One Piece LA Blergh

How did they manage to make something so godawful?!?

Seriously, just make a 1:1 adaptation.

My God, it is worse than 4Kids!

It's like this. Netflix Fullmetal Alchemist wasn't that bad. Their Korean "original" dramas aren't terribly bad. But Disneyfication is bad. Very bad. It's like this. Remember Star Wars? So like back in the day, Star Wars had blacks and women doing action roles. Leia? Lando Calrissian? Yet the films had something for everyone. It wasn't politically excluding. You could have a friend who got in an argument with you over Star Wars, and it wasn't because it was too woke. It would be whether or not Han fired first.

The thing is, the real One Piece is likewise accessible to all. Then I turn on this show and... wtf is this?!? It's organized like my third novel with alot of jumps back and forth. Because I pay attention, I pretty quickly figured out where the cuts and changes were. It's not good.

First, they wanted characters to be more ethnic... read: fill quotas. Look, I didn't mind Luffy looking kinda Hispanic. I can kinda see that. I don't mind Zoro legit being Asian.

I kinda do mind you race swapping Usopp and his dad. I mind a bit move that you didn't try to get an actor who while nobody has the sorta Pinocchio nose Usopp has, you didn't even try to make his nose look pronounced. They picked someone black because his hair is curly.

Sure I get it. But if you're gonna race swap, do it with his mother and him. Yasopp looks like this:

 But while we're on that subject, Usopp's whole arc was garbage. He had three friends in the anime, but none here. There was a whole beachfront scene, but here, everything took place onside the house. Oh yes, there were extremely nice thriller aspects of this part, but the changes undermine one of the best parts. So let's explain.

Nami is more of a classic (pre-woke) feminist. She uses brains rather than brawn. She is legit tomboyish, but that's her personality not her fighting style. But right from the get go, she is kicking ass with her staff. Hold it, hold it, hold it!!! Question: why is this girl sneaking into the marines if before Zoro gets there in the first arc, she is fighting several trained Marines? That makes NO sense. Then, because we haven't pushed enough feminism, we are treated to a flashback of Kuina fighting Zoro. That's actually 1:1 how things went down, aside from him being stuck in a well. But then we have Kaya trying to be a "strong woman" and stupidly rushing into danger, and then both Nami and Kaya needing to be rescued. Zoro having trouble with just two people. Changes that screwed up the entire arc. All because you wanted "strong women."



Look, there's a stupid line of thought here, and it comes from the bullshit of "strong females". When people say they want more strong women, they usually mean like Scarlet Witch or Black Widow. Backstory. Vulnerability. Inner conflicts. A compelling character whose feelings you like and understanspd. They DO NOT mean like Captain Marvel, a wooden character who "feels too much" while not emoting at all.

Go back to the points I mentioned about her beating up Marines and having to be saved here. The thing is, it's actually reversed. Nami and Usopp are the weakest members of the Straw Hats. But while typically they leave the fighting to other people, these two are holding back a line of cat pirates. The thing that made this scene so powerful is that Nami is NOT some great fighter. She's the party rogue not a fighter. But here she was, giving her best. Vulnerability is what makes female characters compelling, particularly when they turn vulnerability into strength. Nami admits she is no fighter, but she is clever, and uses her wits to turn the tide in battle. But this is garbage! Kaya's definition of strength is to hide and then do a Leeroy Jenkins, nearly getting Nami and herself killed.

This is how Nami fights. And how she acts.

And it's freaking awesome!

So sad you can't enjoy movies and television because you can't handle diversity and obsess over the race of cartoon characters.  They gave a role  to a black actor, good lord, the whole thing is crap now! Just relax and enjoy the show.

As for your weird obsession with women needing to show vulnerability instead of fighting, eh, whatever. The manga creator personally signed off on everything in the show, including Nami's fight scenes, so complain to him that he's not handling his own characters correctly.

Real diversity is already present in the show. The characters have different goals, voices, ideals, and drives. And you can't get more diverse than having a reindeer on your team.

 "Diversity" is really conformity. Same playbook for everyone. Globalism bandwagon. And when you don't fit, you get shouted down.

I was at a Pride fest. I made the mistake of telling one of of them that I was conservative and trans. "No such thing," he tells me. In other words, if you're part of a racial or sexual grouping we expect you to fall in line. If you don't , we deny your very existence.

No, I don't find anything diverse about making all women think and act the same.

 I don't find anything diverse about filling racial quotas either. Look, it also has to do with who is race changed up. Usopp strikes me as very white. Dorky, tells tall tales, wears glasses. The only black kid who will ever be like that is Steve Urkel. 

Brook? Has a freaking afro. Franky has an urban energy like Shaft. At the very least, I'd expect the Square systems to be black soul sisters.

The definition of filling a quota is when you literally could swap them to another thing and it would not impact the story. When Nami crosses the line between acting like a tomboyish girl to literally being able to be replaced by a man. And Usopp being black adds no dimensions to his character, you have two white guys.

That's not diversity.

Here's a thought. Actually watch the real show.

The gave a role to a black actor that didn't really highlight his blackness. That's what I object to.


These girls should be black.


This guy? Not only should he not be, but his personality creates some bad implications to black people that white folk don't mind. Being a nerdy lying coward? Is that a role black people want?

But what actually upset me was how poorly they handled Nami. And if we're being honest, everyone but Luffy (Zoro barely got lost, and they swapped out several of his better character moments for fight scenes).


 But then, Luffy's diction came across as still too flat.

Uhhhh but did he sign off, knowing how poorly they would handle it? Was it a vague "we're gonna make a live action of your show" or a very specific "we're going to butcher your characters? You okay with that?" Cuz that's what they did. Stephen King signed off on The Shining too. He ultimately hated what was done to it. Which is why a miniseries was made.

He was probably shown a few scenes that happen to be similar, but I don't think he got an in-depth on how they handled Usopp's arc.

The gave a role to a black actor that didn't really highlight his blackness. That's what I object to.

So you object when black actors don't act black enough.  Or at least, don't play up to your urban black stereotypes. 

All righty then.

When there isn't any good reason for them to be hired, that's a white person that got their job stolen by a black. (I'm looking at you, Ariel)



There are rules against white people playing black characters, women playing transgirl roles, and so forth. White people used to play Asian roles in black and white films, but now it's cultural appropriation.
But the same protections don't exist for white people! So Ariel gets to have her beautiful red hair kinked up and turned a dull brown.

Yes, I think actors should bring themselves into a role. They shouldn't just passively be hired to fill quotas. Usopp's actor should make a convincing case as to why he got the job, and that starts by selling his character. Only he didn't.


If you're going to take a role solely on "unions said there should be a black character" effectively meaning that all the white people who applied didn't get the job, you need to convince me you're the BEST Usopp they could find. I do not object to meritocracy. I do not object to bringing your background into the role. I very much do object when Usopp doesn't even seem like a good Usopp.

You could make Usopp black, female (as above), whatever. But the lack of nose especially ticked me off. Secondarily, they didn't sell the tall tales thing hard enough. Too understated. If you're not the best Usopp, give the job to someone who better looks (and acts!) the part.


 "Not straying too far from source material..." you say. But Usopp's arc is not at all similar!

I'm gonna point you to a show that was multicultural, yet nonetheless worked. The Chosen. How do they do it? Well, because even if there are quota characters, ultimately what drives the show is story and fleshed out characters. One Piece? No, it feels rushed. And the characters feel off.

When there isn't any good reason for them to be hired, that's a white person that got their job stolen by a black. (I'm looking at you, Ariel)

I got a good fantasy story adaptation.  It goes like this, two trolls walk into a bar...

Watched to the end. Wasn't any more impressed.

• They managed to make Koby obnoxious. Not only did have not get any cool military training, but he basically every second just repeats the audiences's sentiment that Luffy couldn't have done this or that.
• Waaaay too much Marine/Navy side scenes. And not letting Garp "breathe" properly through development over the course of the story made me not at all sure they got his character right.
• Arlong sounding like a BLM member. To his credit, he wasn't race swapped for no good reason like Usopp. And the fishman prejudice thing was canon.
• Ruining three entire arcs for no good reason. Usopp's arc was ruining by taking away his friends, taking away his grand entrance, and taking away the scene where Usopp and Nami hold the line against an army of pirates (there are a lousy two pirates in the live action besides Kuro, and Nami for all the feminist crap she pulls hides in the mansion the whole time). Sanji's arc kills off Dog Krieg so they have to basically have Arlong as a filler boss. The Arlong arc has Nami barely cry during the straw hat scene, and I think they also had Luffy actually destroy the maps and furniture in the room (in the live action, he simply punches apart the room).
• Nami's tangerine's are in the top of the ship, while in the live action they are right near the edge. From a botanical perspective, where they are in the live action is kinda asking for the salty sea water to kill them all. They need at least little elevation!
• Currently watching My Adventures with Superman, and realizing just how refreshing the lack of man hatred (thus far) is. The anime and manga didn't push the You Go Girlism with Nami. They gave her defined abilities and weaknesses, and while she was tomboyish, I didn't feel like I was watching someone who wanted to beat Luffy up. I also like Jimmy Olsen despite the race change. Something about how they did it in the live action One Piece just sucks.  In fact, even though My Adventures with Superman sorta does the same thing exactly, everything about the execution is just better.  It just feels like this show I'm watching now somehow learned from the mistakes of One Piece. Lois is spunky, not angry. She uses her brains vs being an instant fighter, and it really feels more like the One Piece anime.

Seriously, awful live action.

I also like Jimmy Olsen despite the race change.

Gosh. How enlightened you are to allow a made up character to be portrayed as someone who isn't white. Sainthood surely isn't far behind.

Oh stop it.

The point is, there's poorly-executed shows and well-executed shows, and the difference is not feeling like a preachy cliche.

Ruining the source material by screwing with sequence events just highlights these other issues all the more.

Oh stop it.

The point is, there's poorly-executed shows and well-executed shows, and the difference is not feeling like a preachy cliche.

Ruining the source material by screwing with sequence events just highlights these other issues all the more.

I suppose you hate the movie Aliens because they gave the lead role to a woman instead of a man as it was written for.

You probably also hate that Nick Fury is played by Samuel L. Jackson because he was white in the comics, which ruined all the Marvel movies. 

And lets not forget how they ruined Men In Black because they changed Agent J's character from white to black.

Those were all terrible movies because of all the poorly executed preachy wokeness, right?  I'm sure you wept with misery watching those knowing they messed with the source material and could have been good movies.

What a tragedy.

Sigh. It's like this.

1. I loathe Usopp in One Piece. I loathe Ariel in Little Mermaid.
2. I am okay with Jimmy Olsen being made black in both Supergirl and in My Adventures with Superman.

Race is not the issue. Character accuracy is. What bothers me about Usopp, after the initial reaction of them turning him black? His nose. Usopp is a liar. Getting rid of his ridiculously like nose is a major live action sin. Likewise, the fact that Ariel is not a redhead is more an issue to me than her being black. Jimmy Olsen is also originally a redhead, but it didn't seem to define him as much as Ariel, who had hair as bright as sea coral, but they turned it to a drab brown.

I would be just as appalled if they took Cloud in Final Fantasy, and made him (gasp) not a crossdresser in that certain part of the game. Cloud not being a crossdresser is shameful. However, they handled it well.

I suppose you hate the movie Aliens because they gave the lead role to a woman instead of a man as it was written for.

No, I wouldn't. Because I saw the movie and never read the original script. It's the exact idea of fucking with the concept as first seen by the public. If they remade Aliens, and made that character a man to be consistent with the original script, I would be mad.

You probably also hate that Nick Fury is played by Samuel L. Jackson because he was white in the comics, which ruined all the Marvel movies. 

Again, no. Samuel L Jackson is never a bad choice for that role.

And lets not forget how they ruined Men In Black because they changed Agent J's character from white to black.

Like with Aliens, the first thing you see it as makes a difference. J is black in the cartoon. He's black in the movies. It doesn't matter!

These are all movies made in the 90s and early 2000s, with characters simply cast. That's it! You just put the character in the role, and they perform the role for the idea in the script. There was no virtue signalling, no actresses spouting out nonsense about how she can beat up men, no removing key features of characters like they don't matter.

You'd like to brand me as some kind of racist or sexist, but you haven't been listening to the words coming out of my mouth.

If they made Zoro a girl, I would not care. I would care however, if they made her prissy, or somehow destroyed her character. That said, the sheer quotaism of making Zoro a girl might make her character hard to sell (that is, you'd have to reverse some details in the backstory or make her a lesbian). Zoro drinks to insane excess, gets lost, is kinda stupid yet kind, and has a certain harshness about him. He also does things like do shirtless endurance training in a cold climate. If you can sell a woman doing that, fine with me. But the moment Zoro does something uncharacteristic ("I broke a nail!") or even doesn't go shirtless in cold weather (I would expect chest bandages anyway), you've ripped us off.

It is about character accuracy. And it's about plot accuracy. When you reorder events, it changes the characters! It also leaves massive plotholes. When you change details about the characters, it changes the characters!

Likewise, the fact that Ariel is not a redhead is more an issue to me than her being black.

It's not racist because it's now about skin color.  It's about hair color instead. Which is totally not at all race related.

Okay.

Sure, explain to me how ginger erasure is not a sort of racism.

https://www.eviemagazine.com/post/why-are-redheads-being-erased-in-media


So an ethnic group that is actually a majority (in comparison) is getting rid of a real minority, and this is not racism?

Redheads comprise 2% of the entire world.

Black people inhabit at least one entire continent, 14% of the US, 16% of Canada, 4% in UK, 8.5% in France, not counting brown-skinned South America, parts of Middle East/South Asia, and Australia. 

Stop being so racist.

ginger erasure

Good name for a band.

Sure, explain to me how ginger erasure is not a sort of racism.

Explain to me how changing hair color, eye color, skin color, nose size, age, gender, height, weight, accent, or the number of moles, pimples, scars and freckles is racism. Are you arguing that no character can ever be changed or recast without it being racist?  Sigh, you are. 

You made it very clear you're quite upset about blacks being drawn or given roles that should be going to whites.  Stop being racist.

Let's flip the script.

Suppose that I, as a white person suddenly find in 2035 that all the shows are covered with black people.
#RepresentationMatters, right? (It doesn't actually, but we're using this analogy dammit)

So I decide to make a show that originally had black people into an all-white cast. Because I need to see people of my race on TV, since my precious ego can't function without successful role models who are white.

If turning a black person white is racist, then you can be damned sure that turning a white person black is racist.
If turning white people black is not racist, then you have to take back all the race baiting because it doesn't matter.



This guy is Jewish. He's based on King David.




Turning him black erases the whole analogy.

If turning a black person white is racist, then you can be damned sure that turning a white person black is racist.

I'm going to stop you right here.  Basic logic fail, again.

"Affirming the Consequent: This is a formally invalid argument of the form “If A, then B; B; therefore A.” It confuses the idea that A can only be true when B is true for the idea that B can only be true if A is true."

Not what I said.

"Affirming the Consequent: This is a formally invalid argument of the form “If A, then B; B; therefore A.” It confuses the idea that A can only be true when B is true for the idea that B can only be true if A is true."

This is not an affirming the consequent argument. For it to be an affirming the consequent argument B must be dependent on the state of A. That would be If A -> B; B = A.

This is an equivalence argument. Also known as "what is good for the goose is good for the gander."
If A = B, then B = A. Unlike the other, this math works. If one thing is called racist, then the same thing flipped the opposite direction must also be racist. Likewise, if you claim society is equal but you make men do something women don't have to do (like fight in a draft), or vice versa, society is not equal.

This is simple logic, and you've twisted it into something it is not.

And you've defined racism as only pertaining to one race. By definition, if you say that only whites can be racist, you are a racist.
You have just committed racism against whites by blaming them as responsible for the world's problems.

This from the Huff Post.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/opinion-can-black-people-be-racist_n_5c3e5e8be4b01c93e00e8764

Now, let’s not confuse racism with prejudice. Prejudice is the belief that a person or a group of people are less than because of who they are. In other words, if a black woman tells you not to bring your bland, raisin-infused potato salad to the cookout because “white folks think salt is the best way to season food,” she’s not being racist. She’s displaying prejudice against you and people like you (and against your potato salad).

Black people can be prejudiced as hell, just like any other group of people. As a matter of fact, I think all humans are prejudiced in one way or another. But just because a black person hurt your feelings that one time doesn’t mean you’ve experienced racism.

This is where I’m going to lose some of you: I don’t believe that people of color can be racist in America.

She's being a racist. She's being racist as hell, and everyone knows it but they've been told black racism doesn't exist, then told to shut up because they are whites and therefore racist by default.

That's a racist idea, and it needs to stop. Just as trying to erase white people from drama needs to stop.

1. If a black person can fill a role originally played by a white person so well that you don't even notice...
2. If them being white wasn't relevant in the first place...
3. Or if them being black adds something to their character that wasn't obvious in the first...
...then indeed, I have no problem with it. But I have a real problem with tokenism, and I have an even more problem being race-shamed by racist assholes.

There are some characters that are so European it simply doesn't make sense for them to be black (Martin Luther or Heidi, for example). And there are other characters where their ethnic or racial background does not matter because their character connects with all of humanity. When you replace a character who was known for their distinctive look (Ariel, for instance) you run afoul of #2. When no amount of acting can distract from the fact that you race swapped them, that's #1. And when there is absolutely no good reason to make the change except lobby groups pressured you into it, that's #3 violated.

Usopp?

Nobody needs to replace a long-nosed kid with curly black hair with a flat-nosed black kid (#2).
His acting wasn't great enough that I forgot they made him black (#1)
And there was literally nothing added from the way they included him (#3), and in fact they made him less of a liar, they made the story arc he was in less cool.

Usopp in the anime went into town, told everyone pirates were coming, and then held them back in a battle on a hill.
(I looked for that hill scene to redeem live action Usopp, and it wasn't there!)
Usopp in the live action hides in a mansion. He's terrible!

Not what I said.

Exactly what you said.

And you've defined racism as only pertaining to one race.

I've not defined racism.  But I can give you an example.

Complaining that your made up fish girl got given black skin in a remake and now you can't enjoy her anymore.  That's racist.

Let's talk Final Fantasy. Here we have a white to white "race swap" with Terra Branford. Green hair to blond hair.

Kinda cool.

Boring!

The issue with Ariel is literally that you cool have found a half-black (tan) girl and dyed her hair brick red, and I would tuned her black skin out. But this leads to another troubling issue. Cultural appropriation.

Yeah, I never thought I'd use that word, given how often the real racists use it to claim that whites can't be traditionally Asian or black cultures. (First, you tell us white isn't a culture, and that all our food is bland... ahem, whites made French food, German food, and Italian food; then if we have culture envy because you've basically led us to not know where our culture is, you in turn don't allow us to want to emulate Asians or blacks, fine double standard there) But it fits.

Let's look at Sazh.


Having not played that Final Fantasy (it was always on consoles that were either too expensive or too high end, and my PC wasn't up to it), my first hope for this character is that he is either a sword master or a gunner, and kinda like Cid. I don't want him to be a lead caster. Square largely doesn't disappoint.

You see, races have cultures. it isn't that black people are inherently better at athletics, jazz, or rap (that would be actual racism). But culturally, that's what they have emphasized in the last hundred or so you years, sports and smooth jazz and music culture. Unlike Enimem (fluke), I respect that blacks own the rap industry. I respect that white jazz players are kinda subpar. And that when you want someone to beat the hell out of someone Shaft or Bruce Lee will do it.

What turning blacks into stand-ins actually does is not only culturally appropriating from whites, which is unfair enough (most whites aren't aware of their own culture), but it dilutes the sense of black culture, by telling them and the audience that it isn't cool for Sazh to be a tough gun-toting train conductor. When you're a stand-in, you're a culture thief. And that implies that your culture is not good in the first place! Is that the message you want?

Fist of the North Star, you can replace the lead with a black guy, and it makes perfect sense.
Terra Branford becoming blond? Now you've butchered that character!

The issue with Ariel is literally that you cool have found a half-black (tan) girl and dyed her hair brick red, and I would tuned her black skin out.

This isn't a skin tone problem, or a hair color problem, or a race swapping problem, or a woke problem or a cultural appropriation problem, or evil liberal inclusiveness problem.

This is a you problem.

Needing to 'tune out' black skin so you can enjoy a movie, that's your problem.  Quit being so hung up on race.  Other skin tones exist, deal with it.

it's not even a bulbmabla problem.

it's their preferred media told them to be outraged so they are.

this is a sheep problem.

Seemingly no problem that most of the female characters looks like children with massive breasts attached....

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 11, 2023, 04:47:00 AM

The issue with Ariel is literally that you cool have found a half-black (tan) girl and dyed her hair brick red, and I would tuned her black skin out.

This isn't a skin tone problem, or a hair color problem, or a race swapping problem, or a woke problem or a cultural appropriation problem, or evil liberal inclusiveness problem.

This is a you problem.

Needing to 'tune out' black skin so you can enjoy a movie, that's your problem.  Quit being so hung up on race.  Other skin tones exist, deal with it.

No. This is a you problem.

You are hung up on race. This is why you say we need to "deal" with other skin tones, when what actually at stake is supplanting people's childhood.



"Other skin tones exist so we should deal with it." (Like you're dealing with people having red hair, huh)

Never mind that her name is Snow White. What exactly is snow white about this girl above?

Should I be ashamed of a girl having white skin and black hair and being attractive? No I should not.

This is a you problem, not a me problem.  I have no problem leaving Shaft, Sazh Katzroy, and Lando Calrissian alone. But you, you want to get rid of my childhood.

You are the problem.

it's not even a bulbmabla problem.

it's their preferred media told them to be outraged so they are.

this is a sheep problem.

Actually, your media told you that this is a "triumph" so you believe them. I watched One Piece live action. Then another. Then another, all the way to the end. And having finished it, I said, "Fuck, this is such BULLSHIT!!! Where is all the cool three-sword fighting? Zoro barely even uses three swords! And where is Usopp fighting on the hill? That was an awesome scene and they cut it!"

No media told me this is bad. It may surprise you, but I don't watch news. I watch shows. When I watch a show, and I realize it sucks, it sucks.
But while we're on that top, the only news source that I found saying One Piece might not be so good was this one.
https://www.polygon.com/reviews/23852766/one-piece-live-action-review-netflix-season-1
All the rest tell how it captures the spirit of the anime and manga. Does it tho.

And when I talk about those points, you pull out the race card, and ignore the fact that what I really said is that Usopp needs more nose. His blackness is secondary to the butchering that already happened.

Saw recently about a girl complaining about the intenret people complaining about snow white ethniticity - the girl said "you guys are all wrong - jet black hair with snow white skin = oriental"



So having character changes maybe an inclusivity thing to bring in more diverse customrrs

But foooooor sure the white conservative complaining about is because they feel replaced.

aaaaaaaaaaaah so your bullshit is obviously bullshit







Sont watch media?
You seem to parot a lot of media.
How does that happen?
You think fox is following your thoughts and says "this bulma seems to know wharswhat, we should 'report' on that"?

Quote from: JJA on December 11, 2023, 08:15:04 AM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on December 11, 2023, 04:47:00 AM

The issue with Ariel is literally that you cool have found a half-black (tan) girl and dyed her hair brick red, and I would tuned her black skin out.

This isn't a skin tone problem, or a hair color problem, or a race swapping problem, or a woke problem or a cultural appropriation problem, or evil liberal inclusiveness problem.

This is a you problem.

Needing to 'tune out' black skin so you can enjoy a movie, that's your problem.  Quit being so hung up on race.  Other skin tones exist, deal with it.

No. This is a you problem.

You are hung up on race. This is why you say we need to "deal" with other skin tones, when what actually at stake is supplanting people's childhood.

I'm hung up on race?  Who started this whole thread by not being able to handle seeing black characters? I don't care what actor plays the role of a fictional character.  Who cares what skin color Snow White or a Vulkan is.  Well, you do apparently. 

So yes. Deal with your own racism.  Not my problem, not Disney's problem. Yours.

Skin tone isn't anything that needs dealt with, it's your reactions to it you need to handle.

Deal with it, dude.  Life is much better if you don't seek out ways to get outraged. Trust me!

Hey tell you what. I'm giving you homework.

Watch She's The Man on Netflix.

Based on 12th Night, there's the whole going to school in drag because soccer, blah blah blah, equal rights.

Now you've got all this nonsense about racism, but I want you to watch this movie, really look at this movie and whether you agree with my assessment that the late night kiss with the real Sebastian shouldn't have happened, and between the debutant ball and hanging out together as "boy" and girl, Olivia and Viola should have hooked up.

Because from where I stand, Hollywood does plenty to ACT like they're enlightened and not racist or sexist, but they waste a perfectly good lesbian plot. How many lesbians get roles in acting? Probably pretty few because Hollywood thinks the audience isn't turned on by lesbians.
If Hollywood is so progressive, why can't this movie work as it ought to? Yes, the other soccer player is a handsome guy, but it seems like the film is trying too hard to pull out a heteronormative ending.

You preach at me ad nauseam about how it's really about racism, you still haven't answered my question about appropriation, or how it benefits blacks to be seen as tokens without a culture of their own.
Black culture is beautiful. It's filled with very urban art, music, and kinda tough aesthetic. We say black were exploited in films like Shaft. I don't agree. Could we retroactively pay those involved in the film better? Sure, but those films very much cemented cultural identity, as much as jazz and rap made women like black men.

Yes, it's really about racism. Your racism, and how you think "representation matters" helps blacks. Wrong. Being represented for something you didn't do makes you a culture thief. 
They weren't the Little Mermaid, they aren't Snow White, but damned if Tia from Princess And the Frog doesn't make the entire story work. Do I care that this gal was often portrayed as European? No, because they make the entire setting work with a particular character, building her from the ground up. Original princess and the frog was a generic girl who could be anyone. But now I watch this movie and I'm like, yup it's Tia only.

Representation doesn't matter. Culture matters. For a couple pages now, you've stomped on mine, while ignoring that black culture is dragged through the mud. Thieves are not who you want blacks identified as. They have a culture, just as whites have culture.

Seriously, the dude is so tough that he tells cars to get out of the way. That's fucking awesome.

You know what's not awesome? Token Usopp. Token Usopp just shows how most of the characters in this series are weaked down because the special effects can't measure up to Oda's vision.

This entire battle on the slopes was cut. Black gal knows it, I know it, you don't seem to understand how fucking weak it makes the live action Usopp without it.

Bottom line, Netflix has zero clue what actual fans find powerful or interesting. I'm watching another of their properties, Yu Yu Hakusho. For a massive relief, it doesn't have one of these quota casts, and they get the general spirit of the show, the dynamic between Yusuke and Keiko, him and his mother, and him and Kuwabara.  They miss details that I think they should have had because they make a scene more powerful and go for the cheap gore effects.  But it feels more thematically accurate (8/10).  One Piece? Try 3/10. They just don't understand what the show is about, and all the hype in the world can't save that. I've seen 45 minutes of one episode of Yu Yu Hakusho, and even though it seems they're cutting a great deal, I feel like it overall works. One Piece? They got the entire mood of the show wrong.  "Let's make a super-serious show about pirates." Uhhhh. Hmmmm. I do believe you need to watch more of the show, as even 4Kids understood that it's not that (even if they did get the recommended age wrong).

Yes, it's really about racism. Your racism, and how you think "representation matters" helps blacks. Wrong. Being represented for something you didn't do makes you a culture thief. 

Wow.  You really think whites 'own' pretty much everything created previous to the 70's because of racism back then?  I suyppose you think remaking "It's a Wonderful Life" must have all whites because otherwise those minorities are stealing your culture?

Get a grip.

I'm pointing out that YOU have a problem with your made up cartoon fish girl having dark skin and that's your problem with being racist.

You're being racist by claiming that minorities are stealing white culture by being included in modern media.  You liked it better when everyone pretended they didn't exist, which is racist.

You have a narrow minded focus on skin color.  Who cares.  Nobody complains when an actor with green eyes plays a character that had brown eyes in a previous adaptation.  Nobody cares if someone is 2 inches shorter than another actor.  But boy, change skin color to something darker and you freak the fuck out. That's racist.

Keep deluding yourself.

Maybe you can answer what happened to these people?







Their image was on products, but it was apparently tres racist to have ANY black person represented on this product. Nevermind that they updated Aunt Jemima from a mammy type to a modern black woman here. That wasn't enough.

"Representation matters." Except when it doesn't.

Keep deluding yourself.

Maybe you can answer what happened to these people?

Yes, of course you are upset that racist stereotypes are being removed.  Do you miss having images of black slaves at your breakfast table?  Are you one of those racists who think blacks were better off as slaves?  I have my suspicions, but I'm sure you will confirm them soon enough.

Because that's what those images were. Aunt Jemima was a slave, and surprisingly some people were a bit offended by using a "happy slave" as a mascot.

Sorry your made up fish girl got 'ruined' by being given black skin. Would you also get angry if she's shown as having a mackerel fish tail instead of a salmon tail? Which fish is more attractive to you?

Their image was on products, but it was apparently tres racist to have ANY black person represented on this product.

LOL! Seriously?

Nike's Michael Jordan shoes would like a word with you.

Serena Williams would also like a word.

What's in your wallet?  If it's a Capital One card then Samuel L. Jackson also would like a word.

There are lots and lots of products represented by black people. It's not racist to have a person of color shilling for your product, but it is to use a black slave as your logo.