On "Cloud Atlas" and the Use of "Yellowface"

I had seen previews for Cloud Atlas a couple of months ago and was very excited. I thirst for movies with any kind of substance, so when a movie of real substance is previewed, I clap and dance like a little schoolgirl.

Imagine how that excitement was extinguished after reading the following review of Cloud Atlas before going to see it.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/cloud-atlas-yellowface-wachowski_n_2017624.html

Now, I usually avoid films and books that use such racial stereotypes like the plague, but I was still drawn to the movie, to its premise of the interconnection of our lives - past, present, and future. I also wanted to make my own conclusions about the use of "yellowface" in the movie instead of using the perspective of the reviewer.

I will give my take on things  without spoilers. None of what I'm going to say is going to kill the plot for you, because you can easily get this from reading the synopsis or summary of the book or film online. The actors in Cloud Atlas play a variety of roles, just as the reviewer said on Huff Post. However, what the review fails to mention is that the plot of the movie deals with past lives and how our souls move through time. 

Film and print form differ in that film relies on the visual to tell the story. Each image, each scene, each costume choice reflects the overall perspective the directors want to impart on their audience. For the Wachowskis, their way of showing how the same soul moves through time in different incarnations to change that person's appearance enough to show that they are different people in each lifetime. This could mean a change of race or gender, but the idea is  to show how we continue to be connected because our souls recycle and continue to add to the world.

How does this play out in terms of "yellow-face?" In the review, it focuses on the time-frame of "New Seoul," where every actor is depicted to have some sort of Korean ancestry. Every actor. This means that, in order to continue with the visual continuity of using the same main actors throughout the movie in different incarnations, and to stay with the story-line of "New Seoul," the actors needed to appear of Asian-ancestry. You cannot replace the main characters with Asian ones just to be true to ancestry while still preserving the visual continuity of the plot and the intention of the directors to show the movement of the soul through time. 

I get the rage over whitewashing history. Seriously, I do. It gets my goat to know that there is even a rumor of casting Angelina Jolie as Cleopatra. No offense to Angelina, but there is a serious melanin problem with her playing Cleopatra. And, do not tell me there is a shortage of good, darker-skinned black actresses, because I'm not buying it. 

**I crossed out the information above due to an awesome anthropologist friend who said that Cleopatra had Ptolemaic ancestry, meaning that she was of Greek descent. That means Angelina Jolie will not need to hit the tanning booth should she accept the role. Thanks, Marea Rosedale!**

I get rather emotional when they depict Asian women in submissive roles, or cast them in typical roles where they do what everyone expects. I hate not seeing more people of my race in main roles on television. I hate that there are no casts where the dominant face reflects my own. 

I understand where the anger comes from, the fury. It shouldn't just be some make-up that makes a person appear Asian; why couldn't a white guy get in blackface as a slave? The Wachowski's could've gone the full monty and broken all taboos, but they played it a little safe with the blackface and I can't say I blame them. They are getting slammed for staying true to the continuity of the storyline instead of trying to figure out how to keep all racial groups appeased. Imagine if they were also accused of blackface. They worked with what they thought they could; in the end, they fell victim to the old addage of "you can't please everyone."

With all that said, I am not casting my vote with the reviewer that Cloud Atlas is guilty of "yellow-face." The decision was not a lazy one. The decision was careful, methodical, and most of all, consistent with the way the rest of the movie was shot. Could the make-up been better? Sure! Could they have gotten Daniel Dae Kim from Lost to take on the role and do some white-face? Sure! Anything can be made better when looked at in hindsight. Hollywood definitely has a long way to go when it comes to casting actors of color, that is for damn sure. However, in the case of Cloud Atlas, the story needed everyone to be racially flexible and have the ability to cross-dress. I don't see feminists getting pissed that Hugo Weaving pulled a Mrs. Doubtfire, at least not yet.

There are times to scream "RACISM!" at the top of our lungs, and there are times where it makes us look more ignorant than not. See the movie, make your own decision. You do not have to agree with me. If you're a strong-minded individual, you already knew that. You also know that it is dangerous to judge without all the facts. We cannot trap ourselves into the common social tendency of judging the surface without bothering to see the whole of an argument. That sort of thinking will doom our society.


**In case anyone was wondering what makes me spectacularly better to analyze and judge racism in film and literature, the answer is: nothing. I am an experienced English teacher who loves to analyze everything, but my word is not, and has never been, law. I have always taught that, if you can support your claim, your ideas are just as valid as mine. Do not fear commenting on this post, unless you plan on doing so based on ignorance and lack of credible support.**