I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I'm not blaming Asian-American Actresses, I'm blaming us, the movie goers, for not making them as famous as we did with Leonardo Dicaprio with "He deserves an Oscar!"
I'm blaming people who are cry out "We need minorities in movies" but don't go to the movies and see the ones being made with minorities in the lead.
I'm blaming us.
What movies are you referring to?
Also, it's not just movies. It's also TV. Leonardo DiCaprio's big break was on the show "Growing Pains."
Has there ever been a single Asian character ever on that show? What about any of the other popular sitcoms of the 1980s?
I know that Hollywood--and for that matter television producers--have some sort of not-clearly-explained disinclination to cast an Asian male in a romantic lead (with either an Asian actress or someone of a different race). Asian actresses will occasionally pop up in romantic roles, but an Asian male? Literally the only examples I can think of are Jet Li from one to two decades ago, and Jackie Chan more recently (and that's kind of pushing it when it comes to "romantic lead"--honestly, you could probably say Owen Wilson or Chris Tucker were the romantic leads of those movies). After that, we have to go to Indian actors, mostly in British films.
Granted, that affects me more directly as a (biracial) Asian male (not that I'm actor), so I assume I'm more inclined to think something's amiss.
According to dating site metadata, asian men and black men compete for the lowest response rate from women. Asian men usually perform the worst at getting responses from same-race women.
So, according to date sites--Asian-American women (or at least those who go onto dating sites) don't want to be romantically involved with Asian-American men?
Huh. That's informative. It did seem like my extended family overseas weren't that optimistic about my chances becoming romantically involved, or starting a family, after I returned to the United States for grad school. And here all this time I was taking it personally....
EDIT: There's also the whole issue of Orientalism and what it means for the desirability of women versus men in "the west", but that's actually pretty clear-cut. Thanks, Dr. Edward Said!
The movie felt like a very pretty mess to me. Interesting design, poorly shot and incoherent action, plot that felt like it left a lot of things underresolved for no reason.
I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
It's odd you'd use Edge of Tomorrow, it ended up with an almost completely different feel and theme from the original. That you call it whitewashed is also odd. Is a western film adapted to a Japanese setting "Japan-washed" or something ?
I'm not blaming Asian-American Actresses, I'm blaming us, the movie goers, for not making them as famous as we did with Leonardo Dicaprio with "He deserves an Oscar!"
I'm blaming people who are cry out "We need minorities in movies" but don't go to the movies and see the ones being made with minorities in the lead.
I'm blaming us.
What movies are you referring to?
Also, it's not just movies. It's also TV. Leonardo DiCaprio's big break was on the show "Growing Pains."
Has there ever been a single Asian character ever on that show? What about any of the other popular sitcoms of the 1980s?
I know that Hollywood--and for that matter television producers--have some sort of not-clearly-explained disinclination to cast an Asian male in a romantic lead (with either an Asian actress or someone of a different race). Asian actresses will occasionally pop up in romantic roles, but an Asian male? Literally the only examples I can think of are Jet Li from one to two decades ago, and Jackie Chan more recently (and that's kind of pushing it when it comes to "romantic lead"--honestly, you could probably say Owen Wilson or Chris Tucker were the romantic leads of those movies). After that, we have to go to Indian actors, mostly in British films.
Granted, that affects me more directly as a (biracial) Asian male (not that I'm actor), so I assume I'm more inclined to think something's amiss.
According to dating site metadata, asian men and black men compete for the lowest response rate from women. Asian men usually perform the worst at getting responses from same-race women.
So, according to date sites--Asian-American women (or at least those who go onto dating sites) don't want to be romantically involved with Asian-American men?
Huh. That's informative. It did seem like my extended family overseas weren't that optimistic about my chances becoming romantically involved, or starting a family, after I returned to the United States for grad school. And here all this time I was taking it personally....
EDIT: There's also the whole issue of Orientalism and what it means for the desirability of women versus men in "the west", but that's actually pretty clear-cut. Thanks, Dr. Edward Said!
No, they do, everyone generally has a positive response rate with the same race. It's just that the asian-asian bonus is often the weakest for men, though sometimes the aa-aa bonus dips below that.
African American men have the lowest response rates on average because Asian women absolutely don't respond to African American men - this is the strongest effect on the male side. Otherwise, they are pretty similar.
On the female side, Asian women have a pretty good deal actually, and African American women are just screwed.
Extrapolating, what explains these effects is that African American and Asian men are tied for third, but Asian women have more choice - therefore they can afford to reject Asian men. African American women do not have a choice, and they have to cling to the same race bonus. Which means African American men have a safety. Asian American men really don't. African American women definitely don't.
So without a go to pairing, Asian men and African American women don't get any love in culturally familiar romance.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
I mean, if you want to use Bane in the Dark Knight Rises, but you don't want him to be jacked up on Venom, and you change his nationality, and you change his motivations so that he's subservient to Talia, and you change a dozen other aspects of the character because they don't fit your vision ... then I would argue that you don't want to use Bane at all -- you just want to use the name Bane to put asses in seats.
I just don't get why the movie gets flak for whitewashing and the cartoon doesn't. If what you say is true, animation is immune from whitewashing because it doesn't matter what race the voice actors are.
Because voice acting is a completely different can of worms, where the performers are always behind the camera and therefore lacks the same sense of audience association. You might as well ask about the ethnicity of the animators.
The professional voice acting community is small in size with huge range. Actors play characters who they would never be considered for in a live movie adaptation as standard practice.
Whitewashing in Avatar: the Last Airbender? How much of the cast of the original cartoon was Asian American?
Edit: huh, less than the movie.
The big thing about the series versus the movie was the inverse correlation between skin tone and asshole.
In the series the lightest skin people were by far the Fire Nation who were just this side of Nazis on the Evil-o-meter. Contrast with the tribe that was always helpful and supportive of the good guys being the darkest skinned.
That the movie just happened to flip this relationship exactly was pretty worthy of side eye. That they defended it with "perfect actors for the roles" who were anything but just added fuel to the fire.
Edit: The series pretty explicitly rejected the idea of skin tone being a predictor of virtue but appearances do matter.
That's kind of not fair. Two of the three cast asian/asian american voice actors were fire nation bad guys (drawn as white looking guys), and the good guy one was a side character. The director of the movie was Asian American and he hired a lot of asian Americans for substantial parts (as the bad guys).
I'm having a hard time deciding which hiring practices were worse.
Exactly, this'd be less of a problem had both sides been Asian/non-white (like in the show) - instead once again white people get to be the heroes/stars. M. Night being a minority himself is not a shield for him participating in these practices, it's heart breaking how he either went along with it or thought there was nothing wrong there.
GiTS and TLA hiring a diverse cast is great, except this only goes so far when the big roles remain out of reach - like lead roles. Both films are instances of a Hollywood production whitewashing their leads.
Fire Nation were meant to be Japanese equivalent, not white. Water Tribe were Inuit.
I just don't get why the movie gets flak for whitewashing and the cartoon doesn't. If what you say is true, animation is immune from whitewashing because it doesn't matter what race the voice actors are.
Animation is less noticeable to the public as a genre, and people generally don't know who the VA's look like. It's not that animation is immune it's that they are below everyone's radar. Plus, they had the advantage of actually giving the audience high quality product, and gave respect to the culture they were inspired by rather than ignoring the implications for a pay check.
This is a bit different from the people who are just angry that a person of non-asian descent was cast as Asian. I agree that if you want to have Asian culture in your story, you might as well go full hog. But I can't abide by the hypocrisy of criticizing casting choices by the race of the actor regardless of the quality of the material. Respecting culture by always doing research makes sense. Sometimes hiring asians and sometimes not depending on the media doesn't make sense to me. Be consistent is my motto.
It's not hypocrisy if you don't know a cartoon exists, this is why there's a disparity as I said upthread. You're underestimating how well known the cartoon media is compared to movies, Rv shows have higher visibility but they have a large gap to big budget movies.
To address a problem first you have to know It's there and having institutial racism effects all media behind and in front of the "camera." Comics, animation, novels etc.
That's why it's not as easy as judging things on consistency alone.
edit: The biggest visibility Avatar: TLA and GiTS ever got was from their movies, before that the public didn't know or care about them.
As soon as ScarJo was announced, I feel most people did.
It was announced before she got involved, and why would any fan want an IP they like to be bad? They feared the movie wouldn't be true to the source and be an Americanized insult - and they were proven right. This isn't the first anime adaption that got a bad reception.
I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
It's odd you'd use Edge of Tomorrow, it ended up with an almost completely different feel and theme from the original. That you call it whitewashed is also odd. Is a western film adapted to a Japanese setting "Japan-washed" or something ?
The original charters were Asian IIRC, so yeah it checks that box.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
I mean, if you want to use Bane in the Dark Knight Rises, but you don't want him to be jacked up on Venom, and you change his nationality, and you change his motivations so that he's subservient to Talia, and you change a dozen other aspects of the character because they don't fit your vision ... then I would argue that you don't want to use Bane at all -- you just want to use the name Bane to put asses in seats.
Ghost in the Shell is even worse.
As much as I liked Tom Hardy as Bane they really should have had a Latino actor for the role, it's not like they aren't any in Hollywood. Javier Bardem, for instance. Talia and Ra's al Ghul, as well. They're supposed to be Middle Eastern descent in the comics.
Whitewashing in Avatar: the Last Airbender? How much of the cast of the original cartoon was Asian American?
Edit: huh, less than the movie.
The big thing about the series versus the movie was the inverse correlation between skin tone and asshole.
In the series the lightest skin people were by far the Fire Nation who were just this side of Nazis on the Evil-o-meter. Contrast with the tribe that was always helpful and supportive of the good guys being the darkest skinned.
