Sly's Unintentional Slight & The Big Short

Sylvester Stallone accepts his Golden Globe 

After last night's Golden Globe Awards, the film awards season officially kicks into high gear.

As I mentioned on the blog last Tuesday, actor Michael B. Jordan's performance in Creed is one of the reasons the latest installment in the Rocky franchise has been a financial success at the box office as well as a hit with critics who've lavished the film with accolades.

Including critic Chris Klimek who pronounced it the "Best Rocky Movie Since Rocky" .

The original Rocky earned ten Oscar nominations and beat out All the President's Men and Network to win Best Picture at the 1977 Oscars, where it also won Best Director for John G. Avildsen and Best Film Editing.

The glowing reviews for Creed were reflected in Sylvester Stallone winning Best Supporting Actor at the Golden Globes last night, but the actor quickly generated a backlash on mainstream and social media when he stepped up to the stage and thanked a bevy of film executives from MGM and Warner Brothers for green-lighting the original Rocky back in 1975 - but failed to even mention or thank director Ryan Coogler or his young costar Jordan.

Creed director Ryan Coogler

Coogler (who directed Fruitvale Station) is the African-American director who not only directed Stallone and Jordan in Creed, he's the one who conceived the idea and story for Creed and first approached Stallone about the project and persuaded him to do it.

Now Stallone is 69-years-old and was obviously emotional on stage as he received a standing ovation from his peers, so under such circumstances anyone might be expected to forget a few things.

But I think the point of the flack he's getting is based on the fact that he's been in the industry long enough to know that you thank the director and your costar who made your performance possible.

Especially before mentioning a long list of film executives from 41 years ago; taken in context of the film industry's efforts to recognize African-American talent from both in front of and behind the camera, it wasn't Stallone's best PR moment.

By all accounts Stallone formed pretty tight relationships with Coogler and Jordan during the shoot, and though he recognized his oversight at the Globes and went back on stage to thank them during a subsequent commercial break, in the merciless immediate-now of the Internet age the mere perception of a slight seen in the context of cultural insensitivity is a hard cat to put back in the bag.

Just ask Mel Gibson, who's infamous profanity-laced anti-semitic tirades against Jewish, African-American and Hispanic people have left him in Hollywood's doghouse for ten years.

I'm not comparing Stallone's oversight to Gibson's bigotry by any means, but Hollywood is under the spotlight for issues related to cultural sensitivity and someone of Sly's stature recognizing the creative achievements of people of color makes a huge difference to the industry - and he should know that.

Steve Carell and Ryan Gosling in The Big Short

Next up on the awards slate will be the Screen Actors Guild Awards which will be broadcast live on Saturday January 30th.

One of the cool benefits of being a member of SAG-AFTRA (as yours truly proudly is) is the opportunity to vote for the SAG Awards - which also means you get free screeners of films and television shows that are in contention for awards season.

So I was fortunate enough to get a DVD copy of The Big Short directed by former Saturday Night Live writer Adam McKay in the mail courtesy of Paramount.

The film is based on the 2010 non-fiction book 'The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine' by author Michael Lewis.

It examines the financial crisis that started in 2007 by looking at an eclectic group of Wall Street insiders who understood the deeper complexities behind the fragility of America's housing bubble and the inflated profiteering off of people's mortgages that was taking place and successfully used that information to reap huge financial profits by essentially placing bets on the implosion of the economy.

Adam McKay's adaptation of the book is an excellent film in the vein of movies like All The President's Men (which chronicled Watergate) and director Michael Mann's brilliant 1999 film The Insider starring Al Pacino, Russell Crowe and Christopher Plummer which chronicles former Brown & Williams VP of research Jeffrey Wigand's efforts to testify in court and on 60 Minutes about the tobacco industry's intentional manipulation of nicotine levels in cigarettes in order to purposefully make smokers more addicted so they'll buy more cigarettes.

Where All The President's Men and The Insider are characterized by a serious dramatic cinematic approach to the heavy subject matter, The Big Short brilliantly infuses dark comedy as a means to break down the complexity of the mortgage crisis to help help average folks better understand what actually sparked the Great Recession.

Matthew Broderick breaks the 4th Wall in Ferris Bueller's Day Off

For example, the movie breaks the unwritten "rule" of acting by breaking The Fourth Wall at various points throughout the script.

For you non-actors who might not know, as an actor standing on a stage faces an audience, he or she is surrounded by three walls; one behind, one to the left and one to the right.

