Don’t Call Me the ‘Black Seth Rogen’

Well said! The best advice: Keep working! It's the only way you're going to change anything. One day someone is going to call some young man "the white Colton Dunn" and some young woman "the female Colton Dunn." And they will be as proud of the label as you are of being called the black Seth Rogen. Not completely proud, but proud enough to keep the faith. And then one day no one will care. The industry powers will select the funniest or the scariest or the most emotional, or whatever the role calls for.

Smart piece and very clever ending line. Chris Rock can be as witty and biting as possible tonight but the imbalance within the Academy needs a protest from the insiders. Start fixing racism like this from the inside. Start with white members who need to see the problem, deem it totally unacceptable (which it is) and make change happen. That is the fastest way. The current members -- the majority men -- need to demand more diversity in gender and race and ethnicity. Threaten not to vote or show up and to speak out. Could that happen? You tell me.

With you on Straight Outta Compton. Great movie.

To be frank, I would feel insulted if anyone compared me to Seth Rogen. Successful, he is. Money, he has. But for an actor, being compared to a gross comedian whose success relies on films geared towards double-digit IQ high-school dropouts doesn't really sound like such a compliment to me.

That's show business! Everyone in it has to put up with demeaning and insulting advice from those who are in control. If you cannot take the heat get out of the kitchen. Not every perceived slight is racial.

There is nothing great about diversity. Too often it means 'going downhill'. Really.

ALL HUMANS Are African! Yes, the genetic material found in Africa from the most ancient humans means that we are all, in effect, Africans. I understand that Hollywood casting is not even remotely interested in such scientific findings, leave alone defining the gradient of African-ness among different human groups. The purpose of TV series is not to be fair, PC or objective; it is to people the narrative provided by the script writer. I'd go farther than that to say that typecasting is often an exercise in defining actors according to stereotypes that fit with the story line. Most stories have conflict among the characters, more often than not, about matters that we would not consider to be PC. So if we find non-PC stories interesting on TV, does that make us biased and capable of only seeing stereotypes? I don't think so, in no small part because often the point of the story is to show how people with significant differences can cooperate and resolve conflicts. Casting for actors is nobody's idea of a fair or logical practice. Its purpose is to find talented people who can do a credible job of acting their parts in the script writer's story. So long as we bear in mind that we're all Africans originally, the matter of stereotypes and non-PC ideas is part of being a member of a species that originated many centuries ago in Africa.

Perhaps I am reading this wrong, it seems that Colton is giving casting directors and directors a pass. They make racist/stereotypical decisions because that is "the industry," so it's not a problem. In the same piece, he seemed troubled to be known as the Black Seth Rogen. When he learned to stop fighting and move into his peg hole, things started going better in his career.
Um, er, yay!

Unless you think black is an insult, there is no inherent insult. I come from a small town and we might say Jack Smith is Elmwood's Liberace. If someone was tall, lanky and funny, you might even say Jack Smith is Elmwood's Eddie Murphy. The only obvious slur is that the referent is more well known or perhaps more talented.

However, black people do see it as an insult, and I can't put myself in their shoes or live their life to see why, or perhaps other white people think that black people will be offended.

The other day I was specifically asked to describe a co-workers appearance to another co-worker so that she could find her. I couldn't say African-American, because the woman wasn't American, and to leave off that she was black would cause confusion, so I said as confidently as possible, she's black, she has short hair, she wears glasses, etc. Still, everyone present looked at me askance and I felt bad.

Isn't the Wiz actually supposed to be the black Wizard of Oz? How is that an example?

I'm "boycotting" the Oscars, but not because of race. I think that's bogus. The Oscars are not objective and diverse people have won many awards. 12 Years a Slave won just two years ago. Do we really want quotas? Which ethnic group gets left out? Personally, I thought Michael B. Jordan and Tessa Thompson (Creed) should have gotten nominations. But, I don't think it was a racial thing. I think they were overlooked because of the vehicle and nostalgia for Stallone. I'm more offended that last year Birdman, a boring movie which was disliked by most everyone I know who saw it, won best movie, and the beloved American Sniper didn't because of anti-gun/war politics, but it's not why I'm boycotting either. BTW, Birdman's director (who also won) is Mexican and may win for Revenant this year.

