There has been a great deal of wailing and gnashing of teeth from this…
The first still released of Scarlett Johansson playing the lead in the upcoming live action movie, Ghost In The Shell (GITS). Asian actors and supporters are up in arms about the idea of yet another “white” actor playing an asian character in a film.
And this is a very valid critique, in most cases. There is a LOT of anti-Asian racism in Hollywood (or simply asian-ignorant effective if not deliberate, overt racism). But it is not valid in this case, and there’s a very good reason for that: The character she is playing is not an Asian character, she just has a Japanese name.
For example, look at the images on the right...
In terms of general casting, Johansson is far more similar in appearance to the actual character than, say, Julia Roberts to Erin Brockovich, or Benedict Cumberbach is to Alan Turing.
And why am I comparing living people to anime character Motoko Kusanagi? Because in both cases, we have solid, original-source visual reference.
If Motoko Kusanagi were a character in a book, we might very reasonably assume a character named Motoko Kusanagi, portrayed in a Japanese book, living in a mythical Japanese city, speaking Japanese, was, in fact, ethnically Japanese. But when we look at the visual source material, we see that she is very clearly not. She even has blue eyes!
This is not unusual, many, many characters from Japanese anime are not visibly Japanese, and this is not the place to dissect that trend. Or, at least, I don’t want to do that now.
The point is that we have a specific character who is not Japanese being used to advance a very real issue, the whitewashing of Asian characters in Hollywood movies.
Let’s take another recent example. Tilda Swinton in Marvel’s Doctor Strange, coming to theatres this November. Swinton plays “The Ancient One” who, in the comics appears as an aged Asian man. Now, on the one hand, I think it’s a good thing that a woman has been cast to portray a male character (just showing how multi-layered this whole debate is, because the male-washing of women and the insistence that “male” is the default gender for all movie characters unless nudity is desired is another really big issue in Hollywood casting).
There is no honest reason why an Asian was not chosen to play this role. The character is a secondary character in the film; no one is going to see this film because they are a huge fan of the Ancient One. They are going to see Cumberbach’s eponymous character, Dr. Strange. The film’s producer, Kevin Feige, claims that there is no reason why Swinton is not appropriate since,
“we use the terms ‘her’ and ‘she’ in the film but, other than that, it’s very androgynous. Because it doesn’t matter... the Ancient One is a mantle more than a specific person... There have been multiple [Ancient Ones], even if this one has been around for five hundred years, there were others. This is a mantle, and therefore felt we had leeway to cast in interesting ways.”
But not, apparently, enough leeway to cast an Asian actor in the role.
Swinton says she did not know if she would be playing the character as a male or female before production began. She is well known as an androgynous actor and has played male roles in other films like Constantine and Orlando. But come on, the visual reference for the character is clearly an Asian Male.
Mind you, the standard depiction of the Ancient One is wildly racist -- pure American 1950’s Sax Rohmer Fu Manchu racist (just like Iron Man’s nemesis, The Mandarin, who’s depiction is also wildly racist -- and they didn’t manage to find an Asian actor to play him in the movies, either, did they?).
So who else could have done the role? How about Aamir Khan, a well known Indian actor, often called the “Tom Hanks of India,” with a more than 45 year career in movies. He would have been great. What about Shidô Nakamura? Another Asian actor with years of experience in motion pictures. What about Shah Rukh Khan? He’s one of the richest actors in the world (richer than Leo and Johnny Depp, by far) because more people have seen his movies than have seen Leo and Depp movies, combined. Granted few of those viewers live in America. But these days, often over 50% of a film’s box office -- especially “action/adventure” films like GITS and Dr. Strange -- comes from overseas markets. The overseas B.O. from Deadpool was 52% of its total $700 million plus receipts. (But I digress. Moving on...)
You want star power? What about George Takei? Freaking George Takei! How amazing would that have been? And how many people would have gone to see Dr. Strange just because George was in it? It would have been a plus for me, I know.
If you want to break the gender barrier, what about Michelle Yeoh? Yeah, that Michelle Yeoh. “Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon” Michelle Yeoh! That film made way more money than GITS is ever likely to make ($213,525,736 worldwide to date). And I would bet she has more name recognition than Tilda. What about Lucy Liu? Sandra Oh? The point here is that there are quite literally dozens of actors with Tilda Swinton’s drawing power at the box office (or better) who could have played the role. Now that’s just plain an obvious racism.
