Like a town marshal determined to nip trouble in the bud, China’s main film distributor rode into the country’s movie theaters on Thursday and took out Quentin Tarantino’s “Django Unchained” before it could get its gun out of its holster.

“Django,” the story of an American slave-turned-bounty hunter who cuts a bloody swath through the antebellum South in an attempt to free his wife, was set to premiere in China Thursday morning. But it was pulled at the last minute after China Film Group, the film’s government-controlled importer, issued a notice instructing theaters to stop showing it.

[...]The movie had already begun showing in some places when the orders arrived. One Chinese fan of Mr. Tarantino’s, 27-year-old photographer Xue Yutao, said he had just sat down to watch a 10:15 a.m. showing of “Django” when the lights suddenly came on.

“About a minute after the film started, several people in suits came in and the film stopped,” he said, adding that the theater apologized and offered them refunds. “At first we were shocked and didn’t know what to do, but then we all laughed at how ridiculous it was.”

Whether or not screenings will resume in China is uncertain. The Guardian tells of official and speculated reasons why the film was pulled from theaters, and the adjustments already made to prepare for China’s tight media regulations:

Media authorities claimed the Quentin Tarantino film, scheduled for release on Thursday, had been postponed for “technical reasons”, but unofficial news websites reported that the real reason was a scene showing full-frontal male nudity.

[...]Tarantino, Django Unchained’s director, had already reined in the movie’s gore for the Chinese market, retouching footage to tone down the colour and bloodshed.

[...]Many online commenters were perplexed by the cancellations because the film had passed China’s notoriously opaque pre-screening censorship process. Censors’ “cutting hands are fiercer than that of a slaveowner, insistent on making Django a eunuch”, wrote one, according to Agence France Presse.

Off Beat China translates netizen commentary showing frustrated suspicion that the film was pulled due to nudity:

One netizen 桃桃林林小淘淘 commented: “Some people don’t have balls, so they cannot tolerate the thought that other people have. I guess that all penis scenes will be cut before the movie is allowed to be shown again.” Netizen imomad thought the same: “Everyone at the censor body is a Taijian (royal servants in China’s history who need to be castrated before taking the job). They don’t have, so others’ must be cut. Or maybe they are intimidated by Django’s size because their own have shrunk due to overuse.” Another netizen 影评老大爷暗夜骑士 commented: “In this hypocritical country, the corrupt and the rich can have group sex parties, and yet the ordinary people aren’t allowed to see a penis.”

Even Hu Xijin, chief editor of mouthpiece Global Times, thought it was a stupid move: “The showing of Django Unchained was stopped abruptly. The action itself does more harm to the country than a few uncut ‘harmful scenes.’ China’s current system lacks people who dare to speak out the truth on sensitive issues to prevent inappropriate policies from being made. Maybe the system doesn’t encourage such people. Absurd policies are everywhere. The government’s credibility among its people is what at cost.”

Even after being edited to satisfy Chinese censors, the film was set to run its marathon 165 minutes, unlike Cloud Atlas and Skyfall, which both saw significant portions cut before opening in China earlier this year. Hollywood has been increasing efforts to reach the Chinese market by catering to the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television (SARFT), China’s media regulator. The Washington Times looks at Tarantino’s taming of Django (and other recent examples) to show the contradiction between Hollywood’s flaunting of free-speech ethics at home and its desire to tap into China’s burgeoning market:

“For an industry that promotes free expression and alleged liberal values to work with totalitarian government that is the antithesis of the values we hold dear as Americans is in many ways a hypocrisy,” said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch.

“They often mask what they do with other values such as the First Amendment, but if indeed they are working with China’s censors, then obviously they don’t believe in those values,” said Fitton.

[...]“The censoring of content is simply ‘good business’ as far as the studios are concerned,” said Stephen Tropiano, an associate professor of screen studies at Ithaca College and author of Obscene, Indecent, Immoral and Offensive: 100+ Years of Censored, Banned, and Controversial Films.

© josh rudolph for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: film censorship, film industry, foreign movies, hollywood, movie industry, SARFT
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

On Weibo, a kind of Chinese Twitter, I recently made a joking comparison between media censorship and the pervasive threat of contaminated food, a constant source of worry:

“There’s no end to these food scares,” a friend sighed. “Is there any hope of a solution?”

