4 ms·

Oh dear. Sorry. If you truly didn't mean to say: - Macbeth is old fiction, but some approaches to adapting it are BETTER than others - Don't do something "inc

Oh dear. Sorry. If you truly didn't mean to say: - Macbeth is old fiction, but some approaches to adapting it are BETTER than others - Don't do something "incongruent" and "brazen" like cast a black man and call your movie Macbeth, because that isn't one of the BETTER approaches. - But honestly, no one cares because ugh Macbeth is so played out, NO ONE gives a damn. Then you shouldn't have said those things? As it stands, you have drawn a rhetorical distinction between fictional Macbeth and the also-fictional Gladiator 2 without actually saying how they're different vis a vis performer ethnicity, other than "more people care about" Gladiator 2. You accuse me of being obtuse and then fail to actually make a point about why people are complaining about Gladiator 2, only that bringing up Macbeth is dumb because who cares about stupid Macbeth.

slothtrop 2y ago
> - Macbeth is old fiction, but some approaches to adapting it are BETTER than others I did say and mean that. > - Don't do something "incongruent" and "brazen" like cast a black man and call your movie Macbeth, because that isn't one of the BETTER approaches. That isn't what I said. Do cast a black man, do call it Macbeth. But seriously, keep going. It's weird to set something in Medieval Scotland and make just one guy a-historical. Make half the cast black, or whatever. It's seems like restraint or half-measure to try to keep in tradition in every other way but a single character. There's no reason you can't go full Bridgerton. I think that would serve it better. I hope that's clear. I'm not sure if you actually aren't capable of grasping, or refuse to do so because you'd rather project racism. It's a bit weird. Another user mentioned people are looking for "depth and coherent world building". I think if it feels coherent then it works. > fail to actually make a point about why people are complaining about Gladiator 2 Dude. You brought up Gladiator 2, not me. Ask them why they're complaining, because I sure didn't. > As it stands, you have drawn a rhetorical distinction between fictional Macbeth and the also-fictional Gladiator 2 without actually saying how they're different vis a vis performer ethnicity, other than "more people care about" Gladiator 2. I don't know anything about Gladiator 2 other than it's an entirely new spectacle.

slothtrop 2y ago

> - Macbeth is old fiction, but some approaches to adapting it are BETTER than others I did say and mean that. > - Don't do something "incongruent" and "brazen" like cast a black man and call your movie Macbeth, because that isn't one of the BETTER approaches. That isn't what I said. Do cast a black man, do call it Macbeth. But seriously, keep going. It's weird to set something in Medieval Scotland and make just one guy a-historical. Make half the cast black, or whatever. It's seems like restraint or half-measure to try to keep in tradition in every other way but a single character. There's no reason you can't go full Bridgerton. I think that would serve it better. I hope that's clear. I'm not sure if you actually aren't capable of grasping, or refuse to do so because you'd rather project racism. It's a bit weird. Another user mentioned people are looking for "depth and coherent world building". I think if it feels coherent then it works. > fail to actually make a point about why people are complaining about Gladiator 2 Dude. You brought up Gladiator 2, not me. Ask them why they're complaining, because I sure didn't. > As it stands, you have drawn a rhetorical distinction between fictional Macbeth and the also-fictional Gladiator 2 without actually saying how they're different vis a vis performer ethnicity, other than "more people care about" Gladiator 2. I don't know anything about Gladiator 2 other than it's an entirely new spectacle.