ASAN: A PSA regarding Tropic Thunder

Post Reply New Topic

I definitely get what you're saying, BokeKaeru. And to be honest, I'm not thrilled with some of the other stuff in the movie. (No, I'm not humorless, it's just not my kind of humor.) But there are several key differences. Dreamworks has black, gay, and Asian people working them. For at least some of these issues, they were attuned to the possible issues. Stiller has mentioned not wanting to offend war veterans. Also, the original script for Robert Downey Jr. to say the n-word, but the actual black actor working on the film (don't know his name, sorry) objected. Because of his feedback, they switched it so that his character said the word instead. Now, I think it's a bit troubling for one person from a certain group to be deemed the judge of what's appropriate or not. But at least other groups were involved with the process and on Dreamworks' radar screen. Until disability groups started speaking up, they had no idea that this was an issue at all. The thought just never entered their minds to begin with. The movie's context reflexts this: the r-word is thrown around as though it has no weight, wheras the n-word is spoken only once. If we have gotten filmmakers to pay more attention to the representation and inclusion of disabled people--and I believe we have--then we have already done something pretty important.

Indeed, are we above being made fun of?

I guess it comes down to hateful intent.

What do you have when you bury 100 [insert your favorite group, I like lawyers] up to their necks in sand?

Not enough sand.

Movie makers try to tickle our funny bone. Are we laughing because we hate that group and feel they deserve our derision, or are we laughing because we like to laugh at ourselves and we feel that group deserves inclusion?

Well, I'm autistic and Australian, so, really, I don't care. The movie looks funny.
It looks inane, stupid, and funny. These aren't serious films; it's just a stupid laugh.
Again; why should I be offended at the word ret*d when I'm not one? If someone thinks I ought to be called one "just because", well, then, I'll just break their jaw.

Okay, I’ve seen the movie.

First, I was offended.

Then I got to thinking about it. They’re not really making fun of ret*d people. They’re making fun of movies and people who make them.

What’s the difference between Stiller playing an actor playing a ret*d person and Downey playing an actor playing a black person?

It’s like I asked before, are we above being made fun of? It might be more offensive to think that ret*d people are too special, too sensitive, to be made fun of. Personally, I’d like to be more included in the love-fest.

I think it’s good that this movie is out there. I think it brings more attention and does less damage to our image than “Rainman.” I think it’s good that ASAN is making a fuss about it, though it might be more appropriate for ARC to do so, because it brings more attention to our issues.

Finally, I think it’s a pretty freakin’ stupid movie.

In fact, I think it’s ret*d.