Hollywood is business. They make movies to make money. Even if it repetitious, incestuous, etc., it is very successful because more often than not the desire to make money encourages them to make largely what their audience wants. People like stereotypes. Modern Family stereotypes (e.g., endless Hispanic and gay jokes/stereotypes), and is critically and popularly acclaimed.

I am "boycotting" b/c it's usually boring and I never found Chris Rock funny. The Academy will likely over-compensate next year, and if some sort of quota requires a black comedian to host - Kevin Hart or Anthony Anderson, please.

Although the Tony Awards are probably not much more diverse than the Oscars, if you want diversity, watch the Tonys. The actors and actresses there seem to be chosen because they have exceptional talent, in spite of looking like regular people. The Oscars, for as long as I have watched them, seem to be peopled by gorgeous people who might happen to have talent. Oscars- gorgeous first, then talent. Tonys- talent first, then maybe gorgeous further down the line. Why? Probably because the theater doesn't do close-ups, Mr. DeMille.

I don't think most actors would be insulted if labeled as the "white Chris Rock". The real story is a remarkable woman ran a showcase--all welcome--and many of those who listened to her got work.

Colton is an incredibly talented performer and writer and I love seeing him on "Superstore". His character is in a wheelchair, and it's great that the show features a three dimensional, funny character with a disability that isn't just there to be an inspirational story. The next step is for actors with disabilities to be hired to play these rolls, rather than able bodied actors. I appreciate Colton's struggle with insensitivity to diversity, but this strikes me as another example of the limited imaginations of Hollywood.

"At a casting session, the director is looking for a specific peg for the specific slot. The black friend, the Indian cabdriver, the over-the-top gay guy. No matter how creative a pilot or movie is on its first draft, scripts have a way of becoming homogenized as they go through a network or studio process."

Thank you for confirming what I have long suspected.

I refuse to watch American television programs because I can't stand the people. I don't know anyone like them and would not want to.

I find myself wondering whether the characters resonate with anybody. Is this a case of art mirroring life, or have script writers hijacked television and created an alternate America that seems accurate but is actually disturbingly artificial?

I worry that the people who watch these programs may be modeling their language and behavior on what they see on TV.

Maybe it's because I'm gay and I don't see myself or other gay people I know portrayed accurately. Either we're over-the-top queens or we're the weirdly straight-acting men on HBO's "Looking."

It's time to change who these shows are written and how the characters are selected and directed.

When major industry producers and directors in the post WW2 era were Jewish you never NEVER saw films in which characters were anything other than WASPs. Even actors who were Jews didn't make it public. Hollywood reflected this incredible unattainable desire to assimilate into what was the predominant culture.
Nothing has changed in Hollywood, America has changed and the media might someday catch up with the idea that the predominant culture has changed. But they stick to their formulas because somewhere deep in our minds many of us still make those ugly comparisons between ourselves and our unattainable "assimilated" self and we buy and buy into the myths.

Old saying: "only your mother loves you for yourself". For everybody else, it's "what can you do for me? I once was reviewing a class for writers at a college and they bought in a tough NYC literary agent to give the students an insider's look at the business. She spoke before the break and after the break only about 25% of the students returned. She gave them just a little too much reality and, I'm guess here, crushed their dreams. Show business, like publishing, is a business first and foremost. It is all about "how fast and easy can you solve my problem?".

Issues of racism and exclusion matter -- when they exist. Have you seen the menu of films nominated for best picture? They are phenomenal, and there simply doesn't exist an equivalent with people of color (Will Smith? Please). Idris Elba was fine, but the film fell flat. "Straight out of Compton" was an awesome film. Especially for someone that grew up in the 80's, or has a particular interest in the history of hip-hop. But these are subjective categories.

I wonder, would it be even more racist to nominate minorities just because they are minorities?

sad, mr. dunn, that you had to go for the in-kind irony of the george carlin gag, too good pass up, ...not fair to the memory of richard prior.

hard to find the real gripe in your litany of gripes, you got into the door thanks to the workshop, which delivered what it promised (check that against the norm)...now get to it, "make some changes - if (you) haven't changed too much while trying to get in "(also known as drinking the kool ade), in which case you can stay at the table, get fat and gripe more....

btw easy to agree that jason mitchell should have got a nod, for "...compton," but so should johnny depp for "black mass."

This is a great article and it's about both competition and compromise. I am all in favor of black actors being nominated at the Oscars. I look forward to seeing Creed and I wouldn't mind a black James Bond (he'd be no worse than Tom Cruise as 6'6" Jack Reacher).
If we're going to say which black actors and directors deserved to be nominated for the Oscars then we should not only say who appropriate nominees should be but which (white) actors should not have made the final cut. The idea of not identifying the less deserving white actors makes it a quota system.

Anyone who doesn't think racism in Hollywood is an issue, please explain to me how David Oyelowo did not get a nominated for an Oscan for his nuanced performance as Dr. King yet Bradley Cooper, playing essentially a block of cement, did?

Mr. Dunn's recount and experience have been repeated too many times elsewhere for it not to be an issue.

Is the same issue prevalent in movie industries in other parts of the world? In Asia or elsewhere, are minorities similarly placed in boxes?

What is one reason I like my daily life in Linköping/Göteborg Sweden so much? I think my answer bears on the subject under discussion as treated here by Colton Dunn. In the past 48 h I have been in and out of Nordstan (Göteborg) and went to a movie En man som heter Ove/A Man Called Ove. In another 2 hours I will be at Centralstation in Linköping. In Nordstan one swims through a shopping center packed with people of every conceivable ethinicty. Same when I get to Linköping.

This real world is what should be shown in far more films than it is. It is a world I love to be in, one of Sweden's gifts to me. A glimpse of this world is shown in En man som heter Ove. Rolf Lassgård is Ove and Bahar Pars is Parvaneh, pregnant and with two kids. He born in Sweden, she in Iran. They both should get awards for being equally extraordinary in showing the possibilities resulting from human beings responding to each other.

So since we are immersed in hearing that Bernie Sanders comes from "all white" Vermont, I would like to see a movie called "A Man Called Bernie" set in Burlington-Winooski where Bernie gets to know my Somali Bantu friend Abdi (Halal Market) and becomes all the more human for that. And the actor who plays Abdi is at least nominated for an Oscar-or better yet new film award.

Don't miss a Man Called Ove!
Thanks Colton Dunn.
Only-NeverInSweden.blogspot.com
Dual citizen USA-SE

Every actor should know by now that in the movies, you are generally not required to act a part, only to look the part. The industry wants stereotypes. When Alec Guiness asked David Lean if he could play Fagin in Oliver Twist, Lean said words to the effect of: don't be ridiculous. Guiness asked to audition and showed up in full makeup and demonstrated clearly to Lean he could could both look and act the part. The end of this story is cinema history.

It's sobering to realize that this same Hollywood is the cultural taste-maker for the entire USA.

Who is Seth Rogan?

What to do? You do what people have ALWAYS done. You bring what sells and what they asked for.
Once you have a foot solidly in the door, then you can work in character treatments that feel more like toy actor you always wanted to be.

Look back at crazy stuff like 1970's sitcoms. None of those actors probably liked the scripts, but the ones who survived are glad they ''sold their soul'' just a wee bit - like on NBC-TV's ''Laugh-In.''

There is some schadenfreude in watching Hollywood get accused of racism (albeit not so much in this piece). Its not just that most Hollywood types consider themselves ultra progressive and inclusive, but that they think much of the rest of the country is racist and delight in their moral superiority. Now it's being turned on them. Their response is "we just produce what people want to watch. It's complicated." But it's always complicated. Will be very tough for Chris Rock to do a good job. He's the best but there is always something very self (and black) depricating about his work. He tells the truth and the truth is not entirely favorable to blacks.

Are you sure you're not the gentile Seth Rogen?

Another self serving burp from the same PC spigot.
The NYT's running the series on what power looks like in America is at least related to broad concerns; the "diversity"that has been hijacked by a "minority"
as a code for look-at-me-too is tiresome, disproportionate. one-dimensional, whine based on a failure to define personal success or fulfillment.

Great column. I'm going to steal 'presidential' for 'mixed race.' Not at all surprised to learn at the end of this piece that Dunn has been a writer for Key and Peele. Thank you.

Really, would the blame re the exclusion of black actors from the Academy Awards lie with the writers? Should Jada Pinkett-Smith direct her fury at them . . . ?

If this is standard practice, it's no wonder that most things made by Hollywood are total garbage.

This is an accurate description of an environment that applies well beyond the film and television industries.

Exceptions can occur, but in my experience, if you are black and in one of the creative industries or almost any other industry, you may at some point be perceived as the "black" version of something or someone.

I led a dual career. In one I was a photographer, but to photo buyers I was a "black" photographer and my photos were anticipated to reflect a "black" sensibility and access to "black" neighborhoods or subjects.

In my parallel career, I was manager in a prestigious company, but I was also the only "black" manager. One interesting aspect of this was that white directors, managers and co-workers always knew my name even when I didn't know theirs. I was rare and they noticed. (Some always asked if I had seen the latest "black" movie and what I thought about it.)

Beyond that, in the past year I have had two doctors state in the first five minutes of meeting me (before they had completed any examination) that I was black and therefore they had to be extra aware of health issues I was (in their minds) more inclined to have (that I didn't have). I couldn't just be a patient, I was a "black" patient.

And if I am in a store, I am a "black" customer rather than simply a customer (i.e., watched closely, or thought to have less money).

This is the reality. But one can also reject this. I dropped the doctors. And I always have a choice of stores in which to shop.

just fyi. seth rogan is the product of the most absurd form of hollywood nepotism. fact is, he's awful. has no business being in hollywood. maybe the luckiest guy in show biz. he knew the right people and weaseled himself into pop culture. a complete fraud if you ask me....

Colton, don't take it personally or racially--this is a system where a writer/producer has to describe even the most inspired project as "Mad Max" meets "Brooklyn," or some other completely ridiculous set of buzz words.

Sorry about the racism in Hollywood (and the rest of the country). All I know is that Key and Peele was one of the weirdest, funniest shows I've ever seen. My channel surfing halted immediately every time I came upon it.

And why didn't we hear these blubberings the year "12 Years A Slave" won best picture? Ahh...yes. Because Hollywood actually does honor quality acting and film making from black Americans. Apparently, if in any single year (n=1 statistics) a favored, among some, black actor is not nominated, then it's evidence of systemic racism.

Great last line!! Tied it all together.

Oh man, Mr. Dunn, I feel your pain! Why can't Rogen be the white Colton Dunn? Or better yet both of you improve your game so you are the "new" Richard Pryor? ( Rogen could then be the "white" Richard Pryor.)

The Black Seth Rogen would be more like Andy Brown....from Amos and Andy.
So, she was way off base. Larry David is the white Kingfish.

I am in the industry. Hollywood puts everyone in a box, and compares everyone to everyone else. A white goofball would simply be called "a Seth Rogen- type."

If you don't like getting compared to others, pick a different business.

To be clear, the only role race plays in this story is the special opportunity you got because of it. And the subsequent manager and series you booked as a result.

All at the terrible cost of being compared to a popular celebrity.

Poor lamb.

I find it astonishing that anyone, New York Times included, can spend significant time and effort on Oscar nominations. There are so many truly important issues to report on, poverty, elections, war in Syria, race relations vis a vie our police. Who cares what awards are given to actors by actors, producers, etc.?

Great perspective. I'm an actor recently submitted for one of those diversity showcases, so I appreciate the read.

As near as I can tell, Hollywood is all about making money. Sydney Poitier made money for movies. Bill Cosby made money for TV, starting with I Spy. If they thought it would have paid off, they would have had Hoss marry a Black woman on Bonanza.

As long as the audience for movies wants the characters in movies to look a certain way, that's how they are going to look. Stop blaming Hollywood, it's we the audience that wants what we want.

How can Academy Awards reflect the diversity of America when the Oscars aren't limited to U.S. movies and U.S. moviemakers. With the exception of a single Oscar for best foreign-language film, the Oscars go to English-language movies, including films make in Canada, Ireland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, England and Australia as well as European films shot in English. This eliminates virtually all movies made in Asia, Africa and Latin America. The English-speaking world is much whiter than the United States.

