Asians almost never get racially-neutral lead roles. If Asians aren't even being cast in racially-explicit lead roles, then it perpetuates a mainstream stereotype. Akira was a perfect opportunity to cast an Asian main actor, and they blew it.
Asians almost never get racially-neutral lead roles. If Asians aren't even being cast in racially-explicit lead roles, then it perpetuates a mainstream stereotype. Akira was a perfect opportunity to cast an Asian main actor, and they blew it.
I'm disappointed.
See, I can buy this line of thinking. But I can't buy labeling it racism.
Why not? It's discrimination on the basis of race. That is pretty much the definition of racism. Racism doesn't just mean overt hate, you know; in fact, these days, most of it is far more subtle and perpetuated by people who don't mean to be racist at all.
As the Avenue Q song goes, everyone's a little bit racist. We've all internalized some prejudice from our environment. You can dedicate your whole life to crusading against racism and still be a little bit racist. I'm a dedicated radical profeminist, but I slip up sometimes, or am ignorant, and have thoughts, use language and make comment that are sexist. There is nothing wrong with understanding and identifying racism as it is; it doesn't make a person an irredeemable monster to have prejudices, because we all do. It's just something we have to work on, collectively and as individuals.
Failing to identify racism because we don't want to label somebody a racist is silly. We're all racists. We're all sexist. We all have a little bit of homophobia. We gotta call 'em as we see 'em or we'll never get better.
It's no more discrimination than it would be to have a black Peter Parker, a black Green Lantern, or a black Nick Fury. It's merely changing the narrative. Just because you re-cast a character's race doesn't mean it's done with malicious intent.
For the upteenth time, the characters' race won't significantly inform the content of the movie.
If we lived in a post-racial egalitarian society where race honestly made no difference, then yes, that would be true. But we don't. We live in a society where Asian folks don't get leading roles, and then an opportunity came along to cast as such, justified by source material and everything, and they cast Yet Another White Dude instead. If you can't see something wrong with that... well, I'm honestly not sure what to say.
It's no more discrimination than it would be to have a black Peter Parker, a black Green Lantern, or a black Nick Fury. It's merely changing the narrative. Just because you re-cast a character's race doesn't mean it's done with malicious intent.
For the upteenth time, the characters' race won't significantly inform the content of the movie.
There is a difference. One of these is switching from majority to minority, and the other is doing the opposite.
Switching race has the same divisive effect on the community and the fandom no matter which direction you switch. But only switching away from minority is racism.
I've read and enjoyed the Akira manga. I also saw the movie, but it has been many years since I have seen it. Also, all you white dudes with your "Hollywood is totally fine and colorblind" thing, just remember, they are trying to sell to you. My old boss was a film maker, he was black. He had seen the film industry from the inside and had stories. I'm partly bitter because I am a girl, and we are almost totally relegated to side characters/romantic interests. If we are the main character, it is categorized as a chick flick, and marketed almost exclusively toward women. I want more Ripleys.
That is the sort of privilege I'm frustrated people don't get. It's not exactly subtle. As a white dude, I can walk into any movie theater playing just about any movie and see another person like me up on the screen, playing a whole range of different characters, heroes and villains. Women can't do that. There are very few movies with black leads and it's always the same four actors. If you are any other minority, or, god forbid, a black woman, you are just utterly screwed.
That is the sort of privilege I'm frustrated people don't get. It's not exactly subtle. As a white dude, I can walk into any movie theater playing just about any movie and see another person like me up on the screen, playing a whole range of different characters, heroes and villains. Women can't do that. There are very few movies with black leads and it's always the same four actors. If you are any other minority, or, god forbid, a black woman, you are just utterly screwed.
But it's not discrimination, you guys!
Dude, my entire country, it's history and culture, to your country is a themed Steak Restaurant, a beer we don't even fucking make, Snakes/spiders, a Simpsons episode and a half remembered joke about a knife. Oh, and Heath Ledger, Hugh Jackman and Sam Worthington. All of whom for most of the major productions they've been in, had to pretend to be North American.
And I'm expected to accept that and shut the fuck up, because of the colour of my skin - Hey, I'm just a white dude, I don't know about people ignoring my nation, I'm too full of white privilege. Even the most hardcore activist types don't give a fuck about us, because we're a majority Caucasian nation.
I don't really have a point, and I'm not entirely serious about it. But either way, I'd like some of my apparent white privilege, if it's not too much trouble, I figure we're about due.
National discrimination is also not cool. You shouldn't be expected to just accept it, and you shouldn't. Next time people make those jokes, tell them to shut up! That isn't about you being white, it's about discrimination against Australian people and culture. That isn't right, and fuck anyone who thinks it is. (Unless of course it's an aspect of Australian culture which is itself discriminatory.)
