Yup. I respect your opinion too. It's all subjective because we're dealing with creative works. There's no hard and fast rule for me, so I take it on a case-by-case basis. Artists (novelists, composers, painters, now movie directors) have been mixing it up for centuries, quoting other works and artists, appropriating styles and mixing them. If that's a director's intention and he or she is clear about it, and executes that vision well that's one thing. That's creative prerogative. But if it's clumsy and for instance pretends to be historical while being inaccurate, that's when I have a problem.\n\n\nIndeed; I mean, I think we can agree that if they, say, made Theodore Roosevelt a dark-skinned individual for a biographic documentary film, it would be totally inappropriate. In the same vain, I would think it would be ridiculous to cast, say, Robert Downey Jr. as Barack Obama in a film made about him. \n\nThese are extreme, quasi-ridiculous examples, but you understand what I'm sayin'; I just feel like, with what they're doing now in Hollywood, things have gotten out of control and gone off the proverbial rails -- I mean, we have a rabid anti-American who has been hired by Marvel to write some new Captain America stories, and he reimagines the Red Skull supervillain in the likeness of one of the nicest conservatives you'll ever meet, Jordan Peterson? Really? Making this guy who has spoken out AGAINST the Nazis a SUPER NAZI in the new books?\n\nAnd THIS guy is going to be penning the new Superman project, which is supposed to see a black actor playing the role to fight for something OTHER than "truth, justice and the American way" because he feels America is a racist, ugly place? \n\nTHIS is the kind of stuff I have a problem with, Jenga; I'm sorry. I know this isn't the same as casting Fishburne as White or Wright as Gordon, but the whole thing is going in a wrong direction for the sake of catering to a certain fringe element that appears to be bigger than we originally suspected.