Movies, race, and cultural appropriation
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 12:19 pmSooooo tired. May have to up sleeping from eight hours to ten, which sounds ridiculous to me. But seriously. I have had my requisite cup of caffeine, and I still can't concentrate.
I was going to write separate posts on Blood Diamond and Casino Royale and cultural appropriation and post-colonialism and race, but looking at my current record, I may as well just do short blurbs and get it over with.
No spoilers for any of these, just cut for length.
Blood Diamond: I found this to be a very well-done, well-written movie on the diamond trade in Sierra Leone in the late nineties. I don't know much about that (need to research more), but I liked that the movie looked at the corrupt government and the insurgents and how both of them make life worse for the people living there, and how it looks at the availability of foreign aid, how so much of it peters out, how there's never enough to go around and everyone is tired. I also like that it looks at how consumers play into the diamond business, how global conglomerates manipulate information or look the other way and provide financing for rebels, how the arms traders and mercenaries play in as well. It's incredibly complicated, and the movie does a good job of showing this and showing how much the Western world plays into it.
I was very wary that the Leonardo DiCaprio character (Danny Archer) and the Jennifer Connelly character (Maggy Bowers) would end up eclipsing the story of the movie, which centers on Djimon Hounsou's character (Solomon Vandy). It nearly does in the middle of the movie, and it seems like once more, the white characters get to have agency and voice and complex moral dilemmas while the black characters only exist to be in sympathy-arousing situations and to further the white characters' emotional arcs. There are some scenes in particular that made me wince, where we see Solomon being silent while the other two speak about his plight, and he never gets a say in any of it. Thankfully, the movie avoids doing this and makes the story Solomon's in the very end.
Go see this; it's my favorite movie of the year.
Casino Royale: Or, in which I am mean and rain on everyone's parade again. In general, I really liked this as a Bond movie (yay no squirming naked women in the credits) and I'm excited about the new direction of the franchise.
Instead of squeeing, though, I'm going to go on about the things that really bugged me. I spent the entire first action sequence squirming in my chair. It's set in Madagascar, and there's this long sequence in which Bond chases an African man wearing a backpack, which has all sorts of bad visual connotations for me (police brutality, colonialism, etc.). Then he blows up half of an embassy. He gets slapped around by M for it, but more for the publicity aspect than anything else. The villain of the piece is also seen financing a guerilla group very briefly. Later on, there's an action sequence in which the guerilla group sends (African) hitmen after the villain and the hitmen end up being killed by Bond.
All of this made me extremely uncomfortable, particularly because it was just set-up for the casino poker scenes. None of the African groups have any sort of voice; we only see them trying to get revenge on the villain of the piece. They don't even have enough power to be the main villains; they're just the henchmen.
Furthermore, that entire opening sequence with Bond chasing the guy? It has all sorts of ugly associations, especially because Bond is an agent of MI:6. He's a British government employee, and he's down there in Africa blowing up embassies and killing African people. I know, I know, action movie blah blah, but that's why it bothers me so much. It's so casual and so quickly glossed over; the entire political struggle of a country is used as quick backstory for the villain and as a shiny action sequence. This is unthinking cultural appropriation that doesn't bother to examine the history of Britain as an empire and as a colonialist nation and really doesn't seem to care. And please don't tell me it's just a (insert noun here); how many more people will watch this and not watch Blood Diamond? Say what you will about it, the fact still remains that the Bond franchise has immense cultural power.
I was trying to think of ways to use the Bond franchise to play with some of these things throughout the movie, because this team doing Bond is obviously interested in playing with the franchise. I want a person-of-color Bond. I want POC M and R and all the other recurring characters. We've had Halle Berry and Michelle Yeoh before as POC Bond girls, but how about going a little further and making a larger commitment?
I mean, I was happy that while I was thinking this, they made Felix (the CIA agent, recurring character) black, but as
sophia_helix pointed out, he's incompetent at poker and ends up giving his money to Bond. Also, I want a female Bond someday, or a movie with M's backstory. And you know, they could have grounded a conflict in African politics without making it fluff, but they chose not to. Or they just didn't think about it. I'm not sure which is worse.
The Painted Veil trailer: I haven't seen this movie at all, so this is all taken from the trailer and the Roeper and A.O. Scott review on the Ebert and Roeper TV show.