However, don't get mad when you ask feminists or civil rights activists fighting on behalf of minorities what they are doing about the problem of people discriminating against Australian culture and they tell you they aren't interested. We all have the right to choose our battles. If you want to fight that one, go out and fight it, and find others who will. Don't expect other people to fight those battles for you, but don't turn down the help where you can get it.
National discrimination is also not cool. You shouldn't be expected to just accept it, and you shouldn't. Next time people make those jokes, tell them to shut up! That isn't about you being white, it's about discrimination against Australian people and culture. That isn't right, and fuck anyone who thinks it is.
Let me try again - I'm saying White privilege isn't necessarily the case just because someone looks caucasian, example, white dude whose culture is entirely ignored, and is generally told to shut up about it, because of the colour of his skin. I picked my own culture because I know that one. Hell, if I were to say I was part of a minority in America, I'd get laughed damn near out of the country, again, because I'm a Caucasian lookin' dude - despite that I would be, by definition, part of a minority.
When I say hardcore activist types, I think we're getting a little crossed on terms here - I mean the type of people who will fire WAY up on EVERY one of those issues, and more. People who are activists for pretty much every social issue, not just one or two issue kinda people. Of course I don't expect all the feminists to start changing tack, that's just silly, I'm the village idiot, but I'm not that dumb.
Side note - As a nation, we identify as much with Asia as we do with America. It's kinda like the neighbors and the second cousins who live across town.
Now, That said - I don't think this is necessarily a huge issue. America has bigger problems to deal with, and it's just a tidy example of how the White Privilege you hear about isn't quite how it's made out to be by the sorts of people who tend to use the term on a regular basis, the aforementioned hardcore activist types. It's more "Caucasian American Privilege", if you want to be accurate, but that also comes with it's own problems, but ones I'm less familiar with.
Also, I don't think this is a huge issue with this movie. Remember, it's not like they've got four white dudes playing the only white dudes in Neo-tokyo, It's Manhattan(Okay, Neo-Manhattan), and frankly, the majority of people in America(And Manhattan) are Caucasian, and we only know the actors for Three main characters and one of whom who is a supporting character at best, and this is all pre-filming, where there is still room for change, though it is less likely than changing the guy's name, rather than the actor.
But, they still might - after all, like I said, they changed actors for Marty McFly halfway through filming Back to the Future. There is still hope, right up until they finish filming. After all, we know literally nothing beyond some basic plot points, the name, where it's set, and four actors, all of which but for the name can change.
I'd be just as pissed off as you, if it was set in Tokyo. But it's not. It's Manhattan, and walking down the street in Manhattan, the majority of people you're going to see are Caucasian - not to say people who are not are unknown, but they're still in the minority. As much as it's going for the safe ethnicity on film as much as anything else, you can't call it inaccurate.
So, could you help me out here. I've not seen Akira in well over a decade, and I don't remember the aspects of it that relied on the movie being set in Tokyo as opposed to another city or nation. If any part of the plot relied on a certain building in or facet of Tokyo, I don't recall it. Please correct me on this.
If a movie could be set in any fictional future city, it makes sense to set it in a city well known to the movie's main audience. In this case, in the USA, and if you're going to destroy a city, New York is a classic target. If the characters in the movie live in the city, it makes sense to have them look like average people from the city, and the average person in New York is pretty much non-Japanese.
I don't see this as a racist decision, or even a disrespectful decision, by the casting directors. I do think more non-whites should be cast in leading roles than they are currently, but I don't think that just because this movie is based on a story first set in Tokyo that this should be the film which MUST be cast with a Japanese actor. If so, great, but if any other film? Just as great.
National discrimination is also not cool. You shouldn't be expected to just accept it, and you shouldn't. Next time people make those jokes, tell them to shut up! That isn't about you being white, it's about discrimination against Australian people and culture. That isn't right, and fuck anyone who thinks it is.
Let me try again - I'm saying White privilege isn't necessarily the case just because someone looks caucasian, example, white dude whose culture is entirely ignored, and is generally told to shut up about it, because of the colour of his skin. I picked my own culture because I know that one. Hell, if I were to say I was part of a minority in America, I'd get laughed damn near out of the country, again, because I'm a Caucasian lookin' dude - despite that I would be, by definition, part of a minority.
When I say hardcore activist types, I think we're getting a little crossed on terms here - I mean the type of people who will fire WAY up on EVERY one of those issues, and more. People who are activists for pretty much every social issue, not just one or two issue kinda people. Of course I don't expect all the feminists to start changing tack, that's just silly, I'm the village idiot, but I'm not that dumb.
