Forum - View topic

NEWS: Hollywood Reporter: Live-Action Akira Film's Production Shut Down

I do agree with your post. Well at least Akira is put away for a while. I was a little concerned with the casting and even if they did make a movie inspired by Akira, it would still get flak. To answer your question, well many reason as in attachment, changes that don't make any sense, and the one that piss me off: pro-asian/pro-Japanese supremacist trolling. This is just like how people complain when US remake Japanese (or Asian) film, but yet they don't complain about when Asia remake American film like this one for example. I've never heard any complaint from the same group of people that yap about American remaking Asian film making complaints about Japan or Asia remaking American film, they either keep quiet or sometime praise Asia for remaking American film (and they will bash the original American film).

The fact is everybody keeps bashing it because mainly of one thing and that ticks me off to no end"GOKU IS NOT AMERICAN HE'S JAPANESE" THAT BASHING ON DBE NEEDS TO FREAKING STOP! Goku is neither Japanese or American....HE IS A DAMN ALIEN,WE ALL KNOW THIS...A ALIEN THAT LOOKS GOD DAMN HUMANOID AND NOTHING MORE so when ever somebody makes a Dragon Ball film Goku...depending on where the film was made....is a different nationality because HE IS AN FREAKING ALIEN...

mdo7,

Quote:

I do agree with your post. Well at least Akira is put away for a while. I was a little concerned with the casting and even if they did make a movie inspired by Akira, it would still get flak. To answer your question, well many reason as in attachment, changes that don't make any sense, and the one that piss me off: pro-asian/pro-Japanese supremacist trolling. This is just like how people complain when US remake Japanese (or Asian) film, but yet they don't complain about when Asia remake American film like this one for example. I've never heard any complaint from the same group of people that yap about American remaking Asian film making complaints about Japan or Asia remaking American film, they either keep quiet or sometime praise Asia for remaking American film (and they will bash the original American film).

Why are you using arguments that I have already debunked before when we engaged in a discussion more than a month ago?

Here is that thread: animenewsnetwork.com/bbs/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1641444#1641444

I have corrected your erroneous arguments as it can be clearly seen there but you come a month later and post the same erroneous arguments as if no one will notice.

Acknowledge your mistakes and learn from them. Otherwise you are being childish.[/u]

Because I like to point that out. If you don't like my view that's fine but don't take your previous argument and put it here.

I'm sorry but that isn't a good enough argument to justify the white wash casting of Dragon Ball Evolution. Superman is also an Alien but has always been played by white men. Goku is an alien but is meant to look like an Asian man no different how Superman is an alien but is meant to look like a white man. Goku should have and should be played by an actor of Asian decent.

This isn't about opinions. This isn't like if we were disagreeing about a certain movie. You wrote comments that you thought were facts but were in fact incorrect and I have corrected them.

You repeated them again as if they were still correct and I am sorry to say that a month later those comments are still wrong.

Again, acknowledge your mistakes and learn from them.

No I agreed with Kibaman 21

Goku is from an alien planet. How do you know if he should be cast Asian or white? It didn't say what outlook he is in the anime or the manga.

So you accuise Hollywood of whitewash. I recall you said that the Hollywood version of Starship Troopers they whitewash Johnny Rico (well in the movie, he's Argentine when in the novel he's Fillipino). Are you going to accuse of Japan of doing this also, because did you know the 1988 anime OVA had Johnny Rico being a blonde argentine (just like in the movie) also and this predate the Hollywood version, so shouldn't you accuse the Japanese of doing the same thing.

Quote:

So you accuise Hollywood of whitewash. I recall you said that the Hollywood version of Starship Troopers they whitewash Johnny Rico (well in the movie, he's Argentine when in the novel he's Fillipino). Are you going to accuse of Japan of doing this also, because did you know the 1988 anime OVA had Johnny Rico being a blonde argentine (just like in the movie) also and this predate the Hollywood version, so shouldn't you accuse the Japanese of doing the same thing.

I'm not familiar with the 1988 OVA. However, if it is true what you say about Rico being portrayed as blonde in that OVA it might not actually mean the same thing because anime operates under a different mindset then the West. In anime, they have characters that are identified as Japanese however they may have have red, yellow, orange, purple, etc... hair and it doesn't change the fact they are meant to be Asian.

