Racebending "Akira"

[Level 2 Diagnostic]

Because that's the way it was in the original. If you are not going to use the source material why use the name other than to try and cash in on the appreciation of the original work? I loved the original both film and book, and would have loved a faithful adaptation.

I can sort of understand that, I mean, I might be interested in seeing a decent adaptation of War of the Worlds that actually took place in England in 1898. But when Spielberg/Cruise made their version set in New Jersey in 2005, did you think they were just trying to "cash in on the appreciation of the original work"? I'm guessing that didn't really bother you, so why would Akira deserve a faithful adaptation more than War of the Worlds, one of the most influential sci-fi novels ever published?

Yeah, it'd be cool if every adaptation of an existing movie/book/comic/whatever was completely faithful, but after dozens of "Americanized" remakes of Japanese horror films, and numerous "Americanized" versions of other foreign films (Death at a Funeral, Get Carter, Funny Games, etc.), I don't get why remaking Akira with an American cast is somehow crossing the line.

 

[Davros]

I can sort of understand that, I mean, I might be interested in seeing a decent adaptation of War of the Worlds that actually took place in England in 1898. But when Spielberg/Cruise made their version set in New Jersey in 2005, did you think they were just trying to "cash in on the appreciation of the original work"? I'm guessing that didn't really bother you, so why would Akira deserve a faithful adaptation more than War of the Worlds, one of the most influential sci-fi novels ever published?

I did not go see Spielberg's version for the very reason that he modernized and Americanized it.

Yeah, it'd be cool if every adaptation of an existing movie/book/comic/whatever was completely faithful, but after dozens of "Americanized" remakes of Japanese horror films, and numerous "Americanized" versions of other foreign films (Death at a Funeral, Get Carter, Funny Games, etc.), I don't get why remaking Akira with an American cast is somehow crossing the line.

Again it comes down to if you change the name change the story all you like.
If you use the name you should be true to the source. I might have liked Starship Troopers had it been called something else, but calling it Starship Troopers means to me that it needs guys in powered armor.

But they can make this movie any way they like, they're just not going to get any of my money if they make it this way.

 

[Aragorn]

Still waiting to hear your opinion on The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum, Davros.

 

[Davros]

Still waiting to hear your opinion on The Bourne Supremacy and The Bourne Ultimatum, Davros.

Never saw them.

 

[lennier1]

Makes me glad that damn Evangelion adaption suffocated in development hell.

 

[firehawk12]

I didn't expect this to be controversial, mostly because of the whole Avatar thing sucking the energy out of it all.

Perhaps I understand casting white in order to appeal to a North American/western audience, but I'd just point to Dragon Ball Evolution as an example of why that doesn't necessarily guarantee success.

That said, for whatever reason I'm mostly indifferent to this for whatever reason. Maybe because I don't think the movie will ever happen.

Edit: I do wonder how people feel about black/female Bond or black Spider-man/Superman/Batman though. I remember the weird controversy that happened when some fans suggested that the dude from Community should be the next Spider-man.

 

[lennier1]

Black James Bond? Long overdue!

 

[firehawk12]

I still remember that being broached here before Craig was cast and that idea didn't go over that well.

Then again, people are bitching that Superman isn't being played by an American, so this stuff does get a bit ridiculous sometimes.

Avatar was a special case, mostly because a lot of Asian Americans sort of saw that as "theirs" and a chance to celebrate Asian/Asian American culture. It was the one and probably only chance for a hundred million dollar blockbuster to be cast with Asian American actors. This other stuff doesn't seem to have the same resonance anyway.

 

[Bishop76]

I'm a huge Bond fan and would love to see a black Bond. I also wouldn't mind if they based a female Bond series off of James Bond, but I do think that's a very fundamental character change that you couldn't have that be a mainline Bond movie. Masculinity is a very important part of the Bond character.

They tried to do that with Halle Berry's character Jinx from that really crappy last Brosnan flick, but... Well, it was really crappy and it's hard to launch a movie series from a really crappy movie.

 

[The Mirrorball Man]

Again it comes down to if you change the name change the story all you like.
If you use the name you should be true to the source.

