Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Red Bones
Aug 9, 2012

"I think he's a bad enough person to stay ghost through his sheer love of child-killing."

Comrade Fakename posted:

That's true, and I do wish that the debate would stick to this central, actually relevant point, instead of allowing outrage to spread into increasingly tenuous arguments around it - "Hollywood's trying to CGI out all asians!", "For some reason, changing the location of a fictional story is immoral now!"

But while I can understand that it can be frustrating to see a character who's originally asian played by a white lady, it seems to me to be more an artifact of the adaption process. If GITS was Western, and Kusanagi was always Japanese-American, then there's no doubt that this would be terrible whitewashing. But since GITS was about a group of all Japanese people, in Japan, any adaptation for a Western audience was going to involve changing either the location or the characters or both. And in that instance, why shouldn't it be Kusanagi who changes, rather than, say Aramaki, who is being played by an actual Japanese person.

So, while it's a pity that another big film is coming out without an asian lead, it seems odd to single out GITS for that.

I don't think GITS is being singled out, honestly. The discourse on media representation has become a lot more public and widespread in the last five or so years, and this discussion happens pretty much every time any reasonably large media property whitewashes roles or perpetuates racist ideas instead of taking an opportunity to push for change. It was literally happening last week with Doctor Strange. If it seems like it's being singled out, it's usually just because smaller media properties receive less notice, so you're less likely to hear the stink being kicked up about them.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Red Bones
Aug 9, 2012

"I think he's a bad enough person to stay ghost through his sheer love of child-killing."

icantfindaname posted:

That twitter guy's argument is especially hilarious because the opinion of the Japanese left, people like Miyazaki, etc, has always been that technology and industry are terrible because of their intimate connection to the WW2 era Japanese military-industrial complex. The entire point of Akira is that cyberpunk Japan is evil and that the technology is a monster that is sacrificing the Japanese people on an altar of authoritarian military-industry

So yeah, he is actually implicitly endorsing the worldview of the Japanese right by saying that cyberpunk land is the true essence of Japanese-ness and by extension Asian-ness

I don't think he's endorsing technology as being great and the essence of Japanese-ness. He says that the story is built upon Japan's "unique" nature as (circa late 20th century) a country that is intensely pacifist and antimilitary, but also a world leader in technology. I'm not sure if that "unique" perspective point is entirely true, but I think it's a valid read (although I think he's talking more about the manga/anime, because I've only seen the film and the film is mostly about existentialism and cyborgs rather than geopolitics).

To be honest, America already made a very culturally specific American film in the late 20th century about a future of existentialism and cyborgs, so I think that another one is pretty unnecessary.

  • Locked thread