8个月前

Selective rage

390 评论

I think in case of Ra's Al Ghul in Nolan movies, the title is passed from one leader to another. He's not a 1000 year old warrior.
- I really don't think it would have hurt to cast an Arab actor as Ra's Al Ghul. And then you wouldn't need a convoluted explanation like that.
  
  That's true. But I wonder if the creative team thought it would be in bad taste to have an Arab guy as head of global terrorist organization so soon after 9/11
  
  In that case, maybe choose a different villain.
  
  Bruh. Since it is a title, it doesn't matter who is holding it. Even comics Ra's Al Ghul doesn't mind that considering he wants Bruce Wayne to be his heir.
  
  Yes, again, you can come up with that convoluted after-the-fact explanation that wasn't in the movie or you can not piss off Arab people.
  
  I don't think not being typecast as terrorists pisses off arabs
  
  Good thing the character isn't a terrorist then. The head of a cult of assassins is not a terrorist. Assassins target specific people for specific reasons, not to create terror.
  
  They want to destroy a city by means of chemical warfare. They're absolutely terrorist jfc did you even see the movie?
  
  I thought we were talking about a character that's the head of a league of assassins, not the actual plot of the movie. You know that the movie didn't have to have that plot, right? You realize it's not some sort of requirement to make that specific Batman story, yes?
  
  ....What even is your point? In almost every iteration Ra's al Ghul is trying to destroy Gotham (or Star City in case of CW's Arrow). He's absolutely a terrorist.
  
  Given assassin actions by definition are terror attacks, I'll disagree with you.
  
  Please show me that definition. Assassinations are generally not done to cause terror. They are done to achieve more specific political goals (i.e. get the guy in power out of power).
  
  So the same definition of terrorism, i.e. specific actions done to further political goals. You're mad for no reason here
  
  Why?
  
  For the same reason the excuse of a white character being named Mitsimu Hashimori is that it's just a title being passed down is something people might find offensive.
  
  I think artists can make whatever they want (within the bounds of the law) and that it's up to the consumers to decide whether they like it or not with their wallets.
  
  When did this become about what people can do and not about whether or not they're being highly offensive?
  It is legal to make and distribute a movie where a guy just yells the N-word for 90 minutes. I assume you would find that offensive. Most people would.
  
  Right, so I wouldn't watch it or give them money, and I'm sure you and most other people wouldn't either. But if that person wants to make it, more power to them.
  It's been about that the entire thread. The OP image is about casting choices.
  
  No one ever said anything about what people can or can not do.
  
  Ghassan Massoud (the guy that played Saladin in Kingdom of Heaven) would have been perfect
- No, I don't thinking would work since his daughter's called Thalia Al Ghul, indicating Al Ghul is a family name.
  Also,we don't need to make up apologies for whitewashing.
  
  He literally says 'we have been around for 1000 years and since Nolanverse is devoid of any fantastical elements, passing the torch is the only possible explanation.
  Her name is Talia Al Ghul from Doylist perspective but not from Watsonian.
  For all we know, she doesn't have any last name/family name in-universe and uses the alias of Miranda when she's globetrotting for a bit of terrorism.
  
  He literally says 'we have been around for 1000 years and since Nolanverse is devoid of any fantastical elements, passing the torch is the only possible explanation.
  I always thought he meant the League of Shadows, not a single position.
  Her name is Talia Al Ghul from Doylist perspective but not from Watsonian.
  She calls Ra's Al Ghul her father. It may be an interpretation that Al Ghul is a name, but so is the title interpretation. And imho the name is far less of a stretch.
  
  Yes. He is referring to League of Shadows. However, very early in the movie he says "If you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal, you become something else entirely" so it seems obvious in hindsight that this applies to Ra's as well as if applies to Batman.
  Hell, I always thought Ken Watanabe was Ra's Al Ghul and the title passed on to Liam Neeson after the former died.
  
  However, very early in the movie he says "If you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal, you become something else entirely" so it seems obvious in hindsight that this applies to Ra's as well as if applies to Batman.
  But that doesn't mean Henri Ducard became a Ra's Al Ghul or Ra's Al Ghul became the League of Shadows. It's like a religious thing, like christians consider themselves reborn after baptism.
  Hell, I always thought Ken Watanabe was Ra's Al Ghul and the title passed on to Liam Neeson after the former died.
  I can see where you're coming from, I'd expect some quote like "I am Ra's Al Ghul now" or something.
  Again, I can see your interpretation, but I think Ra's Al Ghul simply being a name is far less a stretch and requires fewer assumptions.
  
  Ra's al Ghul translates to demon's head. Do you still think it's just a name?

390 评论