I saw that, and at first I thought, WTF! I like Emma Stone and all, but there's no way she could play half Chinese half Hawaiian character, but then a I realized she's only 1/4 Chinese & Hawaiian, which still seemed a bit outrageous until I thought of my niece who is half-Chinese, half-White but you'd never tell from looking at her, and my wife has cousins who are also half-Chinese and don't look the least bit Asian. Then there's the matter that the movie seems to be based on a true(?) story of a hapa girl who had to convince people all her life that she was indeed a hapa and not just another White girl.
Yeah, my fiance is hapa, but "first generation" hapa, so she looks "ambiguously ethnic" (to quote Parks & Rec). But I do recognize that, like, our kids could possibly end up looking more like me (generic euromutt) rather than her.
The thing I'm gathering (from all the backlash on Aloha is that there are two main objections to the film. First, that it's all about white people (even if one of them is a "white" hapa person) -- hence the "Haoles" fake poster (which was brilliant), and doesn't actually deal that much with native Hawaiians or the wide range of racial mixes on the islands. But second, that -- apparently -- the character's racial identity ends up not playing a huge role in the film, or at least that the whole "I have to justify that I am, indeed, part Asian, even though I look northern European, and this is something which informs how my character lives her life" thing isn't really as emphasized. If it is, it's apparently not done in effective enough of a way to get people's attention.
Then again, I thought the outrage over Black Widow's "monster" comments in Age of Ultron was basically just people not understanding the scene, and the product of internet echochambers, so who knows. Maybe it's handled better in the movie than the news is making it seem. Regardless, I've heard it's a crappy movie anyway, so I'll probably skip it.
Back on topic...
LrdSatyr8, if you're suggesting that, rather than file scripts unread, the studios dig through the scripts, read them, and then make them into films, that's probably not going to work because....then they'll have read the scripts. Which means that for any scripts that
don't get produced, if a subsequent movie is similar enough, they'll have to fend off a possible lawsuit. Even if they win, that costs time and money. It's just easier to reject anything that doesn't go through "proper channels."
I get what you're saying -- that there are probably a TON of original ideas out there that nobody's turning into films -- but I don't think Hollywood gives a crap. To the extent that they did, they'd probably just wrap an existing IP around the original idea to market it. That's how things seem to work nowadays. You need an existing IP to market a film, even if it's a (holy crap I'm old!) 23 year old film. Actually, these days,
especially if it's a 23 year old film, since the 18-25 crowd will have never seen it, since they don't believe any worthwhile movies predate their life experiences.
Now GET OFF MY LAWN!