I enjoyed this film because while it does have a white savior thing (purposefully not say complex) going for it, the movie explains and explores why Walt Kowalski is playing that role. Overall Walt is concerned with the younger generations lack of respect for the older and that he recognizes Sue as his neighbor. Once he gets to know them though his saving them is because he has grown to care about them. The last time Walt does his ‘saving’ act, I’ll admit that I was upset that he saved the day at first. Now however I look at differently, Walt clearly knew that his actions were behind the house shooting and what was done to Sue. So in a way instead of saving the day he is really holding himself accountable, and if his last words aren’t anything to go by is atoning for his actions.

Before I go into the strong reasons I see this movie being a good choice of for our program, I want to talk about the two things I love the most about this film. First is the women, I didn’t see one woman in the film that was passive in both the Hmong and white (dead and alive) women. Second is Walt’s character. Even though he is a racist angry old man in the beginning and somewhat in the end, his character shows that it’s never to old to not only change your opinions but it’s also okay to acknowledge your faults and wrongs.

Now on to move relevant observations. This film obviously focuses on Hmong people, which before this film I’d never heard about before, so that was cool. When Sue is talking to Walt about it the first time she says that their not a country but a people and that they came to the U.S. because of the aftermath of the Vietnam War and the U.S. leaving them high and dry when they left Vietnam causing the Vietnamese to attack them due to the Hmong supporting the U.S.. I feel that that one remark speaks loads. The part about Hmong being a people and not a country I feel speaks to the way that race has been in part constructed/validated through countries. Then the part of the Vietnam War really points out that a lot of immigrant populations that come to the U.S. are coming for refuge from conditions and situations that the U.S. has played a part in causing.

Overall however I think this movie really shows that there is more to people than the surface. Sue is constantly is voicing that, but even the other characters show a much deeper side than what they first thought of one another.

I’m aware that for this post we were asked to discuss the reasons of Khan having Aspergers Syndrome. In class I mentioned that it was probably to make the discrimination against Muslims and Middle Easterns/Indian appearing persons more relatable to the audience by showing how prejudice people treat those they are discrimanting against. In the opening scene with Khan in the room with TSA agents not only sets the stage for the film but was one of the more powerful scenes in the film. They way the Agents treat Khan because they suspect him of being a terrorist vs how they treat when they find his card saying that he has Aspergers is very similar and if anything becomes worse when they think that Khan doesn’t really grasp what they are saying/doing to him. That’s why when he says, “My name is Khan, and I’m not a terrorist” point blank to their questioning it disproves that he is incompetent in understanding the situation both of his being targeted as a terrorist and then being mocked. I knew I’d like the film after that one part, but in reality I love it, except for one thing.

Previously to this film I’ve watched “Forest Gump” and “What’s  Eating Gilbert Grape” (Because I have a thing for Johnny, except I’m mad at him right now for “The Lone Ranger”). In both the films and also in “My Name Is Khan”, I’ve felt very uncomfortable with the roles played by Tom Hanks, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Shah Rukh Kahn because they were acting at having born with differently able characteristics. Now I do understand that acting is a skill and an art, but by having able persons playing these roles not only further marginalizes those individuals, it says that people who do identify that way can’t be act and it says that it’s okay to make these very real and very personal identities into a costume. And how are this roles different from Yellow Face, Black Face, Red Face, or Brown Face? I appreciate that this roles do put differently able persons into the mass media scope, but why not go further and find someone who actually is differently able and is acting to play those roles? It’s the same beef I have with Jared Leto for playing and winning an Oscars for his role in “Dallas Buyers Club”, in which he played a Trans* woman, when I know for a fact that there are open Trans* actresses that could have played that role (here’s an article on some of them).

(Content Warning for racial slurs)

I’m in the firm belief that identities you are born with should not be played by people outside of them. Some might ask why then it’s okay then to have gay people play straight roles, Trans* women playing just women roles, etc. and because this post is happening after reading A Tale For The Time Being, I have two responses. First is that these iditities are oppresssed so if people don’t feel safe being open about them in a n environment where others are playing their idetities way should they not play them? But something that Ruth said really struck home with me. Maybe you remember on page 32 when Oliver is telling Ruth that it’s not far that she can use the word “Jap” and he can’t, but her response of, “Exactly. It wasn’t fair” really sums up my feelings on that.

As a Rom Com (Romantic Comedy) enthusiast it was nice to not only see a film in this genre that focused on People of Color but was also produced in America. It was the first feature film I’ve watched that Filipinos and aspects from their culture were part of the main story. I enjoyed a lot of the dialogue that took place in this film mainly around race and culture. There were two distinct spots that really stood out for me.

The first, was at the debut when everyone initially first eats and they go around the room to different tables and show us the conversations that are going on. The conversation about the proper word to use when referring to Filipinos or other people from Asian and/or Pacific Islander decent. The conversation I liked was when the white man at the table in telling the rest of the table that saying “orientals” is not the correct term to use anymore because it’s too “touchy” and the proper word is “Asians”. However when one of the Filipina women reefers to herself and other Filipinos as “Asian”, the white man gets  flustered because the Philippines are not part of Asia but Malaysia so they aren’t Asian. I found it slightly amusing that it was okay for Filipinos to be labeled as “oriental”, a term that did not take into consideration anyone’s geographical location. Not only that but instead of using one word to refer a ton of different people and cultures why not use their actually nationality.

The second piece of dialogue I really enjoyed was when Rose and her friends were dancing as Ben and Rick re-entered the party. Rick, says something along the lines of the dance looking like dances his Mexican cousins did. My first thought to that comment was that while they dancing looks similar it’s really not okay to generalize cultures like that. And then I remembered my history and realized that that comment could also be a reference to Spain having colonized both the Philippines and Mexico.

I started reading Robert G. Lee’s Orientals after watching and writing about the “How I Met Your Mother” episode, which was a bit unfortunate because then I could have used parts of the reading in describing the messed up things in that episode. Anyway that’s not want I want to spend this post talking about. In the “Introduction” when talking about the United States vs. Thind case Lee says, “The important thing about race, the Supreme Court held, was not what social or physical scientist at the time may have had to say about it, but rather how “popularly” defined it.” (pp. xxii *note that my copy of the book has way different page numbers than most others…) in the context of further oppression non-white people from America.

I think that it’s statement worth talking about because of how true it was then, but more imrotantly still is. There’s a series out called “The Power of an Illusion” that really gets into the historical social contract of race and it’s effect on peoples lives up to the present. It questions why we still associate stereotypes with people, even after having disproved them or finding out the factors that lead to those stereotypes, because society still perpetuates inaccurate portrayals of different social groups. Which leads to another reason I found this quote to be essential, the power that media and pop/popular culture have on the general public. From music videos, to video games, to t.v. shows to commercials, people are influenced by what is constantly being portrayed through media and popular culture and because of that it’s dangerous to have misrepresentations of Asian/Americans in them.