Once again, we get a movie set in China, and guess what? It's about ex-pat Britons and their emotional struggles, and the Chinese village suffering from cholera really only seems to be there as a gloriously scenic backdrop so that Naomi Watts and Edward Norton can angst beautifully in front of the camera and demonstrate their saintliness by helping all those poor uneducated Chinese peasants. This is, of course, taken from a book by M. Somerset Maugham, a white writer.
I think there was an indie movie last year about white expats in Shanghai and their emotional traumas (The White Countess), the emotional traumas of white vampires while there's this little thing called the Boxer Rebellion going on ("Darla" and "Fool For Love" from Buffy and Angel), and probably other things that I can't remember off the top of my head. On the one hand, there is the counterbalance of movies like Crouching Tiger and Zhang Yimou's films, which are probably seen more than these indie pictures (not sure). But still. It's not just using other countries giant rebellions and political problems as a backdrop, since that happens all the time and I would be tempted to do that.
It's doing that while seeming to forget that hey, these white characters you're focusing on? They are part of the same nation that's colonizing in the period you're setting your movie in, did you maybe think about that? Because I do, and quite frankly, when the majority of movies set in "exotic" locales are on the expat colonizers, I really have a problem with that.
I was going to write separate posts on Blood Diamond and Casino Royale and cultural appropriation and post-colonialism and race, but looking at my current record, I may as well just do short blurbs and get it over with.
No spoilers for any of these, just cut for length.
Blood Diamond: I found this to be a very well-done, well-written movie on the diamond trade in Sierra Leone in the late nineties. I don't know much about that (need to research more), but I liked that the movie looked at the corrupt government and the insurgents and how both of them make life worse for the people living there, and how it looks at the availability of foreign aid, how so much of it peters out, how there's never enough to go around and everyone is tired. I also like that it looks at how consumers play into the diamond business, how global conglomerates manipulate information or look the other way and provide financing for rebels, how the arms traders and mercenaries play in as well. It's incredibly complicated, and the movie does a good job of showing this and showing how much the Western world plays into it.
I was very wary that the Leonardo DiCaprio character (Danny Archer) and the Jennifer Connelly character (Maggy Bowers) would end up eclipsing the story of the movie, which centers on Djimon Hounsou's character (Solomon Vandy). It nearly does in the middle of the movie, and it seems like once more, the white characters get to have agency and voice and complex moral dilemmas while the black characters only exist to be in sympathy-arousing situations and to further the white characters' emotional arcs. There are some scenes in particular that made me wince, where we see Solomon being silent while the other two speak about his plight, and he never gets a say in any of it. Thankfully, the movie avoids doing this and makes the story Solomon's in the very end.
Go see this; it's my favorite movie of the year.
Casino Royale: Or, in which I am mean and rain on everyone's parade again. In general, I really liked this as a Bond movie (yay no squirming naked women in the credits) and I'm excited about the new direction of the franchise.
Instead of squeeing, though, I'm going to go on about the things that really bugged me. I spent the entire first action sequence squirming in my chair. It's set in Madagascar, and there's this long sequence in which Bond chases an African man wearing a backpack, which has all sorts of bad visual connotations for me (police brutality, colonialism, etc.). Then he blows up half of an embassy. He gets slapped around by M for it, but more for the publicity aspect than anything else. The villain of the piece is also seen financing a guerilla group very briefly. Later on, there's an action sequence in which the guerilla group sends (African) hitmen after the villain and the hitmen end up being killed by Bond.
All of this made me extremely uncomfortable, particularly because it was just set-up for the casino poker scenes. None of the African groups have any sort of voice; we only see them trying to get revenge on the villain of the piece. They don't even have enough power to be the main villains; they're just the henchmen.
Furthermore, that entire opening sequence with Bond chasing the guy? It has all sorts of ugly associations, especially because Bond is an agent of MI:6. He's a British government employee, and he's down there in Africa blowing up embassies and killing African people. I know, I know, action movie blah blah, but that's why it bothers me so much. It's so casual and so quickly glossed over; the entire political struggle of a country is used as quick backstory for the villain and as a shiny action sequence. This is unthinking cultural appropriation that doesn't bother to examine the history of Britain as an empire and as a colonialist nation and really doesn't seem to care. And please don't tell me it's just a (insert noun here); how many more people will watch this and not watch Blood Diamond? Say what you will about it, the fact still remains that the Bond franchise has immense cultural power.
