A presumably black guy is telling me, an Asian guy, how to feel about how Asian men, and Asian women by extension, are represented in media. What would you call that?
If you need me to quantify and qualify the Asian experience, the difference in the Asian-American experience will be lost on you, judging from your question.
No, I'm questioning why
1. A story about excess and rich people is inherently a "white" story, and
2. A story not uniquely specific to Asian Americans, but predominantly featuring Asian Americans, would be bad representation
You're using the fact you're presumably Asian to deflect from answering either question. I'm not saying you should just support any Asian media for the sake of it, even if it looks/turns out shitty. I don't think I'm asking tough questions to answer considering you feel strongly about both of those points
To be fair, they're not the first to make that criticism:
Alfian Sa'at, a Singaporean poet and playwright, commented on the film's title referring to it as "Crazy Rich EAST Asians", further adding "Does a win for representation mean replacing white people with white people wannabes?"
That's just ridiculous though. Why does it need to be qualified by adding East? And to the last part, are they suggesting that to be exuberantly rich is simply to be white people wannabes?
Sometimes I wonder exactly what it is some people actually want.
I swear, it's like some of you weren't around for All American Girl.
Funny, I thought we were discussing the movie and not the book in this thread. You said it yourself: the movie is an adaptation. We'll see how much when it's released.
HAHAHA...are you trying to shame me into supporting this movie or something? I couldn't care less that it centers on the experience of an Asian woman. I enjoyed the hell out of Joy Luck Club when it came out and all the movies Gong Li were in, but I can still recognize how problematic JLC is when it comes to reinforcing Asian male stereotypes. Can I enjoy Fresh Off the Boat while understanding that it's problematic as well or should Eddie Huang be blasted for not liking it for the same reasons?
From what I see in the trailers, CRA isn't any better in that regard except for the boyfriend, who is perfection personified while juxtaposed with Ken Jeong yet again playing another minstrel. Should I support Esther Ku too because her comedy is based on her experience? Or Chinese Burn? Every big movie in the West that features Asians is almost always centered on Asian women who are allowed to be 3 dimensional. That's a systemic issue I'm allowed to speak out against.
Yeah, it's so Asian that it's constantly barraging us with being th Asian version of something white in the trailers. And so what if it is some personal and seemingly arbitrary benchmark? I don't have to support something just because it's Asian and that's not a bad thing.
I would be ecstatic if I was proven wrong when the movie's out. Until then, no thanks.
I think the problem with your comments in this thread has been that you've been throwing out general criticisms about how Asians have been misrepresented and how this movie continues that trend despite appearing to be a movie with an Asian story, written by, directed by, and starring Asian people, without elaborating how the film is actually being misrepresentative.
I mean, this movie appears to deliver a lot of what minorities have asked for in regard to representation in Hollywood - a film where Asians are the stars in roles where they aren't just there for their stereotypical Asianness - they're not just brainy nerds, kungfu masters, punchlines or sidekicks. And yet, for some reason, you believe this is not the movie we asked for, this is merely another caricature, sold to the majority white masses. I don't get it.
But I think I now do. I think the crux of your anger is centred on representation of the Asian man and then extending that out to Asian representation as a whole. Granted, I don't see the same problems with that representation in this film, much like I don't see how your other complaints about it screaming out its Asianness in the trailer. Maybe I should watch the trailers again and keep an eye out for Ken Jeong.
I think you should be mindful not to project what you feel are problems about representation of the Asian man into wild and seemingly unfounded accusations against the film. Personally, I found the trailer to be a bit boring but the trailer may be misleading and the film may be good. But I didn't see how your criticisms matched what I saw in the trailer. We'll see.
That's just ridiculous though. Why does it need to be qualified by adding East? And to the last part, are they suggesting that to be exuberantly rich is simply to be white people wannabes?
Sometimes I wonder exactly what it is some people actually want.
The criticism is in context from a Singaporean's lens.
"Others expressed disappointment in the film's lack of ethnic South and Southeast Asians, Golding being an exception. Kirsten Han, a Singaporean freelance writer, said that it "obscur[ed] the Malay, Indian, and Eurasian (and more) populations who make the country the culturally rich and unique place that it is." Many were critical towards the omission of the country's indigenous Malays and of Indians—the second and third largest ethnic groups in the country, respectively—thus not representing Singapore accurately. As Han points out: [The film is] touted as a win for representation in the U.S. because of its stated goal to have an all-Asian cast, but the focus is specifically on characters and faces of East Asian descent...Ironically, in Singapore, [director] Chu's all-Asian boast is nothing more than a perpetuation of the existing Chinese dominance in mainstream media and pop culture."
Ian Chong, a political scientist at the National University of Singapore, noted "It represents the worst of Singapore. Erases minorities. Erases the poor and marginalized. All you get are rich, privileged ethnic Chinese.
Some commenters criticized the film's use of British and American English over that of Singlish"
Ordinary chick (relatively ordinary) meets magical perfect partner, has to figure shit out with (disapproving) family/loved ones/etc, all works out in the end.
Really I resent how so many rom coms have the chick marrying into unbelievable wealth, and having that be such a large part of the fantasy (in 50 shades the main character is given a laptop, car, etc, and same in twilight).
I honestly wish there were more messages, not of your life being fixed when you meet your prince charming (who takes care of you for the rest of your life). Just more movies that didn't glorify/worship wealth.
Like, I enjoy The Crown because we see the struggles and life of a female ruler. Wealth is inherent but not worshipped. It's more about a woman who tries her best to live up to the pressure of being the queen. I wish there were more stories like that, rather than... this. But, it's based on a popular novel, and popular novels are often wish fulfillment.
You're trying to gaslight and scold me about how I, as an Asian man, shouldn't have a problem with how I'm represented in media? And then you go on to say that yellow face on a typically white story is a win?
See, you keep calling this yellow face on a typically white story without elaborating why that is the case. Are Asians not allowed to make a story about a woman who's suddenly thrust into the world of the ludicriously rich? Would you have a problem with that story if this was an Asian film rather than a Hollywood one?
Personally, I think calling this a white story is borderline offensive as it perpetuates the stereotype that white is the default, and everything else is an anomaly.
On the flipside, what, to you, is an acceptable Asian story? Does it have to be uniquely Asian? Because most stories, at their core, tend to have some sort of universal appeal.
Ordinary chick (relatively ordinary) meets magical perfect partner, has to figure shit out with (disapproving) family/loved ones/etc, all works out in the end.
Really I resent how so many rom coms have the chick marrying into unbelievable wealth.
The criticism is in context from a Singaporean's lens.
"Others expressed disappointment in the film's lack of ethnic South and Southeast Asians, Golding being an exception. Kirsten Han, a Singaporean freelance writer, said that it "obscur[ed] the Malay, Indian, and Eurasian (and more) populations who make the country the culturally rich and unique place that it is." Many were critical towards the omission of the country's indigenous Malays and of Indians—the second and third largest ethnic groups in the country, respectively—thus not representing Singapore accurately. As Han points out: [The film is] touted as a win for representation in the U.S. because of its stated goal to have an all-Asian cast, but the focus is specifically on characters and faces of East Asian descent...Ironically, in Singapore, [director] Chu's all-Asian boast is nothing more than a perpetuation of the existing Chinese dominance in mainstream media and pop culture."
Ian Chong, a political scientist at the National University of Singapore, noted "It represents the worst of Singapore. Erases minorities. Erases the poor and marginalized. All you get are rich, privileged ethnic Chinese.
Some commenters criticized the film's use of British and American English over that of Singlish"
I think that's a fair criticism of the film from a Singaporean perspective.
I don't know much about the makeup of the Singaporean elite, so I don't know how representative this film is about it, but I think it's fair to say I'm not surprised the the film doesn't delve into Singaporean society at large.
In any case, I don't think this is the same criticism that Sparda has of the film.
I think that's a fair criticism of the film from a Singaporean perspective.
I don't know much about the makeup of the Singaporean elite, so I don't know how representative this film is about it, but I think it's fair to say I'm not surprised the the film doesn't delve into Singaporean society at large.
In any case, I don't think this is the same criticism that Sparda has of the film.
