Blue Crush

[Ayers]

The gist of the movie is simple:

Girl is good at surfing.
Girl gets hurt while surfing.
Girl sucks at surfing because she's scared.
Girl faces ultimate surfing challenge.

The beginning of the movie takes us back in time when Anne Marie (the main gal) was surfing with the best of em until her fateful accident. Skipping forward a few years, we find her training with her ragtag band of surfer chicks for the ultimate wave and the Pipe Masters championship. Her dream? To win a bunch of sponserships and get a real life by going pro (please ignore sarcasm :) )

Of course no Hollywood formula seems complete without some love interest, so we find Anne Marie traipzing off with a pro-football QB vacationing in Hawaii. Amid the romps in the hot tub and on the beach, Anne Marie finds herself distancing herself from her dream in order to avoid the trauma that continues to haunt her whenever she surfs.

The plot seems very formulaic.
The acting... second-rate.
However the scenery and surfing definitely get an A+.
This movie made me want to drop my classes and head out to Hawaii (I guess it doesn't take that much encouragement :D )

Rating: **/5

pros? some decent surf shots. hula dancing? Hawaii!
cons? prolly not worth your time unless youre a big fan of surfing.

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Ayers@Aug 21 2002, 01:34 AM
Her dream? To win a bunch of sponserships and get a real life by going pro (please ignore sarcasm :) )
but i thought real surfers who are true to their hearts just want to surf, and don't care about anything else? :unsure:


but what do i know i'm not a surfer

[angel nympho]

^-- technically, yeah, but this girl is young and she's the only one supporting her 14 year old little sister, she just lost her job and has NO money. she needs sponsorships.

[achtungbaby]

'Blue Crush' another 'Good vs. Asian' film

By Jeff Park

“Blue Crush” opened last this month and made money. That should come as no surprise. What also comes as no surprise is that the movie is a surfing movie that is based in Hawaii, has a female blonde, blue-eyed lead, her love interest is a white quarterback, and the villains are island boys, here a hodge podge of “other” ethnicities – just not white. And of course the white star is a leading exponent of surfing as far as this movie goes.
It‘s no surprise, and nothing new. The hit film “The Fast and the Furious” also stole an Asian cultural phenomenon – import racing – dropped white leads (Vin Diesel, is self described as “multi-cultural” and reportedly African-American and white) into the story, and made up an Asian gang as the villains.

What should not go unmentioned here is that “Blue Crush” is “A Brian Grazer Production,” most notably because as one of the big wig producers behind the Oscar winning “A Beautiful Mind,” he also has shown a knack for cultural ignorance. Casting Jennifer Connelly as John Nash’s wife, a native Salvadoran, Connelly’s star would later shine as she picked up the “Best Supporting Actress” Oscar, a major slap in the face to the many hundreds if not thousands of struggling and able Latina actresses. Talk about insult as well as a missed opportunity.

full story (http://yellowworld.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=119&mode=nocomments&order=1&thold=-1)

[angel nympho]

^-- Mmm. I didn't get what he meant about Jennifer Connelly. *Shrug*

The boys weren't really villians, were they? Just bitter ex-boyfriend and co., I thought. In the end, they pulled through and showed their support. Oh...well...

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Aug 27 2002, 03:11 AM
^-- Mmm. I didn't get what he meant about Jennifer Connelly. *Shrug*
john nash's wife is a salvadoran. but they casted a white girl for the part instead. i'm not surprised at all. that movie is not exactly accurate on many counts.

[DaBestSpooner]

Has jeff park even lived in hawaii?

He must have the easiest job in the world, nitpicking the most minute details of hollywood movies and sensationalizing and embellishing them in a story to his liking.

Jeff:
White people surf
White girls surf
White people live in Hawaii, so that makes them hawaiian

[thaite]

No, I don't think that the mere fact of living in Hawaii makes one Hawaiian. Does living in Japan make one Japanese? The indigenous population of Malaysia are Malaysians, all others are simply Malay.

There is race, and then there is ethnicity, and they are not always interchangeable terms.

[DaBestSpooner]

Originally posted by buoywonder@Aug 27 2002, 01:27 PM
No, I don't think that the mere fact of living in Hawaii makes one Hawaiian. Does living in Japan make one Japanese? The indigenous population of Malaysia are Malaysians, all others are simply Malay.

There is race, and then there is ethnicity, and they are not always interchangeable terms.
but if a white girl is born in hawaii, like so many are, they're hawaiian natives. If the person was born in japan, then they are japanese-"insert nationality." I agree that ethnicity and nationality are not interchangeable, but that wasnt the point I was trying to make about the article.

[angel nympho]

Technically, the movie wasn't about "Hawaiians." It was more about a the girl herself. Not where she was. Just so happens that Hawaii has killer surf. Maybe that's why they set the movie there. And besides, let's not forget that Hawaii is a part of the United States. It IS possible for white people to live there, too. And it's my understanding that an awful lot do.