The people you are talking about, who get fired up about every social issue? Those people are kind of idiots. Discrimination is a hugely complex issue, and if somebody is getting worked up and chanting about everything then I guarantee they know next to nothing. Most of them are just parroting buzzwords, because there simply isn't enough time to learn about, to really and truly care about, every social issue.
I don't like discrimination of any kind. However, I'm not a gay rights activist or a civil rights activist or anti-poverty crusader or promoter of religious harmony. I don't like any of the things those people fight against, but those aren't my fights. I can't know that much! I don't have time for that many marches! I don't even know the right terms for them!
I picked the fight I care about most, sexism, for a variety of personal reasons, and I became a profeminist. Well, first I became a female supremest because I was a stupid kid reacting emotionally to trauma, but then I mellowed out and started learning. It's taken me the better part of a decade to realize I basically don't know anything. I have a to-read list as long as your arm. Actually and truly caring about an issue is the work of a lifetime.
Those people who overreact to everything are just people who read books by people who really care. They are the progressive version of the Fox News idiot. They are on the right track in that they are aware at all that there are social issues, but beyond that they are just stabbing in the dark about all this stuff.
So next time they tell you your issues don't matter, remind yourself that they are just the flipped version of the guys who don't believe that black people haven't faced any obsticles since the Civil Rights Act was passed. If they really, actually cared about social issues instead of just latching onto whatever progressive issue came along next, then they'd at least be willing to point you towards where that discussion was happening. Not concerning yourself with the opinions of the ignorant applies to both sides of the political spectrum.
(I don't mean that in a No True Scotsman sort of way, the opposite, really. Idiots exist in every group.)
So, could you help me out here. I've not seen Akira in well over a decade, and I don't remember the aspects of it that relied on the movie being set in Tokyo as opposed to another city or nation. If any part of the plot relied on a certain building in or facet of Tokyo, I don't recall it. Please correct me on this.
If a movie could be set in any fictional future city, it makes sense to set it in a city well known to the movie's main audience. In this case, in the USA, and if you're going to destroy a city, New York is a classic target. If the characters in the movie live in the city, it makes sense to have them look like average people from the city, and the average person in New York is pretty much non-Japanese.
I don't see this as a racist decision, or even a disrespectful decision, by the casting directors. I do think more non-whites should be cast in leading roles than they are currently, but I don't think that just because this movie is based on a story first set in Tokyo that this should be the film which MUST be cast with a Japanese actor. If so, great, but if any other film? Just as great.
While the city's location itself doesn't matter so much, the characters themselves are very much shaped by it, being an urban motorcycle gang, which is a fairly Japanese concept; American outlaw motorcycle culture is much more rural, being based out on the routes and highways, though the attitude towards the law is not dissimilar. That aspect would have been worth keeping for it's uniquely Japanese flare.
However, that doesn't matter that much in this adaptation, because the whole motorcycle gang angle is gone. Can't have the main character be a criminal, he's got to be an everyday Joe! Considering that much of the iconic imagery of Akira centers around those bikes, that makes it a bad adaptation for an entirely different reason.
I wouldn't call myself an Activist, really. I'm somewhat of a fighter by nature, Fighting is kinda what I do and what I know. I just fight things that I think are wrong, when I can, when it will help. I don't tend to prioritize my time, but I also tend to go for maximum effect - I might not fight all the time, but I fight where it will be helpful. Stuff like this, this is just discussion for fun, to me, as with most discussion and arguing on the internet - because you and I discussing, that's not fighting for a cause, that's just talking.
Different methods, I guess, I don't have to focus as much because I'm selective in when I move, and assessing if a measure is good for a cause, and if it will be effective to do so is a much easier assessment. I still don't know shit about shit, but I do have a detailed knowledge of a broad range of topics - but I have some different talents on that scale, I learn real fast on most things. Heh, I'm the village idiot around here, but that's like being the dumbest guy at the Mensa Christmas Party. Quiet, Nine.
I suppose national discrimination is just an issue close to home for me, because I'm from a nation that's mostly ignored in the US. I suppose I get that one as a default. Still, I'm making the point that one should be more careful with terms like "White Privilege", because it's a much more narrow term than the broad application it gets used for.
I should note, I'm not bitching so much - In reality, I probably do face fewer issues in my day to day life than an African American person in the US does. I'm not yet part of that minority I speak of, I'm still like easily 90% of the population here, I'm an Australian in Australia.
