FOX drops Charlie Chan film festival...

[Guest Downhome]

I really don't know what to say other than to just show you the report...

 

LOS ANGELES - Charlie Chan is off the case for the Fox Movie Channel.

 

 

 

The channel, citing respect for contemporary racial attitudes, has dropped a summer festival of movies featuring the character of the Chinese detective.

 

 

The films have been condemned by Asian-American activists as presenting ethnic stereotypes and because white actors played the part of Chan in the films first produced in the 1930s.

 

 

Fox Movie Channel announced its decision on its Internet site Friday, drawing complaints from some fans of the movies as well as compliments from Chan critics.

 

 

In its statement, the channel said the films were made "at a time when racial sensitivities were not as they are today." The channel invited comments from viewers and said it hoped "this action will evoke discussion about the progress made in our modern, multicultural society."

 

 

Fox Movie Channel was part of an effort to restore nearly two dozen early Chan films, which were produced by parent studio 20th Century Fox.

 

 

Some subscribers have complained about the films, which mostly starred Warner Oland and then Sidney Toler as Chan, a spokesman for the channel said. The Organization of Chinese Americans Inc., a Washington-based civil rights advocacy group, also complained.

 

...am I the only one here who feels that groups of all kinds, have it be race related groups, religious groups, animal rights groups, and everything else should just lighten the fuck up? Ugh, this doesn't sit well with me at all.

 

Sincerely,

...Downhome...

[Guest JHawk]

Odd fact:

 

Nobody called these racist when they were first made 70 years ago.

 

How the hell can something be racist 70 years after the fact?

[Guest Downhome]

Odd fact:

 

Nobody called these racist when they were first made 70 years ago.

 

How the hell can something be racist 70 years after the fact?

It's because people in this day and age have fucking SOMETHING up their ass. I'm getting sick and tired of it, so say about me what you will.

 

I fear what society will be like in just a few years from now if crap like this is allowed to continue.

[Guest Nevermortal]

Its the same thing as blackface.

[Guest Downhome]

Just wait, a group of crazy Italians will try to get The Godfather banned from ever being shown again.

 

These people must be stopped damnit!

[Guest godthedog]

eh...i'm indifferent to it. but just to get the other side of the issue out there:

 

first and foremost, we all need to keep in mind that the charlie chan movies SUCKED. OH MY DEAR SWEET GOD DID THEY SUCK. they were a bunch of saturday afternoon b-movies back when the studios were churning out hundreds of movies a year and just needed to get new material out there. nobody should lose sleep over not being able to see some of these shitty movies.

 

second, as nevermortal said, this is pretty much the asian-american equivalent of blackface. it's a white guy trying to look like an asian guy, putting on some funny eye makeup and squinting and generally looking ridiculous. it's horribly dated, and it's kind of embarrassing. would you have the same reaction if TCM showed a marathon of all the "watermelon patch" caricature cartoons they could find, like 'all this and rabbit stew' and 'coal black and de sebben dwarfs'?

 

Odd fact:

 

Nobody called these racist when they were first made 70 years ago.

 

How the hell can something be racist 70 years after the fact?

slavery wasn't wrong a few hundred years ago. how can THAT be racist after the fact?

[Guest JHawk]

I would still say it was pointless because nobody bothered to say anything at the time these damn things came out.

 

As for the movies sucking, I'd agree with that, which is why I wouldn't bother watching them in the first place. I have this button on my remote control that allows me to change the channel. It's nifty.

 

slavery wasn't wrong a few hundred years ago. how can THAT be racist after the fact?

 

Actually, people did complain about that at the time, but the slaveowners went "Shut up bitch" and whipped the hell out of them for it.

[Guest godthedog]

the point is still moot, cause if you go back far enough in time you'll get to a point where slavery was okay. something can easily be racist after the fact.

 

and people WERE complaining about things like this (i.e., the way asians are represented). just didn't have a strong enough lobby for hollywood to care.

 

in sum: just because many people don't BELIEVE something to be the case at the time, that doesn't mean it's not the case.

[Guest El Satanico]

Because it was accepted back then.

 

Just because racist acts were accepted back then doesn't mean they weren't racist.

 

 

EDIT: damn you god

[Guest El Satanico]

When I first read the title...for some reason I kept thinking it said Charlie Chaplin.

 

At least Charlie Chapin getting screwed over in a misguided pc move would be something worth being enraged about.

[Guest godthedog]

EDIT: damn you god

how appropriate for your name.

[Guest El Satanico]

EDIT: damn you god

how appropriate for your name.

indeed...muahaha...muaaaahaha

[Guest godthedog]

EDIT: damn you god

how appropriate for your name.

indeed...muahaha...muaaaahaha

muahaha, muahahahaha...muAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

[Guest Downhome]

I wonder if the International Society For Siamese Twins will prevent the film Stuck On You from being released.

 

My issuse is about the censorship of film. The Charlie Chan films, if anything, put the Asian community in a very good light, even if the main actor was not Asian, he still portrayed the race in a heroic sort of light. Of course there were sterotypes, but aren't there sterotypes in just about every film?