[jp1713]

hi all-

first, big ups to achtung for posting my article.

second, to angel, stories, even ones as vapid and transparent as BLUE CRUSH, use conflict to drive the story forward. it's a fundamental - about as basic as you can get, really - of classical story construction, from shakespeare on through to...BLUE CRUSH. the island boys were used as "villains" - in the formulaic sense - to provide *conflict* to the story. (hence, boy meets girl, boy encounters resistance from brown boys, boy wins out). don't you remember your lit teachers going over this? <nudge>

third, dabestspooner's take. this one is the most problematic for me. let me try to answer her/his arguments.

i'll have you know, spooner, that a lot of asian peeps make their living or aspire to, in film/tv - on BOTH sides of the camera. for you to reduce criticism of an industry that has historically screwed asians - on BOTH sides of the camera - to "nitpicking" is a bit short sighted imo. worse - much worse - it trivializes their struggle.

beyond that, any losses in "the business" for asians seeking careers there are losses for ALL asians (here used generically as a race specifier) as we'll be out asian directors, writers, producers, execs (who can greenlight projects), actors, cinematographers, editors, productions designers... ie: those who can tell our stories uncensored and on the real.

and their struggle is real. just ask any asian actor, for instance, who hasn't worked in 3 months if their residual checks mean anything to them.

moreover, i take issue with your labeling my criticism and analysis as "sensationalizing" - i challenge you to explain to everyone here how i sensationalized anything in my commentary. the piece is factual insofar as BLUE CRUSH is concerned. if you're going to make a charge like that against a serious piece of criticism, you can bet that you'd better be able to defend it.

last, to answer your - off topic - question: "yes" i have lived in hawaii; my dad was born there, and like most mainland buddaheads (my moms is japanese-am) maintain relatives there. i suppose this feeds into your sophomoric reasoning of:

"White people surf
White girls surf
White people live in Hawaii, so that makes them hawaiian"

duh, no kidding.

so what???

didn't you read the part in my article where i give the analogy of using whites in place of Blacks in a movie about hip-hop??? do you understand what analogy means? (no, it has nothing to do with "the science of the rectum") further, can you then apply that to surfing and the way it was appropriated by white people in BC?

these are rhetorical questions, btw...

jp

[angel nympho]

conflict didnt have anything to do with them being asian.

they were local boys... local boys in hawaii.. you expect to be hawaiin, no?

and in response to the hip-hop movie without black people comment:

hawaiians arent the only ones who surf.
hip-hop movies are catered to the black community... this movie was not aimed at hawaiians.



<!--EDIT|angel nympho|Aug 28 2002, 08:00 AM-->

[Ayers]

jp, perhaps living in Hawaii has skewed your view on who surfs. Thinking back to the days when wearing Ocean Pacific (OP) and IZOD was cool, all the pro surfers I saw in competition were white. Even now, scrolling over the results from current pro surfing competitions, there is a notable lack of asian/ethnic last names. Perhaps Hawaii is different, where the surfers are primarily natives, but the rest of the world may not agree with that view.

So I think DBS pointing out there are "White surfers, etc" is not out of line, and it is entirely reasonable for movies to be made about white surfer girls -- even in Hawaii (totally different than documentaries on Vanilla Ice j/k). Actually... now that I think about it, isn't Eminem coming out with a new movie about a white rapper with blacks in supporting roles? <shrug>

I think your belief that Blue Crush is an attack on Asian pride is an opinion... one that you are certainly entitled to. However, when you call all asians to arms and then rebuke those who don't agree with your opinion, then it starts sounding like just another attack. Your article was well-written, but I don't agree with you on a number of points. I'm going to have to leave it at that since I have to get up in 4 hrs, and surgery is never fun with a lot of coffee.

[achtungbaby]

Originally posted by DaBestSpooner@Aug 27 2002, 01:10 PM
I agree that ethnicity and nationality are not interchangeable, but that wasnt the point I was trying to make about the article.
Point being that it is a fact that there are white people in Hawaii who surf? Well, yeah...

[achtungbaby]

Originally posted by jp1713@Aug 28 2002, 12:54 AM
first, big ups to achtung for posting my article.

Actually I just "approved" the posting of it. buoywonder gets the credit :D

Originally posted by jp1713@Aug 28 2002, 12:54 AM
for you to reduce criticism of an industry that has historically screwed asians - on BOTH sides of the camera - to "nitpicking" is a bit short sighted imo. worse - much worse - it trivializes their struggle.

To add: I think it's easy to brush off such criticism as whining or bitching; certainly this seems to be the trendy thing to do, but what's wrong with demanding balance in representation? Is it so much to ask for, or, as its been suggested in other threads, that since we live in a white country, we should expect that white people want to see Asians marginalized?

Originally posted by jp1713@Aug 28 2002, 12:54 AM
do you understand what analogy means? (no, it has nothing to do with "the science of the rectum")...

Thanks for clearing that up, I always wondered... :D

[DaBestSpooner]

Jeff, how is your analysis of blue crush factual when it’s strongly your point of view that Asian culture is being butchered by whites in this movie? Demonizing Asians, that sounds like opinion more than fact, am I wrong? Asians villains your interpretation too. Was her rival in the surf competition Asian? Of course you were nitpicking, Asian bell hops, and the main WHITE female lead is a maid. Well if the main character was played by a Filipino that now would be racist. FYI my criticism of your article was on your analysis of what Blue Crush was, not the struggles of Asian Americans in the media.

I know what an analogy is; don’t try to downplay my intelligence because I strongly do not agree with your "Asiatic pride" views. It's called an opinion learn to live with it.

