Hannibal Chau and mink coats
Aug. 24th, 2013 06:08 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
girlofpreyMy life is full of moral conundrums right now.
Mostly I'm still in Pacific Rim fandom, and I'm trying to work out how racist it is that Hannibal Chau was played by a white guy. When I first saw the film, my first reaction - well my first reaction was "ooh, Ron Perlman!". But then I was a little weirded out that they'd cast a white guy in the role. But then I thought, well, he's the closest thing the film has to a human villain, and for all it's diversity it's still pretty full of white heroes, so would it better if he was played by an actor of colour? And I wasn't sure it would be.
I mean, in the film they make a point of the fact that he's not meant to be Asian, he says his name is made up, and the producers made a point of it as well, that it became a character point that as soon as you saw "Hannibal" you knew he was putting on a persona and was therefore a bit shifty. So it's not quite the same as in Star Trek Into Darkness, which I haven't seen, but as far as I'm aware Khan is still Indian in it and they cast Benedict Cumberpatch to play him. Or The Lone Ranger, where Tonto was meant to be Native American, but they cast Johnny Depp anyway. But on the other hand, Ron Perlman has said in an interview that he felt like originally the character of Hannibal Chau was meant to be Asian, but they decided to change it up to be a white character who was obviously just lying. Which is still taking a role meant for a person of colour and giving it to a white guy. Which is more like the situation in Drive, where the main female role was meant to be played by a Latina woman, but they gave it to Carey Mulligan for fairly racist reasons.
I've heard a few opinions from both sides of the argument, and a few people have said, like I thought, that they were glad the role of "shifty organ dealer making fake remedies from animal parts" wasn't played by an Asian guy, because it's such a stereotype. But then I remember a quote I saw a while back on Tumblr about how POC weren't even being allowed to play the stereotypes people write them as, which I believe was about Tonto in The Lone Ranger, but the point still stands. I think the situation is different when it comes to villains and who's 'scarier', but there's racism on both sides of that argument too. And who am I to say which roles should and shouldn't be played by POC? Like I say, I've seen opinions from both sides on Tumblr, but I've also seen posts by East Asian fans complaining about all the white fans criticising Mako Mori and not listening to Asian fans - AND posts by East Asian fans complaining about how white fans even discuss the flaws in Mako Mori's character and acting like Asian fans should be grateful she existed at all, and how they won't listen to Asian fans about it. So it's hard to know which posts on Hannibal Chau are opinions on the subject based on experience and which might just be white fans playing the Social Justice game. I have no problem with Social Justice, obviously, but if actual Asian people aren't upset about it, that's a different situation to if they are.
To be completely honest, I think a lot of the reason Hannibal Chau was played by a white guy was probably to do with the fact that Guillermo Del Toro loves Ron Perlman, and wanted him in his film. Which mostly makes me imagine Ron Perlman being shoe-horned into various other roles in the film. Tendo Choi? Hermann Gottlieb? Stacker Pentecost? But either way, if that was the reason, it's still a pretty shitty one to cast a white guy in a role meant for an Asian person.
The context in the film sort of compounds the problems with the Hannibal Chau thing as well, like the fact that the film was set in China but we didn't have any Chinese actors playing Chinese characters with lines. The Wei triplets said one battle command in the Hong Kong fight just before they died, which I don't really count. A lot of people have rightfully pointed out that maybe a few Chinese people helping run the Hong Kong shatterdome, rather than just being silent ground crews, might not have gone amiss. And then there's the fact that the whole Hannibal Chau/Kaiju Remedies plotline still had that whole "scary, mysterious Chinatown!" feel to it, which people also picked up on. And yet they didn't want an actual Asian guy running things in scary mysterious Chinatown. Apparently because they wanted Hannibal Chau to be a guy you didn't take too seriously, which is a statement I don't exactly get. Apparently, it's because lying and being so obviously shifty would make "Hannibal" seem less threatening, especially compared to the Kaiju, but idk, if a guy was lying about everything including his name and put a knife up my nose, I don't know if I'd take him less seriously than a guy who lied a little less. In which case an underlying message might be "you would take an Asian guy more seriously as a threat than a white guy", which - hm. You know? But then, again, I start wondering if it would be better for an Asian guy to play "a villain you aren't meant to take seriously" than a white guy. I don't know.
I don't think it's the worst thing in the film, even on the level of racism - I feel like the "Gipsy Danger" and not having Chinese people in command at the shatterdome is probably worse. But it's a little more personal for me, because I did quite like Ron Perlman's performance as Hannibal Chau, and I liked the character as it ended up, with him being so obviously shifty and dicking about with a fake name. And I like Ron Perlman's chemistry with Charlie Day, and I slash Hannibal and Newt, and people are writing fic, so I'm sort of involved in the fandom. But I think the decision to have Ron Perlman play Hannibal Chau was probably sketchy, at best, and I've seen a few posts of people just saying "he's just a scumbag [with a fake name] okay, can we drop it now? Let's just move on" (emphasis mine). Which is basically people saying they don't want to even discuss the problems with the character, which is a pretty bad attitude, I think.
