Podcast: Micah Moore, Blake Faucette, and Eva on Stereotypes and Film

Thanks for having us man. Much respect to Eva and Vu and Blake. I really dug Eva’s insight into her own life and people’s expectations of her (I’d love to hear or read some more). The portrayal of women in media and advertising is such a big and different issue it deserves a lot of time on it’s own.

Everyone here has good observations of media. People have varying levels of sensitivity. Our crew is sympathetic and supports diversifying media, but we’ll never be as sensitive to racial issues as activists, so you’ll probably find some of our choices and topics controversial.

I agree with you guys about what roles are most available for Asian actors. I think Byron’s seen that we usually have different roles filled by Asian talent - but this time we made a crime saga and had roles in the Triad. I feel like one message I’m hearing is ‘because of racism in America it’s just not cool to have Asian talent playing martial artists, gangsters, and villains for now - till things are better film makers should limit the roles to positive characters that don’t coincide with media stereotypes.’ I appreciate that point of view and I see the value in it. On the other hand our actors enjoy opportunities to play good guys and bad guys, and I wouldn’t feel right starting a story with the agenda to limit protagonists or antagonists or lifestyles based on skin tone (even if it was to compensate for past and current media ills). And the martial arts guys just care about personal excellence like athletes. They’re impressed by Tony Jaa, but they’re more impressed by some of his stuntmen that get beat down and take the huge falls. Most of our audience views Jack fighting the Triad and Mafia and saving a Triad mistress the same as Jet Li fighting the French police academy and getting the white prostitute girl in ‘Kiss of the Dragon’ or Jet fighting gangs and getting Aaliyah in ‘Romeo Must Die.’ I hear what you’re saying that it’s not the same because of our society. I don’t deny that but it’s intangible - in other words, it depends entirely on the viewer and their interpretation. All I can say is I hope that one day the world is a better place, so everyone can enjoy films with all kinds of villains, protagonists, and love interests with less controversy.

The industry is so big and tricky, we could only mention a couple points, but if anyone ever needs some specific insight to apply to your agenda, feel free to contact us.

Thanks again everyone. I appreciate your moderate approach Vu and Byron and Eva. I can respect anyone who prefers a militant attitude, but that’s more effective for rallying one’s own troops, and can polarize outsiders. You guys/gal are admirable and did real good.

Much love,
Micah

Great podcast, but saying filmmakers and film investors shouldn’t be “swayed” by audience dollars is like saying Pepsi shouldn’t be “swayed” by its customers’ dollars. If they could only stop listening to the pesky money-holding customers they’d finally bring back Crystal Pepsi.

Byron, I’m not going around forcing people to dress up in Halloween costumes of my choosing, hehe. Brian and I have men’s cheongsams for some public demonstrations - for the actual combat parts his school wears heavy-duty gi’s - but cheongsams and other outfits are fun to wear when educating the public about the history of modern martial arts starting with Bodhidharma. When I started at our school, I had no fighting spirit so I focused on learning history and and associated philosophy of the various Chinese boxing systems. Our kung fu brothers often wear those robes at costume parties (except at that party I was Peewee Herman and you probably saw The Green Arrow and a Werewolf and a Rastafarian Blake.)
If you watched NVP, you’ll know why those hats are in our wardrobe department. If Brian or other people want to play with them and make fun of stereotypical images that’s fine with me. Do you see how comparing the man that is Brian Lee to the stereotype he’s poking fun at makes it totally apparent how ridiculous the stereotype is? He wasn’t leaving my house to go build a railroad based on my expansionist policies, nor was he wearing a costume from a serious film.

I’m not qualified to comment on whether it’s fair for a minority individual to poke fun at their own stereotypes. I have no problem admitting it can be funny when it points out how ridiculous the stereotype is. I don’t know if you find it offensive if a Japanese man dresses as a samurai for Halloween, or a white guy as a Viking or a Spanish guy as a Matador. All that really affects me is the quality of the costumes, lol.

Our friend Yaya Han (the ninja boss in NVP) is a world-famous cosplay model and costume maker.
http://www.angelicstar.net/
She loves anime and often dresses as characters including scantily-clad fighters from Japanese video games, cat-women, uniformed students from anime series, etc. In your opinion, is she an impressive artist at the top of her field, or an affront to Asian people? Or both? All I know is she’s a cool person who’s awesome to hang out with. I think you’re a cool person too, we’d dig hanging out with.

Micah,

I was referring to the caption under Brian’s photo.

Blake,

Thanks again! It was great talking. And I also have no idea what Eric is saying about Crystal Pepsi.

Eric,

Thanks!

As a corporation, Pepsi’s fiduciary responsibilities are to the shareholders. As a filmmaker, do you have a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders? I think there’s a difference between artists and corporations. Or at least there should be.

Oh yeah, good point. Glad you brought that to my attention. I forget that not everyone is knowledgeable of our diverse social circle, or even used to diversity. So it’s probably best to leave some of the satire and poking fun of stereotypes between me and the cast and my closest friends like Brian in our private interaction, since out of context it can send the wrong message. The photo lacks context so it doesn’t really differentiate poking fun at stereotypes versus poking fun at people. Without the context and example of our crews interaction and real thoughts on stereotypes and our brotherly love, the picture just comes off as offensive. Now that I look at the site with some distance from the crazy orgy of film making, I’ll pay better attention to what photos and captions that, lacking proper context, seem to have a negative message. Good on you for point it out. I haven’t really looked at the site since launch.

To further credit your POV, I tend to create media for audiences who are used to diversity and multiculturalism, and don’t believe the hype of stereotypes - I don’t always ponder how a viewer from a homogeneous background with no real diverse social interaction would take it. Something to think about in future films that reach beyond an educated niche audience of Shakespeare-loving MA fans, lol.

Thanks B!

Eric,

Isn’t that what the Fountainhead was all about? Be an architect, do what you want, don’t worry about what’s popular, and then get paid for it (and then write about it and call it “literature”)? Not that I’m an Ayn Rand fan–I think she would’ve been forgotten had she not had the support of the rich folk–but isn’t that how an artist is supposed to relate to his “audience?”

So Eric, which is it? To Ayn or not to Ayn? That is the question.

You make the art you want to make, and the people who like it will come to you. They’ll respect the originality. At the same time, however, I’m not an actor, and I do realize that actors are at the mercy of writers and others further up the chain.

It’s true. Film is not like any art. It’s an extremely expensive one driven by technological advances. You can’t make movies that are seen if you don’t respect the fact that it costs money and lots of it. I make films, but I do so for a small semi-loyal following on the internet and for myself. Micah wants to make features, totally different deal. He has to play ball to a certain degree with the business types.

I love what Justin Lin’s doing, even though it seemed like he sold his soul when he made 3 Fast 3 Furious, but it probably also gave him what he needed to make Finishing the Game. I think when I heard him speak at my university, I recall that he was still pretty much paying off Better Luck Tomorrow. How much should one have to be a starving artist? Even though Tokyo Drift from its synopsis sounds not unlike Dogs, Justin Lin still tried to make the best of it. He fought to get Sung Kang in the film in a role that was not originally in the script, and he even got him into the 4th film along with a bunch of other Asian American actors.

http://www.leastlikely.com/

Haha, talking about post apocalyptic films. It would be so awesome if this PSA was turned into a feature. But could you ever get Hollywood to finance a film with an all Asian American cast, even with all those names even?

Ayn Rand’s protagonists in The Fountainhead and Atlus Shrugged are heroic types, so they don’t well resemble artists. Rand’s got this romantic vision of the markets, and that romanticism doesn’t play well in film art.

“I forget that not everyone is knowledgeable of our diverse social circle, or even used to diversity. So it’s probably best to leave some of the satire and poking fun of stereotypes between me and the cast and my closest friends like Brian in our private interaction, since out of context it can send the wrong message. The photo lacks context so it doesn’t really differentiate poking fun at stereotypes versus poking fun at people. Without the context and example of our crews interaction and real thoughts on stereotypes and our brotherly love, the picture just comes off as offensive.”

Um. I grew up in a VERY diverse “circle” - 40+ nationalities and all races, all combinations of races in an international boarding school. And even in private interactions, any one of our friend pulled that crap about “Blian”, he’d have gotten his ass kicked. Just because you have a few token minority friends to flaunt around does not give you license to be a racist and say, “It’s okay, I have Asian friends so I can make fun of them.”

(And no offense - if this point is contested in 10 paragraph essay comment, I probably won’t bother reading. I may not be in film industry but I do have a life.)

Thanks, Larry and Mama Nabi! As you may have guessed from my non-response to Micah’s comment about not being used to diversity, I was going to let that one die. No need to reignite, right? Especially since reigniting seems unlikely to change anyone’s mind about anything.

But since Larry is asking for the other two pics (I already linked the one on “Blian”), here’s the gallery, and here are pics 2 and 3.

Let me just say this. Even though they all hang out with the same group, I think both Blake and Derek know the score. I still wonder about Micah, Eric, and the rest. I agree with Mama Nabi 150%. I STILL question why the minorities in this “diverse” circle allow themselves to be clowned they way they do. I understand that Tyler Wang said that it’s like family, but family should look out for each other, not use each other to make certain minorities the butt of racial jokes. Maybe Ed Kahana or Tyler can come back to enlighten us.

A member of my board just coined a new term for this: Chuck Willis Syndrome.

Seriously, we joke about this, but how can people make change when they live with the same behaviors that reinforce the status quo?

I have a written response for the podcast that I’ll post in a bit, but just to respond to the initial comments about whether or not being racist in private interactions is okay or not, does this “hipster racism” now extend even to jokes among friends? This is getting ridiculous. So I can’t fun of my Chamorro cousins for being “chaad”? I can’t sling jokes about my own culture? I can’t tease my Korean girlfriend when I see her acting “white” like in “Stuff What People Like”? Does this require white people to now carefully consider and acknowledge the history of racism towards before cracking jokes with their closest friends?

Let me put it this way? How many times have you called something “gay”, or “ghetto”, or cracked jokes about needing rice for dinner, or being Asian in general towards your Asian friends, towards your white friends, towards anyone? If you are one of the world’s saints, then, congratulations, but seriously, again, I would imagine that if it were an Asian guy that wrote that comment on that photo, you wouldn’t get all upset. Or at the very worst you’d say, “hey Asian brother, you need to recognize your history of being oppressed by stereotypes like what you’re promoting in this photo?” But since it’s Micah, you have to reference your circle and how you’d kick their ass.

If you expect Micah, or any white person, or any person in general to consider and acknowledge a history of racism and oppression before making comments and jokes in a private interaction where it is ALREADY assumed that there is mutual understanding of where each person is coming from, than you are WAY over the line. Micah already mentioned that he grew up “color blind” which AA activists apparently don’t appreciate because it shows a lack of acknowledgment of AA’s history of racism, etc. but that doesn’t mean he’s trying to shove it in your face. He’s a human being for Christs’ sake. Call it racial naivete at its worst, but for that you want to crucify him? How many things from your life could someone extract out of context and crucify you with?

I don’t know Ed, I think it’s a personal thing. I have a zero tolerance for people making fun of my ethnicity (and racial jokes in general) because I grew up basically isolated in redneck country and never fought back despite being terrorized by bullies for a long time. I have ‘issues’ in those regards. So I have a knee-jerk reaction to that sort of thing. One time when I was younger a big football player guy who was white said some racially snide sexual comment at me and I punched him so hard across the face that I broke his nose (and my watch) and it made him cry (I cried too though, because I was so mad). But my racial friends have never treated me that way. I’ve never once had to complain to any of my white friends about an ethnic slur, so maybe they know to just not go there with me. But that doesn’t mean I’m right and everybody who acts different is wrong and that everybody should have to walk on egg-shells everytime they’re around any Asian. Different people have different boundaries and different rules. As long as you respect each person as an individual and understand their boundaries, there’s no problem.

So Gail, it seems that by “status quo” you mean the invisibility of Asian women in mainstream media. And by “progressive”, you mean that Asian American women should have the privilege of being objectified and sexualized by white men on an equal level with white women. Suhweeeet - let a sista get in on that! Thanks for clarifying the kind of opportunity and empowerment all us Asian women should be envisioning for ourselves. Si se puede!

Hey Gail, it is indeed a person thing based on mutual understanding. Obviously, that football player crossed the line of mutual understanding when he said that to you and you reacted. He had no idea who you were and how you’d take it otherwise I’m sure he wouldn’t have said it to you or, if he did, he was being a real asshole and deserved getting punched.

As for “cbruhs” comment: “Suhweeeet - let a sista get in on that! Thanks for clarifying the kind of opportunity and empowerment all us Asian women should be envisioning for ourselves. Si se puede!”