However, that doesn't matter that much in this adaptation, because the whole motorcycle gang angle is gone. Can't have the main character be a criminal, he's got to be an everyday Joe! Considering that much of the iconic imagery of Akira centers around those bikes, that makes it a bad adaptation for an entirely different reason.
I disagree - it's just that he's not explicitly in a biker gang when the film starts. He can be an Ex-biker, he can be a dude who is really into motorbikes without being in a biker gang(hey, I ride and really like bikes as much as any Bosozuko, but I'm not a biker gang). We simply don't know at this point.
No one is saying it isn't discrimination because it most certainly is. The point is it is also discrimination to insist that the actors be asian. Hollywood follows a pretty strict business model of not rocking the boat, and yes that is a problem. The solution however is not to be closed minded and insist to do what is essentially the same problem that already exists in reverse.
The concept of privilege is often used as a silencing tactic, sort of the way the phrase "playing the race card" is. It's a messy, muddled thing because of the nature of the concept; by definition, it's hard to tell if you have it, because it's something you take for granted.
Nobody hates people who misuse those terms more than me. Spending your time trying your very hardest to get these concepts recognized only to have somebody abuse and discredit them is pretty much the most frustrating thing there is.
I disagree - it's just that he's not explicitly in a biker gang when the film starts. He can be an Ex-biker, he can be a dude who is really into motorbikes without being in a biker gang(hey, I ride and really like bikes as much as any Bosozuko, but I'm not a biker gang). We simply don't know at this point.
A large part of the early plot is driven by the fact he is a criminal, the dynamics of Tetsuo's inferioty complex regarding Kaneda and his motorbike (and the status it represents), his association with terrorists, etc. The Capsules aren't a throwaway part of the storyline; they are the emotional base from which the primary interpersonal drama of the story unfolds.
I suppose that, with older characters, you could present the Capsules as an ex-gang that are reunited by the unfolding of the plot. That would actually work pretty well. But it's frustrating to see that important dynamic seemingly disregarded.
A large part of the early plot is driven by the fact he is a criminal, the dynamics of Tetsuo's inferioty complex regarding Kaneda and his motorbike (and the status it represents), his association with terrorists, etc. The Capsules aren't a throwaway part of the storyline; they are the emotional base from which the primary interpersonal drama of the story unfolds.
I know and understand, I just figured you already had enough detail to fill the blanks - the point I'm making is less that the bikes and gangs are not an important part of the story, but rather that we simply don't know. He could be an Ex-biker/ex-con gone straight, but keeping the same attitudes, or anything really. We don't know anything right now.
Personally I do not see a negative either way this film turns out. If it is good, regardless of how accurate of a portrayal it is, it will make people want to see the original and possibly bring more people to anime fandom. If it is bad it may prevent other anime adaptations from happening for a while but that also means that when they do another adaptation of an anime they may put more effort into it.
I am not saying that the next adaptation will be great if this one fails but that they may try adapting something easier to change or possibly go the Zack Snyder approach with it, although it will likely take several failures to get there. I would love for this adaptation to be good but I doubt this film, or the next few that they try to adapt, will be worth watching, especially after what they did with Dragon Ball Evolution.
Comics had to go through it and video game still are, it is just what we are going to have to deal with before we can gets films we enjoy, and even once we get films we are enjoy the fanbase will still be divided. Take Batman, Resident Evil, and Watchmen for example. I have seen fans of those franchises argue amongst themselves about whether they are good films, much less adequate adaptations.
That is the sort of privilege I'm frustrated people don't get. It's not exactly subtle. As a white dude, I can walk into any movie theater playing just about any movie and see another person like me up on the screen, playing a whole range of different characters, heroes and villains. Women can't do that. There are very few movies with black leads and it's always the same four actors. If you are any other minority, or, god forbid, a black woman, you are just utterly screwed.
But it's not discrimination, you guys!
I like that Will Smith. He raps happy!
Dude, my entire country, it's history and culture, to your country is a themed Steak Restaurant, a beer we don't even fucking make, Snakes/spiders, a Simpsons episode and a half remembered joke about a knife. Oh, and Heath Ledger, Hugh Jackman and Sam Worthington. All of whom for most of the major productions they've been in, had to pretend to be North American.
And I'm expected to accept that and shut the fuck up, because of the colour of my skin - Hey, I'm just a white dude, I don't know about people ignoring my nation, I'm too full of white privilege. Even the most hardcore activist types don't give a fuck about us, because we're a majority Caucasian nation.
I don't really have a point, and I'm not entirely serious about it. But either way, I'd like some of my apparent white privilege, if it's not too much trouble, I figure we're about due.
