<pedantry hat on>Well, technically, the Chinese subplot in “The Martian” was in the book long before Hollywood got a hold of it, and it made a reasonable amount of sense in the context of the story (in the novel, if not the movie). </pedantry hat>
As for GITS, it could be done well either way. But they do appear to be shoehorning an actress of their choice into the part for some of the worst reasons instead of good reasons - like talent or a different take on the story or any of several other valid reasons.
Hollywood is very specifically concerned with getting past the very strict Chinese censoring boards. The Japanese don’t outright refuse to show movies like the Chinese do. That’s as far as the pandering goes, if they can’t show the movie in China they lose out on hundreds of millions in profits. It’s why movies like Fury Road are struggling to get permission to get a sequel made while others have to throw in hand jobs that contribute nothing to the plot. Other countries have no problems enjoying American movies just as they are.
I don’t think that’s entirely fair. There were westerners in Japan at that time (the movie is largely about “westernizing” the army, no?) and the wiki article says some of the movie was based on the exploits of a French captain who fought in the Shogon-Emperor civil war. Further, sometimes dropping in a white guy is a central plot device. Like Dances with wolves, the white guy serves as an audience surrogate so an alien society can be explained to him and he can be shocked and/or amazed by it. Sure, you don’t have to do it that way but you are expecting different things from the audience if you don’t.
At least in Japan, boinking a tall, blonde woman with big tits is far and away more impressive than doing it with a black haired, East Asian woman. And, the (male) head of the household is the one who decides what movies to watch.
And if you’re Chinese and the woman is an actual Japanese actress, I suspect that it becomes even less thrilling.
And in any case, fairly adventurous individuals can and do find themselves fighting in armies belonging to other countries from time to time, like John Paul Jones, a Scotsman who gained fame serving in the US Navy before becoming a Russian Admiral, or Rick Rescorla, a Cornish man who served in the British Army, the Northern Rhodesia Police, and the US Army.
Aside - Reading your post made me recall something. Isn’t Idris Elba the lead in the movie adaptation of Stephen King’s Gunslinger series? Would he even have time to do a James Bond movie, if he’s committed himself to a series (I’m assuming) of future movies?
All speculation of course. If they really want Elba for Bond, they’ll find a way.
Have you read none of the links here? Yes, assume if it’s a Japanese person making the anime that the default is a Japanese person. Because all the racial clues people think they see (pale skin, blonde hair) are not actually racial clues in anime conventions.
How about “No”?
Well, obviously, if it’s some fictional universe, they’re not strictly “Japanese”. But then they’re not “European” or “American”, either. But what they are, is “not foreign” to Japanese people - they are not marked as “Other”, but as “Us” - Japanese people looking at stock anime characters do not perceive them as different, any more than, as pointed out in one discussion, they need their stickmen to have slanted eyes.
Realistically, Japanese manga artists and animators learned to draw from Disney and European sources. Back when they drew in their own style, the people looked Japanese:
So in practical terms, they are drawing caucasian people, they just don’t realize it until they have to try and draw an actual white person, and go through some contortions to figure out how to do that.
In canon, Motoko has a top-of-the-line cyborg body. However, to not attract attention, the outside of that body is made to look like a regular, run-of-the-mill cyborg. (The manga explicitly states that otherwise, she’d be at risk of being abducted and stripped for parts.)
This also ties in thematically. A big deal is made of how to retain a sense of self when nearly every aspect of your physical being is artificial. To illustrate:
[Motoko travels around the city, and keeps running into exact duplicates of herself]
So, in-story; she looks like a very common kind of cyborg, marketed to the average japanese person who could afford to be one.
Also, I completely agree with the previously cited raisins example.
This is mostly true - there were some pre-War local antecedents as well, but manga as we know it is a post-War, American animation-inspired artform.
Actually, if we’re being pedantic, they looked Chinese, since it was Chinese woodblock printing that inspired the Japanese, including stylistically.