I’m assuming that’s yet ANOTHER sarcastic remark. I figured that by now people on these blogs trying to seriously discuss things would think to avoid being sarcastic because it appears rude, displays a lack of respect for mutual understanding, and masks what you are trying to say in addition to damaging your credibility. So “cbruhs”, you do understand that for someone like Gail that grew up thinking that because she wasn’t white she wasn’t beautiful having an Asian role model recognized as beautiful by society is empowering to her and everyone other female that feels like that? By posting a sarcastic remark like that, you intentionally dismiss her feelings, opinions, views, etc. and destroy any chance at mutual understanding. Just say you don’t agree and hopefully give a few reasons why from YOUR point of view.

“by “status quo” you mean the invisibility of Asian women in mainstream media.”

- Exactly. I feel Asian women belong in the mainstream culture.

“you mean that Asian American women should have the privilege of being objectified and sexualized by white men on an equal level with white women.”

- You’re kidding right? For the record Asian women already ARE objectified and sexualized by men. They always have been. Nothing you do or say is going to change that in the near future. Because all women on the planet are objectified by ALL men in EVERY culture and it’s been that way since the birth of civilization. From the Venus fertility statue to the engravings on the walls of Mayan temples, women have been objectified for their sexuality and sexual desirability to men since men could articulate thought. It’s a universal thing. That doesn’t mean that being left out of the culture helps Asian women with their self-esteem or their sense of personal or ethnic identity, anymore than it helps overweight women or black women.

“Yay, I’m invisible and so therefore not a stereotype.”

No, it doesn’t work that way. It means you’re invisible and therefore an OUTSIDER. Yes, I do think Asian women should be allowed to play the damsel in distress, just as I think they should be allowed to play every god damn kind of role that white women are allowed to play. Because not getting those kinds of roles, not getting those opprotunities, and not seeing Asian women in every kind of role means we don’t belong. It means we don’t contribute, that we’re different and weird and ugly. And a lot of Asian girls have to deal with bad self-esteem issues because of the ramifications of our ‘invisibility’.

Maybe you didn’t have to deal with that problem because you had people who made you feel like you do belong? Well, lucky you! That doesn’t mean it’s not a real problem for other Asian girls. Sorry.

“Stick it to her, Cbruhs!”

- Hahahahaha! Oooo, I’m in trouble now.

gail, you’re my hero

Ed,

See….all the serious talk has been done. There’s no more room for that. There’s well over two hundred comments and a podcast over this issue alone. Nothing left to spew but sarcasm and rhetoric.

You can go first.. Then it’ll be my turn.

There is PLENTY room for discussion. Just because Jaehwan, Blake, Micah, Gail, Eric, and now myself are posting questions and answers to participate doesn’t mean that it’s done and that it’s time for sarcasm and rhetoric.

And I’m not going to use sarcasm because it clearly shows no beneficial gain as I’ve mentioned above. In fact, sarcasm started with the Bicoastal blog “clowning” Eric, Micah and Blake, to which they initially responded with sarcasm. To which people were offended, and ignited this entire issue. Practically every new person that came to the blog discussion started with some sense of sarcasm.

If we divulge in sarcasm it just brings us back to where it all started which goes nowhere.

Ed,

Are you going to post your response to the podcast? Check out TMM’s site. Brother tells it like it is.

C-Bruhs,

Awesome post and awesome link. That’s really all I have to say. Other than that I hope Gail and others listen.

If Gail and Ed actually fought White racism/sexism as much they peddle contrived rationalizations for this shit, they might actually have some credibility.

As is, however, the best you can is that they are very good at contorted White alibis.

Both Gail and Ed’s “arguments” effectively try to deflect blame from Whites by saying that: everybody is racist or sexist; or that there has always been sexism. So we should just get over it.

These disingenuous arguments sweep under the rug the issue of White institutional power and dominance (like in the media), and the reality that White racism and sexism are *qualitatively* more destructive as a result of this influence and power.

These arguments also say a lot about who they are and what they really stand for.

Let’s be brutally blunt.

For these types of Oriental house negroes, power, status, and money are what they truly value.

Since White people are the master, … sorry majority race, Orientals like these people will toady after them–desperate for a pat on the head.

That is what Gail’s pathetic plea for more media “recognition” from mainstream America is really about.

These people desperately seize on any scrap of “acceptance” from White America–no matter how demeaning, or racist, or sexist.

Marcus Garvey once defined the proverbial House Negro as someone who would even lick the spittle off a White person’s mouth if he were asked to do so.

21st-Century Orientals are not much better: They prefer to live on their knees than fight on their feet. All their tired rationalization can’t hide that.

And if you want to see what “multicultural inclusion” and “celebrating diversity” really mean for these people, just look at those “Ching Chong” Facebook photos from the movie that Byron linked to above.

A picture is worth a thousands words.

Larry that’s my whole point, speaking for myself, I am not part of your community.

In fact, seriously, we’ve all put ourselves out on the line with our names so that you can google and find our Facebook accounts, personal websites, youtube accounts, etc. Who are you, Larry? Give me a picture of who I’m looking at. What’s your name, where are you from, how did you get involved in the AA community, what epiphanies did you experience that put you where you are today? I’m seriously curious to know who has the gall to call people “house negroes” etc.

I wrote some things and then I realize that Larry is merely trying criticize the character of those debating as opposed to actually answering the questions I’ve posed. If that’s how you want to do business, then I’ll just ask stuff about you and leave it at that. I won’t leave it to my inferences about you based on your words, I’ll let you define yourself. Bring up something about the podcast and we’ll talk.

lol……its all just useless talk, these NICE people who make these GREAT films are NEVER GOING TO CHANGE! Theyre just gonna keep pumping out these WONDERFUL movies with AWESOME themes and subtexts!

If you dont like them, dont support them, dont bother to keep trying to engage them in dialogue, because they will just deny that there is a problem, or that they were part of the problem.In fact in their world, THERE IS NO PROBLEM.So if you keep raising it they are just getting free publicity. Seriously, dont give them the satisfaction. If it wasnt for BicoastalBitchin and Bigwowo, i wouldve never even heard of the GROUNDBREAKING and FANTASTIC film called Dogs of Chinatown. And to this day, i keep thinking to myself

“wtf is that movie about anyway?”

lol. Dont hate, just spend your money on Justin Lin/Wongfu production/Justkiddingfilms/ etc films and videos. Support the roses and ignore the weeds.Eventually, there will be enough roses to crowd out and totally destroy all the places where the weeds grow.

@ Blake Faucette

You are the poster child for White self-delusion. Props. Too bad they don’t give out Oscars in this category. You prolly would have a more successful career by now.

On the one hand, you and your esteemed colleagues are trying to front yourselves as champions of multiculturalism and diversity no less.

Yet, on the other hand, ya’ll sport racist “Ching Chong” outfits and hats for your little party.

Somehow, I don’t think those two things go together.

If this is your idea of “celebrating diversity,” I’d rather deal with the KKK.

At least, they are more *open and honest* about what they stand for.

And what’s next?

How about a slavery party after your next movie?

You can put on some Blackface and don some slave chains, and maybe get a bevy of African American women to play your “slave girls.”

And then you can glibly dismiss it as “silly shit.” At least you got the “shit” part correct.

In fact, this type new age Minstrelsy is all the rage for White America, ain’t it?

You even offer rationalizations similar to the ones that people in “Blackface” parties use:

Blackface party reveals ignorance, racism, UA students say
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/education/169445

Another Racially Themed Party: Plantation Graduation
http://www.rachelstavern.com/uncategorized/another-racially-themed-party-plantation-graduation.html

Funniest of all, you try to play the White Victim card again whining that you are being “hated because the color of your skin.”

This coming from a self-styled advocate of diversity … who thinks nothing of a little Yellowface party.

You just don’t it–or you don’t want to get it.

BTW, I wouldn’t waste my time or energy “hating” someone like you.

Pity yes.

Sorry one last thing. Larry said:

“On the one hand, you and your esteemed colleagues are trying to front yourselves as champions of multiculturalism and diversity no less.”

I never said I was. I’m not qualified or educated enough on the topic. I can just give insight on the film industry and distribution and how they choose to put together projects with casting in mind.

Byron - I can also give insight on raising kids too, haha. And thanks again for sending me the link to the Wong Fu Productions stuff. Those guys are amazing. Really good cinematography. Their “A message from Wong Fu Productions” video is awesome. I look forward to you doing a piece on them. Much respect for their skills.

i just listened to this podcast in its entirely…….and i have to say, the more micah and blake talk (especially micah) the more they dig their own hole deeper.

I notice that both micah and blake seem to have a paternalistic attitude towards eva and bryon. But whatsmost threatening is that the style of talking and the outlook micah and blake have is quite dismissive and seems to reinforce a “normalising” of the current situation.I think that people who have subconcious racist views are much more dangerous than people who are overtly racist, because they can cover up with P.C bs about “oh colourblind” “meritocracy” “coincidence not stereotypes” and it actually bogs down the whole issue about definingwhat is racist or not.

And its really not helpful, because it detracts away from the issue, and attacks (covertly) the position of the activists. I hope that listeners will be intelligent to realise what is “shuck” and what is truth. Frank Chin was right 30 years ago, even today the issues are the same. Chickencoop chinamen are everywhere with their overlords and micah and blake are prime examples of so called P.C liberals who are actually showing racist love aka Charlie Chan the good son.

Whats REALLY sad is that some yellow people seem to believe all this B.S and support “empowerment” which is actually oppression by a different name.

And artistic expression ? pleeeeeeeeeeease, THESE FOOLS COPIED THEIR STORYLINE AND FILM IDEA FROM “CHINAGIRL” (1987) just see it for yourself

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0092751/

yeah ands its also a “romeo and juliet” film too.lol, sarcasm, its are B.S racist orientalism…….

Basically micah and blake say “well your point of view is valid, and our point of view is valid, blah blah blah….”

So its just liking saying “well your saying racist stereotypes are wrong-thats valid” but we say that “racist stereotypes are true and thats valid too”

In other words they are just saying that racism is okay, even if you disagree thats also okay because all points are valid. They arent changing ANYTHING.In fact i think they’ll just keep doing their thing regardless, and take this whole incident as free publicity.

like i saidbefore, support the roses! weedkillah!

hey blake

thanks for the reply. I think its great that you guys have finally reached out and asked for the advice you needed. Bigwowo , bicoastal bitchin and other such websites are really fantastic sources of information in regards to how not to propagate racism. Sometimes its so easy to get caught up in the moment that you dont even realise that youre doing something immoral or wrong,even when other people tell you. But its good that you have taken a step back and are trying to work out what you did that was offensive and are attempting to find solutions.

Chinagirl and Dogs of Chinatown share many many similiarties maybe it provided the creative “inspiration?” lol, well i’m sure if you work at it, you’re next work will be more original.

You know, ive always known that racism is more about education and ignorance than about hate, so i commend you on taking the first step in educating yourself about the issues and becoming a better human being. I’m sure in time you can improve yourself,and hopefully, we’ll see more positive things from you from now on.

For anyone interested, this is a great film about white privilige, what it is and how it affects society……

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6154391225543898610

Well, my journey’s pulling me forward guys. The following is not directed at anyone individually (except for Larry, even though I love ya brother), but to whoever I’ve had the privilege of hearing from. Thanks for your time and thoughts.

I’m happy to offer insight on the industry and communication theory to anyone here who thinks it would be helpful to their goals. You can decide if that’s out of support for something that aligns with my own goals, or some dastardly attack. I thought you were curious on how to change minds and perspectives in the industry so I laid out some exact passwords and keys that can be applied immediately and directly - things I’ve learned from hard experience. It takes willingness to try a different approach. It time and research. It takes sucking up ego in exchange for measurable results. If you use these suggested approaches you will not get public acclaim as an activist or hero, only the knowledge that your influence has begun to change minds. Maybe there’s no need for such insight. Maybe there’s no need for an alternative approach. Maybe you’re successful and effective and changing the media industry already - at least to your level of satisfaction. Maybe I don’t know how to effectively influence someone in my position, and my opinion on that topic should be scoffed at.

Strategy is not limited for use by only one philosophical viewpoint. You can still learn from people you dream to be villains. I think decently enough of the posters here, but I feel that my advice here will be brushed off and dismissed because my approach was not effective, and that is my fault. I was not able to find a language and angle that would make my ideas adoptable. Learn from this if you want.

Is it important for the public to hear your anger? It’s important for the public to know it’s a serious topic, and one that shouldn’t be ignored - beyond that it’s up to you to choose angry venting at your targets, or crafty persuasion. Emotional gratification or utilitarian change.

Larry made his choice. Larry has chosen language and attitude to ensure that the general public will not take him seriously nor be influenced positively by him. Larry has been working hard to achieve a self-fulfilling prophecy. “People X will never take my message seriously because they suck. I must be abrasive and combative to ensure People X won’t listen to me thoughtfully, then I can brag that I was right all along.” He will try to fulfill that prophecy for every group he is part of.

