Support NeoGAF

[Oersted]

I'm going to assume that your response is so brief because you are unable to articulate why it's a 'weird' post.

In a thread, where people adress an issue, based on an article which adresses an issue, referring to people already adressing an issue, you proclaim an issue is not getting adressed.

Or do you mean Johansson did not address the issue because she assumes her movie will bomb??

Armie Hammer was an unknown at the time, and he played the title character of Lone Ranger.

As for Depp, at this point I don't think anyone sees him as as bankable outside of a Pirates film.

He starred afterwards in Mortdecai, Transcendence and Alice 2.

You realize change takes time? Women of color won't get a landslide of roles after this movie. Of course not. But the idea is to show audiences that women can be badasses in action movies as well.

Twenty years ago this movie wouldn't have happened.

In 1997, the newest entry in the Alien franchise, starring Sigourney Weaver, was released.

In 1997, the 5th Element was released, kickstarting Milla Jovovichs career.

In 1997, a female directed action movie(Project Peacemaker) was released. Till 2017 and Wonder Woman, not one woman directed a action movie in Hollywood.

 

[Meowster]

I'd be good with an Asian lead in this but surely there are better Asian actresses than Rinko Kikuchi out there? Why is her name always the first one mentioned?

 

[Inferno313]

I'm arguing that movies starring unknown actors can be successful and movies starring famous actors can bomb...like I said several times.

Also going by previous whitewashing films like DB Evolution, TLA, and gods of Egypt then yeah I think i'd rather it not be made.

Sure, but I'm explaining why it's unlikely that this film would have even gotten a chance to prove that right.

If we take your thought exercise one step further: Name one film, based on a niche pre-existing property (like GitS), that didn't star a big star, that did well.

 

[kswiston]

I don't have a problem with Jackie Chan making films in China obviously. His politics bothers me somewhat, but I would rather he make better films there than another Rush Hour. Same goes for Chow Yun Fat. I didn't think that was the issue being discussed though.

Someone brought up Jackie Chan, and I gave reasons why he was a bad example for this thread. Especially if we are comparing him to equivalent 60+ white actors (most of whom seem to be reduced to supporting roles in comic and genre films now).

For this thread, Chloe Bennet is a much better example. She basically had to hide her Asian heritage to get callbacks in casting (after originally going to China to pursue singing, since there isn't much of a market for Asian American singers either).

EDIT: And Chloe has the benefit of having a lot of European facial features. It's no doubt even harder if you have an Asian face and an Asian name come casting time.

 

[PSqueak]

To be fair, you would have to be insane to give a $200 million dollar franchise to Kikuchi.

Is it true that she's actually basically box office poison in Japan?

I heard rumors about it due to psychotic Idol-like culture.

 

[#sorrynotsorry]

20 years what wouldn't have been made? An action film with a female? I'll give you 30, Aliens? T2? White female led films are not a new thing. You guys keep saying it takes time but it's been decades and Woc are still being snubbed.

With a budget comparable to this? In what is functionally a new IP to the American public (or worse, an IP related to anime which is "for kids" or "for nerds" to the general public)? No way. Not a chance. This film would not have been green lit.

 

[H.Cornerstone]

I'm confused by your post. Are you saying there are, or aren't bankable stars? Because I don't think there are anymore. Maybe a couple but for the msot part the days of guys like Arnold who could sell movies on their presences alone are gone. Also Lucy is an odd, and I don't think that should be used as evidence for ScarJo being bankable. She's been in plenty of films that haven't done all that well.

There are not. In fact, the only ones I can think of to even bring up would be

Clooney
Matt Damon
Denzel
Brad Pitt
and ScarJO

And I am assuming the executives for GITS saw Lucy (another Sci Fi film) saw how well that did and thought with Scar Jo GITS would have the same success.

 

[Jarmel]

Disney gave a $20 BILLION dollar franchises to three unproven actors, one African British Citizen, one hispanic, and a woman. Why they couldn't also give it to an actress who was in an award wining and highly praised movie (Babel) is beyond me.

Because it's Star Wars. Franchise movies have a ton more leeway with the general public. Lucasfilm also pulled some shitty marketing too in a number of Asian markets in regards to minimizing Boyega.

Im not talking about it being anti-asian im speaking of the economics of it just like you are. Most recent films that have engaged in white washing haven't been successful, There are however plenty of recent films with unknown actors that have done well, and plenty of films with big name actors that have done terribly. The notion that a film needs to have a famous white actor in order to be bankable is nonsense.

