Eleanor was the most complex character in this movie, I feel. When she said to Rachel "You'll never be good enough", I felt that it wasn't so much that she was stating a fact - she was giving her a warning. That this family is cruel to outsiders and she'll likely feel resentful down the line, and much of the bitterness that Eleanor seems to radiate towards Rachel, she was projecting her own resentment for having given up so much for a family that still doesn't truly accept her.
Yeah the book really hits on that because even her is not accepted in the family. She is heavily criticized and judged even though she is from a rich background
All Asian kids understand that sentence: Youll never be good enough. We get it...deep down to our bones, its not just a fun phrase that westerners use to then justify a book deal or a whole movie to be made out of it. A lot of us kids understand that it isn't always saying that WE arent good enough but rather our mother is the one who is insecure....we then go on to say it to our kids lol and hope that they understand its just a way that we say "I love you".
@@sew_gal7340 Sounds like a desperate craving for love especially when your asian parents including fathers never told you they love you and quote "we ain't good enough"
Yeah I can’t remember if it’s explicitly mentioned in the movie, but in the book, Eleanor let’s Nick live with Nick’s grandma (his dad’s mom), specifically so the grandma would be closer to him and therefore Nick would have a more secured future. But this choice distanced him from Eleanor. The grandma was respected by all of Singapore and even by other countries. Those guards that we see guarding her house were GIFTED to her. The king of England KNEW her. She had a lot of influence.
My biggest problem with the movie was Nick. He did not prepare Rachel for anything. He just tossed her into a sea full of sharks and left her to sink or swim. He told her nothing about the world he was from. He didn't tell her about his ex. Despite knowing her financial background she didn't even make sure that she had a dress or transportation for the wedding. Like he knew what his world was like and he completely neglected Rachel. If Rachel didn't have Aquafina's character to help, she would have been even more doomed. And what if Aquafina's character was poor and couldn't afford to help Rachel? Nick claims he loved Rachel but he really set her up to fail.
It was worse in the book. In fact, not only does Nick not tell her stuff about how rich he is because he's quiet rich. In the book, NO ONE knew how rich he was because of how his family was quiet. He also forgot to tell Rachel about his many exes and the threesome between two of them because the women bring it up in front of Rachel and she loses her shit with Nick because he never brought them up.
As my first-generation Chinese-American husband said after being thoroughly unimpressed by the movie, “you’ll know you have good representation when you’re not expected to love and defend a movie just because the people in it look like you. No one expects a movie to capture what it’s like to be white.” Say what you want about CRA, there’s no way to meet expectations when one film has to speak for millions of people.
In America they are so racist their anti white more and more and tokenism for all considered minority, get used to it. be on the look out for that white supremacy that does not exists, it s a phantom and if your asian there is more threat from BLM and antifa albeit bath are morons.
there are tons of movies to capture what its like to be white. they all are. imagine an all white movie set in compton and they are all acting hood......or set in china town and they are all acting chinese.......look at friends, office or any other white show: where is the cultural/personality differences???????????????????????????????????????
What's so unique is this movie is about an Asian American VS Asian Asians in Asia, and the cultural conflicts and expectations that ensue. Think about it - it's not even a story told by Asian film industries.
To illustrate my point - Joy Luck Club - Asian Americans VS Asian Asians in America. Harold & Kumar - Asian Americans VS non Asian Americans in America And Bollywood movies that involve a prominent Asian-American/European character are always set in America/Europe, regardless of who the VS characters are (Asian, Non Asian, or Asian American). Only if the "foreign" character is Asian Asian and returned from a temp stay in America/Europe (let's say after grad school or a work stint), or non Asian, might the movie be set in India.
I wouldn't really say it's unique, it really just boils down to marrying or having relationships with people of different classes which is a story you see all the time especially in Asian dramas and even in western film and TV. And tbh this movie doesn't do it in depth or with any real intelligence or insight. I haven't read the book but the film isn't that deep.
@@durantan2343 I don’t think the movie was going for intelligent or deep either. It’s so normal to watch a mindless romcom that isn’t too deep but has an all white cast. The depth of the concept in my opinion really comes from the fact that CRA just went for an easy romcom vibe without trying to explain itself too much.
The only problem that I had with the movie was Nick's failure to defend his girlfriend. I honestly thought he was a really crappy boyfriend who's only attribute was to charm and please.
I’m not trying to be rude or anything, but in most asian households what your parents or elders say is basically law. It’s kinda hard trying to argue against them when they have been dictating you for your whole life. Speaking from experience. :)
@@jasonwei8686 Yeah, especially since Nick had already spent years away from his mom and what she believed were the responsibilities that he owed his family. Facing those expectations alone would be overwhelming
i think it's a shame that the discourse over henry golding always brushes over his iban heritage and how engaged he actually is in his iban heritage, even completing the iban rite of passage in his 20s (he shot a documentary as well). him being ethnically half white doesn't negate his experiences as an asian man, he was born in sarawak, grew up in terengganu before moving to surrey and then as an adult moving back to malaysia and then moving to singapore. he's a great choice for nick.
But he isnt chinese... not to mention this definitely brushes aside local racism of these chinese overseas, having darker skin is looked down upon. Though props for nick supposed grandma for being truly peranakan, which is historically most likely the case. You have to know history that chinese in Singapore especially the old rich one are from Tjabang Atas. Even though they were probably peranakan down the line somewhere they were succesful part of colonial system they also adopted colonial mannerism, skin colour matters. These family can flee to Singapore because they have money, and definitely looked down upon other chinese groups especially more assimilated ones. Somebody like Nick even if you only consider his Iban identity will never comes from rich family like this. While maybe unintended it can be considered racism toward other asian.
@@abcddef2112 He's not Chinese, but neither are Ken Jeong, Sonoya Mizuno, or Nico Santos. In Turning Red, Sandra Oh (a Korean-Canadian) played a Chinese-Canadian. Most of the charcters in Memoirs of a Geisha were not played by Japanese actors. I think it says a lot that a lot of people feel like a Chinese character MUST be played by an ethnically Chinese actor. This is not a sentiment bestowed on white actors - Keira Knightley playing Anna Karenina, (Russian), Ralph Fiennes playing Amon Goth (german), Rooney Mara playing Lisbeth Salander (Swedish). We have a terrific number of English-speaking Asian actors available now and splitting hairs on these ethnic lines does not help the mission of seeing more Asian representation in Hollywood.
It’s nothing against Henry Golding personally. But when most main Asian male leads (who are handsome/considered love interests) are half-white, it becomes a problem!
@@meganh7526 To be clear, I don't really care what ethnicity Golding is. IMO he played the part convincingly enough, and that's as someone with a Singaporean Chinese mother and an Indonesian Chinese father. However, there's a big difference between a Korean playing a Chinese person, and a half-Iban half-white actor playing a Chinese person (this is in ethnic terms). It's the arguably the same as having Hassan Minhaj or Shahrukh Khan play as a Chinese person - which I'd wager a lot more people would raise eyebrows at. Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are East Asian. No one can consistently tell one another apart based on appearance alone, and despite all the bad blood there's a long history of cultural exchange and genetic intermixing. Iban are part of the broader Dayak ethnic group - they're Austronesian in origin. Culturally, linguistically, ethnically, there's no tie.
So crazy how when there’s an all white cast for a movie or show, it’s deemed “normal” but when it’s an all black, brown, or tan cast it’s “a statement” or “politically correct”. I’m pretty sure the intentions of the creator of CRA was to just make a normal ass movie with an all Asian cast and people took it to the extreme. Lol. Good video though. Loved you guys’ perspective.
The reason people think it is "political" is because Hollywood has been saying it is political. Say it long enough and you taint every other production by association.
It was called a statement as part of its marketing. I guess good job on its marketing as nearly everyone fell for it to be some monumental Asian representation experience as opposed to just a rom com which happened to have a lot of Asians in it. The Asian angle though honestly lead to it being much more successful than it otherwise would have been, so it was the right move, and it lets a bunch of youtubers and bloggers make video essays about it years after the fact, win win.
@@johnstonacys I think you’re underthinking. “As is” doesn’t exist, as no piece of art exists in a vacuum and has a relationship with how it is marketed, how critics represent it, etc. It’s healthy to be skeptical about how CRA has oversold itself.
I rather liked the plotline with Astrid. Like most of the movie, there was a lot of focus on feminine strength. Knowing that Astrid had a different outcome in the book, I'm thrilled they changed it. She manages to be both strong, *and* kind in a way few of the other characters are. As you pointed out in the video, it also gives some perspective on the challenges Nick and Rachel will face beyond the "happily ever after," ending. I kinda hate those endings because they're not real life, and I think rom-com happy endings have misinformed people on the amount of work involved in a real life relationship. I think Astrid's storyline contributed quite a bit to the overall movie. I don't think the story should be the same without it.
I agree! While it has been many years since I read the books, I remember feeling annoyed and upset for Astrid because it took two books before she could be truly happy. Her plotline is not just about her relationship with Astrid, but like many women in her family how they have unrealistic expectations they need to meet. Her ex-husband was petty and terrible, and I remember thinking Astrid did not deserve all this. I appreciate they cut that out entirely and cut off her husband in this movie. I think seeing her leave her husband resonated with a lot of women, regardless of race. Especially when in the past toxic relationships were glorified.
Lol, I have a large family and more than enough of 'reality' in my day to day life. I like to watch ROM coms with happy endings bc there is more than enough negativity in life without me paying for more
I have the opposite take. I thought it was the stupidest part of the movie. Not only was she not really doing anything to make herself "feel small," her husband had a valid point about the incredible pressure of having to look picture perfect, keep up appearances, and live up to expectations of a family that you married into that is so much more well off than you and your wife is the kind of person that could have anyone she wanted due to her wealth alone. You can't stan Encanto for doing something similar while hating a character for the same thing in this. Also, that whole line about making him feel like a man was just tone deaf and dumb. It's like dude, nothing your husband did had anything to do with proving his masculinity, it had to do with him feeling suffocated by the weight of expectations placed on him. Also he wasn't expecting you to do anything about it, he built up resentment because he felt inferior constantly.
I didn’t like the way they introduced her. They want us to be sympathetic with another 1% in the movie because she complimented a kid? That’s it? That’s how you’re supposed to know she’s good?
@@lukelyon1781 It was tied to his masculinity though. one of his first lines in the movie was "everybody knows you wear the money pants in this relationship". all of his complaints were directed to her money and status. not once did he complain about quality time, or her affection. you think if he had more money than her he would be threatened by it?
What liked about the movie is what you said, it doesn't have to be everything, and it doesn't aspire to be. It is just a really well-made romcom, and I'm not saying that in a derogatory way. In a cultural background where romcoms are becoming increasingly scarce or truly bad (looking at you, Princess Switch), Crazy Rich Asians showed how there is a market not only for Asian stories but for good romcoms. The whole plot is something we have seen before, but instead of the superficial will-they-won't-they of most 2000's movies, this movie actually gives reason for them to be unsure of their relationship, and those issues come from identity, social class, economic stance, and cultural heritage like you pointed out. It takes the basic formula and executes it perfectly. It should be remembered for that.
This is a valid argument except for the fact that they market it based on what you claim "it doesn't aspire to be." And they bend over backwards patting themselves on the back for that, too.
Jon Chu's words - that a film doesn't need to be everything - I'm glad that he acknowledged the shortcomings of the film. Also, Shang-Chi got fast-tracked in production and converted from a TV series to a movie because of the success of CRA. I'm thankful that we got this movie.
Awkafina sucks as an actress and she keeps getting casted. This movie kinda sucks to be honest. I opined that African-Americans got Black Panther and we got this shit show.
A big change from the book that I like is Eleanor’s character. Thank goodness they made her much less shallow than the book. Imagine the legendary Michelle Yeoh playing the airhead “book” Eleanor (shudder) (not that she couldn’t do it, she would’ve acted the shit out of it). But Eleanor’s sequences in the book with her yapping friends are excessive and a total drag. I love that in the movie they show that the mother-in-law/daughter-in-law rivalry runs for generations. It’s classist and sexist. It’s dramatic and poignant. It’s peak Asian.
the mother in law/daughter in law rivalry exists because asian families are matriarchal. there's a similar father in law/son in law rivalry in western families which are patriarchal.
I liked that as well. She was clearly so harsh because that was what she had experienced. And yet Eleanor had to reflect if she was going to continue the cycle or break it. And the humility and yet dignity that Rachel had humbled her. Such a nice way to show character development. It didn't even take that much screen time to do it to.
Eleanor is shrewd women in the book and in the movie who would make a great detective with her network of spies she's just brought down by her gossipy dumb rich friends
I find that after so many years nobody has ever hit on the point that the original books were satire. They were published not as any realistic literary portrayal of Singaporean or Asian life but as chick lit for laughing at, not with, the characters and their crazy shenanigans. When it hit the NYT bestseller list it caused a lot of headaches here in Singapore because people would lose that context and start complaining about oh where's the South Asian representation oh why's Eleanor such a girlboss gatekeeper etc. And then when it came time to choose a story to make into a major Hollywood film to be the "Asian American Representation", they chose the only one on the NYT list, which is absolutely lazy and created another layer of misapplied intention, now using a uniquely Singaporean story to represent Asian American Rachel which of course wouldn't work. They could have chosen some other story to adapt, could have found something centred in Asian American experiences, but they didn't, and now we're in this mess, years later still debating whether it was "good representation". It opened a lot of doors and started a lot of opportunities, but the source material was never meant for this kind of seriousness so the movie adaption really couldn't either, no matter how many improvements were done to it (and there were many, except the accents, all wrong, not bad, just misplaced).
you said : " I find that after so many years nobody has ever hit on the point that the original books were satire. They were published not as any realistic literary portrayal of Singaporean or Asian life but as chick lit for laughing at,.." but excuse me, you might not have any experience with the " old family" but, some of ordinary people has. satire? not realistic? well i've seen more crazy things they did. even buy your life, a ministry... but they are so low profile an eats street food with you.
I mean the title is crazy rich Asians personally I was happy when I read the books and saw a filipino, (spoiler) even though her family got kicked out of that place
It's India. Indonesia, not India, is truly where South or Southeast Asia is. The British got it wrong when calling India "South Asia", just like where is "Middle East"? Middle of nowhere, and not East of anywhere. It's not good to keep using a nonsensical term, India Indians not Native American Indians from the USA. There's only Tamil speakers in Singapore mostly, so is the Indian character in the movie even correct? Meaning if that particular person is a Tamil speaker then it fits the location. But most East Asians and Southeast Asians DO NOT consider Indians to be Asians(Oriental/Far East, and far from where & East of where again?! When westerner/non-Asian says "Asian" who would they be talking about? Not Indians and not Israelis or Arab people, etc...) Even Siberia is in Asia but I never saw Siberians stand together and say they are being underrepresented nor do I see Mongolians either because their modern Mongolian script is written in and based on Russian Cyrillic alphabet. As a matter of fact, Mao tried to get rid of Chinese characters altogether but wasn't successful because the Chinese people said Cyrillic and Latin alphabets were hard to learn, so they had to scrap both scripts but used the Hanyu Pinyin as a pronunciation guide only and had no choice but to simplify the Traditional Chinese script which made it hard to learn at first because most people like Mao grew up learning the Traditional Chinese script. Simplified Chinese didn't exist until after 1949 when the communist forcefully took over. If Mao wasn't selfish for power and foolish and learned anything correctly, there would be no communism, no great famine, no simplified script, no pushing people to a place called Taiwan today and there would've been a peaceful democratic true republic in China today (not a fake communist state which tried capitalism and failed at first.) Singapore is seen as a rich "country" but it's actually a "city-state", a term used by ancient Greco-Romans? Most of Singapore is supported and provided by Malaysia. If Hong Kong were to become independent like Singapore, Hong Kong would be a city-state with most things supported and provided by Mainland China. Why not choose a bigger place to represent Asia like China, Mongolia, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines, Cambodia, etc...? I would put in Vietnam too if the geography wasn't too narrow just like it's neighbor Laos to the west.
@@trien30 In Europe and Canada it's Indians who are Asians and Chinese who are called "Orientals," you're basing this all off of what Americans say... also India is directly beneath China, so if they aren't Asian, why are Thai, Vietnamese, Cambodian, etc people Asian? Indian people can absolutely have those same features, the majority of its borders are with China and it is directly below China. Just say you only consider Asian people to be pale with monolids and take your racist self out of these comments.
Are we just not going to talk about how every Southern Asian was some kind of servant or scary bodyguard? I don't know, even as a white dude with no Asian roots I tend to notice the weird difference in treating East Asians and Southern Asians.
The novel (and therefore movie), is basically an ode to Chinese superiority complex. And the issue with the movie began with the very Sinocentric theme of the novel. Set in Southeast Asia, but there is no significant Southeast Asian character at all in the story. Southeast Asians in the book was just two Thai maids and a Malay princess, who brought nothing to the story.