What kind of rule is that? When has that ever happened? I admire your thirst for purity but it's just a fact that anytime a work is adapted to a different medium, things get changed, characters are deleted, added, renamed, modified or fused, plot points are ignored, moved and created, settings and timelines are altered, and that's just the beginning of it. Different medium, different rules.

It's simple, really. An adaptation is the creation of a new piece of fiction, a new work, based on a pre-existing piece of fiction from a different medium. It doesn't need to be true to the source at all. In fact, it's self-evident that if you want a story that is 100% true to the original, just read or watch the original again.

 

[JarodRussell]

To get this right... casting Akira with white/non-asian actors and changing everything is wrong, but casting Thor with black/non-nordic actors (in a movie based on a comic that basically turns the entire mythology upside down) is right. Why is it okay to have Achilles being played by American Brad Pitt? How can Spanish Antonio Banderas play the Arab Ahmed Ibn Fadlan?

I'm confused. When is "racebending" right, and when is it wrong? When is adapting a work right, and when is it wrong?

It's simple, really. An adaptation is the creation of a new piece of fiction, a new work, based on a pre-existing piece of fiction from a different medium. It doesn't need to be true to the source at all. In fact, it's self-evident that if you want a story that is 100% true to the original, just read or watch the original again.

Exactly. And not only based on different media. It worked well for the Star Trek reboot (same medium), as well as for Batman (different medium).

 

[firehawk12]

I'm a huge Bond fan and would love to see a black Bond. I also wouldn't mind if they based a female Bond series off of James Bond, but I do think that's a very fundamental character change that you couldn't have that be a mainline Bond movie. Masculinity is a very important part of the Bond character.

They tried to do that with Halle Berry's character Jinx from that really crappy last Brosnan flick, but... Well, it was really crappy and it's hard to launch a movie series from a really crappy movie.

It's funny, because the two Craig movies haven't really been about banging Bond girls or whatever (and I think were better for it).

I suppose fundamentally, Bond is meant to be male. But if you're going to do a reboot, changing the gender would be the most daring way to do it.

(The flip side being that action movies with women tend to bomb, so that won't ever happen anyway).

But yeah, I don't think there are any sacred cows when it comes to this stuff.

 

[beamMe]

But that's the thing. The US has been "Americanizing" anime for nearly fifty years, going all the way back to (using the American names) Tobor, Kimba the White Lion and Speed Racer.

How is this different or particularly more offensive?

How about starting to appreciate the work/material without feeling the need to have it 'Americanized'?

Why not appreciate both, if you are so inclined?

This is yet another one of those cases that make me wonder, just because Remake of X happens, does X somehow vanish into the ether? Will it no longer be available by DVD or "other means"?

More stuff is never bad. If it's bad stuff, it can be ignored. I've never seen Akira (don't bother to squawk, I've tried anime on people's suggestions and found that I don't like it nearly as much as the suggestors do), but maybe I'll check this new movie out.

Variety is good.
The problem I see with Hollywood adapting anime is that it will get destroyed in the translation.

 

[Noname Given]

(Hey, at least we avoided the Disney remake of "Space Battleship Yamato" where the Script rewrite wanted to change the ship to the U.S.S. Arizona. And I'm a re-blooded U.S. born citizen and know my history, but to BUY a Japanese produced property that has a following and a 37 year history of its own and change the ship.... <--- If the fact it's the Yamato bothers you enough, here's a tip - DON'T ACQUIRE THE RIGHTS TO AN EXISTING PROPERTY!)

Agreed.

But this was done once already when they stupidly changed the Yamato's name to Argo for the English language version of the anime series.

Hopefully the Japanese live-action film will be release to the American or European markets very soon.

You know, while that's true, I can understand to a point as WWII was just 32 years in the past and a lot of paranents and grandparents might still have strong feelings. Also, if in Starblazers the caotain aknowledged that the original hull was that of the Yamato; but the new ship was renamed the Argo.

I first saw the "Space Cruiser Yamato" compilation film back in 1977 on Tom Hatten's 'Family Film Festival' - where they DID keep the name Yamato, and to my knowledge no one protested. As kid of 14 and used to Star Trek, and liking Star Wars, I was enthralled by the fact that here was a story where Earth was not top of the heap and fighting for it's survival; and I was looked when they had the 'Sattelite Reflector Gun' bit as this was the first time I saw television science fiction deal with the fact a stationary gun on a planet surface could be EASILY avoided by a ship in open space.

