CHAN IS MISSING (1982), dir. Wayne Wang
SITE ARCHIVE! (REGULARLY UPDATED)
“Chan is Missing” is a movie about the Chinese made by a Chinese-American, and it avoids the racial stereotyping a lot of Hollywood films do not. It was directed and co-written by Wayne Wang, who has gone on to direct other films about under-represented minority groups, including an adaptation of Amy Tan’s “The Joy Luck Club.” Although the low-budget “Chan is Missing” was filmed over a decade earlier, Wang’s penchant for Chinese characters with real depth already showed.
The movie centers around two San Francisco cab drivers named Jo (Wood Moy) and his nephew Steve (Marc Hayashi), who want to start their own taxi service. When the movie opens, they have given $4,000 to their partner Chan Ho, a relative of Jo’s ex-wife, to go file their business with the city. Unfortunately, several weeks have passed and they haven’t heard back from him. Then they find out from a social worker that Chan was recently involved in a traffic accident, but hasn’t made any of his court appearances.
What happened to Chan? Is he dead, or could he have run off with the money after the accident? Jo and Steve go looking for Chan in Chinatown, only to be told by his co-workers and friends that they haven’t seen him around either. But his jacket turns up at a nightclub he frequented, and there are possible clues in the pocket: a clipping from a local newspaper, about an elderly Chinese man who killed another man over political differences; and a letter from Chan’s brother written in Chinese.
The friends at the nightclub think Chan used the $4,000 to go back to China and resolve a family matter. But Jo, intrigued by the clipping, takes it to a buddy at the Chinese consulate. It turns out to be warning about how dangerous the political climate has become between Chinese who support the mother country’s stance against Taiwanese independence, and those who side with Taiwan. Later, during a stakeout of Chan’s apartment, they hear from his neighbor that a mysterious woman stopped by to talk with Chan about some photographs.
Could the photos Chan supposedly took have something to do with his disappearance? The mystery gradually unravels, albeit in a talky manner reflective of both independent American cinema and the production’s limited budget. Of course, some viewers will be turned off by the lack of movie stars and basic-looking set-ups; indeed, much of the acting seems done by amateurs, and although the black-and-white cinematography could be described as effectively-noirish at times, “Chan is Missing” is not exactly great-looking.
Still, based on cultural significance, the film deserves four stars just for employing real Asian actors as competent protagonists. From the very beginning, Jo and Steve aren’t the usual Chinese stereotypes; the kind of buffoons Mickey Rooney wore yellow-face for in “Breakfast at Tiffany’s.” They don’t have buck teeth or misplace their r’s and l’s, they don’t practice tai chi or kung fu. On the contrary, both men speak English that sounds vaguely American, and while they exist in a universe of Chinese culture – for example, at the house of Chan’s ex-wife, she gives Jo an orange – such references never seem like attempts at exoticism.
The movie also allows Jo and Steve to be very aware of what non-Chinese think of their kind. The former mentions that his fares inevitably ask where a good place to eat at in Chinatown is; he’ll start telling them the differences between regional Chinese cuisines, leading to a good tip. Meanwhile, Steve, who is the more cynical of the two protagonists, bristles over having gone to see “Saturday Night Fever” at a Chinese theater, only to find the opening theme dubbed, “You can tell from the way I use my wok, I’m a Chinese cook, I’m a Chinese cook.”
Finally, the movie shows Chinese can be prejudiced against one another, which may blow some people’s minds. In the history of American cinema, it’s not uncommon for those with similar skin tones to be lumped together, and Asians have especially gotten that treatment. While heterogonous-minded Hollywood still has trouble distinguishing Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans from one another, in “Chan is Missing,” what gets emphasized is that Chinese come in all sorts of shapes, sizes, and political beliefs, and certain ones consider themselves better than others.
For example, early on there is a scene in which Jo, Steve, and Steve’s sister are sitting around the kitchen table, teasing each other about the ingredients in the meal, whether they’re from American supermarkets, as opposed to the more questionable Chinese groceries. They also say unflattering things about “New Money” Taiwanese, disparage “Commie-lovers” who support the regime back in China, and discuss how two Chinese City Council candidates draw from very different demographics within Chinatown.
Being that the main protagonists are American-born Chinese (or “ABC’s”), Jo and Steve initially expect Chan to fit certain stereotypes for a “FOB” – a derogatory term short for “Fresh off the Boat,” or recent arrival to the United States. Steve in particular has a negative image of them, beliefs that get thoroughly subverted over the course of the film. By the end, one character realizes Chan, who could very well be a stand-in for all Chinese, can no longer be so easily categorized. Not that that’s such a bad thing.
Overall rating: *** (out of ****)
“Chan is Missing” is a movie about the Chinese made by a Chinese-American, and it avoids the racial stereotyping a lot of Hollywood films do not. It was directed and co-written by Wayne Wang, who has gone on to direct other films about under-represented minority groups, including an adaptation of Amy Tan’s “The Joy Luck Club.” Although the low-budget “Chan is Missing” was filmed over a decade earlier, Wang’s penchant for Chinese characters with real depth already showed.
The movie centers around two San Francisco cab drivers named Jo (Wood Moy) and his nephew Steve (Marc Hayashi), who want to start their own taxi service. When the movie opens, they have given $4,000 to their partner Chan Ho, a relative of Jo’s ex-wife, to go file their business with the city. Unfortunately, several weeks have passed and they haven’t heard back from him. Then they find out from a social worker that Chan was recently involved in a traffic accident, but hasn’t made any of his court appearances.
What happened to Chan? Is he dead, or could he have run off with the money after the accident? Jo and Steve go looking for Chan in Chinatown, only to be told by his co-workers and friends that they haven’t seen him around either. But his jacket turns up at a nightclub he frequented, and there are possible clues in the pocket: a clipping from a local newspaper, about an elderly Chinese man who killed another man over political differences; and a letter from Chan’s brother written in Chinese.
The friends at the nightclub think Chan used the $4,000 to go back to China and resolve a family matter. But Jo, intrigued by the clipping, takes it to a buddy at the Chinese consulate. It turns out to be warning about how dangerous the political climate has become between Chinese who support the mother country’s stance against Taiwanese independence, and those who side with Taiwan. Later, during a stakeout of Chan’s apartment, they hear from his neighbor that a mysterious woman stopped by to talk with Chan about some photographs.
Could the photos Chan supposedly took have something to do with his disappearance? The mystery gradually unravels, albeit in a talky manner reflective of both independent American cinema and the production’s limited budget. Of course, some viewers will be turned off by the lack of movie stars and basic-looking set-ups; indeed, much of the acting seems done by amateurs, and although the black-and-white cinematography could be described as effectively-noirish at times, “Chan is Missing” is not exactly great-looking.
Still, based on cultural significance, the film deserves four stars just for employing real Asian actors as competent protagonists. From the very beginning, Jo and Steve aren’t the usual Chinese stereotypes; the kind of buffoons Mickey Rooney wore yellow-face for in “Breakfast at Tiffany’s.” They don’t have buck teeth or misplace their r’s and l’s, they don’t practice tai chi or kung fu. On the contrary, both men speak English that sounds vaguely American, and while they exist in a universe of Chinese culture – for example, at the house of Chan’s ex-wife, she gives Jo an orange – such references never seem like attempts at exoticism.
The movie also allows Jo and Steve to be very aware of what non-Chinese think of their kind. The former mentions that his fares inevitably ask where a good place to eat at in Chinatown is; he’ll start telling them the differences between regional Chinese cuisines, leading to a good tip. Meanwhile, Steve, who is the more cynical of the two protagonists, bristles over having gone to see “Saturday Night Fever” at a Chinese theater, only to find the opening theme dubbed, “You can tell from the way I use my wok, I’m a Chinese cook, I’m a Chinese cook.”
Finally, the movie shows Chinese can be prejudiced against one another, which may blow some people’s minds. In the history of American cinema, it’s not uncommon for those with similar skin tones to be lumped together, and Asians have especially gotten that treatment. While heterogonous-minded Hollywood still has trouble distinguishing Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans from one another, in “Chan is Missing,” what gets emphasized is that Chinese come in all sorts of shapes, sizes, and political beliefs, and certain ones consider themselves better than others.
For example, early on there is a scene in which Jo, Steve, and Steve’s sister are sitting around the kitchen table, teasing each other about the ingredients in the meal, whether they’re from American supermarkets, as opposed to the more questionable Chinese groceries. They also say unflattering things about “New Money” Taiwanese, disparage “Commie-lovers” who support the regime back in China, and discuss how two Chinese City Council candidates draw from very different demographics within Chinatown.
Being that the main protagonists are American-born Chinese (or “ABC’s”), Jo and Steve initially expect Chan to fit certain stereotypes for a “FOB” – a derogatory term short for “Fresh off the Boat,” or recent arrival to the United States. Steve in particular has a negative image of them, beliefs that get thoroughly subverted over the course of the film. By the end, one character realizes Chan, who could very well be a stand-in for all Chinese, can no longer be so easily categorized. Not that that’s such a bad thing.
Overall rating: *** (out of ****)
Labels: ***, 80's, Wayne Wang
posted by Phil | 6:50 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home