By this time, so has the rest of the world. The last notable thing he did was nearly go to jail for not paying his taxes. Americans mostly remember him for a single film(or maybe the terrible sequels) or some Fosters ads from back in the day, which introduced that stupid "Shrimp on the barbie" thing.
Oh, and Heath Ledger, Hugh Jackman and Sam Worthington. All of whom for most of the major productions they've been in, had to pretend to be North American.
There are plenty of other Australian lead actors in Movies and TV (especially in TV). Regardless, I don't think this quite equates to the issue that Asian actors are having. Australian actors are hired all the time because they are able to easily fit into the "white image" that Hollywood is looking for. Yeah, perhaps the perception of Australian characters may be warped, but the actors themselves generally don't have as hard of a time finding jobs as lead roles.
Most Asian actors can't change their appearance to look racially-neutral. If Hollywood doesn't want the aesthetic of an Asian for their main character, then they won't be hired, even if the role is supposed to be racially-neutral. It's a problem that a lot of my Asian actor friends are facing.
My gripe with the Akira movie is that Hollywood seems to be altering the story to accommodate to their conventional "white-casting" practices. Akira was a rare (and narratively accurate) chance to place Asian actors in main roles, and they're not doing it.
I'd like to address a prior point, the one that Scott made about changing the name of a work when it has been apparently radically altered.
There is a powerful thing that happens when you adapt a story known to an audience while keeping the name the same. You essentially make a point about the timelessness and universality of the themes presented in the work, and keeping the name the same helps make this point for the audience. Your choice tells the audience, "Hey, you know this story about these people we don't care about? Here's the same story about people you do care about. Try caring more." And yes, it pisses people off, but that's part of the point.
How about that 2007 production of Macbeth with Patrick Stewart? Are you going to tell me that it shouldn't be called Macbeth because of its setting? Shakespeare's works are re-adapted to fit different cultures all the time, and it's done precisely to demonstrate the applicability of the work in question.
Adapting a work from one culture to another is actually an honor for a given work.
EDIT: The other problem with re-named adaptations is that the popularized re-named work can actually bury the original work. How many people on the forums know the original story that was adapted into "Gawain and the Green Knight?" Or that Hamlet was adapted from a Viking story? Or that Romeo and Juliet is just a rehashing of Pyramus and Thisbee?
So you can actually keep the original work alive and relevant by keeping the name in circulation.
Oh, and Heath Ledger, Hugh Jackman and Sam Worthington. All of whom for most of the major productions they've been in, had to pretend to be North American.
There are plenty of other Australian lead actors in Movies and TV (especially in TV). Regardless, I don't think this quite equates to the issue that Asian actors are having. Australian actors are hired all the time because they are able to easily fit into the "white image" that Hollywood is looking for. Yeah, perhaps the perception of Australian characters may be warped, but the actors themselves generally don't have as hard of a time finding jobs as lead roles.
You missed my point. In fact, you missed my point so badly, that you're literally heading in completely the opposite direction while I shout at you to come back, come back, you're going the wrong way, we'll never get to Chicago going that way!
In fact, you even played into my point in doing so - Which was that just because we're also white, just like the majority of north Americans, we are basically told to shut the fuck up about that our entire history and culture are ignored, and we have to pretend to be American to get anywhere in Hollywood most of the time. What, the colour of my skin means this bullshit is acceptable?
My gripe with the Akira movie is that Hollywood seems to be altering the story to accommodate to their conventional "white-casting" practices. Akira was a rare (and narratively accurate) chance to place Asian actors in main roles, and they're not doing it.
Except, they're not. None of the Alterations to the story rule out an Asian main character, except MAYBE it being set in Manhattan might rule out a few characters overall being Asian, since Manhattan has a rather more diverse selection of ethnicity than Tokyo does. Last I checked, Asians are still allowed to own bars, ride motorbikes, have brothers, and all of that.
I'd say it's much, much more likely and reasonable to say that they're altering the story to fit the American audience that the movie is aiming for, just like the original Akira was aimed at a Japanese audience. The race of the main character is irrelevant to the changes to the story we know about at this point in time, I'd wager - after all, name me one changed plot point that would be different if it was an Asian-American actor rather than a Caucasian-American actor.
Also, Yahoo Serious.
That's more a matter of preference. (Okay, no it isn't, I really liked some of his movies.)
You missed my point. In fact, you even played into my point in doing so - Which was that just because we're also white, just like the majority of north Americans, we are basically told to shut the fuck up about that our entire history and culture are ignored, and we have to pretend to be American to get anywhere in Hollywood most of the time. What, the colour of my skin means this bullshit is acceptable?