No matter how we feel about someone personally, recognizing relativity between people and events is what allows us to learn from other people’s successes and failures. You can choose to believe that a different set of rules applies to you in this world You can choose to believe gravity effects you differently. But the general public is still going to evaluate your message by factors that they evaluate any group with. Will you choose moderate language and shoulder the burden of patiently educating society - or will you choose an attitude that the public writes off and dismisses as radical?

Whether he’s right or wrong, before the public can even evaluate Larry’s message, they will relate Larry’s attitude and approach to groups like the far Christian Right, The Nation of Islam, and White Supremacists. I’m not commenting on the content of his message, just the similarity in tone and attitude. The general public writes those groups off as radical and dismisses their messages. If that’s the example you want to follow in an effort to change mainstream America, good luck. Larry’s approach reminds me a lot of Sarah Palin’s campaign that focused so much on branding people as enemies and threats, instead of reaching out based on common interests as Barack did, and trying to pleasantly quash misunderstandings and inspire change.

Even in a more moderate movement, individuals like Larry and ‘Toucan Sam’ interjecting with their chosen language is all that’s needed to distract or repel the public audience from your message. If you and Larry claim to be part of the same movement, the general public will assume he’s a representative and assume your movement is represented by his language and attitude . It’s up to you to establish your brand identity and level of message control. The problem is that I’m right on at least this one topic - everyone that is part of your cause is just as unique and individual as everyone else in this world, and therefore they all have different perspectives. Like all schools of thought, your cause is variable and subject to unique interpretation by every individual member and viewer in the audience. Due to this you are lacking a clear precise message to the public. If other individuals are willing to band together with you as a movement and agree upon a strict set of well-defined opinions and a friendly approach, you’ll have a movement with a streamlined message that can be packaged for public consumption. If you do the same but replace the approach with militantism, you already have plenty of examples of how the mainstream will view your movement (and it’s level of influence).

Disregarding any particular content, the attitude of a few of the posters here compared to the majority of Asian Americans is relative to the Nation of Islam compared to the majority of Muslim Americans. I mean that with no negative or positive connotation. It’s true that both groups, Asian Americans and Muslim Americans, have both had to deal with prejudice and injustice. It’s true that those posters here and members of the Nation have some significant points and concerns. But it’s also true that groups with ‘angry’ attitudes and militant approaches do little to shift public opinion, and in fact tend to polarize the public, including other Muslims and Asian Americans. Those groups become caricatures in American media and society. And those groups do not make up the majority of Muslim Americans or Asian Americans.

The public likes to feel good. They like entertainment. And sometimes they like to feel good by watching drama and discord, but not when it’s aimed at them. The public registers a difference between ‘drama’ and a ‘downer’ If you can’t learn this, if you can’t find a way to package your message in a way that associates it with enjoyment or reward to the public, they will not crave more of your message, they will simply turn the dial. The approach of this blog and BCB are great for attracting people who already agree with the moderators, without concern for polarizing everyone else.

You can hate me all you want. You can hate me when I make a gangster movie that includes the Triad. You can hate when I make films with positive protagonists of all ethnicities. You can hate me for all the ills of world history including slavery, the Crusades, Tienanmen square, and every Asian girl that turned you down in high school. You can hate all you want. Fill your life with it. Let it consume you. Don’t waste time spreading love and nurturing influence that could be spent basking in anger and blame and name-calling on the internet! Let it be your chief experience and passion so that one day far in the future you can lay in your deathbed and reflect on your one chance to experience living on Earth, how you took the opportunity to focus your time on anger and pride and hate.

I can take your hate. I have the ability to dissipate it in breathing, instead of passing it on in this world. Hell, I’ve been turning it into love. It’s made me even closer to many of my friends and colleagues. And the treatment of those individuals is my only real area of resentment toward this blog - you’re willing to to slander a whole host of decent people just to try to tear me down. That’s the only thing that really bothers me here, and so I won’t indulge in it - I have more positive things to do, and scripts to write. I won’t stick around to encourage you calling my friends and respected colleagues sellouts and traitors and ignorant simpletons who don’t have the intelligence and integrity to make ethical decisions about who they hang out with nor take principled stances on art and society. I think it’s nonsense when you speak as if you have the only valid Asian American perspective and devalue or ridicule other Asian Americans for seeing the world differently. If you want to call us all racists, for the sake of visual comedy I wish you were here and could just come out to the bar so we could take in the image of your chosen homogenous gang calling a vastly diverse group of friends and lovers and colleagues racists and prejudiced. We might not be perfect, we might be offensive, but even we can see the humor in that.

You’ve accused me of paying Asian people to come to my rescue and stick up for me on this blog. You’ve proposed that my lifelong friends and social circles and personal interests are all a cleverly-crafted ruse to disguise some racist agenda and mindset.
Luckily for the cause of diversifying media, there are moderate individuals out there actually getting off their asses and infiltrating the system, because for all the good points you make and concerns you have, ridiculous claims like those above make everyone else wonder where your tin foil hat is.

Good day. Good luck. I tried. I failed. You’re smart and all-knowing and I’m dumb and cursed with a genetically-inferior devil brain, so it was obviously your master plan this whole time to make me stop giving a damn. Congratulations and kudos. While we don’t agree on Dogs, outside of that discussion you started pointing out some good problems and hurtful satirical language that’s become accepted in American society, some of which I’d been too comfortable with in my own social circle and hadn’t thought too deeply about - but as you said, you couldn’t let it die with just making a positive thought-provoking point or inspiring change - no, there had to be an attack; you had to assassinate characters. I was really digging some of your insight. But instead of sitting through your demonizations, I’ll just spend greater time probing my friends and mentors more deeply for their own unique insights and anecdotes - and go to them for more influence. I guess I’ll have to live lacking the approval of about 6 anonymous usernames and a few cool individuals.

Despite your opinions of me, I feel for all of you as brothers and sisters who share the human condition and hope you find some happiness and contentment in this life. So long as it doesn’t come at anyone else’s harm. (Larry, you know it’s that molitov cocktail I’m talking about).

Since your hopes for media do coincide with my interests in media, if you ever meet film people who do need tangible advice on breaking into the industry and grabbing a hold, Byron has my email addy. I’ll give them whatever insight I can. And if they have strong production skills and glossy product, I’ll pass along their sample to whatever networks I can access.

@ micah, Blake Faucette

Since you two guys continually insist that you are interested in dialogue, here are some arguments or issues that you can actually address:

One of the points that you two–particularly Micah–appear to push is that you believe in “celebrating diversity or multiculturalism” in your movies and in general.

But this begs some critical questions:

Whose definition of multiculturalism and diversity are you espousing?

What is the actual political nature of your definition of diversity?

And more importantly, whose interests does this definition really benefit?

After all, even the Republican Party now openly talks about “welcoming diversity” or promoting a “diverse group of friends and colleagues”– even as they enact policies that are fundamentally hostile to minorities.

And the same could be said of the Democrats, who have also implemented policies hostile to minorities–even as they spout endless rhetoric about diversity.

In other words, the White Mainstream definition of “celebrating diversity” is not quite as “progressive” as it superficially appears, or that you would have people believe.

In the bigger picture, what’s happening in America is a PARADIGM SHIFT from an older from of White dominance/supremacy based upon Jim Crow Apartheid to a newer form of White dominance/supremacy hidden behind the mask of “diversity” or “colorblindness.”

Put in a simple schematic form:

-Old White Supremacy: White people control institutions, implement policies, or promote culture that benefits Whites as a class and upholds White dominance.

-New White Supremacy: People of diverse backgrounds control institutions, implement policies, or promote culture that primarily–though not exclusively–benefits Whites as a class and upholds White dominance.

In terms of the media, just because one hires or uses racial minorities in a film does not make it some kind of “progressive” work.

In fact, it could be the very opposite.

You can hire many diverse Asian American actors or crew members … but only to make a film that promotes the same old tired White racist crap about Asians that America loves so much.

As I have said before, White Supremacy is not just the KKK.

White Supremacy is ultimately about Mainstream America (including Liberals), who are more disguised behind the figleaf of “diversity.”

Dealing with the KKK is kinda like dealing with a snake out in the open, while dealing with a Liberal is like dealing with a snake in the grass.

This is a *fundamental point* that you two seem hostile towards even considering.

And it is a point that Malcolm X made a long time ago:

“The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative…. Politically the American Negro is nothing but a football and the white liberals control this mentally dead ball through tricks of tokenism: false promises of integration and civil rights.”

God’s Judgment of White America (The Chickens Come Home to Roost)
http://www.blackcommentator.com/42/42_malcolm.html

This speech was given in 1963, but in many ways, it is even more politically revelant today.

In 2009, the mainstream White definition of diversity is NOT about racial justice or equality for minorities.

It’s about maintaining White institutional power and dominance–but with a more multicultural mask.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

@ Larry

Not sure exactly how to answer those questions. Maybe you could start off? I tend to stay out of politics because I feel both major parties have their own agendas and will fuck the people over every time for those agendas. I really just live my life by what my parents taught me. Treat other people the way you want to be treated. With dignity and respect if they deserve it. Some people through their words or actions prove they deserve neither.

You’ve had a lot of assumptions of me even without knowing me. You keep throwing white privilege in my face like I deny that it exists. I know it exists but you seem to think that every white person has benefited from it. I don’t assume that every Asian American is the same. It’s pretty obvious from the diverse amount of opinion here that it’s not the truth. Just because my Korean friend’s families had and still have more money than my parents or me should I assume they were privileged. All people are individuals first and that’s what I see. And like my friends, they also happen to be Korean, Chinese, Black, White and on and on. All I can do is give them the same amount of respect that I would want from them.

When we made the film we chose to incorporate as many of our friends as possible and also considered what type of film they’d most enjoy. I have not and never will ask someone to do something that they are uncomfortable with. After all, it’s just a movie. If Brian felt uncomfortable about his character, he would tell me and we’d make changes because I value his opinion. Huyen was not comfortable with herself being nude in the film. Losing her over some small detail was not an option for us. She’s too good an actress. We changed. Point is we don’t ask people to do things they are uncomfortable with and we value people’s opinions. If one of our actors said this person wouldn’t do this then we’d ask what would he or she do especially if it was specific to an ethnic background. That individual’s experiences are different from yours so you may not agree. In the film, the different gangs are sort of lacking stereotypical cultural identity. It’s not like the Italian guy is sitting their eating meatballs and listening to Sinatra. Other than their skin color they are almost exactly the same. Dressed very similar, do exactly the same things. They are stereotypical criminals. We just wanted to show that all men, regardless of race are capable of evil and without the ability to change then they were doomed. You may see an Asian character in the film and think it’s a stereotype but you also have to accept that most people that see the film (some of them Asian) don’t see that. They see bad characters doing bad things. We obviously are gonna have a difference of opinion on that.

The only problems I had was that people assumed to know us or our intentions. And also I had a problem with some of the racist comments thrown at our friends that supported an opinion that you did not share. I also think the stories you want to see, we cannot tell. The Asian Americans I know here have very different experiences than what you have where you’re from. They also don’t share the same opinions. Any films or characters that we’d come up with may not reflect your views. We try to have universal story elements that appeal to a broad audience but obviously, you can’t please everyone.

I think you and I are just going to have differences of opinions on things and I’m okay with that. Doesn’t make me right or you wrong or vice versa. I have no ill will against anyone here but it’s hard to stay and listen with an open mind to someone who calls your good friend a “Ching Chong House Negro.” I think Micah’s decided to move on which is a shame because I know he’s a good person but he’s had it.

I’ve been more than willing to listen to people’s opinions and check out links to videos and articles that people have sent me. Does it mean I’m going to do everything perfect in the future? Probably not. I’m still going to have flaws. I will however treat people with the same respect given to me.

Blake and Micah,

The difference with Blake and Micah, is that at least Blake is willing to TRY to change, and everyone deserves a chance to improve. So we will see from his next piece of work if he really has changed. Micah seems to be in “oh i’m the victim” mode where he cant even see that he did something wrong, instead writing off criticism as unwarranted. It aint really about you, Micah, its about the work you produce, about your behaviour, and the effects it has on others. If someone says that Dogs of Chinatown is racist, it doesnt mean that YOU as a human being are racist, it just means that piece of work is.

Micah, YOU can change, because racism isnt inherent in the DNA or anything,….people learn to be racist, so they can also UNLEARN it. Micah, I think you should try to unlearn the racism, instead of giving up and saying “people insulted me, its too hard”. Because you will be in a better place if you can unlearn the racism, just like martial arts, if you give up after a FEW MONTHS YOULL NEVER IMPROVE, people only become masters after many years of training. For racism, its hard to undo the years of racist conditioning so of course it takes time, but sometimes you just have to man up and step up and do the right thing, even if it is hard…….