This is true, but that last bit highlights what I’ve been saying all along - anime artists draw Japanese people with stylistic clues that we read as “Western”,* but they don’t*. It doesn’t matter that they derive from Western prototypes, right now they default to using that same style for Japanese people too.
I’m not surprised somebody like Johanssen was cast in a movie like this. Exchange her with another bankable female actor and I’d say the same thing.
I agree, in a perfect world the role would’ve gone to an Asian female actor. It would’ve made a great breakout role. But the studio can’t take a chance on that because it needs a financial return on this project, so they’re going to go with the bankable star rather than the unknown.
I have Facebook friends who hand-wring over this phenomenon all the time. They understand the reason but they, for some reason, still love to bang the race/Hollywood pulpit. Everybody gets it and everyone agrees with them but it’s not going to change the status quo at this very moment.
And it won’t last, because it’s becoming a bigger deal all the time. Using money as an excuse for racism is still racism, and we’re only getting more sensitive to this stuff rather than less. We already saw what happened at the Oscars, and it’s only going to get worse.
If they don’t start taking chances, they will run out of bankable stars in the first place.
Oh, and would people please stop acting like doing something racist for money isn’t racism? Doing it for money is even worse, since it means you must be consciously aware of what you are doing.
You seem to be missing the reason *why *she is bankable. She is bankable because, as an unknown, she was given roles in movies with a good chance of success. Movies based on pre-existing comic books or best selling novels. That got her exposure. It made her famous. It made her bankable.
And this project has a good chance of success. The studio could do with this character what they did with Johanson in Ghost World or Lost in Translation. They could cast a relatively unknown, up-and-coming Asian actress in a “safe” movie based on a best-selling,famous source.
But they didn’t. they cast an established White actor instead. And as a result the chance of an Asian actress breaking out and becoming bankable due to this project the way that Johanson did from Ghost World or Lost in Translation, is zero.
Everybody knows why this decision was made. You haven’t got some deep insight when you point out that the decision was based on money. What you are not explaining however is why Johanson was cast in Ghost World and Lost in Translation instead of a bankable star? Why did the “studio” take a risk and cast an unknown Johansson and not Live Tyler or Nicole Kidman a some other bankable actress of the day?
That is the problem. Studios only ever promote White actresses to be the new It Girl. And as result only White actresses ever become bankable. And that is then used as the excuse when the studio refuses to cast minority actresses in minority roles.
Obviously every bankable actress was once not bankable. The question being asked here isn’t just :Why not cast an Asian actress in an Asian role" it is "Why are Asian actresses never allowed to *have *a potential breakout role? Why do they all have to become established abroad, or in US TV or in independent movies before a US studio will cast them in a safe movie? Why isn’t some Asian actress being given the opportunity in this project that Johanssen got in Ghost World or Lost in Translation.
That’s the real question. Simply claiming that it’s being done for monetary reasons doesn’t address the issue because we know that Johansson herself was given equivalent roles when she wasn’t bankable. So why is it only minority roles where actresses on safe projects have to be bankable?
It’s a loss. A major minority hero has been Whitewashed and White villain has been made into yet another a Black gangster.
Hollywood has never had a problem casting minorities as villains. That’s been a long running problem in its own right. In no sense is it a positive thing that minority hero has been whitewashed while a white villain has been recast as black.
Firstly, Virgin Suicides should have been Lost in Translation, which starred Bill Murray and was . Secondly, the cast of Ghost World included Thora Birch, who was big name at the time and Steve Buscemi. It was based on a commercially successful, cult comic, directly comparable to GitS.
No it’s not. To the extent that anything is sure fire, this is. Large lead in, oodles of internet chatter. Nothing in Hollywood has ever been truly sure fire. but this project has as good a chance as any other non-sequel else ever produced.
Why is a Black Bond in 2016 jarring? What aspect of his character makes a Black man less plausible?