The fourth wall is an invisible barrier between the front of the stage and the audience.


Remember Matthew Broderick's character Ferris Bueller speaking directly to the audience in the 1986 comedy Ferris Bueller's Day Off? That's breaking the Fourth Wall.

Actors are taught not to break the fourth wall, meaning you stay within the script and direct your attention and focus on the actors in the scene, or the set - as a stage actor, you do have to project out towards the audience; but you don't acknowledge them.

As a film or television actor, you never (or rarely) look directly at the camera - if it's not very specifically called for, like breaking the Fourth Wall, even a slight glance at the camera lens during a scene is considered a serious rookie mistake on set and it will ruin a take that must then be re-shot.

Some films (or plays), particularly comedy, sometimes break that rule and have actors directly address the audience; The Big Short uses that effectively.

Actress Margot Robbie in The Big Short

At one point actress Margot Robbie (pictured left) appears in a bubble bath as a butler serves her champagne while she explains how sketchy subprime lending practices created massive profits based on non-existent money by intentionally offering mortgages to people who couldn't pay them back.

The scene is a pretty funny poke at the greed and excess of the uber rich that finds an innovative and sexy way to explain predatory lending.

In another scene celebrity chef and 'Kitchen Confidential' author Anthony Bourdain cuts up old fish to throw in a fish stew to explain how banks and Wall Street firms took really risky sub-prime mortgages out of bad Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDO's) and mixed them in together with higher rated prime mortgages in other CDO's to hide them and sell them off to greedy investors who had no idea what they were buying.

CDO's are basically a bunch of assets pooled together to make a financial product which can be sold, in the case of the financial crisis, most of these CDO's were filled with people's mortgages. When the housing bubble collapsed and home prices fell and people began to default on their mortgages, the value of these CDO's plummeted.

The Big Short effectively explains how this massive financial crime happened and how some people made a lot of money by "shorting" the housing market - betting money that the housing market would collapse.

It's the kind of film that's as educational as it is entertaining and people need to see it.

Don't read too much into The Big Short being snubbed at the Golden Globe Awards last night.

The Globes are decided upon by the 83 members of the Hollywood Foreign Press Association which is largely made up of freelance journalists.

There are some really strong acting performances in this film and my sense is you'll see those recognized by the SAG Awards and the Oscars - which are voted upon respectively by the approximately 160,000 members of SAG-AFTRA; or in the case of the Oscars, the almost 7,000 members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.

The Big Short is a film for the people with a meaning that transcends entertainment and deserves awards recognition - and as the most important part of the awards season unfolds, I think it will.

The Flack Over Finn & Racial Spidey Sense

British actor John Boyega as Finn in 'The Force Awakens'

Earlier today I read an interesting article by blogger Martin Reese about the mixed reactions by some black and white fans to the character Finn in 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens' who's played by British actor John Boyega (pictured left).

Fan-generated controversy over the casting of people of color in major Hollywood film roles continues to offer fascinating insight into the complexities of race in this country.


Oh and speaking of which, kudos to actor Michael B. Jordan for all the accolades he's received for his role as Adonis Creed in the latest film in the 'Rocky' franchise, 'Creed'. Especially after all the grief he got for being cast as The Human Torch in last summer's critically-panned 'Fantastic Four' - check out my blog from August 12, 2015 if you missed that particular cinematic drama.

Before I dive into this, let me first mention that there's been a lot of positive reaction to Finn, including a very insightful commentary in the December 18th issue of The Hollywood Reporter by the creator of ABC's 'Black-ish', Kenya Barris - who discusses why Finn is a real positive for young kids of color.

In some ways the negative reactions to diverse or 'unconventional' casting choices serves as a gateway that permits us to look closer into the ways ingrained perceptions of race (or racial identity) affect the deeper levels of the collective American psyche.

The aforementioned Martin Reese is a self-described engineer, director, screenwriter and who, as the subtitle description to the title of his blog "Martin's Theory of Relativity" says, "Blogs about topics in science fiction, fantasy, horror and comics specifically as it pertains to people of color."

Back on December 26th, he posted a blog that posed some interesting questions about why some black and white Sci-Fi fans (specifically fans of the Star Wars series) populated social media with a flurry of negative comments.

As Reese observes on his blog, "members of Black Social Media are complaining about the Finn character. Seems Finn was not the Black Jedi they were looking for. There have been comments like: "He’s cooning.";"He’s Jar Jar Binks all over again,";  "It’s the emasculation of the Black male to prop up Rey,"; "He’s just a janitor."

Okay, very minor spoiler alert - in 'The Force Awakens', it's made clear that at some point early in his Stormtrooper career, Finn worked for a time as a janitor on a major Empire installation / base.

Some black folks found that racist, which baffles me.

Pre-Jedi Luke Skywalker looks to the future in Star Wars

I mean Luke Skywalker was basically a dirt-poor hick farm boy in the original 'Star Wars' which came out in 1977.

I saw that film eleven times in the theater (really) and I don't recall people of any race complaining that Luke was some kind of galactic version of a redneck just because he worked on his Uncle Owen's farm.

(By the way I'm still not really sure what Uncle Owen was actually farming in the deserts of Tattoine in that movie?)


Just look at some of the complaints (see above) about the character Finn that Reese cited as examples from some disgruntled members of Black Social Media.

There's a sense that some people of color have projected onto Finn (consciously or unconsciously) a hypersensitivity to various ingrained racial stereotypes that have been used to paint African-Americans in this nation for generations; on and off the screen.

People of color in this country have what I describe as a "Racial Spidey Sense", it's like an antennae that detects the presence or intent of prejudice or racism in social situations or public spaces.

As an African-American, you sort of get used to having to constantly be on guard for racism in certain situations. Life is tricky enough, but if you let your guard down racism can sneak up on you in a situation where you least expect it; and it can really throw you off balance.

Racism in America can be very sneaky

Thus "Racial Spidey Sense" is hypersensitive, but it has to be - because racism in these United States can be very, very subtle.

So my sense is that the negative comments about Finn found on Black Social Media are a mix of overreaction, sarcastic wit - or just "Racial Spidey Sense" tingling at the sight of a major black character on the screen in a Star Wars movie.

Now I realize that some of you who may have read this blog before might be thinking, "Dude, seriously, you're like the last person who should be accusing black people of being hypersensitive about anything..."


But I've been quite open about the fact that one of the reasons I began this blog was to have a place to record my thoughts and experiences in order to step back and examine them as written words.

Simply so I can ask myself, Was I being oversensitive? Did that really just happen? Am I wrong?

I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong.

I know I'm oversensitive and sometimes I interpret things incorrectly or misread mixed signals - but as a person who actively devotes time to observing the human condition I'm experienced enough to know that I'm often right about some of the things I observe or feel too.

Many times I've had people email me or leave comments on the blog telling me they felt I was misreading something that I knew I was right about.

Jamaican bobsled team's Olympic helmets. Hmmm....

Like back in February, 2014 during the last Winter Olympics in Russia where I blogged about the Jamaican bobsled team's helmets being painted like watermelons being imagery based on racial overtones - someone commented that I was wrong and that's cool, we can agree to disagree.

Or the time back in 2009 when I blogged about an experience I had at a TD Bank branch on East 43rd street in Manhattan - I had people comment that I misread what happened.


As the title of that blog post suggests, I was admittedly a bit pissed off when I wrote it, but more people commented that they'd experienced the same thing - that blog was written seven years ago and I still get hits on it.

(By the way, being a black person in a bank in America could literally be an entire blog unto itself.)

So let me just wrap up by saying we all have a right to our opinions.

Even though I respect people (both black and white) who had negative things to say about John Boyega's character Finn in the new Star Wars, I disagree with them.

I'm a film fan and a writer and I felt the Finn character was well-written, multi-dimensional and flawed in a way that made him human.

Some people don't like to talk about it, but there are film fans who were a little uncomfortable seeing an attractive leading white female character forming a bond with an attractive black male character onscreen.

But that's okay. The Force Awakens has made more than $1.51 billion worldwide since it opened back on December 18th and is on track to be the highest grossing film in box office history; and it just opened in China today.

So it's probably safe to say that the fans who had negative things to say about the character Finn are dwarfed by those around the world by those like me who liked him.

And that's okay too.

After all, Finn and Rey are just fictional characters in a story that took place "A long time ago in a galaxy, far, far away" from America.


  

'Fantastic Four' Casting Controversy: Hollywood's Struggle To Cast Across Ethnic Lines

Kate Mara, Jamie Bell, Miles Teller & Michael B. Jordan

The last time ethnically diverse casting choices in Hollywood were a topic of discussion on this blog was just before Christmas back on December 19, 2014 when the cast of director Ridley Scott's 'Exodus: Of Gods and Men' was generating controversy and a lot of chatter on social media.    

The media images of thuggish-looking heavily-armed civilian "Oath Keepers" standing around the streets of Ferguson being ignored by police is just too depressing to contemplate, so I'd like to weigh in on the negative buzz surrounding 20th Century Fox and Marvel Entertainment's latest superhero summer action flick 'Fantastic Four'.

The reviews for this film have been pretty brutal, and that's from critics and fans alike.

'Fantastic Four' scored an anemic 9% on the "Tomatometer" and a 23% audience approval rating on the RottenTomatoes.com Website, which said of the critic's consensus of the film, "Dull and downbeat, this Fantastic Four proves a woefully misguided attempt to translate a classic comic series without the humor, joy or colorful thrills that made it great."

As you may have heard, some of those poor reviews have been attributed (in part) to the controversial decision to cast an actor of color for one of the main characters who's always been a white blond-haired guy with blue eyes.

My biggest concern is that the exclusive hierarchy of studio executives, producers, directors, agents and casting directors who wield the kind of clout to get mainstream films made in Hollywood will read way too far into the word-of-mouth social media buzz surrounding the casting of African-American actor Michael B. Jordan (pictured above) in the role of Johnny Storm, The Human Torch.

Jack Kirby-illustrated Fantastic Four cover

As a self-professed film geek who also grew up collecting comic books (and still does) and has written unsold screenplays and graphic novel scripts, I think part of the problem with the audience reaction to this 2015 Fantastic Four film stems from the departure from the look of the traditional characters in the hugely-popular comic book series.

Fantastic Four fans have remained devoted to the comic book since it first came out in the 1960's during the "Golden Age" of Marvel Comics. The signature "look" of the four main characters has remained relatively unchanged over the years.

Aside from some minor alterations to the color and style of the their distinctive uniforms, and periodic changes to Susan Storm's hair styles over the years, this classic comic book cover from the 1960's (pictured left) is basically the image of the characters that has been ingrained into the minds and imaginations of countless thousands of Marvel comics readers.

Through JFK, Vietnam, the Civil Rights struggles of the 60's, the NASA moon landings, Nixon, Watergate - the Fantastic Four pretty much remained a constant.

That "constant" was comforting to fans in the same way the Enterprise crew's Starfleet uniforms on the original 'Star Trek' television series, Detective Columbo's rumpled trench coat on 'Columbo', Archie Bunker's chair on 'All In The Family', or Hawkeye Pierce's worn Army fatigues on 'M.A.S.H' were aesthetically comforting extensions of the characters millions loved - aspects of the characters that defined them.

From my perspective, the differences between the Fantastic Four characters as seen in the image above and the casting of the 2015 film, were simply too jarring for some of the hardcore geek fan base that loves the Fantastic Four; and even the younger generations who flocked to see the 2005 and 2007 films.

As much as I respect the young actors cast to play the Fantastic Four in this third film adaptation of the classic Marvel comic book to hit the big screen, (including Kate Mara as Susan Storm / The Invisible Girl, Kamie Bell as Benjamin Grimm / The Thing and Miles Teller as Reed Richards / Mr. Fantastic) the casting choices are just one of the reasons this film has performed well below expectations.

But it's the casting of an African-American actor to play Susan Storm's brother Johnny that's been one of the more controversial issues being discussed on social media.

Michael B. Jordan as 'Wallace' on HBO's 'The Wire'

Now make no mistake, I'm a huge fan of actor Michael B. Jordan (pictured left).

His work as a performer stood out on HBO's 'The Wire', and considering the level of talent in that cast, and the fact that David Simon's show is regarded by many critics as arguably the greatest television drama ever created, that's no small feat.

Jordan played the character Wallace with a piercing sensitivity and quiet gravitas as the character struggled to find balance between his "day job" in "The Pit" as a low-level drug dealer for the notorious Barksdale crew in the low-rise projects, and raising four young children in squalid housing conditions without the presence of an adult.

Wallace's ill-fated and heart-breaking efforts to try and escape "The Game" and leave the projects of West Baltimore behind later in the series brought grown men (including yours truly) to tears - I know I'm not the only guy who cried when Wallace was killed on 'The Wire', nor am I ashamed to say so.

Jordan's critically acclaimed work in the 2013 film 'Fruitvale Station' about the true story of 22-year-old Oscar Grant's last day before he was shot and killed on a subway platform by police demonstrated that Jordan is one of the most talented young actors working in film today; and clearly a future star.

But that said, while Fox casting him in the 'Fantastic Four' reflects positively on his talent and status as an actor now seen by the industry as a 'bankable' star, I don't think the casting choice served the story itself.

As much as fans of the Fantastic Four comic series and film fans in general also like Jordan as an actor, I think Johnny Storm being reintroduced in the reboot of the franchise as an African-American created a lot of confusion and awkward discomfort.

'Fantastic Four' just wasn't the right project to do that.

The Fantastic Four have been around since the 60's and Sue and Johnny Storm being siblings is just part of that story line; they happen to both be blond and blue-eyed. There's nothing racist about that; that's the way legendary Marvel illustrator Jack Kirby and writer Stan Lee created the characters.

Nichelle Nichols as Lt. Uhura on  the original 'Star Trek' 

Imagine if a new 'Star Trek' film came out and Lieutenant Uhura was cast as a blue-eyed blond; how do you think long-time fans of the show would react?

Uhura's race was an essential component of 'Star Trek's' identity in the same way Sue and Johnny Storm almost looking like twins was an essential component of the Fantastic Four.

When Fox made the decision to change that character element, they essentially tried to fix something that wasn't broken.

From a media marketing standpoint, it was kind of like Coke introducing New Coke.

A major studio like 20th Century Fox has more than enough resources to hire writers to come up with an action vehicle for Michael B. Jordan to act in with a diverse cast; but even if their intention was to try and attract more younger African-Americans into seeing the film, trying to thrust Jordan into the Johnny Storm role was a mistake - and it cost them.

To me this is not about the money. The studio executives from Fox who put $120 million into the production of the latest 'Fantastic Four' plus millions more to market it would obviously disagree with me on that, but box office numbers are how Hollywood gauges success, so let's look at those quickly. 

Fantastic Four was released over the weekend of August 7th on 3,995 theater screens during what was generally a pretty busy three day period for film releases, but it only pulled in $26.2 million.

To put that into perspective that's the lowest box office opening for a major release featuring Marvel characters since 'Ghost Rider: Spirit of Vengeance' premiered to a $22.1 million opening weekend back in 2012.

Compare that to the staggering $191.3 million 'Avengers: Age of Ultron' made for Disney's Marvel release over it's opening weekend back in April; it's since made $1.3 billion worldwide.

Again, what troubles me is that the Johnny Storm casting issue will overshadow the other  reasons that the 'Fantastic Four' movie didn't connect with audiences.

First, in my opinion Miles Teller, cast as Reed Richards, was not an effective casting decision either.

Teller is clearly a talented performer as demonstrated by the critical acclaim he received for his acting performances in the 2013 film 'The Spectacular Now' and in the Oscar-nominated 2014 film 'Whiplash'.

Fox's decision to cast him makes sense, particularly since his role as Peter in the mainstream film adaptation of the widely popular Young Adult trilogy, 2014's 'Divergent'  and  2015's 'Insurgent' makes him an appealing choice to help draw the coveted teen demographic to the movie theaters - but casting him as the young Reed Richards in 'Fantastic Four' just didn't seem to excite fans.

'Fantastic Four' director Josh Trank

Fox also took a pretty big risk in handing off the reins of a $120 million production to newbie director Josh Trank too (pictured left).

Trank impressed the industry and fans with his directorial debut, the 2012 surprise sci-fi hit 'Chronicle'; which Michael B. Jordan was also cast in.

That sci-fi film grossed over $125 million for Fox and it was made on a budget of $12 million.

When it debuted at number one at the box office, at age 27 Trank became one of the youngest directors to open a number one film; which puts him in some impressive directorial company.

Steven Spielberg was 28 when he directed 'Jaws' and James Cameron was 30 when he directed the original 'Terminator'.   

You can see why Fox took a gamble on Trank, but handling a $120 million dollar production is a lot different than directing a $12 million film.

Trank clashed with film executives over changes and re-shoots and later shot himself in the foot when he sent out a widely-read Twitter message that essentially shifted blame for the poor quality of the film onto the interference by film executives; he tried to delete the Tweet but it had already gone viral.

As Kim Masters wrote earlier this morning in a Hollywood Reporter story about what she termed the "Fantastic Four Blame Game": 

"Days before Fantastic Four opened, director Josh Trank sent an email to some members of the cast and crew to say he was proud of the film, which, he wrote, was 'better than 99% of the comic book movies ever made.' 'I don't think so.' responded one cast member." 

That kind of arrogance, as well as the decision to publicly air his grievances with the same film executives who rolled the dice and gave him the chance of a lifetime to helm a super hero movie with a $120 million budget says a lot about Trank.

It also offers some psychological insight into his decision-making ability and how that might have affected the kinds of questionable day-to-day decisions on the set and in post-production that led to the film being what it is.

In the wake of the phenomenal success he had with 'Chronicle', in 2014 Trank was also tapped to direct the new 'Star Wars' stand-alone film for Disney, but left the production after clashing with Lucasfilm executives over the direction and execution of the film.

To be fair to Trank, he's gone on record as saying his being personally overwhelmed with the degree to which he was under the microscope and in the public eye during the filming of 'Fantastic Four' led him to rethink being the director of an installment in the nearly-mythical 'Star Wars' franchise.

So it's obviously not fair to simply blame the problems with 'Fantastic Four' on Michael B. Jordan being cast as Johnny Storm, but the week before the release of the film, when the casting change was already creating buzz, a couple of radio DJ's in Atlanta did just that.

Jordan's Atlanta interview

What should have been a fairly straight-forward radio interview of the featured 'Fantastic Four' cast members devolved into an uncomfortable example of how race can impact perception in America.

As Krystie Lee Yandoli wrote in a July 31st piece for Buzzfeed.com, Jordan and two of his 'Fantastic Four' cast mates, Kate Mara and Kamie Bell, got up and walked out of the interview after one of the DJ's interviewing them continued to obnoxiously press Jordan to explain how his African-American character could possibly be the brother of Kate Mara's character who is white. 

Jordan was patient and professional about it as he tried to explain to the DJ that there were any number of reasons a black person and a white person could be siblings, but the interview turned south and the three actors simply got up and walked out.

But as we know, controversy over casting characters is hardly new for Hollywood and it's interesting how audience and fan reaction to Hollywood casting decisions can vary widely.

Authentically Asian? Actress Emma Stone

Director Cameron Crowe was recently forced to issue an apology for his decision to cast white frequently-blond haired actress Emma Stone (pictured left) as character Alison Ng, who is one quarter Asian, in his recent comedy 'Aloha'.

Vanity Fair's June 3rd article by Josh Duboff was just one of the slew of mainstream and social media articles covering the casting flap after fans and some critics reacted negatively to Sony's decision to not cast an authentically Asian actress for the role.

The racist e-mail exchanges between former Sony Pictures head Amy Pascal and producer Scott Rudin that were leaked last December and the fact that Amy Pascal was the one who greenlit 'Aloha' only adds to the burden Sony faces as it struggles to overcome the pall of bigotry and ethnic insensitivity that hangs over the studio like a cloud.

Consider this, Pascal was also the one who greenlit 'The Interview', a dark comedy about a fictional assassination attempt of North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un.

It was okay for Sony to cast an Asian actor to play a buffoonish Korean dictator who's portrayed as an idiot, but when it came to casting the part-Asian female love interest opposite Bradley Cooper 'Aloha'  no talented Asian actress could be found? Really?

The decision backfired for Sony and Crowe as many viewed it as another example of Hollywood "white-washing" film casts because of producer's apprehension about non-white actors in principal roles in mainstream commercial films.

In all fairness, sometimes Hollywood just can't catch a break.

Snarky bloggers like me give them grief for not putting ethnically diverse casts into mainstream movies, then when Hollywood tries to cast across ethnic lines, audiences rip them apart for it.

Do film executives deserve credit for trying? Absolutely.

Decades of history in the film industry isn't going to change overnight and maybe Fox deserves a measure of credit for taking a shot at casting Michael B. Jordan as the Human Torch in 'Fantastic Four' even though the film didn't click.

But not every project is going to be a hit. It's already made over $62 million and will make more overseas and on VOD or OTT digital video services like Netflix or Amazon.com; and a sequel has already been announced for 2017.

Who plays the Human Torch next time is yet to be seen, but there's no question Michael B. Jordan has a positive future ahead of him as an actor.

Hopefully next time, the executives at Fox will roll up their sleeves and attach him to an innovative project with an original story line; one where the character can be defined simply for who he is and the choices he makes and not for who the audience expects him to be.