Current Events > SJW critic already complaining about lack of diversity in Dunkirk

(+) Yeah! (+)

http://www.hollywood-elsewhere.com/2017/07/usa-today-critic-actually-said-dunkirk/

“The trio of timelines can be jarring as you figure out how they all fit, and the fact that there are only a couple of women and no lead actors of color may rub some the wrong way.”

Fuck historical accuracy I guess.
---

stop giving these people attention voldo
---

Not a lot of women in a WW2 movie? YOU DON'T SAY!
---

Mandasnake posted...

stop giving these people attention voldo

---

Mandasnake posted...

stop giving these people attention voldo

Why? It's good to bring attention to these crazies.
---

Mandasnake posted...

stop giving these people attention voldo

People not making topics about it isn't going to make the insanity go away.
---

UncleBourbon33 posted...

Mandasnake posted...

stop giving these people attention voldo

Why? It's good to bring attention to these crazies.

>legitimizing crazy people will make them stop being crazy
---

Kid_Buu posted...

UncleBourbon33 posted...

Mandasnake posted...

stop giving these people attention voldo

Why? It's good to bring attention to these crazies.

>legitimizing crazy people will make them stop being crazy

---

Kid_Buu posted...

UncleBourbon33 posted...

Mandasnake posted...

stop giving these people attention voldo

Why? It's good to bring attention to these crazies.

>legitimizing crazy people will make them stop being crazy

We;re just making fun of them.
---

There are always a couple idiots like that. Now watch as people claim they represent everyone to the left.
---

What's even Dunkirk about before I say anything
---

gamepimp12 posted...

What's even Dunkirk about before I say anything

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Dunkirk
---

gamepimp12 posted...

What's even Dunkirk about before I say anything

World war 2
---

gamepimp12 posted...

What's even Dunkirk about before I say anything

Dunkirk Evacuation.
Bunch of british soldiers in 1940 are stranded and they're trying to get them not stranded.
Plenty of civilians were present.
---

gamepimp12 posted...

What's even Dunkirk about before I say anything

Oh come on!
---

UncleBourbon33 posted...

Kid_Buu posted...

UncleBourbon33 posted...

Mandasnake posted...

stop giving these people attention voldo

Why? It's good to bring attention to these crazies.

>legitimizing crazy people will make them stop being crazy

We;re just making fun of them.

no, you're actually giving them money through clicks and exposure.
---

Dragon239 posted...

gamepimp12 posted...

What's even Dunkirk about before I say anything

Dunkirk Evacuation.
Bunch of british soldiers in 1940 are stranded and they're trying to get them not stranded.
Plenty of civilians were present.

If that's the case I don't see why there isn't any black major characters or soldiers or even civilians.


But obviously I'm not very aware of the subject so if it's a reason I'd appreciate it if someone told me
---

World War 2 took place in the 1940s.
Segregation in the US ended in the 1960s.

Do the math.


If anything, Hollywood needs to do a film about a black World War 2 regiment (something they should do anyway) so that they can explain to those who slept through US history that American society in the 1940s did not even attempt to hide its social and economic inequality.


One of the myths of World War 2 is that America woke up after the attack on Pearl Harbor and had nothing but victory against Japan from that point onward. That wasn't true. It took two years to fully recover and turn the tide. During that time, soldiers in the Philippines fought a losing battle -- being captured or executed to a person -- so that others might have the time necessary to rebuild America's devastated navy. 1943's Bataan turned that story of sacrifice into an inspiring Alamo-like tale. And it was banned in the South for depicting an integrated team. Producers wanted to honor all who served, so they included a Black soldier and a Latino soldier (free from stereotypes). And for that, the film could not be shown in theaters in the South.

I'm fine with a fictional Captain America having an integrated team of Howling Commandos. I'm okay with Hollywood structuring a story in such a way that members of a white battalion meet up with members of a black battalion. But I am not okay with rewriting history for the sake of inclusion when it comes at a cost of sanitizing the past and sweeping social inequality under the rug.


It's enough of a struggle to get people to accept that systemic racism is still a factor today. It just makes it that much worse when people can go to the movies and think that life has always been fair regardless of race, sex, creed, or religion.

Skye Reynolds posted...

World War 2 took place in the 1940s.
Segregation in the US ended in the 1960s.

Do the math.

There are no US soldiers in this film.

There were significant amounts of African-French troops at Dunkirk and in France at the time, and the Royal Indian Army had a large-ish presence among the British troops there.

Do I think it's an issue for the movie? Nah. But pretending this is some "SJW historical revisionism" while being totally ignorant of the actual history yourselves is a bad look.
---

Skye Reynolds posted...

World War 2 took place in the 1940s.
Segregation in the US ended in the 1960s.

Do the math.


If anything, Hollywood needs to do a film about a black World War 2 regiment (something they should do anyway) so that they can explain to those who slept through US history that American society in the 1940s did not even attempt to hide its social and economic inequality.


One of the myths of World War 2 is that America woke up after the attack on Pearl Harbor and had nothing but victory against Japan from that point onward. That wasn't true. It took two years to fully recover and turn the tide. During that time, soldiers in the Philippines fought a losing battle -- being captured or executed to a person -- so that others might have the time necessary to rebuild America's devastated navy. 1943's Bataan turned that story of sacrifice into an inspiring Alamo-like tale. And it was banned in the South for depicting an integrated team. Producers wanted to honor all who served, so they included a Black soldier and a Latino soldier (free from stereotypes). And for that, the film could not be shown in theaters in the South.

I'm fine with a fictional Captain America having an integrated team of Howling Commandos. I'm okay with Hollywood structuring a story in such a way that members of a white battalion meet up with members of a black battalion. But I am not okay with rewriting history for the sake of inclusion when it comes at a cost of sanitizing the past and sweeping social inequality under the rug.


It's enough of a struggle to get people to accept that systemic racism is still a factor today. It just makes it that much worse when people can go to the movies and think that life has always been fair regardless of race, sex, creed, or religion.

I would agree with all of that, the hell the idea or two Regiments forced to survive sounds amazing


But what does US segregation have to do with a battle that took place in europe that the us wasn't involved in?
---

gamepimp12 posted...

But what does US segregation have to do with a battle that took place in europe that the us wasn't involved in?

Skye is one of the most astoundingly ignorant posters on this entire board, regardless of politics. It's actually breathtaking.
---

RebelElite791 posted...

gamepimp12 posted...

But what does US segregation have to do with a battle that took place in europe that the us wasn't involved in?

Skye is one of the most astoundingly ignorant posters on this entire board, regardless of politics. It's actually breathtaking.

Least I'm openly admiring my ignorance on the subject
---

---

WaterLink posted...

RebelElite791 posted...

There were significant amounts of African-French troops at Dunkirk and in France at the time, and the Royal Indian Army had a large-ish presence among the British troops there.

Do I think it's an issue for the movie? Nah. But pretending this is some "SJW historical revisionism" while being totally ignorant of the actual history yourselves is a bad look.

---

Sorry, I'm a little quick to assume that America is involved whenever social progressives complain.

:v

I have no knowledge over European armies and whether or not they were likewise segregated. If they were more integrated than we were, then critics have every right to complain about a lack of diversity.

RebelElite791 posted...

WaterLink posted...

RebelElite791 posted...

There were significant amounts of African-French troops at Dunkirk and in France at the time, and the Royal Indian Army had a large-ish presence among the British troops there.

Do I think it's an issue for the movie? Nah. But pretending this is some "SJW historical revisionism" while being totally ignorant of the actual history yourselves is a bad look.

Ok? You said it yourself, it's not really an issue with the movie. It's a damn movie meant to entertain. Not a history lecture meant solely to educate.

Also as a side note, for as liberal as Hollywood has a reputation for being they really do come under the spotlight for this shit all the time.
---

Skye Reynolds posted...

Sorry, I'm a little quick to assume that America is involved whenever social progressives complain.

:v

I have no knowledge over European armies and whether or not they were likewise segregated. If they were more integrated than we were, then critics have every right to complain about a lack of diversity.

From my 10 min read it was black civilians and like five different armies that varying amounts of black people in them

It was some segregation but not to the Jim Crow levels
---

WaterLink posted...

Also as a side note, for as liberal as Hollywood has a reputation for being they really do come under the spotlight for this s*** all the time.

Yeah, look up 21. Classic Hollywood racism.

Can't even deflect with usual arguments because it was based on REAL people and they still changed it.
---

Mandasnake posted...

WaterLink posted...

Also as a side note, for as liberal as Hollywood has a reputation for being they really do come under the spotlight for this s*** all the time.

Yeah, look up 21. Classic Hollywood racism.

Can't even deflect with usual arguments because it was based on REAL people and they still changed it.

"But one of them was still Asian!"

Am I the only one that wants a WW2 movie in the perspective of a german nazi kid? I mean sure. Nazis weren't angels, but they have stories and families.
---

cerealbox760 posted...

Am I the only one that wants a WW2 movie in the perspective of a german nazi kid? I mean sure. Nazis weren't angels, but they have stories and families.

Check out Generation War. It's a miniseries but it does offer a different perspective.
---

cerealbox760 posted...

Am I the only one that wants a WW2 movie in the perspective of a german nazi kid? I mean sure. Nazis weren't angels, but they have stories and families.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lore_(film)
---

They did have a couple of black Frenchmen trying to get aboard a European ship at the beginning. None of them had spoken dialogue though.

I don't think it would've hurt to have included a character who was black, but I don't think it was altogether necessary in this type of movie either. I still think I'd rather devote a movie to black soldiers -- and hopefully a better one than Red Tails -- than focus on inserting one in a war movie with a white protagonist.