Overall, while 'Starblazers' didn't focus as much on the dark situations as much as the original 'Space Battleship Yamato', they didn't totally ignore those themes (and we had a few character deaths); plus, 'Starblazers' was more aimed as a kids show for the U.S. while the original Yamato was designed as a more adult anime in Japan.

IMO - 'Starblazers' didn't do the disservice that I saw in the Disney adaptation that was being shopped around Hollywood a few years ago.

 

[Bishop76]

How is it destroyed? Are they coming into your house and taking your copies of Akira when they make this to destroy them? It's not necessarily destroyed, it's just different and in all honesty, most anime needs to be heavily adapted for NA audiences because it's really fucking weird sometimes (and I'm a bit of an anime fan).

 

[beamMe]

How is it destroyed? Are they coming into your house and taking your copies of Akira when they make this to destroy them?

Yeah, right. That's exactly what I meant.

It's not necessarily destroyed, it's just different and in all honesty, most anime needs to be heavily adapted for NA audiences because it's really fucking weird sometimes (and I'm a bit of an anime fan).

Maybe anime isn't for those who need it to be adapted and (perhaps) watered down.

Evangelion, for example, is very complex and not in all aspects understandable, it is funny, sad, action packed and quiet and - in some of its best moments - almost depressingly introspective.
No adaptation by Hollywood or European filmmakers could ever do that story justice. It would be totally different in tone, not recognizable - that story would be destroyed and no longer be Evangelion.

And, I guess, that is what the fans of Akira fear could happen with that film.

 

[beamMe]

You know, while that's true, I can understand to a point as WWII was just 32 years in the past and a lot of paranents and grandparents might still have strong feelings.

I can understand it too.
Perhaps I question the wisdom to buy a show just to change aspects of it because the audience might react negatively.
But Starblazers at least got people interested in the original version, so that's win.

 

[Bishop76]

I agree that Eva is unfilmable. It's an awesome show, but it's not meant for 2 hour treatment. Though the re-edits that have been coming out in movie length are quite good. But seriously, even reworked the whole concept is just too goddamn weird for most people. It's not that they're stupid or uncultured, it's just not a normal story.

I don't think Akira is anywhere near Eva complex, though I am only familiar with the anime and not the manga.

 

[Level 2 Diagnostic]

I'm confused. When is "racebending" right, and when is it wrong? When is adapting a work right, and when is it wrong?

It's easy... when a minority character is played by a white actor, it's always wrong. But only in the case of movies based on manga, anime, or comic books. If it's a horror movie, a romantic comedy, or based on classic literature, it can be screwed around with as much as possible.

 

[lennier1]

I agree that Eva is unfilmable. It's an awesome show, but it's not meant for 2 hour treatment. Though the re-edits that have been coming out in movie length are quite good. But seriously, even reworked the whole concept is just too goddamn weird for most people. It's not that they're stupid or uncultured, it's just not a normal story.

I don't think Akira is anywhere near Eva complex, though I am only familiar with the anime and not the manga.

Have to agree. Even when they recently condensed Evangelion into a movie series a log of the subtleties and subplots were lost. Part of the beauty of that show is that even after the 30th time you'll still discover aspects which had escaped you all those times before. Hell, you could fill a whole library trying to interpret the last two episodes and you'd still only be scratching the surface!
Akira can be adapted into a Live Action version. It's the HOW that makes all the difference.

The problem with most anime brought to the North-American market is that in 98% of the cases the company are doing such a shitty job it makes a fan of the originals weep. There's a reason why so many people prefer the subtitled originals. A prime example would be Initial D, which the US distributor castrated and dumbed down until it became a third-rate kids show. And to add insult to injury they even screwed with the names/lingo and replaced the soundtrack with damn hip-hop to ride on the coattails of those Fast&Furious movies.

Akira has become an iconic movie and should be treated with care. I mean, goddamnshitfucking Justin Timberlake????????????????? This isn't the 50th American Pie movie the producer wants to make so he can justify all those drugs and hookers as tax-writeoffs!