[William Cloud Hicklin]

It strikes me that Amazon's use of 'diverse' casting was brilliant. No, not in any sort of dramaturgical or artistic way, or even really in a political way: but as a tactic it has been quite successful.

Here was Amazon's problem: they knew going in that they were working with the bestselling English-language book in history, and following the insanely successful movies; there was a truly massive fanbase out there. But they also knew that they were going to be selling what the bulk of fans would consider rubbish, and the backlash would be terrible. How to defang it?

The answer was cynical but brilliant: discredit the fan protest by by setting it up for the label of "racist." Deliberately go, not just for 'diverse' casting, not just illogically diverse casting (multi-racial communities and even marriages, in a 'medieval' setting), but then intentionally choose actors who were going to make a big deal of it. Yes, actors' personalities are a definite factor in casting. Peter Jackson knew that he was looking at a three year fairly isolated shoot, and has stated sought actors who would get on together and even bond, in which he mostly succeeded. Here, Amazon's people went for actors who would be aggressively forward with their ideology, starting with Lenny Henry, long known as an outspoken activist.

This was the setup. The fans were goaded, the fans protested, and Amazon lowered the "racist" boom which has been successfully seeded throughout the media coverage, and used to rhetorically nullify the fact that viewers hate this POS (30% on Rotten Tomatoes).

And yet- Henry and Nomvete and Cordova and the rest, in their assertive ideological earnestness and occasional indignation, seem completely clueless as to the real situation: that they are tethered goats. Back in the day, tiger hunters would tie a goat to a post in a jungle clearing, and wait for the tiger to pounce so that they could blast it. And is that not precisely the mechanic at work here?