Uncategorized

This weekend marks the beginning of the Year of the Rat. To celebrate, one of the stars of the upcoming Birds of Prey movie — Cassandra Cain herself, Ella Jay Basco! — recorded a special Lunar New greeting exclusively for The Nerds of Color in front of the latest trailer. Check it out! Birds of […]

Birds of Prey breaks ground on many fronts. Its Feb 7th release will mark the first superhero movie both written and directed solely by women. The film will also make its mark as the first female-led R-rated superhero flick, and depending on how the Harley Quinn-led girl gang movie performs, it could break some box office records too. At a recent event to celebrate the launch of the film, Nerdist joined a small group of journalists who sat down with creator, producer and star Margot Robbie to talk about her five-year journey developing what she hopes is DC’s next smash hit superhero flick.

Warner Bros.

Robbie is clearly passionate about Birds of Prey, which makes sense since the actress-turned-producer first envisioned the project half a decade ago. But she explained that the rarity both R-rated and female-led superhero flicks threw up considerable road blocks as the process began.

“Even the quickest movie making process can be at least three years, I reckon,” Robbie told Nerdist. “But this one, it took a little longer, it was a tall order. It was before anyone had done an R-rated comic book film. I was saying, ‘I want to do an R-rated film.’ It was before Wonder Woman and I was saying, ‘I want a female-led action film’ – you know, those things weren’t being done yet. I think they wanted to make sure that if they’re going to take a risk like that, that it was going to be done correctly. So we spent a lot of time developing the script and making everyone feel confident in the material. Then once everyone was on board, some other things started coming out to help them feel like, ‘Oh yeah, this could work.’ After that it started to move really fast, but in the initial stages I think what I was pitching sounded crazy.”

Warner Bros.

Her inspiration for the film came during the press tour for Suicide Squad, when Robbie first fully encountered the huge fandom for her character as well as the amazing roster of female characters that the DC Universe had to offer.

“During Suicide Squad–when we would go to Comic-Con and such–I started to realize there was just such a huge fan base for Harley,” she remembered. “Whilst I was researching the character I started to read Birds of Prey and first I fell in love with Huntress, and I started looking into all of that. I was like, ‘Wow, there’s so many cool female DC characters and no one knows anything about any of them!’ So what if we had a platform for fans to get to know and fall in love with some of these other amazing women? Focusing on the Gotham City Sirens, there were only three of us and we were all well known, whereas with Birds of Prey you can pick any grouping for that, and I thought that might be the perfect platform to introduce some female characters who might really have some legs in the DC Universe.”

Warner Bros. 

Once she’d convinced the studio that Birds of Prey was a winning idea, Robbie was quick to find her creative collaborator in Bumblebee scribe Christina Hodson.

“Christina was one of the first writers that I met with,” she said. “We met, we started workshopping it, and we had a script within the first year, but we did get stuck in the treatment stage for a bit. Then it gets to the fun part, we’re good to go, we can bring in a director, we can bring in a cinematographer, we can start to cast… which is really the most fun part, when you see those actors reading your words and you’re like, ‘Oh, this is real!'”

As for how it feels now that the film is almost out there for the world to see, Robbie didn’t hold back her excitement – or anxiety.

“This is the scariest part,” she admitted. “I always find when you’re putting a film out there and you’ve spent years putting it together but it’s picture locked and you’re just waiting for everyone to see it, now I can’t do anything about it. I just have to wait for everyone to see it and that’s a scary thing, but I am really excited for people to finally see it. I just hope that they like it.”

Birds of Prey hits screens on Feb 7th.

The post Margot Robbie’s Five-Year Fight To Make BIRDS OF PREY appeared first on Nerdist.

Source: NBC / Getty

After Terry Crews voiced his thoughts on Gabrielle Union’s exit from NBC’s showcase America’s Got Talent, claiming the show offered “the most diverse place I have ever been in my 20 years of entertainment,” and adding that racism and a toxic work culture was “not his experience,” Union swiftly took to Twitter on Friday to reclaim her time.

Just a day prior Crews sat down with the hosts of Today where he distanced himself from Union’s experience. A Variety report published after her termination, which spoke with numerous sources, claimed she was asked to refrain from wearing hairstyles that were “too Black” and felt isolated after she reported a racial joke made by her co-worker, Jay Leno.

After a few days of build up, the show’s producers agreed to launch an investigation into AGT‘s work environment. In the midst of the investigation, former judge Heidi Klum and Crews, who currently serves as the show’s host, have both claimed that Union’s experience was not one they shared. But after Crew’s interview, it was clear that Union could no longer remain silent.

While she never specifically mentions Crews, Union began her Twitter commentary by responding to writer Wanna Thompson, who offered support after Crews’ interview went viral.

“Thank u!” Union wrote. Cuz girlllllll Truth telling, wanting change & having MULTIPLE witnesses who bravely came forward to let EVERYONE know I didn’t lie or exaggerate, really exposes those who enthusiastically will throw you under the bus, forgetting quickly who stepped up 4 THEIR truth.”

