The US culture industry wants the Chinese market. The only way is through the Chinese government, which restricts the number of foreign films allowed in the country each year – thirty-four only. To get one of those precious slots, Hollywood has learned to kowtow.
Now, there’s nothing wrong with Hollywood trying to nuance is content for an overseas market. In fact, part of me loves that Hollywood is being pressured to cater to audience outside the US. But this isn’t about that. This is about Hollywood in service of power; in service of the hegemonic vision of Mainland China, acting as a conduit for its propaganda. It’s about Hollywood making nice with one of the most censorious regimes in the world.
Michael Bay, the Dan Brown of Cinema, learned early on that kowtowing would ensure he’d keep being the best paid worst director in the world.
Transformers 4 was the highest-grossing film of all time in China. Part of that winning formula, no doubt, was its slavish regurgitation of Chinese propaganda – such as depicting the Communist Party effective and wise, such as saying Hong Kong needed the government of Mainland China to protect it, (that last link is the Honest Trailer for Transformers 4, which is hilarious and worth watching). I wonder how the Umbrella Movement feels 
about the latter, especially given the protests against Mainland China’s political meddling in Hong Kong were happening just as the film was released.
China is increasingly cracking down on Hong Kong film and literature as well, banning in some cases, censoring in others. Several senior members of a controversial Hong Kong publishing house were kidnapped by Mainland Chinese authorities, only to turn up months later, confessing on Chinese television. So, yeah, cheers Michael Bay for your support.
Perhaps the most egregious (recent) example of Hollywood’s cravenness is over the as-yet unreleased Dr Strange. Tilda Swinton was cast as the Ancient One. In the comics, the character is a male Tibetan. The head-scratching choice of a female Scottish woman was met with the usual cries of ‘white-washing’. The truth is far worse.
Tilda Swinton was cast because the writers felt it too controversial to have an actual Tibetan in the role, especially if they wanted the film to have any chance of being shown in China. Let’s be clear: the character itself wasn’t political; The Ancient One wasn’t going to be advocating Tibetan independence, or commenting on Chinese colonisation of that nation. The sin of this character in the eyes of Hollywood and China was being Tibetan. That’s it.
The writer, Robert Cargill explained: “he originates from Tibet, so if you acknowledge that Tibet is a place and that he’s Tibetan, you risk alienating the one billion people who think that’s bullshit and risk the Chinese government going, ‘Hey, you know one of the biggest film-watching countries in the world? We’re not going to show your movie because you decided to get political.”
A lot to unpack in that statement, not the least of which is there mere existence of a Tibetan is ‘getting political’. I’m not convinced, as Cargill is, that a Chinese audience would be alienated at the mere mention of Tibet. However, that the Chinese censors could take offence – this seems a reasonable assumption.
Matt Damon being cast as one of the stars of the film, ‘Great Wall’, also caused some people to claim Hollywood was ‘white-washing’ yet another film. They were wrong. Here’s why: Great Wall is not a 
Hollywood movie. Great Wall is a Chinese coproduction, the director is Chinese, and it is filmed in China. Perhaps most importantly, Chinese fans want Matt Damon in the film. They also want their own actors, and they are getting them.
It’s true that Chinese-Americans, specifically, weren’t hired, but in this particular case I don’t think Chinese productions are under any obligation to hire American actors (this issue, however, is self-evidently a problem for Hollywood films in general).
The more important point here is this: Americans are going to have to start dealing with an unfamiliar reality – that of a country, other than their own, making decisions about the content of the major films (Hollywood and other) appearing on their screens. This is a reality that the rest of us have always lived with. It’s not always pleasant, and in the case of China, there will be little compromise for the ethnic or political sensibilities of others.
In general, we’re also going to have to accept the chances of Hollywood putting money into films about Tibet, or the Uyghur in Xinjiang, or Hong Kong, or Taiwan, are minuscule and declining (except, of course, where these films echo Chinese propaganda).
This growing influence is problematic for several reasons. Aside from the obvious problems of censorship and self-censorship, considered visions of a Chinese-dominated future will be harder to come by. In the mid-to-late 80s, for example, speculative fiction was allowed and encouraged to imagine a Japanese-influenced future. Where Japanese culture was integrated into the world-building. Cyberpunk, in particular, is an example of this.
These stories, particularly in film, will be harder to tell now. I’m not simply talking here about negative visions of a Chinese-dominated future. Not at all. Rather, it’s about the space being made for stories being told by thoughtful, imaginative, critical minds.
I lived in Southeast Asia for the best part of a decade, my fiction is focussed on this region, and I’m currently working on a PhD on Southeast and East Asian literature. I’m fascinated by views from the margins, by the counter-hegemonic voices, by those who have experienced a different reality, and who can imagine futures the rest of us are yet able to grasp.
These are important stories. Yet, as Hollywood allies itself to the propaganda of the Chinese state, they’ll be a hell of lot harder to come by.
