I have a lot of Asian friends who'd take issue with their use of 'Oriental' in describing people than Swinton playing that role.
I think they were being deliberately provocative.
I have a lot of Asian friends who'd take issue with their use of 'Oriental' in describing people than Swinton playing that role.
Same name, different character. Fast is Han Seoul-Oh (Get it? Han Solo?), while the Better Luck Tomorrow character is Han Lun.
And Han was only Asian because of Justin Lin.
That's how close you were to not even having Han.
No they are not and it is fucking offensive.I think they were being deliberately provocative.
In the first film not done by the Asian director, funny about that. (Also I believe Han was in Better Luck Tomorrow?)
What are you talking about? Since Tokyo Drift, the series has only been directed by Asian directors, Justin Lin and starting with 7, James Wan.
It would be interesting to know if Asian Americans feel similar, or if that's perhaps something only the Japanese audience is more interested in because they're already so strongly represented in their own media anyway.I don't think anyone is denying that many Asian's do have narrow eyes. The issue comes in with how Asian's were portrayed in western media for so long, whether that be animation or in actual movies where it was common to feature white people dressed up as Asian's and with over the top stereotypes in terms of appearance. Now DICE's Faith wasn't anywhere near those extremes, but it's still going to make some people raise their eyes whenever you go for those stereotypes when characters of those races are rare. Obviously Asian's aren't rare in games in general because of all the Asian studios around the world, but leads in western games? Pretty fucking rare.
I think if you look at games that have Asian character and are developed by Japanese, Korean, Chinese etc. studios you'll see that their characters fall more in line with what those Japanese posters were talking about than what DICE's Faith originally looked like. They still do feature characters with smaller eyes, but it's not the go to look.
It would be interesting to know if Asian Americans feel similar, or if that's perhaps something only the Japanese audience is more interested in because they're already so strongly represented in their own media anyway.
I can't wait to see how tactfully they bring Fing Fang Foom to life in live action on the big screen. He's asian right?
FFF is an alien.
No they are not and it is fucking offensive.
Look, I'm sorry you're offended, but apparently too offended to read the article properly.
1. Even the shittiest old white guy editor in the business KNOWS you don't say "Oriental" when referring to people, unless making a point. As do his copy, sub and deputy editors. It didn't slip through the cracks. It wasn't an article in DieHard Gamefan.
2. It's a strong piece of reporting on a giant cultural problem in Hollywood. Written in scolding terms.
3. The article is written and researched by an Asian-American journalist.
It's a deliberate piece of sarcastic language, in the proper context. It was designed to press that button, on purpose.
Of all the examples in this thread, I can excuse the Ghost in the Shell casting choice because it runs into one of the other big Hollywood stereotypes: the unwillingness to have a female lead in a tentpole action film. There are probably only three women in Hollywood that executives are willing to risk headlining a major film like this, and Scarlett Johansson is in that select company. If anyone else was the lead the film wouldn't have been made in the first place.
Perhaps, but I think that getting Hollywood to consider women viable for big headlining roles like this is a laudable goal in and of itself.A much better solution to the problem...
Thanks for telling me I shouldn't be offended by the use of an offensive word because it's used by "my own people".
And thanks for making the assumption that I didn't read the article and need you to explain to me why I shouldn't feel offended.
YOU said in your post that they DIDN'T intend to be provocative in their language. I'm suggesting you may be OBJECTIVELY incorrect. I'm not telling you whether to be offended or not. I actually don't care whether you're offended or not since you're rude and oblivious. I was defending the use of the word in an excellent article, by a thoughtful writer trying to draw attention to exactly the kind of thing you're offended about.
No, you were suggesting that I didn't read the article properly.
You weren't interested in an honest discussion when you made such a baseless accusation.
Talk about being rude.
By saying I am "objectively" incorrect you are telling me I'm wrong to feel offended. That's what exactly you are doing no matter how many words you used to dress it up.
Objectively wrong. What a joke.