No, good sir. I believe it is YOU that missed my point. I wasn't even addressing your point directly!
My main point was that the problems that Asian actors and Australian actors have are different. I agreed that the image of Australian CHARACTERS is warped in America, but the ACTORS themselves are getting lead roles quite frequently. Perhaps they are required to get rid of their accent and play a typical Caucasian-American character, but at least they can do it. If a racially-neutral lead role was cast to an Asian actor, Hollywood would feel that there's a risk of alienating the white-American audience. Australian actors don't usually face that type of stigma.
I'd say it's much, much more likely and reasonable to say that they're altering the story to fit the American audience.
Bingo. It's legitimately disappointing that Hollywood feels the need to "Americanize" a story like Akira. It sucks that they don't believe that a story set in Japan with Asian actors would sell well in the US. I don't see why that can't be a valid concern.
Also, I probably should have expected it, but you don't have to be so invective in your tone. Oh well. FRC Forum arguments hooray!
Bingo. It's legitimately disappointing that Hollywood feels the need to "Americanize" a story like Akira. It sucks that they don't believe that a story set in Japan with Asian actors would sell well in the US. I don't see why that can't be a valid concern.
That movie already exists, it's called Akira. You are claiming that you feel under represented in Hollywood because of the lack of Asian lead actors but by that exact logic is the reason you don't see that very thing. Are you also mad that a white guy is playing Spike in the live action Cowboy Bebop.
Bingo. It's legitimately disappointing that Hollywood feels the need to "Americanize" a story like Akira. It sucks that they don't believe that a story set in Japan with Asian actors would sell well in the US. I don't see why that can't be a valid concern.
That movie already exists, it's called Akira. You are claiming that you feel under represented in Hollywood because of the lack of Asian lead actors but by that exact logic is the reason you don't see that very thing. Are you also mad that a white guy is playing Spike in the live action Cowboy Bebop.
Comments
I'm disappointed.
As the Avenue Q song goes, everyone's a little bit racist. We've all internalized some prejudice from our environment. You can dedicate your whole life to crusading against racism and still be a little bit racist. I'm a dedicated radical profeminist, but I slip up sometimes, or am ignorant, and have thoughts, use language and make comment that are sexist. There is nothing wrong with understanding and identifying racism as it is; it doesn't make a person an irredeemable monster to have prejudices, because we all do. It's just something we have to work on, collectively and as individuals.
Failing to identify racism because we don't want to label somebody a racist is silly. We're all racists. We're all sexist. We all have a little bit of homophobia. We gotta call 'em as we see 'em or we'll never get better.
For the upteenth time, the characters' race won't significantly inform the content of the movie.
Switching race has the same divisive effect on the community and the fandom no matter which direction you switch. But only switching away from minority is racism.
Also, all you white dudes with your "Hollywood is totally fine and colorblind" thing, just remember, they are trying to sell to you. My old boss was a film maker, he was black. He had seen the film industry from the inside and had stories.
I'm partly bitter because I am a girl, and we are almost totally relegated to side characters/romantic interests. If we are the main character, it is categorized as a chick flick, and marketed almost exclusively toward women.
I want more Ripleys.
But it's not discrimination, you guys!
And I'm expected to accept that and shut the fuck up, because of the colour of my skin - Hey, I'm just a white dude, I don't know about people ignoring my nation, I'm too full of white privilege. Even the most hardcore activist types don't give a fuck about us, because we're a majority Caucasian nation.
I don't really have a point, and I'm not entirely serious about it. But either way, I'd like some of my apparent white privilege, if it's not too much trouble, I figure we're about due.
However, don't get mad when you ask feminists or civil rights activists fighting on behalf of minorities what they are doing about the problem of people discriminating against Australian culture and they tell you they aren't interested. We all have the right to choose our battles. If you want to fight that one, go out and fight it, and find others who will. Don't expect other people to fight those battles for you, but don't turn down the help where you can get it.
When I say hardcore activist types, I think we're getting a little crossed on terms here - I mean the type of people who will fire WAY up on EVERY one of those issues, and more. People who are activists for pretty much every social issue, not just one or two issue kinda people. Of course I don't expect all the feminists to start changing tack, that's just silly, I'm the village idiot, but I'm not that dumb.
Side note - As a nation, we identify as much with Asia as we do with America. It's kinda like the neighbors and the second cousins who live across town.
Now, That said - I don't think this is necessarily a huge issue. America has bigger problems to deal with, and it's just a tidy example of how the White Privilege you hear about isn't quite how it's made out to be by the sorts of people who tend to use the term on a regular basis, the aforementioned hardcore activist types. It's more "Caucasian American Privilege", if you want to be accurate, but that also comes with it's own problems, but ones I'm less familiar with.
Also, I don't think this is a huge issue with this movie. Remember, it's not like they've got four white dudes playing the only white dudes in Neo-tokyo, It's Manhattan(Okay, Neo-Manhattan), and frankly, the majority of people in America(And Manhattan) are Caucasian, and we only know the actors for Three main characters and one of whom who is a supporting character at best, and this is all pre-filming, where there is still room for change, though it is less likely than changing the guy's name, rather than the actor.
But, they still might - after all, like I said, they changed actors for Marty McFly halfway through filming Back to the Future. There is still hope, right up until they finish filming.
After all, we know literally nothing beyond some basic plot points, the name, where it's set, and four actors, all of which but for the name can change.
I'd be just as pissed off as you, if it was set in Tokyo. But it's not. It's Manhattan, and walking down the street in Manhattan, the majority of people you're going to see are Caucasian - not to say people who are not are unknown, but they're still in the minority. As much as it's going for the safe ethnicity on film as much as anything else, you can't call it inaccurate.
If a movie could be set in any fictional future city, it makes sense to set it in a city well known to the movie's main audience. In this case, in the USA, and if you're going to destroy a city, New York is a classic target. If the characters in the movie live in the city, it makes sense to have them look like average people from the city, and the average person in New York is pretty much non-Japanese.
I don't see this as a racist decision, or even a disrespectful decision, by the casting directors. I do think more non-whites should be cast in leading roles than they are currently, but I don't think that just because this movie is based on a story first set in Tokyo that this should be the film which MUST be cast with a Japanese actor. If so, great, but if any other film? Just as great.
I don't like discrimination of any kind. However, I'm not a gay rights activist or a civil rights activist or anti-poverty crusader or promoter of religious harmony. I don't like any of the things those people fight against, but those aren't my fights. I can't know that much! I don't have time for that many marches! I don't even know the right terms for them!
I picked the fight I care about most, sexism, for a variety of personal reasons, and I became a profeminist. Well, first I became a female supremest because I was a stupid kid reacting emotionally to trauma, but then I mellowed out and started learning. It's taken me the better part of a decade to realize I basically don't know anything. I have a to-read list as long as your arm. Actually and truly caring about an issue is the work of a lifetime.
Those people who overreact to everything are just people who read books by people who really care. They are the progressive version of the Fox News idiot. They are on the right track in that they are aware at all that there are social issues, but beyond that they are just stabbing in the dark about all this stuff.
So next time they tell you your issues don't matter, remind yourself that they are just the flipped version of the guys who don't believe that black people haven't faced any obsticles since the Civil Rights Act was passed. If they really, actually cared about social issues instead of just latching onto whatever progressive issue came along next, then they'd at least be willing to point you towards where that discussion was happening. Not concerning yourself with the opinions of the ignorant applies to both sides of the political spectrum.
(I don't mean that in a No True Scotsman sort of way, the opposite, really. Idiots exist in every group.)
However, that doesn't matter that much in this adaptation, because the whole motorcycle gang angle is gone. Can't have the main character be a criminal, he's got to be an everyday Joe! Considering that much of the iconic imagery of Akira centers around those bikes, that makes it a bad adaptation for an entirely different reason.
Different methods, I guess, I don't have to focus as much because I'm selective in when I move, and assessing if a measure is good for a cause, and if it will be effective to do so is a much easier assessment. I still don't know shit about shit, but I do have a detailed knowledge of a broad range of topics - but I have some different talents on that scale, I learn real fast on most things. Heh, I'm the village idiot around here, but that's like being the dumbest guy at the Mensa Christmas Party. Quiet, Nine.
I suppose national discrimination is just an issue close to home for me, because I'm from a nation that's mostly ignored in the US. I suppose I get that one as a default. Still, I'm making the point that one should be more careful with terms like "White Privilege", because it's a much more narrow term than the broad application it gets used for.
I should note, I'm not bitching so much - In reality, I probably do face fewer issues in my day to day life than an African American person in the US does. I'm not yet part of that minority I speak of, I'm still like easily 90% of the population here, I'm an Australian in Australia. I disagree - it's just that he's not explicitly in a biker gang when the film starts. He can be an Ex-biker, he can be a dude who is really into motorbikes without being in a biker gang(hey, I ride and really like bikes as much as any Bosozuko, but I'm not a biker gang). We simply don't know at this point.