You know these faces, you’ve seen all of them in all sorts of roles, many of them over decades, in movies and television. They just never seem to get cast in the A-list roles.
And I’m not suggesting that most producers and directors are wild, overt, Woodrow Wilson-style racists. I don’t think they are in their cushy executive suites saying, “I won’t allow any Asian people in my movies, over my dead body!” No, they are just oblivious racists. The kind of racists who don’t cast Asian actors because it just never occurs to them to cast Asian actors. And then they have the blithering audacity to pat themselves on the back for casting a white woman in the role of an Asian man because they are “thinking outside the box!” Yeah, I’m looking at you Kevin Feige.
And that is the problem.
One argument that can be made for Scarlett Johansson in Ghost in the Shell, other than the one I’ve already made, is that she can reliably put butts in seats. She has box office drawing power. People will go to see a film simply because she is in it. That’s what being a movie star means.
However, fifteen years ago, when she was starring in films like “Ghost World” and “The Man Who Wasn’t There,” ScarJo was a no-name nobody with zero box office clout. Then she did “Lost in Translation” and “Girl with a Pearl Earring” and, suddenly, she had a name that people knew.
On the other hand, did you even know that, after those “break out” movies, she was in The Spirit, The Prestige, The Island, The SpongeBob Squarepants Movie? Unless you’re a big fan, you probably don’t. At that point, she was just another pretty woman with a mildly recognizable name.
Then she did Iron Man 2, the Avengers, Captain America: the Winter Soldier, etc.
Almost overnight, Johansson was a box office giant. That is a major reason she was cast in Ghost in the Shell.
But she also did crap like “Lucy,” and weird little indies like “Under the Skin.”
And that brings up another thought. As all internet pervs and most indie movie fans who can sit through extremely obscure and slowly-paced movies with little or no comprehensible dialogue know by now, Johansson did a bit of nudity in “In the Flesh.” OK, let’s be honest, she did a LOT of nudity in “In the Flesh. Full body, full frontal, full backal (is backal even a word?). Not to put too fine a point on it, she was butt naked multiple times. It was basically her Halle Berry in “Moster” moment. And more. Much more. Why is this relevant?
Because Ghost in the Shell (the original anime) contains a LOT of gratuitous nudity. And the new film is set to receive an R rating.
Now, Marvel’s Deadpool just set tons of box office records since February of this year, proving that an R-rated film can make lots of money. Typically studios require “action” films to have no more than a PG-13 rating in order to green light their sky-high CGI budgets. And this is because they are aiming at the lucrative teenage boy market which spends a huge amount of mommy and daddy’s money on movies and movie-related toys (as well as the equally lucrative man-boy market that buys all the same crap teenage boys do -- but is only doing it for the “investment potential” of having a room full of 3,000 “action figures” still in the original packaging. Uh-huh). Granted, Deadpool was R-rated due to extremely gratuitous violence and the fact that every third word in the film was “fuck.”
But will GITS follow the same pattern as the original anime? It contains an opening sequence of Motoko Kusanagi flipping off a building roof, then falling to the ground, all while fully naked. It has an even longer, lingering, title sequence of a fully naked Motoko Kusanagi being created in vats of runny goo (this being a Japanese film, she has anatomically correct breasts, but no genitalia, even though that area is lingered on several times). And it puts forward the conceit that, in order for her to use her super special “thermal” invisibility camouflage system, she (apparently) needs to be -- you guessed it -- naked. Although at least one other -- notably male -- character in the film seems to manage to wear invisibility camo without needing to be naked during a chase and fight scene. In that scene, as well as the film’s final fight scene she is, again, butt naked for more long, lingering shots of her flipping through the air, etc. -- as well as ripping her own arms off trying to peel open the access hatch of a tank (while naked). She also shares the ending scene with the anatomically correct upper torso of another female cyborg who is also, yep, naked.
Now, I fully expect this film to be cut back to a PG-13 rating before it is released. Or, if it sticks with the R-rating, it will be due to the violence (though the original is not all that violent, or at least most of the bullets are shot at vehicles, not people — but when did sticking to the original themes ever stop an American film maker from adding more explosions, bullets, and blood, hey?), and will have nothing close to the level of nudity in the original. This is America, after all. Shooting someone — or many, many someones — full of bullet holes and watching their heads explode is just good family values fun. But seeing a breast with a nipple is sufficient to drive any true-blue, red-blooded American into the arms of gibbering madness.
But I wonder if one of the reasons ScarJo got the role is that she was willing to do the naked? No idea. Just wondering. But I wonder if none of the nearly-A-list Asian actors approached were willing to take the chance on doing extensive nudity? It can be a career killer for women in movies. It can also be a career launcher. One reason ScarJo got the buzz she did for Lost in Translation is her oft-freeze-framed character introduction wearing nothing but transparent panties.
None the less, the racism in Hollywood is very real. The industry really needs to begin actively casting Asian actors (and Latino actors) in larger roles and building the ones who show potential into A-list stars who will get the roles currently reserved for white actors because they got the star-making treatment early in their careers.
There was a time when black actors never got leading roles, either -- and the prospects for black actors are not, necessarily, ideal even today, but they are better.
This is because, back in the 80’s and 90’s black actors were allowed out of the ghetto of 1970’s “Blaxploitation” movies and “token black friend” roles and into leading parts. The Cosby Show, Fresh Prince of Bel Air, and other shows portrayed black people as just regular people. Actors like Morgan Freeman and Denzel Washington landed serious roles and, eventually, leading roles in successful, money making films.
Heck, Morgan Freeman is now the go-to actor for the roles of both God and the American President.
Even black women are getting serious roles in TV shows like Scandal (Kerry Washington) and How to Get Away with Murder (Viola Davis). And black women like Shonda Ryhmes are now becoming high-powered Hollywood movers and shakers. This is all a good thing. And more progress needs to be made.
And the same has to happen for Asian and Latino actors.
And then there comes the issue of race as a whole in movies and entertainment. Idris Elba is an odds on favorite to play the next James Bond. And why not? He certainly has the looks, gravitas, and acting chops -- probably more of those than are actually needed -- to play the role. Latino actor Lin-Manuel Miranda is currently playing noted white guy Alexander Hamilton on Broadway, in a cast in which none of the objectively white founding fathers is played by a white person (and the show is sold out through the year 11,913 c.e.). And nobody cares that black and latino people are playing “white” roles! (At least no rational people care.)
Maybe we are finally reaching a point where non-white actors will be allowed to play serious leading roles in big-budget productions without someone saying, “But those people can’t guarantee the box office we need.” To which rational people respond, yeah, the way the all-white casts ensured box office gold. Films like Cameron Crowe’s “Aloha” (in which he cast blonde, blue-eyed Emma Stone to play Hawaiian character Allison Ng), or Man from U.N.C.L.E., or Pixels, or Tomorrowland (where even hyper-A-lister George Clooney could not save the film). But the presence of black man Michael B. Jordan, as Johnny Storm, the Human Torch, was what killed the recent Fantastic Four re-boot. Yeah, right.
Maybe we really are starting to see a color-blind casting environment. Just barely.
And the next (or concurrent) step ought to be gender neutral casting. I am a big fan of the idea of Tilda Swinton being the next Dr. Who. I think she would be perfect for the role. The first female doctor, with all of the requisite panache and quirkiness. And to those who say the Doctor has always been male and must remain male, I point to the Master, who was male until he became Missy. and other time lords have gender-switched as well. By this point the only question ought to be, which über-cool English actress gets the part? And there is no English actress cooler than Tilda. But, again, I digress.
And beyond that, can I see a day when a black woman might play the role of, say George Washington? Yes, I can. Why not? Acting is about acting skill, not what the skin or genitals of the actor looks like. If non-plant-people can play Groot, people of color can play “white” people and women can play men and vice versa.
We should be coming to a point where people really are just people. Where gender and “race” are merely footnotes in the story of people’s lives. And so it must become in the entertainments we use to tell those stories. Because that’s what the movies, television, and theatre are: Ways we tell ourselves stories about ourselves. And nobody should be left of those stories any more than they are left out of life itself.