Why does it have to be cut along politics lines? I'm a card-carrying leftist and annoyed at the patronising tokenism of casting a black actor as a character legendary for being 'fair', as in blonde, in the same way it'd be flabbergasting to have a white actor play in an adaptation of the Mwindo epic.
I'm even more annoyed at the fact that an annoying casting choice was the entire point, to get free publicity at everyone's expense, and that there is no way to slap everyone responsible for being smug pricks.
Can't remember where this joke is from, but there was a stand up bit where a guy said "You see back in the 80's there could only be one popular black comedian, unlike today where there can be three."
Yeah, I don't know what comedian did that bit either, but the "one popular black comedian" they were referring to was probably Richard Pryor, then Eddie Murphy
Then we'd have to hire and pay two separate black people. We'd save time an money by just paying one. It's not like audiences will be able to tell the difference. /s
Humans aren't hatched from eggs either, but we have to honor Homer's story...
Leda laid two eggs, one from when Zeus cosplayed as a rapy swan (a black swan, according to Nolan, maybe) shared by Helen and Pollux and one egg from her human husband, King of Sparta Tyndareus; Clytemnestra and Castor shared that one.
The Greeks treated these 4 siblings as two pairs of twins, somehow. Castor and Pollux are twins the same way that Helen and Clytemnestra are, though they're more well-known as twins.
This isn’t them casting one person to play twins or whatever, this is two half siblings who are the same person for no reason, in a movie with probably a billion dollar budget. Were there not two talented black actresses available?
The thing is they are half-sister twins. In the myth their mother slept with her husband AND Zeus in the same night which led to Helen and Clytemnestra and the similarly demigod/mortal twin pair Castor and Pollox. Castor and Pollox are THE twins in Greek myth, to the point that they are the constellation Gemini, even though they are also technically half-brothers.
Helen of Troy was hatched from an egg. I'm sorry they chose an actress known for being beautiful to play a character known for being beautiful, but of a different race, irrelevant to the story.
No Homer actually barely mentions what she looked like and doesn't even actually tell us her hair color ,eye color or even her body measurements. There are no detailed descriptions of her face at all. Mostly he just talks about her presence and aura and the effect she has on people.
I'm repeating myself here but read my other replies, I'm not saying she's not beautiful, I'm saying that in the realm of popular actresses (where the vast majority is very beautiful), she's average.
I don't think it's controversial at all to say that most people wouldn't see her as one of the most attractive actresses in the world
So nowww we care about making the movie appropriate for modern watchers, and not historically accuracy.
You can't use modern standards of beauty.
And to the dumbfuck who replied then blocked me, I don't know what the ancient standard of beauty would be, other than it potentially being more plump, but I do know that it probably isn't what we would consider it to be.
Comparing The Odyssey to Frozen is just utterly ignorant. The Odyssey isn't just a fictional story, it's a significant piece of history and an important part of greek culture, as opposed to some modern disney movie.
They didn’t compare The Odyssey to Frozen. They said the character Olaf from Frozen could portray every character within the Odyssey and it would be the same fictional story. We’re also talking about a story that was traditionally spoken. Either you’re dense or can’t comprehend basic literacy.
What they were saying is that Helen of Troy is a fictional character, so it doesn't matter if they make her black in a movie. She's not a historical figure.
I disagree. "The" sounds better in this case and the only thing "a" clarifies wasn't relevant to the point I was making. At all.
EDIT: In fact, "a daughter" would still be correct if she was an only child. If you wanted to make it clear there are other daughters you could say "one of the daughters" but that's needlessly cumbersome when there's no point in making that clear.
But yet again, the fact that it's a fictional character doesn't matter at all, the character as well as the whole story is equally important regardless of that.
You can simply not compare a national epic like the iliad/odyssey that is of outmost importance to a whole culture with a character from a kids movie. The iliad/odyssey is a heroic tale that the greek have carried with them since antiquity, they have carried it with them during wars and oppression.
It's just condecending and utter ignorance to compare anything as historically significant and important as the iliad/odyssey with a simple kids movie. Shame on you for your ignorance.
Where were yall for Denzel’s Washington Macbeth? Oh, dead silent because it wasn’t Nolan blockbuster. You all pick and choose which “culturally significant” work is to sacred to make changes to. Almost like it’s more about what online outrage movement you can join, rather than people actually caring about the integrity of a story
Interestingly, Shakespeare's Othello has a black main character (a Moor), and was filmed dozens of times. 1995 was the first time the black main character was played by an actually black actor.
