The Hollywood Reporter: There are many examples of acclaimed movies about Indigenous people or war involving Asian countries that center white characters: Dances With Wolves. Full Metal Jacket. The Last of the Mohicans. Apocalypse Now. Among the exceedingly few Hollywood titles to depart from this trend were Apocalypto and Letters From Iwo Jima, which both competed at the 2007 Oscars and were directed by Mel Gibson and Clint Eastwood, respectively.
4 comments:
I had no idea that there were so many stories about violence in Native American and Japanese communities that just focus on white perspectives. That is so frustrating. It is quite upsetting that the industry usually is only willing to promote and invest in stories that feature white main characters. I agree that there needs to be more of a diversity of perspectives and both stories and sides need to be able to share a space in the industry. I think there has definitely been an improvement that films like Killers of the Flower Moon are being created and celebrated so much, but more needs to be done. There are similar stories like Fancy Dance that were unable to receive even half of the support from the industry as Killers of the Flower Moon, just because it was created by and focused on a Native American perspective. I am glad that people are speaking out about this discrepancy, and I’m really happy that Gladstone, while accepting an award for Killers of the Flower Moon, brought the audience’s attention to Fancy Dance.
I saw Killers Of The Flower Moon the Thursday night before it officially came out on Friday. That is how excited I was for this film and how much I love Martin Scorsese’s work. After reading this article, I was surprised that I had never seen a mention of Fancy Dance anywhere before reading this article. I also have never considered that the books that these films are based on are from the white man’s perspective, because that was all that was allowed and all that anyone cared about when these books were more relevant. I am kind of appalled that anyone would say that these movies being from a white man’s perspective are the fault of these brilliant directors. Christopher Nolan and Martin Scorsese have done so much for the film industry throughout their careers and have given strong voices to so many people who wouldn’t have had one.
This article did a great job breaking down what is problematic about movies like Killers of the Flower Moon or Oppenheimer, which has nothing to do with either movie, but with why these movies continue to exist and be made, and why other stories and perspectives do not. In short, the answer is that the other perspectives are not white men. Often in Hollywood, there is this pervasive idea that making a movie centered around characters and stories that are not white, male, or Western is a “risk”. That’s where the privilege in these movies come from- they have the ability and agency to tell the stories that they want to tell, and massive corporations and studios are willing to fund such projects in a way that they rarely are for less typical stories. It was honestly disheartening as well to hear about how despite the press given to some of the indigenous actors in Killers of the Flower Moon, the movie that they are actively campaigning for is still not yet found a buyer, even though it was received at the Sundance film festival to critical acclaim. I think this is a problem we need to fix because it’s stopping us from seeing stories that matter, and making us lose out on some great works of art as well.
I think this title was misleading. I don’t really know what this author’s opinion was and it definitely felt like they were walking on eggshells. It’s true that Hollywood historically will only tell movies from the white male perspective and if they’re not from the white man perspective they’re still usually directed by white men. That obviously sucks and frankly I’m a little sick of it. This article is saying don’t blame the directors for making movies about white men and that they shouldn’t be criticized but rather Hollywood as a system should be criticized. However then they go on to give examples of white men who directed movies from the non white man perspective, showing that it’s possible. But then the author goes on to explain that it’s not possible for a non white man to tell their own story in Hollywood, so therefore it’s fine for white men to keep telling white man stories? I think that’s the whole argument. I feel like if you’re going to call out this issue instead of defending the white men who allow this system to continue you should demand change.
Post a Comment