I really liked this column. It hits the right note to me -- especially the "Hollywood has no time for your feelings. It's not P.C. and it's not racially sensitive." It rings of truth. I guess that's why the whole bruhahha about the Oscars being so white doesn't really seem like a thing to get outraged about. Hollywood is the nexus of a shallow industry that puts a premium on looks and youth. It's never been particularly interested in real/ordinary people. (I am a lot more concerned when I go to an event where are the waiters and the kitchen help and the custodians are all people of color and the attendees are not.) Still, I hope that Mr. Dunn hangs in there and gets the roles eventually -- he seems like a funny guy and one who'd be great fun to watch. Good luck to him.

This faux diversity in Hollywood should be called out for what it is; insulting stereotyping. Its purpose is not to portray a multicultural society; it is to (a) provide cliches for us to sneer at, and (b) make a buck.

Keep complaining folks.

And BTW, and I hate to say this, but, the fence-sitting attitude of the writer does not help. To be insulted and then go out and get an agent seems to me to be part of the problem, not a solution.

In India, George Carlin would be the "white (some famous Hindu comedian)" and in Nigeria, George Carlin would be the "white (some black comedian)" and in Russia, George Carlin would be the "American (some Russian comedian)." Your being called the "black Seth Rogen" is a function of the U.S. still being a majority white country and culture, not racism. By the way, it is a high compliment to you; I wish they would have called me the "white Michael Jordan" on the basketball court at Summer Camp. (Basketball being a predominantly black culture at its highest level.)

George Carlin would have loved that last line...

Sounds like that casting director was showing you a way to market the author to people who are interested in product and not "art." It wasn't her job to give him validation. So far as networks, studios and producers are concerned, the creative class exists to put people in the seats. Equitable collaboration is the exception not the norm. The complaint is the same as it was in 1916, except that minorities are so much more represented today. The gradual demographic shift has made this inevitable, even as worldwide distribution typically relies on stereotypes for cultural bridging.

Here at home, stereotypes of all stripes abound. Needless to say, they include the stupid (white) dad who has no idea what's going on in his family, the arrogant (white) stockbroker whose hubris begs a fall, etc., etc. Everything new eventually can become a stereotype. The antidote is that old saw from the '50s: "There are no small parts, just small actors." If you want to be creative, your job is to shine... tough skin and big heart both help, too.

Great writing here, Mr. Dunn. It's great to get a chance to see inside the Hollywood machine through your eyes.

And Michael B. Jordan, among many others, should've been nominated!

This was an interesting eye-opener. Thanks.

Hollywood is an industry. It's a business. If you want to act outside of a business culture, do indie films or do theater.

After a number of years as a "non-standard type" in Hollywood myself, I have come to feel that making my own material, my own scripts, movies, plays and songs -- with the help of supportive people whom I then turn around and help to make theirs -- is by far the more fulfilling way to go. (Of course, I'm not addicted to fame or money like most Hollywood aspirants.)

And nowadays, with Netflix and the Internet and so on, there is a way to reach the market for our non-mainstream stuff. So I tend to be a little impatient with colleagues who try so hard and eagerly to get a shot at those "network showcases" and then complain about how the network showcases them. Of course the corporate minds squeeze us into stereotypes -- that's their business model.

It's up to us to boycott and end-run the same-ol runaround, and make our own model (s).

"The Wiz" actually is a black version of "The Wizard of the Oz."

So if the woman discussed in the story has put people into today's television shows, I guess white women ( the writer probably would have noted her race if she were black) are not as discriminated against as they would have us believe. The person deciding who gets into these showcases and who is excluded wields a great deal of power.

[[The phenomenon of classifying something as the “black ____” is not new. “The Wiz” is the black “Wizard of Oz.”]]

Um, “The Wiz” IS the black “Wizard of Oz.”

So, what?

Having graduated (1959) from Beverly Hills High School (where I was a social outcast) I learned early on to ignore celebrities. You, I assume, are one and 'Seth Rogan' presumably is another one.

As the "newspaper of record," I will allow that the New York Times is obligated to report on celebrities but the bulk of us are permitted to not care.

I presume that the paucity of comments here is an indication that hardly anybody cares.

A good column and all the points are right on save one, the wiz as the black Wizard of Oz. That's what the The Wiz is. Specifically. A black, (and urbanized) version of the Wizard of Oz. It is its raison d'etre. It is a specific reimagining. One can't be insulted by that.

As one could calling Gregory Hines the black Fred Astaire, (not that I've heard anyone do that, but it would that is the kind of thing he is talking about). There is a distinct difference.