And what Micah/Blake said about Larry, it is incorrect. Micah, you just cant see that hes speaking the truth. Larry is actually just stating the the facts about white privilege, institutionalised racism, white supremacy and social justice, and how the film “Dogs of Chinatown” fits in with all that.

Micah, if you somehow feel uncomfortable because of the truth that Larry is stating, its because deep down, you know he’s right. The choice is up to you if you want to run away like a coward or face up to your own racism and try to unlearn it to become a better man.

Personally, i think Larry is succinctly stating the truth, and what he is saying only serves to demonstrate how well informed and educated about the issues he really is. Larry is quite centerist in his approach in that he only uses concepts and theories that are already established and have already been proven to be valid.

Actually, i think it is LARRY that should be washing his hands of this situation, i can only imagine that for him, its like hitting his head against a brick wall trying to educate people who it sometimes seems, dont really care at all. For all the Micahs and Blakes out there that try to write off Larry’s views and opinions as some kind marginalised aberration, you are clearly ignorant and mistaken in that regard. Many people listen and agree with what he says, not only in America, but around the world,-he is verbalising the concerns of millions in the community!! Instead of complaining, you should just be GRATEFUL that Larry’s even willing to engage in dialogue with you, especially when he keeps having to repeat and explain numerous basic concepts in his replies…..!!

Robert, well i dont know who you are, since i was posting in reply to micah and blake, but i guess from your post that you support micah and blakes view, correct?

well “Put yourself in our shoes ” because youre “white devil that I am”
so that “I go twisting things around again ehh?”

sheesh brother……your post just reeks of insecurity. I never said anything about “white devils” or anything like that. I’ve never said that to anyone in my life!!

But yeah, i have put myself in the shoes of micah and blake, thats why i said they deserve a chance to change. Thats why i gave them a link on white privilege. Thats why i posted and told micah to keep trying to unlearn the racsim he has been taught. If those actions dont demonstrate the empathy and goodwill i’ve shown towards them, then what does!.

Dont be acting so insecure, robert, just cause someone said that theres racism around and tries to help you doesnt mean there out to get you. Just take criticism on board as positive ways to improve….Thats what i say.

And no, i wont “throw trash around your reply” lol, lose the insecurity buddy, it makes you look unattractive.Try to be optimistic, who knows, you might learn something!!!

@ Robert.

Are you still grinding that personal axe of yours?

It’s kinda sad that you spend all your time wallowing in spam/rants about my communication style (even from thread posts months ago!)–instead of actually addressing, you know, the broader issues of White media racism and politics brought up here and elsewhere.

But I guess your interested in hijacking this thread to vent about own personal grievances–and avoid discussing the bigger political issues at hand.

That’s what people often do when they don’t have an argument.

@ Blake Faucette

Regarding diversity in the American media or society, the point is that this idea is largely cosmetic window dressing and does not fundamentally promote racial equality, justice, or empowerment for minorities.

Micah, for example, has repeatedly stated that he believes in promoting “diversity and multiculturalism” in his work and elsewhere.

But just because you have some Asian American (or minority) actors and crewmembers does not mean that your work is “progressive.”

If you look at Hollywood, they also spout this rhetoric about “celebrating diversity”–even as they continue to produce the tired Orientalist crap about Asian people. (See Lost in Translation, Joy Luck Club, or your fill-in-the-blank martial arts flick for examples.)

Instead of having a mostly-White cast making some Eurocentric movie about Asian people like in the past, today you have a diverse, multicultural cast … making some Eurocentric movie about Asian people.

This is true in American society in general whether that be politics, business, education, or media institutions.

“Celebrating diversity” is a political scam.

It’s just a new multicultural mask for the same old White power establishment and value system.

It is old wine in new bottles.

So, the important thing for Asian Americans and other minorities is to start building our OWN institutions, media, and films–instead of relying upon the “benevolent” intentions of European Americans, who unfortunately dominate and control US institutions today.

Haha…and here I thought Asians were supposed to be the sensitive ones.

…overly sensitive that is. ………………..

You should get in touch with Alpha, Mojo. He knows some people who do films on the side too.

still, i think Asian Americans need to keep taking control over the images, the stories that THEY want to tell. I think it’s cool that there are Asian film festivals and all. Remember, Bruce Lee had to leave Hollywood and go to Hong Kong to make the kind of films he wanted and to control how Asians were portrayed. It appears that the system was not going to acquiesce to his desires, so Bruce took it upon himself to control the circumstances.

Asian Americans controlling our own image is critical. But that will probably not happen within a White-dominated media system like Hollywood. It has to start with building institutions IN OPPOSITION to the Mainstream.

Because, ultimately, it’s not in White America’s political interest to allow minorities in general to fundamentally challenge this system.

Even African Americans–who have waged a long fight against White cultural racism dating back to the days of Amos and Andy and before–still face an uphill battle. This is even more true for Asian Americans.

Fade In Online had an interesting article on the experiences of minorities in “Liberal” Hollywood from industry insiders. It’s a somewhat damning though not that surprising peek behind the gilded curtain of Tinseltown.

http://fadeinonline.com/articles/minority-report/

“lol Thanks for proving my point by “talking down” toward me Larry, you never let me down.”

You insecure much, Robert?

“LOL! No Larry, I’m just finding you very predictable, that’s all. And I find it hilarious that the guy with the most “The white’s are out to get us” conspiracy theories thinks that I’M insecure! lol! But that’s ok, you go ahead and paint me with whatever brush you’d like.’

Conspiracy theories? Surely, you can do better than that as an argument. Even you must have heard of things like American chattel slavery, Jim Crow Apartheid, and now White neo-racism. (See the US Prison Industrial Complex and the War on Drugs for examples). It’s called White Supremacy. And it’s American as apple pie.

But keep on living in that world of White Denial, Robert–if it makes you feel better.

The War on Drugs Is Really a War on Minorities
http://www.alternet.org/rights/49782/

STFU Robert, the more you type, the more you just come off as an littleboy wanker. What are you even still comming back to this site for anyway? geez, what a troll…..

@Robert

As always, your attempts to minimize the issues of White supremacy and oppression are contrived as they are unconvincing. You seem to believe that if you continue to cry about “hate” or now “conspiracy theory” this will make all those uncomfortable issues go away.

American chattel slavery and Jim Crow apartheid may have been *formally* outlawed, but they are the moral and political foundation upon which the USA is based as a nation, and they powerfully shape White neo-racism today.

For example, the War on Drugs–as even mainstream pundits like Arianna Huffington have suggested in my link above–is largely a War against Minorities. Do you disagree with this?

Another example, the Southern Poverty Law Center recently issued a report stating that America’s guestworker program (which predominantly involves Latino immigrants) is a system that is “close to slavery.”

CLOSE TO SLAVERY
Guestworker Programs in the United States
http://www.splcenter.org/pdf/static/SPLCguestworker.pdf

I could cite similar reports involving the US criminal injustice system and its massive impact on racial minorities in terms of incarceration figures, arrests, etc.

But apparently in your world, the Southern Poverty Law Center and Arianna Huffington are conspiracy theorists for admitting the inconvenient truth of White racism and oppression in America.

I’m late in catching up here, but some quick thoughts:

“Asian Americans controlling our own image is critical. But that will probably not happen within a White-dominated media system like Hollywood. It has to start with building institutions IN OPPOSITION to the Mainstream.”

@Larry - agreed. I just watched The Slanted Screen on PBS the other week and it’s pretty depressing, this fight over true representation of Asian American males in Hollywood. Independent film making is the only way. But I fear that even if an indie film DOES attract the attention of Hollywood, that one can easily be co-opted by the lure of big bank rolls of the major studios. And you still won’t have any control over your own image. I’m dating myself here, but Paul Westerberg is one of my favorite indie artists and he did the soundtrack for some animated kids film. He said of the experience, as a songwriter working with these entertainment types, “You take Hollywood’s money, you eat Hollywood’s shit.” They went out and got Peter Yorn to do the vocals to one of Paul’s songs for some stupid reason—perhaps they thought that Yorn would make the song more marketable?

So much can be changed at a whim, and as an artist, your vision is forever tampered with in Hollywood. There’s no way my true life or based on a true story crime/action screenplay would get made the way I would want it. It would be a casting nightmare because the main players are white, black, Asian, and hispanic. I’m pretty sure they would change the Asian characters to some other ethnicity.

Comic Bobby Lee remarked that the only thing Hollywood cares about is money, the bottom line. I mean, I get it, they’re not interested in art or equal opportunity so they’re risk adverse. But Lee commented that there has to be some break thru movie with Asians that makes a lot of money. Only then will Hollywood come calling looking to duplicate that success, looking for the next big Asian thing to hook their wagon to. And that creates exposure and opportunities for other Asian American actors. He might be right, but who the hell can wait around, begging Hollywood for an opportunity?

But the documentary reiterated that Asian Americans in the industry will have to fight those battles….same fights that black Americans have gone thru. The only way to get an opportunity, if one is willing to stay in the system and fight for it, is to show that Asian Americans ARE marketable and have cross over appeal, that they CAN be counted on to fill the seats in a movie theater, by showcasing our talents in our OWN movies and screenplays. Indie films have to be the way, it seems.

Indie films are becomming the means to break away from unions. I think Asian American actors would be shooting themselves in the feet if they did that, much like the UAW did. Plus, if the demand for AA actors is low, then forming a union could make their demand lower. You may end up not seeing any AA actors at all in that case.

Larry, I think this is where you and I fundamentally differ. While I certainly can see and agree that power is what can give racism it’s teeth, I don’t think that racism or racist behaviors are left solely to those with power. I define racism as any behavior that seeks to opress or harm based on skin color or place of origin. But to follow your train of thought about racism, bear in mind that power is relative, and there are many forms of power as well. For example, you have power of numbers over me on this blog. Here I am the minority - in spite of what the census may tell you about my private life. By that logic, that would characterize your comments about how you perceive me as being racist in nature (power + prejudice).

I’m not sure I see much merit in continuing our discussion however, as It’s pretty obvious that we disagree on a basic level. I can certainly respect the level of research and effort you’ve put into your views, I just disagree with the logic behind it.

So let me just venture an opinion here since I too was a 44. As always, feel free to disagree with me.

I agree with Larry/mT/Anna in terms of the philosophical/social issues. Being a “majority” on this board doesn’t change the fact that I still have to go outside and work and experience systems that are still broken. It doesn’t change the fact that the Hollywood media will teach White kids self-love while teaching minorities self-hate. It doesn’t change the fact that bigWOWO and the Fighting44s, despite the logic and truth behind our views and observations, still have views that are not understood or supported by the mainstream. It doesn’t change the fact that I spent most of my education reading about people who don’t look like me. It doesn’t change the fact that my favorite TV show is about a White woman, in large part because the American media refuses to make TV shows about people like me.

That being said, on a personal level, I think Robert is being genuine, and I think he has learned a lot about different perspectives from this board. If you compare his statements now with his earliest statements, I do think he’s beginning to place himself in other people’s shoes.

Anyway, carry on!

@byron
“If you compare his statements now with his earliest statements, I do think he’s beginning to place himself in other people’s shoes.”

Tyring to, but finding it increasingly difficult to justify the effort. Thanks for the vote of confidence.

Not even going to bother with further response… what’s the point?

Hi Eric,

I appreciate your insights into the biz, but yeah, i know that my idea is full of holes. it wouldn’t change anything but it is designed to send a message and to basically be a thorn in someone’s ass.

But as for what is fueled by consumer demand, don’t you think that it’s also unknown as to what the public wants to see? In other words, there isn’t much choice in the major studio system. They dictate what and who the public will see. I mean, is it always fair to assume that white audiences always want to see caucasian actors all the time?

It’s been touched upon before, that the bottom line is MONEY. Had Bruce Lee lived and led a life now in the Hollywood system, my feeling is he would have been the biggest action star of the 70’s. AND it would have enabled him to venture outside the action, kung fu genre and into more dramatic roles like John Lone’s role in “The Last Emperor”. Moreover, I’d have to think that since Lee would have been a cash cow, the studios would’ve ventured to find the next Asian action star because that was what was hot.

So which comes first? The demand or the talent? Because Lee was an unknown to most people, but as soon “Enter the Dragon” came out and they (Caucasian audiences, that is) saw him, they wanted more.

I mean, how do we know for sure that, had an actor like Russell Wong, for example, been given an opportunity to be a lead or co-lead in a major studio release that he wouldn’t have been a star? Someone that the American audience would like to see some more? We won’t ever know because the major studios will rarely give that chance to a person of color. A goofy looking Steve Buscemi and Paul Giamatti aren’t conventionally handsome lead actors, but they can still work in Hollywood. Why can’t a Ken Leung, a short, semi balding, guy, get some top roles? The major studios won’t give him that opportunity. He’ll get to play the Asian villain or a grocery store cashier instead.

