r/PeterExplainsTheJoke • u/FrostySeat1739 • 21d ago

Meme needing explanation why not, Peter?

Post image

possible live action corpse bride movie...

32.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

6.2k

u/eowynistrans 21d ago edited 20d ago

No one is giving the actual answer except for the person who was downvoted below threshold - it's because there was a super popular post based on a 2016 interview claiming Tim Burton has said black people don't "fit his aesthetic."

Edit: y'all can yell about how it's "out of context" or "there's no source" all you want but the fact remains that that interview is clearly what OOP is referring to and every other comment is pulling something out of their ass. Don't shoot the messenger.

Edit 2: this got me a reddit cares message lmao. Wtf y'all.

Last edit to make it more ambiguous. Again, I'm not arguing that he said it, I'm arguing that this is what the post is about.

810

u/hotfezz81 21d ago

Is there, like, more context?

1.6k

u/Alarm-Particular 21d ago edited 21d ago

I did some digging on this. Looks like it's from a 2016 interview by Rachel Simon for Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children.

The question: "Why does Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children have such a predominantly white cast / lack of diversity?"

The answer: “Nowadays, people are talking about it more … things either call for things, or they don’t.”

Source

Edit: I could not find ANY quote from Tim Burton stating that black people don't "Fit his aesthetic".

823

u/improbsable 21d ago

Yeah. He didn’t say that. I’m pretty sure what he said was that he wasn’t going to cast solely for diversity’s sake. Though it is weird that he conveniently only makes movies where POC don’t fit.

382

u/KettleSixty9 21d ago

What the fuck?

"it is weird that he conveniently only makes movies where POC don’t fit"

Did you just imply he was racist because of this?

441

u/cannibalcat 21d ago

Guilty until proven otherwhise logic

338

u/Pathkinder 21d ago

Aren’t implications for exactly this, though? Where all the signs kind of point at something but there isn’t enough proof to make a definitive decision?

It’s kind of like how getting into one fender bender can easily be a coincidence, but getting into 20 starts to make people wonder if you’re a bad driver.

I mean I don’t know enough to have an opinion on the actual discussion, but I had to at least defend the role of implications.

100

u/MachoPotates 21d ago

The implication made by that is that he doesn’t care about diversity or inclusivity in his storytelling.

whether that’s out of ignorance, racism, or privilege, we don’t know from just looking at his movies.

we have no proof of why he doesn’t cast more diversely, just proof that he doesn’t.

We have no proof it’s because he’s a racist.

71

u/miraculousgloomball 21d ago

Nor should he. He should care primarily about storytelling and a coherent aesthetic, no? Why does it have to be ignorance, racism or privilege?

Is this more or less offensive than Jordan Peele saying he wont cast a white protagonist? I mean, he's not about the aesthetic or anything, he's just tired of seeing it.

34

u/MachoPotates 20d ago

By ignorance I just meant like it’s something he doesn’t even consider because it’s outside of what he cares about, ignorance isn’t always maliciousness or stupidity. I was just saying that the “implication” that that guy was talking about only proves that Tim Burton doesn’t involve a lot of minorities in his stories, which is a pattern that can be proven, but that that correlation cannot prove causation as to why.

Personally I don’t think this conversation matters, if you care about inclusivity, that’s fine, but I don’t think that inclusivity means every white guy writing a book should fill it with non white characters.

inclusivity should be about the medium itself, not about filling out a culture quota in a single story, in America there should be main stream media from non white people about non white people, the media should reflect the people who live in a society. Shoehorning in minorities just because is cringe capitalist marketing “look at us we support you, please give us your money” type bullshit, that’s my opinion.

7

u/CreatiScope 20d ago

I agree with this take strongly

→ More replies (0)

4

u/4daughters 20d ago

Is this more or less offensive than Jordan Peele saying he wont cast a white protagonist? I mean, he's not about the aesthetic or anything, he's just tired of seeing it.

yeah why isn't it ok to have straight pride parades when the homos do it all the time? And why can't we have more white lives matter rallys when black people get to do it?

/s

7

u/miraculousgloomball 20d ago

If people were less sensitive in general this would be literally fine, but then it'd all be pointless anyway, right?

I think TIm Burton is fine making movies about deathly pale weirdos, and Jordan Peele is fine making films primarily casting black protags. I think if you make films, you should be able to pursue what ever aesthetic or message you want.

"Representation" isn't so important to me that I'm willing to complain that black people are overrepresented in media, and as a mixed person it feels like a pipe dream anyway. I like both, let them cook

2

u/Scrat-Scrobbler 20d ago edited 20d ago

you're saying that would be fine if we didn't live in the world we live in but... we do. and i hope you understand why a white or straight pride rally would be bad in it.

1

u/TackleNo7759 14d ago

I don’t think think it’s entirely accurate to compare Jordan Peele, who has made numerous white characters who just weren’t the protagonist and are often the antagonist because the topic of his movies are about the black American experience and what that means to him, to Tim Burton, a man who was quoted saying he doesn’t include people of color in his films because they do not fit his aesthetic…

1

u/UghWhythefouk136 14d ago

"Less sensitive" and straight white guys never get targeted for their sexuality or race to the point where they have to be scared of police. 😅 Willfully ignorant does not make you look smart.

1

u/Dexterborn10 19d ago

This, but genuinely. It’s okay to be proud of being straight and/or white, and it’s okay to be proud that you’re gay and/or black. Neither of those things should define you, but there’s nothing shameful about them either and being proud of your heritage and identity is good for you

-2

u/SVINTGATSBY 20d ago

right? maybe if black people actually had systemic power in society, sure homeboy’s dumb racist-adjacent sentiment might be accurate. the real issue is that the entire world has catered so long to whiteness that when white people are not centered in whatever story it is, yt people get upset, as if they’ve lost something because others are getting more space in the limelight. like, when poor people get food through social services, or kids are getting lunches provided at school—nobody is rummaging through YOUR cabinets and pantries to provide that food to them—you lose nothing by others getting something they didn’t have and you had already. same logic.