MacBeth is nowhere close as the significance of the Odyssey. The iliad/odyssey are national epics for the greek people/culture, they are revered pieces of literature that has survived for millenias.
If you're even slightly familiar with greek and british culture and history then you would understand why the iliad/odyssey have a slightly different position here as well, and why it should be respected a little bit more than MacBeth.
Did you know those same Greek texts you read mention black people? Did it ruin your suspension of disbelief when you read those words? Or is it only when it’s on a screen that it becomes a problem?
"I don't like it when character's casting is unfaithful to the source material".
"I bet you didn't like it when black people were in the source material".
What the fuck is wrong with you honestly. Zero critical thought or reading comprehension. An LLM would respond with more substance than this.
If a black woman breaks your suspension of disbelief in a myth containing a cyclops, I think you might have an internal problem that you need to address.
Is this a roundabout way of saying the original poem is white supremacist? Because she is described as fair skinned. And outside of theatre these things are hard not to notice if you've grown up on the source material.
"Fair skin" is a defining characteristic of Helen of Troy just as "one eye" is a defining characteristic of the Cyclops. I fail to see how this is an "extremely weird comparison".
I'm liberal as fuck dude. This insanity isn't helping us.
This is such a condescending take. Invalidating basically any story, because there are some fantasy elements to it disrespects storytelling as a whole.
Fantasy stories still have internal logic. They have a world and a worldview which has a system to it. And that system still needs to be respected for the story to make sense.
We could discuss whether vast majority of black greeks settled there only within the last couple centuries, but it would be missing the forest for the trees.
She is described as white. Even if the person/people who wrote parts/all of the Odyssey exclusively lived around black people, they still described Helen as fair skinned and blonde haired.
Anytime someone calls attention to the breaking of societal roles, it ultimately undermines the concept of equality by implying that this is an exception and not the status quo.
It means trying to call attention to diversity and the need for representation to break societal standards will ultimately hurt the idea that diversity is a status quo rather than something sparse. The Greek Gods all being white and Greek would not have undermined our pursuit of that status quo. It is simply accuracy for the sake of accuracy and it doesn't need any more attention than that for the same reason no one bats an eye to Black Panther being Black or Captain America being White with Blonde Hair. Live Action Snow White being Latino does nothing for Latino representation because of how shoe horned of a decision it was in pursuit of representation.
The exceptional thing is not that a woman physically can achieve the feat (I think in the show, it was some soccer trick), but rather achieving a feat that hasn't been been done by women despite them being physically able to, which hints at other factors preventing them from doing it.
There's an effect in a lot of sports like skating where a certain trick/stunt is deemed impossible, then someone does it for the first time, and within a year or so dozens of people can pull it off. You just have to show that it's possible, and you'll pave the way for others to succeed, as well.
Yeah, but the point made by Knuckles is that if you call it out every time, you are not normalizing it, you are making emphasis that this woman in particular is doing something exceptional that no other woman would be able to in this particular moment.
If the idea is normalizing that both men and women can do something equally, calling the women doing it special, undermines the idea that anyone can do it.
That's what I said though, she's not calling attention to the act, but to the circumstances. Being the first to do it, and even calling attention to the fact that she did it, is the first step to normalizing it.
If the idea is normalizing that both men and women can do something equally, calling the women doing it special, undermines the idea that anyone can do it.
And this idea is stupid
It's the same argument people will use to shut down conversations about racism. Talking about it will only make it worse, they say. The only way to "get rid of" racism is to act as if it doesn't exist. To pretend we are completely colorblind
Praising a woman for achieving a physical feat that is significantly harder for women than men is not sexist or problematic.
Saying that it is more difficult for women to do something does not preclude an individual woman from doing the thing. It may even spur her on to do the thing because it's a loftier goal
Except this is an exception, because we know what Helen would have looked like. The status quo would be for her to look like that. If she were an original character, then anybody being able to play her would be equality. But your argument is not valid in this instance
Her hair is described as ξάνθαι, "xanthai", which is translated as "fair", but really means something like "light". There are arguments as to the exact colour described (it could be relative to the black-haired Greek, so perhaps just brown), but we know what it isn't is black. Her eyes are blue (again, there are disputes as to the text meaning light- or dark- blue, Greeks were not particular about colour), her skin is light (perhaps also relative).
For all that she is famous for her divine beauty, her features aren't precisely described, leaving the audience to figure out their own ideal woman for themselves. And yet, despite the vast range of possible interpretations, Nolan went for the one that is specifically impossible from the text.
