Author:
.
<
.
>
76.169.74.243
Use
this link
if you want to link to this message and its entire thread of discussion.
Date:
10/8/2021 1:51:30 PM
Subject:
RE: Deborah Kerr
strange, i dont think you notice the relation with deborah kerr and ben-hur
picture kerr as bens wife, how much more appropriate that would be.
in all actuality that is kerrs role. to the exact. yes you see it now, dont you?
now lets futher review "hiya" hararaeet once again. oh yes.
does she actually resemble a biblical figure, aside from her olive skin tone?
no? does she more resemble something else which is not at all biblical? indeed.
you know its hard to imagine white people in biblical times, aside from all the stunningly accurate history channel recreations depicting brown people trotting along the levant. but the reality is that whites were a significant presence. i would argue more so significant than anyone else. yes indeed. people, including yourself apparently, cant seem to imagine that region being anything other than semetic. the same as they cannot ever picture italy being entirely white, and a nation of white heritage. its blasphemy to presume so as the image of olive toned people wondering those areas are so deeply engrained into peoples understandings and beliefs.
kerr is the absolute most perfect ancient roman or greek female actress of those hollywood decades and probably still is today.
seeing a woman who actually does pass off as something ancient, fantasy-wise at least, is much more appropriate than just casting literally anyone with dark skin.
yes, with all certainty, kerr would have been perfect in that film.
that was absolutely her role.
if not bens wife, then aged to be his mother. or his sister.
yes it would have been perfect. it could have been perfect.
now why exactly do you believe the role went to "hiya" harareet and those other women instead?
hummmm?
explain yourself!
