January 4, 2004
Reader Opinions in the Times
Our commenters make it into the Times! In Motoko Rich's article about cliches about Japan and the Japanese coming from Hollywood films, one of Gothamist's posts about Lost in Translation becomes a rich resource of quotes. Debate broke out over whether or not the film is racist or on the nose. There is a murky area between what would be acceptable if it came from an American/white director versus a Japanese/Asian director (the latter possibly having more leeway for satire, though an eagle eye would be afixed on accuracy), as well as the film being critically well received (like Lost in Translation) or a film not as worried about ideas (Rising Sun, Rush Hour, anyone?); for our money, many Japanese men of a certain age are shorter than Bill Murray, so that sight gag worked. Some of our regular posters quoted, but not named, are Frankenstein (whose quotes are even kept in the article) and RIO. So keep your comments coming, dear readers – the Times needs its quotes!
RIO also has a blog devoted to many things Japanese, TokyoNYC.
|
i love reading gothamist, but quoting it in a Times article seems pretty damn lazy.
First of all, congrats! I read the NYT article and had to come visit here. It's nice to find a wonderful community and I've already book-marked it. :)
I'm one of the few who found LIT tedious and offensive. I didn't understand what was so funny about the Japanese inability to speak English. And what was so funny about the short Japanese men? Are we still in the 80's? Just because Sofia Coppola cast some hip young Japanese friends doesn't make it suddenly cool and hip. To me, a bored rich girl went to Tokyo and made a postcard movie. Nothing more than that.
Disclaimer: I'm a Korean-born filmmaker (I have directed TOO TIRED TO DIE and E-DREAMS) and am about to make a movie about Americans who teach English in Korea. Ironically, the success of LIT is helping my project. I even described it to my investors as a cross between LOCK, STOCK, TWO SMOKING BARRELS and LOST IN TRANSLATION. So, I guess I shouldn't complain. Have a good day!
I agree with rion... I love Gothamist, but the Times journalist seems to have cobbled the article together from internet sources rather than wearin' out the old shoe leather. Obviously blogs have become a major medium for commentary, but to dip and pick from them instead of procuring first-hand comments yourself seems pretty sloppy.
Yeah, laziness is only attractive in bloggers, not people who write for the Times! Seriously, the author could have at least emailed the commenters for their thoughts.
I think an important pre-requisite for judging this film would be a little trip to Japan as a white American. It's very easy to squawk from the couch, but ("lip socks" aside) LIT hits on so many of the things that are bizarre about being an American in Japan. There are stereotypes, to be sure, but just because an American audience guffaws at something like height difference doesn't mean that the director's intent was to ridicule (again, "lip socks" aside) or that such a thing isn't true. LIT isn't perfect, but putting it in the same category as "The Last Samurai" is a pretty big insult. PS: I think Japan is a great place (if a bit confusing at times).
Rock on, Jen! That was totally cool and you know you are still smiling! Maybe a contest should be held by NYC-centric blogs to see who gets the most mentions in the Times in 2004...
Pretty lazy, NYTimes, but very nice to see that Gothamist is "fit to print."
OK, so I just Googled this height topic that got so much play. Says here men in the US average just over 5'9". Japanese men are just over 5'5". Nothing racist about those statistics. Nor was there anything racist about all the times in Asia I couldn't find a shirt or shoes that fit well. Nothing racist about all the times I attracted attention just because of my height and skin color. Or when I had to cram myself into a small bed, or fit into a bus seat with my knees in my face. It was, at times, pretty funny though. To somebody who has never been in such situations, it may be impossible to understand that humor can arise from them.
Agree: article's author was lazy and the article seemed slapped together.
Disagree: LIT racist? I never thought that to be the case. LIT is about silly gringos and the Japan portrayed in the movie is the Japan seen through their eyes. I thought that the viewer is supposed to leave the film feeling sorry for the two protagonists because as Americans, they are totally insulated from the world, even when they leave the homeland security blanket.
This article sets a new standard in lazy reporting. She got a quote from modelminority.com, I'm surprised she didn't also interview the grievance peddlars at asianguy.com.
I didn't find the article lazy, but I am surprised the writer didn't email the posters to ask for permission to re-print their commments. If the writer had done that, perhaps she could have gotten similar, or by now, more fully developed opinions on the matter.
That said, having travelled to Japan and lived there around the same age as the Scarlett Johansen character, I agree that the movie was filled with grotesque Japanese caricatures. And an article on Asian stereotyping in movies this year was a good idea for a story. I'm glad she wrote it and NYT published it.
Imagine if Sofia had placed her two main characters in a four-star hotel in Prague or Russia. Perhaps we would have gotten kookie Czech whores or fumbling Soviet gangsters as replacements.
As Sofia's father says in A Decade Under the Inluence "good filmmaking isn't depicting a canary in a birdcage" ...it's depicting a world view that is wise and whole enough that everyone can relate to it. In LIT, Sofia clearly stoops to conquer.
However, I love Anna Faris' parody of Cameron Diaz. Sofia should clearly continue to make fun of her own spoiled social class.
I guess I'm late to this discussion but it seems to me that the whole point of LIT was the fact that these two people are islolated emotionally and their cultural alienation only serves as an obvious metaphor for that. That being said, it wouldn't make much sense to develop nuanced Japanese characters as their presence in the story would dispell the isolation of the main characters. At its core, LIT is not about Japan or Japanese people at all.
Slipkid hits the nail on the head. Everything in/about Japan, including the people, are backdrops and foils for the main characters and their insular, disconnected worldview.
Even though I've lived and worked extensively in Japan over the years, I can't say the Japanese characters SC put in the film were off the charts. (Granted, I've never met a Engrish-speaking hooker; but I'll give it some more time.)
Perhaps the problem is the high concentration of implausible incidents in the movie. Given enough time, anyone could accumulate enough wacky experiences and stereotype-confirming encounters to fill MONTHS of screentime. Of course, that's what network TV is for...
PS In the mean time, congratulations Gothamists.
PPS And kudos on E-DREAMS, too, WC. It rocked.
You know what's odd about all this?
Focus is promoting her in the best screenplay category for Oscar, but by all accounts, she shot the movie from a treatment, not a script. On top of that Murray apparently improvised the best scenes and dialogue...
In Sofia's own words:
"I love when he sings 'More Than This' to her, but that wasn't even in the script. When I was writing the script, the first thing I pictured was Bill sitting on the hotel bed with the little kimono on, so seeing that on film was really exciting."
And Bob talking about having children: "They turn out to be the most delightful people you will ever meet in your life."
Moral of this post is Murray shoulda won for "Rushmore."
//obvious
The author's wedding is noted.
Back to the Real Estate beat for her.
I'm not so sure that's laziness on the Times' writer's part. What's the difference if the reporter had to go find the contributors for quotes---or if the material is already posted here? It happens to have been a discussion about Far East Asian stereotypes. This is no different than when they pull three or four local Joes off the street to ask them their opinion about an issue of the day.
Congrats to Gothamist that you keep being hyped by the the New York Times! You have to figure out a way on cash in on that.