As far as your other examples of supposed "yellow washing", these all fall under the same mistaken perspective you had before in the previous thread where I replied to you when you brought up the Toei live action Spider-Man show. I corrected you on that. Here is a link to it: animenewsnetwork.com/bbs/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1644249#1644249

What I wrote there also applies for what you wrote here as well as other points I made elsewhere in that post of mine.

This film wouldn't've have ruined anything. The original film and manga would have survived quite unmolested by the existence of a live-action adaptation that nobody would have been obligated to watch. The worst we might have had to endure is some re-issues with tacky, "now a major motion picture," labels on them. I hate those, but it's hardly enough to justify railing against this so vociferously.

A successful live-action adaptation of Akira might help to promote the animated film and manga, perhaps even anime and manga generally. Even if it were not to, as I admit would likely be the case, I cannot imagine that it would do any meaningful harm to anything but the obnoxiously juvenile psyches of some unpleasantly vocal people on the internet.

There's nothing to lose and perhaps a little to gain, so for the sake of that and those who might have been employed by this production, I will hold a little hope out that it can be saved. Why do some people always resort to such zealous purism when it comes to adaptations?

Surrender Artist has it 100% right.

This is not a good thing folks. The North American anime industry isn't doing well. You just saw the results this week, BEI is, for all intents and purposes, gone.

Obviously there are a lot of things contributing the the poor health of the industry, but a big project like Akira, if it's any good, would bring a lot of good exposure to anime and manga. That exposure would lead to more sales. Obviously not everyone who likes the movie will decide to start buying anime DVDs and manga, but some people will.

A successful manga based movie will also lead to more anime movies, creating further benefit and funding more anime & manga.

On the other hand, if the movie gets released and it's a crap, what's the downside ? Not much really. It just means that there's less chance of others being made.

You accuse Hollywood of changing Johnny Rico from Fillipino to Latin American but Japan did the same thing for the 1988 OVA, how is it a different mindset?

What made me angry from you is that you're angry when Hollywood whitewash Asian stuff but yet how is casting a Japanese actor playing Spiderman any different, to me it's no different. Replacing Asian character with white actors (Akira) is no different from replacing white character with Asian actors (Matango, Spider-man). What is the difference between these 2.

FYI: Did you know Toshiro Mifune played a Mexican in a 1962 film, I'm not lying, it really happen.

It speaks many unfortunate volumes that the majority of the people in this thread expressed that they felt both Surrender Artist and tempest were right in their posts. They are not. They are mistaken, myopic and misguided.

Surrender Artist wrote:

Quote:

This film wouldn't've have ruined anything. The original film and manga would have survived quite unmolested by the existence of a live-action adaptation that nobody would have been obligated to watch. The worst we might have had to endure is some re-issues with tacky, "now a major motion picture," labels on them. I hate those, but it's hardly enough to justify railing against this so vociferously. A successful live-action adaptation of Akira might help to promote the animated film and manga, perhaps even anime and manga generally. Even if it were not to, as I admit would likely be the case, I cannot imagine that it would do any meaningful harm to anything but the obnoxiously juvenile psyches of some unpleasantly vocal people on the internet. There's nothing to lose and perhaps a little to gain, so for the sake of that and those who might have been employed by this production, I will hold a little hope out that it can be saved. Why do some people always resort to such zealous purism when it comes to adaptations?

tempest wrote:

Quote:

Surrender Artist has it 100% right. This is not a good thing folks. The North American anime industry isn't doing well. You just saw the results this week, BEI is, for all intents and purposes, gone. Obviously there are a lot of things contributing the the poor health of the industry, but a big project like Akira, if it's any good, would bring a lot of good exposure to anime and manga. That exposure would lead to more sales. Obviously not everyone who likes the movie will decide to start buying anime DVDs and manga, but some people will. A successful manga based movie will also lead to more anime movies, creating further benefit and funding more anime & manga. On the other hand, if the movie gets released and it's a crap, what's the downside ? Not much really. It just means that there's less chance of others being made.

It speaks many unfortunate volumes that the majority of the people in this thread expressed that they felt both Surrender Artist and tempest were right in their posts. They are not. They are mistaken, myopic and misguided.

The reason is not related to the anime business but the discriminatory casting practices that this production is running on that neither Surrender Artist nor tempest acknowledge. Whatever their motivation is for failing to acknowledge that fact I do not know but I will bring it up because it is imperative and THE chief issue.