“Oh, all we need is for food inspections to be as forceful as film censorship,” I told him breezily. “With all that faultfinding and nit-picking, food-safety issues will be resolved in no time.”

More than 12,000 readers reposted this. One wrote: I know what we should do. Let’s have those in charge of film, newspaper and book censorship take over food safety, and have those responsible for food safety censor films, papers and books. That way we’ll have food safety — and freedom of expression as well!

The unpredictable whims of film censors at the State Administration for Radio, Film and Television have been blamed for wrecking China’s Oscar chances, and even state media have carried calls for a more consistent and codified approach. SARFT has been extending its reach to cover online video and require pre-vetting of TV documentaries, however, and Hollywood productions increasingly subject themselves to its censorship in exchange for access to Chinese funding and theaters. Meanwhile, the country has witnessed a seemingly endless stream of food safety problems, most recently cadmium-tainted rice.

Yu’s op-ed was translated by Allan H. Barr, who commented on his translations of Yu Hua and Han Han in an interview at Pomona College’s website (via CDT) in December. See more on Yu Hua via CDT.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: books, censorship, film censorship, food safety, literature, media censorship, news media, newspapers, SARFT, tainted food, TV, weibo, yu hua
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The new policy, which comes into effect immediately, stipulates that all television documentaries for public broadcast, produced by television stations, commercial studios and social organizations, should submit a content summary, cast list and shooting plan to SARFT before filming starts.

SARFT will then review all the information and publish the approved list of documentaries to TV stations. According to the announcement, the purpose of the new policy is to avoid subjects overlapping and resources being wasted.

[…] “I don’t know why they made this policy. Imagine the huge number of documentaries China produces each year, I doubt if they have enough manpower to fulfill this task. It’s almost mission impossible to carry out this policy,” Shu Haolun, professor at the School of Film and Television Arts of Shanghai University, told the Global Times.

[…] “Many documentaries involve sensitive topics which might upset the government. Now they can more easily reject such story ideas through this policy which I think harms our freedom of speech,” the CEO of an independent film production, who asked not to be named, told the Global Times.

The SARFT-unapproved but Oscar-shortlisted documentary Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry will be shown on P.B.S. tonight (Monday, February 25th).

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: censorship, documentaries, film censorship, SARFT, television, TV
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

As Oscar fever grows around the world with the 85th Academy Awards set to begin in Los Angeles just hours from now, excitement is building in China, even though it has no films in competition. There is also a sense of frustration here about why China’s movies aren’t nominated for the world’s biggest awards?

[…] The most popular answer to the question, held by ordinary Chinese and film experts alike, is: “Too few good films. That’s the real reason in recent years Chinese films have moved further and further away from the Oscars dream,” wrote The International Herald Leader newspaper, in a story carried on the country’s popular Tencent entertainment site.

An article by The Economic Daily, carried on People’s Daily Web site, gave another interpretation: “The Oscars have never been a communal forum, the films taken seriously have only the responsibility to portray the North American world view and the lives they’re willing to see.”

The Oscars’ presence in China is almost as thin as China’s at the Oscars, according to The Los Angeles Times’ Barbara Demick. Only one of this year’s Best Picture nominee has so far reached Chinese theaters: Ang Lee’s Life of Pi, which as a co-production with China enjoyed exemption from tight import quotas in exchange for compliance with the whims of the State Administration for Radio, Film and Television.

As for Oscar viewing parties? Unimaginable. The ceremony, which begins at 9:30 a.m. Monday in China, will be broadcast only in much-redacted form hours later by state-owned CCTV. (Last year, it didn’t air until 10:40 p.m. Monday.) […]

[…] “Nobody even has the live stream in China,” complained Raymond Zhou, film critic for the English-language China Daily. “The government won’t allow it. They are afraid somebody will say something against China.”

Chinese television used to broadcast the ceremony live, but stopped after Richard Gere, as a presenter in 1993, called on then-Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping to remove troops from Tibet.