Oh yeah Hollywood did make a hip-hop movie with a white guy in the lead, with black supporting roles its called Zebrahead with Michael Rappaport, it gets shown on BET pretty often. What about Whiteboys with Danny Hooch? Don’t forget those old 3rd Bass videos with all the black guys in the background.

Ayers dude you read my mind. When I think of surfing the first person that comes to mind is Kelly Slater, and I had to sit and think really hard of any Asian surfers, the only one I can think of was Claude Maki, but that’s because I saw "Brother" recently. I know about that enimem movie, but that’s more of a pseudo bio pic.

[jp1713]

ok. you're all right. :rolleyes: i'm not here to counter with y'all, nor convince you of anything. i stand by my arguments, and haven't found anything to persuade me otherwise. and i get the feeling that debating here isn't going to do anything but spiral us all down a bandwidth black hole, and i don't have that time to burn.

my fault was in responding in the first place, becasue i knew what i was jumping into, so i have no one to blame but myself, so my bad. sorry to have wasted time here.

tell you what, tho; if the article gets published i'll give y'all a head's up here, and then you can send in your criticisms to the editor, and see how they respond - fair?

til the next article :lol:

jp

[thaite]

Hey, Jeff, I'm actually glad you came to post here. Hope you stop by again. Don't take things said here too harshly, we all jump on each other.

Some days people kick ass, other days they get their ass kicked. The only ones who don't are the ones who never bother to say anything interesting.

[Arex]

Originally posted by Ayers@Aug 28 2002, 01:30 AM
I think your belief that Blue Crush is an attack on Asian pride is an opinion... one that you are certainly entitled to. &nbsp;However, when you call all asians to arms and then rebuke those who don't agree with your opinion, then it starts sounding like just another attack. &nbsp;Your article was well-written, but I don't agree with you on a number of points. &nbsp;I'm going to have to leave it at that since I have to get up in 4 hrs, and surgery is never fun with a lot of coffee.
In Jeff's defense, I think DBS's initial reply came off a little much like a personal attack as opposed to a debate on the merits on the article itself. I'm sure that wasn't his intent, but whatevers.

Alex

[jp1713]

Originally posted by buoywonder@Aug 29 2002, 01:55 AM
Hey, Jeff, I'm actually glad you came to post here. Hope you stop by again. Don't take things said here too harshly, we all jump on each other.

Some days people kick ass, other days they get their ass kicked. The only ones who don't are the ones who never bother to say anything interesting.
yo bw-

it's not that i "take it" one way or another - it really doesn't matter what's said here - but i do appreciate your support.

there are several ideas flowing throughout my article, held together by the common thread of the imbalance of power in our world. so... movies, such as BC, and more importantly "the business", are just ***reflections*** or symptoms, if you will, of this inequaliity.

ANY facet of society that is directly tied to power - whether that be a dominant or subordinate position - reflects this, from the judicial system, to wall street, all the way to the white house.

so, talking about BC can be seen as just a way to metaphorically illustrate this imbalance of power.

once an individual begins to make the connections in the world in this way, things really begin to make sense. there are REAL creative and economic reasons why movies such as BC get made the way they do, just as there are real reasons why iraq is on dubya's "to do list." but addressing situations that reflect this power imbalance with platitudes - whether it's, "white girls surf," or "the axis of evil" - doesn't solve anything and, in fact, does more harm by obscuring the imbalance. the fact that such a platitude in this context could come from someone ostensibly asian frankly is sad - not surprising (which is doubly sad) - but sad. this viewpoint only throws fuel on the fire of uncritical thought - the very LAST thing that asians, blacks, latinos and natives need. because if one lacks a critical perspective of the world, then they're just like the herd, with life just washing over them, with no say, no opinion. thus, when dubya says "terrorism" that's all he needs - it's like a pavlovian pr machine, fueled on NOT knowing, let alone WANTING to know, but instead being blissfully unaware so long as we have our lattes, suvs and cable tv.

now, if someone can't grasp the elementary concept of an uneven power dynamic, then i can't have an intelligent convo with them, because it's two people talking on different levels.

moreover, my job isn't to teach anyone here how to think, and more importantly, *see* analogically, much less make connections between seemingly disparate (or not) phenomena.

in struggle,

jp



<!--EDIT|jp1713|Aug 31 2002, 10:47 AM-->

[achtungbaby]

Originally posted by jp1713@Aug 28 2002, 05:46 PM
til the next article :lol:
Feel free to submit your articles here, too!

[Shuriken]

I just don't get it...

I don't understand why so many people on this site are criticizing Jeff Park for his analysis of Blue Crush — and I especially don't understand why so many people are making excuses for the movie.

Doesn't everyone who belongs to a site called "Yellow World" want to see more Asian people — especially Asian Americans — in prominent roles in the media? Isn't everyone here tired of — if not pissed off at — seeing stories where Asian people are relegated to the background, particularly when the material might seem to call for Asian lead characters?

If you answer "yes" to these questions, why try to rationalize Hollywood's continual marginalization of Asian people on the screen?

Maybe you liked Blue Crush. Maybe you could just look at it as an individual film where the lead character "just happened" to be white, and maybe you thought that the scene where the adorable white romantic couple fought a bunch of hissable Islander hooligans wasn't racially charged. But if you just look at this movie in a vacuum, you're missing the larger picture.