 

Will all stupid white teenagers start to prevent all films in which actors portray that sort of person from being released?

 

Will all films which show Italians begin to be refused to be shown?

 

Will the episode of Get Smart entitled "Hoo Done it" be banned simply because is stars an actor modeled after Charlie Chan?

 

 

Where does it end, that is the issue. The Charlie Chan films, like it or not, are a piece of cinema history. They weren't that great, but they were classic.

 

There are endless ammounts of films which insult someone, but we can not go refusing them to be shown just because one group of people do not like them.

[Guest JHawk]

Well said, Downhome.

 

Hell, I thought "Dude, Where's My Car" showed stoner white boys in a negative light. Does that mean I can force Cinemax to stop airing it 150 times a month in favor of shitty "pornography"?

[Guest Downhome]

Might as well join all midgets together to get Wizard of Oz and Charlie & The Chocolate Factory banned also.

 

Fuck, those films have more negative sterotypes about midgets than Charlie Chan EVER had about Asians.

[Guest El Satanico]

That was an accurate portrayal...so no

[Guest El Satanico]

Wizard of Oz and Willy Wonka never stereotyped midgets. You're just being absurd now to back up your outrage over shitty Charlie Chan movies...of all things.

 

Besides how would you stereotype midgets? Midgets have no traits to stereotype.

[Guest JHawk]

The only midget stereotype I know of is what Mick Foley referred to as "God's practical joke" in his first book, and I really have no interest in finding out if that one's accurate or not.

[Guest Downhome]

Wait, so all midgets actually do dance and sing for the entertainment of the rest of us?

[Guest IDrinkRatsMilk]

The midgets in those movies weren't playing midgets though, they were playing munchkins and oompa loompas... perhaps they actually do dance and sing, but they don't exist so we'll never know.

 

They did have midgets standing on top of the marquee at the premier of Snow White, that's probably worse... I hear they got drunk and starting causing trouble midway through. It was Disney himself who thought they should be provided with free wine.

[Guest El Satanico]

Wait, so all midgets actually do dance and sing for the entertainment of the rest of us?

That's what we call grasping at straws.

 

Dancing and Singing? Oh come on...is that honestly the best you have?

[Guest CED Ordonez]

OK who else gets visions of the original South Park X-Mas Special while reading this article? Namely:

 

"Is anybody offended by mistletoe?"

*guy raises his hand*

"Take it down!"

 

Anybody else get that vision or am I being screwy at the moment?

[Guest CoreyLazarus416]

Now that you mention it, I get that image.

 

Man, South Park rules.

[Guest JHawk]

That's actually a good comparison, CED. Sad, actually.

 

Basically, until there's something that says being offended is against the law, then there's really not anything to be upset about.

 

And since being offended will never be against the law without about a thousand first amendment lawsuits showing up...

[Guest Lethargic]

1. The people that complain about this stuff should shut the hell up. They've probably never even seen the movies in question. They just know it's a white guy playing an Asian and automatically assume it's racist. I've seen dozens of Chan movies and I never once thought for one second that the movies were racist in any shape or form. OK, so a white guy played Chan. Ooooh, how horrible. Guess what....EVERY OTHER ASIAN CHARACTER IN THE SERIES IS PLAYED BY AN ASIAN. I'd say these movies did more to HELP Asians become accepted in that time period than it did to hurt them. It gave dozens of Asian actors real work who up to that time didn't have much to do get a chance at playing real roles. They got to play heroes and villains instead of servants and sidekicks.

 

2. What does this mean for the Charlie Chan cartoon show? Will the Cartoon Network and Boomerang have to stop showing that as well? God forbid you have Asians portrayed by cartoon characters!

 

3. The Charlie Chan movies kick major amounts of ass. There's nothing like a good murder mystery movie from the 30's or the 40's. And since a few of them star Mantan Moreland, they were also hysterical. It pisses me off because I could be recording a lot of the rare ones from FMC to help complete my collection but because a couple of jerk offs opened their mouths I can't do it.

 

4. If these assholes want to protest something, why don't they go protest the NEW Charlin Chan movie being made with Lucy Liu as Chan. Now THAT is an outrage. White, Asian, CHARLIE Chan should be a MAN.

 

5. My thing with all of this is the fact that I think the only thing worse than racism, is the way people try to act like racism never existed. Parts of our history are now being brushed under the rug because some whore with a stick up her ass in Tacoma might not like it and write an angry letter. Some of the old black movies and Asian movies and whatever movies that were made back then are genuinely good and entertaining movies which shouldn't be just wiped out of existence because a small group of people might get angry over it. I just touched on this some in my recent column on TSM when I talked about Mantan Moreland. It just doesn't make sense that people like him get punished and pushed under the rug because the fact of the matter is that him and the other black entertainers of his day had a HUGE hand in getting the black race into the movies, into the spotlight and into people's homes and on the road to acceptance. But yet his contributions to his race and to the movie industry gets wiped out because some of his movies may not be 100% PC. Give me a friggin break. We're friggin adults, let us choose what we want to watch. I know it's been said 1 billion times but it can never be said enough..... if you don't like it, change the damn channel.

[Guest starvenger]

Being Chinese, I figured I should weigh in on this. However, I really couldn't find reason to care one way or another, but still, I did some spot research:

 

1 - Chan was not played by an Asian man, although apparently he was in silents. It's possible that the moviemakers at the time didn't want to pay an Asian man more for a lead speaking role. Who knows?

 

2 - Lucy Liu (the biggest 'juk sing' or 'banana' in Hollywood by far, and that's not meant as an insult) is known to want to do a remake of Chan movies. So either she doesn't really understand the movies or they aren't as racist as they've been painted out to be.

 

3 - Chan was the detective, yes, but his sons were comic relief, and maybe that's where some of the piss and vinegar comes from. Noone really likes to see their people portrayed as buffoons.

 

4 - The Chan movies may have been good work for Asian actors at the time, but we're still at the point where most Asians in Hollywood have to be martial artists and/or do wire stunts.

 

Anyways, like I said, it doesn't bother me whether or not the Chan movies get shown. It DOES seem to be a bit overly PC, but of course what gets more press - a loud, pushy group that says something is really, really bad or a milder, laissez-faire group that goes "eh"?

[Guest godthedog]

OK, so a white guy played Chan. Ooooh, how horrible. Guess what....EVERY OTHER ASIAN CHARACTER IN THE SERIES IS PLAYED BY AN ASIAN.

if these movies were so progressive, why couldn't they get their main character to actually be portrayed by an asian? and why did they get him to comically exaggerate an accent and attribute these weird sayings to confucius (which confucius didn't even say)? on some levels chan's character was progressive, but on other levels he reinforced the stereotype.

 

I'd say these movies did more to HELP Asians become accepted in that time period than it did to hurt them. It gave dozens of Asian actors real work who up to that time didn't have much to do get a chance at playing real roles.

i'd have to see more chan movies to make a judgement about this.

 

about 5... i agree about pretending the racism didn't exist, but would you rather they show the movies and pretend there's no racism or stereotyping going on? i saw the FMC promos, and none of them gave any hint that anyone between movies during the marathon would discuss the historical ISSUES around it.

 

if FMC really wanted to educate the public about the place charlie chan has in history and the debates that went on over him, then that's a service to the public and it's a shame it got canned. however, i seriously doubt that FCM had any intention of doing this, and would have to see some proof before i'm convinced otherwise. if you're going to show a movie because it's part of film history, then you need to discuss its place in film history, its context and how it's viewed from a historical vantage point. if you're going to show 'the jazz singer' on TCM, great: it's part of film history. but don't just say "hey, here's 'the jazz singer'!" and act like it's something totally ahistorical that fell from the sky. bring up the historical ISSUES around it (blackface, and the coming of sound).

 

It just doesn't make sense that people like him get punished and pushed under the rug because the fact of the matter is that him and the other black entertainers of his day had a HUGE hand in getting the black race into the movies, into the spotlight and into people's homes and on the road to acceptance. But yet his contributions to his race and to the movie industry gets wiped out because some of his movies may not be 100% PC.

there's some fine acting by blacks in 'birth of a nation', should they be praised for getting major parts on the screen? it doesn't only matter that blacks are acting in movies, it matters how they're portrayed.

the debate doesn't end with the "it got them work" argument. if the watermelon patch stereotype comes up over and over again, with no other way that blacks are represented, then there's a problem. willie best was a black success story in hollywood, but i'd hardly call him a credit to his race, because all he ever played were roles that reinforced that stereotype. i've seen parts of 'the littlest rebel' that were so embarrassing they made me want to puke blood. if you're the NAACP, do you want this guy representing your race? and if this is the only way hollywood represents your race, wouldn't you do something about it?

 

i'm not saying repression is the answer, because it isn't. but it should be recognized as what it is, not just as a little light entertainment.

Edited July 2, 2003 by godthedog

[Guest Vyce]

I think it's kind of silly to try and stop the movies myself, although I just can't get around the fact in my own mind as to why Hollywood didn't cast someone who at least looked Asian to play Chan.

 

I mean, you want to hire a white guy, okay, but couldn't you have found a white guy who looked at least a little bit Chinese? They picked the bastards with the roundest eyes to play that part.

 

I actually think the Chan franchise would be pretty cool to bring back to TV as a mystery series (sort of like Monk on USA), but NOT as a Lucy Liu vehicle.

[Guest Ripper]

This is the EXACT same thing as blackface, and if enough people of said race are insulted by it, they can say whatever they want to get it stopped. Charlie Chan films will still exist, they will still be for sale. They just won't have a festival on TCM and some of you guys are pitching a fit over it.

 

It is insulting and demeaning to a race to have someone outside of the race exagerrating features and playing up stereotypes. Your "white stoner guy" makes no sense as there are Millions upon Millons of films protraying whites in a different way. Minorities to this day watch people that are suppose to represent us act like buffons (Bringing down the House made me want to vomit) yet it is the only representation that is there.

 

I see you trying to defend the movies, and if you like them, that's fine and what is to be expected, but you can't call those that don't like them oversensitive pricks when they are the ones being insulted.