Also I'm laughing at the "if scarjo was black" part. If ScarJo was black she wouldn't have anywhere near the career she does now.

There are obviously other factors other than whether the lead is white or not. Gods of Egypt is simply a shitty film and looked bad anyway, so of course it bombed. You still have to make a decent film. What we're talking about is probability. Casting ScarJo increases the odds of it not bombing, it certainly doesn't guarantee it.

Lucy proved to enough execs that she is one of the few actors/actresses that has some level of star power.

 

[lightskintwin]

That's very true, things could have been handled better.

. But her dismissal of it is the definition of White feminism. She can acknowledge both the lack of Asian American leads/Whitewashing controversy around her movie and the gains she's trying to make in gender equality within the movie industry.

 

[Jarmel]

I'd be good with an Asian lead in this but surely there are better Asian actresses than Rinko Kikuchi out there? Why is her name always the first one mentioned?

Because GAF saw Pacific Rim.

Is it true that she's actually basically box office poison in Japan?

I heard rumors about it due to psychotic Idol-like culture.

No clue. Could be possible because Japan is weird like that.

 

[GuitarAtomik]

I'd be good with an Asian lead in this but surely there are better Asian actresses than Rinko Kikuchi out there? Why is her name always the first one mentioned?

Because she's the only one they can think of (which is a problem).

 

[lightskintwin]

There are not. In fact, the only ones I can think of to even bring up would be

Clooney
Matt Damon
Denzel
Brad Pitt
and ScarJO

And I am assuming the executives for GITS saw Lucy (another Sci Fi film) saw how well that did and thought with Scar Jo GITS would have the same success.

Clooney is not a bankable star . Tom Cruise, Will Smith, and Tom Hanks are noticeably missing.

 

[PSqueak]

I'd be good with an Asian lead in this but surely there are better Asian actresses than Rinko Kikuchi out there? Why is her name always the first one mentioned?

Because the diversity problem is so bad that people default to her because of Pacific Rim.

 

[- J - D -]

The way forward is pretty obvious; either enough people support Asian stars lower on the rungs so they get a shot to headline something, rolling stone and all that, or some studio guy/gal takes a chance on casting on a film that's a success and it slowly breaks down the barriers that way.

I don't disagree it's self-perpetuating, because with these sorts of issues it's very much a chicken-or-egg situation. You can't make a big film without bankable leads, can't generate those bankable leads unless they're given roles, but they aren't given roles because they're yet not bankable leads. This isn't even a racial issue—as anyone who has had to apply to entry-level jobs demanding years of experience, it's bullshit that occurs in every industry, and those who are disadvantaged are going to bear the brunt of it.

You can't make a big film without bankable leads? What about a relative unknown in a bankable existing franchise or property? Hollywood has been co-opting ideas from other countries for so long and filling their roles with Taylor Kitsches (or the like), but they can't reciprocate? I see your argument but it's really the same as the previous ones, only more verbose. And yeah, it's tough for newcomers in every industry, sure, and the disadvantaged are definitely getting it the hardest...and?

The problem is that while the solution is obvious, the mechanics of effecting that change aren't. Are people going to see Hidden Figures because it's about women? Because it's about colored women? Or that it's a good movie, or that it's a good movie that features people of color? More to the point, if Hidden Figures was trash, is it someone's responsibility to support crappy entertainment in the hope it somehow translates to more opportunities for minorities or women? Is that something that is enough of a concern to enough people that it can be a large enough economic force to push the studios to consider? And then with these blockbusters it becomes an even bigger issue because now American sensibilities and concerns are increasingly marginalized for a global audience.

I would never deny the complexity of the mechanics involved. We can play-act out the hypothetical situations with Hidden Figures and the why's and how's of its success, but I don't think it's comparable to the issue at hand. the reality is that it is an affable film with a concept that has mass appeal, bolstered by a talented cast of mostly recognizable Black actors, from a talent pool of which actually exists!

 

[captainpat]

Sure, but I'm explaining why it's unlikely that this film would have even gotten a chance to prove that right.

If we take your thought exercise one step further: Name one film, based on a niche pre-existing property (like GitS), that didn't star a big star, that did well.

Life of pi?

 

[Feel the Swift]

There are not. In fact, the only ones I can think of to even bring up would be

Clooney
Matt Damon
Denzel
Brad Pitt
and ScarJO

And I am assuming the executives for GITS saw Lucy (another Sci Fi film) saw how well that did and thought with Scar Jo GITS would have the same success.

Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy recently

 

[ElBoxyBrown]

With a budget comparable to this? In what is functionally a new IP to the American public (or worse, an IP related to anime which is "for kids" or "for nerds" to the general public)? No way. Not a chance. This film would not have been green lit.

Hollywood had plenty of decades to build up bankable Asian actresses before making a decision on GITS. I guarantee you if GITS does well it isn't gonna change anything.

 

[#sorrynotsorry]

There are not. In fact, the only ones I can think of to even bring up would be

Clooney
Matt Damon
Denzel
Brad Pitt
and ScarJO

And I am assuming the executives for GITS saw Lucy (another Sci Fi film) saw how well that did and thought with Scar Jo GITS would have the same success.

DiCaprio? You also missed Jennifer Lawrence who definitely can as well. I'm positive I could think of more too.

 

[#sorrynotsorry]

Hollywood had plenty of decades to build up bankable Asian actresses before making a decision on GITS. I guarantee you if GITS does well it isn't gonna change anything.

No you can't guarantee anything like that.

(Sorry double post)

 

[lightskintwin]

DiCaprio? You also missed Jennifer Lawrence who definitely can as well. I'm positive I could think of more too.

Yes, those two. Oh yeah, you could probably throw Chris Pratt's name into the pile too.

 

[freeofgreed]

With a budget comparable to this? In what is functionally a new IP to the American public (or worse, an IP related to anime which is "for kids" or "for nerds" to the general public)? No way. Not a chance. This film would not have been green lit.

What is it's budget? And T2 had a 100 million dollar budget and that's not even counting for inflation.

 

[lightskintwin]

Leonardo DiCaprio and Tom Hardy recently

LOL Tom Hardy is not a bankable star.

 

[NH Apache]

The thing is though Kusanagi is "human" or at least her experiences were before she became cyberized. Most of her life is alluded to have been in Japan, so she would be a Japanese woman raised in Japan.

Then again she doesn't even remember her real name, so I guess there is theoretical flex space in a sense.

Wait, I thought she had always been in a cyber body. I think that's specifically referenced, right?

The body thing is kind of vague.

 

[freeofgreed]

Sure, but I'm explaining why it's unlikely that this film would have even gotten a chance to prove that right.

If we take your thought exercise one step further: Name one film, based on a niche pre-existing property (like GitS), that didn't star a big star, that did well.

Why does it have to be that? Can't it be based off a new IP which is essentially the same effect?

 

[Kinyou]

I'd be good with an Asian lead in this but surely there are better Asian actresses than Rinko Kikuchi out there? Why is her name always the first one mentioned?

It's probably the only english speaking japanese actress people can think off.

There are not. In fact, the only ones I can think of to even bring up would be

Clooney
Matt Damon
Denzel
Brad Pitt
and ScarJO

And I am assuming the executives for GITS saw Lucy (another Sci Fi film) saw how well that did and thought with Scar Jo GITS would have the same success.

I'd add Tom Cruise to the list. And while Will Smith has a bit of dry period I very much get the feeling that some of those movies he's been in the last years only got approved because of his attachment.

 

[Skiptastic]

To be fair, Kitsch's best work before John Carter, Friday Night Lights, was pretty great. Who doesn't like Tim Riggins?

Tim Riggins was one of the worst parts of that show. Fuck Tim Riggins.

 

[Jarmel]

What is it's budget? And T2 had a 100 million dollar budget and that's not even counting for inflation.

GitS is a largely CGI movie, it's going to cost at least 100 million. The side characters are a bunch of no-name actors so they might be saving money there but Weta ain't cheap.

Cameron is Cameron. Dude is a pure anomaly in the industry. He made a movie about a goddamn historic event and it's #3 on the box office gross list.

 

[Whompa02]

I hope GITS is good so people can stop fucking shitting all over Johansson. I don't even like her or find per particularly attractive. I just can't stand the constant berating on her person and the movie. It's such a joke.

 

[Inferno313]

Life of pi?

That's like... One of the most popular and critically acclaimed novels of the century. It was also being made by an auteur of significant clout, and was likely a less expensive (though, perhaps not significantly so) production than GitS.

 

[BewareTheBatsie]

Didn't Passengers not make a lot of money? I'm not sure if Lawrence and Pratt are super bankable if a movie that had both of them with a big budget didn't do so well.

 

[kswiston]

Clooney is not a bankable star . Tom Cruise, Will Smith, and Tom Hanks are noticeably missing.