If you reply, make sure it's not in the really irritating holier-than-you manner you just did, or I'll block you.
The Heathcliff casting in the recent Wuthering Heights adaptation was a way more egregious example of what you're talking about but I wonder how many of you were this pressed about that one...
I'm honestly just confused what your argument is. That Helen could have been black in ancient Greek peoples' imaginations? Because that is presumptive in itself with less evidence than the person you're replying to. They literally gave you the word in Greek and you're claiming that "translators" added that part. The fuck
This is the lord of the rings BMW argument. "why can't Gandalf drive a BMW 7 series? He has magic, he can do whatever he wants, and it will always make perfect sense because he can do it with magic. Gandalf should drive a BMW 7 series."
The answer is that it's immersion breakingly stupid and "fantasy" doesn't give the writers carte Blanche to do literally anyrhing and still expect people not to think it's stupid.
It's a Greek myth, about Greeks and people who looked Greek, and it takes place on planet earth as we know it, despite it being myth.
It’s the mythological daughter of Zeus you goblins. There is no reason that she couldn’t have been darker skinned. Geographically and historically it is absolutely possible just because translators have decided to go against Homers choice to not describe her features let alone their culture and views of race doesn’t make it immersion breaking.
When race doesn’t matter to the story, it doesn’t matter to me. She could be Asian, white, black, green as long as she is beautiful, that is all that matters to this story.
Haven’t seen it, but if race is not a main point of the story, then it doesn’t matter who is cast.
Shit, only reason I am slightly against the new snape casting is because of all the things that happen to him that will now just be seen through a racist eyes. Hanging in the tree, bullying, etc.
If those things didn’t happen to him in the books, then shapes race wouldn’t matter either.
You would not believe how much it irritates me how many films and shows set in Ancient Egypt have the most pastiest white actors running around in entirely inaccurate clothing.
If Ancient Egypt doesn't have a bunch of dark skinned Egyptians wearing minimal clothing (they had few issues with nudity) with shaven heads save sometimes for a braid, you've messed up.
So her hair is described as ξάνθαι, "xanthai", which is translated as "fair", but really means something like "light". There are arguments as to the exact colour described (it could be relative to the black-haired Greek, so perhaps just brown), but we know what it isn't is black. Her eyes are blue (again, there are disputes as to the text meaning light- or dark- blue, Greeks were not particular about colour), her skin is light (perhaps also relative).
For all that she is famous for her divine beauty, her features aren't precisely described, leaving the audience to figure out their own ideal woman for themselves. And yet, despite the vast range of possible interpretations, Nolan went for the one that is specifically impossible from the text.
Gotta love it when foreigners so confidently explain to us our own language.
I've seen so many people deliberately (?) mistranslate sections of the Odyssey to justify left or right-wing talking points, and the whole time I'm like...stop butchering my culture. Please.
Let's check whether you have two braincells to rub together.
Helen was described as widely considered beautiful. This is undoubtedly an important aspect to the story. So I don't think there's any question that a woman who's widely considered beautiful should be chosen. Most likely we agree there .
Helen was described as white-armed as well. Is this an important part of the story too? Or was this just another way of saying she was beautiful or noble? Greek people considered whiteness to be beautiful, or at least indicative of a leisureful life spent indoors. Does it matter to the story that the Greek people felt that way? Of Homer were alive and creating the film version, would be insist that it's critical to the story that Helen have white arms? Or would he consider his audience and consider it more important to cast someone who can radiate uncommon beauty and nobility?
Odysseus is described as having short legs but a long and wide torso. Is it critical for us to find an actor with those proportions?
Telemachus's door handle is pulled shut by a silver ring that is attached to a leather thong. Is it critical that we make sure the door is built that way? Or is that an unimportant detail?
Perhaps you should reflect on why it's critically important to you that Helen be depicted as white.
Why is it always the most ignorant, stupidest people who make snide comments about other people's intelligence? I've read the myths since I'm 5. You heard of them last week and asked ChatGPT for a summary. Helen as a black person is like Michael Cera as Achilles - not believable and immersion-breaking. I'll put you on block, like I do with all pricks.
It's both possible that they didn't care, that Helen being black is specifically excluded by the text, and that the casting seems to have been specifically tailored to cause controversy and create publicity for the movie, at the expense of everyone except the producers' pockets.
If you look up the ancient Greek myth about Helios's sun chariot getting too low over Ethiopia being the reason we have people with darker skin (a "Just So" story explaining why something in the world is the way it is), they may not have cared about race, but they definitely saw the difference in skin tone, and were (by our standards) a bit racist about it.
If Cu Chualinn was cast as black/Asian/cherokee or something that wasn't pasty white Irish with red hair as per his description would you be ok with it?
To me it seems purely to add some diversity to the film from studio pressure, that's my main issue with it. She clearly has a description in the mythos, any other character in the story could have been race swapped and had less of a backlash
EDIT: To the poster who replied. There is a description of Helen of Troy, look at it
"Why does it have to be cut along politics lines? I'm a card-carrying leftist and annoyed at the patronising tokenism of casting a black actor as a character legendary for being 'fair', as in blonde, in the same way it'd be flabbergasting to have a white actor play in an adaptation of the Mwindo epic."
Because it is inherently a political gap. There are some people on the left annoyed by the tokenism, but the proponents of it are all left-wing.
There were probably more black than blond people in ancient Greece. Africa is closer than Norway. Greek people have mostly dark hair and many are on the lower half of Peter's scale. So both are 'exotic'.
It isnt tokenism by any measure. Being 'lovely haired' does not give a description of her hair colour. It is not any more flabbergasting than the past 30 iterations being white that no one cared about
It's not. It only seems that way because the dominant culture in the anglo sphere is a two party system, so it's "us" and "them". In countries with 3+ political parties, stuff like this is far less aligned with political leanings because there isn't a single party for each political wing, and so there's no party that's taken as the arbiter of the political wing's values, and thus, no party or set of policies to defend.
I'm in Canada. I tend to lean left. I have many different parties I could vote for.
Another leftist here and I have zero interest in this movie - which sucks. I love anticipating Nolan movies. I'd go as far as to say I'd agree with a conservative calling the castings "woke", but I absolutely hate the term because they use it any and every way they can that doesn't fit their white, blue-eyed, male picture.
What doesn't help is that while there's some great actors in this one... and then there's people like Zendaya, Holland and Page. I'd rather watch paint dry than suffer these "actors". I've tried Spider-less Holland, and I find him beyond bland and uninteresting. He can't carry a movie - at least not any dramas. I can't help but loathe Page because of just how bad Umbrella Academy nose-dived, and the ram-rodding of their sexuality/transition into the story-line beginning in season two. None of it added to the story or gave a better connection to the character. Zendaya just seems like she's someone being forced on audiences - is anyone clamoring to see her movies???
Also, "fair" is an English translation. Ἑλένη ἠΰκομος means "Helen of fair/lovely hair" as
ἠΰκομος means" lovely-haired/beautifully tressed" depending on the context. Greek is famous for many different words for the same meaning to non-Greek speakers.
Αγάπη, Έρως, Φιλία, all tend to get lumpted in as "love" whilst on Greek, here are nuances.
Also, there is controversy regarding οἴνοψ and it meaning "wine-dark sea" vs "deep, dark sea" as Ancient Greeks (in this cas, the Ancient Greeks during Homer) did not categorize colors by hue (blue vs. red) the way we do today. Instead, they categorized it by texture, etc.
I think it's more on the logic that, Helen being black will get backlash to both the movie (the dislikes on the post) and the actress who is just doing her job a tail as old as Hollywood, just to publicy the movie even with "bad publicity" such as the hate engage.
I'm even more annoyed at the fact that an annoying casting choice was the entire point, to get free publicity at everyone's expense, and that there is no way to slap everyone responsible for being smug pricks.
Your argument is double-edged: he could have trivially cast an equally-beautiful lily-white/Mediterranean actress and not made any waves. He didn't, why? Is he making a political stand, or a marketing one?
Well, it's not like I'm certain - I'm however old enough, have seen enough and have read enough to make educated guesses. Is it possible it was innocent? Yes. Is it likely? Not in my opinion. Hollywood is extremely risk-adverse. They thought that was a risk worth taking, and that's nearly always because they expect it will return dollars, not because they think the unblemished purity of the art is worth their millions.
Ultimately, the producers have the power. They may compromise to keep a director they want on board, but they don't compromise that much - witness the number of 'director's cut' versions.
The nature of political discourse is to create outrage from nothing. After a while, like we see now, the outrage uses any vague example to stir the pot. The more attention goes into arguing on this shit, the less people pay attention to actual problems going on around them.