Still, I agree that indie movies are the way to go. No matter that your vision won’t get seen by a large audience, the important thing is to create and make movies true to our sensibilities and keep putting it out there. We need to tell our stories and have it captured on film, print, or whatever media, as a document of our human experiences.

I think there is a market for Asian American films and we do see it with the Asian film festivals that seem to be growing. Granted , there are lots of competition from Asia, but I think the AA film makers, writers, etc, are growing.

Second, I’d like to think that any market for Asian American produced films isn’t just catering to the AA audience, but would be able to tell stories that are universal and the characters just so happen to be Asian American. But that’s an interesting observation you’ve made about the big studios taking longer to allocate resources to the next project. Good point, that’s where the indie Asian American film maker can try and help fill the void. George Huang, who wrote and directed the indie cult film, “Swimming with Sharks”, filmed it in about 15 or 18 days. And he had big names like Kevin Spacey and Frank Whaley and an unknown Benicio Del Toro in that movie!

Third, I just watched “The Namesake” on HBO again and wondered how that book was made into a movie. And I wonder what really helped Kal Penn’s career. The Harold and Kumar surprise hit? Or a movie like “The Namesake”, a dramatic role, that gave him exposure and led to other producers and casting agents to consider Penn for other roles, like his TV gig on “House”. Isn’t it about equal opportunity? That he and John Choi were able to be the leads in a comedy, use humor to poke fun at the stereotypes Asians suffer thru, and that maybe it made others in the industry take notice of their talent? Granted, it helped that the Harold and Kumar movie made lots of MONEY.

But is Hollywood really seeing their talent or is it just that they are marketable because people associate them with Harold and Kumar? But maybe if people of color, not just Asians, were allowed that kind of opportunity, they might wind up being seen as talented and therefore considered for non-race specific roles. I think of a Native American actor like Adam Beech who I thought was great in the indie film “Smoke Signals” and later had other film roles like “Wind Talkers” with Nic Cage, and then TV roles in NBC’s “Third Watch” and “Law and Order”.

Eric,

“My whole point is that the studio system isn’t some racist machine that keeps talented, non-white people down. It responds to market forces, racist or not.”

What’s the difference?

“Studios giving both white and non-white people “opportunities” is really dependent on their market value. It doesn’t matter if that value comes from their pure talent or their last name (”Carradine” comes to mind).”

Carradine is a good example. Do you honestly believe that Kung Fu would’ve tanked with Bruce Lee as the lead instead of Carradine? Do you think Carradine had more market value than Bruce? The guy only made two or three movies that were released in this country, and even then, he still makes the cover of martial arts magazines, almost forty years after his death.

I think Hollywood has less of a handle on market value than they think.

Incidentally, this is one reason I support promoting diversity in high positions. People don’t know what will work until minorities are actually given a chance.

Viewers are responsive to trends, lame or not, racist or not, because they make them by voting with their dollars. This is why films like Happy Feet make so much money, with all their stereotypes and bad humor. If studios want to make money, they make films for those viewers. The biggest business in the world isn’t slowing down to appeal to the minority of viewers. That’s for indies. Indies usually pave the way for those changes.

I’m sure Bruce Lee’s performance in the Kung Fu series would’ve been far better, and I’m less sure but still fairly confident it would’ve been a hit. But it’s a risky hit. Anything less than 100% confidence means that studio investors won’t put their money into it. Carradine was a sure winner for them, so they put all their money into the show. If they cast Bruce Lee, it’s possible the show would’ve had fewer investors, the non-Bruce Lee talent may have been been lackluster, and the overall quality could’ve declined, next thing it gets cancelled, etc. It’s impossible to say. But at the time it was possible to prove using graphs, ratings, and box office receipts that Carradine was, unfortunately, more bankable than Bruce Lee. I don’t agree with what they did, I think Carradine was the wrong choice, but they make these decisions all the time, and they make tons of money. If they don’t want to lose all their investors, they stay within their profit models. Nothing changes the profit incentive.

While they’re incredible at turning profits, as I’ve said they’re really bad at making quick changes. So you have independents taking the risks, and we get to see the successes. We DON’T see the hundreds of feminist, ethnic, or otherwise risky films that get made and fail because they didn’t have a big enough market. But the ones that succeed ultimately prove to studios that there’s money there, and you start to see changes.

Hollywood is what it is: a money glacier that responds to viewers slower than indies. It’s up to the indies to make the changes. Studios then steal the ideas that work and make billions.

As for Hayakama and the laws that kept him from reaching stardom, nothing unusual there. Politicians are amazingly apt at ruining minorities’ lives.

I keep stressing that independents need to be the ones making changes, because studios only change for the viewers.

Definitely agree that indie films is definitely A way to go. It should certainly not be the ONLY way to go. All opportunities should be taken. After all, due to the inherent demographic make-up of the industry, you can’t expect to see a mainstream drama film that speaks to the experiences of Asian Americans. On the mainstream front, the first issue would be to turn the tide of the images of Asian Americans by securing more roles, gaining more exposure and preferabbly more positive roles instead of negative ones.

In the indie world, the larger focus would be to continue to put out stories that speak to the Asian American experience because that part of the industry is where you can have the greatest control. You certainly see this quite a bit at Asian/Pacific-Islander film festivals, etc. The challenge here is how do the films cross over from the indie film festival circuit to attracting Hollywood eyes and put some heat on the Hollywood glacier? “Better Luck Tomorrow” was probably one of the few films that accomplished this. However, even then, they took the director-talent but not the story which probably was the true key to the success of that film. Perhaps to Hollywood, they just saw a talented director and not an “Asian American” director. How else could you explain the logic behind putting him in charge of movies like Fast and the Furious 2 and 3, and Annapolis that have no connection to the Asian American experience? Same thing with Ang Lee. To Hollywood, they’re happily putting Asian Americans in charge of big productions because they have both proven to be “good” and profitably-successful directors. However, they don’t recognize that Justin Lin’s strength lies in channeling the Asian American experience (Ang Lee, not so much) and activiating an Asian American audience (without alienating mainstream America). This is where color-blindness can be a problem on Hollywood’s part because they are missing out on some money-making opportunities. In the end, it’s still great to have more minority representation in Hollywood. You gotta start somewhere.

Speaking of being a slow-moving glacier, I saw an article around the office about how Hollywood stars are not proving to be as reliably bankable as in the past. The article speculated (among other reasons) that it was the actual content of the film that was proving to be the bigger draw to audiences than the names of the talent involved. How else can a Superman Returns, practically all animated films, etc. dominate the box office? Audiences now have access to movie trailers, online reviews, peer-reviews, etc. all factors that help them decide whether or not a film is worth watching. Now, they can tell if the next Tom Cruise movie is going to be a stinker or not.

Certainly Hollywood is plauged by lazy/bad screenwriting (or whatever mechanism allows such crappy writing to be made into films). At best it comes off as just bad screenwriting, at worst, it can be viewed as racist or discriminatory. I just watched “Stardust” and while I enjoyed the film’s structure, dialogue, etc. as a whole, there was one part that really struck me as plain silly: Robert DeNiro as a gay pirate. We’re talking full-on gay pirate stereotype: limp wrist, does hair, knows how to give fashion makeovers, and the worst gay male stereotype: cross-dresser. Worst part was that it wasn’t even necessary to the film’s content. They could’ve at least stopped before the cross dressing scene. To those screenwriters and the director/producer, etc. (I guess even DeNiro) it was okay because it was supposed to be a funny or it was also supposed to support the film’s theme of being “comfortable with who you are”. But that stuff could certainly be viewed by people that are gay as discrimanatory. In my opinion it was dumb and unecessary. Who knows how it got through to the final film?

And that’s the big issue. No one really knows exactly how these ideas creep up into films. It could be intentional racism, sub-concious racism, color-blindness, laziness, poor judgement, etc. There’s no way to make every screenwriter perfectly sympathetic to every minority group out there (female, gay, black, latino, Asian, disability) because they wouldn’t be able to write anything from any point of view. The key to balance in the case of the representation of Asian Americans would be to have more people representative of that group in charge of writing, producting, directing, etc.

uRB4N, that is an excellent point, however, if African Americans or Hispanics have the money and desire to buy property there is nothing that your uncle can legally do to stop them. The same happens in Hollywood. Whoever has the money to fund the film has the say on what the content will be and no one can stop them. Unfortunately, you don’t see many pro-Asian American film representation groups out there to fund big mainstream films, much less even the larger “independent films” with budget levels still in the million-dollar range.

It’d be nice if it was as simple as job discrimination because then lawsuits can fly, but because of the way the industry is, and the fact that media is inextricably tied to the First Ammendment, it’s ridiculously complex. In fact, it’s a mess.

Mojorider,

I think your film matter would thrive both among mainstream audiences and especially in the indie circuit. If you were to go the mainstream route, your film sounds like it would fit in the league of films like “Zodiac”. A solid director and recognizably “drama” genre actors would help sell the film greatly. Whenever you market the film, a good “story” is really just one factor among others. Obviously, we all subconsiously WANT to see a good story, but we don’t always PAY to see a good story. The key to marketing and getting buzz is putting out a film product that people WANT to see. If you have enough “WANT” factors, people will check it out.

INTENSE DRAMA is not a WANT factor for most audiences. Not for little kids, not for teenagers, not for seniors. It is probably a WANT factor for people who pride themselves in seeing movies that are “sophisticated”. A movie with “INTENSE DRAMA” caters to that crowd, but it is, initially a limited one.

REVIEWS THAT SAY IT IS A GOOD MOVIE - that gets ALOT more people interested in watching your film. People WANT to know that they are making a good choice among films especially if they don’t know too much about what truly differntiates them. So if you get mainstream reviewers to recommend your film based on the “INTENSE DRAMA” factor, while you still won’t attract teenagers and little kids, you’ll probably get more of the seniors and mainstream crowd looking for a “good” movie to watch.

NAMED ACTORS - a 16-year old teenager that’s a fan of Edward Norton gives the same support as an adult 40-year-old female fan of Edward Norton in terms of watching a film. They WANT to support their favorite actors, directors, etc. and will go out to see it regardless of whether or not it caters to what their friends want to see, etc. Depending on the name it can also denote the quality of a “good” film mentioned above regardless of whether or not it is actually crap. How many times have you heard, “well, it has so and so big actor in it, must be pretty good…”

TRAILER - Getting people interested and excited about a film is a big WANT factor. Craft a kick-ass trailer that appeals to who you want it to appeal to and you give them a WANT factor.

Now, every film has different levels and amounts of WANT factors, and WANT factors can change depending on the season, audience tastes, political climate, economic climate, etc. Trick is, whatever film you make, make sure you put in enough WANT factors to make it stand out compared to other films in your compettitive space whether it’s in the Hollywood blockbuster season or Sundance.

To comment on your response below:
“But as a writer, how could you write a character for which you know nothing about their experiences? Is this why they resort to writing a stereotype for that particular group? Instead of that, why not just write a fully dimensional character who happens to be gay, or black, or Latino, etc…”

You pretty much hit the nail on the head. Imagine you were given a chance to write a screenplay that was going to be produced and boost your career and make you tons of money. You’re going to do your best work, but your best work isn’t always perfect. And, if you judge something like a particular character in the story to be a “minor” character you’ll probably devote less resources to make the character dynamic, exciting, interesting, etc. In effect, you’re pulling it out of your ass. As long as none of the powers that be busts you for it, it’ll fly. It’s not enough to say , “why not”, you have to give them reasons “WHY”. The vast majority of people do something to prevent or as a reaction to a defined PROBLEM. The consequences of a given problem determine how that person prioritizes the solution and actions to address the PROBLEM. Already, if in the mind of a screenwriter, it’s a “minor” thing than it’s not going to be a big enough PROBLEM that would cause them to change their behavior.

Asian Americans, in particular, those that truly recognize and internalize the problems of AA stereotypes in the media, lack of AA cultural representation, etc. are the ones that can best address those problems by their actions in the industry. Actions like producing a film, writing screenplays, directing, acting in roles, buying media for distribution, etc. Hopefully, those actions will produce a net positive effect rather than a negative one.

I think what would be interesting to see is some stats on the “film” industry. How many SAG or Writers’ Guild members identify themselves as Asian Americans? How many directors, how many producers, etc.? That’s a fantastic research topic.

Eric:

“Just as there’s nothing stopping a black or hispanic person from buying property (unless the owner is stupid enough to reject the offer, then it’s the owner’s loss), there’s nothing stopping black or hispanic or AA people from being studio executives. There’s no club. If he has capital, and he puts the word out that he’s starting a company and would like to invest in films, he’ll have dozens of screenplays on his lap by the end of the week. Nothing’s stopping him except his own pocket book.”

What’s ironic about your statement is that this hypothetical Asian person has to already have capital. A white person can work his way up within the existing institutions and promote the status quo of race portrayals. He can become an executive without starting rich. If that’s not a club, I don’t know what is.

Oops…looks like Ed’s comment got spammed. Not sure why. You can see it above.

Eric,

I know you hate it when I bring up this word, but I have to do it again: Practicality. You’re telling Asian Americans to bring capital and create their own firms, and then you quote a statistic that says that the Median Household Income is $66,100. How far is a $66,100 HOUSEHOLD income going to get a guy looking to start his own company? Also, this $66k stat doesn’t take into account the fact that our household incomes tend to be higher because there are often more of us under one roof. It’s not as rosy as you might think. (I didn’t see them being overrepresented in the wikipedia stat. In fact, it says, “87.93% of all households in the top 5% were headed by a person who identified as being White alone. “)

“Can we really say an institution is racist or sexist when on a whim it will (and has to) change its sentiments depending on the audience’s taste?”

I think you’re understating the influence that media has over people’s tastes. Media forms people’s opinions as much as it responds to them.

Ed-

nice post, thanks for sharing your insights and having a belief that my screenplay could appeal to a mainstream audience. I kind of felt that too, but since I want to stay close as possible to the true story, I also feel that it would be better suited to being an indie. Mainstream would be change so much of the story because, afterall, it’s “Based Upon a True Story”, and the major studio could really walk all over the screenplay. I also need to research the legalities of writing about these real life people who are now in jail. I am also wondering if I should write a book first and then see if it can be optioned as a movie. or hell, maybe make it into a mini-series for cable TV. There are some great people in my area to help out. David Simon, who did “The Wire” on HBO, lives around here, as does crime/mystery novelist George Pellicanos. I think HBO allowed Simon to have all kinds of creative freedom on “The Wire”. And that was a really diverse cast as well.

And I agree with you that AAs have to dig in, if they’re already in the industry. They have to network with others of like mindsets and try and push forth their efforts in producing, writing, directing,etc. I’d like to see Asian people in the biz form their own collective prod co; get people like Chow Yun Fat, John Woo, Ang Lee, Jet Li, George Takei, Lucy Liu, Kelly Hu, Kal Penn and John Choi, Margaret Cho, etc, to take a stab at reviewing screenplays and looking at projects that they can do or be a part of. Again, it doesn’t have to be just about the AA experience, it can be a story that has universal appeal.

And that’s a good point; I wonder how many AA’s there are in the WGA? Or have their SAG card? And if they are AA writers in the biz, what are their experiences like in fighting for the things they write?

Eric,

I know you’re still of the belief that it’s all about market forces. But if AA’s have to create their own prod co’s, invest entirely on their own, then implicit in that is they have been rejected by Hollwyood’s major studios’ system and machinery. And exclusion implies a discriminatory practice. We won’t know if a Ken Leung or a Russell Wong could ever have as great drawing power or cross over appeal as a Denzel or a Will Smith because they haven’t been given the access and opportunity. Markets and humans are not always rational. And I think we both agree that Hollywood makes a lot of bad decisions.

jaehwan,

I couldn’t agree more with what you said: “…. you’re understating the influence that media has over people’s tastes. Media forms people’s opinions as much as it responds to them.”

Despite everything that’s been said against my argument in favor of market-based approaches to the issue, I’ve really hard nothing of substance as to what AAs can do OUTSIDE of the market approach.

We’re basically arguing over:

- Whether large studios create racist trends or simply cater to them, be they in America, HK, China, Japan, India, or any country that has a successful film market.
(My argument is that studios simply cater to them, and while the process of changing to a less racist model is slow-going, it inevitably follows viewer trends.)
- Whether AAs are able to enter into the film market despite racial intimidation.
(My argument is that nothing is stopping them from making their own films. The fact that they have to make their own production companies to do their own films is no reason to accuse the system of rejecting them on a racial basis. It’s the same thing with indie filmmakers in general.)
- Whether they lack the capital to enter the film market and start making changes on the back end.
(I argue this isn’t the case with AAs, since they’re over-represented in the top 5% of the income bracket, as evidenced by the link I provided.)
- Whether the studio system makes good decisions.
(It makes profitable decisions. When they mess up, that’s an open invitation for AAs and anyone else to capitalise off their goof, and that’s why AAs should be making their own films.)

As a filmmaker who’s experienced plenty of barriers to entry in the film market, all I can say is this: you can work around it. If there’s an audience for your film, make your film, find your audience, and do whatever innovation necessary to get it seen. Everyone can innovate.

I agree with Mojo. And Eric, your link didn’t show us as over-represented in the top 5%. We’re collectively a tiny blip.

More from “the club:”

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/10/business/media/10emanuel.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&th&emc=th

As it was before, it reaches all the way up to the highest levels of government and society.

I think Ari is right on one thing–I think I’d be pissed too about Medium. That show is worth its weight in gold. I still don’t know what NBC was thinking.

My point was misunderstood and addressed incorrectly.

I provided an example of how using someone’s race to discriminate on the sole reasoning of losing money is illegal in certain situations such as housing. It’s the law. However, Hollywood is using the exact same reasoning as an out.

“I can lose money if I don’t consider the person’s race.”

Why is it legal to discriminate against someone for a job (acting role) but it’s illegal to discriminate against someone for a home?

Like the example I provided, properity values drop when large amounts of African Americans and Latinos move in. Why is it my uncle and his partners not allowed to refuse them rent? He “loses” money on his investment just like any Hollywood studio would.

The response I got was that African Americans and Latinos can create and rent their own apartments. That’s like saying “if you don’t like it, create your own.” I’m perfectly fine with that but it’s not the same comparison.

Also, that just reeks of “If you don’t like it here, you can leave the country.”

Lastly, just because there are more roles for Asian Americans doesn’t count for anything if they’re just more stereotypical roles.

I would vouch for *fewer* roles for Asian Americans if they were actually quality roles. It’s quality that counts, not quantity.

URB4N is spot on, Eric. It makes no sense to tell people just to go do their own thing. You yourself are an indie producer, but that doesn’t change the fact that Hollywood is more open to stories from people of the majority race than the others. And it’s hard to deny the fact that they’re already entrenched with the distribution networks already in place. As Blake even mentioned on this podcast or blog (I forget which), sometimes shitty movies make money just because shitty movies have the backing of large companies.

I read the description on the wiki page that you quoted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States#Race
“Households headed by persons who identified as being Asian alone, on the other hand, were overrepresented among the top two quintiles. In the top five percent the percentage of Asians was nearly twice as high as the percentage of Asians among the general population.”

It doesn’t seem to be overrepresented. If you look at the chart, the top 5% is 6.46% Asian. 6.46%!!! That’s basically our percentage in this country, and if you look at the large cities where almost all of “us” live and where most top 5%’ers live (Asians are about 10% of NYC and 20% of SF), we’re wayyy behind. Plus 6.46% means 6 and a half people out of every 100. Doesn’t seem all that high to me…

Byron my point is for every AA, there are more people in the top 5% of their income than there are for white people. Speaking strictly from statistics, if AA filmmakers comprise the same percentage of white filmmakers among their own race, they have more people to seek funding from. If there are fewer AA filmmakers then that’s even better for them.

I can think of many unintended consequences from a class action lawsuit brought against Hollywood for racial descrimination. I don’t believe our first amendment rights are very reliable thanks to our hugely overarching government, so I’ll just argue from a legal/economic standpoint.

What would the law entail? “Scripts may not be race specific in the studio system” spells disaster. Artists hate being controlled. If they can’t get the studios to make their now-”discriminatory” films, they shift their business to the independent level, a far less “efficient” form of filmmaking where division of labor is less prevelant, budgets are lower, cost of writing goes up, cost of filmmaking goes up, costs are reflected in ticket prices, and that’s no good, especially for poor people straining to buy $10 tickets. And we can also forget about any films made by minorities for minorities. Those will be illegal too.

If “Scripts may not be race specific in any film,” then you’ll end up with films being made overseas, and our film economy will crash. Maybe that’s what some of you would like, but that also means American minorities won’t be doing film work.

You’re also making writers feel like outlaws with the law above. Wanna see some right-wing racist scripts? Make that law happen.

One might bring a class action lawsuit against the Writers Guild of America for not having proper representation in the scripts they accept. Losing the lawsuit, the Writers’ Guild requires a certain quota be met by all their union members’ scripts based on racial percentages. Same thing as above, people would just send in fewer scripts to the Writer’s Guild because most writers are white, writing about mostly white issues. Any scripts written about Asian or Black or Hispanic issues will be sent in by the few minority screenwriters or by White screenwriters, who may not know what the hell they’re talking about, simply writing write scripts for minority actors. The rest of em (probably mostly white) send their scripts to the new Scriptman’s Guild, and Hollywood pulls their scripts from there since that’s where writers can send scripts with the fewest limitations. Now all we’ve done is spend a bunch of money to move business to a new building while leaving minorities in the old one. Sounds a lot like what happens in other sectors of the economy, and for similar reasons.

Say the law says, “Films may be race-specific, but for any roles that are racially ambiguous, studios must hire people so as to accurately represent the racial makeup of the US.” Basically affirmative action. Writers could take into consideration the rule and write entierly race-specific parts in their scripts.

Imagine the law says, “Scripts may be race-specific for X% of roles cast, the remaining Y% must be hired to represent racial makeup.” Casting coordinators, since most audiences are white and most actors are too, might cast minorities in the least prevalent parts of the film so they can make quota while not losing their target audience. If Y is high enough, eventually studios will have to make films that don’t appeal to their mainstream white audience throughout the midwest and the south. They lose money, and they either cut back on hiring or pass the prices off to the consumers, and ticket prices go up.

Ultimately, forcing art industries to conform to racial quotas raises the price of making art and increases unemployment in that field, hurting the people it’s supposed to help. If studios pass the costs off on consumers, ticket prices rise, hurting poor people.

“many AA’s as well prefer to finance “White” movies over AA movies”

Are those AA’s racist, then? My is that, just like the studios, AA investors who prefer to finance “White” movies are simply doing it for the financial gain, and that doesn’t mean they’re racist.

“Perhaps Eric is saying that we should all go indie. If that’s the case, then my question would be whether or not an indie film could make the same kind of impact as a larger film on Asian American culture and self-perceptions.”

Going indie is probably the best chance anyone has at making a change in the market. That’s been the only way for us to do the kind of fight choreography we want to do. Working within the “system”, it’s absolutely impossible to do our kind of choreography. And I’d argue that it’s also impossible to make non-discriminatory decisions regarding scripts and actors in that “system”. But as our ideas gain popularity on the indie front, they become more profitable (or less unprofitable) for studios. If they’re profitable enough, they’ll use em, or else a competing studio will take all their box office sales.

I think the wrong way is through new laws. That’s what that big ol’ essay above is about.

Hi Robert,

I think you misinterpreted my comments about Star Wars. The issue was whether viewer trends dictate what the studio releases, ie, supply and demand. Eric’s viewpoint is that the major studios are driven by consumer demand and not necessarily racist. I, on the other hand, don’t necessarily see it as a strict supply and demand, but rather see it as a blended animal, not necessarily two separate forces, and that’s why I said it was yin and yang entity. And I used Star Wars as an example of a movie starting the trend and showing the audience something it had never seen before. And the audience wanted to see more. Lucas’ Light and Magic raised the bar for everyone and special effects and you saw that with some successful films and not so successful projects (Close Encounters, Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, Tron). It’s really a chicken or egg viewpoint as to which is the cause and what is the effect? And there’s no point in Eric and myself re-hashing this issue, we just have differing views on it.

I don’t entirely disagree with Eric’s economic example; if the audience grows tired of seeing the same old schlock retread again and again (and there’s plenty of it), the audiences will stay away. And then the studios will have to find something new that put the asses in the seats. Nothing in Hollywood is all that original anymore. Look at how many re-makes there have been, the lateset being “The Taking of Pelham, 1,2, 3”. Talk about lazy! And when box office sales slump, the studios will have to find something to get the interest back. My viewpoint has been, why not tweak the supply anyway to create the demand and that you won’t know what the audiences will like until you give them a chance to see something new.

Eric,

I agree with your point: that’s where indie movies can fill the void. So I’m in agreement with you that AA actors need to control their own images by not playing the standard Hollywood game which is stacked against them. And as far as institutions that can work outside the major studio system, I actually found that there are some non-profit groups whose goals are to help AA film makers get their projects off the ground. This is just some of what I found:

http://digitalcontentproducer.com/cameras/revfeat/homecoming/

http://www.aafilmlab.com/

http://www.apafilm.org/

http://asianamericanmedia.org/who-we-are/mission/

I still think the major studio system is a discriminatory process, auditioning for non-race specific roles and AA actors, or other minority actors, getting turned down repeatedly. And they have the cloak of “artistic freedom” to hide behind. The point is, there’s a constant stream of images from Hollywood that is not realistic and it doesn’t reflect real life for lots of people. This is a pluralistic society; to not even acknowledge that in films is a gross distortion and shows the major studios aren’t willing to create roles for people of color. And if they do, it’s a negative stereotype. And that’s why I say it’s a racist system.