@@sallieceelee5660 I feel like it's more a criticism of the discourse surrounding CRA than the plot and the characters itself. Talking about how the movie is perceived, people talk about "how great it was for Asians", "how it brings Asians to the spotlight" "diverse Asian voices" and that kind of thing. These viewpoints forget that within the movie, the voices aren't that diverse. They're only diverse in the context of it being an American movie (and there's nothing wrong with that, just when people say that it's a bit dismissive of other Asian ethnicities). And it doesn't bring "Asians to the spotlight" it brings East Asians to the spotlight, so saying that almost dismisses that other Asian ethnicities are Asian too. It's fine that they're not in the movie where it doesn't make sense but the discourse around it needs to be more mindful of what it's saying because if the discourse is as sinocentric as the movie, that has much more real-world implications than what's in the movie/book imo.
This has to do with its setting in Singapore, where Chinese + Malay + Indians are the 3 largest ethnic groups. CRA mirrored the way race in Singapore operates, in that ethnic Chinese (who make up almost 75% of Singapore’s population) dominate the upper class, whilst a lot of Malay and Indians are more working class. The Singaporean govt has long made efforts towards “racial harmony” but of course it doesn’t work out perfectly. It is really strange to me how very very few reviews of the movie ever made mention of this in their praise of “Asian representation,” how “Asian” isn’t a unified identity and this is very clear in the how the concept race operates in Singapore. Henry Golding (who played Nick) is actually half Malay, which was nice to see
@@hayatidk Henry Golding is NOT half Malay, he is half Iban. And that's the problem I have with Hollywood casting for lead Asian men character - can't they just cast a Chinese man? Casting a half white and half Iban man and pretend that he is Chinese is not real representation. Criticism on that is valid because it hurts people who don't have pan Asian look and perpetuate colourism. Not to mention, Iban and Chinese are totally different ethnicities - it is like casting a Latino to play a Filipino. They may share the same skin colour but they are not the same.
@@coffeemug3009 Henry Golding fits the Old Money/Peranakan mould well because of his British upbringing. Most people of that era speak Malay. So I don't think he is a bad choice. Actually Pierre Png should have been the lead if you want real historical accuracy. Not to mention the on-screen abs were Pierre's and not Henry's. But he's too old for Hollywood or otherwise too 'local' or not marketable enough for Hollywood.
I think book vs movie is deeper than you lay out. The book is about how money drives class divide, and the use of face is being used to keep up this divide. The intro scene is about the power of money, not racism. The movie flipped this, as Hollywood would not want to make a movie that critics wealth. The subplot becomes weird, because it can't fuel the culture narrative, where it did build up money/face narrative of the book.
Like I said in the video, I respectfully disagree. I don't think a book that spends pages and pages with the narrator gushing about expensive things is being as critical as you're suggesting.
@@QualityCulture I don't think the book is very critical (considering the author is from an old-money Straits Chinese sort of background himself) but it is at least more self-aware. In the book Astrid confesses that her family's wealth came from the drug trade and Western imperialism in China. For someone who read the book, the scene in the movie where Astrid buys and wears a pair of earrings with Burmese diamonds is quite horrifying esp. if you know Singapore's relationship to the military junta there (basically SG is the "Switzerland" of SEA and a lot of blood money fr diamonds, drugs, etc. goes through the banks here). The wealthy in SEA (esp. SG being the wealthiest SEA state) never stopped profiting off human rights abuses.
@@godofnothing428 Are we talking abt the same Hollywood? Where currently the biggest movies are superhero franchises bankrolled partly by the US military, and even people like Spike Lee are finding it hard to get funding for movies that don't stick to the tried-and-tested formula, that has become more like spectacles than art? "Prestige" cinema and stuff like Parasite (which didn't even come from the US) are Not the majority of films, and Parasite doesn't even come close to looking at sth as damning as the wealthy descendents of those who benefitted from colonialism.
@@Naomi-fb1ej yes the Hollywood that also critics wealth. Hollywood makes tons of movies and shows, some critic wealth, I have watched many. Others don’t, there is variety
I think class is the better lens to examine the film through. The scene where they make dumplings bugged me, because the elites in Singapore don’t exactly celebrate their Chinese heritage. It turns out that in the book they make scones?? That makes much more sense because the wealthy elites in colonial countries emulated the British. It’s British-inspired class bigotry that makes them look down on the American. They’d look down on mainland Chinese as well.
Having lived in Singapore, it seemed obvious to me that scene was a direct appeal to Singaporean culture specifically. Secret family recipes mean a LOT to my Singaporean friends, especially those who run or have family connections to hawker stands. Knowing how to eat the food is culturally important in many circles. Showing they know how to make the food was also a pretty perfect way to show just how old-money their family is too. It sets them further apart from the newly rich, even if it isn't totally realistic. "We built this country, and we haven't lost sight of our roots."
@@komyn27 Yeah that’s fair. A bit of creative licence. I think it also keeps it simpler for the average Western viewer who is promised something exotic and thoroughly “Asian”. I have friends who grew up in that kind of environment, and I quizzed them after the movie because I was confused as to who these “old money” Chinese-heritage families were. Growing up in a former British colony, it didn’t ring true, though honestly it would have been fascinating if it were!
Not true at all, the Nyonyas/Babas (Peranakans) who are the oldest and highest social class in Singapore are basically defined by their local family recipes. Every Singaporean knows this. Depends on how truly old money your friends are - a lot of upper middle class (which includes those who studied abroad) emulate the Brits, but that's far from "old money".
@@maplestory2723 Peranakans are much more interesting, though I don’t know what proportion of the richest in Singapore are Peranakan. Kwan (the author) isn’t, neither are the families he depicts in the book as far as I can tell. But fair point, the use of “old money” to describe the families in the book isn’t helpful. There’s old money and then there’s old-old money 😉 Would you consider the characters in the book/movie to be middle class though?
As a 1st gen Nigerian-American I relate so much to these Asian movies. So many similarities in culture. Specifically, ‘Joy Luck Club’ changed my life and helped me understand my mom so much more. It’s crazy that now that I’m mother I can see that I’m living such a similar life to mom across generations.
As a Singaporean, I found the portrayal of Singapore on screen to be a problem. Even if Crazy Rich Asians was focusing on the small subset of Singaporeans who are super rich and from old money and are Chinese, do they not have friends of other races? It's Singapore, after all. And, if they don't have many friends of other races, perhaps it should be portrayed as something bad? Instead, it was just glossed over. I can understand the 1% just mixing around with each other, and Peik Lin and her father wanting to portray themselves as Americanised since that seems more "atas" or upper class. But Peik Lin could have been a good gateway to showing a more multi-racial / multi-cultural Singapore, and that didn't happen. Singapore was portrayed as some kind of ultra-Chinese utopia - especially with the Chinese music. Considering how many times I've been asked if Singapore was in China, I hate that Singapore was watered down into another Chinese city somehow. I love rom-coms and I want to love Crazy Rich Asians as a rom-com (and that mahjong scene was great!). But the portrayal of Singapore being reduced to a backdrop (and not a very good one) makes it hard to go back for a rewatch.
I appreciate your perspective! I'm white but loved CRA - a close family friend is from Singapore and showed it to my mom and I to encourage us to visit with her the next time she goes back. Your comment makes me want to visit even more to see "real" Singapore instead of the reduction in CRA.
True.. like I know some rich Singaporean from the other races as well. And where the Johor royal families? Like I know they own lots of property in Singapore. The Young families should encounters them during business
Yeah. The accents are just not right. The Singaporean accent of Chinese was completely missing from the film; the Singaporean accent of English was completely missing from the film. I'll say that they portrayed the Crazy Rich Asians as Americanised because of their place in the US, nothing more. I'm relatively certain, given the prevalence of high teas, etiquette, and poshness in the 'atas', that Britishisation seems to be more common among the rich. Makes sense when you think about it; all of the old rich families of Singapore were Brits.
It almost feels like the negative response to Crazy Rich Asians from Asians exactly reflects the unrealistic expectations of success that Asian culture is rife with - I'd say this film was an A- in terms of what it wanted to portray, but people want it to be an A++. I agree with you and John Chu - no single film should bear the burden of perfectly portraying every nuance of a culture or race, especially since it would literally be impossible. Also, in retrospect, I love the decision to focus on the differences in cultural experiences between people in a monolithic country and a second-generation Chinese-American person (Rachel) rather than the extravagance. Framing Rachel as the main character allows the target audience, which I believe are either non-Asians or "third culture" Asians, to be immersed in the experience of being in an unfamiliar culture and struggling to adapt to it. It's a highly effective narrative choice.
also cause this plot is every outdated korean drama, just google rich guy/secret air/ceo falls in love with poor naive girl imo it's almost a perverse way of worshipping the capitalist dystopia of massive income inequality by portraying them as a life goal/higher class of people
The scene between their mothers, Eleanor realises that Rachel's mum protected her family just as fiercely with none of the money, connections, support or resources ❤️🔥
As someone who’s half black, it always hurts a little when people say, “why couldn’t they cast a full (POC)” Being told you’re not (POC) enough is something I heard a lot. So it’s sad to see actors still dealing with that
We need stories for both those of mixed heritage and those who are not. Our experiences are different and one should not be erased by the other as both are valid. Its not about being "enough" but allowing ALL of us to exist and have positive representation.
I hear you but I think it’s more so about the fact that Hollywood always casts people with proximity to whiteness. Monoracial people of color are not allowed to represent their own race(let that sink in). It’s not that you’re not enough but it’s that people want to see their race represented FULLY and not to the extent that makes white people feel comfortable. I think we should have depictions of both mixed/biracial people and monoracial people. Both stories matter and should be represented fairly.
I think there's something similar with the black community, although i am not really an expert on the matter so i apologize if i get it wrong. but i think it's similar to how darkskin black women are often overlooked for lighter skinned or biracial women. i feel that a similar type of erasure is done to full blooded asian men especially in lead romantic roles.
I feel for you but you're also ignoring the long history of full Asian men being deemed as not romanceable both in real life (in western society) and in Hollywood movies. For the longest time (and even until now) you don't really see full Asian man cast as a romantic lead. If they're Asian they're going to be half white. That's the reason why when Henry Golding was cast many Asian men felt disappointed by it, because yet again a half white Asian male is cast.
All this movie needed to do was be popular. And it was! It did exactly what it was made for. It both entertained us and opened the door to more Asian (specifically Asian American) stories. I’m loving how we’re getting more diversity in our movies and shows.
The Astrid plot line is the reminiscence of the book’s plot and theme, which it is about classism and class struggle, rather than Asian identities. And this is the core problem regarding the film of Crazy Rich Asian. Because the movie of Crazay Rich Asian try to tell a very different story than the book. As a result, many of the settings in Crazy Rich Asian kind of loses its meanings in the movie. Like imagine, how would the story change if Nick Young came from a middle class instead of being one of the few Rich and powerful? The cinematography, sound track, actors, are all great. Many of the characters, plot lines, scenes, are very enjoyable to watch which makes Crazy Rich Asian a good Hollywood film. However, at its core, many of these plot elements are just disjointed from one another.
the movie actually watered down alot of complex stuff regarding the plot, I adore the character dynamics in the novel and Astrid's arc line and character development was much more interesting than the main couple that they had less screen time in the third book lmao
Since then we have gotten The Farewell, Minari, Shang-Chi, and Everything Everywhere All at Once. We're getting more flavors of pie slices! The movie definitely did it!
@@liliuh_ there’s nothing wrong with that. But it’s important to appreciate non western and non America media as well. We just keep calling for diversity on American screens but then pay no attention to international media. You can really look into k dramas, j horror and other genres that are popular within asia. It shouldn’t have to take seeing Asians on Americans screens more for you to be satisfied
@@shirley444 I'm southeast asian. I grew up watching many, many types of asian media. Cantonese/HK shows, Thai shows, Viet shows, your usual kdrama, cdrama, jmovies, whatever. That's not the point. It's about the REPRESENTATION and not necessarily just seeing asian people on my screen.
I agree, asian-american movies are more relatable to me as an Asian American - even though I mostly watch Chinese, korean, thai, Japanese movies. The personalities of the characters, their experiences and the humor just feels more relatable than the average kdrama or drama character. @@liliuh_
When this movie came out, my friend from Thailand went to see it, and she later called me and said it was fine, but she was annoyed that it's only ever Chinese, Japanese, or Korean people that get representation.
@@NoName-dx1no ummm when did that person deny that thailand is part of SEA? The author is singaporian, its insane to expect him to write about ALL asians
Tell your friend just because it says Asian doesn't mean it will represent all asian countrys it's a movie for entertainment not a documentary of different countries in Asia
I wish you brought up how every South Asian in this movie is some kind of servant. I enjoyed Crazy Rich Asians, it’s a decent rom com. But if they market this on mindful “representation”…I mean c’mon. They literally doing what white ppl been doing in Hollywood to East Asians, which you criticized in the beginning of the video.
especially since in the context of Singapore, where Chinese folks are the majority and enjoy racial privilege, the film and book both ignore the non-Chinese minority population too. To Singapore minorities, while we recognise the feat this is for chinese diaspora, the Singaporean-ness is very clear in the obscene wealth and in the exclusion of brown people. still fun to see sg on the big screen, but the lack of seeing myself in my own country is weird
In this case I think the film reflected the same lack of south Asians the book had. Nearly all of the major roles were family members so I get that part, but I do agree there probably should’ve been more variety in south Asian background/ minor characters. I guess they inadvertently reflected how exclusive the Chinese elite in Singapore can be. Again, this film isn’t perfect and I don’t think it can be everything for everyone, but yeah this is one of the things they could’ve done better
yeah especially in its marketing (and discourse surrounding it) as "diverse". To an extend, it makes sense within the context of the movie if that's the story you're trying to tell - like it almost reflects how South Asians don't have a place in the type of society shown in the movie - BUT if people then go around marketing it as "such a diverse Asian film" it's very telling who they think of when they hear someone is Asian. It's only diverse within the US context where an Asian-led film is rare, but it's not a diverse film in itself.
The Sikh guy is a guard, not a servant, yeah? It's a respectable job which they have had since the beginning of colonial times. I agree more positive representation would have been desirable, but there is nothing wrong with representing this true side of history! The real servants in a Chinese peranakan household are the Amahs or the Chinese slave girls bought from the region of China where their ancestors are from. The Amahs take vows of celibacy while the Chinese slave girls sometimes get raped or forced to be tertiary wives. Maybe that's the real fault of the movie-- not enough poor or underclass Chinese.
I think they sorta go through it in the books. Where the prestige isn't just about money but also in race. I remember a footnote in the books where the ranking was like 1. Singapore 2. Chinese 3. Korean etc etc Note this is not of course a "fact", but something the asian elite have in their heads. Both in the books and in the movies, a lot of the staff were Filipinos. Overseas Filipino workers in the service industry is very common, and many migrate to places like Singapore or Hong Kong for better pay. I don't really see it as "what white people are doing", but another discussion of the divide and racism even amongst the Asian community. Plus I don't expect the author or the movies to handle the divide of Chinese-Singaporeans vs Filipinos, as the author is Chinese-Singaporean and the major roles in the movie were actors of East-Asian descent. TLDR: As talked in the video, Crazy Rich Asians is only one movie, and it shouldn't be the by all tell all of all Asian representation, as Asia alone is a HUGE continent, comprised of many cultures and races. But I can appreciate that it's a stepping stone for more stories to come.
As an indigenous Australian I watched this movie purely for its romcom value. I loved it. My favourite scene was the wedding where Nick was best man. So beautiful and romantic. Bawled my eyes out!
I really liked the small dive into Eleanor's backstory and small scenes with the Grandmother. It showed that she's doing the same thing to Rachael(i.e inter-generational trauma).
I'd be really interested to hear your thoughts on Everything Everywhere All at Once! While I enjoyed CRA when it came out, I struggled to really connect with the narrative, characters, and emotions in the same way I would with the Daniels' film four years later. It's funny how a wacky absurdist multiverse movie felt more grounded in my own experience as an Asian human than CRA, but that's just how I feel. That movie spoke to my soul, man.
I absolutely agree, and its funny because technically without this movie, we might not have even gotten Everywhere, considering Ke Huy Quan only returned to acting because of his fear of missing out due to this movie.
Even with all its flaws **cough Awkwafina's blaccent cough** **cough no darker-skinned Tamil Indians in speaking roles in a movie set in SINGAPORE cough-cough** I still like _Crazy Rich Asians_ and I am looking forward to a deeper dive into Astrid's story in the sequel.
