The tail is now wagging the dog

Just seen an advert for a new TV series with a Black woman playing Anne Boleyn!!!! The TV companies have armies of people making sure that everything on the screen is authentic and yet they cast someone who is the wrong colour??? Can you imagine the furor if they made a film about Martin Luther King and cast Tom Hanks as him.

I thought the same thing admin

I'm with the admin on this.

Also, let's not forget they're pushing for a black James bond as well.

I hate racism,but....they're going a bit too far this time.

It's about going beyond colour when it comes to acting, in my opinion.
You don't need to type cast people because they are black.
If you see the character they are playing and not the actual person, such as
the character of Hannibal Lecter, played by Anthony Hopkins. Who is, in my opinion a great actor. He has played some fantastic characters and has been convincing in every role. And he is Welsh
Although I am in agreement with taking things too far when it comes to promoting blacks over others, in areas where they don't have the same abilities or qualifications as another person.

There is, after all, still a lot of prejudice directed at blacks and other minority groups in this country. Now I can see that great black actor, Sidney Poitier in the role of James Bond.

I agree, and it is one thing to have a quirky theme to a TV series such as Bridgerton, in which black actors, portray white characters, that can come under 'artistic licence' but in any case, after trying hard to watch Bridgerton, I classed it as crap, after three episodes.

But this is different, because Anne Bo;yen was an historical fact, and she wasn't black, so this is a 'bastardisation' of history, (look the word up) and it has just taken this black thing too far, and far from promoting racial harmony, stuff like this is going to do the opposite, and promote racial disharmony, because folk including me are just sick of the whole thing, because you cannot change history, and don't blame me for what my ancestors may or may not have done.

It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if they had a black actor playing James Bond, because each film is set in a contemporary setting, in the time at which the film was made, so 'Dr No' was set in 1962 even though it is 'based on the Ian Fleming character which was from the 1940s and early 50s

So I am sure that black spies work for MI5 and MI6 so a James Bond being black is fine, however if a James Bond film was made which was set in the 1940s a black actor playing the part would in my opinion be wrong, because it would be unlikely that a black man with a public school background, could have become a suave sophisticated spy.

The 'Black and White Minstrels Show' was deemed racially insulting, due to them being White entertainers imitating Blacks.

It looks laaaaike t'taaaaide's turned !

Although this thread is discussing the colour of Anne Boleyn's skin, there are some issues which aren't being viewed: Anne Boleyn was executed for treason and other charges, she was also educated in France and, I believe, a maid of honour for a period of time while in France - a country that was in conflict with England - and, it has been claimed, Anne Boleyn returned to England to marry her Irish cousin.
I must admit, when I had History lessons and read about 'our' (English, Scottish, British) monarchy and periods of reign, some of the information was difficult to truly and honestly absorb as some of the information was extreme. A part of this is, the trial of Anne Boleyn, as it came across as, and I think the best word to choose here is: 'dodgy'. I read that Anne Boleyn was accused of most things that were, at that time, actions to have her executed: incest, adultery, treason, plotting to kill the King - and possibly even 'witchcraft'. In other words, her chances of walking out of that trial as a free woman was about the same as one of us 'posters' winning the Lottery three times on the trot.
Anyway, I haven't seen the advert and I do not know this new series. But, I am now interested in the portrayal of Hernry VIII. My History lessons etc taught me that Henry VIII was a Tudor, white, a big man with red hair and was, in his later life, a lustful, egotistical, paranoid and tyrannical monarch.
So, we now are possibly being given a different perspective of these two people and could view Anne Boleyn (the modern portrayal) as an extremely dangerous woman of foreign roots who wants to bring England down and hand the monarchy to France or Ireland - or both!
Or!
Henry VIII as a racist and as a sexist ( whatever negative opinion one wishes to have) and a man (I assume he is portrayed as being male) only interested in himself and power with the attitude that his position gives him the right to act the way he wishes.
(In these present times, I am not sure that it is clever to contribute to the negative actions of an English monarch or anything to do with our monarchy - in other words, adding fuel to the fire could be extremely unwise)
Or!
Henry VIII the victim.
OR!
Henry VIII the saviour and his actions are to save England and the English from dangerous people and rival countries. In other words, a hero.

Interesting to learn who will be portrayed as the villain and who will be portrayed as the saviour (hero or heroine), if anyone.

To be honest, I am not sure that it is a good idea to run this series as there are too many delicate issues which possibly cannot be handled in a way which will avoid issues from some areas of our society. Also, the timing is definitely inappropriate, unless there are some motives to influence our society to ask the question: 'Is there a need for a monarchy?' - a question which I feel should not be introduced by a television 'drama' or any 'one person'. We all have our own perspective and opinions, so it is extremely dangerous for one person or the selective few to be given the power to make judgement for the masses.

Sometimes, it is better to keep to the information, which we have come to acknowledge as 'close to the facts', that we have been handed throughout the years no matter how negative and distressing we feel some of those facts are.

Sparticus was set in 100BC and everyone in the film had perfect teeth, and spoke perfect English.........some with an American accent.

No way was it historically accurate

Who do I complain to???

Wether HenryX111 was black or white he was still responsible for destroying some of our most historical buildings. He was the tudor equivelant of Wigan council

Just picking up on TTS ,comment's ,
That tv series Bridgerton for all its success i watched the whole series and could not get my head round most of the star's cast were black ie queen victoria and so on i felt it was not needed i don't know why the writer's /producers cast most of them as black for me it took away the whole idea of the plots i am at a loss why !
G.B.

Golden Bear

The reason you are at a loss at the plots in Bridgerton, is because (in my opinion) the whole thing was crap !

ianp

Henry the Eighth was a nasty evil King, a shithouse of the highest order, a womanising glutton, but was wife number two 'Black' ?

Anne Boleyn

ianp

As yon Will Shakespeare said :

"The evil that men do lives after them; the good is oft interred with their bones ..........."

Wife number six had Wigan connections!

Well, Pemberton at least!

Think she cum fra lommra green?

Rio,
You have got your X’s and V’s mixed up.

Broady was it not Henry the thirteenth?

Broady was it not Henry the thirteenth?

I don’t think so Rio.

Tommy Two Stroke,
I am bewildered by your words which are addressed to me as I never stated anything about the colour of Anne Boleyn's skin and nor did I ever state that I personally thought that Henry VIII was a really nice guy.
I actually stated that I had received information which guided me to have an opinion that Henry VIII was not a very nice person.

Also, much of what I typed was put forward as information to be questioned and for readers to conclude their own opinion. Much information was not in first person and therefore, not my opinion.
I put forward the possibilities of what viewers may see when watching the series and the various paths the interpretation may take.

As I cannot clearly understand the meaning behind the way you seemed to point your typed words at me, I would be grateful if any member or members of WW could fully explain and clarify the meaning and intention.

Here we go!

ianp

I was pointing out that the topic is about a black actress playing Anne Boleyn, which I think is wrong, and I was trying to 'condense' your remarks about Henry the Eighth, into just a few words, and to 'condense' them even more I will just say that he was a 'Wrong Un'

The point I am making is that portraying Anne Boleyn as a black woman has hardly been mentioned in the media. Just a comment in the press. However if a white man was portrayed as Martin Luther King there would be disorder and protests all over the place.
On another tack the presenters on TV these days are not necessarily the best people for the job It's now based on the colour of your skin. Would Micah Richards have ever got a job on the football channels. if it wasn't for the colour of his skin? If he had been that good a presenter why wasn't he on before all this BLACK LIVES MATTER campaign? Same for Alex Scott.. I bet they go to bed every night and say THANK YOU GOD FOR MAKING ME COLOURED

Tommy Two Stroke,
Okay! Fully understood.
I just got the impression that you were taking my words as my personal opinion regarding Anne Boleyn and Henry VIII...etc.
No issues my end.

admin.,
I typed my words to further the issues which may occur regarding this modern interpretation. That is why I typed 'OR!'.
Also, I typed that I felt it was inappropriate to broadcast at this present time as the monarchy has been under scrutiny.
Additionally, I typed that some things should stick to the facts.

admin.
As I have said before they won't be happy until every presenter / commentator is a coloured member of the LGBT community. Who is to blame? Ourselves for allowing it to happen. I use the only method at my disposal when I see something i don't like. The ON/OFF switch.

Broady, it's not only being 'allowed to happen', it's being widely promoted.

what is strange though is that there doesn't seem to be the same push for Asian presenters.

We do have quite a lot of Asian presenters.

Not seen many Oriental looking presenters

I won't be watching football focus when dan leaves.

don't forget the high ranking coppers either

Asian is the posh word for Indian and Pakistani folk.
But when I was young Asian had the same meaning as Oriental, or that is how we understood it, Asia was where China was, and Japan

SPOT ON T.T.S. FROM THE BEAR !!!

I've always understood "Asians" to mainly refer to people from India and it's surroundings.
Arabs were North African, Chinese were Oriental and Russians were just that. Russian!

Poppycock !

Around these parts people from India and the Indian sub-continent were known as Indians, and folk in the know would point out that some were Pakistani's and clever dicks would even mention that some were Bangladeshi's, the Indian sub-continent is a common name for South Asia, but we called them Indians.

Naughty name for them began with P

Tea came from Ceylon, and had nowt to doo with Monkeys playing a piano ....

Orientals had slitty eyes, were yellow in colour, and they came from Asia

TTS what naughty name? I resume you are referring to the term Paki? What is the difference???? to us being called Brits, American being called Yanks. Or Australians being called Aussies. Its an abbreviation What is the difference??? These names are still in use?

Admin

Yes, that is the word, and another description began with W

Dave Whelan is a Limey.

Ask him.

Dave Whelan is a fraud. Ask him that too!

They are abbreviations..for Gods sake... No one is kicking up a fuss about. BRITS. AUSSIES. YANK.S etc. I would like to ask these people who complain what is the difference???

Pakis don't complain about being called Pakis either.
Only do-gooders are bothered!

If they live just north of Wigan, do they prefer to be called 'Pakistandish'?

Why do pakis let their restaurants and takeaways be referred to as Indian, when everyone knows they hate India. 2 faced gets

Alex Scott just got the job of hosting Football Focus next season, what is the world coming to. That squeak she calls a voice drives me crackers, inevitable really, right sex and right colour.

Are we going to avenge our past by pulling down the statue of Whelan outside the stadium?

What about the guy with the shiny foot in the Park? Any links with slavvery ( ducks)

Slavery has been around since time began The Egyptians took other African people as slaves. The Romans took the Celts and other Europeans as slaves i.e. SPARTACUS The Arabs have taken various people as slaves The Vikings took the British as slaves etc etc. Don't get me wrong Slavery is a terrible thing BUT have any of the Black American Celebrities, Politicians, etc thought where they would be now if their ancestors hadn't been taken from Africa... AND probably? they had a better life as slaves in America than they would have had back in Africa.

Slavery exists to this day in Africa but it’s blacks buying blacks but very little mention of that. Doesn’t suit their agenda.

I very much doubt that the the African slaves would have had a better life in America, or anywhere else come to that. From the outset of their journey's from their homeland, they died in huge numbers from the crammed and squalid conditions they were shackled in and from diseases they had never encountered before.

Sold at slave markets.
Children torn from mothers arms, never to be reunited. Women raped, abused, starved, beaten and worked to the point of dropping, in either in fields or households and goodness knows what else. Children fared no better.
Men in all kinds of hard labour work, whipped for the slightest misdemeanor, hung for attempting to run away, forced into savage, to the death fights for sport. And goodness knows what other abuses.
I bet they were really grateful for being educated into our civilized ways.

I don't agree with the tearing down of monuments, it is after all our shameful past, of which we all, including the black communities, should never be allowed to forget.
To eradicate these reminders, as with the German death camps, is leaving this part of history to be repeated.
Although the making amends for it all now, is in my opinion, causing divisions and resentments. P

I'm not sure how slavery has anything to do with the original post, but it stands to reason that a black woman should not be portrayed as Anne Boleyn who was white, and that can never be argued with because it's an historical fact.

However, fictional characters can be portrayed as any ethnic character, because they're fictional and not based on real people.

This thread has deviated from its original point and racist comments have replaced the topic for no apparent reason.

link

How about a film about Martin Luther King being played by a white actor

The tail will soon morph into the dog.