That the movie just happened to flip this relationship exactly was pretty worthy of side eye. That they defended it with "perfect actors for the roles" who were anything but just added fuel to the fire.
Edit: The series pretty explicitly rejected the idea of skin tone being a predictor of virtue but appearances do matter.
That's kind of not fair. Two of the three cast asian/asian american voice actors were fire nation bad guys (drawn as white looking guys), and the good guy one was a side character. The director of the movie was Asian American and he hired a lot of asian Americans for substantial parts (as the bad guys).
I'm having a hard time deciding which hiring practices were worse.
Exactly, this'd be less of a problem had both sides been Asian/non-white (like in the show) - instead once again white people get to be the heroes/stars. M. Night being a minority himself is not a shield for him participating in these practices, it's heart breaking how he either went along with it or thought there was nothing wrong there.
GiTS and TLA hiring a diverse cast is great, except this only goes so far when the big roles remain out of reach - like lead roles. Both films are instances of a Hollywood production whitewashing their leads.
Fire Nation were meant to be Japanese equivalent, not white. Water Tribe were Inuit.
I just don't get why the movie gets flak for whitewashing and the cartoon doesn't. If what you say is true, animation is immune from whitewashing because it doesn't matter what race the voice actors are.
Animation is less noticeable to the public as a genre, and people generally don't know who the VA's look like. It's not that animation is immune it's that they are below everyone's radar. Plus, they had the advantage of actually giving the audience high quality product, and gave respect to the culture they were inspired by rather than ignoring the implications for a pay check.
This is a bit different from the people who are just angry that a person of non-asian descent was cast as Asian. I agree that if you want to have Asian culture in your story, you might as well go full hog. But I can't abide by the hypocrisy of criticizing casting choices by the race of the actor regardless of the quality of the material. Respecting culture by always doing research makes sense. Sometimes hiring asians and sometimes not depending on the media doesn't make sense to me. Be consistent is my motto.
It's not hypocrisy if you don't know a cartoon exists, this is why there's a disparity as I said upthread. You're underestimating how well known the cartoon media is compared to movies, Rv shows have higher visibility but they have a large gap to big budget movies.
To address a problem first you have to know It's there and having institutial racism effects all media behind and in front of the "camera." Comics, animation, novels etc.
That's why it's not as easy as judging things on consistency alone.
If it's a complex issue, I don't understand the huge simplistic negative reaction. I especially don't understand the argument that whitewashing deprives Asian actors of work if it only applies to live action media. Voice actors are actors. It's what kept Mark Hamill alive between star wars movies. Plus, it's pretty much the only way left to leap from the small screen to the big screen on the same property: something Japan does quite well.
I believe this thread has approached this controversy with impressive nuance, especially by those that know the property, and it makes that article about how MANAA is targeting Scarlett Johansson irritating to me. I feel like my identity is being used like a stick and I don't want to be on their side.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
It's odd you'd use Edge of Tomorrow, it ended up with an almost completely different feel and theme from the original. That you call it whitewashed is also odd. Is a western film adapted to a Japanese setting "Japan-washed" or something ?
It's kinda whitewashed, but like the most "reasonable" way of going about it. It's not set in Japan like the novel/manga is, and the characters who are all changed to be American or European have different names and are essentially different people but with similar roles in the narrative. The one character who does stay the same has the same name and backstory but was American in the novel/manga and became British in the film.
and honestly I felt that it was about as good as a hollywood adaptation can get. It stayed pretty true to the themes of the original stuff, kept the entire narrative premise, and paid homage to the original quite frequently. It just had a very hollywood ending which I was sort of okay with.
Whitewashing in Avatar: the Last Airbender? How much of the cast of the original cartoon was Asian American?
Edit: huh, less than the movie.
The big thing about the series versus the movie was the inverse correlation between skin tone and asshole.
In the series the lightest skin people were by far the Fire Nation who were just this side of Nazis on the Evil-o-meter. Contrast with the tribe that was always helpful and supportive of the good guys being the darkest skinned.
That the movie just happened to flip this relationship exactly was pretty worthy of side eye. That they defended it with "perfect actors for the roles" who were anything but just added fuel to the fire.
Edit: The series pretty explicitly rejected the idea of skin tone being a predictor of virtue but appearances do matter.
That's kind of not fair. Two of the three cast asian/asian american voice actors were fire nation bad guys (drawn as white looking guys), and the good guy one was a side character. The director of the movie was Asian American and he hired a lot of asian Americans for substantial parts (as the bad guys).
I'm having a hard time deciding which hiring practices were worse.
Exactly, this'd be less of a problem had both sides been Asian/non-white (like in the show) - instead once again white people get to be the heroes/stars. M. Night being a minority himself is not a shield for him participating in these practices, it's heart breaking how he either went along with it or thought there was nothing wrong there.
GiTS and TLA hiring a diverse cast is great, except this only goes so far when the big roles remain out of reach - like lead roles. Both films are instances of a Hollywood production whitewashing their leads.
Fire Nation were meant to be Japanese equivalent, not white. Water Tribe were Inuit.
I just don't get why the movie gets flak for whitewashing and the cartoon doesn't. If what you say is true, animation is immune from whitewashing because it doesn't matter what race the voice actors are.
Animation is less noticeable to the public as a genre, and people generally don't know who the VA's look like. It's not that animation is immune it's that they are below everyone's radar. Plus, they had the advantage of actually giving the audience high quality product, and gave respect to the culture they were inspired by rather than ignoring the implications for a pay check.
This is a bit different from the people who are just angry that a person of non-asian descent was cast as Asian. I agree that if you want to have Asian culture in your story, you might as well go full hog. But I can't abide by the hypocrisy of criticizing casting choices by the race of the actor regardless of the quality of the material. Respecting culture by always doing research makes sense. Sometimes hiring asians and sometimes not depending on the media doesn't make sense to me. Be consistent is my motto.
It's not hypocrisy if you don't know a cartoon exists, this is why there's a disparity as I said upthread. You're underestimating how well known the cartoon media is compared to movies, Rv shows have higher visibility but they have a large gap to big budget movies.
To address a problem first you have to know It's there and having institutial racism effects all media behind and in front of the "camera." Comics, animation, novels etc.
That's why it's not as easy as judging things on consistency alone.
If it's a complex issue, I don't understand the huge simplistic negative reaction. I especially don't understand the argument that whitewashing deprives Asian actors of work if it only applies to live action media. Voice actors are actors. It's what kept Mark Hamill alive between star wars movies. Plus, it's pretty much the only way left to leap from the small screen to the big screen on the same property: something Japan does quite well.
No one is saying whitewashing is only bad if it only occurs in a specific media, it's bad no matter where it happens. Why people act on one media rather than another I've discussed twice - it's all to do with visibility (and all media have fucked up issues with race relations, some better than others). That's why visibility is important, people can't have an opinion on something if they don't know about it. The movies provides that spotlight less visible industries don't. Nor is anyone saying nobody should be voice actors, though I'm sure Hamill would be able to survive without VA Asian characters - his biggest role was of a white man (Joker) not a Japanese man (Firebird Ozai). Someone else has gone over the details in why being a VA is a different from being an actor.
Whitewashing deprives Asian actors of work because those roles were originally meant to be for those actors, in a field where minorities have a distinct disadvantage to start with, and this effects all sorts of ethnicities. Without access to those roles they have less of an opportunity to put in their dues, grow a fan base or be the next big star - while white actors get all that and more, and also endless chances if they fail. If a minority actors had as many fallbacks as Ryan Reynolds they would have retired by now, because the studies would consider them box office poison. They have work twice as hard for half as much, and they still get left out in the cold for the biggest roles.
The best way for crossover between media for actors in America is acting on a tv show, not being a VA.
I believe this thread has approached this controversy with impressive nuance, especially by those that know the property, and it makes that article about how MANAA is targeting Scarlett Johansson irritating to me. I feel like my identity is being used like a stick and I don't want to be on their side.
I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
It's odd you'd use Edge of Tomorrow, it ended up with an almost completely different feel and theme from the original. That you call it whitewashed is also odd. Is a western film adapted to a Japanese setting "Japan-washed" or something ?
The original charters were Asian IIRC, so yeah it checks that box.
I don't see how. Also it seems to be a one way street where Western adaptations are frowned upon and framed as whitewashing but the reverse does not apply.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
I mean, if you want to use Bane in the Dark Knight Rises, but you don't want him to be jacked up on Venom, and you change his nationality, and you change his motivations so that he's subservient to Talia, and you change a dozen other aspects of the character because they don't fit your vision ... then I would argue that you don't want to use Bane at all -- you just want to use the name Bane to put asses in seats.
Ghost in the Shell is even worse.
As much as I liked Tom Hardy as Bane they really should have had a Latino actor for the role, it's not like they aren't any in Hollywood. Javier Bardem, for instance. Talia and Ra's al Ghul, as well. They're supposed to be Middle Eastern descent in the comics.
They changed his entire story and history to fit the feel and setting of Nolans Dark Knight. Why then would the casting need be Latino?
I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
It's odd you'd use Edge of Tomorrow, it ended up with an almost completely different feel and theme from the original. That you call it whitewashed is also odd. Is a western film adapted to a Japanese setting "Japan-washed" or something ?
The original charters were Asian IIRC, so yeah it checks that box.
I don't see how. Also it seems to be a one way street where Western adaptations are frowned upon and framed as whitewashing but the reverse does not apply.
Because 1) the topic usually is about Western movies, 2) you can be against both, 3) there are varying circumstances why this is more accepted. None of the Asian countries doing this have huge minority populations IIRC, unlike America. America has no such excuse, it's a melting pot culture from people all over the world. It's not Sweden.
And this is literally whitewashing. Having an Asian/non-white character being acted by a white person is the definition of the term.
They changed his entire story and history to fit the feel and setting of Nolans Dark Knight. Why then would the casting need be Latino?
There's absolutely no reason they couldn't have kept his character a Latino in that movie. He's not a character defined by his race there, which is another thing the movie missed an opportunity on since Bane is proud of his heritage. Same for Ra's and Talia.
edit: Ironically they hired a Latina actress for their Montoya analog.
But after the show came out, a lot of the same people who assumed that Supergirl was going to be terrible are now saying that it's the single best show on in the DC lineup right now.
People expected "Pirates of the Carribean" and "21 Jump Street" to be terrible. Then they weren't. Many sequels produced as a result.
Whitewashing in Avatar: the Last Airbender? How much of the cast of the original cartoon was Asian American?
Edit: huh, less than the movie.
The big thing about the series versus the movie was the inverse correlation between skin tone and asshole.
In the series the lightest skin people were by far the Fire Nation who were just this side of Nazis on the Evil-o-meter. Contrast with the tribe that was always helpful and supportive of the good guys being the darkest skinned.
That the movie just happened to flip this relationship exactly was pretty worthy of side eye. That they defended it with "perfect actors for the roles" who were anything but just added fuel to the fire.
Edit: The series pretty explicitly rejected the idea of skin tone being a predictor of virtue but appearances do matter.
That's kind of not fair. Two of the three cast asian/asian american voice actors were fire nation bad guys (drawn as white looking guys), and the good guy one was a side character. The director of the movie was Asian American and he hired a lot of asian Americans for substantial parts (as the bad guys).
I'm having a hard time deciding which hiring practices were worse.
Exactly, this'd be less of a problem had both sides been Asian/non-white (like in the show) - instead once again white people get to be the heroes/stars. M. Night being a minority himself is not a shield for him participating in these practices, it's heart breaking how he either went along with it or thought there was nothing wrong there.
GiTS and TLA hiring a diverse cast is great, except this only goes so far when the big roles remain out of reach - like lead roles. Both films are instances of a Hollywood production whitewashing their leads.
Fire Nation were meant to be Japanese equivalent, not white. Water Tribe were Inuit.
I just don't get why the movie gets flak for whitewashing and the cartoon doesn't. If what you say is true, animation is immune from whitewashing because it doesn't matter what race the voice actors are.
Animation is less noticeable to the public as a genre, and people generally don't know who the VA's look like. It's not that animation is immune it's that they are below everyone's radar. Plus, they had the advantage of actually giving the audience high quality product, and gave respect to the culture they were inspired by rather than ignoring the implications for a pay check.
This is a bit different from the people who are just angry that a person of non-asian descent was cast as Asian. I agree that if you want to have Asian culture in your story, you might as well go full hog. But I can't abide by the hypocrisy of criticizing casting choices by the race of the actor regardless of the quality of the material. Respecting culture by always doing research makes sense. Sometimes hiring asians and sometimes not depending on the media doesn't make sense to me. Be consistent is my motto.
It's not hypocrisy if you don't know a cartoon exists, this is why there's a disparity as I said upthread. You're underestimating how well known the cartoon media is compared to movies, Rv shows have higher visibility but they have a large gap to big budget movies.
To address a problem first you have to know It's there and having institutial racism effects all media behind and in front of the "camera." Comics, animation, novels etc.
That's why it's not as easy as judging things on consistency alone.
If it's a complex issue, I don't understand the huge simplistic negative reaction. I especially don't understand the argument that whitewashing deprives Asian actors of work if it only applies to live action media. Voice actors are actors. It's what kept Mark Hamill alive between star wars movies. Plus, it's pretty much the only way left to leap from the small screen to the big screen on the same property: something Japan does quite well.
No one is saying whitewashing is only bad if it only occurs in a specific media, it's bad no matter where it happens. Why people act on one media rather than another I've discussed twice - it's all to do with visibility (and all media have fucked up issues with race relations, some better than others). That's why visibility is important, people can't have an opinion on something if they don't know about it. The movies provides that spotlight less visible industries don't. Nor is anyone saying nobody should be voice actors, though I'm sure Hamill would be able to survive without VA Asian characters - his biggest role was of a white man (Joker) not a Japanese man (Firebird Ozai). Someone else has gone over the details in why being a VA is a different from being an actor.
Whitewashing deprives Asian actors of work because those roles were originally meant to be for those actors, in a field where minorities have a distinct disadvantage to start with, and this effects all sorts of ethnicities. Without access to those roles they have less of an opportunity to put in their dues, grow a fan base or be the next big star - while white actors get all that and more, and also endless chances if they fail. If a minority actors had as many fallbacks as Ryan Reynolds they would have retired by now, because the studies would consider them box office poison. They have work twice as hard for half as much, and they still get left out in the cold for the biggest roles.
The best way for crossover between media for actors in America is acting on a tv show, not being a VA.
I believe this thread has approached this controversy with impressive nuance, especially by those that know the property, and it makes that article about how MANAA is targeting Scarlett Johansson irritating to me. I feel like my identity is being used like a stick and I don't want to be on their side.
This is it, right? Can you explain why you think is bad? I don't see it.
They merely following what other Asian actors in Hollywood have been doing, like Constance Wu and Ming-Na Wen.
It's cause they're going after an actor because that person is high profile, not because they're the cause of the grievance. It is the job of the actor to try experiences that aren't their own, and this one is being punished for it. It's disingenuous and spiteful, and it shows a lack of class.
And I contend that anime is not, and never will be, meant for asian americans. Asians maybe.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Its important to remember that whitewashing like all opportunity hoarding against minorities isn't exclusively bad because what it does to the specific people missing out on specific opportunities. It also hurts entire communities as minorities don't have the contacts that white people have.
So an Asian actress didn't just miss out on being the major. The Asian actress' family and friends (who are also are disproportionately minorities) miss out on being gaffers or script writers or whatever. In addition to Asian kids not thinking they can be actors.
It's cause they're going after an actor because that person is high profile, not because they're the cause of the grievance. It is the job of the actor to try experiences that aren't their own, and this one is being punished for it. It's disingenuous and spiteful, and it shows a lack of class.
And I contend that anime is not, and never will be, meant for asian americans. Asians maybe.
They have both, IMO. They need high profile examples or the public won't care or know what or what they're on about and their example is one of the most popular white actresses in the world acting as a Japanese woman from a Japanese IP. GiTS movie spoiler
What's amazing is that this is literally what happens in the movie!
Any case that wants the public to sympathize with them requires a high profile example, if they did that to Aang pre-The last Airbender film nobody would have blinked because they don't know who he is.
Yes, it is a job of an actor to try new experiences - except they're not doing this in the movie and by simply casting a white person in the role robs the opportunity of an Asian/-American actor of a chance they deserve a shot at. They don't have the same opportunities white actors do in the industry. As far as I know they didn't even bother color blind casting with the movie, it was white women or nothing. What acting job an actor chooses they will be negative reception if it has bad connotations, especially when racial matters are involved. Margot Robbie would have gotten the exact same reaction had she not moved to Suicide Squad.
Who anime is for an intriguing subject and how it relates to this movie. I agree it was originally meant for the Asian market, and likely still is, but since the 80's it's been a growing industry online and on tv networks in other non-Asian countries. This has gotten so hot as a commodity Hollywood itself has made several big budget adaptions.
However, this movie isn't an anime, it's based on one. It is not controlled by the Japanese side or by interests concerned about the Japanese experience they view this from the American lens and through their political ideology. Thus it's being judged on American terms, which Asian Americans are apart of. That said, Asian Americans didn't have to get the role, I think we'd have been fine if any competent Asian actress got it. They're upset about the missed opportunity for auditioning because this is the kind of role careers are made from.
And if it was strictly for Asians why would it ok for a non-Asian to get the lead role, if this was made in Japan I guarantee Scarlett Johannessen wouldn't have been Motoko, a Japanese actress would have. This also applies to other white roles in the movie, like Kuze and Batou. Supporting roles that were played by Asians, like Togusa and Aramaki would have gotten more to do than being glorified cameos.
I'm not blaming Asian-American Actresses, I'm blaming us, the movie goers, for not making them as famous as we did with Leonardo Dicaprio with "He deserves an Oscar!"
I'm blaming people who are cry out "We need minorities in movies" but don't go to the movies and see the ones being made with minorities in the lead.
I'm blaming us.
What movies are you referring to?
Also, it's not just movies. It's also TV. Leonardo DiCaprio's big break was on the show "Growing Pains."
Has there ever been a single Asian character ever on that show? What about any of the other popular sitcoms of the 1980s?
I know that Hollywood--and for that matter television producers--have some sort of not-clearly-explained disinclination to cast an Asian male in a romantic lead (with either an Asian actress or someone of a different race). Asian actresses will occasionally pop up in romantic roles, but an Asian male? Literally the only examples I can think of are Jet Li from one to two decades ago, and Jackie Chan more recently (and that's kind of pushing it when it comes to "romantic lead"--honestly, you could probably say Owen Wilson or Chris Tucker were the romantic leads of those movies). After that, we have to go to Indian actors, mostly in British films.
Granted, that affects me more directly as a (biracial) Asian male (not that I'm actor), so I assume I'm more inclined to think something's amiss.
According to dating site metadata, asian men and black men compete for the lowest response rate from women. Asian men usually perform the worst at getting responses from same-race women.
So, according to date sites--Asian-American women (or at least those who go onto dating sites) don't want to be romantically involved with Asian-American men?
Huh. That's informative. It did seem like my extended family overseas weren't that optimistic about my chances becoming romantically involved, or starting a family, after I returned to the United States for grad school. And here all this time I was taking it personally....
EDIT: There's also the whole issue of Orientalism and what it means for the desirability of women versus men in "the west", but that's actually pretty clear-cut. Thanks, Dr. Edward Said!
No, they do, everyone generally has a positive response rate with the same race. It's just that the asian-asian bonus is often the weakest for men, though sometimes the aa-aa bonus dips below that.
African American men have the lowest response rates on average because Asian women absolutely don't respond to African American men - this is the strongest effect on the male side. Otherwise, they are pretty similar.
On the female side, Asian women have a pretty good deal actually, and African American women are just screwed.
Extrapolating, what explains these effects is that African American and Asian men are tied for third, but Asian women have more choice - therefore they can afford to reject Asian men. African American women do not have a choice, and they have to cling to the same race bonus. Which means African American men have a safety. Asian American men really don't. African American women definitely don't.
So without a go to pairing, Asian men and African American women don't get any love in culturally familiar romance.
Also, the primary thing an adaptation needs to do, like any movie, is to be a good work. Followed very closely by staying reasonably faithful to the source material.
The little details can be nice, but what matters most is sticking by the story and its characters. And from what I'm hearing here, they didn't really do either of those things.
These type of adaptations tend to be a forgettable generic mess that only took the spotlight due to the IP it was attached to.
The whole "adaptations can do whatever" attitude kind of baffles me. If they're not interested in the source material as a reference, past the point of having lots of little nods to throw out to convince people that it's faithful, then it doesn't even really feel like an adaptation to me. It feels like a totally new work with someone else's brand painted onto it.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
I mean, if you want to use Bane in the Dark Knight Rises, but you don't want him to be jacked up on Venom, and you change his nationality, and you change his motivations so that he's subservient to Talia, and you change a dozen other aspects of the character because they don't fit your vision ... then I would argue that you don't want to use Bane at all -- you just want to use the name Bane to put asses in seats.
I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
It's odd you'd use Edge of Tomorrow, it ended up with an almost completely different feel and theme from the original. That you call it whitewashed is also odd. Is a western film adapted to a Japanese setting "Japan-washed" or something ?
The original charters were Asian IIRC, so yeah it checks that box.
I don't see how. Also it seems to be a one way street where Western adaptations are frowned upon and framed as whitewashing but the reverse does not apply.
Because 1) the topic usually is about Western movies, 2) you can be against both, 3) there are varying circumstances why this is more accepted. None of the Asian countries doing this have huge minority populations IIRC, unlike America. America has no such excuse, it's a melting pot culture from people all over the world. It's not Sweden.
And this is literally whitewashing. Having an Asian/non-white character being acted by a white person is the definition of the term.
No, I understand why you're calling it whitewashing. I just fail to see why it's a bad thing. Japanese anime is adapted by a Hollywood studio and so they cast a high-profile Hollywood Actor. That's what it boils down to.
As to the points: 1) fair enough, 2) why would you be against both or either? It's a very close-minded world view that seeks to box in people by their race and decide what is and is not appropriate for them to do based on their race, 3) if we're talking excuses, money and high-profile names come to mind.
They changed his entire story and history to fit the feel and setting of Nolans Dark Knight. Why then would the casting need be Latino?
There's absolutely no reason they couldn't have kept his character a Latino in that movie. He's not a character defined by his race there, which is another thing the movie missed an opportunity on since Bane is proud of his heritage. Same for Ra's and Talia.
edit: Ironically they hired a Latina actress for their Montoya analog.
There's also no reason to make his character a Latino in that movie, considering they completely changed his past and heritage. I don't think anything would have been lost, but I also think Tom Hardy played it amazing.
Asian-Americans have been moving to Asia to break into the entertainment industry for a while now despite initially having a limited grasp of Mandarin, Cantonese or Korean. It's been difficult for Asian-Americans to make it in Hollywood, since they are often type-casted into certain roles such as socially awkward geeks or kungfu masters. Mike Hale from the New York Times described how even famous actresses like Maggie Q and Lucy Liu are not entirely able to escape the mold of the "sexy nerd" or the "dragon lady."
In the past, Asian-American actors and actresses like Russell Wong and Maggie Q (both of whom are mixed race) have used Asia as a launching pad to break into the industry and subsequently move back to the U.S. These days however, an increasing number are deciding to remain in Asia. The expanding entertainment industry there simply promises more opportunities for them. Asian-American actors and singers are finally getting a chance to pursue their American dreams, but ironically, it's Asia that's making it possible.
Maggie Q told Time Out magazine that she owes her success to Hong Kong. Originally from Hawaii, she moved there in 1997 with $20 in her pocket in a last-ditch effort after failed modeling stints in Japan and Taiwan. Whereas Taiwanese markets at the time were looking for either "tall blonds" or "100% Chinese girls," Hong Kong consumers were craving something fresh. Maggie Q fit the bill. She was introduced to acting by Jackie Chan and learned martial arts (and Cantonese) from scratch. She starred in both English and Cantonese-speaking movies in Hong Kong, and was propelled to fame in 2002 acting alongside fellow Asian-American actor Daniel Wu in Naked Weapon.
It's cause they're going after an actor because that person is high profile, not because they're the cause of the grievance. It is the job of the actor to try experiences that aren't their own, and this one is being punished for it. It's disingenuous and spiteful, and it shows a lack of class.
And I contend that anime is not, and never will be, meant for asian americans. Asians maybe.
They have both, IMO. They need high profile examples or the public won't care or know what or what they're on about and their example is one of the most popular white actresses in the world acting as a Japanese woman from a Japanese IP. GiTS movie spoiler
What's amazing is that this is literally what happens in the movie!
Any case that wants the public to sympathize with them requires a high profile example, if they did that to Aang pre-The last Airbender film nobody would have blinked because they don't know who he is.
Yes, it is a job of an actor to try new experiences - except they're not doing this in the movie and by simply casting a white person in the role robs the opportunity of an Asian/-American actor of a chance they deserve a shot at. They don't have the same opportunities white actors do in the industry. As far as I know they didn't even bother color blind casting with the movie, it was white women or nothing. What acting job an actor chooses they will be negative reception if it has bad connotations, especially when racial matters are involved. Margot Robbie would have gotten the exact same reaction had she not moved to Suicide Squad.
Who anime is for an intriguing subject and how it relates to this movie. I agree it was originally meant for the Asian market, and likely still is, but since the 80's it's been a growing industry online and on tv networks in other non-Asian countries. This has gotten so hot as a commodity Hollywood itself has made several big budget adaptions.
However, this movie isn't an anime, it's based on one. It is not controlled by the Japanese side or by interests concerned about the Japanese experience they view this from the American lens and through their political ideology. Thus it's being judged on American terms, which Asian Americans are apart of. That said, Asian Americans didn't have to get the role, I think we'd have been fine if any competent Asian actress got it. They're upset about the missed opportunity for auditioning because this is the kind of role careers are made from.
And if it was strictly for Asians why would it ok for a non-Asian to get the lead role, if this was made in Japan I guarantee Scarlett Johannessen wouldn't have been Motoko, a Japanese actress would have. This also applies to other white roles in the movie, like Kuze and Batou. Supporting roles that were played by Asians, like Togusa and Aramaki would have gotten more to do than being glorified cameos.
I don't care, it's like picking on an applicant that got the job after the person you were rooting for got unjustly booted. It's theater for the sake of the limelight and I refuse to sanction scapegoating no matter what the cause. She was lying? The interetation that she played a Japanese woman is impressively even more shallow than the movie itself.
What Japanese culture is there in this movie, really? What defines the protagonist? Is it her Japanese heritage? Not in this story. She only deserves this criticism if this movie succeeds at pulling off the existential theme of being something other than your own race. Everybody agrees that this is not at all what happens; it's all exposition with zero backing in the character. Mira is Motoko, and then John was the demons. Blame the writer for this schlock, not the professional who did just about as good a job as could have been done and seemed to have more of a grasp of the philosophical nuance of the original story than the actual people that controlled the plot and direction.
I would be happy if an American company produced an Asian director who was passionate about showing America Asian stories. I would also be happy with an American Movie called Mobile Armored Riot Police that was all about brainwash/cyberizing minorities into Caucasian bodies and turning them into a totalitarian police force, and they find out about this cultural erasure and rebel. It's the same plot twist but much more appropriate for the darker side of the American melting pot, and it escapes from the Get Out-like fetishistic asiaphilia that both sides of this fight suffer from.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I don't think we can have that type of movie due to the subconscious fear of having our livelihood stolen by AI
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
It's odd you'd use Edge of Tomorrow, it ended up with an almost completely different feel and theme from the original. That you call it whitewashed is also odd. Is a western film adapted to a Japanese setting "Japan-washed" or something ?
The original charters were Asian IIRC, so yeah it checks that box.
I don't see how. Also it seems to be a one way street where Western adaptations are frowned upon and framed as whitewashing but the reverse does not apply.
Because 1) the topic usually is about Western movies, 2) you can be against both, 3) there are varying circumstances why this is more accepted. None of the Asian countries doing this have huge minority populations IIRC, unlike America. America has no such excuse, it's a melting pot culture from people all over the world. It's not Sweden.
And this is literally whitewashing. Having an Asian/non-white character being acted by a white person is the definition of the term.
No, I understand why you're calling it whitewashing. I just fail to see why it's a bad thing. Japanese anime is adapted by a Hollywood studio and so they cast a high-profile Hollywood Actor. That's what it boils down to.
As to the points: 1) fair enough, 2) why would you be against both or either? It's a very close-minded world view that seeks to box in people by their race and decide what is and is not appropriate for them to do based on their race, 3) if we're talking excuses, money and high-profile names come to mind.
Yet rather than simply address it as actual whitewashing you say it is framed as such, implying there isn't any whitewashing.
It's a bad thing since there is no level playing field for minorities, including Asians, in Hollywood. No one is questioning how it is done, yes that is correct we're saying how they came to consolation was wrong. What it boils down to is that that option was not an option for Asian actors, no matter how talented they are. Even for Asian roles, like Motoko. Scarlett would't have gotten a balance at this role, if white actors had the obstructions in the industry. She got there by building up her career through smaller roles (and some actors can go to the big time with a big lead role, like Motoko*), that's a luxury most Asian actors don't have.
2) Because x-washing is bad no matter what country does it? It;d be hypocritical of me to not be ok with what Hollywood is doing, while letting other country's off simply because I don't live there. Other countries have their own problems with their Hollywood's, too. I'm not boxing them in by their race, you've got that backwards. Nor do I think they should only be allowed Asian centric roles (but it would be stupid to freeze Asians out of Asian roles), if the ethnicity of the role isn't a defining feature of their personality - everyone should get a shot at those roles, they don't right now. 3) those are poor excuses, and ignore the underlying problems for why minorities/Asians can't access them. Those are what many actors strives for, yet white actors hold a monopoly over. You can't get a foot in the door if the people in charge won't open it for you - those people? Generally white or answer to those who are, and the is very little inclination up the food chain to change. They like the way things are as it is.
They changed his entire story and history to fit the feel and setting of Nolans Dark Knight. Why then would the casting need be Latino?
There's absolutely no reason they couldn't have kept his character a Latino in that movie. He's not a character defined by his race there, which is another thing the movie missed an opportunity on since Bane is proud of his heritage. Same for Ra's and Talia.
edit: Ironically they hired a Latina actress for their Montoya analog.
There's also no reason to make his character a Latino in that movie, considering they completely changed his past and heritage. I don't think anything would have been lost, but I also think Tom Hardy played it amazing.[/quote]
You don't think Bane being Latino in the comics is a good reason to hire a Latino actor? What was it about the role in the movie that required him to be white, he could have been black or Indian and with a good enough actor we'd have had a similar performance. IIRC the character is a world traveller and spend at least some of his life in the Middle East or Asia, so him being a native there or South American wouldn't alter anything substantial.
* many child actors do this, and the Red Ranger's actor in the Power Rangers movie
I think discussing the nationalities of people playing villains is well beyond the scope of this movie. Villain nationalities are a *huge* awkward can of worms, totally separate to leading roles.
It's cause they're going after an actor because that person is high profile, not because they're the cause of the grievance. It is the job of the actor to try experiences that aren't their own, and this one is being punished for it. It's disingenuous and spiteful, and it shows a lack of class.
And I contend that anime is not, and never will be, meant for asian americans. Asians maybe.
They have both, IMO. They need high profile examples or the public won't care or know what or what they're on about and their example is one of the most popular white actresses in the world acting as a Japanese woman from a Japanese IP. GiTS movie spoiler
What's amazing is that this is literally what happens in the movie!
Any case that wants the public to sympathize with them requires a high profile example, if they did that to Aang pre-The last Airbender film nobody would have blinked because they don't know who he is.
Yes, it is a job of an actor to try new experiences - except they're not doing this in the movie and by simply casting a white person in the role robs the opportunity of an Asian/-American actor of a chance they deserve a shot at. They don't have the same opportunities white actors do in the industry. As far as I know they didn't even bother color blind casting with the movie, it was white women or nothing. What acting job an actor chooses they will be negative reception if it has bad connotations, especially when racial matters are involved. Margot Robbie would have gotten the exact same reaction had she not moved to Suicide Squad.
Who anime is for an intriguing subject and how it relates to this movie. I agree it was originally meant for the Asian market, and likely still is, but since the 80's it's been a growing industry online and on tv networks in other non-Asian countries. This has gotten so hot as a commodity Hollywood itself has made several big budget adaptions.
However, this movie isn't an anime, it's based on one. It is not controlled by the Japanese side or by interests concerned about the Japanese experience they view this from the American lens and through their political ideology. Thus it's being judged on American terms, which Asian Americans are apart of. That said, Asian Americans didn't have to get the role, I think we'd have been fine if any competent Asian actress got it. They're upset about the missed opportunity for auditioning because this is the kind of role careers are made from.
And if it was strictly for Asians why would it ok for a non-Asian to get the lead role, if this was made in Japan I guarantee Scarlett Johannessen wouldn't have been Motoko, a Japanese actress would have. This also applies to other white roles in the movie, like Kuze and Batou. Supporting roles that were played by Asians, like Togusa and Aramaki would have gotten more to do than being glorified cameos.
I don't care, it's like picking on an applicant that got the job after the person you were rooting for got unjustly booted. It's theater for the sake of the limelight and I refuse to sanction scapegoating no matter what the cause. She was lying? The interetation that she played a Japanese woman is impressively even more shallow than the movie itself.
What Japanese culture is there in this movie, really? What defines the protagonist? Is it her Japanese heritage? Not in this story. She only deserves this criticism if this movie succeeds at pulling off the existential theme of being something other than your own race. Everybody agrees that this is not at all what happens; it's all exposition with zero backing in the character. Mira is Motoko, and then John was the demons. Blame the writer for this schlock, not the professional who did just about as good a job as could have been done and seemed to have more of a grasp of the philosophical nuance of the original story than the actual people that controlled the plot and direction.
I would be happy if an American company produced an Asian director who was passionate about showing America Asian stories. I would also be happy with an American Movie called Mobile Armored Riot Police that was all about brainwash/cyberizing minorities into Caucasian bodies and turning them into a totalitarian police force, and they find out about this cultural erasure and rebel. It's the same plot twist but much more appropriate for the darker side of the American melting pot, and it escapes from the Get Out-like fetishistic asiaphilia that both sides of this fight suffer from.
Bad example, for this movie there never was a qualified Asian actress allowed to audition before switching to a white actress. This is how causes are changed in the world, citing cases people care about is how they get people to care and unless people care nothing will change with the industry. This movie and Motoko's role was like Christmas for them for a case against whitewashing in Hollywood, like The Last Airbender's was. There is no scapegoating here, Scarlett had to know what was at stake for accepting this job offer.
Technically there was Japanese culture in the movie, like the robot geishas and it being in Japan but this was all aesthetics, the characters may as well have lived in America while they were there. The protagonist is the lead actor in the movie, which falls under Motoko's role - the lead wasn't Batou or Aramaki.
Who was lying? I'm going to need more context for that statement.
I saw the movie, and yes that was literally a plot point. That's why it was in spoilers. The thing is they could have done something interesting or reconstructive with this problematic decision, and why they made her look like Scarlett Johanssen. GiTS spoilers
Discovering your real self was another ethnicity has to effect their personality to a degree, and yet they do nothing with it.
Instead it's painfully obvious they didn't care about the implications we've got Scarlett as Motoko everyone! We'll shoot this movie and cash that pay check!
That they didn't choose to delve into her changing her race in the movie isn't an excuse to act like it didn't happen. It did happen, they just didn't bother delving into the consequences of what that would do to a person or that even if they didn't do this it applies in a meta sense since Motoko is Japanese/Asian in the rest of the material.
But they don't care about cultural erasure in the movie is the thing, they may as well have done this to white people. No one cares about that, they do care about the individuals though. Nor does the film go into the darker side of the "melting pot," and if they did wouldn't that be blunted by having white actors and not giving the minority roles they were based on nothing of substance. GiTS spoilers
We only see a glimpse or two of pre-cyborg Motoko, her head is hidden and she never speaks a single word. There's nothing to grasp for the audience to care about this Motoko. There's less for Kuze, who we only know about the fact because he talks about it briefly. He doesn't give a shit about it.
it escapes from the Get Out-like fetishistic asiaphilia that both sides of this fight suffer from.
This? I can't even
edit: You may not care about this, but plenty of people do.
I think discussing the nationalities of people playing villains is well beyond the scope of this movie. Villain nationalities are a *huge* awkward can of worms, totally separate to leading roles.
Have you seen this movie? The main villain is
white, he's Tanka's CEO. Stock corporate asshole with no personality other than being evil AF. Kuze is the other, played by a white actor. Many of roles with bigger parts have white actors, like Batou and Motoko's doctor. All are given more to do than supporting roles played by Asians, they start off with Tugosa with a role you think is going to be a strong supporting then he disappears a third/half way into the movie. Batou's the biggest role in the unit, then Aramaki (who is a glorified cameo).
It's not the nationalities per se is the problem, it's the ethnicities and the opportunities they've given in the movie. The largest Asian representative of villains in the movie are
the assassins with the briefcase guns seen in the trailer.
The rest are masked goons.
It's not like there can't be good Japanese villains in movies, The Wolverine was great with that.
I think discussing the nationalities of people playing villains is well beyond the scope of this movie. Villain nationalities are a *huge* awkward can of worms, totally separate to leading roles.
That only tends to be true for when the villain is a stereotype who is entirely defined by stereotypical ethnicity, which is what tends to happen when "whiteness" is considered as "default."
Fu Manchu isn't offensive because he's a Chinese villain. He's offensive because he's a Chinese villain stereotype. You can have him played by a white guy, and it makes the problem worse, not better.
It's cause they're going after an actor because that person is high profile, not because they're the cause of the grievance. It is the job of the actor to try experiences that aren't their own, and this one is being punished for it. It's disingenuous and spiteful, and it shows a lack of class.
And I contend that anime is not, and never will be, meant for asian americans. Asians maybe.