I don’t know if you’ve been to Singapore (or Malaysia, which has many similar dynamics), but despite the fact that the countries are quite multicultural in terms of the ethnicity of their citizens, it’s extremely stratified by race. That’s especially true when it comes to this generational wealth tycoon family. It’s like if you go to a fancy country club in America - the vast, vast majority of people are white, sometimes literally exclusively, even though of course that’s not the makeup of the country as a whole.
why Awkwafina portayed a good portion of Asians wanting to emulate the Black American Culture/thug life, who can be labeled as black sheep of the family HAHAHA also, her family is a great example of new money!
i just think the "discussion" and "controversy" was rooted from the fact that there are too many different aspects of "asian", and also people expected it to be "their type of representation", when in fact asian representation is still in its process of maturizing, and the fact that we're such diverse communities. generalizing the term "asian" itself is already too broad, we can't ever get a 3 hour film to satisfy everyone.
I experienced Crazy Rich Asians as a regular romcom movie. I had watched so many international films and dramas throughout the years, I was already used to seeing Asian actors in big budget performances. It never registered to me that most people had never seen an East Asian cast in a leading role until my older brother (who mostly sticks to Western media) told me how amazed he was by this film - and specifically with Henry Golding. For him, Crazy Rich Asians was a glimpse into a world he never knew existed. I had to laugh. Talented POC have always been in the entertainment industry, but I guess now they're finally making waves in Hollywood. And while Crazy Rich Asians might have it's flaws (i.e. an inaccurate representation of the multicultural population of Singapore), I think it did the job it set out to do.
I do absolutely agree that for Henry Golding, claiming he wasn’t “Asian Enough” was easily harmful to him and his identity. I think this criticism is a poorly worded attempt to describe the erasure many Asian (and coloured) people feel when half-white actors are deliberately cast to play NON-half-white characters. It inherently ignores and dismisses the privilege any proximity to whiteness grants them. As MUCH as half-white mixed POC feel ostracized in regular life, it NEEDS to be stated how often Hollywood is asked to include diversity and then cast half-white actors as an act of colorism, racism and ethnic erasure. It’s extremely prevalent in the black community and often found in the Asian community. It’s doubly-toxic because it easily allows for non-mixed people to resent mixed individuals and the privilege their proximity to whiteness is getting THEM jobs. It gets THEM in the door. It’s often our ONLY representation. And at least in my experience when only half-white people are seen as the representation for POC it makes it feel like that’s the only way to be beautiful or desirable - which has a lot to do with internal and externalized racism. That being said, CRA is amazing simply by being able to see a film where there are almost only Asians on screen, but I think… and I might be out on a limb here, John Cho experiences a lot more appearance based vitriolic racism or demasculation (commonly experienced by Asian men) than someone like Henry Golding who has more Eurocentric features and was just a “safer bet” as a romantic, “leading man”. And that’s just… racism. It’s not Henry Golding’s “fault” he benefits in some ways from being mixed, and it doesn’t excuse people calling him “not Asian enough”. AND, it’s also disengenous to not acknowledge the pain many of us feel when for a long time half-white POC were (and potentially still are) the ONLY representation we usually see on a regular basis in leading roles. But again, CRA had so many non-mixed actors it in, but there is still something to be said about the underlying racist attitudes surrounding sex and attractiveness and why someone like Henry Golding was chosen to be the face of this movie and NOT John Cho when I feel like it’s fair to say Asian men struggle to be represented as desirable in a lot of western media.
I agree wholeheartedly that it's shitty when Hollywood continually casts half-white people for POC roles--I understand that (I think it's more about colorism than genetic makeup but that would be too long of a comment). But as far as Henry Golding, I would understand the 'representation' argument more if he was the only Asian person in the movie, but it's a fully Asian cast. He is not the sole source of representation in this film. And to me (a full-blown Asian guy), Henry Golding did represent Asian men as desirable in CRA, because he *is* an Asian man. Also, John Cho was too old to play an early-30s character at that point. I do get where you're coming from though, thanks for sharing your perspective
@@QualityCulture oh my GOD John Cho is almost 50 LOL I did not know that. And I mean, to your point -- it's quite possible a lot of the outrage is at the *idea* of Henry Golding playing this character, without actually asking a lot of Asian men how they his portrayal actually makes them feel. So, great point! And thanks for reading my comment 🥺
The issue with Golding is that he is mixed Iban and White, but he was cast as Chinese. That's yellow washing, in the sense that you send the signal that all Asians, regardless of the type of Asian, are basically just Chinese. It is as offensive as casting a Japanese person to play Jose Rizal (native Filipino). And the issue with the movie began with the very Sinocentric theme of the novel. Set in Southeast Asia, but there is no significant Southeast Asian character at all in the story. Southeast Asians in the book was just two Thai maids and a Malay princess, who brought nothing to the story.
@@QualityCulture The issue with Golding is that he is mixed Iban and White, but he was cast as Chinese. That's yellow washing, in the sense that you send the signal that all Asians, regardless of the type of Asian, are basically just Chinese. It is as offensive as casting a Japanese person to play Jose Rizal (native Filipino). And the issue with the movie began with the very Sinocentric theme of the novel. Set in Southeast Asia, but there is no significant Southeast Asian character at all in the story. Southeast Asians in the book was just two Thai maids and a Malay princess, who brought nothing to the story.
@@sallieceelee5660 YES, okay, completely agree with you. I find this SO difficult to bring up as a point in conversation because people strawman and sealion the proposal so quickly. I found the same with Lara Jean in TATBILB where she was written to be half-Korean half-white but played by a Vietnamese actress! All over it said "BRILLIANT FOR ASIAN REPRESENTATION!" when all it did was make people think all Asian people look alike LOL. But the main criticism to my point was that no one culture "owns" features and it's a point I agree with, too... but at the same time it sucks because we all *know* what's happening here... don't we? It's frustrating because obviously you can have tons of mixes in your family's history, and that absolutely doesn't deny your culture or ethnicity. But when it comes to Hollywood like. They really could not give less of a shit to acknowledge the wide BREADTH of C O U N R T I E S people are so quick to entirely equate with one another. And while yes it's wrong to presume "to be Chinese means having X-feature", Hollywood is fundamentally a visual medium, and it's... literally just lying. Like Henry Golding can't look half-Chinese Half-Singaporean because he's not ethnically from either of these histories of people LOL. But again... I will concede there is a conversation to be had about like... if *ideally* your features should define your race (BECAUSE your race DEFINES you??) but like... I don't think we're there yet LOL. A Great First Step: acknowledging that these huge nations of people from countries all over the world are in fact. Different from one another.
Astrid's story isn't weird or convoluted at all! It's honest and displays the deepest betrayl for the modern women. It couldn't be more relevant in these times.
The comments of Golding not being “Asian enough” also missed how he’s SEA and very involved in his community and culture (even going through a rite of passage important in his culture) he was right for this movie, especially since it’s set in a SEA country
As someone who is half middle eastern but raised by the other parent, and having little contact with my middle eastern parent, I so understand the disconnect from that culture and the heritage connected with my ethnicity.
After watching the movie, I read the CRA books, and was surprised that not only did the Youngs actually have Indian old-money friends who are mentioned several times, who we learn about enough some key events take place at one of their parties. In addition (*SPOILER ALERT*) Astrid and Charlie Wu even get engaged in India, at the home of Charlie’s Indian friend, assisted by Shah Rukh Kahn. Is this representation fantastic? No, but it’s an indication that there are South Asian people in their world who aren’t relegated to just “the help,” and I wish they were at least mentioned in the movie.
I have to disagree on Nik being perfect lol. I’d be PISSED at him for keeping so much from me, and I didn’t feel like he was as present as he should’ve been going into it. He made good choices by the end, but man did he fuck up on the way. Which tbh I like - he’s not shown to be a perfect Prince Charming, and it shows his familial influence and blind spots. He gets it together by the end, but calling him perfect…nah man lol. I love this essay! I like hearing how others’ view it. Always great content
I've been holding off on CRA for the longest time given it's lack of representing Singaporean diversity and Awkwafina's terrible blaccent. Nevertheless, I'm not blind to the fact that it still opened doors. Thanks for your thoughts here.
Totally agree with this assessment. As an Asian born in Asia who moved to the US and was predominantly raised there but also traveled back to Asia fairly regularly to visit family, I'm regularly reminded when I do something "American". I speak my native tongue fluently and am much more in tune with my culture than Rachel's character, but she was still totally relatable. I actually felt tied to both sides, being raised in America by traditional Asian parents (i.e. no hugging/touching, no saying "i love you", no congrats when you get good grades/succeed because that's what's expected...etc.); don't worry, we know we love each other. I definitely also catch myself judging fellow Asian immigrant kids/transplants who don't speak/care to learn their mother tongue or learn about their heritage (i.e. having grown up in America on Chinese children's stories/fables alongside American/European ones). I was in high school when Better Luck Tomorrow came out and immediately watched it; it led me to watching Joy Luck Club soon after. Having seen those movies, I think I had a realistic expectation of this movie being what it seems you're trying to say it is - another stepping stone in the right direction for Asians in American/international movies. It definitely sucks that it took 25 years, but it's a welcome move forward. 🎬
For that, you need to adapt an Asian American story or something by good Japanese/Korean writers (aka please no light/web novels with authors who need to touch grass). Since Southeast Asia only had white and Japanese colonizers, you don't read a lot of stories that specifically involve characters with African-(insert country name) blood. Also, Japan and Korea are more likely to have them because they were once "colonized" by USA or they have US military bases, which means higher population of black-asian mixes and awareness of them. Because I can straight up tell you that most Southeast Asians have never seen enough black-asian mixed people to think of their racial status as anything but an anomaly.
If anything, the dialogue that comes out of criticisms of this movie just reveals a lot of the problems within asian culture, from colorism and China centrism, to the "Cinderella" trope of a woman being the luckiest thing alive if she can catch the eye of a hot rich dude that fixes all her problems
for me i was just happy to see the typical cheesy dramatic romcom fairytale w asian faces, that it was possible for us to have that kind of light-hearted movie w cultural context that at least showed a huge variety of different ways asian ppl think and live
Fun facts: In the mah jong scene, Rachel sits on the "west" position while Eleanor sits on the "East" position. West vs East. Rachel also discards the 8 bamboo tile. 8 symbolizes wealth in Chinese culture so she was saying "I give up the money".
I loved this movie but I was a little disappointed that they cut out Alexander’s sister, Cassandra (i think that’s her name.) She’s a doctor that was very sensible, down to earth and was even a little annoyed to be at the bachelorette party because it took time away from her patients. They merged her and Astrid’s character in the movie a little which makes sense given the medium constraints but she was another supporter and ally of Rachel’s from the book. She knew how insane her family was, but still tried to create a normal life for herself.
Her name is Sofie, and she was Colin’s sister and Astrid’s cousin. I don’t agree that they should have included her since her role was so small so it made sense to give that plot line to Astrid, because it gave Rachel and Astrid the opportunity to connect on a more meaningful level that isn’t really present in the book trilogy.
Films just need to tell stories without having to meet a quota or agenda. That way we can enjoy them for what they are and what they are trying to say.
@@juanchoresultay2704 I mean that there have been very few all Asian led movies in Hollywood and so this movie was a few of its kind. And because it has that kind of weight on it, it has to push certain issues to the front of the story that people want to see onscreen. When that happens for a movie with only a 2 hour run time, some of the elements of the story will have to be sacrificed. It's unfortunate but it almost always ends up that way. Was it a bad movie? No not at all. I enjoyed it quite a bit but there were times when I felt it could have delved deeper into our main characters. Basically what I am saying a movie like this can't just be for entertainment or have certain freedoms in the storytelling because it's supposed to be "trailblazing". If it's the writer(s)'s decision to have the movie be a statement well than that's good and fine but I think the very best movies I have seen are the ones that remained true to the storytelling without feeling the need to pander to an audience, or sanitize elements of the movie for the sake of being unoffensive.
@@wisehead1830 i agree, ultimately this movie is just a romcom and i think it should be allowed to just exist as such. obviously having the first all asian casts sets it up for high expectations to talk about certain things, but i don’t think it should be necessary if the movie doesn’t require it. this is a cinderella esque romcom about a girl and a family that just so happens to be asian, but being asian doesn’t have to be the forefront of the movie at all times in the same way an all white cast romcom isn’t focused on it’s whiteness.
I took the chinese covers of 1920s foxtrot songs was a Great Gatsby reference. the entire book about Great Gatsby is about the cultural divide between new money vs. old money and classism which is also one of the main themes of CRA.
such a wonderful video about this brilliant movie. i'm so excited about the movie with astrid. glad you talked about that moment with rachel and eleanor at the end because it really was so powerful. thanks for this great video essay!
Thank you SO very much for this excellent analysis of the theme relating to women's position and relationships within the culture and with each other throughout the generations. I certainly hope that many more Asian Americans are inspired to write, to produce and to finance all sorts of films with actors of Asian descent. I'm African American and I DO enjoy watching films about people different from myself whether from another lifestyle, ethnic group, socio-economic status or any other number of differences. Thank you again. Barbara🌺
As a black female I actually enjoyed this movie a great deal; why? Because it emphasized to me the differences ( the culture) and similarities( concepts of old/new money, generational trauma) between us all. The generational trauma hit hardest. It's amazing that no matter your skin color...no matter what culture you come from, you can still experience such hard hitting similarities. I don't have a right to comment on the substance of asian representation but I truly felt that the movie did more than to be identified as a movie for asian representation. I am a fan of many of the actors in this movie and it was a treat seeing them interact with each other. Plus, the visual beauty of the scenes was excellent. That wedding was something out of a dream.
The unfortunate thing about this movie is that it's been sold as being "a major Asian American blockbuster" which the film fails to deliver. The story is one of a Chinese American from a mainland Chinese background who meets a Peranakan Singaporean man. It comes close to explaining this within the first ten minutes in the scene in the Hawkers Market when they sit down to a dinner of Hakka Mei, Asam Laksa, Apam Balik , Ayam babi pongteh. This is not Chinese food, this is a fusion, which is what Singapore was/is until heavy resettlement from mainland China since the early 2000's. If you wanted an American Asian film, this isn't it.
So.. Asian equals Chinese? Peranakan is Asian. It's even more Asian cuz it's a fusion of a few diverse Asian cultures. TBH, I am not sure what is your point. This is not an Asian American movie because there is a heavy Peranakan element involved? Or the exact opposite, that this is not an Asian American movie because it is almost exclusively Chinese with very little non-Chinese Asian flavor? OR because there is not enough of the "American" flavor in this so called Asian American movie. This film is a lightning rod of controversy because different people from different races want (or demand?) different things from the movie. As it is the non-Chinese Asian audience especially in Singapore are annoyed that the cast is almost exclusively Chinese because the studios sold it as an "Asian" movie.
@@hailyrizzo5428 I think that's how the film was marketed, which is why I said if you wanted an Asian American film, this isn't it. The mother's advice to her daughter is to wear a traditional red dress, little thinking that things have moved on, that Singaporean society is not a freeze frame and in the case of Henry Golding's heritage, it's diverse.
just a heads up, Rachel is a game theory prof, not an economics one. the youtuber Accented Cinema did a really good video on this, breaking down her mahjong scene with Eleanor.
to be fair: a lot of these feelings are the same way i feel about the first black panther movie. where after the hype died down, it's started to get more criticism from both within and without the black community for a litany of shortcomings. but i feel like it shouldn't be understated just HOW important of a movie it was on it's own and how it effected the culture. and because of how important and successful it was, BP2 was able to be made with utmost care and be one of the best marvel projects made to date.
Ngl i cried during the mahjong scene in your essay, which came out of nowhere even for me who doesnt cry for movies. Even as an Asian (Filipino), i live in a household that was different from their values and family believes, which really made fortunate and grateful. I dont know if its my mind subconsciously telling me that although different, there are aspects in my life right now that are actually similar to the stereotypical Asian strict family culture, albeit minimal. Thats all just sharing.
I'm kinda concern that the writers for the original won't return to do the second film (they really should have paid her better its gross hearing about it now), the writer from the first film was a Chinese Malaysian and really captured the nuance of life , food, mindset and culture in SG and MY in its own little fairy tale great gatsby esq way, that the series is based in. It might lose some of its finer cultural narrative because its going to be put together by a fully Americanized lens this time.
I mostly loved this movie and I'll tell you why. As a POC, there is something warm about seeing other POC in community on film and television. I frequently felt myself wanting to be there too to celebrate with the characters and learn about their culture. For me, at least, you feel a kinship in the struggle to get these types of films made. But, also seeing the complex characters and their story arcs was humanizing and validating. I'm grateful this very romantic movie got made. Plus, I always thought Asian people were beautiful, and the men desirable, so there's that as well. The only part I found off-putting was Awkwafinas role. It took me right out of my immersion into this world. I found her blaccent offensive. I preferred her in Shang-Chi, where she played a Chinese-American girl with an immigrant family. I'm also 1st gen American, so there was a recognition of the line you walk between your parent's culture and the culture you are building for yourself. Plus Michelle Yeoh is in it and I'd watch her paint a fence. Thanks for the video.
Agree 100000% with every point except criticism of Awkwafina - blacks don't hold a monopoly over that accent and it perfectly fits her character in the movie.
@@Muslimah1987 you used "blacks" to refer to black people(!) Of course you won't understand what a blaccent is and how is not ok to imitate it for laughs when real life people struggle and are looked down upon for speaking like that every day. Akwafina admitted to using it despite growing in a predominantly white area, and then apologized. So stay in your lane.
@@literaIIyshy Nonsense, stop trying to use woke shut down tactics that no one except the intellectually bankrupt cares for. The woke mob bullies people into apologising for anything, that means nothing anymore. Would you take issue with a black person speaking in the same style as Ronald Reagan? Or would it be just as absurd since whites don't hold a monopoly over this style of speech? These pointless, nonsensical sensibilities are exactly why the black community in America continues to be such a resounding failure. Your argument has no head or tail. There is no sign of reason, logic or anything that would persuade a sound human mind. Yet here we are. Boring and embarrassing.
I think the whitewashing conversation is valid as long as it’s not directed at Goulding specifically. When I was growing up black women who were biracial and very light were casted way more and very differently than mid to dark brown ladies. It was a way of checking off a box, while using people with features that align with Eurocentric standards. There’s better representation now because of the callouts making the industry aware of biases conscious or unconscious.
10:41 I do wonder though if they'll do the crashing the wedding rehearsal via helicopter and Elinor just pays for the repairs and told Nick that they should thank her because the altar was poorly made. 14:12 Michael Teo. Who else read the first book and went "Weak." And wasn't all that surprised on how he turned out in the second book?
I watched this movie as a young white woman and loved it. I don't love romcoms. But this one had so much heart. The women's relationships really made it
This film has a subtle underlying statement about culture that I am very interested in but ultimately disagreed with the final message. At it's base, it wanted to use the Eastern vs Western culture concept and which is the "right" way to live a life. There are some stories where you want the protagonist to be pure and correct and must fight against adversaries without compromising their ideals. Paragons like the Superman type. But there are some stories where you want the protagonist to have a flawed ideal and the antagonist to have an opposing flawed ideal on the opposite extreme. The plot is resolved when the protagonist learns from the antagonist and reconcile with a more wholistic and balanced ideal. I think in CRA, I feel like going for the latter is more appropriate. Ultimately Rachel, being the Western representative "won" the ideological war. Pursue happiness. It would be cool if they insightfully dissected the strengths and problems of each way of living. Plus, for a film that attempts to appeal to both the Eastern and Western audience. It's smarter to not declare an objective loser in the ideological war.
Man, well pieced together essay. It articulated so much I appreciated about the show which some people may not have noticed. But I definitely felt a lot of those moments.
A movie does not have to be great by itself to have a great impact. It was fun, and, having watched it with my female caucasian friends, it was a memorable experience as I saw them react "normally" without having problems with immersions because the cast was asian. Of course, a lot has changed since, with Parasite, BTS, and Squid Game making "representation" not as big of a deal, but at the time, it was impactful.
Yeah gutting that Hollywood's idiotic idea that Asian actors aren't bankable has lost actors roles and resulted in the cancellation of fantastic productions such as the series Selfie (which starred Cho)
This was a terrific analysis. I especially love how you point out the clash between cultures: ambitious, independent women vs. women who are expected to marry into money and have the perfect family. It rings true even amongst us who aren’t crazy rich. 😛 my sister is in her mid 30s and is judged by a lot of my family for not being married yet.
Thank you! So many Asian video essayists/film reviewers have been overly harsh toward Crazy Rich Asians and other Asian centric films that's come out the past couple of years. I don't think lifting up movies just because they're about "minorities" is at all right, but critiquing a film for what it isn't (unless you're addressing misleading ad campaigns) is disingenuous and intellectually lazy. Film reviews and essays ought to be engaging the film as it is not the reviewers pet subjects and wish list that aren't in the film. Anyway really appreciated this video. (PS the sound track is freaking amazing! I was dancing in my seat in the theater. I'm so thrilled that Michelle Yeoh has been in so many films & television in the last 5 years. And even if Crazy Rich Asians wasn't great, getting Ke Huy Quan back on screen would give it a special place in film history.)
Great Video!! Would love love love a breakdown of Joy Luck Club. This movie and book were so pivotol for me and I so wish it got more attention. Thanks so much for the great content.
For me it meant a lot just because as as mixed black kid exploring routes and not being black enough ect. This explored this in a relatable way for me which to me is a testament to good storytelling.
@@shastasilverchairsg I think that's the point. Regardless of location of population being reprsented, it was meant to be a "fish out of water" tale-- perhaps in a way to be relatable to people outside the culture looking in.
I watched Crazy Rich Asians last year, and I loved that movie. Even without being Asian, I could understand and relate to all the family expectations both Nick and Rachel had to deal with because of their wedding and their diverging family traditions, despite both families being Asian
I strongly dislike CRA but I appreciate what it did for Asians in Hollywood. I strongly dislike it because it was extremely colourist with brown Asians being relegated to maids and workers, as is the case in a lot of, if not most, Asian media. It's lazy. Not very good representation on that level. It's kind of like... I get that it was a step up from Hollywood racism, but Hollywood is trapped in 30 years ago so it's not saying much these days in the landscape of representaiton in media. But sure. It's fine. And people who love it, I'm glad you do.
Maybe I'm an info junkie, but I savored all of Kwan's Trilogy. It was a world I knew nothing about. I also felt that the film was imaginative and delightful interpretation of the book. Yes, as needed, it focused more attention on the central plot of Rachel and Nick. I enjoyed both. The film inspired me to read the books. Win, win. Every underrepresented community wants so much fom the few films that squeak three. I hope there are more to come.
I concur that the film is better than the book. I enjoyed the book, and attributed a lot of the success of the film's screenplay towards having such a good starting point-- And it made great sense to me that the movie did improve particularly on a character front on so many points over the book, once it was given the opportunity to. Take Astrid's plot for instance, as you mentioned, in the film it's still a bit of a mess, but it's way less of a mess than it was in the book. Things like that, choosing to beef up Eleanor's role, even up to the somewhat hand-wave-y ending to the final couple, I felt like those were all good improvements or at least attempts at improvements over pretty solid source material. And I Absolutely agree with the idea that part of the critique of this film, because of course there are many things this film does not do well, beginning with a failure to critique capitalism and continuing on through many other areas, but part of the problem in the reason people are expecting that is absolutely because it stands alone. I think it is victim to the same thing that a lot of LGBT stories are victim to right now, which is everyone somehow expecting them to be the standard bearer for everything everyone has ever wanted out of a story casting those characters in a positive light. And I absolutely believe that as we get more movies centered around LGBT characters, and TV shows, just as we get hopefully many more shows and films centered around Asian characters, that they begin to stand on their own, and that they're allowed to be silly or flawed or speaking to one experience but not other experiences or whatever they need to be to tell the story they want to be, instead of having to somehow be perfect in their singularity. 💚
The only thing I remember in this movie was that my people were the maids. The series really only focused on the dominant East Asian elite and the many south and southeast Asian workers keeping Singapore afloat are just the servants. I didn’t really bother to revisit it until this video.
Can we talk about the scene where the indian security guards came around or is "Asian Representation" and "steering away from stereotypes" reserved for east asians?
Those Indian security supposed to be there for a reason. They are Gurkhas and were “gifted” to Nick grandmother I don’t remember for what thing exactly but for something she did for foreign royal family. In the books there were told that it is not common practice for Singapore, but Shan Sui deserves best guards in the world. I barely remember the film but in the books it was represented the best way I think 🥹
@@totteringchatter oh sorry I think it was bad wording :( I’m not sure if it can be considered as gift, because, if I understood that part right, they had salary and were serving, the only difference - they could serve only royal family or smth, and the right to have that type of servant were gifted. Maybe you are correct and I’m not empathetic enough to them! I think I were focusing too much on Thai maids Shan Sui had, that were bought and brought to Singapore to be forever servants to certain family. I’m not sure how exactly people became Gurkhas, but if they can choose this path, then, I think, this exact part weren’t too bad?
@@soniaromanova Oh yeah totally, I think the Chinese maids were pretty problematic too and it felt like a little nod to Ah Ku culture in Singapore but that i think is exactly what im talking about you know? Like its always a point of contention/ a hard thing to choose to portray things as they really are while fitting that into the tone of a comedy. Especially when the reality of a lot of these customs and norms is derogatory to many people, you know? like i dunno if i personally can sit here and talk about what would have been a good choice to make around representing these parts of rich Singaporean lifestyles while acknowledging their inherent racism, but i know for a fact playing into the whole idea of "oh big brown Indian man with a turban scary" was the wrong way to do that. My people arent a joke, our traditions of martial art arent any different to those from China that are revered you know? Sorry long reply hahah thank you for your kind replies too!
People on Twitter recently found out Henry is half white and suddenly they're claiming that he doesn't look fully asian at all, I think that is so disrespectful
He looks like every generic upper/middle class southeast asian man, have they seen a southeast asian person before? By “fully asian” do they mean they don’t look like the typical asian they’re used to?
I’d love to hear your opinion on Memoirs of a Geisha. When I was young I adored that movie but as I got older I realized there’s a lot that’s kind of messed up about it. And now that I live in Japan I really wonder how people feel about that movie from the perspective of being Asian… especially the casting. After seeing Michelle Yeoh I had that feeling.
This is one of my all-time favourite movies, not because of it being "woke" but because it tells a really heartwarming and fun story that transports me to this incredible world I previously knew almost nothing about. It's just such a fun, gorgeous and emotional movie. I hate that people downplay what it is because they think it should've done more for Asian representation. People should just enjoy it for what it is and stop analyzing it so much through a social justice lens. Obviously, it's an incredible landmark for Asian representation, but if you're only judging it through that one aspect of what it is, you won't be able to appreciate what a great movie it is outside of that label.
Saw the discussion about henry golding on twitter and i agree that henry looks pretty much similar with some people from singaporea, malaysia, and indonesia. Especially because there's some people that half-caucasian in the three country and we saw them just like a common person. Many of us feels very okay with henry golding because it feels like someone who we actually met pretty often in our real life. Also very agree with asian vs american culture. I feel every region in asian have different yet similar culture and value. Here in Indonesia, we always have conversations about "the west value" vs the traditional value haha
The reason for Astrid's subplot will be evident in the next movie as she moves forward with an old love that we saw briefly at the end of Crazy Rich Asians. And I thought this movie showed a realistic account of how women treat each other. Some see competition and seek to undermine while others support and uplift the women in their lives. Loved every minute of it...especially that wedding!
as someone who is half white half asian I really don't get why people thought casting henry golding was an issue. like there's basically no half asian roles out there, so if you're a half asian actor you gonna have to play a white or asian role instead. I honestly think he was great as nick.
I like a lot of elements of the movie- the only thing that really struck me as off was portraying Astrid as "down to earth" by... having her splurge millions on jewelry and then having her Filipina maids hide it from her husband. Like, compromising yourself to soothe your husband's ego is relatable. But there were a million better ways for them to show that.
Honestly, I am very proud of the movie. I enjoyed it, and would tell everyone around me to watch it. Chinese have long been plaque by divide and inferialism. This movie actually brings out a very good message: be true to yourself, be proud of your culture, and be who you are. The mahjong scene is so beautiful and classic, because it reflects the Chinese belief: when you let go, you invite the possibilities of holding to something even more wonderful. I remember when I was young, my English educated aunt would look down on me, telling me things like: “it’s useless to learn Chinese”. But I would not give up my root, my identity; I choose to embrace my culture, and to be proud of who I am. And I am proud of this movie. Really wonderfully done.
I see Eleanor as an example of the "My way or the highway"/"No, nothing you do is good enough" character/trope, like Lindo Jong in "Joy Luck Club" and Guiseppe in "In the Name of the Father" . . .which of course has its roots in real life 'cause yeah there are people like that, ugh.
I loved this movie. What I didn’t care about was the marketing stating it as a “Very diverse cast”. Yes, a very diverse cast situating of one type of people from one part of the world. How diverse.
Diversity is about giving more people opportutinities to participate and tell their stories. It's not about representing every color of the rainbow in one picture. This is a good story that happens to be about Chinese-Singaporeans.
@@NewGuy2534 that just shows you dont know anything about Asians. The cast was from multiple countries, varying ethnicities. Like if you think Pinoy, a Japanese person, a Chinese Malaysian and and an Iban person all look and think alike, thats ridiculous.
I'm an SEAn not concerned to obsess over every details of this production. It is a Hollywood film depicting an idea of what SEA/Singapore is like. Even local productions' depiction of their own country can sometimes be way off. To be fair, Daughter-in-law/Mother-in-law antagonistic relationship due to one of them is not rich enough is a fairly typical TV/film subject here. I can just turn on any TV drama/lakorn/sinetron/teleserye/etc. and chances are one of them will show this issue.
I didn't think I needed asian representation until I saw Crazy Rich Asians. It was eye opening how important representation is, to just see Asians being "normal." To see an Asian American main character that's a love interest for being smart, capable, kind, and strong, not "Asian"
I despise how dismissive Asian-Americans and others of the diaspora are of the criticism against this film by Asians who actually live in the region, particularly Southeast Asia. The scene where Rachel was inexplicably freaked out by the darker skinned guards is pretty telling of what kind of movie this is to us.
sadly it's always been like that for darker skinned members of any race. black, latino, asian, arab, doesn't matter. COLORISM is very real in the movie industry and some light skinned POC don't even acknowledge that
what i find fascinating is that asian americans tend to prefer the film, which was written and directed (and thus shaped) by its asian american film maker, whereas asians born and brought up in asia go for the books, which focuses more on the sharp social divide and the generational gaps regarding westernisation that a lot of us are struggling with, with the rise of globalisation
Eleanor was the most complex character in this movie, I feel. When she said to Rachel "You'll never be good enough", I felt that it wasn't so much that she was stating a fact - she was giving her a warning. That this family is cruel to outsiders and she'll likely feel resentful down the line, and much of the bitterness that Eleanor seems to radiate towards Rachel, she was projecting her own resentment for having given up so much for a family that still doesn't truly accept her.
Yeah the book really hits on that because even her is not accepted in the family. She is heavily criticized and judged even though she is from a rich background
All Asian kids understand that sentence: Youll never be good enough. We get it...deep down to our bones, its not just a fun phrase that westerners use to then justify a book deal or a whole movie to be made out of it. A lot of us kids understand that it isn't always saying that WE arent good enough but rather our mother is the one who is insecure....we then go on to say it to our kids lol and hope that they understand its just a way that we say "I love you".
@@sew_gal7340 Sounds like a desperate craving for love especially when your asian parents including fathers never told you they love you and quote "we ain't good enough"
@@sleepyearth every chinese stereotypeparents willsay u r not good enough ，they thought IT iskindof motivation
Yeah I can’t remember if it’s explicitly mentioned in the movie, but in the book, Eleanor let’s Nick live with Nick’s grandma (his dad’s mom), specifically so the grandma would be closer to him and therefore Nick would have a more secured future. But this choice distanced him from Eleanor. The grandma was respected by all of Singapore and even by other countries. Those guards that we see guarding her house were GIFTED to her. The king of England KNEW her. She had a lot of influence.
My biggest problem with the movie was Nick. He did not prepare Rachel for anything. He just tossed her into a sea full of sharks and left her to sink or swim. He told her nothing about the world he was from. He didn't tell her about his ex. Despite knowing her financial background she didn't even make sure that she had a dress or transportation for the wedding. Like he knew what his world was like and he completely neglected Rachel. If Rachel didn't have Aquafina's character to help, she would have been even more doomed. And what if Aquafina's character was poor and couldn't afford to help Rachel? Nick claims he loved Rachel but he really set her up to fail.
I must agree
Yup! My first thought as well
For sure. I was upset they didn't really talk about this stuff
It was worse in the book. In fact, not only does Nick not tell her stuff about how rich he is because he's quiet rich. In the book, NO ONE knew how rich he was because of how his family was quiet. He also forgot to tell Rachel about his many exes and the threesome between two of them because the women bring it up in front of Rachel and she loses her shit with Nick because he never brought them up.
@@VeronicAM313 trash, Nick was wrong for that.
As my first-generation Chinese-American husband said after being thoroughly unimpressed by the movie, “you’ll know you have good representation when you’re not expected to love and defend a movie just because the people in it look like you. No one expects a movie to capture what it’s like to be white.” Say what you want about CRA, there’s no way to meet expectations when one film has to speak for millions of people.
In America they are so racist their anti white more and more and tokenism for all considered minority, get used to it. be on the look out for that white supremacy that does not exists, it s a phantom and if your asian there is more threat from BLM and antifa albeit bath are morons.
Exactly! And the solution is...more films, made by a variety of people.
there are tons of movies to capture what its like to be white. they all are. imagine an all white movie set in compton and they are all acting hood......or set in china town and they are all acting chinese.......look at friends, office or any other white show: where is the cultural/personality differences???????????????????????????????????????
@@serenityq26 whatever dude!!! just make good stories and fuck the racist bs either way.
@Joint Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations (JEMSO) The Havana syndrome has already been debunked…
What's so unique is this movie is about an Asian American VS Asian Asians in Asia, and the cultural conflicts and expectations that ensue. Think about it - it's not even a story told by Asian film industries.
To illustrate my point -
Joy Luck Club - Asian Americans VS Asian Asians in America.
Harold & Kumar - Asian Americans VS non Asian Americans in America
And Bollywood movies that involve a prominent Asian-American/European character are always set in America/Europe, regardless of who the VS characters are (Asian, Non Asian, or Asian American). Only if the "foreign" character is Asian Asian and returned from a temp stay in America/Europe (let's say after grad school or a work stint), or non Asian, might the movie be set in India.
I wouldn't really say it's unique, it really just boils down to marrying or having relationships with people of different classes which is a story you see all the time especially in Asian dramas and even in western film and TV. And tbh this movie doesn't do it in depth or with any real intelligence or insight. I haven't read the book but the film isn't that deep.
@@durantan2343 I don’t think the movie was going for intelligent or deep either. It’s so normal to watch a mindless romcom that isn’t too deep but has an all white cast. The depth of the concept in my opinion really comes from the fact that CRA just went for an easy romcom vibe without trying to explain itself too much.
@@durantan2343 the novel is shallower than the movie.
They're not Asian Asians, the film depicts Paranakan Singaporean/Malaysian society. It's quite specific.
The only problem that I had with the movie was Nick's failure to defend his girlfriend. I honestly thought he was a really crappy boyfriend who's only attribute was to charm and please.
I’m not trying to be rude or anything, but in most asian households what your parents or elders say is basically law. It’s kinda hard trying to argue against them when they have been dictating you for your whole life. Speaking from experience. :)
@@jasonwei8686 ^
Yah agreed. I wish he had a bit more depth.
@@jasonwei8686 Yeah, especially since Nick had already spent years away from his mom and what she believed were the responsibilities that he owed his family. Facing those expectations alone would be overwhelming
Because Asian males are spineless mamaboys
i think it's a shame that the discourse over henry golding always brushes over his iban heritage and how engaged he actually is in his iban heritage, even completing the iban rite of passage in his 20s (he shot a documentary as well). him being ethnically half white doesn't negate his experiences as an asian man, he was born in sarawak, grew up in terengganu before moving to surrey and then as an adult moving back to malaysia and then moving to singapore. he's a great choice for nick.
But he isnt chinese... not to mention this definitely brushes aside local racism of these chinese overseas, having darker skin is looked down upon. Though props for nick supposed grandma for being truly peranakan, which is historically most likely the case.
You have to know history that chinese in Singapore especially the old rich one are from Tjabang Atas. Even though they were probably peranakan down the line somewhere they were succesful part of colonial system they also adopted colonial mannerism, skin colour matters. These family can flee to Singapore because they have money, and definitely looked down upon other chinese groups especially more assimilated ones.
Somebody like Nick even if you only consider his Iban identity will never comes from rich family like this. While maybe unintended it can be considered racism toward other asian.
@@abcddef2112 He's not Chinese, but neither are Ken Jeong, Sonoya Mizuno, or Nico Santos. In Turning Red, Sandra Oh (a Korean-Canadian) played a Chinese-Canadian. Most of the charcters in Memoirs of a Geisha were not played by Japanese actors. I think it says a lot that a lot of people feel like a Chinese character MUST be played by an ethnically Chinese actor. This is not a sentiment bestowed on white actors - Keira Knightley playing Anna Karenina, (Russian), Ralph Fiennes playing Amon Goth (german), Rooney Mara playing Lisbeth Salander (Swedish). We have a terrific number of English-speaking Asian actors available now and splitting hairs on these ethnic lines does not help the mission of seeing more Asian representation in Hollywood.
It’s nothing against Henry Golding personally. But when most main Asian male leads (who are handsome/considered love interests) are half-white, it becomes a problem!
@@angelbiscuits yep. And that's the problem this vid and everyone here seems to skip over.
@@meganh7526 To be clear, I don't really care what ethnicity Golding is. IMO he played the part convincingly enough, and that's as someone with a Singaporean Chinese mother and an Indonesian Chinese father.
However, there's a big difference between a Korean playing a Chinese person, and a half-Iban half-white actor playing a Chinese person (this is in ethnic terms). It's the arguably the same as having Hassan Minhaj or Shahrukh Khan play as a Chinese person - which I'd wager a lot more people would raise eyebrows at.
Chinese, Japanese and Koreans are East Asian. No one can consistently tell one another apart based on appearance alone, and despite all the bad blood there's a long history of cultural exchange and genetic intermixing. Iban are part of the broader Dayak ethnic group - they're Austronesian in origin. Culturally, linguistically, ethnically, there's no tie.
So crazy how when there’s an all white cast for a movie or show, it’s deemed “normal” but when it’s an all black, brown, or tan cast it’s “a statement” or “politically correct”. I’m pretty sure the intentions of the creator of CRA was to just make a normal ass movie with an all Asian cast and people took it to the extreme. Lol. Good video though. Loved you guys’ perspective.
The reason people think it is "political" is because Hollywood has been saying it is political. Say it long enough and you taint every other production by association.
It was called a statement as part of its marketing. I guess good job on its marketing as nearly everyone fell for it to be some monumental Asian representation experience as opposed to just a rom com which happened to have a lot of Asians in it. The Asian angle though honestly lead to it being much more successful than it otherwise would have been, so it was the right move, and it lets a bunch of youtubers and bloggers make video essays about it years after the fact, win win.
I think you are overthinking. Just watch a movie as what it is.
@@sirtipsalot7320 my comment was more of a general standpoint but I agree I guess.
@@johnstonacys I think you’re underthinking. “As is” doesn’t exist, as no piece of art exists in a vacuum and has a relationship with how it is marketed, how critics represent it, etc. It’s healthy to be skeptical about how CRA has oversold itself.
I rather liked the plotline with Astrid. Like most of the movie, there was a lot of focus on feminine strength. Knowing that Astrid had a different outcome in the book, I'm thrilled they changed it. She manages to be both strong, *and* kind in a way few of the other characters are.
As you pointed out in the video, it also gives some perspective on the challenges Nick and Rachel will face beyond the "happily ever after," ending. I kinda hate those endings because they're not real life, and I think rom-com happy endings have misinformed people on the amount of work involved in a real life relationship.
I think Astrid's storyline contributed quite a bit to the overall movie. I don't think the story should be the same without it.
I agree!
While it has been many years since I read the books, I remember feeling annoyed and upset for Astrid because it took two books before she could be truly happy. Her plotline is not just about her relationship with Astrid, but like many women in her family how they have unrealistic expectations they need to meet. Her ex-husband was petty and terrible, and I remember thinking Astrid did not deserve all this. I appreciate they cut that out entirely and cut off her husband in this movie.
I think seeing her leave her husband resonated with a lot of women, regardless of race. Especially when in the past toxic relationships were glorified.
Lol, I have a large family and more than enough of 'reality' in my day to day life. I like to watch ROM coms with happy endings bc there is more than enough negativity in life without me paying for more
I have the opposite take. I thought it was the stupidest part of the movie. Not only was she not really doing anything to make herself "feel small," her husband had a valid point about the incredible pressure of having to look picture perfect, keep up appearances, and live up to expectations of a family that you married into that is so much more well off than you and your wife is the kind of person that could have anyone she wanted due to her wealth alone.
You can't stan Encanto for doing something similar while hating a character for the same thing in this.
Also, that whole line about making him feel like a man was just tone deaf and dumb. It's like dude, nothing your husband did had anything to do with proving his masculinity, it had to do with him feeling suffocated by the weight of expectations placed on him. Also he wasn't expecting you to do anything about it, he built up resentment because he felt inferior constantly.
I didn’t like the way they introduced her.
They want us to be sympathetic with another 1% in the movie because she complimented a kid? That’s it?
That’s how you’re supposed to know she’s good?
@@lukelyon1781 It was tied to his masculinity though. one of his first lines in the movie was "everybody knows you wear the money pants in this relationship". all of his complaints were directed to her money and status. not once did he complain about quality time, or her affection. you think if he had more money than her he would be threatened by it?
What liked about the movie is what you said, it doesn't have to be everything, and it doesn't aspire to be. It is just a really well-made romcom, and I'm not saying that in a derogatory way. In a cultural background where romcoms are becoming increasingly scarce or truly bad (looking at you, Princess Switch), Crazy Rich Asians showed how there is a market not only for Asian stories but for good romcoms. The whole plot is something we have seen before, but instead of the superficial will-they-won't-they of most 2000's movies, this movie actually gives reason for them to be unsure of their relationship, and those issues come from identity, social class, economic stance, and cultural heritage like you pointed out. It takes the basic formula and executes it perfectly. It should be remembered for that.
Very well said. It should go down as one of a classic romcom. There’s only so few these recent years.
This is a valid argument except for the fact that they market it based on what you claim "it doesn't aspire to be." And they bend over backwards patting themselves on the back for that, too.
@@AllTheArtsy yeah but how superficial is it to judge a movie from its marketing?
exactly!!!
Jon Chu's words - that a film doesn't need to be everything - I'm glad that he acknowledged the shortcomings of the film.
Also, Shang-Chi got fast-tracked in production and converted from a TV series to a movie because of the success of CRA. I'm thankful that we got this movie.
If it fast-tracked Shang Chi, I’m super glad about that as well
Shang Chi is soooo good
@Yesui Not sure, but there are definitely sources pointing to production being sped up
crazy rich asians is the perfect movie to put on when u wanna just chill
Awkafina sucks as an actress and she keeps getting casted. This movie kinda sucks to be honest. I opined that African-Americans got Black Panther and we got this shit show.
A big change from the book that I like is Eleanor’s character. Thank goodness they made her much less shallow than the book. Imagine the legendary Michelle Yeoh playing the airhead “book” Eleanor (shudder) (not that she couldn’t do it, she would’ve acted the shit out of it). But Eleanor’s sequences in the book with her yapping friends are excessive and a total drag.
I love that in the movie they show that the mother-in-law/daughter-in-law rivalry runs for generations. It’s classist and sexist. It’s dramatic and poignant. It’s peak Asian.
the mother in law/daughter in law rivalry exists because asian families are matriarchal. there's a similar father in law/son in law rivalry in western families which are patriarchal.
@@r6guyActually, it's still the mother-in-law/ wife dynamic
I liked that as well. She was clearly so harsh because that was what she had experienced. And yet Eleanor had to reflect if she was going to continue the cycle or break it. And the humility and yet dignity that Rachel had humbled her. Such a nice way to show character development. It didn't even take that much screen time to do it to.
Asian families are patriarchal, Asian men are spineless mamaboys unlike American men
Eleanor is shrewd women in the book and in the movie who would make a great detective with her network of spies she's just brought down by her gossipy dumb rich friends
Michelle Yeoh is a treasure and I'm so happy and grateful that we can see more of her
I find that after so many years nobody has ever hit on the point that the original books were satire. They were published not as any realistic literary portrayal of Singaporean or Asian life but as chick lit for laughing at, not with, the characters and their crazy shenanigans. When it hit the NYT bestseller list it caused a lot of headaches here in Singapore because people would lose that context and start complaining about oh where's the South Asian representation oh why's Eleanor such a girlboss gatekeeper etc. And then when it came time to choose a story to make into a major Hollywood film to be the "Asian American Representation", they chose the only one on the NYT list, which is absolutely lazy and created another layer of misapplied intention, now using a uniquely Singaporean story to represent Asian American Rachel which of course wouldn't work. They could have chosen some other story to adapt, could have found something centred in Asian American experiences, but they didn't, and now we're in this mess, years later still debating whether it was "good representation". It opened a lot of doors and started a lot of opportunities, but the source material was never meant for this kind of seriousness so the movie adaption really couldn't either, no matter how many improvements were done to it (and there were many, except the accents, all wrong, not bad, just misplaced).
oh that actually makes a lot of sense! i would love to research more about the book author's position about this
you said : " I find that after so many years nobody has ever hit on the point that the original books were satire. They were published not as any realistic literary portrayal of Singaporean or Asian life but as chick lit for laughing at,.." but excuse me, you might not have any experience with the " old family" but, some of ordinary people has. satire? not realistic? well i've seen more crazy things they did. even buy your life, a ministry... but they are so low profile an eats street food with you.
I mean the title is crazy rich Asians personally I was happy when I read the books and saw a filipino, (spoiler) even though her family got kicked out of that place
It's India. Indonesia, not India, is truly where South or Southeast Asia is. The British got it wrong when calling India "South Asia", just like where is "Middle East"? Middle of nowhere, and not East of anywhere. It's not good to keep using a nonsensical term, India Indians not Native American Indians from the USA. There's only Tamil speakers in Singapore mostly, so is the Indian character in the movie even correct? Meaning if that particular person is a Tamil speaker then it fits the location. But most East Asians and Southeast Asians DO NOT consider Indians to be Asians(Oriental/Far East, and far from where & East of where again?! When westerner/non-Asian says "Asian" who would they be talking about? Not Indians and not Israelis or Arab people, etc...) Even Siberia is in Asia but I never saw Siberians stand together and say they are being underrepresented nor do I see Mongolians either because their modern Mongolian script is written in and based on Russian Cyrillic alphabet. As a matter of fact, Mao tried to get rid of Chinese characters altogether but wasn't successful because the Chinese people said Cyrillic and Latin alphabets were hard to learn, so they had to scrap both scripts but used the Hanyu Pinyin as a pronunciation guide only and had no choice but to simplify the Traditional Chinese script which made it hard to learn at first because most people like Mao grew up learning the Traditional Chinese script. Simplified Chinese didn't exist until after 1949 when the communist forcefully took over. If Mao wasn't selfish for power and foolish and learned anything correctly, there would be no communism, no great famine, no simplified script, no pushing people to a place called Taiwan today and there would've been a peaceful democratic true republic in China today (not a fake communist state which tried capitalism and failed at first.) Singapore is seen as a rich "country" but it's actually a "city-state", a term used by ancient Greco-Romans? Most of Singapore is supported and provided by Malaysia. If Hong Kong were to become independent like Singapore, Hong Kong would be a city-state with most things supported and provided by Mainland China. Why not choose a bigger place to represent Asia like China, Mongolia, Malaysia, Thailand, the Philippines, Cambodia, etc...? I would put in Vietnam too if the geography wasn't too narrow just like it's neighbor Laos to the west.
@@trien30 In Europe and Canada it's Indians who are Asians and Chinese who are called "Orientals," you're basing this all off of what Americans say... also India is directly beneath China, so if they aren't Asian, why are Thai, Vietnamese, Cambodian, etc people Asian? Indian people can absolutely have those same features, the majority of its borders are with China and it is directly below China. Just say you only consider Asian people to be pale with monolids and take your racist self out of these comments.
Are we just not going to talk about how every Southern Asian was some kind of servant or scary bodyguard? I don't know, even as a white dude with no Asian roots I tend to notice the weird difference in treating East Asians and Southern Asians.
The novel (and therefore movie), is basically an ode to Chinese superiority complex. And the issue with the movie began with the very Sinocentric theme of the novel. Set in Southeast Asia, but there is no significant Southeast Asian character at all in the story. Southeast Asians in the book was just two Thai maids and a Malay princess, who brought nothing to the story.
@@sallieceelee5660 I feel like it's more a criticism of the discourse surrounding CRA than the plot and the characters itself. Talking about how the movie is perceived, people talk about "how great it was for Asians", "how it brings Asians to the spotlight" "diverse Asian voices" and that kind of thing. These viewpoints forget that within the movie, the voices aren't that diverse. They're only diverse in the context of it being an American movie (and there's nothing wrong with that, just when people say that it's a bit dismissive of other Asian ethnicities). And it doesn't bring "Asians to the spotlight" it brings East Asians to the spotlight, so saying that almost dismisses that other Asian ethnicities are Asian too. It's fine that they're not in the movie where it doesn't make sense but the discourse around it needs to be more mindful of what it's saying because if the discourse is as sinocentric as the movie, that has much more real-world implications than what's in the movie/book imo.
This has to do with its setting in Singapore, where Chinese + Malay + Indians are the 3 largest ethnic groups. CRA mirrored the way race in Singapore operates, in that ethnic Chinese (who make up almost 75% of Singapore’s population) dominate the upper class, whilst a lot of Malay and Indians are more working class. The Singaporean govt has long made efforts towards “racial harmony” but of course it doesn’t work out perfectly. It is really strange to me how very very few reviews of the movie ever made mention of this in their praise of “Asian representation,” how “Asian” isn’t a unified identity and this is very clear in the how the concept race operates in Singapore. Henry Golding (who played Nick) is actually half Malay, which was nice to see
@@hayatidk Henry Golding is NOT half Malay, he is half Iban. And that's the problem I have with Hollywood casting for lead Asian men character - can't they just cast a Chinese man? Casting a half white and half Iban man and pretend that he is Chinese is not real representation. Criticism on that is valid because it hurts people who don't have pan Asian look and perpetuate colourism. Not to mention, Iban and Chinese are totally different ethnicities - it is like casting a Latino to play a Filipino. They may share the same skin colour but they are not the same.
@@coffeemug3009 Henry Golding fits the Old Money/Peranakan mould well because of his British upbringing. Most people of that era speak Malay. So I don't think he is a bad choice. Actually Pierre Png should have been the lead if you want real historical accuracy. Not to mention the on-screen abs were Pierre's and not Henry's. But he's too old for Hollywood or otherwise too 'local' or not marketable enough for Hollywood.
I think book vs movie is deeper than you lay out. The book is about how money drives class divide, and the use of face is being used to keep up this divide. The intro scene is about the power of money, not racism. The movie flipped this, as Hollywood would not want to make a movie that critics wealth. The subplot becomes weird, because it can't fuel the culture narrative, where it did build up money/face narrative of the book.
Like I said in the video, I respectfully disagree. I don't think a book that spends pages and pages with the narrator gushing about expensive things is being as critical as you're suggesting.
@@QualityCulture I don't think the book is very critical (considering the author is from an old-money Straits Chinese sort of background himself) but it is at least more self-aware. In the book Astrid confesses that her family's wealth came from the drug trade and Western imperialism in China. For someone who read the book, the scene in the movie where Astrid buys and wears a pair of earrings with Burmese diamonds is quite horrifying esp. if you know Singapore's relationship to the military junta there (basically SG is the "Switzerland" of SEA and a lot of blood money fr diamonds, drugs, etc. goes through the banks here). The wealthy in SEA (esp. SG being the wealthiest SEA state) never stopped profiting off human rights abuses.
Hollywood wouldn’t want to make a movie that critics wealth. This is simply false. Do you even watch Hollywood movies?
@@godofnothing428 Are we talking abt the same Hollywood? Where currently the biggest movies are superhero franchises bankrolled partly by the US military, and even people like Spike Lee are finding it hard to get funding for movies that don't stick to the tried-and-tested formula, that has become more like spectacles than art? "Prestige" cinema and stuff like Parasite (which didn't even come from the US) are Not the majority of films, and Parasite doesn't even come close to looking at sth as damning as the wealthy descendents of those who benefitted from colonialism.
@@Naomi-fb1ej yes the Hollywood that also critics wealth. Hollywood makes tons of movies and shows, some critic wealth, I have watched many. Others don’t, there is variety
I think class is the better lens to examine the film through. The scene where they make dumplings bugged me, because the elites in Singapore don’t exactly celebrate their Chinese heritage. It turns out that in the book they make scones?? That makes much more sense because the wealthy elites in colonial countries emulated the British. It’s British-inspired class bigotry that makes them look down on the American. They’d look down on mainland Chinese as well.
Having lived in Singapore, it seemed obvious to me that scene was a direct appeal to Singaporean culture specifically. Secret family recipes mean a LOT to my Singaporean friends, especially those who run or have family connections to hawker stands. Knowing how to eat the food is culturally important in many circles.
Showing they know how to make the food was also a pretty perfect way to show just how old-money their family is too. It sets them further apart from the newly rich, even if it isn't totally realistic. "We built this country, and we haven't lost sight of our roots."
@@komyn27 Yeah that’s fair. A bit of creative licence. I think it also keeps it simpler for the average Western viewer who is promised something exotic and thoroughly “Asian”.
I have friends who grew up in that kind of environment, and I quizzed them after the movie because I was confused as to who these “old money” Chinese-heritage families were. Growing up in a former British colony, it didn’t ring true, though honestly it would have been fascinating if it were!
Not true at all, the Nyonyas/Babas (Peranakans) who are the oldest and highest social class in Singapore are basically defined by their local family recipes. Every Singaporean knows this. Depends on how truly old money your friends are - a lot of upper middle class (which includes those who studied abroad) emulate the Brits, but that's far from "old money".
@@maplestory2723 Peranakans are much more interesting, though I don’t know what proportion of the richest in Singapore are Peranakan. Kwan (the author) isn’t, neither are the families he depicts in the book as far as I can tell. But fair point, the use of “old money” to describe the families in the book isn’t helpful. There’s old money and then there’s old-old money 😉
Would you consider the characters in the book/movie to be middle class though?
As a 1st gen Nigerian-American I relate so much to these Asian movies. So many similarities in culture. Specifically, ‘Joy Luck Club’ changed my life and helped me understand my mom so much more.
It’s crazy that now that I’m mother I can see that I’m living such a similar life to mom across generations.
Joy Luck club was very good!
i'm a second gen nigerian american and definitely agree on the similarities!
I don't know about storytelling or representation or marketability... I'm just glad Michelle is back. And being treated more like an actress than ever
As a Singaporean, I found the portrayal of Singapore on screen to be a problem. Even if Crazy Rich Asians was focusing on the small subset of Singaporeans who are super rich and from old money and are Chinese, do they not have friends of other races? It's Singapore, after all. And, if they don't have many friends of other races, perhaps it should be portrayed as something bad? Instead, it was just glossed over.
I can understand the 1% just mixing around with each other, and Peik Lin and her father wanting to portray themselves as Americanised since that seems more "atas" or upper class. But Peik Lin could have been a good gateway to showing a more multi-racial / multi-cultural Singapore, and that didn't happen.
Singapore was portrayed as some kind of ultra-Chinese utopia - especially with the Chinese music. Considering how many times I've been asked if Singapore was in China, I hate that Singapore was watered down into another Chinese city somehow. I love rom-coms and I want to love Crazy Rich Asians as a rom-com (and that mahjong scene was great!). But the portrayal of Singapore being reduced to a backdrop (and not a very good one) makes it hard to go back for a rewatch.
The author is from Singapore, so the burden is on him. Kevin Kwan chose to only write about Chinese families in Singapore.
I appreciate your perspective! I'm white but loved CRA - a close family friend is from Singapore and showed it to my mom and I to encourage us to visit with her the next time she goes back. Your comment makes me want to visit even more to see "real" Singapore instead of the reduction in CRA.
True.. like I know some rich Singaporean from the other races as well. And where the Johor royal families? Like I know they own lots of property in Singapore. The Young families should encounters them during business
@@AxelQC He loosely based it on here. And then the Americans didn't adapt it more closely to Singapore when they set it completely in Singapore.
Yeah. The accents are just not right.
The Singaporean accent of Chinese was completely missing from the film; the Singaporean accent of English was completely missing from the film.
I'll say that they portrayed the Crazy Rich Asians as Americanised because of their place in the US, nothing more. I'm relatively certain, given the prevalence of high teas, etiquette, and poshness in the 'atas', that Britishisation seems to be more common among the rich. Makes sense when you think about it; all of the old rich families of Singapore were Brits.
It almost feels like the negative response to Crazy Rich Asians from Asians exactly reflects the unrealistic expectations of success that Asian culture is rife with - I'd say this film was an A- in terms of what it wanted to portray, but people want it to be an A++. I agree with you and John Chu - no single film should bear the burden of perfectly portraying every nuance of a culture or race, especially since it would literally be impossible.
Also, in retrospect, I love the decision to focus on the differences in cultural experiences between people in a monolithic country and a second-generation Chinese-American person (Rachel) rather than the extravagance. Framing Rachel as the main character allows the target audience, which I believe are either non-Asians or "third culture" Asians, to be immersed in the experience of being in an unfamiliar culture and struggling to adapt to it. It's a highly effective narrative choice.
also cause this plot is every outdated korean drama, just google rich guy/secret air/ceo falls in love with poor naive girl
imo it's almost a perverse way of worshipping the capitalist dystopia of massive income inequality by portraying them as a life goal/higher class of people
The scene between their mothers, Eleanor realises that Rachel's mum protected her family just as fiercely with none of the money, connections, support or resources ❤️🔥
As someone who’s half black, it always hurts a little when people say, “why couldn’t they cast a full (POC)” Being told you’re not (POC) enough is something I heard a lot. So it’s sad to see actors still dealing with that
No but it's a valid point
We need stories for both those of mixed heritage and those who are not. Our experiences are different and one should not be erased by the other as both are valid. Its not about being "enough" but allowing ALL of us to exist and have positive representation.
I hear you but I think it’s more so about the fact that Hollywood always casts people with proximity to whiteness. Monoracial people of color are not allowed to represent their own race(let that sink in). It’s not that you’re not enough but it’s that people want to see their race represented FULLY and not to the extent that makes white people feel comfortable. I think we should have depictions of both mixed/biracial people and monoracial people. Both stories matter and should be represented fairly.
I think there's something similar with the black community, although i am not really an expert on the matter so i apologize if i get it wrong. but i think it's similar to how darkskin black women are often overlooked for lighter skinned or biracial women. i feel that a similar type of erasure is done to full blooded asian men especially in lead romantic roles.
I feel for you but you're also ignoring the long history of full Asian men being deemed as not romanceable both in real life (in western society) and in Hollywood movies. For the longest time (and even until now) you don't really see full Asian man cast as a romantic lead. If they're Asian they're going to be half white. That's the reason why when Henry Golding was cast many Asian men felt disappointed by it, because yet again a half white Asian male is cast.
All this movie needed to do was be popular. And it was! It did exactly what it was made for. It both entertained us and opened the door to more Asian (specifically Asian American) stories. I’m loving how we’re getting more diversity in our movies and shows.
The Astrid plot line is the reminiscence of the book’s plot and theme, which it is about classism and class struggle, rather than Asian identities. And this is the core problem regarding the film of Crazy Rich Asian. Because the movie of Crazay Rich Asian try to tell a very different story than the book. As a result, many of the settings in Crazy Rich Asian kind of loses its meanings in the movie. Like imagine, how would the story change if Nick Young came from a middle class instead of being one of the few Rich and powerful? The cinematography, sound track, actors, are all great. Many of the characters, plot lines, scenes, are very enjoyable to watch which makes Crazy Rich Asian a good Hollywood film. However, at its core, many of these plot elements are just disjointed from one another.
the movie actually watered down alot of complex stuff regarding the plot, I adore the character dynamics in the novel and Astrid's arc line and character development was much more interesting than the main couple that they had less screen time in the third book lmao
Astrid gets a lot more plot time in the 2nd and 3rd books. Rachel & Nick are more bystanders in the 2nd novel. Nick is the main character in the 3rd.
Since then we have gotten The Farewell, Minari, Shang-Chi, and Everything Everywhere All at Once. We're getting more flavors of pie slices! The movie definitely did it!
This movie is such a comfort movie for me!! I was like 'FINALLY, an asian movie that doesn't have to feature martial arts!"
Have you ever heard of K drama or C drama ?
@@lalaicyling8429 Yes but I'd like more western representation in American media as well ^^
@@liliuh_ there’s nothing wrong with that. But it’s important to appreciate non western and non America media as well. We just keep calling for diversity on American screens but then pay no attention to international media. You can really look into k dramas, j horror and other genres that are popular within asia. It shouldn’t have to take seeing Asians on Americans screens more for you to be satisfied
@@shirley444
I'm southeast asian. I grew up watching many, many types of asian media. Cantonese/HK shows, Thai shows, Viet shows, your usual kdrama, cdrama, jmovies, whatever.
That's not the point. It's about the REPRESENTATION and not necessarily just seeing asian people on my screen.
I agree, asian-american movies are more relatable to me as an Asian American - even though I mostly watch Chinese, korean, thai, Japanese movies. The personalities of the characters, their experiences and the humor just feels more relatable than the average kdrama or drama character. @@liliuh_
When this movie came out, my friend from Thailand went to see it, and she later called me and said it was fine, but she was annoyed that it's only ever Chinese, Japanese, or Korean people that get representation.
Yep
@@lindsaygrace5702Thai people are considered South East Asian btw
We're just jungle Asians to them I guess
@@NoName-dx1no ummm when did that person deny that thailand is part of SEA?
The author is singaporian, its insane to expect him to write about ALL asians
Tell your friend just because it says Asian doesn't mean it will represent all asian countrys it's a movie for entertainment not a documentary of different countries in Asia
I wish you brought up how every South Asian in this movie is some kind of servant. I enjoyed Crazy Rich Asians, it’s a decent rom com. But if they market this on mindful “representation”…I mean c’mon. They literally doing what white ppl been doing in Hollywood to East Asians, which you criticized in the beginning of the video.
especially since in the context of Singapore, where Chinese folks are the majority and enjoy racial privilege, the film and book both ignore the non-Chinese minority population too. To Singapore minorities, while we recognise the feat this is for chinese diaspora, the Singaporean-ness is very clear in the obscene wealth and in the exclusion of brown people. still fun to see sg on the big screen, but the lack of seeing myself in my own country is weird
In this case I think the film reflected the same lack of south Asians the book had. Nearly all of the major roles were family members so I get that part, but I do agree there probably should’ve been more variety in south Asian background/ minor characters. I guess they inadvertently reflected how exclusive the Chinese elite in Singapore can be. Again, this film isn’t perfect and I don’t think it can be everything for everyone, but yeah this is one of the things they could’ve done better
yeah especially in its marketing (and discourse surrounding it) as "diverse". To an extend, it makes sense within the context of the movie if that's the story you're trying to tell - like it almost reflects how South Asians don't have a place in the type of society shown in the movie - BUT if people then go around marketing it as "such a diverse Asian film" it's very telling who they think of when they hear someone is Asian. It's only diverse within the US context where an Asian-led film is rare, but it's not a diverse film in itself.
The Sikh guy is a guard, not a servant, yeah? It's a respectable job which they have had since the beginning of colonial times. I agree more positive representation would have been desirable, but there is nothing wrong with representing this true side of history! The real servants in a Chinese peranakan household are the Amahs or the Chinese slave girls bought from the region of China where their ancestors are from. The Amahs take vows of celibacy while the Chinese slave girls sometimes get raped or forced to be tertiary wives. Maybe that's the real fault of the movie-- not enough poor or underclass Chinese.
I think they sorta go through it in the books. Where the prestige isn't just about money but also in race. I remember a footnote in the books where the ranking was like
1. Singapore
2. Chinese
3. Korean
etc etc
Note this is not of course a "fact", but something the asian elite have in their heads.
Both in the books and in the movies, a lot of the staff were Filipinos. Overseas Filipino workers in the service industry is very common, and many migrate to places like Singapore or Hong Kong for better pay.
I don't really see it as "what white people are doing", but another discussion of the divide and racism even amongst the Asian community. Plus I don't expect the author or the movies to handle the divide of Chinese-Singaporeans vs Filipinos, as the author is Chinese-Singaporean and the major roles in the movie were actors of East-Asian descent.
TLDR: As talked in the video, Crazy Rich Asians is only one movie, and it shouldn't be the by all tell all of all Asian representation, as Asia alone is a HUGE continent, comprised of many cultures and races. But I can appreciate that it's a stepping stone for more stories to come.
Gosh, I love this movie. The moment in the end where Nick reveals the ring during the second proposal gives me chills every time.
As an indigenous Australian I watched this movie purely for its romcom value. I loved it. My favourite scene was the wedding where Nick was best man. So beautiful and romantic. Bawled my eyes out!
I really liked the small dive into Eleanor's backstory and small scenes with the Grandmother. It showed that she's doing the same thing to Rachael(i.e inter-generational trauma).
I'd be really interested to hear your thoughts on Everything Everywhere All at Once! While I enjoyed CRA when it came out, I struggled to really connect with the narrative, characters, and emotions in the same way I would with the Daniels' film four years later. It's funny how a wacky absurdist multiverse movie felt more grounded in my own experience as an Asian human than CRA, but that's just how I feel. That movie spoke to my soul, man.
That's actually something we're working on now, so be on the lookout 👀
I absolutely agree, and its funny because technically without this movie, we might not have even gotten Everywhere, considering Ke Huy Quan only returned to acting because of his fear of missing out due to this movie.
@@QualityCulture I'm so excited!
Even with all its flaws **cough Awkwafina's blaccent cough** **cough no darker-skinned Tamil Indians in speaking roles in a movie set in SINGAPORE cough-cough** I still like _Crazy Rich Asians_ and I am looking forward to a deeper dive into Astrid's story in the sequel.
I don’t know if you’ve been to Singapore (or Malaysia, which has many similar dynamics), but despite the fact that the countries are quite multicultural in terms of the ethnicity of their citizens, it’s extremely stratified by race. That’s especially true when it comes to this generational wealth tycoon family. It’s like if you go to a fancy country club in America - the vast, vast majority of people are white, sometimes literally exclusively, even though of course that’s not the makeup of the country as a whole.
why Awkwafina portayed a good portion of Asians wanting to emulate the Black American Culture/thug life, who can be labeled as black sheep of the family HAHAHA
also, her family is a great example of new money!
I actually think that Crazy Rich Asians was the funniest that Awkwafina has ever been in especially when pairing her with Ken Jeong
i just think the "discussion" and "controversy" was rooted from the fact that there are too many different aspects of "asian", and also people expected it to be "their type of representation", when in fact asian representation is still in its process of maturizing, and the fact that we're such diverse communities. generalizing the term "asian" itself is already too broad, we can't ever get a 3 hour film to satisfy everyone.
I experienced Crazy Rich Asians as a regular romcom movie. I had watched so many international films and dramas throughout the years, I was already used to seeing Asian actors in big budget performances.
It never registered to me that most people had never seen an East Asian cast in a leading role until my older brother (who mostly sticks to Western media) told me how amazed he was by this film - and specifically with Henry Golding. For him, Crazy Rich Asians was a glimpse into a world he never knew existed.
I had to laugh. Talented POC have always been in the entertainment industry, but I guess now they're finally making waves in Hollywood. And while Crazy Rich Asians might have it's flaws (i.e. an inaccurate representation of the multicultural population of Singapore), I think it did the job it set out to do.
I do absolutely agree that for Henry Golding, claiming he wasn’t “Asian Enough” was easily harmful to him and his identity. I think this criticism is a poorly worded attempt to describe the erasure many Asian (and coloured) people feel when half-white actors are deliberately cast to play NON-half-white characters. It inherently ignores and dismisses the privilege any proximity to whiteness grants them.
As MUCH as half-white mixed POC feel ostracized in regular life, it NEEDS to be stated how often Hollywood is asked to include diversity and then cast half-white actors as an act of colorism, racism and ethnic erasure. It’s extremely prevalent in the black community and often found in the Asian community. It’s doubly-toxic because it easily allows for non-mixed people to resent mixed individuals and the privilege their proximity to whiteness is getting THEM jobs. It gets THEM in the door. It’s often our ONLY representation. And at least in my experience when only half-white people are seen as the representation for POC it makes it feel like that’s the only way to be beautiful or desirable - which has a lot to do with internal and externalized racism.
That being said, CRA is amazing simply
by being able to see a film where there are almost only Asians on screen, but I think… and I might be out on a limb here, John Cho experiences a lot more appearance based vitriolic racism or demasculation (commonly experienced by Asian men) than someone like Henry Golding who has more Eurocentric features and was just a “safer bet” as a romantic, “leading man”. And that’s just… racism.
It’s not Henry Golding’s “fault” he benefits in some ways from being mixed, and it doesn’t excuse people calling him “not Asian enough”. AND, it’s also disengenous to not acknowledge the pain many of us feel when for a long time half-white POC were (and potentially still are) the ONLY representation we usually see on a regular basis in leading roles.
But again, CRA had so many non-mixed actors it in, but there is still something to be said about the underlying racist attitudes surrounding sex and attractiveness and why someone like Henry Golding was chosen to be the face of this movie and NOT John Cho when I feel like it’s fair to say Asian men struggle to be represented as desirable in a lot of western media.
I agree wholeheartedly that it's shitty when Hollywood continually casts half-white people for POC roles--I understand that (I think it's more about colorism than genetic makeup but that would be too long of a comment). But as far as Henry Golding, I would understand the 'representation' argument more if he was the only Asian person in the movie, but it's a fully Asian cast. He is not the sole source of representation in this film. And to me (a full-blown Asian guy), Henry Golding did represent Asian men as desirable in CRA, because he *is* an Asian man. Also, John Cho was too old to play an early-30s character at that point.
I do get where you're coming from though, thanks for sharing your perspective
@@QualityCulture oh my GOD John Cho is almost 50 LOL I did not know that. And I mean, to your point -- it's quite possible a lot of the outrage is at the *idea* of Henry Golding playing this character, without actually asking a lot of Asian men how they his portrayal actually makes them feel. So, great point! And thanks for reading my comment 🥺
The issue with Golding is that he is mixed Iban and White, but he was cast as Chinese. That's yellow washing, in the sense that you send the signal that all Asians, regardless of the type of Asian, are basically just Chinese. It is as offensive as casting a Japanese person to play Jose Rizal (native Filipino).
And the issue with the movie began with the very Sinocentric theme of the novel. Set in Southeast Asia, but there is no significant Southeast Asian character at all in the story. Southeast Asians in the book was just two Thai maids and a Malay princess, who brought nothing to the story.
@@QualityCulture The issue with Golding is that he is mixed Iban and White, but he was cast as Chinese. That's yellow washing, in the sense that you send the signal that all Asians, regardless of the type of Asian, are basically just Chinese. It is as offensive as casting a Japanese person to play Jose Rizal (native Filipino).
And the issue with the movie began with the very Sinocentric theme of the novel. Set in Southeast Asia, but there is no significant Southeast Asian character at all in the story. Southeast Asians in the book was just two Thai maids and a Malay princess, who brought nothing to the story.
@@sallieceelee5660 YES, okay, completely agree with you. I find this SO difficult to bring up as a point in conversation because people strawman and sealion the proposal so quickly.
I found the same with Lara Jean in TATBILB where she was written to be half-Korean half-white but played by a Vietnamese actress! All over it said "BRILLIANT FOR ASIAN REPRESENTATION!" when all it did was make people think all Asian people look alike LOL. But the main criticism to my point was that no one culture "owns" features and it's a point I agree with, too... but at the same time it sucks because we all *know* what's happening here... don't we?
It's frustrating because obviously you can have tons of mixes in your family's history, and that absolutely doesn't deny your culture or ethnicity. But when it comes to Hollywood like. They really could not give less of a shit to acknowledge the wide BREADTH of C O U N R T I E S people are so quick to entirely equate with one another.
And while yes it's wrong to presume "to be Chinese means having X-feature", Hollywood is fundamentally a visual medium, and it's... literally just lying. Like Henry Golding can't look half-Chinese Half-Singaporean because he's not ethnically from either of these histories of people LOL.
But again... I will concede there is a conversation to be had about like... if *ideally* your features should define your race (BECAUSE your race DEFINES you??) but like... I don't think we're there yet LOL. A Great First Step: acknowledging that these huge nations of people from countries all over the world are in fact. Different from one another.
Astrid's story isn't weird or convoluted at all! It's honest and displays the deepest betrayl for the modern women. It couldn't be more relevant in these times.
I loved it so much!!!
The comments of Golding not being “Asian enough” also missed how he’s SEA and very involved in his community and culture (even going through a rite of passage important in his culture) he was right for this movie, especially since it’s set in a SEA country
As someone who is half middle eastern but raised by the other parent, and having little contact with my middle eastern parent, I so understand the disconnect from that culture and the heritage connected with my ethnicity.
After watching the movie, I read the CRA books, and was surprised that not only did the Youngs actually have Indian old-money friends who are mentioned several times, who we learn about enough some key events take place at one of their parties.
In addition (*SPOILER ALERT*) Astrid and Charlie Wu even get engaged in India, at the home of Charlie’s Indian friend, assisted by Shah Rukh Kahn. Is this representation fantastic? No, but it’s an indication that there are South Asian people in their world who aren’t relegated to just “the help,” and I wish they were at least mentioned in the movie.
I have to disagree on Nik being perfect lol. I’d be PISSED at him for keeping so much from me, and I didn’t feel like he was as present as he should’ve been going into it. He made good choices by the end, but man did he fuck up on the way. Which tbh I like - he’s not shown to be a perfect Prince Charming, and it shows his familial influence and blind spots. He gets it together by the end, but calling him perfect…nah man lol. I love this essay! I like hearing how others’ view it. Always great content
I've been holding off on CRA for the longest time given it's lack of representing Singaporean diversity and Awkwafina's terrible blaccent. Nevertheless, I'm not blind to the fact that it still opened doors. Thanks for your thoughts here.
im pretty sure that's just awkwafinas voice... that's how she is in interviews and shang-chi
Totally agree with this assessment. As an Asian born in Asia who moved to the US and was predominantly raised there but also traveled back to Asia fairly regularly to visit family, I'm regularly reminded when I do something "American". I speak my native tongue fluently and am much more in tune with my culture than Rachel's character, but she was still totally relatable. I actually felt tied to both sides, being raised in America by traditional Asian parents (i.e. no hugging/touching, no saying "i love you", no congrats when you get good grades/succeed because that's what's expected...etc.); don't worry, we know we love each other. I definitely also catch myself judging fellow Asian immigrant kids/transplants who don't speak/care to learn their mother tongue or learn about their heritage (i.e. having grown up in America on Chinese children's stories/fables alongside American/European ones). I was in high school when Better Luck Tomorrow came out and immediately watched it; it led me to watching Joy Luck Club soon after. Having seen those movies, I think I had a realistic expectation of this movie being what it seems you're trying to say it is - another stepping stone in the right direction for Asians in American/international movies. It definitely sucks that it took 25 years, but it's a welcome move forward. 🎬
Funny how you can constantly see wasians playing (desirable) asian roles but never any blasians in an "all asian cast".
true. asians will need to confront our own internailized racism before that happens
What are wasians and blasians?
@@kittykittybangbang9367 white asians and black asians, biracial that is
@@lets_wrapitup oh 👌
For that, you need to adapt an Asian American story or something by good Japanese/Korean writers (aka please no light/web novels with authors who need to touch grass). Since Southeast Asia only had white and Japanese colonizers, you don't read a lot of stories that specifically involve characters with African-(insert country name) blood. Also, Japan and Korea are more likely to have them because they were once "colonized" by USA or they have US military bases, which means higher population of black-asian mixes and awareness of them. Because I can straight up tell you that most Southeast Asians have never seen enough black-asian mixed people to think of their racial status as anything but an anomaly.
If anything, the dialogue that comes out of criticisms of this movie just reveals a lot of the problems within asian culture, from colorism and China centrism, to the "Cinderella" trope of a woman being the luckiest thing alive if she can catch the eye of a hot rich dude that fixes all her problems
“Crazy Rich Asians” is a great book series and the movie is one of my comfort movies that I love. Looking forward to more.
for me i was just happy to see the typical cheesy dramatic romcom fairytale w asian faces, that it was possible for us to have that kind of light-hearted movie w cultural context that at least showed a huge variety of different ways asian ppl think and live
this made me cry and i’m not even asian, such a great video,movie and stories
Fun facts:
In the mah jong scene, Rachel sits on the "west" position while Eleanor sits on the "East" position. West vs East. Rachel also discards the 8 bamboo tile. 8 symbolizes wealth in Chinese culture so she was saying "I give up the money".
I loved this movie but I was a little disappointed that they cut out Alexander’s sister, Cassandra (i think that’s her name.) She’s a doctor that was very sensible, down to earth and was even a little annoyed to be at the bachelorette party because it took time away from her patients. They merged her and Astrid’s character in the movie a little which makes sense given the medium constraints but she was another supporter and ally of Rachel’s from the book. She knew how insane her family was, but still tried to create a normal life for herself.
Her name is Sofie, and she was Colin’s sister and Astrid’s cousin. I don’t agree that they should have included her since her role was so small so it made sense to give that plot line to Astrid, because it gave Rachel and Astrid the opportunity to connect on a more meaningful level that isn’t really present in the book trilogy.
@@oceansong9621 It was Sofie, thanks! It’s been a while since I read the book.
Films just need to tell stories without having to meet a quota or agenda. That way we can enjoy them for what they are and what they are trying to say.
wdym quota or agenda like a political statement or advocate?
@@juanchoresultay2704 I mean that there have been very few all Asian led movies in Hollywood and so this movie was a few of its kind. And because it has that kind of weight on it, it has to push certain issues to the front of the story that people want to see onscreen. When that happens for a movie with only a 2 hour run time, some of the elements of the story will have to be sacrificed. It's unfortunate but it almost always ends up that way. Was it a bad movie? No not at all. I enjoyed it quite a bit but there were times when I felt it could have delved deeper into our main characters. Basically what I am saying a movie like this can't just be for entertainment or have certain freedoms in the storytelling because it's supposed to be "trailblazing". If it's the writer(s)'s decision to have the movie be a statement well than that's good and fine but I think the very best movies I have seen are the ones that remained true to the storytelling without feeling the need to pander to an audience, or sanitize elements of the movie for the sake of being unoffensive.
@@wisehead1830 i agree, ultimately this movie is just a romcom and i think it should be allowed to just exist as such. obviously having the first all asian casts sets it up for high expectations to talk about certain things, but i don’t think it should be necessary if the movie doesn’t require it. this is a cinderella esque romcom about a girl and a family that just so happens to be asian, but being asian doesn’t have to be the forefront of the movie at all times in the same way an all white cast romcom isn’t focused on it’s whiteness.
I just watched this again last night, how timely...
I honestly thought Astrid's subplot had some of the film's best moments.
I took the chinese covers of 1920s foxtrot songs was a Great Gatsby reference. the entire book about Great Gatsby is about the cultural divide between new money vs. old money and classism which is also one of the main themes of CRA.
such a wonderful video about this brilliant movie. i'm so excited about the movie with astrid. glad you talked about that moment with rachel and eleanor at the end because it really was so powerful. thanks for this great video essay!
Thank you SO very much for this excellent analysis of the theme relating to women's position and relationships within the culture and with each other throughout the generations. I certainly hope that many more Asian Americans are inspired to write, to produce and to finance all sorts of films with actors of Asian descent. I'm African American and I DO enjoy watching films about people different from myself whether from another lifestyle, ethnic group, socio-economic status or any other number of differences. Thank you again. Barbara🌺
As a black female I actually enjoyed this movie a great deal; why? Because it emphasized to me the differences ( the culture) and similarities( concepts of old/new money, generational trauma) between us all. The generational trauma hit hardest. It's amazing that no matter your skin color...no matter what culture you come from, you can still experience such hard hitting similarities. I don't have a right to comment on the substance of asian representation but I truly felt that the movie did more than to be identified as a movie for asian representation. I am a fan of many of the actors in this movie and it was a treat seeing them interact with each other. Plus, the visual beauty of the scenes was excellent. That wedding was something out of a dream.
The unfortunate thing about this movie is that it's been sold as being "a major Asian American blockbuster" which the film fails to deliver. The story is one of a Chinese American from a mainland Chinese background who meets a Peranakan Singaporean man. It comes close to explaining this within the first ten minutes in the scene in the Hawkers Market when they sit down to a dinner of Hakka Mei, Asam Laksa, Apam Balik , Ayam babi pongteh. This is not Chinese food, this is a fusion, which is what Singapore was/is until heavy resettlement from mainland China since the early 2000's. If you wanted an American Asian film, this isn't it.
So.. Asian equals Chinese? Peranakan is Asian. It's even more Asian cuz it's a fusion of a few diverse Asian cultures. TBH, I am not sure what is your point. This is not an Asian American movie because there is a heavy Peranakan element involved? Or the exact opposite, that this is not an Asian American movie because it is almost exclusively Chinese with very little non-Chinese Asian flavor? OR because there is not enough of the "American" flavor in this so called Asian American movie. This film is a lightning rod of controversy because different people from different races want (or demand?) different things from the movie. As it is the non-Chinese Asian audience especially in Singapore are annoyed that the cast is almost exclusively Chinese because the studios sold it as an "Asian" movie.
@@hailyrizzo5428 it’s not an Asian American movie because it’s not American at all lol. The experience doesn’t reflect that of virtually any AAs.
@@pixiel1xie That's why I'm trying to find out from the OP what he meant when he used those labels
@@hailyrizzo5428 I think that's how the film was marketed, which is why I said if you wanted an Asian American film, this isn't it. The mother's advice to her daughter is to wear a traditional red dress, little thinking that things have moved on, that Singaporean society is not a freeze frame and in the case of Henry Golding's heritage, it's diverse.
@@pixiel1xie yes, my point exactly
Love this video, glad it said a lot of what I felt seeing the criticisms as well. I would love to write videos like this.
You should!
just a heads up, Rachel is a game theory prof, not an economics one. the youtuber Accented Cinema did a really good video on this, breaking down her mahjong scene with Eleanor.
to be fair: a lot of these feelings are the same way i feel about the first black panther movie. where after the hype died down, it's started to get more criticism from both within and without the black community for a litany of shortcomings. but i feel like it shouldn't be understated just HOW important of a movie it was on it's own and how it effected the culture.
and because of how important and successful it was, BP2 was able to be made with utmost care and be one of the best marvel projects made to date.
Ngl i cried during the mahjong scene in your essay, which came out of nowhere even for me who doesnt cry for movies. Even as an Asian (Filipino), i live in a household that was different from their values and family believes, which really made fortunate and grateful. I dont know if its my mind subconsciously telling me that although different, there are aspects in my life right now that are actually similar to the stereotypical Asian strict family culture, albeit minimal. Thats all just sharing.
I'm kinda concern that the writers for the original won't return to do the second film (they really should have paid her better its gross hearing about it now), the writer from the first film was a Chinese Malaysian and really captured the nuance of life , food, mindset and culture in SG and MY in its own little fairy tale great gatsby esq way, that the series is based in. It might lose some of its finer cultural narrative because its going to be put together by a fully Americanized lens this time.
I mostly loved this movie and I'll tell you why. As a POC, there is something warm about seeing other POC in community on film and television. I frequently felt myself wanting to be there too to celebrate with the characters and learn about their culture. For me, at least, you feel a kinship in the struggle to get these types of films made. But, also seeing the complex characters and their story arcs was humanizing and validating. I'm grateful this very romantic movie got made. Plus, I always thought Asian people were beautiful, and the men desirable, so there's that as well. The only part I found off-putting was Awkwafinas role. It took me right out of my immersion into this world. I found her blaccent offensive. I preferred her in Shang-Chi, where she played a Chinese-American girl with an immigrant family. I'm also 1st gen American, so there was a recognition of the line you walk between your parent's culture and the culture you are building for yourself. Plus Michelle Yeoh is in it and I'd watch her paint a fence. Thanks for the video.
Agree 100000% with every point except criticism of Awkwafina - blacks don't hold a monopoly over that accent and it perfectly fits her character in the movie.
@@Muslimah1987 you used "blacks" to refer to black people(!) Of course you won't understand what a blaccent is and how is not ok to imitate it for laughs when real life people struggle and are looked down upon for speaking like that every day. Akwafina admitted to using it despite growing in a predominantly white area, and then apologized. So stay in your lane.
@@literaIIyshy thank you! nicely put
I found her character off-putting as well. She's essentially playing the 'sassy black friend' trope.
@@literaIIyshy Nonsense, stop trying to use woke shut down tactics that no one except the intellectually bankrupt cares for.
The woke mob bullies people into apologising for anything, that means nothing anymore.
Would you take issue with a black person speaking in the same style as Ronald Reagan? Or would it be just as absurd since whites don't hold a monopoly over this style of speech?
These pointless, nonsensical sensibilities are exactly why the black community in America continues to be such a resounding failure.
Your argument has no head or tail. There is no sign of reason, logic or anything that would persuade a sound human mind. Yet here we are. Boring and embarrassing.
I think the whitewashing conversation is valid as long as it’s not directed at Goulding specifically. When I was growing up black women who were biracial and very light were casted way more and very differently than mid to dark brown ladies. It was a way of checking off a box, while using people with features that align with Eurocentric standards. There’s better representation now because of the callouts making the industry aware of biases conscious or unconscious.
10:41 I do wonder though if they'll do the crashing the wedding rehearsal via helicopter and Elinor just pays for the repairs and told Nick that they should thank her because the altar was poorly made.
14:12 Michael Teo. Who else read the first book and went "Weak." And wasn't all that surprised on how he turned out in the second book?
I watched this movie as a young white woman and loved it. I don't love romcoms. But this one had so much heart. The women's relationships really made it
This film has a subtle underlying statement about culture that I am very interested in but ultimately disagreed with the final message. At it's base, it wanted to use the Eastern vs Western culture concept and which is the "right" way to live a life.
There are some stories where you want the protagonist to be pure and correct and must fight against adversaries without compromising their ideals. Paragons like the Superman type. But there are some stories where you want the protagonist to have a flawed ideal and the antagonist to have an opposing flawed ideal on the opposite extreme. The plot is resolved when the protagonist learns from the antagonist and reconcile with a more wholistic and balanced ideal.
I think in CRA, I feel like going for the latter is more appropriate. Ultimately Rachel, being the Western representative "won" the ideological war. Pursue happiness. It would be cool if they insightfully dissected the strengths and problems of each way of living. Plus, for a film that attempts to appeal to both the Eastern and Western audience. It's smarter to not declare an objective loser in the ideological war.
Man, well pieced together essay. It articulated so much I appreciated about the show which some people may not have noticed. But I definitely felt a lot of those moments.
A movie does not have to be great by itself to have a great impact. It was fun, and, having watched it with my female caucasian friends, it was a memorable experience as I saw them react "normally" without having problems with immersions because the cast was asian. Of course, a lot has changed since, with Parasite, BTS, and Squid Game making "representation" not as big of a deal, but at the time, it was impactful.
John cho is an amazing leading man. I still get the feels when I see him staring as a love intrest in charmed OG.
Yeah gutting that Hollywood's idiotic idea that Asian actors aren't bankable has lost actors roles and resulted in the cancellation of fantastic productions such as the series Selfie (which starred Cho)
Selfie was such a fun show!
Yeah I really enjoyed the dichotomy between John Cho and Karen Gillian. I was pretty put out when it ended so soon.
@@kraziiXIII Aye it was definitely cut short just as the characters journeys were ready to expand into new chapters.
My page is dedicated to Selfie! Karen Gillan and John Cho met up last year. They still get asked about the show. It was definitely ahead of its time.
This was a terrific analysis. I especially love how you point out the clash between cultures: ambitious, independent women vs. women who are expected to marry into money and have the perfect family. It rings true even amongst us who aren’t crazy rich. 😛 my sister is in her mid 30s and is judged by a lot of my family for not being married yet.
Thank you!
So many Asian video essayists/film reviewers have been overly harsh toward Crazy Rich Asians and other Asian centric films that's come out the past couple of years.
I don't think lifting up movies just because they're about "minorities" is at all right, but critiquing a film for what it isn't (unless you're addressing misleading ad campaigns) is disingenuous and intellectually lazy. Film reviews and essays ought to be engaging the film as it is not the reviewers pet subjects and wish list that aren't in the film.
Anyway really appreciated this video.
(PS the sound track is freaking amazing! I was dancing in my seat in the theater. I'm so thrilled that Michelle Yeoh has been in so many films & television in the last 5 years. And even if Crazy Rich Asians wasn't great, getting Ke Huy Quan back on screen would give it a special place in film history.)
Great Video!! Would love love love a breakdown of Joy Luck Club. This movie and book were so pivotol for me and I so wish it got more attention. Thanks so much for the great content.
For me it meant a lot just because as as mixed black kid exploring routes and not being black enough ect. This explored this in a relatable way for me which to me is a testament to good storytelling.
Interestingly enough as a non-crazy-rich Singaporean I couldn't relate to it at all.
@@shastasilverchairsg I think that's the point. Regardless of location of population being reprsented, it was meant to be a "fish out of water" tale-- perhaps in a way to be relatable to people outside the culture looking in.
I watched Crazy Rich Asians last year, and I loved that movie. Even without being Asian, I could understand and relate to all the family expectations both Nick and Rachel had to deal with because of their wedding and their diverging family traditions, despite both families being Asian
its about being more successful than the most successful white person
I strongly dislike CRA but I appreciate what it did for Asians in Hollywood. I strongly dislike it because it was extremely colourist with brown Asians being relegated to maids and workers, as is the case in a lot of, if not most, Asian media. It's lazy. Not very good representation on that level. It's kind of like... I get that it was a step up from Hollywood racism, but Hollywood is trapped in 30 years ago so it's not saying much these days in the landscape of representaiton in media.
But sure. It's fine. And people who love it, I'm glad you do.
Maybe I'm an info junkie, but I savored all of Kwan's Trilogy. It was a world I knew nothing about. I also felt that the film was imaginative and delightful interpretation of the book. Yes, as needed, it focused more attention on the central plot of Rachel and Nick. I enjoyed both. The film inspired me to read the books. Win, win. Every underrepresented community wants so much fom the few films that squeak three. I hope there are more to come.
I concur that the film is better than the book. I enjoyed the book, and attributed a lot of the success of the film's screenplay towards having such a good starting point-- And it made great sense to me that the movie did improve particularly on a character front on so many points over the book, once it was given the opportunity to.
Take Astrid's plot for instance, as you mentioned, in the film it's still a bit of a mess, but it's way less of a mess than it was in the book. Things like that, choosing to beef up Eleanor's role, even up to the somewhat hand-wave-y ending to the final couple, I felt like those were all good improvements or at least attempts at improvements over pretty solid source material.
And I Absolutely agree with the idea that part of the critique of this film, because of course there are many things this film does not do well, beginning with a failure to critique capitalism and continuing on through many other areas, but part of the problem in the reason people are expecting that is absolutely because it stands alone. I think it is victim to the same thing that a lot of LGBT stories are victim to right now, which is everyone somehow expecting them to be the standard bearer for everything everyone has ever wanted out of a story casting those characters in a positive light.
And I absolutely believe that as we get more movies centered around LGBT characters, and TV shows, just as we get hopefully many more shows and films centered around Asian characters, that they begin to stand on their own, and that they're allowed to be silly or flawed or speaking to one experience but not other experiences or whatever they need to be to tell the story they want to be, instead of having to somehow be perfect in their singularity.
💚
The only thing I remember in this movie was that my people were the maids. The series really only focused on the dominant East Asian elite and the many south and southeast Asian workers keeping Singapore afloat are just the servants. I didn’t really bother to revisit it until this video.
Can we talk about the scene where the indian security guards came around or is "Asian Representation" and "steering away from stereotypes" reserved for east asians?
Those Indian security supposed to be there for a reason. They are Gurkhas and were “gifted” to Nick grandmother I don’t remember for what thing exactly but for something she did for foreign royal family. In the books there were told that it is not common practice for Singapore, but Shan Sui deserves best guards in the world. I barely remember the film but in the books it was represented the best way I think 🥹
@@soniaromanova I understand why you might think that, but I ask that you revisit the idea of people being gifted like objects.
@@totteringchatter oh sorry I think it was bad wording :( I’m not sure if it can be considered as gift, because, if I understood that part right, they had salary and were serving, the only difference - they could serve only royal family or smth, and the right to have that type of servant were gifted. Maybe you are correct and I’m not empathetic enough to them! I think I were focusing too much on Thai maids Shan Sui had, that were bought and brought to Singapore to be forever servants to certain family. I’m not sure how exactly people became Gurkhas, but if they can choose this path, then, I think, this exact part weren’t too bad?
@@totteringchatter or those maid were Chinese, not Thai… I don’t remember well that part but it is still sad
@@soniaromanova Oh yeah totally, I think the Chinese maids were pretty problematic too and it felt like a little nod to Ah Ku culture in Singapore but that i think is exactly what im talking about you know? Like its always a point of contention/ a hard thing to choose to portray things as they really are while fitting that into the tone of a comedy. Especially when the reality of a lot of these customs and norms is derogatory to many people, you know? like i dunno if i personally can sit here and talk about what would have been a good choice to make around representing these parts of rich Singaporean lifestyles while acknowledging their inherent racism, but i know for a fact playing into the whole idea of "oh big brown Indian man with a turban scary" was the wrong way to do that. My people arent a joke, our traditions of martial art arent any different to those from China that are revered you know? Sorry long reply hahah thank you for your kind replies too!
People on Twitter recently found out Henry is half white and suddenly they're claiming that he doesn't look fully asian at all, I think that is so disrespectful
He looks like every generic upper/middle class southeast asian man, have they seen a southeast asian person before? By “fully asian” do they mean they don’t look like the typical asian they’re used to?
He has eyes somewhere in between yellow and white
I’d love to hear your opinion on Memoirs of a Geisha. When I was young I adored that movie but as I got older I realized there’s a lot that’s kind of messed up about it. And now that I live in Japan I really wonder how people feel about that movie from the perspective of being Asian… especially the casting. After seeing Michelle Yeoh I had that feeling.
This is one of my all-time favourite movies, not because of it being "woke" but because it tells a really heartwarming and fun story that transports me to this incredible world I previously knew almost nothing about. It's just such a fun, gorgeous and emotional movie. I hate that people downplay what it is because they think it should've done more for Asian representation. People should just enjoy it for what it is and stop analyzing it so much through a social justice lens. Obviously, it's an incredible landmark for Asian representation, but if you're only judging it through that one aspect of what it is, you won't be able to appreciate what a great movie it is outside of that label.
Saw the discussion about henry golding on twitter and i agree that henry looks pretty much similar with some people from singaporea, malaysia, and indonesia. Especially because there's some people that half-caucasian in the three country and we saw them just like a common person. Many of us feels very okay with henry golding because it feels like someone who we actually met pretty often in our real life.
Also very agree with asian vs american culture. I feel every region in asian have different yet similar culture and value. Here in Indonesia, we always have conversations about "the west value" vs the traditional value haha
Even I thought he was Filipino (I'm Filipina with Chinese ancestry). He looks like most of my mestizo friends in Manila.
He looks like a regular Filipino guy, like a security guard. He doesn't even look mestizo (mixed race) to me.
The reason for Astrid's subplot will be evident in the next movie as she moves forward with an old love that we saw briefly at the end of Crazy Rich Asians. And I thought this movie showed a realistic account of how women treat each other. Some see competition and seek to undermine while others support and uplift the women in their lives. Loved every minute of it...especially that wedding!
as someone who is half white half asian I really don't get why people thought casting henry golding was an issue. like there's basically no half asian roles out there, so if you're a half asian actor you gonna have to play a white or asian role instead. I honestly think he was great as nick.
I like a lot of elements of the movie- the only thing that really struck me as off was portraying Astrid as "down to earth" by... having her splurge millions on jewelry and then having her Filipina maids hide it from her husband. Like, compromising yourself to soothe your husband's ego is relatable. But there were a million better ways for them to show that.
Really well done ! Thank you for this :) I watch CRA whenever I’m feeling down
Haha, that's great! Maybe I'll give the film a revisit.
Me too!
Honestly, I am very proud of the movie. I enjoyed it, and would tell everyone around me to watch it.
Chinese have long been plaque by divide and inferialism. This movie actually brings out a very good message: be true to yourself, be proud of your culture, and be who you are.
The mahjong scene is so beautiful and classic, because it reflects the Chinese belief: when you let go, you invite the possibilities of holding to something even more wonderful.
I remember when I was young, my English educated aunt would look down on me, telling me things like: “it’s useless to learn Chinese”. But I would not give up my root, my identity; I choose to embrace my culture, and to be proud of who I am.
And I am proud of this movie. Really wonderfully done.
I see Eleanor as an example of the "My way or the highway"/"No, nothing you do is good enough" character/trope, like Lindo Jong in "Joy Luck Club" and Guiseppe in "In the Name of the Father" . . .which of course has its roots in real life 'cause yeah there are people like that, ugh.
I loved this movie. What I didn’t care about was the marketing stating it as a “Very diverse cast”. Yes, a very diverse cast situating of one type of people from one part of the world. How diverse.
Diversity is about giving more people opportutinities to participate and tell their stories. It's not about representing every color of the rainbow in one picture.
This is a good story that happens to be about Chinese-Singaporeans.
To Hollywood diverse simply means not white.
But you still have the majority looking and acting and thinking the same. Tell me how that is diversity and not DiversityTM.
@@NewGuy2534 Because rich people are all the same.
@@NewGuy2534 that just shows you dont know anything about Asians. The cast was from multiple countries, varying ethnicities. Like if you think Pinoy, a Japanese person, a Chinese Malaysian and and an Iban person all look and think alike, thats ridiculous.
I'm an SEAn not concerned to obsess over every details of this production. It is a Hollywood film depicting an idea of what SEA/Singapore is like. Even local productions' depiction of their own country can sometimes be way off.
To be fair, Daughter-in-law/Mother-in-law antagonistic relationship due to one of them is not rich enough is a fairly typical TV/film subject here. I can just turn on any TV drama/lakorn/sinetron/teleserye/etc. and chances are one of them will show this issue.
I didn't think I needed asian representation until I saw Crazy Rich Asians. It was eye opening how important representation is, to just see Asians being "normal." To see an Asian American main character that's a love interest for being smart, capable, kind, and strong, not "Asian"
I despise how dismissive Asian-Americans and others of the diaspora are of the criticism against this film by Asians who actually live in the region, particularly Southeast Asia.
The scene where Rachel was inexplicably freaked out by the darker skinned guards is pretty telling of what kind of movie this is to us.
She wasn't freaked because of their skin color,they just popped up in the dark,in a forest zone.I'd be scared too.
@@teeboygamer1743 that's racism on TV.
sadly it's always been like that for darker skinned members of any race. black, latino, asian, arab, doesn't matter. COLORISM is very real in the movie industry and some light skinned POC don't even acknowledge that
@@teeboygamer1743 if that is the only role for a dark skinned person in this movie, then it is telling.
@@emiljayatileke416 what nobody wants to admit is that non-white people are just as racist, if not more so,than white people
I love Crazy Rich Asians! I've read the book in 2015 and I was captivated by the story.
Great analysis - really enjoyed watching!
what i find fascinating is that asian americans tend to prefer the film, which was written and directed (and thus shaped) by its asian american film maker, whereas asians born and brought up in asia go for the books, which focuses more on the sharp social divide and the generational gaps regarding westernisation that a lot of us are struggling with, with the rise of globalisation