Some people on this thread are asking: Why can't a movie set in Hawaii have a white lead character? But this question is bass-ackwards. Hollywood has been making Hawaii-set movies with white lead characters for decades. To mention only a few: Waikiki Wedding, Honolulu, From Here to Eternity, Ma and Pa Kettle at Waikiki, The Revolt of Mamie Stover, Gidget Goes Hawaiian, Blue Hawaii (starring Elvis Presley), Diamond Head, Ride the Wild Surf, In Harm's Way, Hawaii, Paradise — Hawaiian-Style (Elvis again), Kona Coast, Tora! Tora! Tora!, The Hawaiians, Big Wednesday, Aloha Donny and Marie, The Castaway Cowboy, Black Widow, Goodbye Paradise, and Pearl Harbor. There were also a couple of long-running TV shows called Hawaii Five-0 and Magnum PI.

Hawaii-set movies with lead Asian characters — Picture Bride, Johnny Tsunami, Lilo and Stitch — are very much the exception to the rule. But with Hawaii's Asain/Pacific population now standing at 62%, the disproportionate number of "Hawaii" movies with white lead characters is starting to look ridiculous.

And while watching Blue Crush, I was willing to go along with its white, blonde lead character (although I'd like to know how many blondes work as hotel maids in Hawaii). But when the fight scene with the local roughnecks appeared, I also got the idea that the film was trying to make its white characters look like the "put-upon" "victims" of "discrimination."

In 1990, Japanese American filmmaker Steven Okazaki won the Oscar for his documentary Days of Waiting, about a real-life white woman (the wife of a Japanese American man) who was imprisoned in an internment camp during World War II. The Japanese American internees numbered more than 120,000, but it was the story of the lone white woman that received sympathy and public recognition (even though the white woman was in the camp voluntarily, while the Asian prisoners weren't). In 1993, 20th Century Fox poured $40 million and Sean Connery into the blockbuster Rising Sun, a white man's paranoid fantasy about Asians victimizing whites. Meanwhile, Hollywood still shows no interest in the story of Vincent Chin — a real-life saga about whites victimizing Asians. Are Jeff and I the only ones who see a pattern here???

[SunWuKong]

yeah i want to see more asian characters in american popular media. and it seems to me to be kind of ridiculous that all the main roles in Blue Crush were white. but i haven't watched this movie so i don't really want to comment on it specifically.

more importantly, i don't even want to watch it. i've been pretty fed up with hollywood anyway and i hardly watch any american movies anymore.

[Shuriken]

Originally posted by SunWuKung@Sep 4 2002, 02:17 AM
yeah i want to see more asian characters in american popular media. and it seems to me to be kind of ridiculous that all the main roles in Blue Crush were white.
Thanks for your comment, SWK. But just to be exact, the white lead character's friends were played by Michelle Rodriguez, a Latina, and Sanoe Lake, who is hapa, and both of them got higher billing and more screen time than just about all of the other white characters. Still, why couldn't Rodriguez's or Lake's character have been the protagonist? (Rhetorical question.)

[achtungbaby]

Originally posted by Shuriken@Sep 3 2002, 03:33 PM
I just don't get it...

I don't understand why so many people on this site are criticizing Jeff Park for his analysis of Blue Crush — and I especially don't understand why so many people are making excuses for the movie.
I don't disagree with anything you've said. I was kind of surprised to see so much of a backlash to Jeff's review. There've been controversial posts in the Rant Room before, so I'm not sure why this one was critiqued.

[Hito]

Where can i find Jeff Park's review?

[SunWuKong]

Originally posted by Hito@Sep 4 2002, 02:03 PM
Where can i find Jeff Park's review?
here it is (http://yellowworld.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=119&mode=nocomments&order=1&thold=-1)

[jp1713]

shuriken-

first, thanks for "getting it." it's been my experience that asians typically don't understand cultural criticism; they seem to lack the intellectual tools that would enable them to deconstruct what's going on in the institutions of power in our society. and the movie industry is nothing if not an institution of power.

which brings me to another subject that perhaps the asian backlash here of my commentary can help illumuniate; namely, is there a corallary here between asians (here denoting asian-pacifics/asian-pacific americans) typicaly tracking educationally into the hard sciences/non-liberal arts and not the liberal arts or fine arts?

my suggestion for this stems from my anectdotal experience; typically, asians that studied engineering, biology, or even econ, but not history, english, communications, art history, let alone asian-am history, seem to lack a consciousness about politics, and in particular history - the most valuable subject of all.

as a result, these asians come out prepared to work for "the man," but hold little intellectually in terms of a working understanding of politics, history, cultures, other than an intuitive or sophmoric view at best.

for them, there's no contradiction in wearing abercrombie & fitch clothing because "it's just clothes, don't make sucha a big deal about it." their worldview becomes reduced to a set of platitudes that explains away relatively complex phenomena such as white guys and asian women with simpicity like "it's all about who you fall in love with." end of argument. after all, how can you argue with someone who doesn't understand sexual politics???

they lack the intellectual tools to make connections in the world, so as to understand when king platitude himself, DUHbya, says "axis of evil" they understand ONLY what DUHbya wants them to.

the world is not that simple - certainly not as simple as DUHbya wants us to believe. and thank god that there ARE those that understand this.

Chomsky once gave a great illustration of just how lacking the american public is on political, economic and historical issues. he drew the example of sports talk radio shows. and how often the callers were very wel informed on strategy, key players, coaching moves, etc.

but there is no such popular corollary for alternative politics, art or history. you have to dig for it.

i thought my arguments were pretty straightforward, and like you, was amazed at how many (presumably) asians just didn't get it; among my peers, the article was considered one of the better ones i've composed.

BLUE CRUSH, in the end, is really just a vehicle to talk about how imbalanced "things are," the liberties that powerful white males are privilieged to make. what a luxury! in talking about BLUE CRUSH, it becomes a touchstone, if you will, to talk about larger issues in society, powers that play upon asians and Others ****whether or not one is aware of them.**** i myself would rather know than not.

so, i'm just wondering: is there a connection between one's education - formal or informal - and their ability to make sense of seemingly innocuous things - such as movies - and the larger forces in our society that run this world?

thanks again for your post, shuriken.

jeff park



<!--EDIT|jp1713|Sep 8 2002, 01:22 AM-->

[Shuriken]

I don't really have any answers to Jeff's probing questions. However, I would like to toss out another anecdote about Hollywood's white-washing of Asian subject matter:

A few years ago, Julie Sue, a Chinese American attorney based in L.A., successfully prosecuted some garment manufacturers who held their Asian-immigrant female employees in slave-like conditions. Hollywood soon came knocking, and a production company called Sue wanting to make a movie out of the case with her as the lead character. But there was one caveat: the production company said that it wanted to change her character to a white woman on the grounds that the audience needs an "American" hero to identify with. Sue angrily responded that she is an American, and she refused to have anything to do with the project.

Now, if the movie had been made according to the production company's design and portrayed a real-life Chinese American woman as a Caucasian (in the way that A Beautiful Mind portrayed the real-life Salvadoran woman Alicia Nash as an Anglo), I wonder if many of the members of this site would have been angered by that, or if they would have shrugged it off as "just a movie." In such a case, I'm sure that the production company would have defended changing Sue's character to white on the grounds that they needed a star for the role or that they merely cast "the best actress for the part." They would have claimed that the character's race was incidental, when in fact, as Julie Sue's story proves, race was very important to the production company.

To me, this anecdote confirms a bit of Hollywood "conventional wisdom" that I have always suspected. Hollywood assumes that its audience can't relate to or identify with a lead character with an Asian face. To put it bluntly, Hollywood caters to a racially discriminatory viewer. This is why there are so many movies and TV shows with non-Asian lead characters, even in roles and stories where such characters would more likely be Asian.

[DaBestSpooner]

Originally posted by jp1713@Sep 7 2002, 08:21 PM
shuriken-

first, thanks for "getting it." it's been my experience that asians typically don't understand cultural criticism; they seem to lack the intellectual tools that would enable them to deconstruct what's going on in the institutions of power in our society. and the movie industry is nothing if not an institution of power.

which brings me to another subject that perhaps the asian backlash here of my commentary can help illumuniate; namely, is there a corallary here between asians (here denoting asian-pacifics/asian-pacific americans) typicaly tracking educationally into the hard sciences/non-liberal arts and not the liberal arts or fine arts?

my suggestion for this stems from my anectdotal experience; typically, asians that studied engineering, biology, or even econ, but not history, english, communications, art history, let alone asian-am history, seem to lack a consciousness about politics, and in particular history - the most valuable subject of all.

as a result, these asians come out prepared to work for "the man," but hold little intellectually in terms of a working understanding of politics, history, cultures, other than an intuitive or sophmoric view at best.

for them, there's no contradiction in wearing abercrombie & fitch clothing because "it's just clothes, don't make sucha a big deal about it." their worldview becomes reduced to a set of platitudes that explains away relatively complex phenomena such as white guys and asian women with simpicity like "it's all about who you fall in love with." end of argument. after all, how can you argue with someone who doesn't understand sexual politics???

they lack the intellectual tools to make connections in the world, so as to understand when king platitude himself, DUHbya, says "axis of evil" they understand ONLY what DUHbya wants them to.

the world is not that simple - certainly not as simple as DUHbya wants us to believe. and thank god that there ARE those that understand this.

Chomsky once gave a great illustration of just how lacking the american public is on political, economic and historical issues. he drew the example of sports talk radio shows. and how often the callers were very wel informed on strategy, key players, coaching moves, etc.

but there is no such popular corollary for alternative politics, art or history. you have to dig for it.

i thought my arguments were pretty straightforward, and like you, was amazed at how many (presumably) asians just didn't get it; among my peers, the article was considered one of the better ones i've composed.

BLUE CRUSH, in the end, is really just a vehicle to talk about how imbalanced "things are," the liberties that powerful white males are privilieged to make. what a luxury! in talking about BLUE CRUSH, it becomes a touchstone, if you will, to talk about larger issues in society, powers that play upon asians and Others ****whether or not one is aware of them.**** i myself would rather know than not.

so, i'm just wondering: is there a connection between one's education - formal or informal - and their ability to make sense of seemingly innocuous things - such as movies - and the larger forces in our society that run this world?

thanks again for your post, shuriken.

jeff park
what a load of hubris!