They have both, IMO. They need high profile examples or the public won't care or know what or what they're on about and their example is one of the most popular white actresses in the world acting as a Japanese woman from a Japanese IP. GiTS movie spoiler
What's amazing is that this is literally what happens in the movie!
Any case that wants the public to sympathize with them requires a high profile example, if they did that to Aang pre-The last Airbender film nobody would have blinked because they don't know who he is.
Yes, it is a job of an actor to try new experiences - except they're not doing this in the movie and by simply casting a white person in the role robs the opportunity of an Asian/-American actor of a chance they deserve a shot at. They don't have the same opportunities white actors do in the industry. As far as I know they didn't even bother color blind casting with the movie, it was white women or nothing. What acting job an actor chooses they will be negative reception if it has bad connotations, especially when racial matters are involved. Margot Robbie would have gotten the exact same reaction had she not moved to Suicide Squad.
Who anime is for an intriguing subject and how it relates to this movie. I agree it was originally meant for the Asian market, and likely still is, but since the 80's it's been a growing industry online and on tv networks in other non-Asian countries. This has gotten so hot as a commodity Hollywood itself has made several big budget adaptions.
However, this movie isn't an anime, it's based on one. It is not controlled by the Japanese side or by interests concerned about the Japanese experience they view this from the American lens and through their political ideology. Thus it's being judged on American terms, which Asian Americans are apart of. That said, Asian Americans didn't have to get the role, I think we'd have been fine if any competent Asian actress got it. They're upset about the missed opportunity for auditioning because this is the kind of role careers are made from.
And if it was strictly for Asians why would it ok for a non-Asian to get the lead role, if this was made in Japan I guarantee Scarlett Johannessen wouldn't have been Motoko, a Japanese actress would have. This also applies to other white roles in the movie, like Kuze and Batou. Supporting roles that were played by Asians, like Togusa and Aramaki would have gotten more to do than being glorified cameos.
I don't care, it's like picking on an applicant that got the job after the person you were rooting for got unjustly booted. It's theater for the sake of the limelight and I refuse to sanction scapegoating no matter what the cause. She was lying? The interetation that she played a Japanese woman is impressively even more shallow than the movie itself.
What Japanese culture is there in this movie, really? What defines the protagonist? Is it her Japanese heritage? Not in this story. She only deserves this criticism if this movie succeeds at pulling off the existential theme of being something other than your own race. Everybody agrees that this is not at all what happens; it's all exposition with zero backing in the character. Mira is Motoko, and then John was the demons. Blame the writer for this schlock, not the professional who did just about as good a job as could have been done and seemed to have more of a grasp of the philosophical nuance of the original story than the actual people that controlled the plot and direction.
I would be happy if an American company produced an Asian director who was passionate about showing America Asian stories. I would also be happy with an American Movie called Mobile Armored Riot Police that was all about brainwash/cyberizing minorities into Caucasian bodies and turning them into a totalitarian police force, and they find out about this cultural erasure and rebel. It's the same plot twist but much more appropriate for the darker side of the American melting pot, and it escapes from the Get Out-like fetishistic asiaphilia that both sides of this fight suffer from.
Bad example, for this movie there never was a qualified Asian actress allowed to audition before switching to a white actress. This is how causes are changed in the world, citing cases people care about is how they get people to care and unless people care nothing will change with the industry. This movie and Motoko's role was like Christmas for them for a case against whitewashing in Hollywood, like The Last Airbender's was. There is no scapegoating here, Scarlett had to know what was at stake for accepting this job offer.
Technically there was Japanese culture in the movie, like the robot geishas and it being in Japan but this was all aesthetics, the characters may as well have lived in America while they were there. The protagonist is the lead actor in the movie, which falls under Motoko's role - the lead wasn't Batou or Aramaki.
Who was lying? I'm going to need more context for that statement.
I saw the movie, and yes that was literally a plot point. That's why it was in spoilers. The thing is they could have done something interesting or reconstructive with this problematic decision, and why they made her look like Scarlett Johanssen. GiTS spoilers
Discovering your real self was another ethnicity has to effect their personality to a degree, and yet they do nothing with it.
Instead it's painfully obvious they didn't care about the implications we've got Scarlett as Motoko everyone! We'll shoot this movie and cash that pay check!
That they didn't choose to delve into her changing her race in the movie isn't an excuse to act like it didn't happen. It did happen, they just didn't bother delving into the consequences of what that would do to a person or that even if they didn't do this it applies in a meta sense since Motoko is Japanese/Asian in the rest of the material.
But they don't care about cultural erasure in the movie is the thing, they may as well have done this to white people. No one cares about that, they do care about the individuals though. Nor does the film go into the darker side of the "melting pot," and if they did wouldn't that be blunted by having white actors and not giving the minority roles they were based on nothing of substance. GiTS spoilers
We only see a glimpse or two of pre-cyborg Motoko, her head is hidden and she never speaks a single word. There's nothing to grasp for the audience to care about this Motoko. There's less for Kuze, who we only know about the fact because he talks about it briefly. He doesn't give a shit about it.
it escapes from the Get Out-like fetishistic asiaphilia that both sides of this fight suffer from.
This? I can't even
edit: You may not care about this, but plenty of people do.
The context of "who was lying" is that MANAA accused Ms. Johansson of lying. Not of accepting a role 'destined' for an Asian actor, but lying. On one level, it's a cheap shot at an actor that demonstrates ignorance about acting - what comes to mind when you think of playing a person of a different race? Hint: it's not called whitewashing.
On another level, the group seems to cling to the argument that Asian people should be hired on their looks and genetic background. That's the only argument I see from them - the star trek argument of embracing stereotypes. Maybe if they actually did show any knowledge of the material at all in their explanation, I would buy it a bit more, but they don't care about Ghost in the Shell. They just want to raise a ruckus to further their agenda.
Marty: The future, it's where you're going? Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
The context of "who was lying" is that MANAA accused Ms. Johansson of lying. Not of accepting a role 'destined' for an Asian actor, but lying. On one level, it's a cheap shot at an actor that demonstrates ignorance about acting - what comes to mind when you think of playing a person of a different race? Hint: it's not called whitewashing.
On another level, the group seems to cling to the argument that Asian people should be hired on their looks and genetic background. That's the only argument I see from them - the star trek argument of embracing stereotypes. Maybe if they actually did show any knowledge of the material at all in their explanation, I would buy it a bit more, but they don't care about Ghost in the Shell. They just want to raise a ruckus to further their agenda.
The Media Action Network for Asian Americans (MANAA) has blasted the casting choice of Scarlett Johansson in “Ghost in the Shell” just ahead of the film’s opening weekend.
In a statement released Friday, the group condemned the movie’s “whitewashing” of Johansson’s character Motoku Kusanagi who first appeared in the Japanese manga of the same name.
The organization also criticized Johansson’s recent interview on “Good Morning America,” in which the actress said she “would never attempt to play a person of a different race, obviously.” MANAA responded by writing that “she was lying.”
Additionally, the group denounced the casting of Michael Pitt in the role of Kuze in the film, which MANAA said “is revealed to have originally been named Hideo, meaning he too was Japanese.”
“Apparently, in Hollywood, Japanese people can’t play Japanese people anymore,” MANAA President Robert Chan said. “There’s no reason why either Motoku or Hideo could not have been portrayed by Japanese or Asian actors instead of Scarlett Johansson and Michael Pitt. We don’t even get to see what they looked like in their original human identities — a further white-wash.”
I honestly can't see anything here that was incorrect, the context for the Motoko role was that she's a Japanese woman in the IP and when Scarlett said that she never would play another race flies in the face of that fact when she accepted the role.
With roles like this it's not simply just acting - it comes with all the racial baggage that comes with the part. She's not playing an ordinary white woman like Black Widow here. She's doing this figuratively GiTS spoilers
and literally.
She's certainly not playing a character who is heavily influenced by Japanese society like Motoko does in every other piece of the franchise, so she's not playing another race culturally, either.
This is just from my perspective, and I'd like to of to their site but my computer says they may be hacked so that's out of the question temporarily, but I think they're doing that (at first) because right now Asians in America are having trouble even getting that much in opportunities for work. They need to walk before they can run. I'm sure they'd like Asians to have roles in all sorts of roles, who wouldn't? But if they can't get a Japanese role like Motoko to an Asian actor they don't really have the time for a more nuanced conversation since Hollywood doesn't respect them enough to let them in the door. Once that's begun, yeah they probably would expand. I'm just a layman in these matters, though, if anyone else has any insight I'd like to hear it, especially from an Asian perspective. If they truly didn't care about GiTS they wouldn't have bothered using it as an example. It is an amazing opportunity they're given but they'd be folks not do act. They won't get attention to their cause by not giving anyone examples, and GiTS is perfect for that. Using it politically doesn't mean some people in the group don't care about it or aren't fans. Not to mention before now GiTS was an obscure franchise to the American public.
I mean, yeah, they want to cause some noise on this issue. That's how things change, especially in Hollywood. Talking nice to execs only go so far, businesses require tremendous pressure and shame to move in the right direction - otherwise they don't give a shit about how they're screwing with people's livelihoods and cultures for the almighty dollar and their own agendas. Which don't include Asian leads or giving the Asian community the same opportunities as the white actors, in America or abroad.
The movie felt like a very pretty mess to me. Interesting design, poorly shot and incoherent action, plot that felt like it left a lot of things underresolved for no reason.
The movie felt like a very pretty mess to me. Interesting design, poorly shot and incoherent action, plot that felt like it left a lot of things underresolved for no reason.
"He's build his own network of human minds!"
...and then that thread is never mentioned again.
It did play a part in the end.