I know it's alright to like problematic things (up to a point), as long as you're aware of the ways they're problematic and honest about them. But I sort of feel like I shouldn't support the character or any fic about him, if the way his character came about was weird and if fandom's attitude to the problem is "let's not talk about it". There's a plenty of sketchy things I do love, but often those have some sort of sexist issues, and I think I have more right to say how much sexism I will accept from something than how much racism I'll accept. Idk, I don't feel that bad about it, but it's sort of a thorny issue and it's kind of putting me off the fandom for now. I think if they do bring Hannibal Chau back in the sequels we possibly might have - which I had been hoping they would do, because like I said I liked Ron Perlman's performance of him - they should probably move away from the "Hannibal Chau" thing, and let us learn part of his real name maybe. But given the fact they're not letting go of the "Gipsy Danger" thing (we're getting a second one! Upgraded!), they probably won't.
It's a shame that, given how high the hopes were for a diverse film written by a POC and starring more POC than is usual for a blockbuster action film, there's still so many problems with it. But nothing's perfect I guess, and progress is better than nothing.
And my dad has also offered me my grandmother's old mink coat. She died last year, but they're just on the points of selling her house so they're just finishing sorting through her stuff now. I don't agree with fur, obviously, but it's not like I'd be buying a new one and contributing to supply and demand. On the other hand, I do think wearing fur is kind of an advertisement for it. But I also don't like things going to waste when they still do their job, and how many people can say they own an antique mink coat? But if I hate the way the coat was made, why would I like the product? Also, where would I even wear a mink coat? Also, will the coat even fit me? It seemed a little forward to check about that when I hadn't decided if I would morally like to own a mink coat. I will probably not take the mink coat.
Hmm. This is life, I suppose.
Mostly I'm still in Pacific Rim fandom, and I'm trying to work out how racist it is that Hannibal Chau was played by a white guy. When I first saw the film, my first reaction - well my first reaction was "ooh, Ron Perlman!". But then I was a little weirded out that they'd cast a white guy in the role. But then I thought, well, he's the closest thing the film has to a human villain, and for all it's diversity it's still pretty full of white heroes, so would it better if he was played by an actor of colour? And I wasn't sure it would be.
I mean, in the film they make a point of the fact that he's not meant to be Asian, he says his name is made up, and the producers made a point of it as well, that it became a character point that as soon as you saw "Hannibal" you knew he was putting on a persona and was therefore a bit shifty. So it's not quite the same as in Star Trek Into Darkness, which I haven't seen, but as far as I'm aware Khan is still Indian in it and they cast Benedict Cumberpatch to play him. Or The Lone Ranger, where Tonto was meant to be Native American, but they cast Johnny Depp anyway. But on the other hand, Ron Perlman has said in an interview that he felt like originally the character of Hannibal Chau was meant to be Asian, but they decided to change it up to be a white character who was obviously just lying. Which is still taking a role meant for a person of colour and giving it to a white guy. Which is more like the situation in Drive, where the main female role was meant to be played by a Latina woman, but they gave it to Carey Mulligan for fairly racist reasons.
I've heard a few opinions from both sides of the argument, and a few people have said, like I thought, that they were glad the role of "shifty organ dealer making fake remedies from animal parts" wasn't played by an Asian guy, because it's such a stereotype. But then I remember a quote I saw a while back on Tumblr about how POC weren't even being allowed to play the stereotypes people write them as, which I believe was about Tonto in The Lone Ranger, but the point still stands. I think the situation is different when it comes to villains and who's 'scarier', but there's racism on both sides of that argument too. And who am I to say which roles should and shouldn't be played by POC? Like I say, I've seen opinions from both sides on Tumblr, but I've also seen posts by East Asian fans complaining about all the white fans criticising Mako Mori and not listening to Asian fans - AND posts by East Asian fans complaining about how white fans even discuss the flaws in Mako Mori's character and acting like Asian fans should be grateful she existed at all, and how they won't listen to Asian fans about it. So it's hard to know which posts on Hannibal Chau are opinions on the subject based on experience and which might just be white fans playing the Social Justice game. I have no problem with Social Justice, obviously, but if actual Asian people aren't upset about it, that's a different situation to if they are.
To be completely honest, I think a lot of the reason Hannibal Chau was played by a white guy was probably to do with the fact that Guillermo Del Toro loves Ron Perlman, and wanted him in his film. Which mostly makes me imagine Ron Perlman being shoe-horned into various other roles in the film. Tendo Choi? Hermann Gottlieb? Stacker Pentecost? But either way, if that was the reason, it's still a pretty shitty one to cast a white guy in a role meant for an Asian person.