“The Chinese translators didn’t know what to do, so they just tried to ignore the sentences. After that, they were afraid of the Oscars,” said Wu Renchu, a Shanghai film critic. “It is regrettable. There are many Chinese movie fans, students and white-collar workers who really would like to watch the ceremonies.”

[Update: CCTV6's M1905.com (via Bill Bishop) is streaming the awards ceremony.]

Gere’s outspokenness earned him a twenty-year ban from the awards, ending tonight with a musical performance to mark Chicago‘s six-Oscar haul in 2003. “Apparently, I’ve been rehabilitated,” he told HuffPost UK. “It seems if you stay around long enough, they forget they’ve banned you.” Despite this punishment, Gere became a symbol of Hollywood’s defiance of Chinese authoritarianism, before hunger for Chinese funding and market access made this a disposable luxury. From Damien Ma at Foreign Policy:

In Hollywood in the 1990s, China was an oppressive place. Red Corner opens with Gere gazing up at security cameras in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, ground zero of the infamous bloodshed of early June, 1989, seared into many Americans’ memories. Brad Pitt, too, had been blacklisted from China, ostensibly for starring in the 1997 feature Seven Years in Tibet, in which his character becomes friends with the young Dalai Lama.

[… But t]he era in which China could still be a menacing villain and stir political passions from the Spielbergs and the Geres appears to be ending. Even Brangelina are reportedly studying Mandarin. And the political drama surrounding disgraced Chinese politician Bo Xilai, ripe for Hollywoodification, will never see the light of day. Too bad, because the Bo Ultimatum is the Chinese Godfather waiting to be made. As Hollywood gathers for its biggest awards night Sunday, the industry seems to be biting its tongue. After all, the future, as Jeff Daniels quips in Looper, is in China.

From The New Yorker’s Evan Osnos:

[… T]hese days, Hollywood directors find themselves in the curious position of being more compliant than some of their Chinese counterparts. When censors ordered the Chinese director Lou Ye to make additional cuts to his movie “Mystery” just over a month before the film’s release date, Lou took the unusual steps of publicly tweeting the censors’ demands and then removing his name from the credits. Online, he explained his decision to break the taboo of discussing censorship in the hope that the system would “become more transparent and eventually be cancelled.” He was not willing to comply in silence. “We are all responsible for this unreasonable movie-censorship program,” he wrote.

[…] By comparison, Hollywood has been less vocal on the subject of censorship. When James Cameron released “Titanic” in 3-D last year—having agreed to censor Kate Winslet’s breasts—the Times asked him about the compromises of working in China. He said, “As an artist, I’m always against censorship… [But] this is an important market for me. And so I’m going to do what’s necessary to continue having this be an important market for my films. And I’m going to play by the rules that are internal to this market. Because you have to. You know, I can stomp my feet and hold my breath but I’m not going to change people’s minds that way.”

Transparency might be a more constructive approach than either foot-stomping or meek compliance. While there may be no end in sight for Chinese film censorship, Osnos suggests that the industry could formally and publicly catalogue cuts made at SARFT’s behest. Lou’s defiance, meanwhile, together with changes recently imposed on imports such as Cloud Atlas and Skyfall, has prompted calls for a more codified and less capriciously restrictive system. From Kristie Lu Stout at CNN:

[…] Lu Chuan is calling for change in the censorship system, hoping that Chinese filmmakers can be governed less by guesswork and more by a transparent rating system.

Lu says there must be change for the sake of his craft and also because his audience demands it.

“In an American movie, you can blow up the White House. We cannot blow up (Tiananmen) Square. It’s different. But the audience wants to see a lot of exciting visual things. So I think the leadership will think about that.”

He’s asking for the freedom to film China’s own “Independence Day,” the freedom to blow up anything without fear of political blowback.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Academy Awards, Dalai Lama, Evan Osnos, film censorship, film distribution, film industry, hollywood, Lou Ye, Lu Chuan, oscars, Richard Gere, SARFT, Tiananmen Square, Tibet, Titanic
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The original film, based on the novel of the same name, spanned 172-minutes long for European and American markets but was cut to just 137 for its mainland version, according to the film’s directors.

