this post was submitted on 03 May 2025
449 points (94.3% liked)

Today I Learned

23585 readers
171 users here now

What did you learn today? Share it with us!

We learn something new every day. This is a community dedicated to informing each other and helping to spread knowledge.

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)


Rule 1- All posts must begin with TIL. Linking to a source of info is optional, but highly recommended as it helps to spark discussion.

** Posts must be about an actual fact that you have learned, but it doesn't matter if you learned it today. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.**



Rule 2- Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.

Your post subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.



Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.



Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.



Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.



Rule 6- Regarding non-TIL posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-TIL posts using the [META] tag on your post title.



Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you vocally harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.



Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.



Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.



Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.



Partnered Communities

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

😳

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ImperialATAT@lemmy.world 168 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

I think the groundbreaking part was Dan O'Bannon’s note in the Alien script that gave us more amazing characters in Aliens.

“At the start of Dan O'Bannon’s script for Alien, there’s a note that few other screenplays contain: “The crew is unisex and all parts are interchangeable for men or women.” It’s a line that fundamentally altered the nature of the film, affecting everything from the presentation of its characters to the way Ridley Scott and his team approached casting, and it was certainly for the best.”

source here

[–] Chip_Rat@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Haha I read that originally as "they be robots and have removable arms and legs that fit erybody else."

That's fascinating though. I must say I like Aliens much better. I rarely revisit Alien but I might do in the near future.

[–] SpongyAneurism@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 22 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Imho, they are different genres altogether.

Alien is a real horror-movie, while Aliens leans more towards the action-movie genre, of course retaining horror elements, but it doesn't quite play on the body-horror and fear of the unknown as much as the first part does.

[–] lagoon8622@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Alien is art. Aliens is a schlocky action movie (nothing wrong with schlocky action movies, but it's just a completely different thing)

[–] shalafi@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I've watched Alien in the background dozens of times, had forgotten how it really went. My wife had never seen it, no clue.

She sat like this, edge of the couch, glued to the screen the whole time. And I came away with my view of the movie totally refreshed. A work of art indeed!

Cheers to your wife.

Looks like she enjoyed herself. 😆

[–] exasperation@lemm.ee 5 points 2 months ago

I feel the same way about the first and second Terminators, and the first Rambo and its sequels.

[–] Sergio@slrpnk.net 8 points 2 months ago

So you're saying that one's a bug-hunt, and the other's a stand-up fight?

[–] Chip_Rat@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes. As a child Alien was too scarey for me but I was able to watch Aliens. As an adult I don't usually wade into horror, except on a Super Eyepatch Wolf tangent, but still love action sci-fi.

I find it interesting how a trilogy (then... However many there are now...) can wander from one genre to the other. It's risky because you make a sequel partly because the the financial security you get from your fan base. Not sticking to that fanbases tastes is risky but also introduces people to new things in a more comfortable way.

I think it's kind of a natural evolution. The fear of the unknown effect of Alien wears off for the viewer, once the creature has been revealed and defeated in the first part. So a sequel in the same vein woulndn't really work, but recycling the creature as a fearsome enemy in an action flick surely does.

I also don't really gravitate towards horror movies as I find most of them to be pretty cheesy or tryhard edgy. Alien is the exception. This one is a work of art.

[–] GraniteM@lemmy.world 96 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I knew I made this for a reason

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)
[–] Agent641@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

Most people are assuming that her default skin tone is that of the foster mother. Pretty sure with enough makeup and studio lighting you canake a naturally tanned person look pretty pale.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Mothra@mander.xyz 68 points 2 months ago (3 children)

I see from the comments that apparently it was makeup. I wonder to what extent this is makeup, since after all, ALL actors on set wear make up. I have a similar skin complexion and if I sunbathe for a week I'll look like Vasquez too.

[–] Dagwood222@lemm.ee 15 points 2 months ago

If an actor loses weight or works out to be more muscular, that's commitment to their craft.

If they lay out in the sun, that's cheating!

[jk]

[–] prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 2 months ago

Well, to be fair, blackface is also a type of makeup

[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

The fact that they tanned her is not the issue. The fact that they tanned her to play an ethnicity she is not, is the problem. Especially during an era where people of that ethnicity were lucky to be typecast in something.

I know it's before this time, but Martin Sheen had to change his name to get work in Hollywood because nobody would hire someone with a Hispanic sounding name.

[–] hydriplex@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

That's his son. And his other son is Emilio Estevez which is Sheen's real last name. Technically it's Charlie's last name too, but he kept his father's stage name for the stage.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nieminen@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

James Roday Rodriguez did the same before he got his role in Psych.

[–] Enzy@lemm.ee 60 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Brown face? That's just a tan

[–] NIB@lemmy.world 60 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The american obsession with melanin levels is insane. Why cant they be normal and be racist to people who live over the next hill, like us enlightened europeans.

[–] sowitzer@lemm.ee 19 points 2 months ago

That’s offensive. Those over the hill have bushier eyebrows. They are totally different and meant to be hated.

[–] Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Nah you guys just claim the brown ppl are "culturally different" because they're Muslim so they should leave

[–] mic_check_one_two@lemmy.dbzer0.com 36 points 2 months ago (4 children)

I think the point is that if it was important for the character to be Hispanic, they could have hired a Hispanic actor for it. Her being Hispanic didn’t have any meaningful impact to the story, so why not just let her character be white? If they did it to make the film more appealing to Hispanic viewers, then surely an actually Hispanic actor would have been a better fit. White actors have historically been given distinctly non-white roles just because Hollywood is afraid of melanin.

The history of it goes all the way back to old black and white films, with movies like Dragon Seed or The Teahouse of August Moon, which both had major asian roles filled by popular white actors. The unfortunate part is that they often aren’t respectful when they do it; It often ends up being a caricature of the race instead. Anyone who has seen Breakfast at Tiffany’s will know what I’m talking about. Or hell, there are even cases of outright blackface, like a white actor playing Othello in the 1965 movie. Many people have criticized Al Pacino’s accent in The Godfather as offensive, bordering on caricature.

If you want more recent examples, we could point at Jake Gyllenhaal playing a middle-eastern prince in Prince of Persia. Or Johnny Depp playing a Comanche caricature in The Lone Ranger. Another good example is Scarlett Johansson being given the role of Matoko Kusanagi, in Ghost in the Shell. The movie is based on a Japanese anime, and is based in Japan. But Hollywood refused to hire a Japanese actor to play the role, and instead gave it to the whitest white woman who has ever whited.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

To Be Fair

Johnny Depp's character was considered insane by the other native americans in the film, who were played by actual native americans like Saginaw Grant. It's not much better but the film still doesn't pretend he represents them.

Didn't Gods of Egypt have an all white cast and 1 black guy playing as... the gods of egypt...?

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 8 points 2 months ago

Thanks for pointing out that there's always more than one lens to look at the world through.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Masamune Shirow himself confirmed that Kusanagi was a mass production model on the outside to blend in and not have her harvested for parts, like a custom body would be.

Also the whole fucking theme of the franchise is “what is a soul (ghost)”. Kusanagi has canonically swapped “shells” multiple times, is it a ship of Theseus thing or is she still the same person?

But this is an argument I can’t win, so I’ll leave this here and disappear 🫠

[–] BackgrndNoize@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Yet in the original Anime the shell is still Asian, cause they are in Japan, why change that, you can pretend it was done to make a statement about soul vs body, but everyone knows why they actually hired a white actor. Also they treated that subject matter only at the surface level, a better example of this theme is in the movie The Creator.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] CluckN@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Brown nose? That’s just business.

[–] Jerb322@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Brown finger, that's just play time.

[–] Texas_Hangover@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 months ago

Its almost like the people who come up with this batty shit never actually leave the basement, so they don't understand suntans.

[–] jaemo@sh.itjust.works 51 points 2 months ago

I wrote an article about how Jim Carrey used greenface (very offensively too) during the filming of "The Mask", but hardly anyone cared.

He's not even an amphibian!

[–] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 42 points 2 months ago (1 children)
  • Hey Vasquez, have you ever been mistaken for a man?

  • No, have you?

She was bad ass

[–] GeeDubHayduke@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 2 months ago

That movie is one of the best sources for quotes.

"This little girl survived ... with no weapons and no training. Right?"

"That's great! WHY DON'T WE PUT HER IN CHARGE?!?"

[–] Davel23@fedia.io 29 points 2 months ago (3 children)

She's also in Titanic, but in a very small role as an Irish mother.

[–] BigTrout75@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Just curious, is it offense that she dyed her hair reddish and has Hollywood freckles for the Irish role?

[–] khannie@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago

Irish. Trying to muster one fuck to give but just can't manage it unfortunately.

Side note: She's a great actress.

[–] dumbass@leminal.space 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The Irish don't care, they're too busy secretly taking over the world.

[–] BigTrout75@lemmy.world 11 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Good thing god created alcohol to slow them down.

[–] dumbass@leminal.space 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Hasn't worked, those bastards are everywhere!

It wouldn't surprise me if we finally make contact with that uncontacted tribe off the coast of India and there was already a bunch of Irish dudes chilling out with them already.

[–] starlinguk@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Bit weird. Irish people tend to have dark hair and pale skin.

[–] EmoDuck@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 months ago

SMH my head, so now she's doing irish face? Potato face? No wait, now I'm being racist

[–] SharkWeek@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 months ago

And Lethal Weapon

[–] HappyTimeHarry@lemm.ee 20 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Im pretty sure thats just a tan, but its interesting that her imdb page says "Jenette Goldstein is a true chameleon"

[–] UpperBroccoli@lemmy.blahaj.zone 16 points 2 months ago

I think shes got a company now that is making extra comfy bras.

[–] felixwhynot@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Was it makeup? Lighting can do a lot too…

[–] MudMan@fedia.io 2 points 2 months ago

It was, even though apparently one of her parents is of Brazilian and Moroccan descent.

This is mildly racist in two different directions. There was clearly an assumption of what a "private Vasquez" should look like they were shooting for. She was allegedly cast partially because she was in the right shape for the character already. These days they would have gotten an actor in shape that looked like the ethnic stereotype they had in mind, probably.

Which is still kinda more messed up than just having cast her, kept the character and just not spray tan her. Didn't even have to change her name. I don't speak for American latinos, but from where I stand the visual design of the character seems like a much bigger issue than the casting.

[–] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 2 points 2 months ago

Didn't Schwarzenegger wear mudface in Predator?

load more comments
view more: next ›