This is a series of posts at a blog called Sociological Images that deals with how people of colour are used in advertising that's aimed at a white audience and I think it makes some fantastic points that can be compared to film.
I think we can all agree that M Night is not looking at this film in the wide reaching audience terms that the TV show did. We get a lead cast of all white actors with everyone else in the background or as villains.
This summed it up for me.
"I offer you examples of ads that include people of color in order to associate the collectively-held meaning of the racial minority group (i.e., stereotypical traits, the social construction of the group) with the product."
The only reason we have Asians at all is to give this thing cred as a martial arts flick. Take a look through, it's pretty interesting reading.
August 11 2009, 12:00:34 UTC 2 years ago
That kind of made me blink a bit and think of the counter argument for anti-racebending-movement who say, "Well, now there are less opportunities for white people./What about the white actors?" I have nothing against straightening hair, my hair is straight at the moment. But isn't it nice for the media to say, "Hey, your natural texture is normal" (or beautiful depending on the product) after years of us just saying that to ourselves?
Still, advertising knows that it's trying to get everyone to buy. It's weird and it may be a bit biased, but I if I see a commercial with any sort of PoC, I may actually look into the product even if it's not something I would have bought initially.
August 11 2009, 16:16:42 UTC 2 years ago
I think this is really relevant to our cause, as it points out a lot of films were Middle Easterners are vilified, which is really what seems to be going on with TLA. (Though, TLA also went ahead and vilified South Asians as well...)
August 11 2009, 16:46:16 UTC 2 years ago
August 11 2009, 17:56:28 UTC 2 years ago
Yea, extra proves my point in Racial Impact 3. Speaking of that, I need to get back to those some time this month.
August 11 2009, 20:36:13 UTC 2 years ago
August 11 2009, 22:13:16 UTC 2 years ago
And I tell you, the examples in this documentary (if you actually see it) are not only terrifying at times (or just astonishingly shocking) but also some of what's happening with how they're treating Fire Nation (clothing, actor representation etc) could fall into some of the mistakes shown in the documentary. There's even an example of a movie where, normally if you see kids dying (especially if it's in a war-zone or a war-ravaged area) you know it's happening but you don't see it, you actually not only see them being murdered but you see all the blood and gore of it and most of them happen to be Middle-Eastern children. It's just a thought to think about.
I hope they don't end up treating the Fire Nation in association with Middle-Eastern culture or the Arab-American image because that might bring some negative political connotations and with all the more negative images versus positive ones, I wouldn't doubt they would go the more negative route and Middle Eastern people don't need that kind of thing.
August 12 2009, 22:41:48 UTC 2 years ago
August 13 2009, 03:33:08 UTC 2 years ago
Certainly, because TLA is typical for Hollywood in lumping Arabs, Persians, South Asians and "swarthy looking" people of every background all together as if they are interchangeable.
I know several of the "Arabs" in just this little clip are played by South Asians, such as the Pakistani actor Art Malik. "Lost" is another big one, with an Iraqi character played by Naveen Andrews.
Considering Hollywood expected us to believe Eurasian actress Kristin Kreuk was actually a Muslim Indian in "Partition," I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
August 13 2009, 22:34:35 UTC 2 years ago
August 13 2009, 22:42:38 UTC 2 years ago
August 16 2009, 17:04:06 UTC 2 years ago
Their post just went up.