Links » Cream » Iron Man 3′s Mandarin Problem
Links » Cream » Iron Man 3′s Mandarin Problem |
- Iron Man 3′s Mandarin Problem
- Photo: Drying Nectarines, Sancha, by Juliana D. Balla
- Nicholas Kristof on Tiananmen and Sweatshops
- Director Reveals Mystery of China’s Film Censorship
- Chinese Court Upholds Fine Against Dissident Ai Weiwei
- Gaming the System: A New Breed of Sino-foreign Film Co-productions
- Word of the Week: Heir Apparent
- The Daily Twit – 9/26/12: Stop the Madness!
- Running A Wal-mart In China Is Hard
| Posted: 26 Sep 2012 11:55 PM PDT
My logic was flawless, in my opinion, but that doesn't always matter when you're dealing with creative folks. Everyone knows that you can't have a foreignish film like Iron Man 3 with a Chinese villain; the script would never get through censorship review, right? I was therefore surprised when the rumors circulated that Ben Kingsley, who is his generation's Charles Bronson in terms of playing a broad range of ethnic characters, would be joining the cast as The Mandarin. Hard to believe. Why would China's State Administration of Radio, Film and Television (SARFT) approve a high-profile flick with a British national playing the role of a diabolical Chinese super-villain? I had no explanation and could only speculate that perhaps DMG Entertainment's Dan Mintz has secret photos of SARFT officials caught in flagrante with farm animals, thereby greatly reducing government approval angst. Aside from the China problem, Iron Man director Shane Black was on the record as referring to The Mandarin as a "racist caricature." Nevertheless, by May of this year, the decision had been made and filming had already begun. At the time, one rumor suggested that perhaps The Mandarin would only be a minor villain:
I wonder how silent a silent partner villain needs to be before SARFT signs off? The whole thing still sounded to me like a huge risk, considering what is at stake with the Chinese market. An alternative theory (don't you love this stuff?) involved a second, good guy Chinese character, played by Andy Lau:
Ah, so the "good Chinese" offsets the "bad Chinese"? Well, that rumor died after Andy Lau decided to pass on the film. Too bad, the idea of China's "technology sector" coming to the rescue is fabulous. Talk about moving up the value chain! At the same time, other rumors suggested that Kingsley may have joined the cast not as The Mandarin, but as another bad guy. Latino Review, which has been hitting the Iron Man 3 rumors hard this year, had this to say in late April:
So maybe no Mandarin at all? But it doesn't end there. The latest rumor, again attributed to Latino Review, is that an evil organization called "The Ten Rings" will play a prominent role in the movie, and as we all know:
Hmm. The plot thickens. So maybe Kingsley's The Mandarin is a secondary character (who could be excised from a China version?), the main bad guy is Guy Pearce, and the evil organization might be renamed The Ten Rings"? Heaven knows if that is anywhere close to what this movie is going to look like when it's finally in the can, but I can at least see how that story could be given to SARFT for approval. And Iron Man 3 really should avoid a Mandarin problem and keep a low profile. Why? As I wrote in an earlier post today, SARFT is on the lookout for questionable Sino-foreign co-productions, and if the reporting on all this is true, Iron Man 3 sounds a bit dicey to me, with a limited China tie-in to the main storyline and a lack of Chinese talent. And this certainly doesn't make the flick sound like a bona fide co-production at all:
Black was also quoted in the New York Times as saying: "Basically we're setting aspects of the film in China," Mr. Black said, "but we won't be filming in China." Nice obfuscation. Sounds like a lawyer drafted that statement for him. Ouch. I hope SARFT, which has yet to approve the co-production, doesn't read the trades or the New York Times. For the record, Disney/Marvel has pushed back, saying that once an approval is secured, they plan to shoot scenes over here at some point. DMG's Dan Mintz has also said that the rumors flying around about Iron Man 3′s production plan are untrue. So when the director was talking about his shooting schedule, he had no idea what he was talking about? Yeah, I buy that. Do you? I'm really looking forward to this movie now. God knows what it's actually going to look like, but I have a feeling that the U.S. and China versions might end up being a tad bit different. © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Photo: Drying Nectarines, Sancha, by Juliana D. Balla Posted: 26 Sep 2012 10:43 PM PDT  Drying Nectarines, Sancha © Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Nicholas Kristof on Tiananmen and Sweatshops Posted: 26 Sep 2012 10:21 PM PDT In an open Q&A session at Reddit this week, The New York Times' Nicholas Kristof discussed his experience covering the Tiananmen protests and his views on sweatshops, among other important issues.
© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Director Reveals Mystery of China’s Film Censorship Posted: 26 Sep 2012 10:27 PM PDT Exasperated by the long and tangled process of gaining official approval for his latest movie, Mystery, director Lou Ye took to Sina Weibo to describe what was going on, and ultimately removed his own name from the credits in protest. From Tea Leaf Nation:
See more on SARFT and censorship via CDT, including a speech by writer Murong Xuecun on the "absurdities" of Chinese censorship. © Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Chinese Court Upholds Fine Against Dissident Ai Weiwei Posted: 26 Sep 2012 10:33 PM PDT Artist and activist Ai Weiwei's appeal in his tax evasion case has been rejected, and the fine of US$2.4 million has been upheld. Ai was detained for 81 days in 2011 before authorities announced that his art studio was being charged for tax evasion. From Reuters:
CNN has more on the legal inconsistencies with the case:
As is his habit, Ai relentlessly documented his day on Twitter and Instagram. A survey of Ai's work, titled "Ai Weiwei: According to What?" will open October 7 at the Hirschhorn Museum in Washington, DC. Authorities are still holding Ai's passport, even though his probation ended June 21, and so he is unable to travel for the exhibit or for other planned events in the U.S. and Europe, he recently told the New York Times. © Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Gaming the System: A New Breed of Sino-foreign Film Co-productions Posted: 26 Sep 2012 10:02 PM PDT This article originally appeared in Agenda magazine. Check out the current issue here.
One such negative outcome may be playing itself out in the film industry right now. Last month, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television (SARFT) issued a cautionary statement about the misuse of certain Sino-foreign co-productions, reminding film studios that these structures should not be used improperly. What's going on here exactly? For the most part, film co-productions have been utilized properly and effectively in China over roughly the past 15 years. The law allows a foreign film studio to either hire a Chinese enterprise to make a film locally, or alternatively an ad hoc structure can be built up where the two partners share in the investment, production and profits. Most co-productions have been used to make films meant primarily for the China market. They are shot in China, include a primarily Chinese cast, and are filmed in the Chinese language. While these films may be distributed internationally, the bulk of the proceeds come from the China box office. With the exception of films like Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, which was quite successful outside of China, co-produced films have not had a tremendous impact elsewhere. Similar to Joint Ventures, a co-production is not likely to be the first choice of a foreign film studio, which may have the ability to finance a project themselves and many decades of institutional knowledge and industry expertise. So why do they saddle themselves with a local partner? The answer is a familiar one: because they have to. Yes, the foreign studio could hire Chinese actors and screenwriters and film movies in Los Angeles, or London, or anywhere in the world. That production might not even cost more than doing so inside China. The problem is not with the production, though, but rather with distribution. If you want to screen a foreign film in China, you have to obtain permission, and China maintains a quota on foreign film imports. So while a foreign studio may prefer to produce that made-for-China movie all by itself in Los Angeles (although this may be changing), getting that film into China might be impossible. Co-productions are a solution to that problem and others. All films that are made by co-production are considered to be domestic and therefore are not required to go through the importation process. Co-produced films are also not subject to the same "blackout date" problem that plagues the scheduling of imported films, and foreign co-production partners are allowed to take a higher share of profits than for studios whose films are imported. This is considered to be a win-win: China gets the financing and expertise from abroad, and the foreign studios obtain access to the local market. What could be better? Some clever foreign studio executives apparently thought that co-productions were not living up to their potential. They liked the idea of getting around the import quota, but they were also stuck with making movies that were really only suitable for the China market. Although box office numbers here have been growing quickly, the U.S. market is still number one. The solution? Co-productions in name only, just the bare minimum in terms of Chinese actors, domestic production and China-related story lines. Reporting on SARFT's complaints, the Wall Street Journal explained how the game is being played:
Does Looper still qualify as a co-production? Perhaps, if one uses a very narrow interpretation of the law, and the studio is able to convince SARFT that Joseph Gordon-Levitt was born in Jilin. One can almost imagine Endgame and DMG being questioned by the authorities about their co-production and using the disingenuous excuse: "Was that wrong? Should we not have done that? We gotta plead ignorance on this thing, because if anyone had said anything to us at all when we first started that that sort of thing is frowned upon…" I suspect that SARFT might be willing to accept that in the short term, but they have sent out a clear warning that they are not pleased at this violation of the spirit of the law. For the foreign film studios, the question then is whether this is the beginning of a crackdown that will force co-productions back to traditional made-for-China theatrical pictures. That remains to be seen, but SARFT's comments are certainly a shot across the bow. From the perspective of global foreign investment, it is ironic that these foreign studios have sought to play the "we're just following the law as it is written" game against China. Many Chinese companies, after all, have themselves skirted rules by creative manipulation of both Chinese and foreign law. Just look at the typical Chinese company that achieved a foreign listing without all those pesky disclosure requirements by use of the so-called "reverse merger" process. Companies will try just about anything to pry open a market. At the margins, some of their more creative attempts can lead to spectacular opportunities, while others can end in slapdowns from the regulatory authorities. It looks the latter scenario for some foreign film studios and their "co-productions." © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Word of the Week: Heir Apparent Posted: 26 Sep 2012 12:00 PM PDT Editor's Note: The CDT Grass-Mud Horse Lexicon is a glossary of terms created by Chinese netizens and frequently encountered in online political discussions. These are the words of China's online "resistance discourse," used to mock and subvert the official language around censorship and political correctness. The Word of the Week features Lexicon entries old, new and timely. If you are interested in participating in this project by submitting and/or translating terms, please contact the CDT editors at CDT [at] chinadigitaltimes [dot] net.
Although "heir apparent" is sometimes translated as "crown prince," it is a separate designation from the "crown princes" (太子 tàizǐ) or princelings, descendants of prominent and influential senior Communist officials. Xi Jinping is both "heir apparent" and a "princeling," being the son of former PRC State Councilor Xi Zhongxun. On February 11, 2009, Xi Jinping discussed international intervention in a speech to overseas Chinese in Mexico, generating yet another grass-mud horse neologism:
Read more about Xi Jinping from CDT. © Anne.Henochowicz for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| The Daily Twit – 9/26/12: Stop the Madness! Posted: 26 Sep 2012 05:46 AM PDT We'll soon be rid of two nettlesome matters that have graced The Daily Twit far too often of late: the China-Japan dispute over the Diaosenkakyu™ Islands and the U.S. presidential election campaign. Both of these appear to be headed into the final stretch. First, the maritime dispute, and although there was more disturbing news on this front today, at least I can report that China and Japan are sitting down and talking about it. Guardian: China and Japan meet over disputed islands — The two foreign ministers had a chat in New York while attending the UN assembly. Nice to see that they're taking advantage of the trip to neutral territory. Neutral for them, at least. I've personally always harbored a deep dislike of Manhattan – don't ask me why. The Guardian also has more coverage on some of the more ridiculous fallout from the dispute. Two of my favorites: Japanese books removed from sale by China in row over islands and Chinese film pulled from Tokyo film festival over row with Japan. Keep it classy out there, guys. Telegraph: China claims disputed islands are 'sacred territory' — That's really not very helpful, is it now? Rather laughable as well. On to the U.S. presidential election, or as I like to call it, the contest to see which candidate is the bigger China basher. Let's start off with one of the most idiotic Op/Eds I've read in quite some time: Forbes: Will China Bashing Cost Mitt Romney The Election? — Not sure if this is a parody or what, but not only is the premise completely ridiculous, but the author never even bothers to back up his thesis with either evidence or even logic. Maybe the guy was high when he wrote it or something, I don't know. If you ask me, Romney may very well lose this election, but if he does, it won't be because of the China bashing. FactCheck: Romney Ad on China Mangles Facts — Speaking of Romney and idiots, here's a fisking of the latest anti-China ad from Romney. I can't do this justice in a sentence or two, so if you want a good laugh, click through. You can also read my response: Does Mitt Romney Know the Difference Between Currency Manipulation and IP Infringement? Wall Street Journal: Obama Takes Tough China Talk to Ohio — Not to be outdone, Obama hammers back on the China front, accusing businessman Romney of profiting from China-related deals. Perish the thought! U.S. investors benefiting from China outsourcing? Somebody call a cop, quick! The Diplomat: How to Avoid a U.S.-China Cold War — After all the electioneering crap, this is probably appropriate. This look at the future of US-China relations by Tsinghua's Yan Xuetong is worth a read, although the term "superficial friendship" sounds a bit creepy. In other news: Xinhua: China mulls harsher punishments for illegal mapping — Internet companies that offer map services better follow the rules or face tough penalties, including fines or worse. Among other things, "failure to demonstrate China's complete territory" is a big no-no. If I were giving advice to a startup that had concerns in this area, I would tell them to just label the entire globe "China" and be done with it. I think erring on the side of caution is the way to go here. Forbes: China's Financial Institutions Expand Overseas — Jack Perkowski checks in with a good piece on what China's banks are doing overseas. China Daily: China plans campaign to promote Christian theology — Headline is slightly misleading. This is all about managing/controlling the growth of Christianism (Christiness?) in China, something the government has been doing for a very long time. What struck me here is the idea that the State shall dictate "correct theological thinking," which sent me into paroxysms of laughter. © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| Running A Wal-mart In China Is Hard Posted: 26 Sep 2012 04:20 AM PDT The problems retailers face in China are well known, with labor and logistics probably being at the top of the list. For stores that sell food, you've also got to throw in a number of other complications involving food quality and labeling. Now add on top of all that the concerns of foreign investors like Wal-mart or Carrefour, and the idea of running these things sure is daunting. There have been lots of examples over the years of these problems, including Wal-mart's fairly recent issues with food labeling in a few of its outlets in Chongqing last year. And now there's this:
Yikes. The Price Law, and related issues in the Anti-unfair Competition Law and Anti-Monopoly Law, can give a retailer nightmares. In this instance, you had what sounds like a local decision, perhaps just in one store, to sell a certain product "on sale," but in fact the sales price was higher than the sticker price offered within seven days previous to the sale. Apparently you can charge more for a product, but you can't then call that a "sale." Makes sense – that's fraud. No idea whether this was a mistake or done on purpose, but the store was fined 100,000 yuan, and Wal-mart has to deal with this as yet another PR bump in the road. A very small matter, to be sure, but then again, a story about it made it into the national Xinhua news feed, and the Hubei price bureau was talking about it at a press conference. I have a feeling all it takes is one pissed-off customer to make a phone call to the local officials to get that Wal-mart investigation up and running. It's tough being a foreign investor in China, as Wal-mart by this point knows all too well. Then again, things could be worse. At least it's not a Japanese company. © Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us |
| You are subscribed to email updates from Update » Links » China 优文 Cream To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610 | |
Comments