I'm not asking for a GOOD "gypsy" portrayal. Not bad would suffice well.
I'm torn on the new Sherlock Holmes movie. Oh, I want to see it, definitely. But every time I see a trailer or picture and Noomi Rapace is in it, I wince and go, "Oh, please don't be atrocious, please don't be atrocious."
Which, she's a Swede. She ought to be a point in favour of the film.
But she's also playing a Gypsy fortune teller.
Obviously, there have been, and still are, Gypsy fortune tellers, quite often in large skirts and dangling jewelry. But along with the witches and thieves, the Gypsy fortune tellers are the only Romani people that ever make it onto the screen (and not usually played by Romani actors, either). TVTropes lists two main tropes for gypsies: Hot Gypsy Woman and Gypsy Curse. Everyone else, everyone you'd be way more likely to encounter IRL, never enters a film. Because gypsies, to the mainstream media, aren't people, they're fairytale creatures. They're put in a fairytale-type setting, they deal with magic, and none of this would be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that nothing else exists.
And, also, that the same tropes are being played straight that were played straight before half a million of them were killed in WWII. Just sayin'.
Of course, I can't know that the SH movie will be one of the worst offenders. After all, there have been semi-okay portrayals before, like Jenny Calendar (fully characterized, modern woman, who just happened to exist in a genre show where her entirely storyline was tied up with a gypsy curse, Jesus Christ what is with people?). And SH is partially made by Brits, who ought to at least be aware that "Gypsies" refers to people - a couple of different ethnicities of people, to be exact - who do exist. Guy Ritchie certainly does, seeing how he had Brad Pitt portray an Irish Traveller type "gypsy" in Snatch, though whether that portrayal is evidence of anything, good or bad, I can't even tell.
So it always comes down to the same thing - the wince, and the plea: "Please don't be atrocious!"
This entry was originally posted at http://katta.dreamwidth.org/563496.html and has
comments there.
Which, she's a Swede. She ought to be a point in favour of the film.
But she's also playing a Gypsy fortune teller.
Obviously, there have been, and still are, Gypsy fortune tellers, quite often in large skirts and dangling jewelry. But along with the witches and thieves, the Gypsy fortune tellers are the only Romani people that ever make it onto the screen (and not usually played by Romani actors, either). TVTropes lists two main tropes for gypsies: Hot Gypsy Woman and Gypsy Curse. Everyone else, everyone you'd be way more likely to encounter IRL, never enters a film. Because gypsies, to the mainstream media, aren't people, they're fairytale creatures. They're put in a fairytale-type setting, they deal with magic, and none of this would be so bad if it wasn't for the fact that nothing else exists.
And, also, that the same tropes are being played straight that were played straight before half a million of them were killed in WWII. Just sayin'.
Of course, I can't know that the SH movie will be one of the worst offenders. After all, there have been semi-okay portrayals before, like Jenny Calendar (fully characterized, modern woman, who just happened to exist in a genre show where her entirely storyline was tied up with a gypsy curse, Jesus Christ what is with people?). And SH is partially made by Brits, who ought to at least be aware that "Gypsies" refers to people - a couple of different ethnicities of people, to be exact - who do exist. Guy Ritchie certainly does, seeing how he had Brad Pitt portray an Irish Traveller type "gypsy" in Snatch, though whether that portrayal is evidence of anything, good or bad, I can't even tell.
So it always comes down to the same thing - the wince, and the plea: "Please don't be atrocious!"
This entry was originally posted at http://katta.dreamwidth.org/563496.html and has
comments there.