Poll: White-Washing in Movies

[tahrey]

Oh, and incidentally, as a resident of Great Britain:

What, were there no British-Asian actors available to play a half-British/half-Japanese character?! Even if it ended up being an "eh, close enough" British-Chinese or similar? The guy's as much Irish, Portugese, and Hawai'ian as he is Chinese, and although both parents came from here, he was raised Canadian and speaks decidedly Uhmerkan.

 

[tahrey]

This seems more of a "STARPOWA!" issue than white washing. It sounds like they are tryng to do a Last Samurai V2.0.

Ken Watanabe does ring a few bells, but I had to look him up. Once I saw his picture I recognize him, although damned if I can actually list any movies I saw him in.

Kiroyuki Sanada didn't ring any bells, but I recognize his face as the villain of rush hour 3, but that is about it. In their country they might be famous, but here in the US I would bet hardly anyone recognizes them.

Sometimes a movie breaks an actor (or a bunch of 'em) rather than the other way around, though... Having a big name star can give a film quite a boost, yes, and it's a definite benefit if they also happen to be good at their job. However, if you think that the only reason people will come to see it is BECAUSE it has person X or Y starring, then you're already on to a loser. An awesome premise can itself be more than enough, regardless of who's playing the parts.

 

[Arakasi]

Honestly I just don't care.

I also think it's racist to say "He's white! He shouldn't be in a samurai movie, only Japanese people should!".

 

[Bat Vader]

This kinda reminds me of the film Gandhi. Good movie but I think they picked the wrong actor for the title role. They picked Ben Kingsley a British actor to play Gandhi. That doesn't seem exactly right to me.

 

[6037084]

Since this isn't a documentary and we can safely assume it's made to make money, I don't see why the studio can't do whatever the hell they want if they think it'll bring more money in. You see if the target audience is 90% white and having the main character be white helps the moviegoers relate to the character and which would result in more moviegoers I really don't see why the studio can't use that method to make more cold hard cash.

 

[Winterbird]

There are two reasons for doing this:

1. They're making movies for an American audience which is mostly white. You may think that's a stupid reason, but there's research to suggest that people actually do identify more with their own ethnicity in movies. Not everyone of course, but a significant number of people for movie studios to take it into account.

2. Adding a white person in a foreign culture helps them explain it to the audience. Tom Cruise in The Last Samurai is a good example. The idea that the last person in an order of Japanese warriors is a white American is ridiculous, but since the character knows nothing about Japanese culture it has to be explained to him in the film, and is therefore explained to the audience as well.

 

[Meatspinner]

His mother was English and his father was a Hawaiian-born American of Native Hawaiian, English, Irish, Portuguese, and Chinese descent.

Dam, that's quite the rainbow detergent they are using to wash with

 

[Something Amyss]

Non-white role given to a white actor? Internet response: Rage!
White role given to a non-white actor? Internet response: Deal with it.

Kinda funny you put it that way. the presence of a "deal with it" response correctly indicates a large number of people still raging over it. I suspect then that your assessment has less to do with hypocrisy and more to do with confirmation bias and your own standards. People do get in an uproar when, say, a black guy gets a part aimed at a white guy, which is contrary to the message of hypocrisy and indicates that there might be more than a single standard out there less because of hypocrisy and more because of diversity of opinion.

Anyway, as amusing as whites feigning persecution (especially since it's almost always over comic book characters or something else decidedly fake) always is to me, my response both to whites not getting those roles and to the current topic at hand is fairly apathetic. If they were looking for guys like Keannu it was going to suck anyway, in all probability. It's, by the topic creator's admission not attempting to be historical.

At that point, I have trouble separating it from the other ten thousand Japanese stories we've assimilated and added white people to.

 

[Something Amyss]

2. Adding a white person in a foreign culture helps them explain it to the audience.

There's no evidence this is where there going, is it?

The reason that Last Samurai did it was specifically because it's a "dances with wolves" story.

 

[Ryotknife]

This seems more of a "STARPOWA!" issue than white washing. It sounds like they are tryng to do a Last Samurai V2.0.

Ken Watanabe does ring a few bells, but I had to look him up. Once I saw his picture I recognize him, although damned if I can actually list any movies I saw him in.

Kiroyuki Sanada didn't ring any bells, but I recognize his face as the villain of rush hour 3, but that is about it. In their country they might be famous, but here in the US I would bet hardly anyone recognizes them.

Sometimes a movie breaks an actor (or a bunch of 'em) rather than the other way around, though... Having a big name star can give a film quite a boost, yes, and it's a definite benefit if they also happen to be good at their job. However, if you think that the only reason people will come to see it is BECAUSE it has person X or Y starring, then you're already on to a loser. An awesome premise can itself be more than enough, regardless of who's playing the parts.

that is true.

However, just from personal experience this is how most of my conversations go with regards to seeing a movie

A; hey you want to see X movie?
B: which one is that?
A: it is the one with Y actor

I am not sure if people see a movie solely because of a certain actor, but ill go out on a limb and say that people...organize/prioritize/preception based upon its actors (or if it is an established series like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings).

That, and people do see some movies The Expendables simply because it is full of star power.

 

[Helmholtz Watson]

So that's my little rant. I want to know what you think; should they have added a white character to the story (note the word "should", not "did they have a right to")? Are there instances of changing skin tones in media that really tick you off?

I agree that movies should not be white washed, but at the same time I don't think it should go 180 degrees in the other direction either, like with the movie Thor or the proposition that Idris Elba should be the next James Bond or Donald Glover should be Spider Man.

 

[Winterbird]

2. Adding a white person in a foreign culture helps them explain it to the audience.

There's no evidence this is where there going, is it?

The reason that Last Samurai did it was specifically because it's a "dances with wolves" story.

Well I don't know, there's not enough information yet. I should have mentioned that while I understand why things like this are done, I still don't really approve.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Non-white role given to a white actor? Internet response: Rage!
White role given to a non-white actor? Internet response: Deal with it.

That's not quite true, when Idris Elba got the part of Heimdall there was more than a little bit of rage that a Norse God should be played by a black Englishman. Eventually it piped down because Idris Elba is awesome.

Of course non-whites getting white characters is much, much rarer than the reverse, so much so that an attitude that raging fans should deal with it (when non-whites have to deal with it constantly) isn't entirely unfair.

 

[Albino Boo]

This kinda reminds me of the film Gandhi. Good movie but I think they picked the wrong actor for the title role. They picked Ben Kingsley a British actor to play Gandhi. That doesn't seem exactly right to me.

Give you hint here Ben Kingsley is his stage name, his real name is Krishna Pandit Bhanji. I'll give you 3 guess as to what part of the world that name originates from.

 

[zehydra]

I don't know who should be more insulted: the Japanese history buff (for obvious reasons), or the Western movie goer, because Hollywood thinks they're incapable of relating to people that aren't of European descent.

In the case of white-washing however...there's quite a trend of marginalizing people of colour. Now, you can say they needed to put a white guy in, cause nobody would watch a movie about people who aren't white...but while that passes the buck on, there's still quite a problem.

Fortunately, the Japanese are the least marginalized people of color, so the damage isn't as severe as it would be in other cases.

Japanese aren't "people of color"

Not that that term makes much sense anyway

 

[Carlston]

My thought on the matter.


So what.

Every country wants to put their populaces ethnic makeup into a series.

Look at Power rangers, when Saban sold it to Africa guess what all the rangers were black, Usa played the melting pot card, ect ect.

My question is, why are they so afraid of having a "PC" casting when every -white- show has to have x amount of blacks asians ect?

You remake the ring just cause it is from Japan doesn't mean you are forced to only have Japanese actors.

 

[sammysoso]

Eh, since they aren't really going for accuracy I don't think it matters very much.

If this was more a period piece, then yea, I would have a problem.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

I would much rather all the ronin were Japanese. Having a white character for purposes of audience relevance is stupid for a start, but changing the lore to accomodate a white character where none exists is ridiculous, especially considering what would have to transpire for a half British samurai to exist in that time. That said, I don't think it's racism, just Hollywood being stupid in the same way most game publishers are stupid when it comes to female protagonists.