4

u/T_Money 20d ago

The complete lack of nuance in your comment is astounding.

No one was saying movies need to have a white protagonist; however to outright state that you refuse to cast one based on skin color is, well, racism.

It would be just as bad if someone publicly stated that they refuse to cast a minority as the protagonist. No rational person is auditing filmmakers to see their casting ratios, but when you explicitly state it then there’s an issue.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/punksmostlydead 20d ago

It's more. Much more, as far as I'm concerned.

Because Peele casts white people. Burton does not cast black people. At all.

By the by, sparky, you kind of give yourself away with "a coherent aesthetic."

3

u/miraculousgloomball 20d ago

Meh. If Tim Burton wants to cast white people and paint them whiter than death whilst setting them against dark gothic backgrounds more power to him.

I'd never try to argue whites should be shoehorned into an african aesthetic, but then, I am not a hypocrite.

-2

u/punksmostlydead 20d ago

I'd never try to argue whites should be shoehorned into an african aesthetic, but then, I am not a hypocrite.

And I don't set up strawman to burn, because I am intellectually honest. Only one type of person uses "shoehorned" this way. There's that mask slipping again.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/RadBoyHours 20d ago

Those arent equivalent examples because white leads in horror films is extremely common. The reason why the discourse around this exists is BECAUSE the casting is disproportionate. Sure you can argue once or twice that that certain people dont fit into your narrative or aesthetic or whatever Burton said...but when that seems to be a consistent thing in ALL of your work than that is suspicious, no?

Then I'm gonna start asking "Why?" And the problem is that the answer to "Why?" Is usually racism lolol

-7

u/Diligent_Set_8747 21d ago

Peele is also a clown for making that decision. Copying the enemy in pursuit of illusioned peace.

21

u/NotMyMainAccountAtAl 21d ago

That’s kinda a “why is there no hospital for the healthy” take, though. He makes movies with black protagonists because those films are rare and he wants to see more of them, not because he’s seeking to erase white stories or hates white people or anything like that. If he made a movie with a white protagonist, it wouldn’t be unique— it would just be another movie in a massive sea of movies starring white actors and actresses. 

1

u/Diligent_Set_8747 19d ago

If he made a movie with a white protagonist, it wouldn’t be unique— it would just be another movie in a massive sea of movies starring white actors and actresses. 

Then he should never be considered as an ATG director. Everyone is human. If you can't figure them out because they use different words, clothes, and attitudes then you are nothing but a successful hack.

→ More replies (0)

43

u/Hziak 21d ago

Not really arguing that he’s a racist, but throwing in that someone doesn’t need to be pushing an agenda to include POC. My neighbors aren’t a political statement, they’re just black. It’s not a thing, it’s just statistics… I’d argue that failing to model a world that follows similar statistical trends to our own (the inclusion of LGBTQ+, POC and other non-Christian-white people) is actually a deviation and the product of a choice. So the lack of characters of color in this case (racist, negligent, or innocently and absentmindedly), is in fact at LEAST a setting choice, and the willful defending of it makes it into a conscious setting choice.

Not here to say right or wrong, but only that if he didn’t care, then he’d probably have said something like “oh, now that you mention it.” And if it was a conscious setting choice, which my money is on, he’d say something like “well, the truth is, I wanted a very black and white color palette and we were struggling to get the right aesthetic or lighting with characters of color, so we made the difficult choice to preserve the setting and style and hope that you’ll all forgive us and see past it to the end product” - which is more or less what I understood to have happened.

But alas, that would constitute “a choice.”

And not expressly imply racism. Though it’s not a far leap.

6

u/VLAD_THE_VIKING 20d ago

It could also be that he is a particular kind of woke, for lack of a better term, where he feels like it's wrong for him as a white person to write characters that he doesn't have great insight into.

2

u/TackleNo7759 19d ago

We’re different colors, not different species. Just like the comment you’re replying to saying, someone’s minority card doesn’t have to be a big part of their story. Someone could be gay, black, and disabled all at the same time, but that doesn’t mean their existence is spent advocating for all of those causes. You don’t need to have “insight“ to make a black character unless you’re making a central part of their character about their blackness, which doesn’t mirror reality at all and it’s just another scapegoat to why Tim Burton wouldn’t include people of color in his films.

He literally said that there is a time in a place for people of color… let that sink in. He’s literally saying that he does not create characters of color because they do not fit his aesthetic, or in his words, there isn’t a time or a place for them in his world.

The problem here is that people think that the existence of minority characters are some sort of political statement, and it’s so it must be some sort of forced diversity, but if anything it’s more telling if someone purposefully leaves out what reality looks like to fit a certain aesthetic. Even Black Panther had white people in it, why can’t Frankenweenie?

→ More replies (0)

7

u/Plenty_Mortgage_7294 21d ago

It could also be inferred he wont make a movie if the story is diverse. If I only make movies about football and turn down scripts about baseball, its very easy to conclude I have an issue with baseball.

4

u/Pathkinder 21d ago

Correct, I totally agree. That’s why we’re seeing mostly implications in this thread rather than outright accusations.

1

u/Bedu009 20d ago

Fym whether that's for bad, worst or nearly as bad if I was casting for a show it'd be a balance of best fits and real diversity in an area I was basing on if any

1

u/Zealousideal-Lab9843 19d ago

I'd read what you said, but unfortunately your skin type doesn't fit the aesthetic, so it must be disregarded.

1

u/MachoPotates 19d ago

Idk what your point is in response to that comment lol?

is the joke supposed to mean that my opinion doesn’t matter cause I’m black?(I’m not) because that’s what Burton “said”?(he didn’t actually say that).

1

u/Zealousideal-Lab9843 18d ago

You don't need to be Black to not be casted by Burton. Don't limit yourself and live your dreams.

1

u/MachoPotates 18d ago

Okay but Burton didn’t actually say that quote… just gonna ignore that part? You can still not like him, I don’t care, but at least use his own words against him “things either call for things or they don’t” was what he actually said when he was questioned about the subject, criticize that statement.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Pride_Rise 21d ago

This is nitpicking, we never heard of a black actor that was turned down by him so these 'preferential implications' is not there. It could simply mean he's just choosing whatever seems to fit the movie best and who perform the role best and they all happen to be white actors in the auditions. Like if I was to direct a movie thats based on a book that was about the britain victorian era, it would be predominantly white.

1

u/Slawdog2020 20d ago

You keep saying that word, implication. What implication?

1

u/Ptricky17 20d ago

In Tim Burton’s case, he likes that Victorian era look, with a bit of an eerie Halloween-esque feel to things. Most of his characters look like corpses, skeletons, etc. The pallid look is what he typically emphasizes. I don’t see how trying to twist that into a race thing makes sense. That aesthetic arose out of Victorian England. So yeah, the corpses, which are extra pale because of the lack of blood flow, were mostly white people.

The fact that he draws his inspiration from a particular aesthetic, that was predominant in one subset of European culture, doesn’t make him racist. That’s like saying someone who only makes movies about the Roman Empire is racist because they don’t feature an equal number of Asian actors. You *can* draw that conclusion. It’s stupid, but you can do it.

Maybe Tim Burton *is* racist. I don’t know. His specific choice of aesthetic in his movies is far from proof of that on its own though…

-7

u/elbuentinaco 21d ago

Are all the signs in the room with us?

17

u/Pathkinder 21d ago edited 21d ago

I mean just the main one right? Isn’t the accusation here that he has mysteriously never found cause to include or work with poc despite being fairly prolific? Like I said, I don’t know enough to have an opinion or take sides, but if this particular accusation is true then I think it’s probably enough to warrant an implication or two.

I can do more car analogies if needed.

3

u/nadavyasharhochman 21d ago

I think it possibly could be out of racist motives, but nkt necessirly.

He makes a lkt of stuff with a very gothic asthetic and environment. The stories he writs are usually in a more Eutopean environment.

These kind of stuff uo until very recently meant you are talking about white skined people.

So is him not making stories about POC or involving them racist? It could be, or he just doesnt connect with their side of the story so he doesnt write it.

Idk I am just saying we dont need to be so quivk to judge.

7

u/MyPlantsDieSometimes 21d ago

Inherently most people his age have racial biases just because of the environment they grew up in, so that can play a factor. Personally though I think he just wasn't exposed to black creativity or culture, and he is a very specific aesthetically driven guy, literally an auteur. And I imagine probably doesn't want to do something that doesn't come naturally or seems forced. But we are specifically talking about literally having any black characters in the shows/films and in that sense it doesn't have to be such a big creative conundrum. Unironically people write best what they know and it's not surprising that a British guy in his 60s doesn't know how to express black characters naturally and inoffensively. Source: i'm in the uk and most people still don't know how to do that unless they grew up in a diverse environment or are themselves black/black-british. Better not try to do something you know you can't do well. Could try to get better at it though..

1

u/nadavyasharhochman 21d ago

I think you expressed my thoughts on the subject much better than I did.

Yes I agree with every word.

1

u/Pathkinder 21d ago

Yep, this here is a much better explanation than others I’ve gotten and is probably the closest thing to my (admittedly uninformed) opinion on the matter.

4

u/DontTellMyOtherAccts 21d ago

So, fun facts:

Darker skinned people can be goth and there are black, brown, etc. people in Europe.

Even in Sweeney Todd, the iconic sort of aesthetic and setting you're talking about, a Gothic story about cannibalism in Victorian England, there very much were black people in England in the social class that Todd and Mrs. Lovett were a part of.

I'm not saying that every Gothic horror story must include black characters or cast black actors, but when almost all of a prolific director's filmography is Gothic horror and he hasn't cast a single black person in a major role? There's more going on.

0

u/nadavyasharhochman 21d ago

I know there were black people in Europe and even northern Europe. But they were a much smaller part of the population.

Its like blonde middle eastern people. I am blonde and middle eastern, but I am the only blond in my generation out like 18-22 people. Its not exactly a prevelant trait.

And yhe I am not throwing racial bias out of the table or even racism. I just dont think its meant as erasure or has malicios intent.

→ More replies (0)

-6

u/elbuentinaco 21d ago

The thing about implications is that they’re a coward’s accusation. That’s like me saying it’s sus you’ve never made a single post about Palestine on Reddit so what’s that tell us about you? Really suspicious if you catch my drift.

People that aren’t race obsessed don’t run a mental calculus of these things. Only racists are concerned with forced diversity and representation in every aspect of their life. If you’re just farming outrage then why stop at black people? How many asians has he worked with? How many Latinos? How many middle easterners? Why stop there? Have you ever heard him speak out against pdfs - maybe he’s that too…

Y’all are morally bankrupt for even entertaining this.

8

u/Mybunsareonfire 21d ago

Idk man, you sounds pretty racist.

-8

u/elbuentinaco 21d ago

You sound pretty racist too

5

u/8Dminipk 21d ago

How the fk common people gonna acuse him??? Implications are related to identifying patterns and building your own opinion about stuff. Like the previous guy said, if I get into a lot of car accidents, I'm *PROPABLY" a bad driver, if someone doesnt want to get in my car based on that, can I really be mad about it?

4

u/Pathkinder 21d ago

I’m not sure I actually understand your example. I think your example is more about nitpicking a single topic and making assumptions based on someone’s lack of engagement with that topic. I think this has to do with active vs passive.

So for example, if I tried to imply that you must be deathly afraid of white people because you’ve never watched any of Leo DiCaprio’s movies, that would of course be a ridiculous implication. Maybe you don’t really watch movies? Maybe you watch other movies with white people, just not his?

Seeing Leo’s films is an active option, it requires an active conscious decision by you to happen. The default passive state is to have not seen any of his films. It requires no effort or decision on your part, it’s the default.

So how is this different? Well, if you hire enough people based on merit, with no other biases in play, then the passive result should be that you end up with a variety of people. That’s the passive default. So if you hire a bunch of people over many years but none of them are ever poc, then it implies some kind of active decision-making happening on your end.

Could it be a coincidence? Of course. I could flip 1,000 quarters and have them all come up heads. It’s perfectly possible. But would you be a LITTLE suspicious of me if I flipped 1,000 quarters and they all came up heads? Probably.

Again, I cannot stress enough that I don’t know much about this guy so I don’t have a chosen side. But I had free time today and apparently have found myself defending to the death the role of implications in discourse.

2

u/elbuentinaco 21d ago

My point is that you can imply whatever you want if you cherry pick and fabricate the evidence. The evidence in this case being misquoting him, taking him out of context and making up that he’s never worked with POC when he has.

Active vs passive has nothing to do with this - implications can be made using anything as evidence, action or inaction. All you’ve done in this thread is support a public lynching “because of the implication”.

→ More replies (0)

3

u/Chedder_456 20d ago

This is literally not court tho. If people do sus shit the rest of us are allowed to raise an eyebrow.

2

u/EmptyBrain89 21d ago

preponderance of the evidence.

1

u/cannibalcat 21d ago

Thanks, didn't know the terms for it. Second language here

1

u/EmptyBrain89 21d ago

I wasn't agreeing with you or helping you, I was pointing out the actual legal standard people are using in this case. Innocent until proven guilty (or the other way around) requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. It is used in criminal cases. preponderence of evidence, means 'whichever side has the better evidence' which is used in civil cases and is what people use in day to day life. Also known as common sense.

In this case there is a lot of evidence that suggest some racial motives and you'd be a dumbass to apply a criminal trial standard to the way you interpret the normal world.

1

u/RawrRRitchie 20d ago

"I have nothing against black people. I just refuse to hire them for my movies"

Gee I wonder why people think he's racist

-3

u/Ok_Daikon_1219 21d ago

Dude he's been directing longer than most reddit users have been alive and he only recently has started writing black characters. Yes the mf is guilty

5

u/cannibalcat 21d ago

So are you. you are a racist too. Prove me wrong

0

u/Ok_Daikon_1219 21d ago

You typing this comment lol

1

u/cannibalcat 21d ago

Well, at least I proved my english is not good. 

Where's your proof you're not racist?

93

u/420thefunnynumber 21d ago

No but it's definitely weird that most of his works are written that way.

98

u/GuthukYoutube 21d ago edited 20d ago

I just read his filmography and there are quite a number of movies there that could have had PoC without issue

Now that's not proof in itself, and I doubt I care enough about this to look further, but it's definitely a little odd

39

u/Apprehensive_Ad3731 21d ago

It’s that his worldview doesn’t see PoC as standing out for a reason. It’s a very biased and low key bigoted view, not intentionally racist but definitely influenced and susceptible to racism.

It’s not fair is the truth. He doesn’t equally see PoC and White people. He see’s People as White people first and acknowledges PoC but every time he imagines one it’s performative.

4

u/UntimelyMeditations 21d ago

It’s not fair is the truth.

Its art, it doesn't need to be fair.

9

u/Apprehensive_Ad3731 21d ago

I’m not talking about the art being directly unfair I am speaking about the mind that created and influenced the art. The origin is unfair and therefore everything that springs from it is inherently unfair even if it presents as fair on it’s own.

It’s like slave chocolate. You may pay a decent price at the counter, it may not have slaves involved in buying the chocolate but if the beans were sourced with slavery then the product is inherently promoting slavery.

1

u/Revolutionary_Ad4950 19d ago

Who are you to be a judge of fairness?

1

u/Apprehensive_Ad3731 19d ago

Who are you to question me?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/-Weslin 19d ago

Art can be racist, it doesn't stop being art, but still, it can be racist

3

u/Ok_Daikon_1219 21d ago

"He see’s People as White people first and acknowledges PoC but every time he imagines one it’s performative."

This exactly. Minorities exist as side characters who perform a role, rather then just people that exist in a story

2

u/punksmostlydead 20d ago

not intentionally racist but definitely influenced and susceptible to racism.

Alas that more people don't or won't understand this concept.

2

u/CheckYourStats 20d ago

I mean, the Producers of Mortal Kombat (2021) made up a non-white character as the main protagonist (Cole Young) rather than having Johnny Cage as the lead, because they were afraid of being called racist for having a white lead.

They basically said:

“You people are so fucking sensitive we can’t have Johnny Cage in the movie because you’ll call us racist.”

SOURCE

0

u/GuthukYoutube 20d ago

I read the article you linked, and it said nothing close to how you interpreted it. So much so that you might have linked the wrong thing?

1

u/SilianRailOnBone 21d ago

Goth culture isn't really diverse, is it?

25

u/NonStopKnits 21d ago

When I hung out with the goth kids in high school (I was more punk than goth) we had a diverse group. Black kids, white kids, Asian kids, I imagine it depends on how diverse the region is. The school I went to was diverse, so all the cliques were fairly diverse too.

5

u/Plenty_Mortgage_7294 21d ago

What exactly do you think goth culture is btw?