[…] “Although the mainland version is a bit constrained, [we] fully believe in the regulator’s editing standards,” said Cloud Atlas co-director Tom Tykwer, who was in Beijing on Tuesday to promote the movie ahead of its January 31 release.

[…] Material deleted mainly comprised of love scenes, gory sequences and nudity. A number of same-sex love scenes between actors Ben Whishaw and James D’Arcy were also cut from the film due to the Sarft’s strict ban on homosexual content.

Details of changes to the latest Bond film, Skyfall, also emerged last week following its belated Beijing premiere. While The Atlantic’s Matt Schiavenza dismissed the edits as “little more than a government tailoring a popular film for its audience“, Xinhua reported that the altered film had prompted calls for a less capricious censorship process:

Shi Chuan, a professor from Shanghai University’s school of film & TV arts and technology, proposed the enaction of relevant laws and the establishment of norms for movie censors to follow.

[…] “Movie regulators should respect the producers’ original ideas, rather than chopping scenes arbitrarily,” Shi said.

However, he said that he believes the censorship system is necessary for China’s film industry.

[…] During an annual session of China’s political advisory body held in March last year, Yin Li, vice chairman of the China Film Association, said Chinese film-making faces too many restrictions regarding sensitive topics such as public security, diplomacy, ethnic minorities and religion.

“I hope China can offer more freedom to film-makers so that a more favorable environment can be created for the country’s movie industry,” Yin said.

While money from the mainland has attracted attention recently, SCMP’s Vivienne Chow wrote that Cloud Atlas‘ financing suggests a role for Hong Kong in the global film industry:

According to veteran Hong Kong filmmaker Philip Lee, an executive producer of Cloud Atlas responsible for its fund-raising in Asia, Hong Kong has a unique edge in film financing, especially in the Asia-Pacific region.

“Hong Kong is the Asian financial centre and has a long history in filmmaking. With more collaboration with foreign projects or companies, knowing how to find the right match is very important, and Hong Kong has the expertise,” says Lee, who served as an associate producer of the international hit Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and a line producer for Batman film The Dark Knight during its filming in Hong Kong.

[…] “The mainland certainly has capital, but can they find the right people? Not necessarily. Hong Kong can be more active in bridging this gap,” [Media Asia's head of distribution Ricky Tse Chi-keung] says.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Beijing, censorship, diplomacy, ethnic minority, film censorship, film industry, films, hollywood, Hong Kong, movie industry, movies, public security, religion, SARFT
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The missing scene was set in Shanghai, when a French hitman (played by Ola Rapace) is shown shooting a Chinese security guard in the elevator lobby of a skyscraper before preparing for an assassination.

Later in the film, in a casino in Macau, Daniel Craig’s Bond questions the story’s femme fatale, Severine (Berenice Marlohe), about whether her tattoo is the result of her being forced into a local prostitution ring at an early age. While the lines remains intact on the soundtrack, the Chinese subtitles suggest the spy is asking her about being coerced into the mob instead.

The film’s Chinese subtitles also fudged the exposition of the back story of the film’s villain, Raoul Silva (Javier Bardem), who tells Bond how he was handed over to the Chinese authorities while working for the MI6 in Hong Kong. He adds that he suffered immense torture at the hands of his interrogators before attempting to kill himself.

Increasingly, content likely to hurt the feelings of the Chinese people is being removed during production, often in consultation with officials.

Bloomberg’s Tim Culpan, meanwhile, reports that genius inventor Tony Stark will be outsourcing some of his gadgets in the forthcoming Iron Man 3:

In a product-placement deal for Paramount Pictures Corp.’s third Iron Man movie, Robert Downey Jr.’s character Tony Stark will battle his latest nemesis, the Mandarin, using TCL’s products. Some real-world features, such as handheld devices interacting with televisions, will be replicated on-screen.

[…] “I believe our new generation of products are as good as those from Samsung and Apple,” Tomson Li, TCL’s chairman and co-founder, said in an interview at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas last week. “This Iron Man cooperation is very useful for us to promote the TCL brand in the global market, including the U.S. and China.”

