Over the past couple of years there has been a trend towards only having people of certain types playing roles that match that type. The latest instance of this is with regards to Bryan Cranston (of Breaking Bad and Malcolm in the Middle) playing a disabled person. People are claiming he should not have accepted this role and it instead should have gone to a disabled person who wants to act.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-46793406

I personally am against this because as a viewer. The same goes for gay roles, I don't see why straight people can't play those roles. If a gay man can play a straight man, I don't see why a straight man can't play a gay man. I also don't see why American adaptations of Asian stories should feature Asian actors if it is being re-envisioned in an American city rather than an Asian city, to me it seems like you are adapting the work to a new setting and are amending the cast accordingly. I don't think its wrong its wrong for a Japanese movie company to remake Die Hard in Tokyo and have it feature Asian actors.

But then I get to thinking how is my stance different than white actors using blackface or brownface, which I am against because it is too obvious that the company simply didn't want a minority actor. I think it boils down to whether or not makeup or prosthetics are required to for the actor to achieve that role. Though I should say, I'm not completely sold on any one stance just yet. Anyone else care to wade in?

I think it's a bit of a stretch to see Cranston sitting in that chair and be convinced. Not interested in the film. And having Kevin hart, a comic, make gags about disability comes off as rude.
Would be better if the joke was "approved" by a truly disabled person in the chair!

That said, I don't know that we need to create a society where every single person represent ONLY their own race, gender, sexual orientation. That kinda locks us into boxes by rule, and I don't think that's right either.

golden sloth said:

---

Over the past couple of years there has been a trend towards only having people of certain types playing roles that match that type. The latest instance of this is with regards to Bryan Cranston (of Breaking Bad and Malcolm in the Middle) playing a disabled person. People are claiming he should not have accepted this role and it instead should have gone to a disabled person who wants to act.

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-46793406

I personally am against this because as a viewer. The same goes for gay roles, I don't see why straight people can't play those roles. If a gay man can play a straight man, I don't see why a straight man can't play a gay man. I also don't see why American adaptations of Asian stories should feature Asian actors if it is being re-envisioned in an American city rather than an Asian city, to me it seems like you are adapting the work to a new setting and are amending the cast accordingly. I don't think its wrong its wrong for a Japanese movie company to remake Die Hard in Tokyo and have it feature Asian actors.

But then I get to thinking how is my stance different than white actors using blackface or brownface, which I am against because it is too obvious that the company simply didn't want a minority actor. I think it boils down to whether or not makeup or prosthetics are required to for the actor to achieve that role. Though I should say, I'm not completely sold on any one stance just yet. Anyone else care to wade in?

---

Robert Downey, Jr. in blackface was hilarious. I still laugh every time I hear the name Lance.