This may come across as a non-sequitur but I wrote the following piece regarding an article about the dearth of foreign film at the box office:

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/Movies/story?id=7768842&page=1

First of all, “Hollywood” is no longer just a literal place in California but a figurative metaphor used to describe mainstream US film industry driven by two main imperatives: maximize revenue and seek to appeal to the broadest range of audiences.

In order to understand Hollywood in qualitative terms, we must revisit the Gaussian distribution curve (also known as the Error Curve or the Bell Curve). The fat middle portion of this curve represents “maximum revenue” and “broadest range of audiences”. This space is dominated by Joe Six-Pack and Joe the Plumber. Eclectic tastes in foreign film are confined to the tail ends of the spectrum. The Hollywood business model is fundamentally incompatible with the wide distribution of foreign film.

In many ways, Hollywood’s control over what America gets to watch in the cinema resembles the practices of Big Cable. Cable companies exert local monopolies in their respective regions. In my county, it is Time Warner Co.

Cable TV programming is not driven by consumer choice. The cable companies buy content from studios and TV syndicates so the programming is determined by the convenience and short-term profit motives of the cable company. The cable provider acts as a distribution middle-man.

This is not an insignificant reason why cable TV programming is mediocre. When was the last time anyone heard anyone raving about their cable provider? Me neither.

The article makes brief mention of TV-based VOD as a possible market for foreign film. But VOD is still subject to the whims and decisions of corporate suits.

Our Entertainment-Media complex is not a true democratic system. Programming is mostly determined by a faceless corporate oligarchy, not citizens. Nielson ratings and other modes of marketing research are not a true reflection of consumer preferences because this is a measure of the relative popularity of shows already predetermined by the corporate oligarchy.

In order for us to have a truly democratic system, we need to have a world-class broadband internet system. Therein lies another rub. The United States currently possesses a broadband network, like the infrastructure, that is worthy of a Second-World nation intent on making its way to Third. South Korea and Sweden enjoys 100-Mbps symmetrical speeds supported by fiber straight to the residence for $20 a month. There is ample bandwidth to download a high definition movie under 10 seconds. With Time Warner Road Runner, I pay $45 a month for asymmetrical speeds, advertised at 3Mbps download/sub-1Mpbs upload. One rarely enjoys the advertised speeds because the cable ISPs surreptitiously employs “traffic throttling” in their bandwidth management. This level of service is typical for most households across the nation.

If we had a world-class internet, streaming HD video would be a reality. The consumer would choose content, thereby bypassing Hollywood and Big cable, instead of having it dictated by a corporate oligarchy.

The fact that cable companies provide both TV and internet on the same pipe presents a conflict of interest. Young college students no longer subscribe to cable; they simply watch “House” or “American Idol” via Hulu on their laptops. This trend hints the direction that the market will move towards in the future. The cable companies realize this and to delay the inevitable they are trying to introduce broadband cap limits (Time Warner Road Runner attempted to do just this in NY and Texas a couple of months ago). They are seeking to prevent direct broadband content cannibalizing their TV business.

In order to overthrow the corporate oligarchy, we need to have a technological advocacy, awareness, and a grassroots movement amongst citizens:

1. Cut your umbilical cord to Big Cable. By law, certain basic channels are required to be broadcast free via air even with the transition to digital signals by June 2009. If you still own an analog cathode-ray tube TV, you are entitled to coupons for digital-to-analog converter boxes.

https://www.dtv2009.gov/

If you own a LCD/Plasma screen, you may want to invest in a high-quality digital tuner and a HD antenna. In my area, I get 30+ over-the-air channels, many are already HD, and two are even Korean language channels.

2. If at all possible, get internet access via DSL or better yet Verizon FIOS.

3. We need to have a convergence between the PC and the living room TV.

Much content is now available on the web, Hulu being a well-known example of such. Netflix makes movies available via the web. NBC provides its syndicated programming online in HD. These are just a few examples. The PC needs to evolve into a specialized multimedia device that inhabits the living room right under the TV, connected to high-speed broadband, optimized for the purpose of delivering content from direct sources on the web onto the living room screen, combined with additional functions traditionally fulfilled by DVD/CD players and Tivo, and be easy to use with a remote control.

4. We need to have a public-interest advocacy and lobby over control of the internet. Broadband needs to be understood as a basic public utility, like electricity, water, post, mass transit, and roads. Under the Obama Administration, a precedent has been set for the nationalization of private industry. Internet should be place under the control of the people, in the form of a revenue-generating Federal agency like the USPS, governed not by the profit-motive but the public good, national security, and the recognition of the internet as a prime driver of innovation.

Hmm….although I hate to keep going back to this topic of what’s racist or not, I think at this point we can settle on some definitions that will help clarify everyone’s point of view on issues not only related to Hollywood but also other issues.

First off, it seems that Jaehwan, et. al argue that because of Hollywood’s mechanisms (social, political, economical, etc.) and more importantly, the products it produces promoting racial stereotypes and other messages that subjugate racial minorities the Hollywood industry is racist. I doubt they will extend the label of “racist” to everyone working in a “racist” system, but it would be reasonable to assume that any product produced by a “racist” system that continues to promote racial stereotypes or discriminatory messages should be labeled racist.

Now, there are probably two levels of racism within that label: intentional (bigotry) or sub-conscious (includes being “colorblindness”). Most of us are stuck on “intentional” racist, but I can see that Jaehwan, et. al are trying to bring up more issues related to the sub-conscious side of racism in an industry like Hollywood.

That being said, a question that I’d like to see people’s opinions on is the following:

Justin Lin, directs and produces “Better Luck Tomorrow”, largely outside of the Hollywood system, and it is far from anything anyone would label racist. It clearly promotes the opposite of stereotypical images for the Asian racial minority.

Years later, Justin Lin makes several films, one of which is Fast and Furious: Tokyo Drift. In this film, a white Caucasian male from the U.S. beats the Asian Yakuza antagonist (evil Asian stereotype) at drifting (white dominating Asian stereotype) and wins the Yakuza’s girlfriend (Asian male emasuclation stereotype). Thus, Tokyo Drift is exactly a product produced by a “racist” system, big Hollywood studio, promoting racial stereotypes. Would anyone agree that this film by the definition set above should be labeled “racist”? Granted, especially with Justin Lin at the helm, it’s not “intentionally” racist, but because it does promote those stereotypical images, it should be classified as “subconsciously” rascist. And of course, you couldn’t possibly extend the label of “racist” to Justin Lin given his previous film, “Better Luck Tomorrow” and his own personal beliefs and efforts in the filmmaking community to advance the image of Asian Americans.

Now with that aside, there is certainly a dearth of positive Asian media images and that is a shame and unfair. While life is full of both, that doesn’t mean that it should always continue to be that way. More positive images of Asian Americans is in big demand by the Asian American community and I’m interested to see how people step up to the plate to deliver that. Hollywood can make money based on that demand. Whether or not they could make more money catering to a “white” majority audience, I can’t say because I don’t have data or the ability to analyze that. What I can say is that I many a major Hollywood studio has probably lost more money on films that have catered to the “white” majority then they ever have lost investing in a film that catered to the Asian American audience. That alone should at least prompt Hollywood marketing CEOs to investigate new revenue streams that could be achieved by targeting the AA community. Maybe they already have and decided not to do so. That’s a judgement call. Would I agree with their judgement? Definitely not, and this is where the indie film industry would come in.

I think Hollywood is about as deliberately racist as the fast food industry is deliberately prejudiced against healthy people. But both are plagued with sub-standard mediocrity due to the bottom-line/lowest common denominator mentality. But with movies like “Fast Food Nation” and “Super-Size Me”, fast food industry has become reformed. I dare say McDonald’s is a healthier place to eat now than it was 10 years ago.

Perhaps there needs to be an equivalent of “Super-Size Me” and “Fast Food Nation” for Hollywood itself. Turn the scrutiny of the camera lens of Hollywood on Hollywood itself. But I do not yet see the likes of Michael Moore or Morgan Spurlock arising from Asia-America.

Also, found some interesting comments by David Ren, writer/director of the indie movie “Shanghai Kiss”, on IMDB:

“This biography is completely inaccurate. “Shanghai Kiss” is hardly a “big budget” film and I do not have “bigger budget films on the way”. I do not care about making big films. I only care about telling stories I’m passionate about and my stories tend to have indie sensibilities. ”

“This is David Ren, writer/director of Shanghai Kiss. It’s come to my attention that a DVD Screener copy has leaked onto the internet, which is unfortunate because we are still a month away from release. Since the leak just a few days ago, tens of thousands of people have already downloaded it, which is almost unheard of for a fairly small indie film. While I’m happy that so many people are seeking out the film and enjoying it, I’d like to share my thoughts on the situation.

Shanghai Kiss is an autobiographical story and a film that is very personal to me. Some of you have commented on the lack of Asian male leads in American films that are not in the action/martial arts genre. This is especially true for love stories. This is because Hollywood doesn’t think America is ready to accept an Asian male as a romantic lead.

This film was not financed by a major studio. It wasn’t even financed by an independent financing company. A large portion of the film was financed by a single investor, who put her life savings into the movie. She even sold her house, which she had owned for twenty years. This investor has never made more than five figures a year, but still put in in excess of seven figures. She did this because she felt that this was a story that had to be told and it would be a huge step forward in the way that Asian Americans are portrayed in the media.

Our deal is a royalties deal, meaning the investor gets a percentage of every DVD sold. If this film is a success, Hollywood will take notice and realize that a love story with an Asian male lead could be profitable. If it fails, we could see another twenty years without another film like this. So if you enjoyed it and want more films like it to be made, please support it by purchasing the DVD…..

This is not a film produced to make a lot of money. This is a passion project for, not just me, but everyone involved. The cast worked for almost nothing. Hayden Panettiere’s fee was probably her lowest since she was four years old. She did it because she believed in the movie and knew it was time a story like this was told.

I want to make clear that I’m not asking people to support the film just because of the Asian American cause nor am I trying to guilt people into sales. I’m only asking the people who truly enjoyed it to show Hollywood their support. Movies are greenlit based on the kinds of movies that have been financially successful in the past. I also want them to understand that, in this case, when they are pirating or illegally downloading the movie, they are not taking money from a large faceless corporation, but from a middle class worker like many of us.

Respectfully,
David Ren ”

“I’m glad you loved the film. Now you know what it takes to get an Asian American film made. A lot of people talk about the lack of realistic Asian American representations in the media, but it’s take courageous investors to put their money where their mouth is and change that.

If you want to pursue filmmaking as a career, the easiest way to write a great screenplay. More than that, write one so personal, there is no one else who can direct it but you. Once you are established, you might get offers to do more mainstream Hollywood fare but I believe the first film should always be a personal one. Develop your voice and make sure that voice stands out.

David”

Just some more food for thought on the DIY approach as opposed to begging Hollywood for a bone. It seems like David Ren is stepping up to the plate. I just hope he stays true to what he said about not caring about big budget movies and all. Because really, isn’t it the dream for all indie film people to get recognized at Sundance or Telluride or whatever film festival by the majors? wouldn’t most people jump at the chance to sign with a major studio?

Kobukuson, that’s a great point about the industry needing a “Super Size-Me”, etc. to shine the light on all the outright bigotry and the more subtle forms of “racism” that occur in Hollywood. But like he said, outside of PBS it’s going to be hard to get that message out there. Again I think the whole problem is how the label “racism” is viewed in mainstream society.

“Racism” has been demonized so greatly by the media in mainstream society that people are scared as hell to be racist in anyway shape or form. They’ve seen Don Imus, a famous white male radio host for over 20 years or something like that, lose everything he has in an instant over a simple racist comment. People seeing that think, “man, if that can happen to that guy, I don’t ever want to be caught being caught with a shred of racism”. People are very much on-edge about the issue of racism which is why you can imagine alot of people don’t want to talk about it much less confront it. To them (myself included) we grew up thinking the isssue of being racist was settled simply by how much you tolerated other people unlike yourself in terms of racial appearance. As you grew up a little, you realized that beyond tolerance, it was also a matter of recognizing how certain things like certain words, and stereotypes that could determine your level of racism. And that’s where I think mainstream society is at right now. In that mindset, if you’ve accomplished tolerance and discernment of racist thinking so as not to produce outwardly racist behaviors (this is where the “colorblind” mentatlity comes in) you’ve lived up to society’s expectations regarding racist and can be classified as a non-racist. The fear is gone and you can go about living the rest of your life and facing other challenges.