To support the marketing effort, Li sealed a deal last week to rename Grauman’s Chinese Theater in Los Angeles as TCL Chinese Theater, buying naming rights for the cultural landmark along the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: consumer electronics, film censorship, film industry, hollywood, macau, movie industry, Shanghai
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

[…] Paramount Pictures just learned the hard way that some things won’t pass muster — like American fighter pilots in dogfights with MIGs. The studio months ago submitted a new 3-D version of “Top Gun” to Chinese censors. The ensuing silence was finally recognized as rejection.

(“Political disapproval?” wondered the Times’ Edward Wong. “Or just good taste?”)

Mr. Cohen’s “Mummy” film, which was shot throughout China in 2007, was a historical fantasy about an evil emperor who is magically resurrected by foreign adventurers in 1946. The script was preapproved by China’s censorship board with only token changes — the emperor’s name had to be fictionalized, for instance. The censors also cautioned that the ancient ruler should not resemble Mao Zedong.

In a 2011 Web post, Robert Cain, a producer and consultant who guides filmmakers through China’s system, described having worked in Shanghai on a romantic comedy that went off script; the director included a take in which an extra, holding a camcorder, pretended to be a theater patron taping a movie on a screen.

The next day, Mr. Cain and others involved with the film were summoned to the office of a Communist Party member who told them the film was being shut down for its “naïve” and “untruthful” portrayal of film piracy. Assuming they had been reported by a spy on their crew, the producers apologized and managed to keep the film on track.

As tricky as dealing with SARFT may be for foreigners, it is all the more so for Chinese filmmakers. Last year, director Lou Ye described the tortuous process of securing approval for Mystery, a film he ultimately disowned in protest.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2013. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: cinema, film censorship, film industry, films, hollywood, Mao Zedong, movie industry, piracy, SARFT
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

But in the last few years, more and more filmmakers like Yang have been trying to carve out a new middle ground: They are developing scripts for art house-style movies that can win a “dragon seal” (Chinese censors’ official stamp of endorsement). As the number of these government-approved indie films grows, a nascent Chinese industry — production houses and exhibitors — is emerging to support them.

The trend is not without its detractors, who fret that a new generation of filmmakers may be sacrificing its artistic integrity. But Yang and others say independent filmmaking in China can be broader than just underground cinema.

While non-dragon seal films can be sold only overseas or online, Yang said applying for a dragon seal, so that a film can be screened domestically, does not necessarily mean making a deal with the devil.

Among members of the younger generation, though, there seems to be an expectation — perhaps naive, perhaps practical — that they will simply hop back and forth between the two worlds of dragon seal and underground independent film with little conflict.

Indie films in China continue to run into trouble with the government with the power outages earlier this year at the Beijing Independent Film Festival. While the “dragon seal” is available for filmmakers, other filmmakers, such as Lou Ye, have taken a more confrontational approach when dealing with government censorship.

See also “Devils on the Doorstep”: Film Censorship Up Close, via CDT.

© Melissa M. Chan for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: dragon seal, film, film censorship, film industry, Lou Ye, SARFT, yang jin
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The delay points to a central quandary regarding culture in China today. Officials want to impress the world with its richness, but they also want to manage it as they have managed the economy, and this constant meddling leaves culture in a deeply uncomfortable place, suspended between genuine creativity and political correctness, between greatness and mediocrity.

In film, weak ideas, often because of political restraints and bowdlerized scripts, and delayed openings because of lengthy censorship are weakening the ability of Chinese directors to attract audiences. As foreign imports increase, people are voting with their feet and domestic movies are slipping financially.

[...]

To try to change that, film bureaucrats said last week that the National Film Development Fund would return its 5 percent cut of box office takings to theaters that show more domestic films, in a kind of reward.

Yet in a sign of what officials really intend, at the same news conference, Sun Zhijun, deputy head of the party’s Propaganda Department, said: “Some media organizations and people believe that deepening the cultural reform is for the purposes of making the culture an industry and wholly market-based. This is not true.”

In an accompanying blog post, Tatlow writes about the difficulties of parsing out why censors choose to restrict one film over another. For more on how State Administration on Radio, Film, and Television censors films, see the text of a decision to censor the 2000 film Devils on the Doorstep, via CDT.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: art censorship, film censorship, film industry, SARFT
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The SARFT decision, written in 2000 when the movie was released, offers a rare glimpse into the decision-making process of SARFT, which is responsible for overseeing and censoring the content of movies released in China. It explains in detail, almost scene by scene, the reasons for banning the movie.

On his blog China Copyright and Media, Rogier Creemers has translated the full document. From Creemers’ introduction:

Normally, censorship decisions are not made public, and their content is only revealed by reference in interviews with filmmakers. However, this document provides an insight into some of SARFT’s methods and priorities.

The most important part of the verdict relates to the portrayal of Chinese villagers and Japanese soldiers against the background of the Second World War, or, using the Chinese term, the War to Resist Japan. Throughout, SARFT takes the film to task for incorrect depictions of the nature of the Chinese people. An old grandfather should not be shown as being sympathetic to a young Chinese soldier, it is deemed incorrect that the villagers care for the Japanese soldier and the Chinese traitor (汉奸 hanjian), or that they indicate that they haven’t really suffered under the occupation. When the Japanese soldier imagines being attacked by the villagers, he imagines them as Samurai. However, SARFT feels that what he should feel most are “the armies resisting Japan, such as the Eighth Route Army or guerrilla forces”. Imagining villagers as samurai “uglifies the Chinese people”. In short, in this film, the “common Chinese people” do not show sufficient hatred towards the Japanese, do not sufficiently differentiate between foe and friend, and display ignorance and apathy. At the same time, according to SARFT, the film does not correctly display the cruelty of the Japanese army but, amongst others, shows a Japanese soldier giving sweets to children. Also, “Japanese army songs are played often, putting a spin on the Japanese imperialists flaunting their strength, which may gravely hurt the feelings of the Chinese people.”

A smaller issue comes at the end of the film, where a Guomindang general declares that only the Guomindang can legally accept the surrender of Japanese troops. Again, this does not fit in official CCP historiography and is therefore beyond the pale.

Lastly, there are a few issues of obscenity and language. A sex scene between Ma Dasan and his lover Yu’er is deemed to “bring about strong, harmful sensual stimulation to people.” A scene in which the villagers’ pack donkey gets aroused by a Japanese army donkey is described as vulgar and boring.

The full translation is on China Copyright and Media.

© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | 2 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: arts censorship, film censorship, Jiang Wen, SARFT
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Over twenty days from September 8 to 26, Lou tweeted his negotiation process with SARFT [the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television]. At one point, Lou tweeted,

“I’m waiting for an answer: Can the film be released on time without any changes, yes or no? The answer is so simple but so difficult–[the process] makes me feel disappointed and sad, but I also feel a sense of understanding and support. China’s domestic film industry needs everyone to work together. I totally accept the fact that I’m a director in the age of film censorship. I just want a dialogue [with the authorities], and a dialogue is not a confrontation. There are no winners and losers in a dialogue. There are no enemies.”

[…] Lou’s exposure of the inner workings of China’s film censorship process and bold gesture attracted support from other filmmakers, artists, and average netizens in China. Another director named Zhang Jiangnan (@张江南导演) commented, “Every time I looked at my films after censorship, I thought about removing my name, but I can never be as resolute as Lou Ye. I keep a ‘director’s cut’ for myself to make me feel better. To tell the truth, it’s about getting used to eating [expletive]…” A film critic named Han Houye (@韩浩月) commented, “Lou’s removal of his name as director is like a hunger strike on the street.”

See more on SARFT and censorship via CDT, including a speech by writer Murong Xuecun on the “absurdities” of Chinese censorship.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | 2 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: directors, film censorship, film industry, Lou Ye, SARFT, sina weibo
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

Western studios are increasingly inclined to excise potentially negative references to China in the hope that the films can pass muster with Chinese censors and land one of several dozen coveted annual revenue-sharing import quota slots in Chinese cinemas.

[…] Mainland censors have long taken out scenes they deem culturally or politically offensive. In 2007, a Chinese pirate character played by Chow Yun-fat was removed from Disney’s “Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End” for its release in China. The character is bald, has a long beard and long fingernails. At one point, he recites a poem in Cantonese, not Mandarin, which Beijing promotes as the nation’s common language.

[…] “I’m not sure working with China is that different from working with a big studio,” said Michael London, an independent film producer who has had discussions with Chinese entities on a co-production. “I’m being partly facetious, of course. But I do think most producers in this climate have long since stopped looking askance at any entity that can help get their movie made. There are always going to be challenges and compromises.”

Censorship has not dampened the Chinese market’s response films to films such as Men in Black 3 and the recently re-launched Titanic, but many spectators are concerned about Hollywood’s growing chumminess with China. University of Southern California professor Stanley Rosen observed that Hollywood has become even more sensitive to the portrayal of Chinese people than the Chinese government. He worries that moviegoers could receive a positively-biased view of China.

The Diplomat also reported on Hollywood’s “kowtowing” to China in February. These concerns flared up particularly strongly last October, when human rights groups protested against Relativity Media’s decision to film in Linyi, Shandong, near the site of blind dissident Chen Guangcheng’s illegal house arrest.

© Wendy Qian for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Chow Yun-fat, film, film censorship, media market, USC
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

… In 1997, the scene where Jack draws the nude portrait of Rose was completely uncut and displayed on a wide screen in China, which was deeply registered in the memory of Chinese. 15 years later, when Titanic sails into the cinema again, the nude scene was removed by Chinese censors.

Many moviegoers find censoring of the nude painting scene unacceptable and ridiculous, “It wasn’t deleted 15 years ago. Why delete it now?” “I didn’t wait 15 years to see a three-dimensional iceberg!” Net user “Cambrian” wrote, “I just want to use a cliché that so many people in their school days love to use, the wheel of the history is spinning, however, it turns out it is only backpedalling ….”

Some even lampooned the state watchdog with a satirical news story, “The State Administration of Radio, Film and Broadcast finally gave an explanation of its decision to remove the nude scene it OK’d 15 years ago: ‘In light of the specialness of 3D movies, we are concerned that viewers may extend their hands for a touch during the scene and hit heads of viewers sitting in their front, which may result in disputes. In consideration for building a society with spiritual civilization, we decide to remove the scene.’”

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: censorship, cinema, film censorship, hollywood, SARFT
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

China is the fastest-growing movie market in the world, with box-office receipts in 2011 rising 29% from the previous year to break the $2-billion mark. Yet film criticism here remains a practice stunted by corruption and bribes, state censorship and the culture’s emphasis on personal connections, or guanxi, that makes penning negative reviews hard to do. Consumers aren’t in the habit of reading reviews, in part because they are attuned to the fact that the government, and filmmakers, work to ensure only articles they endorse see the light of day.

As such, the young and tech-savvy are increasingly turning to online forums, where outspoken views are easier to come by. Registered users on Douban, China’s largest website devoted to movie, music and book reviews, topped 53 million in 2011 ….

But the Web is not always free from censorship. When the film “Beginning of the Great Revival” was commissioned to mark the 90th anniversary of the Chinese Communist Party last year, Douban and Mtime disabled their star rating system and user reviews. The move was an apparent attempt to squash sardonic comments from Internet users about the historical epic, which was seen as heavily propagandistic.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: bribery, cinema, Douban, film censorship, film industry, SARFT
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall

The manuscript of a book usually needs to be reviewed at least three times by the publishing house. Depending on the subject matter the General Administration of Press and Publications (GAPP), various propaganda departments and other government agencies may also be involved in the approval process. Television and movie productions require the approval of the State Administration for Radio, Film and Television (SARFT) ….

“I stay away from sensitive topics, because I don’t want my work to go to waste, nor do I want to be forced to say what I don’t intend,” said Qiu.

Qiu said he has turned down requests to write about China’s civil war. His father was on the side of the communists, while his in-laws supported the nationalists. “I know quite a bit about both sides, but I can’t write about it in a way I would approve of myself,” he said.

“It’s not possible to comply with the rules and stay true to yourself,” said Shi Kang, whose novel Fendou (Struggle), about the post-1980s generation, was made into a popular TV series. “We are the mouth and throat of the government, have to be,” he said fatefully.

See also Murong Xuecun on the “absurdities” of Chinese censorship, and another Global Times article on censorship of imported materials, via CDT.

© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | 3 comments | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: censorship, film censorship, history, SARFT, television, writers
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall