Scarlett Johansson, who faced a violent reaction for playing an Asian character in the live action of Paramount Ghost in the shell remake, then he faced so much reaction after being chosen as a trans character in the next Tex Gill biopic Rub and throw that she He retired from the show, he has more ideas about what kind of parties people should give him. In an interview with As If magazine, the actress complained about political correctness in art and opined that "As an actor, I should be able to play" Any person, or any tree, or any animal, because that is my job and the requirements of my work".
Johansson's comments were picked up by the Daily Mail and have already caused enough excitement over the fact that the actress has published a statement that says the article was "edited to click on the bait and is widely taken out of context." A context is missing: the interview is Not a standard profile. Instead, As If paired Johansson with contemporary painter David Salle, and the two collaborated on a photo shoot of the actress with her work; Johansson and Salle talked about the project. One part of the context Johansson probably refers to is the shoot itself, during which Salle asked Johansson to "play with the idea of living inside a tree," according to photographer Tatijana Shoan, which is why the idea being thrown like a tree was easily at hand. But unless the interview has been shuffled beyond recognition, his statement seems a bit misleading. Johansson writes that "The question I was answering in my conversation with the contemporary artist, David Salle, was about the confrontation between political correctness and art," as if Salle raised the issue. But as it was published, that section of the interview shows Salle trying to get Johansson to talk about the mechanics of his trade, while directing the conversation towards political correctness in the casting. Johansson was asked about his role models and the actors of the Method of the 1950s were mentioned, describing them as follows:
With actors like James Dean, Natalie Wood and Marlon Brando they exhibited a kind of liberation, a kind of show of emotions without apologies. You even see it in the writing of the time with dramatists like Tennessee Williams and Arthur Miller. They would write these wonderfully dirty, complicated and ugly scenes for actors and audiences to experience. It was a time of real guts.
"It was a time of real guts" seems the moment when the wheels jumped to the track. Here is the full exchange on the casting that followed, which surely makes it look like Johansson was the one who led the conversation:
Do you think mode or generation is still important today?
You know, acting goes by trends.
Are we seeing an acting trend today?
Hmm … We live in such a strange time that it has no identity in many ways. I do not know if there is a trend in the performance, but there are certainly trends in the casting at this time. Today there is a lot of emphasis and conversation about what it is to act and who we want to see representing on the screen. The question now is, what is acting anyway?
Right. Who gets to play what roles …
You know, as an actor I should be allowed to play any person, any tree, any animal, because that is my job and the requirements of my work.
Yes. Should he only represent himself, his gender, his ethnic background, or can he, in fact, play beyond these categories?
There are many social lines that are being drawn now, and much political correctness is being reflected in art.
Does that bore you? Bother you? You dare? You dare? I know it's complicated, there probably is not an answer.
You know, I feel it's a trend in my business and it has to happen for various social reasons, but sometimes it gets awkward when it affects art because I feel art should be free of restrictions. What do you think, David? You are literally creating art all the time.
"Without identity", by the way, is how Johansson described his character in Ghost in the shell. Anyway, read the full interview, but if the context is missing, it is not obvious what it could be. Johansson clarified the point he was trying to make in his statement:
Personally, I believe that, in an ideal world, any actor should be able to interpret any person and Art, in all its forms, should be immune to political correctness. That was the point he was making, even though he had not found it that way. I recognize that, in fact, there is a generalized discrepancy between my industry that favors white and cynical actors and that not all actors have been given the same opportunities that I have had the privilege. I continue to support, and I always have, diversity in any industry and I will continue fighting for projects where everyone is included.
The end result is that another round of unconvincing defenses awaits us for the problematic release, although in this case, the fact that Johansson is not playing with a tree or a person of a different gender or ethnic origin in a specific upcoming movie should keep the news. Relatively short cycle. That's good, because when Johansson's next movie, Rabbit Jojo, It will be released in October, we will want to have a slightly different conversation about the casting. Here is his co-star, screenwriter and director, Taika Waititi, who talks about his role in the film, an adaptation of Christine Leunens' novel. Caging Skies, and his general theory of casting, which is not as blind to color as Johansson's:
It turns out that racially insensitive pitching can be used for both good and evil, as long as you're annoying be disrespectful