This is where AA activists see the problem. Racism doesn’t end there. To them, the time has come to broaden that scope of racism to include things like media representation of Asian Americans, the “glass ceiling” etc. However, since the topic of “racism” has been so demonized by the media, to begin to turn the mirror on collective mainstream society is to invite them to see the “evil” in their ways and that is probably TOO HEAVY for society in its current state to handle. If “racism” wasn’t such a demonized issue, I imagine mainstream society would feel alot more comfortable with looking at the issues at hand and be able to cope with the challenges of eliminating “racism” in society and this would actually be much more progressive to achieving gains for minorities.

To sum it up, it’s kinda like a kid playing basketball for the first time. All the kids says he sucks and can’t play ball and he might practice hard to prove them wrong, but he’ll more than likely grow up with a inferiority complex about sports and shy away from ever hitting the court again. Ideally, you’d hope that other kids wouldn’t tell him he sucks, but if you can’t control that, it would be very helpful if there was someone there to back him up and encourage him to keep trying. Mainstream American society doesn’t want to hear that they suck in terms of racial equality, there is NO COUNTRY on Earth that wants to hear that about their own culture, but they DO need to be aware of the issues and somehow get more of a mindset to work towards improving their game.

Now I’m sure there are some people reading this thinking that mainstream America’s limited sense of “racism” is dumb, ignorant, etc. but you gotta remember that it took along time for people to switch over from black and white TVs to color, from analog to digital, from CD players to MP3 players; there are early adopters, the early majority, the late majority, and laggards. People like you are early adopters, I could be more in the early majority, and alot of people are still in the late majority with the KKK and Fox News making up the laggards. Society like Hollywood is massive glacier and does indeed respond to change slowly.

And Mojorider, yes indeed, that was definitely my point about the example of how mechanics in Hollywood could certainly turn even a filmmaker’s work like Justin Lin into something “racist”. The idea being to take the sting out of the faceless label of “racism”. People like myself, Eric, etc. we’re here because like mainstream society, we certainly do not want to be “racist” or produce work that people would consider racist. Now, of course you can’t please everyone, but because we’re here in these AA blogs, we’re interested in how we can put out films that are more sensitive AA issues. Which is why early on, we’ve been struggling to determine exactly what is “racist”, so as to know where to start.

Ed, racism cannot be demonized. If you look up the definition in any dicionary (which I suggest that you do) it is clearly defined as a negative already. Racism deals with the idea that some ethnicies are racially superior to others. Saying that racism has been demonized is like saying that child molesting has been demonized… one can’t demonize the demonic, so to speak.

Also, Don Imus had a loooong record of making racist comments, jokes, and banter, on his show. The problem was that he (and you apparently) had interpreted the fact that he had gotten a pass on it to mean that he had the right to continue doing it in perpetuity without reprecussion. His “nappy-headed ho” comment was simply the last straw in a continuing pattern of racist humor that many minorities have objected to for the entire 20 years he was doing it. And to say that Don “lost everything” is useless hyperbole. Did anyone confiscate his property, liquidate his bank account, or thow him in prison? Did they repossess his car? Don Imus is still a multi-millionaire and doing FAR better than the vast majority of the people whom he has offended.

Imus was not arrested or driven from employment by secret police or a government comission. He was let go because he reached a market tipping point in which his controversial comments began costing his employers more money than it was making for them. Live by the market, die by the market. So please spare the sob story.

Unfortunately, my analogy apparently didn’t communicate the message I was trying to get across. That certainly isn’t the first time that this sort of thing has happened largely because I often try to juggle too many thoughts and probably leave some holes in my examples, but to clarify:

The basketball analogy was not meant to be sob story. It was meant to be an insight as to how mainstream society reacts to thoughts about race and why that reaction can pose challenges to gains for minorities. I do not mean to cast the mainstream societal majority as victims, but in mmy opinion mainstream society often view themselves as powerless victims incapable of change part of which is because they are scared to death to be associated with racism. Thus, they take a defensive approach. It’s a defense mechanism, and it’s trained by the media.

With the Don Imus example, I, like most of mainstream American society, saw a media host’s career go down in flames. If the media doesn’t follow up with a story of how Don Imus is still hot stuff despite losing his show then the interpretation of the story and the moral lesson that the media effectively produced was this: if you are associated with racism you will suffer big consequences. This message is what the media puts out all the time which is why you hear everyone touting “diversity” because what better way to say that you are not racist than to promote that you are the exact opposite. Whether or not that diversity stuff checks out, I’m not going to debate about that. I’m sure most of you agree (myself included), especially in the case of Hollywood, is that it’s bullshit.

“Racism (and I am using that term as a catch all) and institutions can only be fixed if we don’t call out the bullshit and racism that happens. Yeah, that really makes sense dude.”

mT, I didn’t say that (at least I’m clarifying that was not the intended message). If the kid sucks at basketball (racism), the kid needs to be aware of the problem to fix it–period. Now, you can take the heavy-handed approach and call people assholes, idiots, racists, etc. or you can take a different one. So, I’m not saying that problems with racism can only be fixed if people don’t call bring attention to it. I personally agree with a different approach. You may not agree with it, but we’re both still addressing the issue. Case in point with films, I don’t get all crazy slamming blogs about how racist it is to cast a white dude as the lead in the new Airbender movie, instead, I work on my script casting two Pacific islanders as leads in an action-adventure movie. Both forms of activity work towards addressing an issue of media representation of minorities. Some like it hot, but I personally cannot sustain being “angry” all the time like alot of the AA activists here encourage because anger doesn’t work for me.

King, I see your point. I would certainly agree that you need the carrot and the stick approach. Different situations require different ways of handling for the best outcome, I am just personally more of the carrot approach when it comes to the world of media and film. That “carrot” approach would be the indie film approach that we’ve been discussing.

At SFSU, professors greatly emphasized how the protests and riots of the 60s led to the creation of the Ethnic Studies department both on that campus and across the nation. Certainly this would be a great example of how the stick approach yielded excellent gains for minorities.

Just a little perspective on the much-promoted idea that Hollywood doesn’t really see Black, White, Yellow, or Brown, and is really only in it for the green.

Allow me to offer you an example of how what seems to make good economic sense doesn’t always actually happen when it comes to race and long standing prejudices.

You may, or may not, know that in the mid-1990s, African-descended women first began to make inroads into the ranks of supermodel level high-fashion. They had been introduced in the 1970s but the 1990s was to be their ascendancy as supermodels. Now, this may sound a bit odd to some, but there was a very real worry in high-fashion that this simply would not work. Of course, it wasn’t that the liberal and open-minded fashion industry was bigoted!! — it’s just that OTHER people wouldn’t buy clothes off the backs of black models! So, you see, the industry was just protecting their investment.

But Wow—it did work.
Black supermodels soon emerged and became every bit as famous, as sought after, and as glamorous as their White counterparts. Models like:

Iman
http://thecomebackgirl.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/iman1.jpg

and Naomi
http://www.artfagcity.com/wordpress_core/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/naomi-campbell_195597g.jpg

and Tyra
http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w108/chabao1/TyraBanks009.jpg

very quickly proved that non-white women (and Black is about as non-White as you can get) could bee seen as beautiful, could do the job of supermodel, and could sell products. BUT as the nineties ended, Black models literally went out of style, and the percentages of African-descended models on the runways has taken a dramtic plunge since the turn of the century, even though no one disputes that the Black supermodel “experiment” worked.

So… in july of 2008, partly in protest of the lack of Black models represented in high-fashion, Vogue Italia decided to dedicate a “Black issue” exclusively to African-descended models. It was release in July 2008 and immediately sold out (even though July is traditionally a very slow month for fashion mag. sales). Therefore, for the first time in Vogue history, they had to reprint an edition due to the incredible demand.

http://www.wowowow.com/post/all-black-italian-vogue-flies-newsstands-68869

http://www.foliomag.com/2008/all-black-italian-vogue-s-white-hot-newsstand

http://adage.com/bigtent/post?article_id=129759

So now that it’s almost a year later, you might think that things might be changing in the high-fashion industry. They haven’t. Instead of trending toward a more diverse showing of models including all groups (which the evidence suggests would not only make more sense, but more money) the fashion industry has fallen back on a bevy of very pale, very blonde, and very thin girls of mostly slavic ethnicity, almost exclusively.

QUIZ QUESTIONS:

1) Is this really just about money?
2) Is Hollywood any more honest with itself than the fashion industry?
3) Why don’t White models ever “go out of style?”
4) Is it possible to create a demand with heavy marketing and then just “respond to the market” that you created?

Worth thinking about.

Yes, and where, pray tell, are the Asian supermodels? At this point, the fasion industries in China, Japan, S. Korea, and Hong Kong, are major contributors of both markets and money. Are there really not enough Asian women buying Prada to at least warrant a little more exposure on the runways of Milan and Paris? Should the models reflect, even to a small degree, the women who actually purchase the products?

What’s wrong with using Asian women as supermodels in the west? They have certainly been exotified enough, given all the rice chasing that’s going on. You can’t argue that they don’t represent a large enough market… there are even more Asians in the world than their are Whites. You can’t argue that Asian’s can’t afford to buy the products, at least based on the wealth statistics. So why do the high-fashion runways look like this?

http://images.nymag.com/images/2/daily/2009/03/20090303_models_560×375.jpg

One of many articles on the subject.
http://www.nydailynews.com/lifestyle/2008/02/10/2008-02-10_fashion_week_runways_lacked_minorities.html

Again, I ask, is this really all about making money, or are there deeper, and more tribal instincts playing out here?

I personally don’t believe that Hollywood is any different.

Oops. I think I’m off. A mannequin is actually a real person, right? I guess I learn something new every day.

@King - wow, excellent points there. It certainly bolsters the factual statement that Hollywood is a racist entity. I just don’t entirely agree with the argument that Eric Jacobus proposes that it’s all about free market forces. If you control the media, you control what gets seen and you don’t have to care about the demand from the consumers. If they did, then the major studios would be pumping out original screenplays instead of retreads of old hits, eg, The Heartbreak Kid, The Bad News Bears, Taking of Pelham 1,2,3, and endless sequels.

@Gailyip - thanks for the link and your insights. Yeah, I’m not into the censorship and regulation of artistic endeavors either, but you’re right: the MPAA, meetings held in secrecy and unknown board members, is the agent of censorship and I fully agree that it puts a stranglehold on indie films that dare to be edgier or unconventional. Isn’t the kiss of death to be NR? Because the indie film maker now has the trouble of finding distribution for a NR labeled movie!

@mojorider Yes, anything that potentially harms your distribution is the kiss of death in film.

Being unrated and having a theatrical run just doesn’t happen anymore. And theatrical runs are like a ‘promo’ trailer for the DVD sales (which is where the industry really makes its money). So having your movie released without a big theatrical run is like releasing any product without any kind of real mainstream promotion. Unless you’re one of these grassroots guys who has the smarts and the skills to find and generate your audience to make your money back? You’re fucked.

And some places like Wal-Mart, well, if you’re not distributed by a major American company and you don’t have a rating? You don’t get into Wal-Mart (or in some cases Blockbuster, etc). And because Wal-Mart has made itself the ‘only show in town’ for tons of small-towns and small cities across America? Boom. There’s a huge core group of your audience gutted in a single blow. This is why the music industry allowed in those ‘Warning’ stickers. It was for the EXACT same reason as the MPAA, so that the big distributors could use a censor-style loophole to kneecap the small guys while appeasing the outraged soccer moms. And that’s exactly what they’ve done. It allows groups like Wal-Mart to dictate to the consumer and the audience at large, what they should be able to watch and listen to, while eliminating and absorbing the competition.

That’s the real reason why you got people in the film and music industry constantly complaining about the internet, because its shot their whole system to shit. Online a couple of guys doing a web comic like Penny Arcade can have as much promotional power as Marvel comics! Tila Tequila who’s a small Asian model, got a TV deal, and was on the cover of tons of mainstream magazines that had NEVER put an Asian on the cover, EVER. Why? The internet. So people telling you that you can’t make change, that change is impossible, or that it we can’t create a demand for Asian American films, music, etc? Are full of shit. And nobody can tell me that there’s no audience for Asian action heroes or Asian leads. Akira Toriyama and Masashi Kishimoto have made billions of dollars and broken tons of cable network ratings and sales records by promoting Asian heroes in comic books and anime to a predominately white culture.

Eric’s right that the system is glacial when it comes to change, but a large part of that is middle management attempting to justify their jobs, often at the expense of the artist’s work. If you want a really interesting insight on big budget filmmaking rent Ryûhei Kitamura’s Midnight Meat Train. There’s an awesome commentary track on that DVD where Kitamura (who speaks perfect English and is incredibly well spoken) and Clive Barker go into painstaking details about how the modern big studios work and how inner-politics basically eviscerated their horror film.

@ Gailyip, No, my bad! I didn’t mean to come off as adversarial to your position, I meant to agree with you. We both think that it’s a ridiculous excuse.