleable moments involving actors other than Bell or Danson, or between Danson or Bell and another of the cast members. The assumption that whitewashed promotion helps a show is not borne out by the results in this case, and we honestly can't know if it's the best way to get viewers if they don't try anything else. Why can't Eleanor do karaoke with Chidi? Or Jianyu could dance. The Good Place could have a talent show for residents of the neighborhood-- that would give us many humorous promotable moments, I'm sure.

Going back a few days, I'm continuing to be blown away by the solidarity being shown between stars of "Birth of a Nation" and people who are boycotting the film. Gabrielle Union  Aja Naomi King both weigh in, below:

http://www.colorlines.com/articles/gabrielle-union-understands-why-you-might-skip-birth-nation 

Has there ever been a situation where the leads of any production expressed solidarity with those boycotting it? I guess Eddie Huang did this with Fresh off the Boat, too.

[Ms Blue Jay]

19 minutes ago, possibilities said:

Maybe the ratings are so low because of the lopsided promotion. Couldn't hurt to try a different approach. [snip]. The assumption that whitewashed promotion helps a show is not borne out by the results in this case, and we honestly can't know if it's the best way to get viewers if they don't try anything else.

Completely agree.

When people speak with such authority on people of colour being used in advertisements I do wonder what the assumptions are based upon.  

I *think* the show New Girl changed its original marketing of being about a cute quirky girl (the show's name, the promotion mostly just showing Zooey's face, IIRC) to later being focused on 4-5 main cast members.  And I *think* that that new strategy has worked for them as the show is somehow in its 6th season, now.

Edited October 13, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[St. Claire]

The talk of who is on the DVD made me pull out one of my favorite programs (Sports Night) to examine both the DVDs and to ponder on the show's diversity. The DVD box includes the six ensemble cast leads (I don't know if that's the right way to phrase it- ensemble leads- but basically the stars whose names would be on the opening credits as opposed to the closing ones). Five are white, one is Black. Robert Guillaume is probably the biggest star of the six at the time; this is pre- Six Feet Under Peter Krause and a pre- Desperate Housewives Felicity Huffman and a pre-Good Wife Josh Charles. The three cases within the box have two cast members each- Krause and Charles on one, Huffman and Guillaume on one, Sabrina Lloyd and Joshua Malina on one. So, a whole lotta whiteness.

I never really thought much about the show's overall diversity when I watched it, but there are some recurring characters of color for whom their color is not a THING. In fact, one of the tech guys (Dave) was a white guy in the pilot and replaced by Jeff Mooring for the remainder of the show's run. Kim, the production assistant, is played by Kayla Blake. There are some storylines and one-off lines that tap into Isaac being black, but mostly he's just Isaac, the boss for whom the showrunners have huge respect and the network less so. The managing editor of this sports show could well have been a white guy, but having Robert Guillaume in the role means you can have lines like "Danny, you know I love you, right? Because of that I can tell you this- no rich, young, white guy ever got himself anywhere with me comparing himself to Rosa Parks" or "Casey is out with Pixley? Do you suppose the two of them could be any more white?" or the brilliant speech he gave in Six Southern Gentlemen of Tennessee when he spoke about the Confederate flag.   

[BoogieBurns]

16 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I think it's the chicken and the egg conversation.  I feel like they barely had non-whites speak much dialogue in Season 1 -- remember when Kelly was only used for the Diversity episode?  And her whole character was about being Indian, and slapping Michael for being racist.  So yes, I say that The Office was not much interested in real diversity early on, and then eventually became more interested in it.  The character of Kelly for example, was able to become much more of a real character (outside of just being "Indian", or a Reactor to Racism,) later on.  If the show offers such contracts to 5 white actors, I am not sure why someone would argue that doesn't say anything about the show's feelings towards diversity.  It takes a person to negotiate a contract sure, but it also takes another person to accept it.

First, I am a huge fan of diversity. Second, I am a huge fan of The Office. There are a million reasons why it could have gone this way, but my guess is that the contracts were based on the pilot episode. The pilot episode was 90% identical to the UK Office pilot. The characters were white there. They had no idea who would become the breakout star of the show 4 years into it. 

If it makes you feel any better, the people who started the show all went on to make diverse shows. So, they learned from their "white washed mistake" once they were in charge. 

[possibilities]

They didn't have to cast the remake with all white leads just because the UK version did it. How would it have ruined the pilot if one or more of the roles had been something other than white? The story itself did not depend on whiteness. Casting the same exact characters with POC actors would have worked perfectly fine. They changed names, they could have changed races, too. It's crazy to me what is considered necessary to retain and how little justification there is for it in almost every case.