Why anyone would gleefully get up on TV and tell lies that NO ONE disputed…But we already know,” Union continued.

And in reference to Crews’ claims that the show values diversity behind the scenes as well as in front of the camera, Union had this to say:

As the investigation is ongoing, Union was committed to remain silent but, she voiced that she would rather continue to speak her truth and maintain her autonomy.

Crews’ comments proved to be discouraging and unsettling for many who believed he should have offered more support to Union or remained silent. By adding his voice to the other side, it left Union alone and without an important, nuanced outlook on the dynamics behind the scenes, as Union and Crews were the lone two Black faces on the show.

And many pointed out that after Crews came forward about being a victim of sexual assault, Union was one of his main supporters, being a rape victim herself.

Union has a plethora of folks on social media who have her back as the story continues to evolve. This is definitely nowhere near the end, nor should it be.

Sam Mendes’ World War I masterpiece 1917 is a frontrunner for the Best Picture Oscar, so I guess now is the time for people to come out of the woodwork with very bad opinions about it.

One such stupid opinion is that of Laurence Fox. Fox is an English actor you’ve likely never heard of (his credits include Victoria), son of another obscure actor, James Fox. The younger Fox appeared on the James Delingpole podcast (I don’t think I could make up a more British name) to whine about a scene in 1917 that included a Sikh soldier.

In the scene, traumatized and solitary soldier Schofield (George MacKay) finds himself on a transport with several other soldiers, including a Sikh soldier, Sepoy Jondalar, played by Nabhaan Rizwan. The moment isn’t emphasized, with the focus of the scene staying on Schofield, but it is noticeable and welcome to see a non-white soldier there.

For Laurence Fox, however, it was distracting and that’s where we come to his tone-deaf comments on diversity: “Even in 1917 they’ve done it with a Sikh soldier, which is great, it’s brilliant,” he said, “but you’re suddenly aware there were Sikhs fighting in this war. And you’re like ‘OK, you’re now diverting me away from what the story is’.” Apparently this guy can’t concentrate on a scene if there aren’t just white people in it. How terrible for him.

He went on to agree with the asshole host about “shoehorning” in diversity: “It is kind of racist—if you talk about institutional racism, which is what everyone loves to go on about, which I’m not a believer in, there is something institutionally racist about forcing diversity on people in that way. You don’t want to think about [that].”

Fox is wrong on so many levels here: Institutional racism is a thing—and a very real and big problem in both the UK and America—but even more pressing, the diversity in 1917 is not forced. It’s accurate and important. Sikh soldiers were a real and important part of World War I.

Thankfully, The MAMA Project, a UK organization dedicated to stopping Anti-Muslim violence, took time to educate yet another ignorant white guy.

History lesson for Laurence Fox:

Every sixth British soldier serving in WW1 was from the Indian subcontinent, Sikhs made up more than 20% of the volunteer army (close to 1.5m served).

74,187 Indian soldiers died and a comparable number were wounded.

Photos: UKPHA Archive. pic.twitter.com/NtCRd6mpQs

— TellMAMAUK (@TellMamaUK) January 21, 2020

Laurence Fox’s comments show the pervasive ignorance that comes from white privilege and living inside a bubble where white stories and people are the default and all that matter. It can be argued that 1917 does not go far enough in terms of diversity. The whole film could have been about a Sikh as easily as it was about a white man, but it is also a story based on Mendes’ own grandfather, so some of the whiteness of the film can be explained. What can’t be said is that the diversity in the film is too much. It’s a subtle, great addition to the film. It makes the movie better and it matters to audiences.

Rahul Kohli, who we loved on iZombie, tweeted about the impact of the moment.

1917 moved me in many ways. One way I wasn’t expecting was the inclusion of Indian soldiers, something many war films seem to neglect. I sat in the theatre with tears in my eyes at the mere sight of a Sikh soldier. I knew representation mattered, I just didn’t know how much. pic.twitter.com/t3oZv1FL2c

— Rahul Kohli (@RahulKohli13) January 11, 2020

1917 is not just an incredible film because it’s about war, but because it is a film about humanity. It follows a single person relentlessly and painstakingly through the hellscape of World War I and recognized that it wasn’t an all-white world. In doing so it shed light not just on the horrors of the war, but the people who fought in it, Sikhs included.

Fox, for his part, has been educated on this and actually apologized, even if it was wishy-washy.

Fellow humans who are #Sikhs

I am as moved by the sacrifices your relatives made as I am by the loss of all those who die in war, whatever creed or colour.

Please accept my apology for being clumsy in the way I have expressed myself over this matter in recent days.

L

— LAURENCE FOX (@LozzaFox) January 23, 2020

Hopefully, he won’t be the last person that learns from this film.

(via: Yahoo entertainment, image: Universal)

Want more stories like this? Become a subscriber and support the site!

—The Mary Sue has a strict comment policy that forbids, but is not limited to, personal insults toward anyone, hate speech, and trolling.—