[ SECRET POST #4206 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4206 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 24 secrets from Secret Submission Post #602.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

They should have gotten an older actress.

[(Anonymous)]

+1

Oh, a meaty autobiographical role about an older, fat, trans(? - some sources say Tex Gill was trans, some say they were a butch lesbian) person? Let's cast a young thin actress!

I understand why people are upset. There are plenty of actresses out there looking for roles like these that actually fit the profile of Tex Gill physically, but Hollywood loves "uglifying" pretty actors and putting them in fatsuits and inches of prosthetics.

[(Anonymous)]

They should have gotten a trans man. but if they had to get a cis actress, they should have got a fat one.

[(Anonymous)]

It's not that easy. ScarJo is going to put butts in seats, but even more so, will attract investors to fund the movie.

[(Anonymous)]

Is it still worth making the project if it can only be made with Scarlett Johansson?

I mean, I get the financial reasons, and why it's profitable for the investors if they have Scarlett Johansson in the movie. But I don't personally care much about the investors and their profits. And I don't think that their profits can be considered a real justification for making the movie a certain way. I understand that it was their reason for doing so; it's just not a reason that I care about, or think is adequate.

[(Anonymous)]

How do you suggest they fund the project?

[(Anonymous)]

Have your famous actor in a major role that is not that character.

[(Anonymous)]

If that's the only way of making the project, is it still worth making?

[(Anonymous)]

Yep, director and writer get to tell the story they want to tell.

[(Anonymous)]

Can you expand on what you mean by that? Not sure I understand what you're getting at, sorry.

[tabaqui]

Didn't work with Ghost in the Shell, apparently.

[(Anonymous)]

Still, these facts are very telling of what people want to change about the industry. People are ready for change, Hollywood wants security, yadda yadda.

[(Anonymous)]

if they're going to cast someone cis, they should have cast a man

[(Anonymous)]

^^^^^^

[(Anonymous)]

I don't think non-trans people get how harmful this habit of casting women to play trans men or men to play trans women is, in terms of its cultural impact on a society that largely does not understand trans people already.

just the image of ScarJo playing a man in this movie, then giving interviews in press junkets in dresses and makeup, and walking the red carpet clearly presenting as a woman only conflates in otherwise uneducated people's minds that trans men are women "pretending" to be men. that should be the very thing trans narrative movies should be working AGAINST, not contributing to.