[Irlandesa]

Why are we talking as if The Good Place has low ratings?  Compared to TBBT or Empire?  Sure.  But compared to other NBC shows?  I don't watch but predictor sites like TV's Grim Reaper and TV BY THE NUMBERS both have it as likely to be renewed.  It does well for NBC for the kind of show it is.  It pulls in similar numbers to its lead in, Superstore, which stars the promoted America Ferrera. 

Edited October 13, 2016 by Irlandesa

[Ms Blue Jay]

I think I heard that TGP lost in the ratings versus Kevin Can Wait reruns.  But that's good to hear. 

[phoenics]

18 hours ago, Kromm said:

I don't have the power to "stall" or create rules for the TV industry. I am the peanut gallery watching from afar.

I believe it's case by case. Sleepy Hollow is another show with no recognizable star. You might rate Nicole Beharie as one, but most people wouldn't I think. But neither was the "other guy". So it was a show with no way to position itself as anyone's "vehicle". In THAT case someone made a decision, and it was probably a racist one. Two actors. Co-leads, at least theoretically, with no bigger celeb? And some knob leaves out the black woman consistently?  Of COURSE it's racist. 

But that doesn't mean EVERY case of white faces in an ad is racist. You can't take the general and apply it to every specific, as if it automatically applies. Apples to apples are shows with a disparity between marquee stars, people who's names are known to sell product or generate publicity, and shows where you can't hang a show on a name.  Matthew Fox was not enough of a name to sell all of Lost on, so he wasn't especially dominating in the ads. It's as simple as that. Again, this is no excuse for excluding faces of color when all things are equal.  But the point, although it seems I'm alone in being frank enough to say it and so seemingly project an assumption that I'm being some huge racist asshole, is that not all things ARE equal. And race is not always the factor that makes them unequal. You have a product, a show, and don't feature the better known stars disproportionately? If so, then you're being a fool, IMO. If that better known star was lets say... Sam Jackson (if he ever moves over to TV), then it's a black actor who's very name sells a show. If it's Halle Berry (when she came to TV for that crappy show she did), it was her face and name all over the ads. That's reality, just as much as Ted Danson and Kristen Bell being FAR bigger stars than the names and faces of Jameela Jamil, William Jackson Harper and Manny Jacinto. 

I gave examples where they will still push a newbie white star who is completely unknown and do a whole "Introducing" bit to promote them in the PR.  You appear to be attempting to teach me that one example doesn't prove the theorem - I get that - it's why I provided an example where your explanation doesn't account for the fact that even newbie white faces get more promotion than more established black leads.

No one called you a racist anything.

[phoenics]

17 hours ago, Minneapple said:

I'm actually glad they ended it because they had zero chemistry; in fact Kara and James were awkward and painful to watch. I'm hoping they do something more interesting with Jimmy this year, give him a purpose other than being Kara's love interest. 

Just so you know - the bad taste in my mouth was due to the hack way they ended it - in a way that made zero sense for the narrative - a la Zack and Lisa.  When you've racebent a character to pair with the lead, killing that off requires a bit more thought and care than the hack job that we got - at least it does if you want to avoid the appearance of any kind of "ism".

I don't think the "chemistry" thing is very relevant given how subjective that is.  I'm not arguing it either way, just that it had no bearing on HOW they ended something they'd built up for a full year.

[Minneapple]

58 minutes ago, phoenics said:

Just so you know - the bad taste in my mouth was due to the hack way they ended it - in a way that made zero sense for the narrative - a la Zack and Lisa.  When you've racebent a character to pair with the lead, killing that off requires a bit more thought and care than the hack job that we got - at least it does if you want to avoid the appearance of any kind of "ism".

Ah, okay. I see. Well, it wasn't the only plot that they just quickly did an about-face on. And honestly the news that's recently come out about James's character makes me way more excited for him and for the show. The writing for his character was so boring last year; his only function was to be Kara's love interest. And that was poorly done; their manufactured UST was such a drag on the show. It was a bad waste of Mehcad Brooks.

2 hours ago, Irlandesa said:

Why are we talking as if The Good Place has low ratings?  Compared to TBBT or Empire?  Sure.  But compared to other NBC shows?  I don't watch but predictor sites like TV's Grim Reaper and TV BY THE NUMBERS both have it as likely to be renewed.  It does well for NBC for the kind of show it is.  It pulls in similar numbers to its lead in, Superstore, which stars the promoted America Ferrera. 

Yeah. It appears as though ratings for The Good Place were up last week, even in the face of football, so that's a positive sign.

[Neurochick]

23 hours ago, phoenics said:

I call BS.  Exhibit Sleepy Hollow - which for the first two seasons, flat out refused to feature Nicole Beharie prominently in its promotion, choosing instead to feather Tom Mison, even though NB was definitely the bigger name and star. Tom was a complete unknown and NB had already starred in 42 and numerous other films.

I agree.  Look at what's happening on the Today Show right now.  They fired Billy Bush and will replace him with another white male, Carson Daily.  It's like networks feel that if a white man isn't talking to us, we'll never know what's going on in the world.

As far as who is being promoted on a show; maybe it also depends on what audience the show is trying to reach.  For instance, a show like 60 Minutes is geared towards older, more well to do people, that's why the hosts of that show tend to be older and whiter.  

I'm thinking about the show Pitch, Kylie Bunbury is on most of the ads for that show, and she's not well known, though she was on a show on ABC Family (Freeform); but the show is about her and if she wasn't front and center in those ads, it would seem strange.  

Edited October 14, 2016 by Neurochick

[jhlipton]

On 10/10/2016 at 3:20 PM, topanga said:

Have you seen the TV show "Queen Sugar." The black people on the show range from hi-yella (light skinned) to very dark brown skin, and the lighting is perfect. Each skin tone is rich with color and contrast. And so many people of color who watch it get excited because we're not used to seeing brown skin being filmed with such great lighting and cinematography. 

Is the lighting/photography much different from Greenleaf?  That, to my untrained eye, seemed pretty good.

21 hours ago, Minneapple said:

I'm hoping The Good Place gets a second shot. It's such a quirky show with an offbeat kind of humor. And it truly is diverse, AND the nonwhite characters aren't just props or tokens.

I was hoping for Brooklyn 99 Shur but got Parks & Recreastion Shur.  Very disappointing.
I applaud the diversity, but it's Just Not Funny!

6 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I think I heard that TGP lost in the ratings versus Kevin Can Wait reruns.  But that's good to hear. 

The ratings that matter are NBC vs NBC rather than NBC vs CBS or any other network. 

[ChromaKelly]

9 hours ago, jhlipton said:

I was hoping for Brooklyn 99 Shur but got Parks & Recreastion Shur.  Very disappointing.
I applaud the diversity, but it's Just Not Funny!

 

Is that like "I wanted Sixteen Candles Molly Ringwald, not Pretty In Pink Molly Ringwald."?

I am a fan of The Good Place, but I haven't really seen any press or advertising for it. The only thing I've seen is Kristen Bell and Ted Danson on a few late night shows, which yes I would chalk up to them being the bigger names. If there is cast pictures or ads, I would think those would have the other leads, or at least I would hope. I would think in 2016, a diverse cast would be seen as a plus, and people might be drawn in seeing that the show has non-white leads.

[Archery]

On ‎10‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 11:25 PM, Oracle42 said:

At this point, a lack of diversity or lack of minorities in the promos for a new show generally means it's a new show I'm not going to watch. 

I realized the other day that my thought process goes like this when I'm watching a preview of a movie or TV show:  All white cast.  Yawn.  Bored.  Moving on.  It just feels so been-there-done-that. (But I'm only in the relevant demographic for one more year, so the suits don't really care what I think anymore.)

[possibilities]

I've seen a lot of commercials for The Good Place on NBC-- all of them feature Bell and Danson, and only Bell and Danson.

I'm 51, so I've been irrelevant to advertisers for 2 years now. Despite this, I did receive and faithfully fill out one of those tv watching journals when I got one from the ratings gods this summer. It was unfortunately a week when most of the shows I watch were on hiatus, however. Still-- they asked me how old I was before they sent the thing, so maybe they do care at least a little bit about people over the age of 49.

[selkie]

I can understand the Bell and Danson emphasis because the concept of the show is hard enough to explain in a handful of seconds, and those two really were most likely to draw people in based on familiarity while at the same time they're trying to explain a different version of the afterlife in 30 seconds or less. I'm giving the show a try because on Danson because the last thing I'd seen him in was the wonderfully absurd 'Bored to Death' and was curious to see what he'd do in his next project. 

'Superstore' is dead easy to promo in comparison in terms of basic concept- 'It's a workplace comedy with the lead from Ugly Betty'' can be covered in less than ten seconds, and you've got the freedom to do an awful lot with the other 20+ seconds of the promo.. 

[Raja]

From the Agents of SHIELD fan fight over Chloe "Bennet" Wang and her role on the show.

6 hours ago, teenj12 said:

Except, people changing their names to a more suitable 'screen name' and POC actors changing their names to assimilate into a White-dominated society are totally different things. I honestly cannot believe you just dared to compare the two, as if the racism in the Hollywood industry isn't obvious (especially towards Asians). 

The more "suitable" screen name was not totally different, just because we don't put a racial category on the name. The suitability is chosen many times because of the ethnic group. To pull a Eric Braeden out of a Hans Gudegast is exactly the same thing. As is Jack Soo of Barney Miller  fame passing for other than Japanese while still Asian when he got out of the Go For Broke segregated regiment in WWII to start his acting career.

Edited October 15, 2016 by Raja

[possibilities]

The promos for The Good Life don't explain the premise of the show at all. The latest batch showed Kristen Bell and Ted Danson doing karaoke.

[Kromm]

1 hour ago, possibilities said:

The promos for The Good Life don't explain the premise of the show at all. The latest batch showed Kristen Bell and Ted Danson doing karaoke.

It's not all that easy to explain a high concept show premise in a 15 second promo anyway. 

Do you really expect them to STILL be digging to try and reiterate it in a promo for Episode 6?

What they should be doing at this point is doing promos that emphasize the show's good reviews. Reading reviewer quotes is a little talky as an approach, but given that there's little they can do to properly convey the premise anyway, then they should just draw people in whatever way they can.

And yes, that probably includes showing more of the non-white cast. The strong emphasis I legitimately think they needed on Bell and Danson kind of has an expiration date. If that approach hasn't drawn certain viewers in after the first few weeks then you do indeed go to something else to scoop up people who weren't impressed by Bell and Danson's lily white smiling faces and big celeb reps.

[angora]

Still on The Good Place, but a slightly different subject... (spoilers for a plot point that happened a few weeks ago.)

I'm of two minds about the Jianyu reveal.  On the one hand, I get that, if they wanted to have another character turn out to be there by mistake in the same way that Eleanor is, Jianyu was their best bet.  It would've been weird to reveal that Chidi didn't belong in the Good Place, since he already knew about Eleanor's secret, plus that character pairing works a lot better if Eleanor and Chidi are genuine opposites.  Tahani would've been too obvious, since Eleanor was already suspicious of her and trying to prove that she wasn't as "good" as she seemed; instead, Tahani was basically Jianyu's red herring.  Michael and Janet aren't actually human, so neither of them would've been "chosen" for the Good Place anyway.  That left Jianyu as the only other main cast member who could've been given a surprise reveal.  Not to mention, he'd had the least to do so far, and the flip from Jianyu to Jason was certainly a big change.  Like an earlier poster said, I also like that Jason isn't any sort of typical Asian stereotype - when it comes to not-the-sharpest-tool Filipino bros, Josh Chan from Crazy Ex-Girlfriend is still my favorite, but Jason is entertaining.

That said, I'm kind of disappointed not to have Jianyu as a genuine character.  "Buddhist monk under a vow of silence" is definitely a stereotype for Asians in movies/TV, but even though it's a familiar image, it's not a familiar CHARACTER - does that make sense?  Though I'm not sure how well the show would've pulled it off, I was interested in seeing this Buddhist monk fleshed out as an actual person rather than just a shorthand image of inner peace.  Whether it would've been through the show finding creative ways for Jianyu to convey meaning without speech or if he would've eventually ceased his vow of silence, I wanted to know what he was like as a person and what he thought about The Good Place.  A character like that feels VERY original to me, and while I enjoy Jason, I wish I could've really seen Jianyu.

[topanga]

On 10/14/2016 at 0:01 AM, jhlipton said:

Is the lighting/photography much different from Greenleaf?  That, to my untrained eye, seemed pretty good.

I'm not sure. I tried to watch an episode of Greenleaf (I was stuck in my hair stylist's chair) but rolled my eyes the entire time. Way too much manufactured, soapy drama and no likable characters. 

 

3 hours ago, angora said:

That said, I'm kind of disappointed not to have Jianyu as a genuine character.  "Buddhist monk under a vow of silence" is definitely a stereotype for Asians in movies/TV, but even though it's a familiar image, it's not a familiar CHARACTER - does that make sense?  Though I'm not sure how well the show would've pulled it off, I was interested in seeing this Buddhist monk fleshed out as an actual person rather than just a shorthand image of inner peace.  Whether it would've been through the show finding creative ways for Jianyu to convey meaning without speech or if he would've eventually ceased his vow of silence, I wanted to know what he was like as a person and what he thought about The Good Place.  A character like that feels VERY original to me, and while I enjoy Jason, I wish I could've really seen Jianyu.

I hear ya, but I actually like Jason better than Jianyu. I like that he's a ditzy, not-so-bright character who just happens to be Filipino. In fact, I like having Nigerian, Filipino, American black, and Pakistani characters on a show where we don't focus on their ethnicity. 

I'm sure The Good Place must have plenty of monks and priests. Uh, maybe not priests. 

[DearEvette]

On 10/14/2016 at 0:01 AM, jhlipton said:

Is the lighting/photography much different from Greenleaf?  That, to my untrained eye, seemed pretty good.

 

I've only watched a couple of eps of Greenleaf (I can't with the religious backdrop).  None of the characters disappear or look ashy or grey. So it is lit well.

Queen Sugar is on a whole other level visually, imo.  So it is really hard to compare the two.  QS feels much more cinematic and lush. The photography to me feels like it is a conscious part of the storytelling.  You can tell that the way some of the scenes are shot that their composition is just as, if not more, important to the story being told as the dialogue. I've actually paused some of the scenes to just stare at them. 

[angora]

11 hours ago, topanga said:

I hear ya, but I actually like Jason better than Jianyu. I like that he's a ditzy, not-so-bright character who just happens to be Filipino. In fact, I like having Nigerian, Filipino, American black, and Pakistani characters on a show where we don't focus on their ethnicity. 

I'm sure The Good Place must have plenty of monks and priests. Uh, maybe not priests. 

I do like that about him, too.  Like I said, if he was going to be someone other than Jianyu, I'm glad it's someone of the "just happens to be" variety.  He's fun, and I like that he generally means well but is still a major screw-up because he keeps doing such dumb things - hee!

When I say that Jianyu as originally presented felt very original, I didn't mean as a resident of the Good Place.  I agree that there are probably plenty of monks there.  (Although, really, we haven't seen any characters who were deeply devoted to their religion in life.  In the main cast, we have one moral philosopher, one woman who dedicated her life to charitable giving, and two people who are trying to hide the fact that they're there by mistake.  Having one character be deeply religious would've been another reasonable angle to take - how would they react to discover that Paradise was based on a point system of good vs. bad deeds and the vast majority of people don't make the cut? - and having that character be Buddhist instead of Christian or Jewish would've been refreshing.)

Instead, I meant he felt very original as a character on TV/film.  I can at least point to a handful of just-happen-to-be Asian characters, including characters on comedies.  I can't think of any three-dimensional Buddhist monk characters (again, I'm talking about a real character, not just a nameless symbol of enlightenment standing in the background,) which is why I think Jianyu could've been a character with a lot of potential.

IF done well, that is, which is the crux of the matter.  If he'd continued to mainly be a silent presence for Tahani to react to, that wouldn't have cut it; in that case, Jason would definitely be the preferably alternative.  But if he'd been fleshed out the way the other characters are starting to be, letting us see his fears and flaws, how his past informs his actions, the aspects of the Good Place that he struggles with, all the while being someone that TV usually portrays as a robe rather than a complex person, would've been really cool.

[Ms Blue Jay]

I totally get your point, but it wasn't until the "Jianyu Reveal" that I was hooked on the show.  Now I can say I'm definitively a fan.  I understand your desire for a good Buddhist monk character on American TV - sure, why wouldn't I?  But Jianyu was portrayed as a silent , assumed to be totally good, Asian character and that didn't give me any interest.  No complexity or dimension. When he turned out to be a Filipino guy who was just somewhat moronic, a DJ, (but very unintentionally funny in my opinion) and as we've all said again and again, "just happened to be Filipino", THAT'S when I got excited about the show.  He was a fully developed, fully realized, three dimensional Filipino character on an American network television show and that's what got me excited about the show in the first place.  Unfortunately it took 4 episodes to get there.  I love the actor who plays Jason. I find him so believable as that idiot. Chidi is also a fantastic character played by a great actor.  

It's exciting of course because for so many decades you'd just see Asian people as background characters fitting some type of stereotype and of course they'd always have an accent.  

Edited October 16, 2016 by Ms Blue Jay

[DeLurker]

59 minutes ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

It's exciting of course because for so many decades you'd just see Asian people as background characters fitting some type of stereotype and of course they'd always have an accent.

So much this. 

[angora]

It seems people mostly understand where I'm coming from and we're in an "agree to disagree" situation, which is cool.  I don't want to keep going on about it, because like I said, I'm divided on Jason rather than against him.  I'm definitely all for seeing PoC in non-stereotypical roles, which I get can still be depressingly tough to find for Asians.  I'll just clarify one more thing, and then I'll back off Jason.

When I say that Jianyu interested me, it was more for what the show COULD do with him rather than what they WERE doing with him.  Ms. Blue Jay, I agree that the first three episodes gave him virtually nothing in the way of dimension.  If all the show had in mind for him was nodding serenely as Tahani got increasingly unstrung trying to get anything out of him, no thank you.  I wouldn't have wanted that at all.  What I was hoping was that the show simply hadn't gotten around to him yet, and getting to know him was coming.  After all, Chidi's a terrific example of a genuinely "good" person who is still hugely entertaining and has understandable flaws, and I like what they have going on with Tahani, helping an incredible number of people during her life more out of combating her inferiority complex than for altruistic motives.  The Jianyu of the first three episodes seemed very straightforward "good," but I was hoping that the layers would get peeled back on him like they've been on Chidi and Tahani, so he could be both good AND interesting/complicated.  (This most likely would've necessitated his vow of silence ending sooner rather than later, which would've been fine.)

I like how the show can be off-the-wall silly and engrossing at the same time, and there could've been some neat ideas to explore with Jianyu.  For someone whose ultimate liberation from a cycle of death and rebirth would be nirvana - an extinguishing, a state of non-self - what would he think of the prospect of being in this afterlife for eternity?  Having spent most of his life rejecting material things and not thinking about his wants, how well would he transition to an eternity of indulging and enjoying himself (in a similar vein to Chidi's difficulty in testing the waters of a "new hobby" or the way Tahani continually acts as though she's still trying to up her stats and "win" the afterlife)?  Hell, what would he think of people going on about how "wise" he is and what a "beautiful soul" he has when they don't actually know him and are just going off the image they have of what a Buddhist monk is?

That's what I think could've been cool to see, but only if the show was interested in exploring him the way they have Chidi and Tahani.  If it wouldn't have had any plans for him besides being Tahani's silent foil and an occasional poker-faced sight gag?  Then I 100% agree that we're way better off with Jason.  I wanted to see what Jianyu could've had the potential to be rather than more of the same from the first three episodes, absolutely.

[jhlipton]

On 10/14/2016 at 9:47 AM, ChromaKelly said:

Is that like "I wanted Sixteen Candles Molly Ringwald, not Pretty In Pink Molly Ringwald."?

Not a huge Hughes fan [gasp!].  So more like Stranger Than Fiction Will Ferrell vs any other Will Ferrell.  To Be or Not To Be Mel Brooks vs Silent Movie Mel Brooks.

19 hours ago, topanga said:

I'm not sure. I tried to watch an episode of Greenleaf (I was stuck in my hair stylist's chair) but rolled my eyes the entire time. Way too much manufactured, soapy drama and no likable characters.

Add in really implausible story-lines and ICKY scenes like Isabel letting Noah f**k her (not even make love -- that was plain "wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am" action) when she had been opposed to any sex before marriage.  Or the daughtr and dad being all lovey-dovey when he first appears then not giving a crap about each other at the end.  I probably won't be back for next season.

 

7 hours ago, angora said:

I can't think of any three-dimensional Buddhist monk characters (again, I'm talking about a real character, not just a nameless symbol of enlightenment standing in the background,)

Kwai Chang Caine?  LOL

[DeLurker]

1 hour ago, jhlipton said:

Kwai Chang Caine?  LOL

I actively resisted bringing this very sore choice up because it still makes the collective blood in my family boil!  Thanks Jhlipton!

[possibilities]

Is anyone watching "Timeless"? One of the three people in a team of time travelers is a Black man, and they are making a point in every episode (there have been only 2 so far, but it seems to be something they're serious about) that wherever they go in "American history" it's going to be rotten for him. He's allowed to express disgust and anger, the two white people he "travels" with are sympathetic to the problem, and they are also showing specific things from the relevant time periods.

In episode two, Our Heroes travel to the day of the Lincoln assassination, and hotly debate whether they are willing to carry out the mission they've been given (to stop a "terrorist" from tampering with history and allow the assassination to go forward), and they also show formerly enslaved men searching for their families who they were separated from when sold during slavery.

The premise of the show is that there is a rogue time traveller who is trying to change history. Our team of 3 is supposed to stop him from succeeding, no matter what the event, because any changes to history (even tiny ones) can have unpredictable and possibly dangerous effects, so whatever the situation, they are supposed to try to capture the guy who's tampering, and prevent him from altering any events. There is a fair amount of debating so far, about the morality of the time travellers' actions and inactions, and I'd be curious what others think about how well they are handling it.

I personally feel like the show has some problems, but I give them points for trying, and I'm not ready to give up yet. I like that they are wading into the situation with a diverse ensemble (not just the time travellers, but also the organization they work with in the present), and confronting the issues rather than shying away. I want them to do well with it, because I'm afraid that if it doesn't work, nothing like it will ever be greenlit again, or to justify the idea that "no one wants to hear about that stuff, it's not entertaining, so whitewash it forevermore."