I was trying to think of ways to use the Bond franchise to play with some of these things throughout the movie, because this team doing Bond is obviously interested in playing with the franchise. I want a person-of-color Bond. I want POC M and R and all the other recurring characters. We've had Halle Berry and Michelle Yeoh before as POC Bond girls, but how about going a little further and making a larger commitment?
I mean, I was happy that while I was thinking this, they made Felix (the CIA agent, recurring character) black, but as
The Painted Veil trailer: I haven't seen this movie at all, so this is all taken from the trailer and the Roeper and A.O. Scott review on the Ebert and Roeper TV show.
Once again, we get a movie set in China, and guess what? It's about ex-pat Britons and their emotional struggles, and the Chinese village suffering from cholera really only seems to be there as a gloriously scenic backdrop so that Naomi Watts and Edward Norton can angst beautifully in front of the camera and demonstrate their saintliness by helping all those poor uneducated Chinese peasants. This is, of course, taken from a book by M. Somerset Maugham, a white writer.
I think there was an indie movie last year about white expats in Shanghai and their emotional traumas (The White Countess), the emotional traumas of white vampires while there's this little thing called the Boxer Rebellion going on ("Darla" and "Fool For Love" from Buffy and Angel), and probably other things that I can't remember off the top of my head. On the one hand, there is the counterbalance of movies like Crouching Tiger and Zhang Yimou's films, which are probably seen more than these indie pictures (not sure). But still. It's not just using other countries giant rebellions and political problems as a backdrop, since that happens all the time and I would be tempted to do that.
It's doing that while seeming to forget that hey, these white characters you're focusing on? They are part of the same nation that's colonizing in the period you're setting your movie in, did you maybe think about that? Because I do, and quite frankly, when the majority of movies set in "exotic" locales are on the expat colonizers, I really have a problem with that.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 08:43 pm (UTC)P.S. Considering all of the flak they apparently caught for making Bond blonde, I can't imagine what sort of fallout a POC Bond would make :) But I love the concept.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 09:10 pm (UTC)I usually turn away from the horrible politics in Bond movies, because... well. Yeah. I think I just thought about it more this time because I watched it just a few days after seeing Blood Diamond and the vast difference in how they treated the subject matters really bugged me.
Le sigh. Someday, there will be really cool revisionist Bond stuff with a female Bond and a POC Bond -- or better yet, a female, POC Bond working for a post-colonialist African nation and attempting to stop international arms traders. That would be awesome.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 09:16 pm (UTC)My wife and I, who both play poker in real life, spent a fair amount of time trying to decide whether Bond was competent (it's hard to tell when they only show you portions of the hands, and when the hands are so unrealistic). One thing that struck us both was that, for a guy who kills people professionally, he seems like an awfully passive player.
Also, the most unintentionally hilarious scene in the movie occurs at the end of the poker tournament, when Bond tips the dealer. He hands the guy a half-million-dollar chip, which would be extraordinarily generous if not for the fact that tournament chips have no cash value. I only wish I were cool enough to tip people with Monopoly money and get a "thank you" in return.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 09:46 pm (UTC)(Oh, and don't forget "nameless hot dead Latina" and "evil and inept Greek villain" at the beginning -- apparently brown skin was just a code for failure in the movie.)
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 10:02 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 10:02 pm (UTC)Yes, that too!
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 10:29 pm (UTC)That's the problem with Texas Hold 'em -- it's too complex for the instant analysis you can do with Baccarat. It's like Blackjack for stupid people, I swear. (Stupid rich people.)
Baccarat implies a moneyed background (and a grand tradition of movie gambling, especially Bob le flambeur!); while Texas Hold 'em implies -- memorized mathematical tables of probability? Not nearly as sexy and exotic, but at least it cuts out a scene where someone has to explain the rules of the game.
Except you never get to say "suivi" if you're not playing Baccarat.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 10:34 pm (UTC)I like to think that every era gets the action heroes it deserves; the 80s developed one crazed extreme after another, each one more naked the more it tried to hide its motives.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 10:35 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 10:38 pm (UTC)I actually do think we'll see a black male Bond at some point. Female Bond feels more radical and therefore unlikely to me, though I'd certainly love to see it.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 10:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 11:03 pm (UTC)I'm really gunning for a black Bond now. That would be so cool. Or it'd just be awesome reading a revisionist version of Bond with the numbers filed off, or M backstory fic, or something. Though they should really pick up on the M backstory idea for a new franchise.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 11:06 pm (UTC)I also thought that it was interesting how many movies have come out about Africa lately (based on pure impression, as I have no statistics); you can see the Bond movies going from Russia as the great evil and Asia in a few (esp. the latest Brosnan ones) and now Africa. Alas, I don't have enough data to map out the countries involved over the decades, but it'd be neat to see what hte trend was.
