'GHOST IN THE SHELL' CASTING CONTROVERSY

There has been a lot of controversy over the casting of Scarlett Johansson as Major Motoko Kusanagi in the 'Ghost in the Shell' (GiTS) live action film, which will hit theaters in March 2017. The casting of Johansson in an iconic Japanese role was bad enough, but the topic has exploded over the last few days because of the recent report by Screencrush that producers of GiTS attempted to "Asianfy" white actors with visual effects instead of just hiring Asian actors. Honestly, I've been concerned about Scarlet Johansson's casting as Major Motoko Kusanagi since it was announced last year, but that takes the cake. It's actually quite stunning to hear this type of thing happening in the year 2016. Are these people even from this century? Have they time traveled from 1956?

MARKETABILITY CRAP

Max Landis

This has of course created a bunch of defenders of the poor oppressed Hollywood producers. The biggest defender was Max Landis, director of 'America Ultra,' who claims Hollywood is just afraid because of marketability reasons.

According to Landis, you shouldn't be mad at Hollywood, because Hollywood is just following what the culture wants and Hollywood is afraid. There are no Asian A-list actresses who could market this movie to the masses. Unfortunately Landis doesn't seem to get that casting Johansson in the role of an iconic Japanese character IS THE REASON WHY THERE ARE NO ASIAN A-LIST FEMALE ACTRESSES.

I guess we should feel sorry for Hollywood because they're just a reflection of our society right? I've commented before that had Gene Roddenberry given in to fear then neither George Takei nor Nichelle Nichols would have been cast in 'Star Trek' in 1966 and that was 50 years ago.  FIFTY YEARS and we are still dealing with this "fear as an excuse" crap. A more recent example would be when 'Sicario' filmmakers were pressured to make the lead character male--they refused. Emily Blunt owned that movie and the movie went on to be successful despite Hollywood's fears. Even if the "fear" excuse was valid, when did fear make it ok to exclude people? Also, it's just plain false. See below.

JUST THE FACTS

Chris Hemsworth in the doomed film 'In the Heart of the Sea'

As Landis himself alluded to, major stars are no longer the key to successful films. There was once a time when a certain film star could guarantee box office success. That just doesn't happen anymore. Hollywood's free lunch has gone away. As I noted in a previous article, there are very few people in Hollywood who can guarantee box office sales. Perhaps it's because of technology and social media. Why go see a movie with a 30% rating on Rotten Tomatoes when you can just wait for it to come on Netflix or not watch it at all? Given the expense of a full price movie ticket, Americans in particular are choosier on what films they go see in the theater. Domestic theater viewership in America has tanked. This is true.

This is why Hollywood heavily depends on the international markets to make it's money back. If the film tanks domestically it can still make its money back overseas. My father isn't a famous Hollywood director and I'm not a Hollywood insider like Landis, but I am a researcher by trade and have discovered that apparently Hollywood doesn't even read it's own research. Diverse films (and films with female leads) do better at the box office GLOBALLY and domestically. 

So why then if these films do better at the box office both domestically and globally--why does Hollywood still cast films based on old models? Because "Hollywood continues to treat those successes as anomalies."  So Hollywood's decision to exclude women and people of color is not logical and it's not based on making money. Hollywood is literally leaving money on the table.

PROBLEM AND SOLUTION FOR 'GHOST IN THE SHELL'

Sarah Michelle Gellar in 'The Grudge' and Naomi Watts in 'The Ring'

Hollywood appropriates thousands of foreign films/television shows all the time. Making a western version of a film, based on a Japanese film is not a new concept. Both 'The Ring' ('Ringu') and 'The Grudge' ('Ju-On') are based on Japanese films and the American versions have white female leads. It's assumed that a western version will have a different casting. The GiTS publishers knew that once they sold the rights to Hollywood, a Japanese actress would (unfortunately) not be cast in the role. It would be nice if westernized versions included more cultural diversity, but that's a whole different issue. Diversity in Hollywood is a known problem. You can read my article about that here.

The problem is that the makers of this film...are crazy people. Not only does the film have diversity issues, but they failed to change the character names. So Scarlett Johannson is still named Motoko Kusanagi; Michael Pitt is the Laughing Man aka Kuze; Pilou Asbæk is Batou, etc. To top it off they attempted to visually alter the predominately white cast to look Asian.  If the producers of this film want to "westernize" this property, then they should start by changing ALL of the characters names. Also, they should make sure that ScarJo looks like ScarJo. Instead of putting a dark-haired wig on ScarJo to make her appear "more" Asian. Let ScarJo appear with her natural blonde hair with purple streaks so that there is no mistake that she is NOT an exact representation of Motoko Kusanagi.

The best and most simple thing to do would be to hire a Japanese actress. Rinko Kikuchi of 'Pacific Rim' would have been an ideal choice. But if Hollywood insists on making a western version with a white actress, then own it. Don't try to "Asianfy" the cast because you don't want to be called out for whitewashing. Simply put-- if you cast a white actress in an ICONICALLY Japanese role--you're going to be called out for it. There's no way around it. Don't make it worse.

APPROPRIATE CULTURAL CHANGES

Via Geek League of America

So what's the problem with 'GiTS' you ask? The problem is that the character of Motoko Kusanagi is iconic. 'GiTS' is probably the biggest anime to ever come out of Japan since 'Akira.' My typical rule of thumb is that an iconic character like Superman, Batman, Captain America, Peter Parker's Spiderman, or in this case Motoko, cannot and should not be culturally changed. The character has too much back story in support of their culture and it's part of their identity. I personally would never want to see a non-Caucasian Clark Kent/Superman. The character has 80 years of history and canon and is simply too iconic for a cultural change.

EDIT: That does not mean that Clark Kent shouldn't/couldn't be replaced as Superman with a character who was non-Caucasian. As I noted below, both Peter Parker and Miles Morales are Spider-Man. What I'm saying is that Clark Kent may be too iconic to be changed. However, that should not prevent another character from taking on the Superman mantel. Comic book characters change all the time.

Via Caped Wonder

Some fans have complained that cultural changes of comic book characters seem to happen one-way: from white to non-white and that those changes are considered acceptable, whereas the other way around is not. I understand this criticism. However, most of the characters that have been culturally changed are minor characters like Heimdall (Idris Elba), Perry White (Laurence Fishburne), or Nick Fury (Samuel L. Jackson). To my knowledge the characters I mentioned above are not iconic or nearly as well known outside of the films. It's unrealistic for characters like Superman or Captain America to live in an all-white world. That's just not reality...at least not in America with a 37.4% minority population (who will be 57% of the American population in 2050). So it makes sense that minor characters are culturally changed to reflect a modern society.

Miles Morales is the new Spider-Man.

That said, I can understand why people took issue with an iconic character like Johnny Storm/Human Torch (Michael B. Jordan). Johnny Storm is an iconic Marvel character. It's difficult to culturally change a character with this much back story. Perhaps the best way to adopt cultural changes in comic books is organically. Comic book characters change throughout the years, depending on the comic book age they're in. For example, Peter Parker's Spider-Man has been replaced with Miles Morales. Miles is the new Spiderman, but he's completely separate from Peter Parker and has his own unique backstory. I would love to see a Miles Morales Spiderman. Unfortunately, since Hollywood plays with the same old playbook we will yet again see another version of Peter Parker. It's only the 3rd time it's been rebooted in the last 14 years, but who's counting?

WHY SCARLETT WHY?

First let me say that I'm not excusing ScarJo's decision to take this role. Either she or her agent should have known that Motoko Kusanagi was not a role she should play. The role is too iconically Japanese and should have been played by a Japanese actress. PERIOD. That said, ScarJo is also living and working in a messed up system. ScarJo is 31 years old (she'll be 32 years old later this year). That's still pretty young by most standards--but not by Hollywood. No, in Hollywood women may as well hit the retirement home by the time they hit 32. Anne Hathaway said she stopped getting roles at 32. At age 37 Maggie Gyllenhaal was told that she was "too old" to be the love interest of a 55 year old man. Yes, that's right.

Don't forget women only have 1/3rd of the speaking roles in films and most films can't pass the Bechdel Test. What few speaking roles women have mostly take place between the ages of 22 to 31. Men have most of their speaking roles between the ages of 42 to 65. Again, Johansson is 31.

This doesn't excuse her choice to accept a role like this, but it helps to understand where she may be coming from. Her direct competition for the GiTS role was not a Japanese actress, but Margot Robbie. Clearly the filmmakers were never going to cast a Japanese actress in this role. Robbie is 25 years old and the current "IT" girl in the movie community, but she's not yet a household name, which is why Johansson was likely cast. Johansson also had some success in the action genre as Black Widow and in 'Lucy.' Had this casting taken place after Robbie's role in 'Suicide Squad,' then this part in GiTS would have likely gone to Robbie because she's younger.

So to a certain extent I understand why Johansson took this role. Her decision to take this role was not a good decision, but in my opinion the majority of the problem lies with the producers, writers, and director of this film. It doesn't help that Rupert Sanders is directing. The same Sanders who directed 'Snow White and the Huntsman' and not much else.

"MOTOKO KUSANAGI IS NOT JAPANESE?" 

Actresses Kumiko Goto, Characterization of Motoko, Nozomi Sasaki, and Meisa Kuroki

I have been having amazingly civil debates on Youtube about this casting, but one of the big bones of contention I've had with people is that Motoko either looks white or is secretly white in the manga and the anime. Motoko has had dark hair with purple streaks and blue eyes. Motoko has also had purple eyes and red eyes. Motoko is a freaking cyborg. But if the name MOTOKO KUSANAGI doesn't scream Japanese, then I don't know what will.

I will simply direct you to an article explaining that according to the Japanese their anime characters look Japanese. Anime is all about the exaggeration of features. As you can see above, there are plenty of Japanese actresses who have Motoko-like features.

Lastly, if Motoko was actually white and not Japanese, then why would the producers of GiTS go to all the trouble of visually altering the character to look Asian?

EXAMPLES

Finally, I want to make the important point that non-white characters are changed to white ALL THE TIME, but you may not even be aware of it. Here are albeit brief examples of how Hollywood whitewashes films and you don't even notice it:

• 'Warm Bodies,' Nora's character was half Ethiopian. In the book, she had brown skin. 
• Katniss Everdeen in 'The Hunger Games' is described as having dark olive skin with dark black hair and grey eyes. Suzanne Collins said that "it is a time period where hundreds of years have passed from now. There’s been a lot of ethnic mixing." 
• Irene (Carey Mulligan) in 'Drive' was supposed to be a Latina woman in her early 20s.
• Jake Gyllenhaal in 'Prince of Persia.' Nuff said.
• The lead character in '30 Days of Night' (Josh Hartnett) was changed from Eskimo to white. 
• John Nash's wife Alicia (Jennifer Connelly) in 'A Beautiful Mind,' was originally from El Salvador. 
• In 'Star Trek Into the Darkness' Khan Noonien Singh (Benedict Cumberbatch) is supposed to be Indian. At least in previous films, Khan was played by Mexican-born Ricardo Montalban.
• In 'The Lone Ranger,' Johnny Depp played Tonto. It's rumored that Depp may or may not have some Native American blood somewhere in his family, but he's not sure. Hmmm, then perhaps get a Native American to play a Native American.
• Rooney Mara played Tiger Lily in 'Pan.' 
• Kevin Spacey plays a character who was written to be African American in 'Play it Forward.' 
• Anthony Hopkins plays a light-skinned African American man in 'The Human Stain.' 
• In 'House of the Spirits' Meryl Streep, Jeremy Irons, Glenn Close, and Winona Ryder are all Latin Americans. For some reason a Hispanic person translates to white actor with dark hair in Hollywood.
• In 'A Mighty Heart,' Angelina Jolie portrays a bi-racial woman.
• In 'Argo,' Ben Affleck played a man of Mexican heritage, Tony Mendez.
• In 'Starship Troopers' Casper Van Dien portrays Johnny Rico who was of Filipino descent. 
• In 'The World Trade Center,' William Mapother plays Marine Sergeant Jason Thomas, who of African American descent.
• In 'Spotlight' Mark Ruffalo portrays Mike Rezendes, who is visibly Hispanic.
• The film '21' (based on Bringing Down the House) changed the entire cast from Asian to white. 
• Then there are the less obvious exclusions like the exclusion of Sophia Duleep Singh "who led the Women’s Tax Resistance League and was a major player in the Women’s Social and Political Union, yet was never featured in the film 'Suffragette.'"
• Don't get me started with 'The Last Airbender,' 'Dragonball Z,' 'Gods of Egypt,' 'Exodus,' or 'Aloha.'

I am not saying that casting directors shouldn't have the flexibility to cast who they believe will best fit the role. There are of course scenarios in which an actor is so incredible their ethnicity shouldn't matter, but the rate at which the very few roles for non-white characters are changed to white is higher than people realize. Changing white characters to non-white is not as prevalent despite the public perception of it.

So anyhoo, as much as I love Scarlett Johansson I will not be supporting or seeing 'Ghost in the Shell' in theaters. I am Hollywood's direct demographic. The sad thing is that if this film fails, Hollywood will not blame itself for its ineptitude. No, on this point I agree with Landis. Hollywood will claim, "well I guess anime films just don't sell" or "we should have changed the lead to male."

Hollywood is like a cat with a urinary tract infection. The cat doesn't realize that the problem is coming from within so it always blame the litter box. Or perhaps Hollywood is just the litter box.