ETA: Also wanted to bring over the link to this speech by Conrad Ricamora, about the importance of representation. It's relevant to the "sexy Asian men" conversation we were having earlier. He talks about it both from the perspective of being Asian and from the perspective of being gay:

Edited October 17, 2016 by possibilities
add link

[Raja]

59 minutes ago, possibilities said:

Is anyone watching "Timeless"? One of the three people in a team of time travelers is a Black man, and they are making a point in every episode (there have been only 2 so far, but it seems to be something they're serious about) that wherever they go in "American history" it's going to be rotten for him. He's allowed to express disgust and anger, the two white people he "travels" with are sympathetic to the problem, and they are also showing specific things from the relevant time periods.

In episode two, Our Heroes travel to the day of the Lincoln assassination, and hotly debate whether they are willing to carry out the mission they've been given (to stop a "terrorist" from tampering with history and allow the assassination to go forward), and they also show formerly enslaved men searching for their families who they were separated from when sold during slavery.

The premise of the show is that there is a rogue time traveller who is trying to change history. Our team of 3 is supposed to stop him from succeeding, no matter what the event, because any changes to history (even tiny ones) can have unpredictable and possibly dangerous effects, so whatever the situation, they are supposed to try to capture the guy who's tampering, and prevent him from altering any events. There is a fair amount of debating so far, about the morality of the time travellers' actions and inactions, and I'd be curious what others think about how well they are handling it.

I personally feel like the show has some problems, but I give them points for trying, and I'm not ready to give up yet. I like that they are wading into the situation with a diverse ensemble (not just the time travellers, but also the organization they work with in the present), and confronting the issues rather than shying away. I want them to do well with it, because I'm afraid that if it doesn't work, nothing like it will ever be greenlit again, or to justify the idea that "no one wants to hear about that stuff, it's not entertaining, so whitewash it forevermore."

 

I like that they have taken the issue head on. When diverse cast first started showing up on TV the elephant in the room was rarely addressed or saved for the very special episode. The third episode of Timeless is scheduled to be the late 50s to  early 60s in Las Vegas, While a Sammy Davis Jr may have broken some color lines it was still a segregated city

[Minneapple]

11 hours ago, Ms Blue Jay said:

I totally get your point, but it wasn't until the "Jianyu Reveal" that I was hooked on the show.  Now I can say I'm definitively a fan.  I understand your desire for a good Buddhist monk character on American TV - sure, why wouldn't I?  But Jianyu was portrayed as a silent , assumed to be totally good, Asian character and that didn't give me any interest.  No complexity or dimension. When he turned out to be a Filipino guy who was just somewhat moronic, a DJ, (but very unintentionally funny in my opinion) and as we've all said again and again, "just happened to be Filipino", THAT'S when I got excited about the show.  He was a fully developed, fully realized, three dimensional Filipino character on an American network television show and that's what got me excited about the show in the first place.  Unfortunately it took 4 episodes to get there.  I love the actor who plays Jason. I find him so believable as that idiot. Chidi is also a fantastic character played by a great actor.  

It's exciting of course because for so many decades you'd just see Asian people as background characters fitting some type of stereotype and of course they'd always have an accent.  

This exactly. I wish more casting directors got this. Jason is just a regular old guy who happens to be Filipino. That's it! That's all I ask, is that more regular old characters were of different races. That you have different characters of color and that they are just treated like regular old people, because that's what they are. Not tokens. Not stereotypes. There is nothing stereotypical about any of the characters on The Good Place. That's part of why I like it so much. 

Edited October 17, 2016 by Minneapple

[Dee]

I hate when media acts as if race/ethnicity/gender/disability/etc is inconsequential.

Those differences serve as crucial elements in making people who they are and informing how they see the world.

They deserve to be acknowledged, not downplayed or hand-waved, because they make writers and/or the audience uncomfortable.

[atomationage]

I watched two episodes of Kim's Convenience last night.  I thought I saw a discussion of it here, but nothing came up in searches.  I liked the show and the characters, but I thought the accents the actors used were somewhat offensive.  Maybe Margaret Cho does something similar in her act.

[Neurochick]

10 minutes ago, Dee said:

I hate when media acts as if race/ethnicity/gender/disability/etc is inconsequential.

Those differences serve as crucial elements in making people who they are and informing how they see the world.

They deserve to be acknowledged, not downplayed or hand-waved, because they make writers and/or the audience uncomfortable.

True, but it can get tiring if the entire show is about their race/ethnicity/gender/disability.

A good example of that balance, at least for me, is "Queen Sugar."  Yes, these people are black and the show does address that fact; but it's not a show about their blackness. 

[Drogo]

1 minute ago, atomationage said:

I watched two episodes of Kim's Convenience last night.  I thought I saw a discussion of it here, but nothing came up in searches.  I liked the show and the characters, but I thought the accents the actors used were somewhat offensive.  Maybe Margaret Cho does something similar in her act.

Kim's Convenience forum.

[Kromm]

13 hours ago, Minneapple said:

This exactly. I wish more casting directors got this. Jason is just a regular old guy who happens to be Filipino. That's it! That's all I ask, is that more regular old characters were of different races. That you have different characters of color and that they are just treated like regular old people, because that's what they are. Not tokens. Not stereotypes. There is nothing stereotypical about any of the characters on The Good Place. That's part of why I like it so much. 

I don't entirely agree.  Jason is a cliche. A slightly cartoonish stereotype, more than a typical "regular guy". Just not a specifically Asian one. You literally could put a white face on what he's doing (the airhead raver kid) and it would play the same. The Asian hook is only that he occupied that other Asian-specific cliche, the Monk, then shattered it with his reveal.

In other words, the reality of the character is race-blind, but it's because a race-specific cliche was exploded to get him there.

Which is great actually. TV has cliches. It's always going to have cliches. It's just good to subvert them, and that's what this did.

[atomationage]

5 minutes ago, Drogo said:

Kim's Convenience forum.

Thanks!  For some reason it doesn't show up in alphabetical order in the K's, but is at the end, and I didn't see it. 

[Dee]

3 hours ago, Neurochick said:

True, but it can get tiring if the entire show is about their race/ethnicity/gender/disability.

I completely understand.

Which is why I love(d) shows like Happy Endings, Empire, Queen Sugar, Atlanta, etc. that actively engage the characters backgrounds, but don't reduce them to just that.

It can be a tightrope walk, but it can be done. Especially with more 'diverse' writers rooms.

Edited October 17, 2016 by Dee

[Trini]

Thought I'd mention this here; sounds interesting:

Quote

Freeform Picks Up New Comedy Pilot "Brown Girls" from Writers Shilpi Roy and Nastaran Dibai

The pilot centers on the relationship between Rimmi, an Indian-American aspiring beauty vlogger, and Devi, a young woman who has recently emigrated from India.

A little more info here: http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news/2016/10/17/freeform-picks-up-new-comedy-pilot-brown-girls-from-writers-shilpi-roy-and-nastaran-dibai-8111/20161017freeform02/

Edited October 17, 2016 by Trini

[Minneapple]

4 hours ago, Kromm said:

I don't entirely agree.  Jason is a cliche. A slightly cartoonish stereotype, more than a typical "regular guy". Just not a specifically Asian one. You literally could put a white face on what he's doing (the airhead raver kid) and it would play the same. The Asian hook is only that he occupied that other Asian-specific cliche, the Monk, then shattered it with his reveal.

In other words, the reality of the character is race-blind, but it's because a race-specific cliche was exploded to get him there.

Which is great actually. TV has cliches. It's always going to have cliches. It's just good to subvert them, and that's what this did.

Actually, you're right. And yes, this is a good thing. Jason's ethnicity is part of who he is, but it doesn't define him completely. He's not the "Asian guy" whose entire plot revolves around being Asian. They've done the same with Chidi and Tahani.

33 minutes ago, Trini said:

Thought I mention this here; sounds interesting:

A little more info here: http://www.thefutoncritic.com/news/2016/10/17/freeform-picks-up-new-comedy-pilot-brown-girls-from-writers-shilpi-roy-and-nastaran-dibai-8111/20161017freeform02/

Well, this sounds interesting. Definitely something I would check out.

[angora]

9 hours ago, Dee said:

I hate when media acts as if race/ethnicity/gender/disability/etc is inconsequential.

Those differences serve as crucial elements in making people who they are and informing how they see the world.

They deserve to be acknowledged, not downplayed or hand-waved, because they make writers and/or the audience uncomfortable.

 

8 hours ago, Neurochick said:

True, but it can get tiring if the entire show is about their race/ethnicity/gender/disability.

A good example of that balance, at least for me, is "Queen Sugar."  Yes, these people are black and the show does address that fact; but it's not a show about their blackness. 

ITA on both counts.  I love that about a show like Master of None.  Dev can agonize over what to text a woman or experience the nightmare of babysitting a friend's kids for an extended period of time, and he can also struggle to connect with his immigrant father and lament the depressing "you can only cast one, or else it's an 'Indian' show" rule of television.  Universality interwoven with specificity - it's a beautiful thing.