We recognise that it is our responsibility to help ensure that casting decisions reflect the diversity and culture of the time periods portrayed. In this instance, we failed to live up to our own standards of sensitivity and diversity, for which we sincerely apologise. Lionsgate is deeply committed to making films that reflect the diversity of our audiences. We have, can and will continue to do better.
That is a funny statement. Let us look at some movies to help us understand film industry a bit better. For all I know, arm or leg amputees can be "used" the way any director sees fit, stereotyped in mischievous, evil and painful ways, and no one else gives a shit. That's where it's at.
|Movie||Subplot summary||Amputee actor/actress||Director||Distribution||Public apology (for casting fake actor/actress)|
|Hancock (2008)||Arm amputation, twice; derogatory portrayal, asinine plot, unacceptable stereotyping.||Fake.||Peter Berg.||Sony Pictures.||No.|
|Iron Man 3 (2013)||Two amputee characters on the "evil" side, asinine plot, weird stereotyping.||Fake, both.||Shane Black.||Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures.||No.|
|Mad Max Fury Road (2015)||Lead role with arm amputation, tanks in the end, stupid plot, weird stereotyping.||Fake||George Miller.||Warner Bros Pictures.||No.|
|Home of the Brave (2006)||Injured war veterans; good plot and acting.||Fake.||Irwin Winkler.||Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer; Millennium Films; Nu Image.||No.|
|Kingsman - The Secret Service (2014)||Evil double leg amputee fighter with sword like blades. Reasonably stupid plot and stereotyping.||Fake.||Matthew Vaughn.||20th Century Fox.||No.|
In addition for fakeness of amputee actors, 4/5 movies (above) have a really shitty approach to portraying and stereotyping these amputees. But, any director or distributor feel like apologizing for either picking the fake actors, weird plot or for doing the amputee community yet another disservice?