Nobody hates people who misuse those terms more than me. Spending your time trying your very hardest to get these concepts recognized only to have somebody abuse and discredit them is pretty much the most frustrating thing there is. A large part of the early plot is driven by the fact he is a criminal, the dynamics of Tetsuo's inferioty complex regarding Kaneda and his motorbike (and the status it represents), his association with terrorists, etc. The Capsules aren't a throwaway part of the storyline; they are the emotional base from which the primary interpersonal drama of the story unfolds.
I suppose that, with older characters, you could present the Capsules as an ex-gang that are reunited by the unfolding of the plot. That would actually work pretty well. But it's frustrating to see that important dynamic seemingly disregarded.
I am not saying that the next adaptation will be great if this one fails but that they may try adapting something easier to change or possibly go the Zack Snyder approach with it, although it will likely take several failures to get there. I would love for this adaptation to be good but I doubt this film, or the next few that they try to adapt, will be worth watching, especially after what they did with Dragon Ball Evolution.
Comics had to go through it and video game still are, it is just what we are going to have to deal with before we can gets films we enjoy, and even once we get films we are enjoy the fanbase will still be divided. Take Batman, Resident Evil, and Watchmen for example. I have seen fans of those franchises argue amongst themselves about whether they are good films, much less adequate adaptations.
You forgot Paul Hogan mate.
Most Asian actors can't change their appearance to look racially-neutral. If Hollywood doesn't want the aesthetic of an Asian for their main character, then they won't be hired, even if the role is supposed to be racially-neutral. It's a problem that a lot of my Asian actor friends are facing.
My gripe with the Akira movie is that Hollywood seems to be altering the story to accommodate to their conventional "white-casting" practices. Akira was a rare (and narratively accurate) chance to place Asian actors in main roles, and they're not doing it.
I'd like to address a prior point, the one that Scott made about changing the name of a work when it has been apparently radically altered.
There is a powerful thing that happens when you adapt a story known to an audience while keeping the name the same. You essentially make a point about the timelessness and universality of the themes presented in the work, and keeping the name the same helps make this point for the audience. Your choice tells the audience, "Hey, you know this story about these people we don't care about? Here's the same story about people you do care about. Try caring more." And yes, it pisses people off, but that's part of the point.
How about that 2007 production of Macbeth with Patrick Stewart? Are you going to tell me that it shouldn't be called Macbeth because of its setting? Shakespeare's works are re-adapted to fit different cultures all the time, and it's done precisely to demonstrate the applicability of the work in question.
Adapting a work from one culture to another is actually an honor for a given work.
EDIT: The other problem with re-named adaptations is that the popularized re-named work can actually bury the original work. How many people on the forums know the original story that was adapted into "Gawain and the Green Knight?" Or that Hamlet was adapted from a Viking story? Or that Romeo and Juliet is just a rehashing of Pyramus and Thisbee?
So you can actually keep the original work alive and relevant by keeping the name in circulation.
In fact, you even played into my point in doing so - Which was that just because we're also white, just like the majority of north Americans, we are basically told to shut the fuck up about that our entire history and culture are ignored, and we have to pretend to be American to get anywhere in Hollywood most of the time. What, the colour of my skin means this bullshit is acceptable? Except, they're not. None of the Alterations to the story rule out an Asian main character, except MAYBE it being set in Manhattan might rule out a few characters overall being Asian, since Manhattan has a rather more diverse selection of ethnicity than Tokyo does. Last I checked, Asians are still allowed to own bars, ride motorbikes, have brothers, and all of that.
I'd say it's much, much more likely and reasonable to say that they're altering the story to fit the American audience that the movie is aiming for, just like the original Akira was aimed at a Japanese audience. The race of the main character is irrelevant to the changes to the story we know about at this point in time, I'd wager - after all, name me one changed plot point that would be different if it was an Asian-American actor rather than a Caucasian-American actor. That's more a matter of preference.
(Okay, no it isn't, I really liked some of his movies.)
My main point was that the problems that Asian actors and Australian actors have are different. I agreed that the image of Australian CHARACTERS is warped in America, but the ACTORS themselves are getting lead roles quite frequently. Perhaps they are required to get rid of their accent and play a typical Caucasian-American character, but at least they can do it. If a racially-neutral lead role was cast to an Asian actor, Hollywood would feel that there's a risk of alienating the white-American audience. Australian actors don't usually face that type of stigma. Bingo. It's legitimately disappointing that Hollywood feels the need to "Americanize" a story like Akira. It sucks that they don't believe that a story set in Japan with Asian actors would sell well in the US. I don't see why that can't be a valid concern.
Also, I probably should have expected it, but you don't have to be so invective in your tone. Oh well. FRC Forum arguments hooray!