The context in the film sort of compounds the problems with the Hannibal Chau thing as well, like the fact that the film was set in China but we didn't have any Chinese actors playing Chinese characters with lines. The Wei triplets said one battle command in the Hong Kong fight just before they died, which I don't really count. A lot of people have rightfully pointed out that maybe a few Chinese people helping run the Hong Kong shatterdome, rather than just being silent ground crews, might not have gone amiss. And then there's the fact that the whole Hannibal Chau/Kaiju Remedies plotline still had that whole "scary, mysterious Chinatown!" feel to it, which people also picked up on. And yet they didn't want an actual Asian guy running things in scary mysterious Chinatown. Apparently because they wanted Hannibal Chau to be a guy you didn't take too seriously, which is a statement I don't exactly get. Apparently, it's because lying and being so obviously shifty would make "Hannibal" seem less threatening, especially compared to the Kaiju, but idk, if a guy was lying about everything including his name and put a knife up my nose, I don't know if I'd take him less seriously than a guy who lied a little less. In which case an underlying message might be "you would take an Asian guy more seriously as a threat than a white guy", which - hm. You know? But then, again, I start wondering if it would be better for an Asian guy to play "a villain you aren't meant to take seriously" than a white guy. I don't know.
I don't think it's the worst thing in the film, even on the level of racism - I feel like the "Gipsy Danger" and not having Chinese people in command at the shatterdome is probably worse. But it's a little more personal for me, because I did quite like Ron Perlman's performance as Hannibal Chau, and I liked the character as it ended up, with him being so obviously shifty and dicking about with a fake name. And I like Ron Perlman's chemistry with Charlie Day, and I slash Hannibal and Newt, and people are writing fic, so I'm sort of involved in the fandom. But I think the decision to have Ron Perlman play Hannibal Chau was probably sketchy, at best, and I've seen a few posts of people just saying "he's just a scumbag [with a fake name] okay, can we drop it now? Let's just move on" (emphasis mine). Which is basically people saying they don't want to even discuss the problems with the character, which is a pretty bad attitude, I think.
I know it's alright to like problematic things (up to a point), as long as you're aware of the ways they're problematic and honest about them. But I sort of feel like I shouldn't support the character or any fic about him, if the way his character came about was weird and if fandom's attitude to the problem is "let's not talk about it". There's a plenty of sketchy things I do love, but often those have some sort of sexist issues, and I think I have more right to say how much sexism I will accept from something than how much racism I'll accept. Idk, I don't feel that bad about it, but it's sort of a thorny issue and it's kind of putting me off the fandom for now. I think if they do bring Hannibal Chau back in the sequels we possibly might have - which I had been hoping they would do, because like I said I liked Ron Perlman's performance of him - they should probably move away from the "Hannibal Chau" thing, and let us learn part of his real name maybe. But given the fact they're not letting go of the "Gipsy Danger" thing (we're getting a second one! Upgraded!), they probably won't.
It's a shame that, given how high the hopes were for a diverse film written by a POC and starring more POC than is usual for a blockbuster action film, there's still so many problems with it. But nothing's perfect I guess, and progress is better than nothing.
And my dad has also offered me my grandmother's old mink coat. She died last year, but they're just on the points of selling her house so they're just finishing sorting through her stuff now. I don't agree with fur, obviously, but it's not like I'd be buying a new one and contributing to supply and demand. On the other hand, I do think wearing fur is kind of an advertisement for it. But I also don't like things going to waste when they still do their job, and how many people can say they own an antique mink coat? But if I hate the way the coat was made, why would I like the product? Also, where would I even wear a mink coat? Also, will the coat even fit me? It seemed a little forward to check about that when I hadn't decided if I would morally like to own a mink coat. I will probably not take the mink coat.
Hmm. This is life, I suppose.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2013-08-24 05:17 pm (UTC)as for mink coats - my mum also gave me her fur coat! she can't wear it out because people will definitely hate it (she got this years and years ago) and I can't wear it but I don't want her to throw it away. It is such a waste! It is taking up space in my wardrobe but I feel happier it is there.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-08-24 05:50 pm (UTC)I know exactly what you mean! That's how I feel. Like I couldn't wear it, but I don't want to throw it away either. I don't even know if we'd be able to sell it on, or what a charity shop would do with it. I feel like we should just keep it around. For if the heating breaks? And it gets cold? Maybe?
(no subject)
Date: 2013-08-24 07:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2013-08-24 07:32 pm (UTC)Did you hear about the Daddy's Home (http://shirleytemplar.tumblr.com/post/56494912488/katemonkeyville-buddhistbatbear-i-propose) jaeger? I loled.
(no subject)
Date: 2013-08-26 08:20 pm (UTC)I really hope I can trust Travis Beacham, but he did seem quite sincere, so I'll cross my fingers and hope that his apparent goodwill gets filtered down through the rest of the writing/directing crew.