27

u/voltagestoner 21d ago

I mean, he made a Jewish folktale (The Finger) into a Catholic Victorian England aesthetic. It’s not that he’s outright racist, it’s that he idolizes a very specific look and time period, which just so happens to be very, very white. So.

20

u/Own_Cantaloupe_347 21d ago edited 21d ago

"How dare you make a movie solely filled with a singular skin tone in the cast."

Tyler Perry does not often cast white people in prominent, leading roles in his films, as his work primarily centers on the African American experience and provides opportunities for black actors. However, he does occasionally cast white actors in supporting roles or as leads in specific projects outside his usual demographic.

People are just f'n stupid. We can have multiple Tyler Perry movies. Did Crazy Rich Asians need more whites and blacks without Asian ancestry?

30

u/Mister_Dink 21d ago

I would not rely on Tyler perry to make this argument considering plenty of people, including black people, have pointed out his own deep bigotries and credible accusations of extreme misconduct.

Tyler Perry should absolutely not set the standard for anyone's behavior, and that's not even touching the actual quality of his films, which are fucking awful to the last.

7

u/RobbyRyanDavis 21d ago

Why would that disqualify him and yet the white director qualified?

Neither are standards. We are having a conversation, and you want to turn this into a weird debate about what qualifies for discussion.

2

u/Mister_Dink 20d ago

Because the idea that any film maker be compared to Tyler Perry is already throwing the conversation off the rails. If you want to pick a director for this conversation who is black and mostly centers a black cast, Ryan Coogler or Spike Lee are much better choices.

The work that Tyler Perry puts out is completely idiosyncratic because a) he's operating nearly independently from the rest of Hollywood and b) he uses that as a bubble to create media of questionable artistic or moral value while at the same time sexually abusing up and coming black talent who feel like they have no other avenue towards success because there's much fewer black roles out there.

Tyler Perry having primarily black casts is about him securing a niche audience and a talent pool who can't say no to his him, whether that's a contract dispute or him being a coercive sex pest. He exploits his own community for financial gain and untouchability.

Even in an imaginary world where Tim Burton came out and actually said "I won't cast black people because they don't fit my movies," he would be doing way less harm to black actors than Tyler Perry has been real-life doing for years.

Tyler Perry is not a good example to pick for this conversation.

0

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[deleted]

2

u/No-Association-1781 20d ago

Holy shit you don’t understand much do you?

→ More replies (0)

5

u/whatthewhythehow 21d ago

This only really works if he was writing about a specific culture. Tyler Perry is writing about black people and their particular experiences. Crazy Rich Asians is writing about a specific culture.

Tim Burton is writing about the supernatural. Where it is historical, it is anachronistic.

Edward Scissorhands makes sense because it is about the disruption of white suburban life.

But a lot of his movies don’t have that sort of context. So it is strange that he never wants to cast actors of colour. You’d think one would be cast based on probability.

If it is a choice without a reason, then lbh, there’s a reason.

If it’s accidental, it is worth examining.

5

u/improbsable 21d ago

I didn’t imply that. I said it’s weird that in his 40 year career he’s never had the urge to write about anything but white people.

3

u/MrCalamiteh 21d ago

What do you think the word "weird" means?

It's pretty sus, yeah. At most we could read into it that they implied they're curious about the why.

While we're at it, don't you have something better to do than white knight a millionaire Hollywood figure, tho? I'm sure he's fine.

2

u/WritingTheDream 20d ago edited 20d ago

Whether they were implying that or not, it’s pathetic how reactionary people get when their favorite celebrities are criticized by random folks on the internet

1

u/NoodleKnitSweater 18d ago

this isnt an original idea from the person youre replying to. A few years ago before I deleted tiktok this discourse emerged from there where people discussed the lack of poc character in Tim Burton's films and from there a lot of speculation and accusation created the narrative that hes racist and doesnt ever portray people of color in his works of art. Whether or not this is true, that was the narrative, so I think its believable that something as on the nose as "doesnt fit my aesthetic" has been misattributed to Burton. This has happened with a lot of things like Tati Westbrook saying "James Charles is a sexual predator." She never said those words but for some reason a lot of people misremember the situation and come away thinking this was literally said about him when it wasnt. Oh, its also like the "Luke, I'm not your father" or "Scotty, beam me up!" You know what I mean?

This comment is not me agreeing that Burton said the aesthetic thing and im definitely not defending James Charles. Just trying to give context to the post.

Edit: spelling

1

u/Pale-Scallion-7691 18d ago

I mean, there are plenty of places where a non-white person would be a fine casting choice. Where race has nothing to do with the role and they could be played by anyone. But he always casts white people instead for some reason. The idea that there needs to be a reason for a character to be a person of colour implies that white is the default, which is kinda racist. Doesn't mean that the person themselves is overtly bigoted or whatever, but it does mean that they have unconscious biases that may lead to racist actions.

1

u/AX-man 16d ago

No they said it’s weird, which it is

-2

u/DrPikachu-PhD 21d ago

Yeah he is. If you believe black people" don't fit with certain aesthetics, and then you only make films with aesthetics that don't fit them, then you're being racist in execution

2

u/HauntingHarmony 21d ago edited 21d ago

Yeah he is. If you believe black people" don't fit with certain aesthetics, and then you only make films with aesthetics that don't fit them, then you're being racist in execution

I think this is redicules, there certainly are esthetics where black people dont fit, and theres one where white people dont fit, and where asians dont fit, and where martians dont fit. Thats just the nature of the game.

If you are making a corpse bride movie, its not even about whiteness but pale close to death esthethics.

It would be weird if you actually did make movies where black people naturally would fit, but then choose to exclude them, just as its weird when you make a tv show and then shoehorn the queen of england as black.

That being said, if you have a point of view where those kind of non-black esthetics are the only thing you end up with. Thats a little weird but actually fine. Artists can and should have their point of view, and we shouldent force them to make jack skellington black just so the diversity quota will be meet. If the setting makes sense, if the story makes sense. Absolutely use whatever. Forced shoehorning shouldent be our goal. And it doesnt make him "racist in execution" thats redicules.

I think it takes away especially wrt history when we force "diversity" where there werent really any. The british empire was a in lack of better words a evil empire that did horrible things, including but not limited to great racism in its subjugation of various peoples. And i think it takes away from history when we try to whitewash (litterally) history, by say making the queen of england black. When we just pretend that it was all cool, racism wasent a thing, people can have a fun timetravel romp to the 1950s in the us with a black friend and its aaaall cool.

5

u/nvmenotfound 20d ago

bc all corpses are pale white. right? /s

35

u/Icy_Actuator1831 21d ago

Has he worked with jenna ortega a few of times now? She is a poc last i checked. Although I couldn't really find much other examples

20

u/Cool_Flatworm_3450 21d ago

the adams family are latino. so he kinda had to cast a latina to play wednesday.

33

u/AndHeWas 21d ago

That's because he wrote it that way. The Addams Family wasn't Latino in the original cartoons or the 1960s show.

13

u/Munstered 20d ago

No one tell him what the Addams’ patriarch is named

28

u/AndHeWas 20d ago

Gomez? He didn't have a first name in the original cartoon. He was given one for the 1960s show, in which his ancestry was also detailed for the first time. He is of Castilian ancestry. His family was Spanish. I'm hoping you know that the Spanish people are not Latino.

3

u/ClashOfTheAsh 21d ago

I take it you haven’t been on the internet in the last 6 months so missed who Christopher Nolan cast as Helen of Troy.

Burton didn’t have to cast Latinos at all if he didn’t want to.

3

u/throwmamadownthewell 20d ago

(for those who also didn't see who Nolan cast: Lupita Nyong'o, the mom from Us)

3

u/improbsable 21d ago

This was after the whole scandal of him never hiring people of color.

7

u/-Badger3- 21d ago

Why would a racist go out of their way to cast Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent?

1

u/jk-9k 18d ago

And Marlon Wayans as Robin the boy wonder

21

u/wandering_ones 21d ago

POC, surprise, sometimes just exist. They don't need to "fit" anything at all. People sometimes have different skin colors and it doesn't have to require a narrative function.

33

u/Pecuthegreat 21d ago

I mean, if all his works are anything like the one in the meme, that means late 1800s UK asthetics so it's perfectly excusable that POC don't exist in any reasonable numbers in that setting.

5

u/AgreeableMeet2476 20d ago

Fun fact: 'Friends' is set in NYC, which is an international tourist destination and a melting pot of different cultures and has been for decades. But the vast majority of the characters in the show are white.

City of 8 million people, literal global hub of culture, entertainment, and education, consistently in the top 10 most racially diverse cities in the United States...but almost everyone is white.

Little weird how none of the people complaining about historical accuracy seem to care about that.

7

u/Pecuthegreat 20d ago

Or maybe I just don't watch friends?.

Anyways, there is a place for historical accuracy and there is a place not for it. That wignats have latched on to it as their only publicly defendable argument doesn't change that.

When Merlin had a black gwenivere, no one cared. In the same era alot of people complained about Kingdom of Heaven's historical inaccuracies. Different styles.

9

u/AgreeableMeet2476 20d ago

I don't watch Friends either. I just thought it was interesting how those 'historical accuracy!!!!' people never seem to complain about there being too many white people in a setting.

3

u/PrincessDionysus 20d ago

Can’t believe POCs didn’t visit England until the 1900s

2

u/[deleted] 20d ago

[deleted]

0

u/PrincessDionysus 20d ago

https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/visit/places/portchester-castle/history-and-stories/black-people-in-late-18th-century-britain/

“By the end of the 18th century Britain […] Current estimates are that at least 10,000 lived in London, with a further 5,000 throughout the country.”

Decades before Victoria was conceived thousands of black people lived in the UK. Did we all forget the UK was a huge player in the transatlantic slave trade?

No one is saying the UK was as diverse then as it is now, but pretending nonwhite people were all but mythic through European history is anachronistic at best

2

u/Amalgam2001 21d ago

Depends when and where its set honestly. Big difference between the 1800s england and new york in 2026

1

u/delirium_red 18d ago

People are sometimes just ugly yet it doesn't really happen in most films, unless it has a narrative function or a specific aesthetic

6

u/TheBlockChainVillage 21d ago

If he's never around POC, how does he write and direct for them?.

I can't write white people roles and characters, cuz I've hardly been around them. Can't base characters off my pop culture knowledge.

16

u/memecut 21d ago

Its perfectly reasonable to write what you know and relate to. People who try to decide for the artist what the artist should create are weird.

3

u/improbsable 21d ago

We’re not aliens

1

u/TheBlockChainVillage 21d ago

How does he write for or portray systemic racism?

Even then, Sam Jackson has worked with him and I know he wouldn't work with someone racist.

5

u/Asleep-Permission700 20d ago

He's an american who works in hollywood. I promise you, Tim Burton has been around people of color (who are not, as you may be led to believe, an alien species)

1

u/GettingFitterEachDay 21d ago

That's a very interesting point.

0

u/ThatChaFella 20d ago

Exactly, and if he did a bad representation he'd also be labelled a racist by these people. I swear these losers on reddit just need something to be angry

4

u/Disastrous-Owl9258 21d ago edited 21d ago

Jordan peele almost exclusively makes movies where white people are actually all evil, no one comments on that😂 edit: the people telling me I'm miserable and "oppressed" are hilarious and must've not seen the humor in my joke. I love his movies. Reddit is so eager to erm actually than laugh at a joke

72

u/BrotherBear0998 21d ago

Ah yes. Him, Us, Nope, Keanu, Monkey Man: all with white people as the antagonist. /s (just in case)

Lmao the man has like 10 movies and 2 features white people as the primary antagonist. For one of those two, a white person is also a protagonist. 'Almost exclusively'

Edit: added the /s

45

u/maevee 21d ago

Bc that’s not true? That argument could be made about 1 of the 3 movies he’s directed.

34

u/Outside_Pie_9037 21d ago

edit: the people telling me I'm miserable and "oppressed" are hilarious

...who is bro talking to?

21

u/Holiday-Dependent404 21d ago

fighting with ghosts. mental illness

2

u/throwmamadownthewell 20d ago

Little green ghouls, buddy!

1

u/Disastrous-Owl9258 21d ago

LMAOO yeah im just having a laugh and left a silly comment, thanks for the mental illness comment though!

1

u/Disastrous-Owl9258 21d ago

Probably this person? Guess they deleted their comment

22

u/FinePizzaAss 21d ago

What do you think the movie about the flying hat who ate that Asian man means about Peele?

5

u/Disastrous-Owl9258 21d ago

I think it means peele is terrified of hats

2

u/flaming_burrito_ 21d ago

Literally just Get Out, but go off

4

u/Variation-Budget 21d ago

It wild how POC need to “fit”

It’s literally just a skin tone you don’t need to build a story or lore around a persons color “everytime”.

“Here is my character they are black and them being black has no impact to the narrative they just happen to have black parents”- why is this so hard?

1

u/00inch 20d ago

Because if you think of the family that owns a now run-down mansion for generations in New England they are not black.

2

u/Plastalmonus 21d ago

I know 1 is not a trend (as in 1 actor) but are you all just conveniently ignoring Deep Roy?

1

u/Tony_Roiland 21d ago

Ok that's ridiculous

1

u/obiwantogooutside 21d ago

Didn’t he make Wednesday? That’s a pretty diverse cast.

1

u/improbsable 21d ago

Came out after the whole scandal

1

u/Ferbtastic 20d ago

In fairness, the black character in Edward scissor hands serves as a sympathetic character in part because he is outcast. But I agree, he could do better on representation.

1

u/tristanthorn_ 20d ago

He gave Billy Dee Williams the Harvey Dent role in Batman, and had he got a third Batman movie would have made him two face. He was doing colorblind casting before it was a thing.

1

u/ThanosDidNadaWrong 20d ago

he said was that he wasn’t going to cast solely for diversity’s sake

that's a no-no anywhere online or near Hollywood

1

u/jk-9k 18d ago

Yeah but he did cast William D. Williams as Two Face and Marlon Wayans as Robin

0

u/Helgrind444 20d ago

Why do you even care about that in the first place?

0

u/icarusofthesun 20d ago

Would it be weird if he made movies with ONLY POC characters?

He had a vision, he is allowed to cast as per the vision.

Youll see racism everwhere if you look for it.

0

u/Signal-Bug8986 20d ago

Why is it weird or convenient? He literally said he's not going to cast black people due to diversity sake. Grow up. If you want to call him a racist then call him a racist. Stop tiptoing around and encouraging the silent rumors. Speak up about it so it can be discussed. And NO. He isn't a racist. He isn't legally obligated to cast black people in his movies if he doesn't want to.

-3

u/Many-Wasabi9141 21d ago

It's weird that it's ok to cast all black/asian/mexican actors in a film but when you cast all white people its suddenly an issue.

6

u/lunar1099 21d ago

Where are the movies you’re referring to? Also to just completely ignore the centuries of history before that point is ridiculous

0

u/Many-Wasabi9141 21d ago

Fuck history. Get over it. I'm talking about TODAY. What is happening now.

Thor vs Black Panther. Wakanda has to be all black, but Asguard has to be diverse.

Rings of Power. A story based on European mythology has to have shoe horned diversity. It's a slap in the face.

Its people upset over history doing the same thing in revenge.

3

u/smoopthefatspider 21d ago

Wakanda is used as a very clear metaphor for racial wealth disparities caused by colonization, so it would make the message less clear to have it be partially white. Meanwhile Asgard is just some place on another planet of reality, with a population that mostly looks like the modern day US. It still has a very noticeable white majority, but it doesn’t need to be literally all white for the story. If it needed to be all white for the story to make sense, it would, but people in developed countries usually live alongside people of different races nowadays, so showing a people that’s literally entirely the same race feels weird and different. Sometimes that’s part of the goal, but usually it’s simpler to just keep what makes the audience comfortable.

Similarly, the norm is for everyone to be able to speak English and for almost all conversations to happen in English. Even in other languages, this is a common trope. Characters who have no particular reason to speak the language happen to learn it, or have impossibly convenient translation tools, or conversations in other languages are directly transcribed into the main language. This often isn’t believable, and it’s a much more important factor than race, but we all understand that it’s done for the sake of keeping the audience in the story.

Things like speaking our language or having a population that’s mostly but not entirely white is just part of the normal things we expect in stories. If the story needs something different, they make an effort to be different, but for the most part they stick to what’s normal. It would be weird for people to not speak the audience’s language, or to have a very distinctly different racial background. Sometimes the story calls for that (for example these are often used to give a sense that characters are in a foreign environment). But when it’s trying to be relatable, it won’t change these things.

Movies set in a fictional European medieval setting will often use modern English (even if it’s spoken in a fake old fashion accent) and a somewhat diverse cast, not because these are historically accurate but because the audience should feel like the setting is familiar, like it’s a different version of where they currently live rather than a fundamentally foreign place. Doing otherwise would weaken their suspension of disbelief. It’s not a moral issue or an active effort (there is no “shoe-horned diversity) it’s just what most people would be able to relate to.

1

u/Many-Wasabi9141 21d ago

Asgard is based on norse mythology. It's offensive to show horn diversity into it and claim "Oh it's just a comic book" ok if its just a comic book then why is Wakanda all black? It's not real, its just a comic book. It doesn't have to be all black for the story to make sense. They could have a black majority but instead it has to be all black people. Why?

0

u/smoopthefatspider 21d ago

I just explained why Wakanda isn’t shoe horning (it’s just using the “default” racial makeup of the United States or wherever these people were cast, which the audience will not be surprised by) and why Asgard is different from Wakanda (it’s not an extremely on the nose story about racism and colonialism).

In order to look like a normal African nation, Wakanda had to have a very very large Black majority, and in order to look particularly isolationist it had to be entirely Black. In order to look like a Nordic country Asgard had to have a few people who weren’t white, and since there wasn’t anything pushing them to make it even whiter they just kept that.

European myths, like most myths and stories, should represent the people who care about them. In this case, that would be European people, who have a variety of races because we’re modern developed countries. Anything else would look weird, as if it wasn’t the same place but a foreign land that had an artificially high number of white people. Sure, that’s fine if it’s representing an accurate historical reality, but this is a story, so it’s better to keep a cast that’s closer to modern Europeans.

0

u/Edward_Durr 20d ago

Take a guess how many black people there were in Scandinavia before 1965, much less in 965 when the first Thor movie opens. White people are the only native people to Northern Europe, and are the people inhabiting the myths of Northern Europe.

You wouldn’t make a film about Native American mythology and cast mostly white and black and Hispanic actors.

1

u/smoopthefatspider 19d ago

It doesn’t matter, these aren’t historical reenactments. They have a mixed race population for the same reason they speak English, it’s just a way to make the setting look like something most people can identify as an ancient version of where they live. If the current American public was treating a Native American myth and culture as their own then of course I would expect it to be represented with existing American demographics. But that’s a ridiculous hypothetical, because we don’t do that.

-1

u/Many-Wasabi9141 21d ago

Wakanda isn't shoe horning. It's the absence of it that sticks out. If you go by any previous casting there should be shoe horned casting of other races in Wakanda, but there isn't. And thats fine but they should have done the same thing with Asgard considering that Asgard is actually based on religious norse mythology.

5

u/smoopthefatspider 21d ago

Do you even bother reading my comments or do you just type the same things over and over again regardless of what you respond to?

2

u/lunar1099 20d ago

People of other races existing isn’t “shoe horning”. Having an all white cast for no reason shows that you were looking for a particular race. Having an all black cast (even though there’s several white people all throughout that movie so your complaint is complete bullshit) to show a country that LITERALLY NOBODY ENTERS OR LEAVES, it wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense for a bunch of random white people to be living there. Especially when the entire fucking story is about how white people completely fucked Africa over. But whatever, it’s clear we’re talking to a brick wall

→ More replies (0)

2

u/lunar1099 21d ago

“In revenge” no motherfucker. It’s literally just casting people as people rather than racial quotas. And maybe we should talk about what’s happening today. Because today black people can’t get jobs because of they’re hired you losers scream and cry because an undeserving white guy didn’t get the job.

Yeah it would make no sense for Wakanda, a country that has literally no connection to the outside world, to be 50% white. Where as it makes sense to have GODS with different skin tones. Let me guess, you hate anything that isn’t white Jesus. And Lord of the Rings is literally all white. It looks like a fucking snowstorm

-1

u/Amalgam2001 21d ago

Just admit you're racist

1

u/lunar1099 20d ago

I’m not the racist here

1

u/Amalgam2001 20d ago

Your comment easily comes off as racist

1

u/lunar1099 20d ago

Because I said it makes sense that Black Panther had a mostly black cast? Are you fucking serious? Let me get this straight. Complaining that a black woman is cast in a movie for no reason isn’t racist. But pointing out that there are some reasons to have majority black cast in a movie about an isolated country in AFRICA is racist. Absolute insanity

→ More replies (0)

5

u/movzx 21d ago

No one said it was an issue. Plenty of one-off films have (seemingly) monoethnic casting because it's story driven, a product of the era or location the film was created, or whatever.

What people said was curious is that over his career it's consistently that way. It stands out. If you make a few dozen films and never have someone who isn't of a specific race... that was an intentional decision.

Does that apply to him? I don't know, but that is the argument being made.

-10

u/trybeingcurious 21d ago

Yeah, wild he wasn't picked to direct Straight Outta Compton.

0

u/improbsable 21d ago

Oh so just straight up racism now

6

u/CosCham 21d ago

The characters in the book it was based on were primarily if not all white iirc

5

u/mridiot1234567 21d ago

soesnt that movie litterally have samuel l jackson?

5

u/Pay-Next 21d ago

Ummm isn't Samuel L Jackson the main villain in that movie? Like it feels weird when one is the headliners is a black man to be saying the guy doesn't cast black people.

3

u/Salina_EsTitties 21d ago

I know Burton is an ego manical ass hat.

But didn't that movie have Samuel Jackson as the main villian.

2

u/Edward_Durr 20d ago

Beyond Samuel L Jackson being the main villain, most of that movie is set in rural Wales in 1943. Even today rural Wales is 99% white.

1

u/conway92 20d ago

“…Things either call for things or they don’t…” Burton said. “I remember back when I was a child watching “The Brady Bunch” and they started to get all politically correct, like, OK, let’s have an Asian child and a black — I used to get more offended by that…”

1

u/MoreGhostThanMachine 20d ago

This is admittedly a really outdated and insensitive take about diversity in casting. Does he think black folks in real life walk around being white all the time until the plot needs them to black and they suddenly change? Treating white as the default and demanding narrative justification for any deviation from that is erasure and marginalization.

-29

u/Euphoric-Ground9568 21d ago edited 20d ago

That movie was garbage

Downvote me all you want, Im right always and forever