-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Quartz: Over the last decade, whitewashed movies lost nearly half a billion dollars
- Thread starter Deepwater
- Start date
- Status
What even is whitewashing now?
If that's what you wanna read from that comment, sure, but you know that's not what they said.
Those movies that heavily and poorly whitewashed people, also happened to be shitty movies and would be shitty with non-white people in those roles. Fact.
No, it's just a completely incidental factor. If you did a financial comparison of all the movies the Wachowskis have made, I imagine they have ultimately lost more money than they have profited. Does that mean that siblings shouldn't direct movies? Does that mean that transgendered people shouldn't direct movies? No, obviously not because you're just cherry-picking elements of those films and assuming those elements were some deciding factor in their box office success or failure.
Hollywood is such a crapshoot. Many movies fail for a multitude of reasons. You can't just pick some arbitrary element, look at all the films containing said element, and then come to any meaningful conclusion.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
Likely referring to Infernal Affairs..
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
At this point white washing and bad movies go hand in hand. Yes they are bad movies with serious problem on top of white washing but there are more bad movies with white washing than good movies with white washing.
A Link to the Past
Banned
The list's credibility suffers for the fact that they include Tropic Thunder. It's a movie that makes fun of whitewashing.
lightskintwin
Banned
The funny thing about Tropic Thunder's blackface, despite it being satire, is it's the best hair and makeup job I've ever seen of it.
But the movies don't fail because of white washing.
Both those films are western adaptations of a foreign property that retains the core story but shifts the setting to the West. The article specifically states that such movies aren't included in the analysis (hence The Departed not appearing), yet inexplicably includes Edge of Tomorrow.
I don't think either of those are whitewashed.
Speed Racer's source material was already heavily adapted for the West. It's not like it's a direct adaptation of Mach GoGoGo, just like the Power Rangers movie isn't a direct adaptation of Super Sentai. I don't think Speed Racer should be categorised as whitewashing either.
ElBoxyBrown
Banned
They also don't succeed from star power.
Rest
All these years later I still chuckle at what a fucking moron that guy is.
Blackface is to disparage and denigrate black people, it's not that either since it points out that people do and say racist things without thinking that they are. It's satire.
Claude Augario
Member
You can't have a discussion about Ghost in the Shell without someone arguing that.
You can't talk about Hollywood without someone arguing that.
It's the entire reason we're still talking about whitewashing in 2017. Whitewashing is justified by saying no one would see the movie otherwise, movie bombs, suddenly whitewashing has no culpability in audience's perception of the movie. Rinse and repeat.
We don't disagree there, my issue is that you acted as if that poster said that whitewashing is fine because they said that the movies didn't fail because if whitewashing, which is true.
You're missing the whole point of the movie you fucking idiot.
That movie (and Thunder) has no reason to be included with all the actual straight-up whitewashing trash in that list.
Blackface is a person of another race putting on black makeup to look like a black person or a stereotype of one. I understand Tropic Thunder's satire and I don't think it should be on this list, but it's still technically blackface.
Whitewashing is done in an attempt to gain some kind of edge or advantage that the film would not have otherwise. Having a white lead charcter is like having an Ace in your hand in poker. It increases your chance of success, but it's not any guarantee of success. You might be holding two Aces, but somebody with three 6's will still beat you. You didn't lose because you got Aces, you lost because of some other mitigating factor. There's no actor out there that guarantees huge box office, just like there's no card in the deck that guarantees a winning hand.
Rest
All these years later I still chuckle at what a fucking moron that guy is.
Then you and I have different definitions of blackface.
lightskintwin
Banned
GOTDAMN LOL
I understand and know the point of the film, but even if I didn't; what does that have to do with my suggestion of improving it's depiction of Asian characters that the film spectacularly failed at?
When did I ever say this film or Tropic Thunder should be included for whitewashing?
Sakura
Member
I think white washing is stupid, and wish movies didn't do it, but the article is pretty silly.
There are movies on there that are not white washing. And their explanation for why the failed movies failed doesn't apply to all of them in my opinion. Did Dragon Ball fail because a white guy plays Goku? Or because it is an absolutely terrible movie that would fail regardless of what race the cast was? Is Dragon Ball even white washing when the series isn't set in our world, and many of the characters are aliens? Goku isn't named Son Goku because he is Chinese.
It feels like they are just trying to inflate their list of failed movies to lend the article credence.
There are movies on there that are not white washing. And their explanation for why the failed movies failed doesn't apply to all of them in my opinion. Did Dragon Ball fail because a white guy plays Goku? Or because it is an absolutely terrible movie that would fail regardless of what race the cast was? Is Dragon Ball even white washing when the series isn't set in our world, and many of the characters are aliens? Goku isn't named Son Goku because he is Chinese.
It feels like they are just trying to inflate their list of failed movies to lend the article credence.
Yeah, you're wrong. It doesn't have to disparage black people to be blackface. It's offensive because historically, it was used to disparage or stereotype black people. Same with yellowface.
Here's an example: in 2009, a group of white guys appeared on an Australian variety show with an act tributing the Jackson Five. They called themselves the Jackson Jive and had black makeup on (except one guy with white makeup). Their intentions were sincere and they didn't intend to be racist. By your definition, it's not blackface.
Wikipedia said:
neurosisxeno
Member
The movies that failed did so because they were shit movies. Reminds me that I need to go see GITS at some point--assuming it hasn't already bombed out of every theater near me.
What? Get out.
Edge of Tomorrow was a good movie. Y'all trying to pretend all of those on that list are trash are just crazy.
hodayathink
Member
Edge of Tomorrow also wasn't whitewashed. It was adapted.
Edge of Tomorrow wasn't one of the films that lost money.
not psycho
Member
Some of the best films are adaptations. Kurosawa alone has
Macbeth (Shakespeare) -> Throne of Blood
King Lear (Shakespeare) -> Ran
Hamlet (Shakespeare) -> The Bad Sleep Well
The Idiot (Dostoevsky) -> The Idiot
Speed Racer and Edge of Tomorrow aren't exactly based on Shakespeare but they're still good.
As for the idea that "they're bad movies and would have failed anyway"... that's missing the point.
Hollywood has been relying too much on white casts and big names. What these numbers are attempting to show is that this reliance doesn't work. On the other hand, a diverse cast can be a draw (Fast and Furious). Hollywood shouldn't be scared of casting minorities, and they shouldn't be confident in casting white people.
That doesn't mean GITS would do better with an identical movie and only the actress replaced. But it does mean that perhaps it wouldn't be an identical movie if they weren't relying too much on Scarlett Johansson to sell it.
Macbeth (Shakespeare) -> Throne of Blood
King Lear (Shakespeare) -> Ran
Hamlet (Shakespeare) -> The Bad Sleep Well
The Idiot (Dostoevsky) -> The Idiot
Speed Racer and Edge of Tomorrow aren't exactly based on Shakespeare but they're still good.
As for the idea that "they're bad movies and would have failed anyway"... that's missing the point.
Hollywood has been relying too much on white casts and big names. What these numbers are attempting to show is that this reliance doesn't work. On the other hand, a diverse cast can be a draw (Fast and Furious). Hollywood shouldn't be scared of casting minorities, and they shouldn't be confident in casting white people.
That doesn't mean GITS would do better with an identical movie and only the actress replaced. But it does mean that perhaps it wouldn't be an identical movie if they weren't relying too much on Scarlett Johansson to sell it.
Kadayi
Banned
Horse shit article with horse shit premise. The assumption that people didn't go and see a film because of X has to be grounded in a reality wherein all other factors can be dismissed.
Not every hollywood film is profitable, and a box office giant Sci-fi film is a particularly hard nut to crack (and no I don't regard either Star Wars or Guardians of the Galaxy as Sci-fi films). For every Matrix or Minority report, there are dozens of films that fail to light up the box office, but with most of these things, it's the long tail that needs to be factored in.
Not every hollywood film is profitable, and a box office giant Sci-fi film is a particularly hard nut to crack (and no I don't regard either Star Wars or Guardians of the Galaxy as Sci-fi films). For every Matrix or Minority report, there are dozens of films that fail to light up the box office, but with most of these things, it's the long tail that needs to be factored in.
hodayathink
Member
Except that their selective cherrypicking of movies undermines any attempts to actually prove anything except that they started with a conclusion and went searching for data to try to fit it.
gutter_trash
Banned
Americans have a weird definition of "white",
Still stuck on the 18th century Anglo Prostant definition
Still stuck on the 18th century Anglo Prostant definition
Triggerhappytel
Member
The Last Airbender made a profit? Yuck.
That's ridiculous, because it being a white man playing a black man is literally the gag. He's a serious character actor and literally spends most of the time 'in character' as a black man stereotype. Shouldn't be on the list.
Also: is the key ingredient to the whitewashing to have Benedict Cumberbatch in the movie? And should Iron Man 3 qualify? Or would that ruin their numbers because it made a shit load of profit?
That's ridiculous, because it being a white man playing a black man is literally the gag. He's a serious character actor and literally spends most of the time 'in character' as a black man stereotype. Shouldn't be on the list.
Also: is the key ingredient to the whitewashing to have Benedict Cumberbatch in the movie? And should Iron Man 3 qualify? Or would that ruin their numbers because it made a shit load of profit?
Kentuchi
Neo Member
What exactly do we even mean by whitewashing?
It seems that many are in the camp of if there's a white lead in a movie which is adapted from a work of art from maybe Asia then it's morally wrong. I think this is a very simplistic generalization of the situation, take Ghost in The Shell for instance, the studio is spending so much money on making the film and would naturally want to make a profit, for that they need to be able to draw viewers to the cinemas.
Some problems arise there. First, most people outside of the general anime/manga community have no idea what Ghost in The Shell is, you are also not selling this movie to Japanese but to Americans so you need actors that would be able to bring in the viewers, I don't know if there's any Asian actress like this currently, maybe Lucy Liu but she seems kind of aged for that role.
Second, you're not making the Japanese movie version but rather adapting the original material to American audiences, people tend to forget that Ghost in The Shell wasn't even generally liked initially because of the type of storytelling it adopted where most have to watch over and over to really get a grasp on the story as it's very thick, not until the community grew older did we become able to appreciate the themes of identity etc. that the story told. Blockbusters have to be generally simplistic to be blockbusters, this means changing elements of the story to accommodate American audiences.
Could go on and on but the point is that I don't think these decisions are made by seemingly evil white men trying to eradicate other cultures as is implied, a large number of these are rational business decisions that you might disagree with of course, no problem with that, but they're still based on some type of reasoning of how they think they should go about their business.
Also you can't solely attribute the failing of these movies to be because of having white leads, there could be and most likely there are other factors to consider for the failure of these movies. Again simplistic generalization of a situation.
It seems that many are in the camp of if there's a white lead in a movie which is adapted from a work of art from maybe Asia then it's morally wrong. I think this is a very simplistic generalization of the situation, take Ghost in The Shell for instance, the studio is spending so much money on making the film and would naturally want to make a profit, for that they need to be able to draw viewers to the cinemas.
Some problems arise there. First, most people outside of the general anime/manga community have no idea what Ghost in The Shell is, you are also not selling this movie to Japanese but to Americans so you need actors that would be able to bring in the viewers, I don't know if there's any Asian actress like this currently, maybe Lucy Liu but she seems kind of aged for that role.
Second, you're not making the Japanese movie version but rather adapting the original material to American audiences, people tend to forget that Ghost in The Shell wasn't even generally liked initially because of the type of storytelling it adopted where most have to watch over and over to really get a grasp on the story as it's very thick, not until the community grew older did we become able to appreciate the themes of identity etc. that the story told. Blockbusters have to be generally simplistic to be blockbusters, this means changing elements of the story to accommodate American audiences.
Could go on and on but the point is that I don't think these decisions are made by seemingly evil white men trying to eradicate other cultures as is implied, a large number of these are rational business decisions that you might disagree with of course, no problem with that, but they're still based on some type of reasoning of how they think they should go about their business.
Also you can't solely attribute the failing of these movies to be because of having white leads, there could be and most likely there are other factors to consider for the failure of these movies. Again simplistic generalization of a situation.
I wish people would stop making this argument, as if "rational business decisions", and I'm being forgiving on the "rational part", can't still be harmful to the public, on a financial or cultural level.
I'm sure the Pepsi ad also followed the "rational business decision" of not wanting to piss off any potential customers by overly politicizing their ad, but guess what, people don't appreciate their rationale (on either side of the political spectrum) and they rightly got tarred and feathered for it.
And GITS is the latest example of this "rational business decision" of dumbing down IPs during adaptation, and then leaning on "star power" to sell it, being not at all rational, but rather a relic of a stale and conservative executive zeitgeist, but instead of engaging in some introspection on why their decision making process might be wrong, the producers just blamed the "controversy" for its dismal performance.
Really, TL;DR here:
1) Not all business decisions are rational. Businessmen are as vulnerable to bias and superstition as anyone else.
2) Even if the business decision IS rational, doesn't necessarily justify it on moral or ethical grounds. I'm sure the decisions leading up to the subprime mortgage crisis were "rational" too, in so far as banks were making money, until the system collapsed on itself.
bggrthnjsus
Member
should tropic thunder count? i mean i get that it's blackface but it's kind of satire
also star trek into darkness it's not like khan was originally played by an indian person
if you take those 2 out i think the rest end up losing even more money
basically everything else on the list i get it
also star trek into darkness it's not like khan was originally played by an indian person
if you take those 2 out i think the rest end up losing even more money
basically everything else on the list i get it
lol, that's not true. If it were the Irish and Italians and Jews wouldn't be considered "white."
hodayathink
Member
Actually, Iron Man 3 technically wouldn't qualify because Ben Kingsley is half-Asian (IIRC, Indian).
- Status