(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 11:06 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, Jan. 8th, 2007 11:38 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 12:53 am (UTC)(I should post on that book some time. I think it might be the most memorably bad book I've ever read. It was just so flagrantly bad in so many different ways.)
No, there have been quite a few movies about Africa lately; there was also the one with Forrest Whittaker as Idi Amin, in which he was brilliant but annoyingly had a white man as the main character. Unfortunately, the movie vanished so quickly that he will probably be forgotten come Oscar time.
I don't know what's up with Africa blipping onto Hollywood consciousness; sometimes these things take a while to percolate. I expect in a few years we'll see an influx of movies with white (non-Middle Eastern) male leads set in the Middle East.
(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 01:17 am (UTC)(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 01:18 am (UTC)Yeah, and there was Constant Gardener last year or the year before that, Hotel Rwanda, and probably some more. I'm really looking forward to some on the Middle East, though not the obligatory white male lead.
(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 01:43 am (UTC)(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 01:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 02:04 am (UTC)La Femme Nikita.
(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 02:29 am (UTC)(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 02:49 am (UTC)Hmm, I'm not entirely sure about this. I mean, obviously, they weren't the main villain. However, they were clearly considered an extremely dangerous force--the reason that Le Chiffre went to the poker game at all was that if he couldn't pay them (and his other clients) back, he could expect to be killinated. They weren't his henchmen; they were his pissed-off *bosses*.
Also, I think we were supposed to infer that the embassy was corrupt and in cahoots with the bomber. Obviously, you can't strip away all the unfortunate historical resonance when you have a white guy go into a black country's embassy, blow up half of it (though apparently without serious body count), and basically walk away unpunished, but, unlike many other Bond films, it strikes me as the kind of scenario which wouldn't be problematic without the resonance.
(Also, having mad Parkour skillz isn't a stereotypical non-Western/black ability.)
(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 02:54 am (UTC)I wonder if the African elements were left over from the book too? I'm told that a lot of the plot holes I complained toward the end were actually a matter of being too faithful to the book.
But on the whole, thank you for pointing this all out--I was pre-disposed to fixate on gender in the movie (which I hated) and so wasn't thinking about consciously about race, but yes, it could really have been done better.
I wish I could pretend that the beginning (post-credits) and, particularly, the end didn't exist, because mmmm, Daniel Craig. Alas.
(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 02:56 am (UTC)Okay, I missed that Mr. White (or whoever, the guy kneecapped at the end) was also the broker in the beginning, so I was obviously not getting a lot of what this movie intended to convey: but I have no idea where this came from. Do you remember any specifics?
(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 03:54 am (UTC)Casino Royale
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 11:02 am (UTC)But of course this positive depiction only applies to the African-American. I really appreciate your post as you opened my eyes to the racism inherent in the rest of the film.
(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 03:07 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 03:11 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 05:08 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Tue, Jan. 9th, 2007 05:27 pm (UTC)I don't think the racial politics were great but it was the first Bond film where even minor characters seemed to be human rather than cartoons. Even the dead wife from the Bahamas knew that Bond was using her for information and told him so, but wanted to have a bit of fun anyway. There seemed to be a self-awareness to all the characters that I appreciated, that they didn't seem to exist merely to be shagged or killed by Bond. Of course they all ended up being one or the other, or both, but it is a Bond movie after all.
You always get the best discussions from your posts!
Re: Casino Royale
Wed, Jan. 10th, 2007 06:54 pm (UTC)Thank you for reading!
(no subject)
Wed, Jan. 10th, 2007 07:12 pm (UTC)It was mostly the historical resonance of a British government agent going down to Madagascar and blowing stuff up, and having that be the jazzy opening sequence.
(no subject)
Fri, Jan. 12th, 2007 05:45 am (UTC)That the movie ends with Solomon about to tell his own story was a great improvement on where I thought it was going to stop, with Danny Archer's blood turning into the red African earth. And I liked Archer as a character.
(no subject)
Fri, Jan. 12th, 2007 06:23 am (UTC)