After all, if non-traditional, cross-racial casting is such a good thing for the bio-pic of Frank Sinatra, why not have a white guy play the slain civil rights icon? As such, I may have to join Debbie Schlussel in her call DreamWorks to give serious consideration to casting the very white, very blond Wilson as the lead.

Are you offended by the suggestion? If so, IÂ’m sure you must be equally outraged by the suggestion of Jamie Foxx as OlÂ’ Blue Eyes. After all, there is something quite silly about such casting decisions in historical or biographical features.

This puts me in mind of a discussion I had over 20 years ago when I was doing a graduate fellowship with the Coro Foundation in St. Louis. When a couple of my colleagues argued that race shouldnÂ’t matter in casting decisions, I caused quite a stir when I made the following observation.

“Sometimes race really does matter. After all, no one is going to cast me as Chaka Zulu, and there would be an uproar if someone did. When you are dealing with historical facts, such things as race and gender can and do make a difference. And since the original historical person was a white peasant girl, no matter how talented a black actress is she just cannot play Joan of Arc.”

Friends, that isn’t racism. It is common sense. Otherwise we will see such absurd things as Ben Stiller playing Barack Obama, or Morgan Freeman as Ronald Reagan. And while a bit of gender bending by John Travolta in Hairspray might be good clean fun, do we really believe that audiences will suspend their disbelief sufficiently to allow Nathan Lane to play Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis in a movie – and should they even be asked to do so?

Posted by: Greg at 11:43 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.