[angel nympho]

I think it's pointless to critique this movie about their lack of Asian portrayal. Keep in mind who the target audience of this movie was: young female surfers. The kind who idolize girls like Layne Beachley and Keala Kennelly, Megan Abudo and Rochelle Ballard. The people who want to see this movie WANT to see girls who fit into that category. The point of the movie was to portray the FEEL of surfing as a sport, not the LOOK of faces of Hawaii. As a surfing movie, Blue Crush has gone a long way, seeing as how Hollywood and surfing don't exactly have a very good track record. It was the first movie to actually get the lifestyle down pretty well.

And the arguments that the only seemingly "Asian" look was the bad guy? Well the reason he got cast had nothing to do with his look or the want to portray an Asian guy as a villain. He got cast because he's a pro bodyboarder. He was just one of many athlete cameos in the movie.

Why is there such an uproar about the lack of Asian faces in this movie particularly? Simply because it's set in Hawaii? I mean, Crazy/Beautiful took place in Palisades. Tons of Asians are there. I didn't see any Asians in that movie, but nobody gave a shit. Why is this movie any different?

[achtungbaby]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 01:57 PM
Why is there such an uproar about the lack of Asian faces in this movie particularly? Simply because it's set in Hawaii? I mean, Crazy/Beautiful took place in Palisades. Tons of Asians are there. I didn't see any Asians in that movie, but nobody gave a shit. Why is this movie any different?
I didn't see Crazy / Beautiful. But if they made a movie about Koreatown, for example, without any of the main characters being Korean, I'd be annoyed.

Uproars are necessary in Hollywood. Without 'em, do you honestly think they'd cast minority characters out of the goodness of their own hearts?

[Arex]

If I'm not mistaken, APIs make up something in the realm of 60% of Hawaii's population. I did a quick web search for the Pacific Palisades and saw numbers between 4.5% and 7%. Based on those numbers, I'd say it's more reasonable to expect a greater API presence in a movie set in Hawaii than one set in the Pacific Palisades.


Alex

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by achtungbaby@Oct 4 2002, 10:32 PM
Uproars are necessary in Hollywood. Without 'em, do you honestly think they'd cast minority characters out of the goodness of their own hearts?
I'd like to think that minority characters are cast for reasons more than just their skin color, yes.

You say this like every non-minority in the world is a racist. I honestly believe that most people aren't.

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by Arex@Oct 4 2002, 10:35 PM
If I'm not mistaken, APIs make up something in the realm of 60% of Hawaii's population. &nbsp;I did a quick web search for the Pacific Palisades and saw numbers between 4.5% and 7%. &nbsp;Based on those numbers, I'd say it's more reasonable to expect a greater API presence in a movie set in Hawaii than one set in the Pacific Palisades.


Alex
Either way. *Shrug* That wasn't really my point. My point was that the movie wasn't about people living in Hawaii. It was about the women's surfing community. And for that reason, it portrayed a main character as somebody who looks just like an awful lot of the most admired women in pro surfing.

If I was a Hollywood person, I'd realize that you can't please everybody with one movie. Had this movie starred nobody but Asians, I'm sure a lot of people who watched it wouldn't have felt the same way. It's hard to have a movie starring a bunch of minorities and not have a big "race" issue in the plot. This movie was designed to please a certain group of people. It accomplished this. Maybe the next movie will be better suited to please you.

Personally, If I had to choose a group of people I want to please, I'd probably aim for the majority, too. That's how you make more money.



<!--EDIT|angel nympho|Oct 4 2002, 10:39 PM-->

[Arex]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 03:35 PM
You say this like every non-minority in the world is a racist. I honestly believe that most people aren't.
I would agree that most people aren't consciously racist in their beliefs, but when their actions result in disparate or unfair results, I think it's perfectly reasonable to call them out on it.


Alex

[Arex]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 03:36 PM
It's hard to have a movie starring a bunch of minorities and not have a big "race" issue in the plot. This movie was designed to please a certain group of people. It accomplished this. Maybe the next movie will be better suited to please you.

Personally, If I had to choose a group of people I want to please, I'd probably aim for the majority, too. That's how you make more money.
Don't you see it's exactly this kind of mentality that keeps Asian Americans from getting a fair shake in Hollywood? You say that you'd like to think that most minorities aren't cast solely because of their skin color. But then you turn around and say that, by casting minorities, it's hard not to have a big "race" issue in the plot. Why is this? Why must race necessarily be an issue just because a minority is cast?

Alex

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by Arex@Oct 4 2002, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 03:36 PM
It's hard to have a movie starring a bunch of minorities and not have a big "race" issue in the plot. &nbsp;This movie was designed to please a certain group of people. &nbsp;It accomplished this. &nbsp;Maybe the next movie will be better suited to please you. &nbsp;

Personally, If I had to choose a group of people I want to please, I'd probably aim for the majority, too. &nbsp;That's how you make more money.
Don't you see it's exactly this kind of mentality that keeps Asian Americans from getting a fair shake in Hollywood? You say that you'd like to think that most minorities aren't cast solely because of their skin color. But then you turn around and say that, by casting minorities, it's hard not to have a big "race" issue in the plot. Why is this? Why must race necessarily be an issue just because a minority is cast?

Alex
I don't think it should be. But have you ever seen a movie that had most of it's roles be minorities and have it NOT be about race? I'm not talking about when A minority is cast. I'm talking about when a cast is made up of almost entirely minorities. And NO I don't think this attitude keeps Asians out of Hollywood. I don't think it's an attitude. I think it's common sense that if I want to make the most money and have as many people as I can come to watch my movie, a movie that caters to "white pop america" brings in money from almost every facet of Americans, whereas a movie about Asian americans pretty much brings in money from Asian Americans and a few others who are interested. Much like films about black people (by this i mean, like, soul food, the brothers, omar epps type stuff) will get most of its money from black people and a few others who are into that kind of movie. movies built to cater the widest audience will have the most appeal. when movies are to be made about things that EVERYBODY might not be interested in, its a completely different story. but when we're looking to cater the widest audience with a group of minorities cast as the major roles, there HAS to be a race issue in order to get as much attention from non-minorities to take it out of the category that only minorities will be interested. it's true that we relate better to characters that look like us, talk like us, and live like us when there's nothing going on to make us emotionally attatched to the character.

^-- oh yeah, and i think that's why the producers wanted to change the julie sue character. although, in that case, i doubt it would have been necessary, seeing as how the movie actually had a point.

[Green_Circle]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by achtungbaby@Oct 4 2002, 10:32 PM
Uproars are necessary in Hollywood. &nbsp;Without 'em, do you honestly think they'd cast minority characters out of the goodness of their own hearts?
I'd like to think that minority characters are cast for reasons more than just their skin color, yes.

You say this like every non-minority in the world is a racist. I honestly believe that most people aren't.
And I agree that the majority of non-minorities aren't racist. So if that's the case we can star minorities in any movie that Hollywood makes without their regard for 'target audiences'. Hollywood peeps like to say that white America only wants to see actors that look like them. I say that that argument is racist on its head and the implication that white America is racist and only wants to see its own kind on screen. The same old argument they like to use to keep us off the screen is getting tired. I believe that white folks would like to see more of us non-whites in film as much as we would like to see us. :dance:

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by Green_Circle@Oct 4 2002, 11:44 PM
Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 10:35 PM
Originally posted by achtungbaby@Oct 4 2002, 10:32 PM
Uproars are necessary in Hollywood. Without 'em, do you honestly think they'd cast minority characters out of the goodness of their own hearts?
I'd like to think that minority characters are cast for reasons more than just their skin color, yes.

You say this like every non-minority in the world is a racist. I honestly believe that most people aren't.
And I agree that the majority of non-minorities aren't racist. So if that's the case we can star minorities in any movie that Hollywood makes without their regard for 'target audiences'. Hollywood peeps like to say that white America only wants to see actors that look like them. I say that that argument is racist on its head and the implication that white America is racist and only wants to see its own kind on screen. The same old argument they like to use to keep us off the screen is getting tired. I believe that white folks would like to see more of us non-whites in film as much as we would like to see us. :dance:
I agree that most non-minorities aren't racist and don't mind seeing minorities on screen, but I think it's still important to have non-minorities represented. Honestly, I'm sure people aren't being racist, but it's awfully easy to assume that when an entire cast of a movie centers around a certain ethnic group, the movie is built to cater to that ethnic group. That's why I think it's a good thing to have casts be of mixed ethnicities. Then they can avoid the whole "you're being racist" finger pointing, and still have a bunch of characters that anybody can identify with.

What I don't understand is why people get so upset when Hollywood wants to make characters the audience can relate to, insisting that it isn't true that audiences want to see characters that look like them, but then turn around and complain that movies only have white people in them and we don't look like any of them. Isn't that just kind of supporting the Hollywood idea that we want to see people on screen that we look like?

[achtungbaby]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 02:35 PM
You say this like every non-minority in the world is a racist. I honestly believe that most people aren't.
I don't think all white people are racist. But let's try and be reasonable about this: take into consideration their record on race -- do you think it points towards justice or inequality?

Hey, I'm all for forgiveness and moving on and so on. And certainly, progress has been made -- but that progress is the result of minorities doing many of the things conservatives despise: kicking, screaming, bitching.

[Arex]

Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 04:58 PM
I agree that most non-minorities aren't racist and don't mind seeing minorities on screen, but I think it's still important to have non-minorities represented. &nbsp;Honestly, I'm sure people aren't being racist, but it's awfully easy to assume that when an entire cast of a movie centers around a certain ethnic group, the movie is built to cater to that ethnic group. &nbsp;That's why I think it's a good thing to have casts be of mixed ethnicities. &nbsp;Then they can avoid the whole "you're being racist" finger pointing, and still have a bunch of characters that anybody can identify with.

What I don't understand is why people get so upset when Hollywood wants to make characters the audience can relate to, insisting that it isn't true that audiences want to see characters that look like them, but then turn around and complain that movies only have white people in them and we don't look like any of them. &nbsp;Isn't that just kind of supporting the Hollywood idea that we want to see people on screen that we look like?
I don't think any Asian American necessarily wants to see every Hollywood movie having a 100% Asian American cast. The problem here is underrepresentation and misrepresentation. No white person can complain that that whites haven't had their fair share of Hollywood screen time. Nor can any white person really say that they've been casted out of pictures where they "rightfully" belong. Minorities, on the other hand, and particularly Asian Americans, just aren't getting a fair shake. Not only are Asian Americans not cast enough overall, but they're also grossly undercast in movies and television programs with scenarios where you ordinarily would expect to see Asians. More consideration for the reality of things (e.g., Asian Americans in Hawaii, or Asian Americans in the import race scene), or more lead characters played by Asian Americans (where race is not an issue) is all we're asking for.

And consider this: I, as an Asian American, usually have no problem relating to many of the characters in big Hollywood productions played by white people. The fact that the actor is white doesn't take away from my moviegoing experience as an American, as a human being. Why then is it so far fetched to believe that a white American can't relate to that same character if played by an Asian American? Will the person's Asian-ness somehow detract from the average white American's moviegoing experience? Is the movie somehow less palatable to mainstream white America? If so, then wouldn't that seem to suggest that the majority of white Americans still tend to harbor at least some kind of racist attitudes? If that's the case, then I'd argue that the need for reform in Hollywood (in the small ways noted above) is even greater, since mass media can have such a huge impact on people's attitudes and perceptions.

Alex

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by achtungbaby@Oct 5 2002, 12:17 AM
Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 02:35 PM
You say this like every non-minority in the world is a racist. &nbsp;I honestly believe that most people aren't.
I don't think all white people are racist. But let's try and be reasonable about this: take into consideration their record on race -- do you think it points towards justice or inequality?

Hey, I'm all for forgiveness and moving on and so on. And certainly, progress has been made -- but that progress is the result of minorities doing many of the things conservatives despise: kicking, screaming, bitching.
Well, the way I see it, their record seems to point to inequality because of those who were in power. People in places of high power often lean towards inequality in order to keep themselves in power. Race is a human invention created to keep those in power in power. But when it comes to the general public, I don't think a majority of them are racist.

[angel nympho]

Originally posted by Arex@Oct 5 2002, 01:02 AM
Originally posted by angel nympho@Oct 4 2002, 04:58 PM
I agree that most non-minorities aren't racist and don't mind seeing minorities on screen, but I think it's still important to have non-minorities represented. Honestly, I'm sure people aren't being racist, but it's awfully easy to assume that when an entire cast of a movie centers around a certain ethnic group, the movie is built to cater to that ethnic group. That's why I think it's a good thing to have casts be of mixed ethnicities. Then they can avoid the whole "you're being racist" finger pointing, and still have a bunch of characters that anybody can identify with.

What I don't understand is why people get so upset when Hollywood wants to make characters the audience can relate to, insisting that it isn't true that audiences want to see characters that look like them, but then turn around and complain that movies only have white people in them and we don't look like any of them. Isn't that just kind of supporting the Hollywood idea that we want to see people on screen that we look like?
I don't think any Asian American necessarily wants to see every Hollywood movie having a 100% Asian American cast. The problem here is underrepresentation and misrepresentation. No white person can complain that that whites haven't had their fair share of Hollywood screen time. Nor can any white person really say that they've been casted out of pictures where they "rightfully" belong. Minorities, on the other hand, and particularly Asian Americans, just aren't getting a fair shake. Not only are Asian Americans not cast enough overall, but they're also grossly undercast in movies and television programs with scenarios where you ordinarily would expect to see Asians. More consideration for the reality of things (e.g., Asian Americans in Hawaii, or Asian Americans in the import race scene), or more lead characters played by Asian Americans (where race is not an issue) is all we're asking for.

And consider this: I, as an Asian American, usually have no problem relating to many of the characters in big Hollywood productions played by white people. The fact that the actor is white doesn't take away from my moviegoing experience as an American, as a human being. Why then is it so far fetched to believe that a white American can't relate to that same character if played by an Asian American? Will the person's Asian-ness somehow detract from the average white American's moviegoing experience? Is the movie somehow less palatable to mainstream white America? If so, then wouldn't that seem to suggest that the majority of white Americans still tend to harbor at least some kind of racist attitudes? If that's the case, then I'd argue that the need for reform in Hollywood (in the small ways noted above) is even greater, since mass media can have such a huge impact on people's attitudes and perceptions.

Alex
A lot of good points you bring up. But who exactly is to decide where Asian people BELONG? I mean, think of it from the standpoint of the people making the movie. Do you think they honestly have the authority to say where we belong?

And I agree with you on the fact that I can relate to non-Asian characters in movies. But that's easy for us, we're used to living dual roles as a minority in America and as an American in America. So we all kind of have a sense of what it's like to be a non-minority, because we've all been in situations where we've been accepted unquestionably. But what does a non-minority know about being a minority? Absolutely nothing. You can't expect a white American to understand what it feels like to be cast aside simply because of their race, therefore if a character in a movie experiences this, it'll be hard for some to relate on THAT level. However, in the case of movies where race issues don't exist, I don't think there'll be a problem.

I hope none of you think I think that Asians don't belong in the media or something.

[Green_Circle]

The way I see it is that those in power in hollywood are fully content to have things just the way they are. The poster who said that Hollywood needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the present day meaning it's no longer just a white world anymore, made a good point. I don't believe that the white audience is racist. To subject them to a lily white world in this day and age does all of us a disservice. The world is changing and they need to catch up to reality. :retard: