Since its movie theater debut earlier this month, the new Marvel film Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings has grossed more than US$307 million worldwide, the biggest-earning opening during the COVID-19 pandemic after Marvel’s Black Widow.
The film also topped box offices in Taiwan and Hong Kong, although it has so far failed to gain approval for distribution in China, and could even be banned for featuring an “insulting” character.
Chinese social media users have said that the character of Xu Wenwu (徐文武), played by Hong Kong superstar Tony Leung (梁朝偉), is mainly based on the character the Mandarin (滿大人) in Marvel’s comic books, and that the Mandarin is based on Fu Manchu, a character in Sax Rohmer’s 1913 book The Mystery of Dr. Fu-Manchu.
They say that Fu Manchu is an expression of the racial stereotype of a “yellow peril,” which is allegedly deeply rooted in Hollywood. Thay also attack Leung, whose role in the movie is that of a crafty Chinese gangster, saying that he is willing to sell his integrity to rid himself of the epithet “king of bad movies.”
However, the reason for China’s extremely picky attitude toward the film arouses curiosity. China has become the world’s largest movie market after the US, and Hollywood cannot afford to ignore it. It is reinforcing references to Chinese culture in movies to connect with the country’s massive audience, as can be seen in Doctor Strange, Mulan and most recently Shang-Chi. The trend seems irreversible.
Perhaps Chinese are so intimidated by the huge success of Hollywood films in their country that they are attempting to declare their cultural sovereignty based on “bloodline.” Some even mock the looks of lead actors and actresses of Asian descent in Hollywood, saying that their narrow eyes or their eyebrows with highly raised tips are a biased Western conception of Asian aesthetics.
Nevertheless, the power to set the agenda for films, as well as in other parts of culture, still relies on market mechanisms, and whoever can satisfy the audience and boost sales by selling elements of Chinese culture to the world can set the agenda.
Chinese filmmakers have probably realized that Hollywood is better at marketing Chinese culture to the world. Take the Chinese fantasy films Monster Hunt (捉妖記) or Legend of the Demon Cat (妖貓傳) for example: The gap between them and Shang-Chi is unmeasurable.
Cultural sovereignty claims based on bloodline raises another question: Who exactly is the target audience of Shang-Chi?
When lead actor Simu Liu (劉思慕), who plays Xu Shang-Chi (徐尚氣), said that the film is not only for Chinese, but also Asian fans around the world, Chinese social media users were furious and threatened to boycott the film.
Intriguingly, the identity issue has spread to South Korea, where viewers complained that there is too much dialogue in Chinese in the film, accusing Hollywood of currying favor with Chinese viewers. South Koreans’ sense of being wronged seems to come from the belief that their country’s entertainment industry is leading the Asian market.
South Korean director Bong Joon-ho even won Best Director at the Academy Awards last year, so why were there no Korean roles in Shang-Chi?
As people interpret Shang-Chi differently, the film has triggered a postmodern cultural identity recognition and a shift of power in the entertainment world. Such confrontations might be unavoidable as the US and China continue to wrestle with each other.
Jessica Chou is a professor of information management at Yuan Ze University.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS