Group 4 Blog 4

Thanks to getting hosted by the Ethnic Studies librarian, Sine, we got access to multiple kinds of sources including books, newspaper copies from the 80s, mail receipts, and more. We decided to focus this blog post on examining Chan is Missing (1982), which was programmed in the early stage of the festival, and analyze how this film revealed transnational cultures and reflected the state of the Asian American film at the time.

Directed by Wayne Wang in 1982, Chan is Missing is referred to as the turning point for Asian American films, reversing the public’s general impression of Asian American films being stigmatized solely as “social documentaries.” The movie narrates a story about Chinese American identity through the lens of two Chinese cab drivers on their way to search for a figure “Chan.” This journey later turns into very tricky and imaginary investigations that display the complexities of Asian American identity. The plot consistently places the main character at the crossroad between Chinese and American culture to reflect the contradictions between the different cultures. From the angle of consciousness of the people, use of language, and even food in life, Chan is Missing demonstrates “Chinese-ness” and its uneasy assimilation with local features. The movie was well regarded as “undermin[ing] Hollywood’s historical repertoire of Chinese stereotypes” (Erin Franziska Hogerle) and it brought its contribution to the turnaround of the cinematic stereotypes by introducing the concepts of heterogeneity, fluidity, and contingency.

An interview with the director Wayne Wang by Renee Tajima and Walter Lew further revealed the first-hand disclosure of Wayne’s own views on the filmmaking process, intentions with the film, and how Wayne navigated himself in determining Asian American identity. Wayne sought to retain the most balance between cultures, mainstream or not, throughout the movie. The first layer of color highlights contradictions and the ever-changing character of the people in the film as a way to oppose the general stereotype of very fixated figures. Due to Chinese culture being much-overlooked, Wayne aimed for the chance to raise the audience’s attention and awareness of what Chinatown truly is like before introducing criticism of present racism and oppression. 

The movie, though conceived as a more unconventional narrative, had its own roadblock during the production as Wayne found it hard to express his ideas with the casted team each having quite different backgrounds. Wayne admitted to sacrificing a lot in order to adjust the film into a more standardized narrative style to achieve an easily accessed sense of understanding for the public. Wayne’s choice to go forward with this change shows that he valued the cultural commentary shining through and making an impact more than any possible ego-driven attachment to his original artistic imagining of the film. Ultimately, this correction might have benefited the movie from straying too abstract and theoretical, risking viewer alienation. Instead, this narrative change helped the viewer become more receptive to the movie’s Chinese elements, giving the audience the chance to appreciate and contemplate Chinese identity and cultural contrast.

One noted subversion is the film’s characterization of Chinatown itself. Where Hollywood films at the time have created a stigmatized view of Chinatown, Chan is Missing shows Chinatown as “resolutely ordinary - a place of neat middle-class apartments, well-lighted inexpensive restaurants, busy kitchens, language schools, sunny sidewalks and one center for the elderly” (NY Times article). This NY Times article is a really interesting primary source because it’s a review of Chan is Missing from 1982, the year of the film’s debut. It reflects early sentiments and reception of the public at the time. The article goes on to describe Chan is Missing’s use of humor as, “like everything else in the film, used to illustrate the film's quite serious concerns. These are identity, assimilation, linguistics and what one hilariously earnest young woman, describing Chan's argument with a traffic cop, defines as ''cross-cultural misunderstandings”” (NY Times article). Ultimately, this review shows that Wayne’s reluctant changes and intent for the film worked as the cultural contemplation, as well as the other themes, were successfully communicated to the audience.

We believe that the intentions of this film truly highlight the early CAAMFest goals, which is why we think it makes sense for CAAMFest to screen this at its debut festival. It breaks the traditional American stereotypes on what it means to be Asian American, both in the narrative continent and in film form, making this film a pinnacle of cutting-edge Asian American cinema. It offers new opinions to the masses in a palpable way that beckons the viewer in. Chan is Missing redefined the scope of Asian American film both for Asian American cinema itself and for the onlooking masses.

Sources:

Asian American Films and Filmmakers (author unknown) (checked out at Ethnic Studies Library)

Asian American Film Festivals by Erin Franziska Hogerle (checked out at Ethnic Studies Library)

NY Times “FILM: 'CHAN IS MISSING' AT CINEMA STUDIO” -- A version of this article appears in print on June 4, 1982, Section C, Page 11 of the National edition with the headline: FILM: 'CHAN IS MISSING' AT CINEMA STUDIO -- https://www.nytimes.com/1982/06/04/movies/film-chan-is-missing-at-cinema-studio.html

Wayne Wang in front of Chan is Missing cinema sign photo: https://privilegeoflegendsblog.com/2021/01/04/chan-is-missing-a-search-for-cultural-identity/