Ordinary chick (relatively ordinary) meets magical perfect partner, has to figure shit out with (disapproving) family/loved ones/etc, all works out in the end.
Really I resent how so many rom coms have the chick marrying into unbelievable wealth, and having that be such a large part of the fantasy (in 50 shades the main character is given a laptop, car, etc, and same in twilight).
I honestly wish there were more messages, not of your life being fixed when you meet your prince charming (who takes care of you for the rest of your life). Just more movies that didn't glorify/worship wealth.
Like, I enjoy The Crown because we see the struggles and life of a female ruler. Wealth is inherent but not worshipped. It's more about a woman who tries her best to live up to the pressure of being the queen. I wish there were more stories like that, rather than... this. But, it's based on a popular novel, and popular novels are often wish fulfillment.
I sometimes can't tell when one ends and the other begin because it always involves a single working Mother finding love with a young handsome heir to a Super rich business company who must endure endless criticism and humiliation from the family to prove her worth to get the happy ending.
...for th record I didn't watch any of them I just glance over my mom's shoulder when she does and picked up some details (030)~ that's my official statement
I sometimes can't tell when one ends and the other begin because it always involves a single working Mother finding love with a young handsome heir to a Super rich business company who must endure endless criticism and humiliation from the family to prove her worth to get the happy ending.
Baffles me that people recognize this movie as looking like dogshit, but they still have to "support" it because of the cast. About as clueless as people dogging on Facebook, but are still using WhatsApp and Instagram.
People need to stop taking half-measures on what they believe in, for fucks sake.
Asians shouldn't create or participate in a movie unless they are absolutely, positively sure that it will win 100% Rotten Tomatoes ratings and win Oscars left and right.
I sometimes can't tell when one ends and the other begin because it always involves a single working Mother finding love with a young handsome heir to a Super rich business company who must endure endless criticism and humiliation from the family to prove her worth to get the happy ending.
...for th record I didn't watch any of them I just glance over my mom's shoulder when she does and picked up some details (030)~ that's my official statement
I sometimes can't tell when one ends and the other begin because it always involves a single working Mother finding love with a young handsome heir to a Super rich business company who must endure endless criticism and humiliation from the family to prove her worth to get the happy ending.
...for th record I didn't watch any of them I just glance over my mom's shoulder when she does and picked up some details (030)~ that's my official statement
Yep. & is it any wonder than so many East Asian countries don't have the best reputation when it comes to women marrying for material goods (cough China house and car) and a crazy pressure on superficial shit (cough Korea plastic surgery).
I think the problem with your comments in this thread has been that you've been throwing out general criticisms about how Asians have been misrepresented and how this movie continues that trend despite appearing to be a movie with an Asian story, written by, directed by, and starring Asian people, without elaborating how the film is actually being misrepresentative.
I mean, this movie appears to deliver a lot of what minorities have asked for in regard to representation in Hollywood - a film where Asians are the stars in roles where they aren't just there for their stereotypical Asianness - they're not just brainy nerds, kungfu masters, punchlines or sidekicks. And yet, for some reason, you believe this is not the movie we asked for, this is merely another caricature, sold to the majority white masses. I don't get it.
But I think I now do. I think the crux of your anger is centred on representation of the Asian man and then extending that out to Asian representation as a whole. Granted, I don't see the same problems with that representation in this film, much like I don't see how your other complaints about it screaming out its Asianness in the trailer. Maybe I should watch the trailers again and keep an eye out for Ken Jeong.
I think you should be mindful not to project what you feel are problems about representation of the Asian man into wild and seemingly unfounded accusations against the film. Personally, I found the trailer to be a bit boring but the trailer may be misleading and the film may be good. But I didn't see how your criticisms matched what I saw in the trailer. We'll see.
First off, thank you for actually reading and trying to genuinely see it from my perspective.
It's not about the film being misrepresentative though. It's about poor representation in it's marketing. We only have the trailers to go off of and I see and hear the same dogwhistles from the last 30 years since I've been aware of them. Imagine if every black movie was like a Tyler Perry movie. If you like those types of movies, good on you, but that shit would get old quick if you want something more.
I'm going to segue a bit and talk about Justin Lin's Star Trek Beyond for a bit and how it relates to representation in relation to another character in the trailer.
There was a pretty big debate on Sulu being gay in it and I wasn't happy about it, not because gay people are gross(they aren't), but because that's just another example of a gay Asian man on screen because an Asian man being with any woman is considered taboo. What didn't connect for me was that Asian men in the gay community suffer from serious fetishization and discrimination ie rice queens. So seeing Sulu with a physically strong looking Asian male partner and happy Asian daughter is actually a revolutionary act that a vast majority of people would miss. It's so subtly subversive and Lin put a few things like that in the movie too. It took a while for me to actually understand it because it required me to learn more about racism in the gay community first. How does that relate to CRA you might ask? Well, there's a character that looks like Just Another Gay Asian caricature in the trailer. Honestly, I love BD Wong's work because he broke so much ground without making a career out of being a walking talking stereotype gay and/or Asian, but based on the trailers, CRA seems to just pile on tropes and stereotypes little by little. That's just the tip of the iceberg and this forum, or thread for that matter, isn't a good space to do Asians in the Media 101.
I'm not making mindless accusations; I'm pointing out patterns that have played out time and time again for at least 30 years. If the trailers are misrepresenting the movie, then good. I'd be more than happy to eat shit on this one and do it gladly. But if it's doing it to put white asses in seats, then it's a serious problem.
See, you keep calling this yellow face on a typically white story without elaborating why that is the case. Are Asians not allowed to make a story about a woman who's suddenly thrust into the world of the ludicriously rich? Would you have a problem with that story if this was an Asian film rather than a Hollywood one?
Personally, I think calling this a white story is borderline offensive as it pervades the stereotype that white is the default, and everything else is an anomaly.
On the flipside, what, to you, is an acceptable Asian story? Does it have to be uniquely Asian? Because most stories, at their core, tend to have some sort of universal appeal.
I'm glad you think it's offensive because that's the point! No matter how hard we try, we still can't escape the fact that whiteness is the default. That's the reality whether we like it or not and that's how the movie seems to be marketed. Rosanne made a comment along the lines of "they're just like us" when referring to Blackish and Fresh Off the Boat in a condescending way and it was pretty damning not only because it was dismissive, but because it also inadvertently pulled the curtain to show us the hidden slaughterhouse of those shows. "Just like us" is the draw, but "us" is really white people. That's why Eddie Huang shits on his own show.
There's no such thing as a perfect movie with perfect representation, but with the way the movie is marketed, it's pretty far from the mark and we haven't even really addressed feminism, classism, and inter-ethnic conflicts.
An example of a good uniquely Asian movie? Harold and Kumar go to Whitecastle. Wrapped up in a superficial stoner movie is something actually authentic to the Asian-American male experience and pretty subversive as well. It's a very political movie. However, acceptability(a strong word to use) is upto the viewer and I'm not going to shit on anyone that doesn't like it or doesn't want to support it. It's far from perfect of course and has it's own issues with how women are portrayed.
Oh and for those holding their breath for a list, here it is:
I am not your mule.
If you're asking for proof of something that's understood like the pervasiveness of white as normal, then you're not arguing in good faith.
Yep. & is it any wonder than so many East Asian countries don't have the best reputation when it comes to women marrying for material goods (cough China house and car) and a crazy pressure on superficial shit (cough Korea plastic surgery).
Class-ism is something that hits me hard because I actually come from poor families. Many Chinese immigrants I've met are super low-key and modest, but there's always that pressure to "marry up".
From some POVs, I really do get it since many families come from poor socioeconomic backgrounds. But it shouldn't be the only factor -- love should, ideally, factor in somewhere, right?
First off, thank you for actually reading and trying to genuinely see it from my perspective.
It's not about the film being misrepresentative though. It's about poor representation in it's marketing. We only have the trailers to go off of and I see and hear the same dogwhistles from the last 30 years since I've been aware of them. Imagine if every black movie was like a Tyler Perry movie. If you like those types of movies, good on you, but that shit would get old quick if you want something more.
I'm going to segue a bit and talk about Justin Lin's Star Trek Beyond for a bit and how it relates to representation in relation to another character in the trailer.
There was a pretty big debate on Sulu being gay in it and I wasn't happy about it, not because gay people are gross(they aren't), but because that's just another example of a gay Asian man on screen because an Asian man being with any woman is considered taboo. What didn't connect for me was that Asian men in the gay community suffer from serious fetishization and discrimination ie rice queens. So seeing Sulu with a physically strong looking Asian male partner and happy Asian daughter is actually a revolutionary act that a vast majority of people would miss. It's so subtly subversive and Lin put a few things like that in the movie too. It took a while for me to actually understand it because it required me to learn more about racism in the gay community first. How does that relate to CRA you might ask? Well, there's a character that looks like Just Another Gay Asian caricature in the trailer. Honestly, I love BD Wong's work because he broke so much ground without making a career out of being a walking talking stereotype gay and/or Asian, but based on the trailers, CRA seems to just pile on tropes and stereotypes little by little. That's just the tip of the iceberg and this forum, or thread for that matter, isn't a good space to do Asians in the Media 101.
I'm not making mindless accusations; I'm pointing out patterns that have played out time and time again for at least 30 years. If the trailers are misrepresenting the movie, then good. I'd be more than happy to eat shit on this one and do it gladly. But if it's doing it to put white asses in seats, then it's a serious problem.
I'm glad you think it's offensive because that's the point! No matter how hard we try, we still can't escape the fact that whiteness is the default. That's the reality whether we like it or not and that's how the movie seems to be marketed. Rosanne made a comment along the lines of "they're just like us" when referring to Blackish and Fresh Off the Boat in a condescending way and it was pretty damning not only because it was dismissive, but because it also inadvertently pulled the curtain to show us the hidden slaughterhouse of those shows. "Just like us" is the draw, but "us" is really white people. That's why Eddie Huang shits on his own show.
There's no such thing as a perfect movie with perfect representation, but with the way the movie is marketed, it's pretty far from the mark and we haven't even really addressed feminism, classism, and inter-ethnic conflicts.
An example of a good uniquely Asian movie? Harold and Kumar go to Whitecastle. Wrapped up in a superficial stoner movie is something actually authentic to the Asian-American male experience and pretty subversive as well. It's a very political movie. However, acceptability(a strong word to use) is upto the viewer and I'm not going to shit on anyone that doesn't like it or doesn't want to support it. It's far from perfect of course and has it's own issues with how women are portrayed.[/SPOILER]
Fair enough, I found it hard to judge the film, including it's portrayal of the men in it from the trailer alone, so I'll reserve my judgment. I am genuinely excited about how this will turn out despite not being that impressed with the trailer.
There was a pretty big debate on Sulu being gay in it and I wasn't happy about it, not because gay people are gross(they aren't), but because that's just another example of a gay Asian man on screen because an Asian man being with any woman is considered taboo. What didn't connect for me was that Asian men in the gay community suffer from serious fetishization and discrimination ie rice queens. So seeing Sulu with a physically strong looking Asian male partner and happy Asian daughter is actually a revolutionary act that a vast majority of people would miss. It's so subtly subversive and Lin put a few things like that in the movie too. It took a while for me to actually understand it because it required me to learn more about racism in the gay community first. How does that relate to CRA you might ask? Well, there's a character that looks like Just Another Gay Asian caricature in the trailer. Honestly, I love BD Wong's work because he broke so much ground without making a career out of being a walking talking stereotype gay and/or Asian, but based on the trailers, CRA seems to just pile on tropes and stereotypes little by little. That's just the tip of the iceberg and this forum, or thread for that matter, isn't a good space to do Asians in the Media 101.
i was reading about this film today and apparently Jon Chu convinced Wu to excise the dialogue where Rachel talks about her "no Asian guys" policy.
in the book, this comes up when Sylvia tries to set Rachel up with Nick while obscuring that he's Asian...because Rachel has a "no asian guys" policy. Rachel even rolls her eyes and looks away when Sylvia tells her that Nick is Asian. Sylvia accuses her of being a self-loathing asian (although Sylvia married a white guy too). Rachel explains her distaste for Asian guys because ever since she hit puberty, asian men check her out creepily and test her social resume to see if she would be a suitable wife/mother.
Even though an asian american man wrote the book, he sure could have fooled me...
at least Chu knows better than to include this kind of self-hating asian bullshit in the film. i'm all for asian american representation in western media -- we all know about the history of asian men in western media, especially film/tv, they are typically weak, effeminate, -- they're the nerd, the sidekick, never the leading man, unworthy of female attention. the scene i describe above is consistent with that kind of portrayal, arguably even worse because an asian american man wrote it.
i was reading about this film today and apparently Jon Chu convinced Wu to excise the dialogue where Rachel talks about her "no Asian guys" policy.
in the book, this comes up when Sylvia tries to set Rachel up with Nick while obscuring that he's Asian...because Rachel has a "no asian guys" policy. Rachel even rolls her eyes and looks away when Sylvia tells her that Nick is Asian. Sylvia accuses her of being a self-loathing asian (although Sylvia married a white guy too). Rachel explains her distaste for Asian guys because ever since she hit puberty, asian men check her out creepily and test her social resume to see if she would be a suitable wife/mother.
Even though an asian american man wrote the book, he sure could have fooled me...
at least Chu knows better than to include this kind of self-hating asian bullshit in the film. i'm all for asian american representation in western media -- we all know about the history of asian men in western media, especially film/tv, they are typically weak, effeminate, -- they're the nerd, the sidekick, never the leading man, unworthy of female attention. the scene i describe above is consistent with that kind of portrayal, arguably even worse because an asian american man wrote it.
i don't have a problem with a portrayal of asian-american women who choose to only date white men. to deny that this happens is to ignore reality. out-marriage rates for asian-american women, especially to white men, have only been increasing for the past few decades -- what's interesting is that it's so much higher than out-marriage rates for asian-american men. there are probably a multitude of reasons for this disparity, with no conclusive answer, but i'd venture to say it wouldn't surprise me if fetishization of asian women and emasculation/invisibility of asian men in western media have something to do with it.
i disagree that this is really an exposure. the author works hard to explain why Rachel's distaste for asian men is justified in her eyes-- basically, she dated some bad asian men plus that whole leering + wife/mother resume evaluation thing i mentioned above, which if Rachel is to be believed, simply spreads harmful stereotypes of Asian men.
but as i said, good thing jon chu convinced wu to cut this part of the book out.
i don't have a problem with a portrayal of asian-american women who choose to only date white men. to deny that this happens is to ignore reality. out-marriage rates for asian-american women, especially to white men, have only been increasing for the past few decades -- what's interesting is that it's so much higher than out-marriage rates for asian-american men. there are probably a multitude of reasons for this disparity, with no conclusive answer, but i'd venture to say it wouldn't surprise me if fetishization of asian women and emasculation/invisibility of asian men in western media have something to do with it.
i disagree that this is really an exposure. the author works hard to explain why Rachel's distaste for asian men is justified in her eyes-- basically, she dated some bad asian men plus that whole leering + wife/mother resume evaluation thing i mentioned above, which if Rachel is to be believed, simply spreads harmful stereotypes of Asian men.
but as i said, good thing jon chu convinced wu to cut this part of the book out.
I really don't think it would've been bad had they left it in the movie because it has an ALL asian cast, therefore you can have all types and various Asian characters with different mindsets that shows actual issues in Asian communities without it standing out as opposed if she was the only Asian Character in a predominately White cast that only dated White guys.
Everyone was on the lookout for potential blind spots and cultural cliches. Wu convinced Chu to remove dialogue from the book wherein Rachel boasts about never dating Asian men. Yeoh, touring Eleanor's kitchen set, pointed the finger at a packet of MSG. "You can't have that on the table!" she exclaimed, but Chu reassured her that no one would notice. (She was later vindicated when the director sent a snapshot of the pair on set to his father — owner of the deceptively old-school Silicon Valley power spot Chef Chu's — who ignored the film icon next to his son and instead complained about the MSG in the background.)
yes you're right. wu is responsible for nixing the dialogue, not chu. i read it off a blog that mixed it up, but the hollywood reporter has to be the blog's source