He did try to convince Major to come with him (to the network) and when that failed he went there alone leaving his body to be destroyed.
Personally I'm hoping for a sequel, where disembodied minds like him are explored more.
I know the elephant in the room is the whitewashing, but we don't need to spend page after page discussing it; to be honest, whitewashing was the least of this film's problems. I will say this, though - if Ghost in the Shell were a great film, I could probably look over the whitewashing as a contrivance to appeal to western audiences, but that as it stands, it's basically the peak of Shit Mountain.
Posts
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Universally, is told to not go in expecting the original.
So, according to date sites--Asian-American women (or at least those who go onto dating sites) don't want to be romantically involved with Asian-American men?
Huh. That's informative. It did seem like my extended family overseas weren't that optimistic about my chances becoming romantically involved, or starting a family, after I returned to the United States for grad school. And here all this time I was taking it personally....
EDIT: There's also the whole issue of Orientalism and what it means for the desirability of women versus men in "the west", but that's actually pretty clear-cut. Thanks, Dr. Edward Said!
I would argue that now is the perfect time to have that conversation.
And I would also argue that if film producers don't think we can have that type of movie right now, they shouldn't be remaking Ghost in the Shell.
Because that's what Ghost in the Shell is.
Its an adaptation, they can carry over as little or as much as they want.
A good adaptation is more than just the brand-name. Regardless of how much or little it changes, it still manages to somehow embody the essence of the work it's adapting.
Edge of Tomorrow: changed a lot, white-washed the lead, still a good adaptation.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
It's odd you'd use Edge of Tomorrow, it ended up with an almost completely different feel and theme from the original. That you call it whitewashed is also odd. Is a western film adapted to a Japanese setting "Japan-washed" or something ?
No, they do, everyone generally has a positive response rate with the same race. It's just that the asian-asian bonus is often the weakest for men, though sometimes the aa-aa bonus dips below that.
African American men have the lowest response rates on average because Asian women absolutely don't respond to African American men - this is the strongest effect on the male side. Otherwise, they are pretty similar.
On the female side, Asian women have a pretty good deal actually, and African American women are just screwed.
Extrapolating, what explains these effects is that African American and Asian men are tied for third, but Asian women have more choice - therefore they can afford to reject Asian men. African American women do not have a choice, and they have to cling to the same race bonus. Which means African American men have a safety. Asian American men really don't. African American women definitely don't.
So without a go to pairing, Asian men and African American women don't get any love in culturally familiar romance.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
I mean, if you want to use Bane in the Dark Knight Rises, but you don't want him to be jacked up on Venom, and you change his nationality, and you change his motivations so that he's subservient to Talia, and you change a dozen other aspects of the character because they don't fit your vision ... then I would argue that you don't want to use Bane at all -- you just want to use the name Bane to put asses in seats.
Ghost in the Shell is even worse.
Because voice acting is a completely different can of worms, where the performers are always behind the camera and therefore lacks the same sense of audience association. You might as well ask about the ethnicity of the animators.
The professional voice acting community is small in size with huge range. Actors play characters who they would never be considered for in a live movie adaptation as standard practice.
Case in point:
https://www.buzzfeed.com/btopher/17-voice-actors-of-the-2000s-and-a-circle-of-conn-19oz9
It's not hypocrisy if you don't know a cartoon exists, this is why there's a disparity as I said upthread. You're underestimating how well known the cartoon media is compared to movies, Rv shows have higher visibility but they have a large gap to big budget movies.
To address a problem first you have to know It's there and having institutial racism effects all media behind and in front of the "camera." Comics, animation, novels etc.
That's why it's not as easy as judging things on consistency alone.
edit: The biggest visibility Avatar: TLA and GiTS ever got was from their movies, before that the public didn't know or care about them.
It was announced before she got involved, and why would any fan want an IP they like to be bad? They feared the movie wouldn't be true to the source and be an Americanized insult - and they were proven right. This isn't the first anime adaption that got a bad reception.
The original charters were Asian IIRC, so yeah it checks that box.
As much as I liked Tom Hardy as Bane they really should have had a Latino actor for the role, it's not like they aren't any in Hollywood. Javier Bardem, for instance. Talia and Ra's al Ghul, as well. They're supposed to be Middle Eastern descent in the comics.
If it's a complex issue, I don't understand the huge simplistic negative reaction. I especially don't understand the argument that whitewashing deprives Asian actors of work if it only applies to live action media. Voice actors are actors. It's what kept Mark Hamill alive between star wars movies. Plus, it's pretty much the only way left to leap from the small screen to the big screen on the same property: something Japan does quite well.
I believe this thread has approached this controversy with impressive nuance, especially by those that know the property, and it makes that article about how MANAA is targeting Scarlett Johansson irritating to me. I feel like my identity is being used like a stick and I don't want to be on their side.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
It's kinda whitewashed, but like the most "reasonable" way of going about it. It's not set in Japan like the novel/manga is, and the characters who are all changed to be American or European have different names and are essentially different people but with similar roles in the narrative. The one character who does stay the same has the same name and backstory but was American in the novel/manga and became British in the film.
and honestly I felt that it was about as good as a hollywood adaptation can get. It stayed pretty true to the themes of the original stuff, kept the entire narrative premise, and paid homage to the original quite frequently. It just had a very hollywood ending which I was sort of okay with.
No one is saying whitewashing is only bad if it only occurs in a specific media, it's bad no matter where it happens. Why people act on one media rather than another I've discussed twice - it's all to do with visibility (and all media have fucked up issues with race relations, some better than others). That's why visibility is important, people can't have an opinion on something if they don't know about it. The movies provides that spotlight less visible industries don't. Nor is anyone saying nobody should be voice actors, though I'm sure Hamill would be able to survive without VA Asian characters - his biggest role was of a white man (Joker) not a Japanese man (Firebird Ozai). Someone else has gone over the details in why being a VA is a different from being an actor.
Whitewashing deprives Asian actors of work because those roles were originally meant to be for those actors, in a field where minorities have a distinct disadvantage to start with, and this effects all sorts of ethnicities. Without access to those roles they have less of an opportunity to put in their dues, grow a fan base or be the next big star - while white actors get all that and more, and also endless chances if they fail. If a minority actors had as many fallbacks as Ryan Reynolds they would have retired by now, because the studies would consider them box office poison. They have work twice as hard for half as much, and they still get left out in the cold for the biggest roles.
The best way for crossover between media for actors in America is acting on a tv show, not being a VA.
Fair enough.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-ghost-movie-controversy-20170401-story.html
This is it, right? Can you explain why you think is bad? I don't see it.
They merely following what other Asian actors in Hollywood have been doing, like Constance Wu and Ming-Na Wen.
I don't see how. Also it seems to be a one way street where Western adaptations are frowned upon and framed as whitewashing but the reverse does not apply.
They changed his entire story and history to fit the feel and setting of Nolans Dark Knight. Why then would the casting need be Latino?
Because 1) the topic usually is about Western movies, 2) you can be against both, 3) there are varying circumstances why this is more accepted. None of the Asian countries doing this have huge minority populations IIRC, unlike America. America has no such excuse, it's a melting pot culture from people all over the world. It's not Sweden.
And this is literally whitewashing. Having an Asian/non-white character being acted by a white person is the definition of the term.
There's absolutely no reason they couldn't have kept his character a Latino in that movie. He's not a character defined by his race there, which is another thing the movie missed an opportunity on since Bane is proud of his heritage. Same for Ra's and Talia.
edit: Ironically they hired a Latina actress for their Montoya analog.
You're confusing expectation with desire.
I expected Donald Trump to be a horrible president. I expect GiTS to be a terrible movie. That doesn't mean that I desire these things to be terrible.
But audiences also love to be surprised. When the Supergirl trailer first came out:
People immediately thought of this:
But after the show came out, a lot of the same people who assumed that Supergirl was going to be terrible are now saying that it's the single best show on in the DC lineup right now.
People expected "Pirates of the Carribean" and "21 Jump Street" to be terrible. Then they weren't. Many sequels produced as a result.
It's cause they're going after an actor because that person is high profile, not because they're the cause of the grievance. It is the job of the actor to try experiences that aren't their own, and this one is being punished for it. It's disingenuous and spiteful, and it shows a lack of class.
And I contend that anime is not, and never will be, meant for asian americans. Asians maybe.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
So an Asian actress didn't just miss out on being the major. The Asian actress' family and friends (who are also are disproportionately minorities) miss out on being gaffers or script writers or whatever. In addition to Asian kids not thinking they can be actors.
They have both, IMO. They need high profile examples or the public won't care or know what or what they're on about and their example is one of the most popular white actresses in the world acting as a Japanese woman from a Japanese IP. GiTS movie spoiler
Yes, it is a job of an actor to try new experiences - except they're not doing this in the movie and by simply casting a white person in the role robs the opportunity of an Asian/-American actor of a chance they deserve a shot at. They don't have the same opportunities white actors do in the industry. As far as I know they didn't even bother color blind casting with the movie, it was white women or nothing. What acting job an actor chooses they will be negative reception if it has bad connotations, especially when racial matters are involved. Margot Robbie would have gotten the exact same reaction had she not moved to Suicide Squad.
Who anime is for an intriguing subject and how it relates to this movie. I agree it was originally meant for the Asian market, and likely still is, but since the 80's it's been a growing industry online and on tv networks in other non-Asian countries. This has gotten so hot as a commodity Hollywood itself has made several big budget adaptions.
However, this movie isn't an anime, it's based on one. It is not controlled by the Japanese side or by interests concerned about the Japanese experience they view this from the American lens and through their political ideology. Thus it's being judged on American terms, which Asian Americans are apart of. That said, Asian Americans didn't have to get the role, I think we'd have been fine if any competent Asian actress got it. They're upset about the missed opportunity for auditioning because this is the kind of role careers are made from.
And if it was strictly for Asians why would it ok for a non-Asian to get the lead role, if this was made in Japan I guarantee Scarlett Johannessen wouldn't have been Motoko, a Japanese actress would have. This also applies to other white roles in the movie, like Kuze and Batou. Supporting roles that were played by Asians, like Togusa and Aramaki would have gotten more to do than being glorified cameos.
Literally the plot of the original film.
I misunderstood you, that's on me.
The little details can be nice, but what matters most is sticking by the story and its characters. And from what I'm hearing here, they didn't really do either of those things.
These type of adaptations tend to be a forgettable generic mess that only took the spotlight due to the IP it was attached to.
The whole "adaptations can do whatever" attitude kind of baffles me. If they're not interested in the source material as a reference, past the point of having lots of little nods to throw out to convince people that it's faithful, then it doesn't even really feel like an adaptation to me. It feels like a totally new work with someone else's brand painted onto it.
Yeah see, this is exactly what I was getting at.
No, I understand why you're calling it whitewashing. I just fail to see why it's a bad thing. Japanese anime is adapted by a Hollywood studio and so they cast a high-profile Hollywood Actor. That's what it boils down to.
As to the points: 1) fair enough, 2) why would you be against both or either? It's a very close-minded world view that seeks to box in people by their race and decide what is and is not appropriate for them to do based on their race, 3) if we're talking excuses, money and high-profile names come to mind.
There's also no reason to make his character a Latino in that movie, considering they completely changed his past and heritage. I don't think anything would have been lost, but I also think Tom Hardy played it amazing.
https://mic.com/articles/76097/why-young-asian-americans-are-fleeing-hollywood#.4gcNYf4i0
I don't care, it's like picking on an applicant that got the job after the person you were rooting for got unjustly booted. It's theater for the sake of the limelight and I refuse to sanction scapegoating no matter what the cause. She was lying? The interetation that she played a Japanese woman is impressively even more shallow than the movie itself.
What Japanese culture is there in this movie, really? What defines the protagonist? Is it her Japanese heritage? Not in this story. She only deserves this criticism if this movie succeeds at pulling off the existential theme of being something other than your own race. Everybody agrees that this is not at all what happens; it's all exposition with zero backing in the character. Mira is Motoko, and then John was the demons. Blame the writer for this schlock, not the professional who did just about as good a job as could have been done and seemed to have more of a grasp of the philosophical nuance of the original story than the actual people that controlled the plot and direction.
I would be happy if an American company produced an Asian director who was passionate about showing America Asian stories. I would also be happy with an American Movie called Mobile Armored Riot Police that was all about brainwash/cyberizing minorities into Caucasian bodies and turning them into a totalitarian police force, and they find out about this cultural erasure and rebel. It's the same plot twist but much more appropriate for the darker side of the American melting pot, and it escapes from the Get Out-like fetishistic asiaphilia that both sides of this fight suffer from.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
Yet rather than simply address it as actual whitewashing you say it is framed as such, implying there isn't any whitewashing.
It's a bad thing since there is no level playing field for minorities, including Asians, in Hollywood. No one is questioning how it is done, yes that is correct we're saying how they came to consolation was wrong. What it boils down to is that that option was not an option for Asian actors, no matter how talented they are. Even for Asian roles, like Motoko. Scarlett would't have gotten a balance at this role, if white actors had the obstructions in the industry. She got there by building up her career through smaller roles (and some actors can go to the big time with a big lead role, like Motoko*), that's a luxury most Asian actors don't have.
2) Because x-washing is bad no matter what country does it? It;d be hypocritical of me to not be ok with what Hollywood is doing, while letting other country's off simply because I don't live there. Other countries have their own problems with their Hollywood's, too. I'm not boxing them in by their race, you've got that backwards. Nor do I think they should only be allowed Asian centric roles (but it would be stupid to freeze Asians out of Asian roles), if the ethnicity of the role isn't a defining feature of their personality - everyone should get a shot at those roles, they don't right now. 3) those are poor excuses, and ignore the underlying problems for why minorities/Asians can't access them. Those are what many actors strives for, yet white actors hold a monopoly over. You can't get a foot in the door if the people in charge won't open it for you - those people? Generally white or answer to those who are, and the is very little inclination up the food chain to change. They like the way things are as it is.
There's also no reason to make his character a Latino in that movie, considering they completely changed his past and heritage. I don't think anything would have been lost, but I also think Tom Hardy played it amazing.[/quote]
You don't think Bane being Latino in the comics is a good reason to hire a Latino actor? What was it about the role in the movie that required him to be white, he could have been black or Indian and with a good enough actor we'd have had a similar performance. IIRC the character is a world traveller and spend at least some of his life in the Middle East or Asia, so him being a native there or South American wouldn't alter anything substantial.
* many child actors do this, and the Red Ranger's actor in the Power Rangers movie
Bad example, for this movie there never was a qualified Asian actress allowed to audition before switching to a white actress. This is how causes are changed in the world, citing cases people care about is how they get people to care and unless people care nothing will change with the industry. This movie and Motoko's role was like Christmas for them for a case against whitewashing in Hollywood, like The Last Airbender's was. There is no scapegoating here, Scarlett had to know what was at stake for accepting this job offer.
Technically there was Japanese culture in the movie, like the robot geishas and it being in Japan but this was all aesthetics, the characters may as well have lived in America while they were there. The protagonist is the lead actor in the movie, which falls under Motoko's role - the lead wasn't Batou or Aramaki.
Who was lying? I'm going to need more context for that statement.
I saw the movie, and yes that was literally a plot point. That's why it was in spoilers. The thing is they could have done something interesting or reconstructive with this problematic decision, and why they made her look like Scarlett Johanssen. GiTS spoilers
That they didn't choose to delve into her changing her race in the movie isn't an excuse to act like it didn't happen. It did happen, they just didn't bother delving into the consequences of what that would do to a person or that even if they didn't do this it applies in a meta sense since Motoko is Japanese/Asian in the rest of the material.
But they don't care about cultural erasure in the movie is the thing, they may as well have done this to white people. No one cares about that, they do care about the individuals though. Nor does the film go into the darker side of the "melting pot," and if they did wouldn't that be blunted by having white actors and not giving the minority roles they were based on nothing of substance. GiTS spoilers
This? I can't even
edit: You may not care about this, but plenty of people do.
Have you seen this movie? The main villain is
It's not like there can't be good Japanese villains in movies, The Wolverine was great with that.
That only tends to be true for when the villain is a stereotype who is entirely defined by stereotypical ethnicity, which is what tends to happen when "whiteness" is considered as "default."
Fu Manchu isn't offensive because he's a Chinese villain. He's offensive because he's a Chinese villain stereotype. You can have him played by a white guy, and it makes the problem worse, not better.
The context of "who was lying" is that MANAA accused Ms. Johansson of lying. Not of accepting a role 'destined' for an Asian actor, but lying. On one level, it's a cheap shot at an actor that demonstrates ignorance about acting - what comes to mind when you think of playing a person of a different race? Hint: it's not called whitewashing.
On another level, the group seems to cling to the argument that Asian people should be hired on their looks and genetic background. That's the only argument I see from them - the star trek argument of embracing stereotypes. Maybe if they actually did show any knowledge of the material at all in their explanation, I would buy it a bit more, but they don't care about Ghost in the Shell. They just want to raise a ruckus to further their agenda.
Doc: That's right, twenty five years into the future. I've always dreamed on seeing the future, looking beyond my years, seeing the progress of mankind. I'll also be able to see who wins the next twenty-five world series.
http://variety.com/2017/film/news/scarlett-johansson-ghost-in-the-shell-whitewashing-1202020230/
I honestly can't see anything here that was incorrect, the context for the Motoko role was that she's a Japanese woman in the IP and when Scarlett said that she never would play another race flies in the face of that fact when she accepted the role.
With roles like this it's not simply just acting - it comes with all the racial baggage that comes with the part. She's not playing an ordinary white woman like Black Widow here. She's doing this figuratively GiTS spoilers
This is just from my perspective, and I'd like to of to their site but my computer says they may be hacked so that's out of the question temporarily, but I think they're doing that (at first) because right now Asians in America are having trouble even getting that much in opportunities for work. They need to walk before they can run. I'm sure they'd like Asians to have roles in all sorts of roles, who wouldn't? But if they can't get a Japanese role like Motoko to an Asian actor they don't really have the time for a more nuanced conversation since Hollywood doesn't respect them enough to let them in the door. Once that's begun, yeah they probably would expand. I'm just a layman in these matters, though, if anyone else has any insight I'd like to hear it, especially from an Asian perspective. If they truly didn't care about GiTS they wouldn't have bothered using it as an example. It is an amazing opportunity they're given but they'd be folks not do act. They won't get attention to their cause by not giving anyone examples, and GiTS is perfect for that. Using it politically doesn't mean some people in the group don't care about it or aren't fans. Not to mention before now GiTS was an obscure franchise to the American public.
I mean, yeah, they want to cause some noise on this issue. That's how things change, especially in Hollywood. Talking nice to execs only go so far, businesses require tremendous pressure and shame to move in the right direction - otherwise they don't give a shit about how they're screwing with people's livelihoods and cultures for the almighty dollar and their own agendas. Which don't include Asian leads or giving the Asian community the same opportunities as the white actors, in America or abroad.
...and then that thread is never mentioned again.
He did try to convince Major to come with him (to the network) and when that failed he went there alone leaving his body to be destroyed.
Personally I'm hoping for a sequel, where disembodied minds like him are explored more.