My initial reaction to your comment was "that'd be so fcked up". My next reaction was "oh yeah, it's hollywood."

That's a great point.

On a related point, one thing I've heard from a number of actors is that there isn't any role that a good actor shouldn't be allowed to play.

The opposite argument has often been used to exclude Asian Americans from non-ethnic-specific roles. Thus, the only time you'd see an Asian person on screen was when the script called for an Asian person on screen.

While I'm all about authenticity (ask me about my sushi preferences), it's hard for me to disagree with the notion that actors should be allowed to portray any character.

Now, this doesn't excuse an actor from racist, stereotypical portrayals/caricatures, which is a whole separate issue. That's because you either were to lazy to do your homework, were ill-equiped to handle such a role, or were just being an ass.

On another note, Lee Herrick is calling for a boycott of the film:
apapoetry.blogspot.com/2005/1...06.html

I think he brings up a lot of great points, and I generally agree with them all. This movie sounds pretty fucked up, and the only reason I'd see it is out of curiosity. What I disagree with, however, is the notion of a boycott, because abstractly, I think's a dangerous path to go down.

With any piece of work out there (however misguided it may be), I'd advocate for having folks go and experience it for themselves, so that they can form their own opinions that are based on the work itself, and not on someone else's interpretation.

Interestingly enough, folks called for a boycott of Eric Byler's Charlotte Sometimes b/c they perceived it to de-sexualize Asian American men. Likewise, folks called for a boycott of Justin Lin's Better Luck Tomorrow b/c they thought it exploited a real-life incident.

Whether or not these films do fall in line with their criticisms is a whole other debate, but one that you can really only engage in if you've actually seen/experienced the work.