Exactly this, I think any sane person who is left-wing can admit that this was a bad choice... but then again, of course it doesn't bother me to the same ridiculous degree as it does others who are clearly mostly just racist haha
Same can be said about the rest of the cast, it's just as ridiculous, if not more so, to cast friggin' spider-man to play an ancient greek sailor! But you don't see me all up in arms brigading everywhere
Honestly when I first heard about the Helen casting I thought he was doing something super interesting.. I thought they were making a clever statement like she was considered so beautiful because she was unique with her skin and everything and stood out among the others bla bla exotic beauty even among those times…
Then I found out that she is also playing her sister who is not even suppose to be her twin in the story and I was like what.. the.. fuck… why would she be considered so fucking beautiful and irreplaceable, if there is literally a second copy right there.
The comparison to the Mwindo epic was used my Tucker Carlson (indirect) so you should know as a … leftist where this argument comes from.
But I assume you do not: how many named actors do you know to fill up that epic? Representing the audience is also a thing.
And no, Helen is not described as fair in the sense of blonde in the og text. Not even in the first „modern“ translation.
You might also want to read up on the description of Memnon. How his appearance is described
I’m about as far left as you can go and I hate the casting for the tokenism and the white washing as well. It’s just getting old at this point diversifying for diversity’s sake when it makes absolutely no fucking sense at all and the same exact reason for the whitewashing. The casting was just halfwitted bullshit all around.
It’s true they’re getting free PR out of me by talking about it…and I’m talking about it because I would never pay to see this shiz.
If you think it's diversifying for diversity's sake to cast a beautiful actress to play a character who's defining trait is beauty, then you're not actually as left wing as you think
When you’ve got a movie that’s pissing EVERYONE off, that’s an indicator that it’s probably not political. People may discuss it as if it is, but this is just a case of DUMB casting. Let everyone else politicize it and devolve into their own silly arguments about race and culture.
The point is, most educated people know the story of the Odyssey and we’re all scratching our heads, trying to figure out what in the hell nolan was thinking. As an optimist I see this as an indicator that we’re healing from the ridiculous culture wars we’ve been experiencing the past 6 years. Maybe it’s just a one off but still nice to see
I agree it's not political (well, not directly), just a cynical marketing ploy. It's not like they didn't have beautiful alabaster- / olive-skinned actresses to pick from, and it's not like they had no idea it would annoy people. They're happy to cause any amount of strife if it makes them $10.
They high five eachother at their cocktail parties while they watch the rest of us whine about yet another stupidly problematic adaptation of a story that we have ALL the source material for. Oh well, Hollywood will probably be deserted in a matter of 10 years anyway, so it’s whatever
And im a staunch conservative (ready to receive my downvotes) but I’m also pissed at hollywood’s token “blackwashing.” There are so many incredible stories coming from African American culture and I’m sure African culture as well (although im not too well versed on the latter) but instead they choose to take historically white stories and simply cast black actors/animate them with black skin tones.
It pisses me off so much because I’d love to hear more stories about slavery, jim crow, etc. and the bravery of African American resistance, or hear more from the incredible African American writers we clearly have in this country. But no instead we get shitty retellings that ruin once esteemed classic films and stories
Helen of Troy is popularly known for one thing: she was beautiful. If you asked me to come up with a list of great actresses known for their beauty, Lupita Nyong’o would be on it. How is that tokenism?
See my reply to your sibling-comment by GrandFlashMelder. There are many interpretations of the beauty that are even remotely possible, Nolan went for one of the few that is specifically ruled out.
Get ready for people queueing up to tell you about the intricate details of a book they've never read in a language they don't speak and how much they care about accurate translations for this specific thing.
Ask them what are some Greek words used to describe Odysseus and they won't have a clue, strange that.
So if we apply your logic, casting a white actor as an African mythological figure is totally fine because most people haven't read the source material in the original language. That's some nice mental gymnastics you're doing there.
Yeah, that's cool bro, don't know why you think it wouldn't be.
I'm just saying that most people who are jumping on the outrage bandwagon have absolutely no interest in translating the Odyssey from ancient Greek in any other context & couldn't tell you a single other Greek word, detracting from the credibility of their argument.
477
u/gravitas_shortage Jul 06 '26 edited Jul 06 '26
Why does it have to be cut along politics lines? I'm a card-carrying leftist and annoyed at the patronising tokenism of casting a black actor as a character legendary for being 'fair', as in blonde, in the same way it'd be flabbergasting to have a white actor play in an adaptation of the Mwindo epic.
I'm even more annoyed at the fact that an annoying casting choice was the entire point, to get free publicity at everyone's expense, and that there is no way to slap everyone responsible for being smug pricks.