If we are talking about now and not 10-20 years ago, the list is small.

Dwayne Johnson
Kevin Hart
Denzel Washington
Leonardo Dicaprio

Denzel has been super consistent for 15 years now. The other three have had several projects do better than expected without a money drawing license attached, and have had relatively few misses in recent years.

There are a few others, but I disagree with people like Brad Pitt or Matt Damon who have as many misses as they do hits. Casting them is better than casting Armie Hammer obviously, but I don't think they personally make or break the success of most of the films they are in.

Tom Cruise's star isn't as ascendant as it once was, but he's probably the best aging of the 90s draws.

 

[PSqueak]

The thing is though Kusanagi is "human" or at least her experiences were before she became cyberized. Most of her life is alluded to have been in Japan, so she would be a Japanese woman raised in Japan.

Then again she doesn't even remember her real name, so I guess there is theoretical flex space in a sense.

This makes me curious about how valid an argument for or against whitewashing is when the source material Anime features characters that aren't technically japanese but we expect them to be played by japanese actors.

Like for example, Goku, is a humanoid Alien (superman style) that we take for granted would be in the very least "Asian" (not especifically japanese as the world's nationalities in DB are vague as fuck), but technically speaking Goku could be any race because he isn't human, would this excuse be valid for him to be any race? or should he be japanese?

What about One Piece? It takes place in an alternate world, but Oda said despite this he has a specific nationality or real life region he envisions the characters to be from, would people cry "Race bending!" if they casted a japanese man as Luffy instead of a Brazillian (which Oda says he envisions Luffy as)?

 

[Skux]

Her casting is a win for women of all colors, so pipe down Asian Americans and bask in this progress. Scarlett Johansson is the hero we both deserve and need.

Producers are not going to look at the success of this film (if it is successful) and suddenly cast black women in their movies.

No, the fact that the film exists as a blockbuster production with a female lead is a win for women. The fact that Scarlett is playing an Asian character is another slap in the face to Asian Americans who have had to put up with this shit for decades.

They could have done a dozen other things. They could have used cast a Japanese actress and used the money saved on SJ's paycheck on marketing. They could have hired big names in supporting roles for mainstream appeal and turned an unknown Asian into a star and springboard that into further roles and opening doors for casting other Asian actors.

And is it really that big of a win for women in the first place? The trailers mostly portray SJ as a sex object.

 

[lightskintwin]

It's probably the only english speaking japanese actress people can think off.


I'd add Tom Cruise to the list. And while Will Smith has a bit of dry period I very much get the feeling that some of those movies he's been in only got approved because of his attachment.

LOL It's hilarious how people somehow try to bring down Will Smith when none of his movies have bombed, some of underperformed but he's one of if, not the biggest of Hollywood's consistent performers as a lead actor.

Even Collateral Beauty which was critically panned has made 83 million on a 36 million dollar budget. Do I really need to pull up all of these other actors you all name as Bankable stars that have movies that not only bombed but didn't come close to recouping their production budget?

 

[dripdripsplash]

Oh this is the one who did commercials for some israeli settler company right.

Yeah...

 

[freeofgreed]

That's like... One of the most popular and critically acclaimed novels of the century. It was also being made by an auteur of significant clout, and was likely a less expensive (though, perhaps not significantly so) production than GitS.

You keep moving goal posts. Plenty of Americans had no idea what the book was before the film came out.

 

[Spasm]

I'd be good with an Asian lead in this but surely there are better Asian actresses than Rinko Kikuchi out there? Why is her name always the first one mentioned?

Rila Fukushima, Tao Okamoto, and Karen Fukuhara (lol) would also be decent choices, but arguably, none of them are as bankable as Rinko to a risk-adverse Hollywood.

If we are allowed to step outside Japan, I think Doona Bae woulda made a fantastic Major.

 

[freeofgreed]

GitS is a largely CGI movie, it's going to cost at least 100 million. The side characters are a bunch of no-name actors so they might be saving money there but Weta ain't cheap.

Cameron is Cameron. Dude is a pure anomaly in the industry. He made a movie about a goddamn historic event and it's #3 on the box office gross list.

There are plenty of big budget films starring women.

 

[BronsonLee]

Oh this is the one who did commercials for some israeli settler company right.

Yeah...

She also did the most phoned in commercial in history

 

[Xe4]

Disney is not making Ghost in the Shell.

if Ghost in the Shell had the kind of cachet and pop cultural relevance that Star Wars does, Dreamworks/Paramount probably could and would cast whoever they want in the lead role.

