cordelianne: (Xander pirate)
cordelianne ([personal profile] cordelianne) wrote2006-07-09 09:51 pm
Entry tags:

You're not a real pirate! Real pirates live on boats and don't look stupid! (btvs 6:6)

teehee That quote from "All the Way" always cracks me up. Anyway I'm using it because I saw Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest last night.

Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest

I'm finding it tricky to determine my exact reaction to the movie. I love fluffy, fun and silly (bonus if has absurd moments which POTC 2 has) summer blockbusters, and that's what the movie is. I love them because I can just sit back, munch on popcorn, giggle and have a relaxing couple of hours. I can turn off my brain (which is good because it helps me ignore problems with plot, bad writing, etc.) and just have a good time. Over the years I've accepted that Hollywood generally is not the place to look for wonderful representations of anyone regardless of sex, race, sexuality, background etc.

However I'm really distressed by the representation of the aboriginal Caribbean residents, the Calinago or Caribs. I recall enough from history class to know that the Calinago were not cannibals. Now I totally get that POTC 2 is a silly movie that isn't in any way claiming to accurately portray anyone. And certainly it's not like the British and the East India Trading company are portrayed in a good light.

But I was sort of flailing around about my reaction because I still feel really uncomfortable about the movie (despite having fun during all the non-cannibal scenes), so I did some research to see what other reactions are. I was particularly interested to see how the descendants of the Caliango responded to the movie. It turns out that the President of the National Garifuna Council of Belize sent a letter in 2005 to The Walt Disney Company calling them to task for the erroneous representations and noting how damaging they are. I found a link to that letter here. I find this part to be of particular note:

Our Calinago ancestors were a warrior race who migrated to the lesser islands of the Caribbean from the Amazon region of South America and, as with any warrior race, they engaged in ritualistic practices to encourage fearlessness among warriors. They fought to the death to defend their islands against invaders in the colonial era which followed the arrival of Columbus to our shores, an unfortunate event that changed for the worst the natural evolution and development of indigenous societies of the world in the period that followed.

The myth about cannibalism was started because the Calinago were not intimidated by the European invaders and waged war in the defense of their territory and way of life.


I understand that the movie is a very over-the-top silly experience (and I love that sort of thing!), but I do think there's a way the filmmakers could have represented the Calinago without resorting to - and perpetuating - very harmful myths. For example, the pirates could have thought the Calinago were cannibals, but we - the audience - could have known differently and laughed with the Calinago at the stupidity of the pirates. Subtitles would could have accomplished this (and I noted that there were no subtitles when the Calinago spoke, making them essentially voiceless in the movie).

This issue really dampened what is otherwise an enjoyable movie. Johnny Depp is the highlight of the movie as usual. Orlando Bloom was fun to watch and has a great back (see I'm capable of appreciating the surface stuff!). I like women dressed up as men, so even enjoyed Keira Knightley (it's interesting that the filmmakers definitely tried to make her more appealing to modern women, yet did not take the same care with the Calinago). Norrington also rocked. And I loved the three-way fight!!! I also had fun with all the slashy subtext.

I guess I can't fully turn off my brain during a fun movie. And I'm not sure that's a bad thing.




On a different subject, I'm very very very very excited because a week tomorrow is when I arrive at [livejournal.com profile] savoytruffle's for a pre-Writercon visit. And then it's Writercon!!!!!!!! *dances*


ETA: The celebrations for Italy winning the World Cup are still going strong here. I imagine that it must be insane in Italy!

poc2

[identity profile] one-small-weed.livejournal.com 2006-07-10 04:27 am (UTC)(link)
Yeah, I was really, really uncomfortable with the "natives" for a variety of reasons. I noticed that the filmmakers also killed off all the people of color on the crew of the pearl, after implying that they were kind of sneaky. I almost walked out at that point - I was feeling icky.
It's wierd, because it seems that they tried to reflect historical reality in that they portrayed pirates of different cultural and ethnic backgrounds, but could only handle the diversity in a typical Disney way - all the accents belong to the villians or clowns, etc. It's frustruating, because I want to be able to just sit back and admire Johnny Depp, and instead there's all this unsettling crap, which, as you point out, is not very suprising, but disappointing nonetheless.
I loved the Swamp Witch, though. Ahh, the ambivalence . . .

[identity profile] earth-vexer.livejournal.com 2006-07-10 04:47 am (UTC)(link)
I guess I can't fully turn off my brain during a fun movie. And I'm not sure that's a bad thing.
I don't think that's a bad thing at all. It's too bad, however, that the filmmakers didn't turn their brains *on* when they were making the damn thing. But in an awful way it's fascinating to me that such a portrayal can be 'okay' in this day and age (sorry, this is my anthropology schooling rearing its head). What does it say about our currently 'accepted' views of the Other (and the supposedly enlightened views of Hollywood)?

For example, the pirates could have thought the Calinago were cannibals, but we - the audience - could have known differently and laughed with the Calinago at the stupidity of the pirates.
That's what I would have expected to see. That would have been a clever treatment. Oh, but it would have been too *confusing* for the masses. /sarcasm

[identity profile] crossoverman.livejournal.com 2006-07-10 05:14 am (UTC)(link)
I think the plot was too convoluted as it was. Giving a twist to the natives would have complicated matters further. And I don't think lack of subtitles makes the "natives" voiceless, rather it puts us in the main characters' shoes - of not knowing what's going on.

My main question would be how these tribes are identified in the film. How do we know the filmmakers are portraying the Calingo specifically? Why can't they just be generic island tribe that are cannibals?

As you say, the British and the East India Trading Company aren't portrayed as particularly nice people. Jack Sparrow is out for himself. And when push comes to shove, Elizabeth will do whatever it is to save herself as well. One of the themes of the film is how people can be corrupted.

This of course doesn't excuse racism. And you're right when you say that Hollywood is not the place to look for accurate or flattering portrayals of race or sex or sexuality.

Of course I only have my white male perspective to see this film from. There are certainly other race cliches that do stand out to me, but I am woefully ignorant of the tribes of the Caribbean sea.

Given that the film is also a period piece, it's harder for me to fully accept there's any damage being done by a film whose first job is to entertain, not educate. Also given that the film is basically an homage to all pirate movies that have come before, it's hard to bypass featuring cannibals... just as you can't go past sea monsters and Davey Jones and cursed treasure and damsels in distress.
ext_7262: (Default)

[identity profile] femmenerd.livejournal.com 2006-07-11 05:58 am (UTC)(link)
I guess I can't fully turn off my brain during a fun movie. And I'm not sure that's a bad thing.

It's not.

*is not really here*

[identity profile] ozma914.livejournal.com 2006-07-12 04:18 am (UTC)(link)
Even though I can get rather violently upset at acts of racism, I didn't mind the cannibal parts a bit -- didn't even think of it in terms of race, to be honest. That might be because I grew up with a lot of old movies and TV shows that showed things we now know as racist, not because the makers were racist, but because no one gave it a thought at the time. (Gilligans Island and its cannibals would be a good example for this case.) If a drama, or even an action film set in the present day, had shown the same characters, I probably would have been at the lead of the picket line.

Once you pointed it out, I thought about the natives shown in Pirates and realized they didn't have to be portrayed as cannibals at all -- there could have been just as much jeopardy if they'd just been planning to use Jack in a ritual sacrifice. For that matter, most of the cannibal scenes were totally unnecessary to the plot, at all. That leaves me wondering, in these days of politically correct thinking, if there wasn't one person at the studio who didn't stop to think about how this might look to more sensitive viewers, or how it might effect the young and impressionable. Mindless entertainment is fine, but in this case I have to reverse my normal "live and let live" attitude and say they could have avoided the objectionable parts.
ext_7189: (Default)

[identity profile] tkp.livejournal.com 2006-07-18 05:45 pm (UTC)(link)
I'm replying so late on what's probably already a dead issue for you because I only just saw Pirates...plus I'm on vacation and it's hard to get online!

But anyway, I had a similar problem with Dead Man's Chest. And the same problem with King Kong. One thing about it is that the killer-cannibal-fearsome natives is a really common thing in old adventure stories, and such natives mistaking the White Man/outsider for a god is an old trope too. Since the movie (and the first one also) does use so many adventure story cliches, none of which are meant to be taken seriously, my guess is that's why this kind of representation was deemed okay.

But what disturbs me is that much of the movie's humor is drawn from playing on those cliches--Jack Sparrow's mythic escape from the island on which he was abandoned in the first movie turned out actually to have the most mundane and actually pitiful explanations. Why they chose to do that elsewhere and not with the situation with the natives is what really bothered me. That and there was no reason for that whole portion; it had no bearing on the wonky, confused plot; if they'd've cut it they could've gotten in good character work and a cleaner story.

Just ugh!