Hollywood has practiced for many, many years (almost since its inception) discrimination in its casting against nonwhite actors that sadly continues to this day. It is statistically proven that nonwhite actors are being limited in the roles they can play and white are preferred for lead roles by the Hollywood top dogs. So much so that there could even be legal grounds for a lawsuit according to Russell Robinson, professor of law at UCLA, because of the blatant discrimination practices that Hollywood operates on.

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117954779

As that article notes, whites are casted 82% of the time for lead roles.

If one wants to measure that against population, consider that the U.S. is, based on the last census, 63.7% white. If one wants to measure that against ticket buyers, well only 56% of them are white according to the MPAA: http://www.mpaa.org/Resources/93bbeb16-0e4d-4b7e-b085-3f41c459f9ac.pdf

There is no doubt about it. Hollywood head honchos are racist and the facts prove it as nonwhite actors have been and continue to be marginalized in favor of white actors.

The United States is a multicultural nation. Regardless of whether or not the Hollywood adaptation of Akira is set in Tokyo or New York does not in any way change the fact that Asian Americans can and should play Kaneda and Tetsuo as Manhattan is a very multicultural borough in New York and many people of Asian decent live there. In fact, New York's Chinatown can be found in Manhattan.

This movie being made with this kind of casting in place (i.e. whites as the leads) will only continue to limit the talent of Asian American actors that don't get the opportunities that white actors do and will keep the negative image up for nonwhites in Western media where whites are portrayed as multi-layered, interesting, attractive, intelligent, heroic, and many other positive qualities while also being the main characters in stories. While on the other hand nonwhites largely get portrayed as stereotypes and no more than sidekicks to whites.

If the movie is to be made with whites as the leads it must not be made for if the movie turns out to be a box office success it will serve as a way to justify the racist casting that Warner Bros. did. And that will only serve to push back what little progress has been made in this area.

I already explained why in my post. And I also said "it might be" since I haven't seen it for myself.

You need to read better.

This was already explained in the post I linked to which was of the thread where you and I had our previous debate.

No, I didn't know. However I don't see what relevance that has to your argument seeing how that was a Mexican production.

LargeView wrote:

It speaks many unfortunate volumes that the majority of the people in this thread expressed that they felt both Surrender Artist and tempest were right in their posts. They are not. They are mistaken, myopic and misguided.

And you and your obsessive approach to single issue that had not really been part of or motivated this argument before you blasted it in are tedious, obnoxious and intractable and insulting adjective and insulting adjective and insulting adjective... The way you're doing this is never going to accomplish anything; it feels like there's no kind of empathy for the people whom you're ostensibly trying to persuade and thus either just a robotic act or crusade to display your own righteousness. You almost come across like those people who talk about birth certificates every time anybody even mutters the syllables o-ba-ma. And that's not a comment about correctness, but about manner. You don't feel like part of a conversation, but like somebody who wanders around with a chip on his shoulder looking for soapboxes to shout too-well rehearsed tirades from. It makes your arguments seem inaccessible and impossible to meaningfully engage.

Be careful Surrender Artist, Longview and I had a long debate in a previous post about Akira and I think he's a pro-Asian supremacist, and he said Spiderman played by a Japanese is justified but yet has problem with white actor playing as an Asian character.

You're freaking me out with these paranoid thought.

There's already Asian portray in positive way

Ever watch The joy Luck Club, that film show Asian in a positive manner.

Rush Hour
The Corruptor
and the 1961 version of Flower Drum Song which had all Asian cast not white people

if they were then Boyz n the Hood would not have black people in it,

and Warner Bros produced Enter the Dragon and it had an Asian in it, and the cast are diverse.

If Hollywood is racist, then is Resident Evil racist because Resident 4 was accused of being anti-spanish and Resident Evil 5 has been blast by many African American of being racist. Resident Evil is made in Japan, BTW. You're no different from people that accused racism on stupid thing.

Also, as I notice from your post, you defend casting Asian actors to play Caucasian characters, so you're pulling double standard.

I think you need to reread your post, you didn't say "it might be" you said "it might not actually mean the same thing because anime operates under a different mindset then the West". Again you're pulling stuff just to throw in your rethorics.

I did a lot of them have things that doesn't make sense and some double standard, and contradiction.

You're doing it again, you accuse Hollywood of whitewashing but it's OK for Japanese to play a Mexican. Just like how you give a thumbs up for Spiderman played by a Japanese actor.