They were planning to distribute it when ScarJo was cast though. Anyhow, as seen with Avatar, The Life of Pi, etc. You don't need name recognition to make big bucks, just a well made movie, and good marketing campaign.

 

[lightskintwin]

If we are talking about now and not 10-20 years ago, the list is small.

Dwayne Johnson
Kevin Hart
Denzel Washington
Leonardo Dicaprio

Denzel has been super consistent for 15 years now. The other three have had several projects do better than expected without a money drawing license attached, and have had relatively few misses in recent years.

There are a few others, but I disagree with people like Brad Pitt or Matt Damon who have as many misses as they do hits. Casting them is better than casting Armie Hammer obviously, but I don't think they personally make or break the success of most of the films they are in.

Tom Cruise's star isn't as ascendant as it once was, but he's probably the best aging of the 90s draws.

OK, that might be closer to the truth but Will Smith is definitely still part of that conversation. It's weird how people think he isn't simply because he hasn't starred in as many Big Budget action films as he used too.

 

[kswiston]

LOL It's hilarious how people somehow try to bring down Will Smith when none of his movies have bombed, some of underperformed but he's one of if, not the biggest of Hollywood's consistent performers as a lead actor.

Even Collateral Beauty which was critically panned has made 83 million on a 36 million dollar budget. Do I really need to pull up all of these other actors you all name as Bankable stars that have movies that not only bombed but didn't come close to recouping their production budget?

Current Will Smith looks bad because he went from eight $100M+ domestic films in a row to having a bunch of underperformers in a row. MIB3 made a ton of money but the finance side of it was Sony Pictures being Sony Pictures. As such it is unfairly discounted. Everything else since Seven Pounds was low key, up until Suicide Squad blew up.

EDIT: He's in the same category as Tom Cruise.

 

[Inferno313]

You keep moving goal posts. Plenty of Americans had no idea what the book was before the film came out.

I'm not moving any goal posts. I'm not arguing that Scarlett is who should be the star of this film.

I'm explaining to you why the film would not exist without her, or another actress of her fame, due to Hollywood's risk-adverse nature. You can choose to not believe me, and think that the director of Buried would've gotten a film based on a niche anime from 22 years ago, with no stars of note attached, green lit with a $150+ million budget.

 

[freeofgreed]

I'm not moving any goal posts. I'm not arguing that Scarlett is who should be the star of this film.

I'm explaining to you why the film would not exist without her, or another actress of her fame, due to Hollywood's risk-adverse nature. You can choose to not believe me, and think that the director of Buried would've gotten a film based on a niche anime from 22 years ago, with no stars of note attached, green lit with a $150+ million budget.

And does that absolve them from blame? I don't know why so many people in this thread insist on doing these companies PR for them. The casting in this film absolutely deserve it's criticism. And the state of diversity casting won't change without it.

 

[Abounder]

Sidesteps racial controversy...what else would you expect from someone on Team Mahvel? After all the MCU is having 17 consecutive movies starring super white guys, the MCU sets the bar for action/universe franchises. It is undoubtedly a smart business decision to feature Scarjo though since not only does controversy build hype, she made even Lucy successful.

 

[Feel the Swift]

LOL Tom Hardy is not a bankable star.

Mad Max, The Revenant, The Dark Night Rises

LOL indeed

 

[7Th]

An actor being in a few box office hits doesn't make them bankable stars. You don't become a bankable star unless you carry an original IP poorly reviewed movie like ScarJo did with Lucy.

 

[Inferno313]

And does that absolve them from blame? I don't know why so many people in this thread insist on doing these companies PR for them. The casting in this film absolutely deserve it's criticism. And the state of diversity casting won't change without it.

What on earth are you talking about? I'm not defending the casting at all. I've criticized it in this thread, and in many others. My posts in this thread have been an attempt to provide context and examination into why exactly these casting decisions get made. Not to justify them. To criticize a system requires an understanding of the why's and how's of said system.

"They should just cast an asian unknown" is an uninformed fantasy that doesn't understand the systemic issues at play, at all. THAT's the shit that won't change the state of diversity casting.

 

[see5harp]

I don't know. Lucy seems more like an anomaly to me. It would be interested to find out how many people actually see The Avengers movies because of ScarJo's character. Nothing she does in the Avengers movies is remotely memorable.

 

[Lebron]

Mad Max, The Revenant, The Dark Night Rises

LOL indeed

People saw all those movies purely because of Tom Hardy. Yup.