"Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" supports Western neo-colonialism in China
The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor
Directed by Rob Cohen
Universal Pictures
112 minutes
2008
Reviewed 2008 August
Most of the things that MIWS would like to say about "The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" it has already said about "The Magnificent Seven." In "The Mummy," people in an oppressed nation, China, welcome Europeans to help defeat a Chinese domestic enemy. Rick O'Connell's (Brendan Fraser) and Evelyn Carnahan-O'Connell's (Maria Bello) now-grown son Alex (Luke Ford) is a glorified tomb raider looking for the Chinese emperor Qin Shi Huang's remains. The emperor in this movie is portrayed as having conquered, enslaved, worked to death and capriciously killed people, and having been obsessed with holding onto power to the point of seeking out immortality. Alex, along with his parents, actually contributes to the unleashing of the "Dragon Emperor" and his forces by accident and is at first hindered in his work by a Chinese womyn (Isabella Leong), Lin, who turns out to be the daughter of a sorceress (Michelle Yeoh), Zijuan. The O'Connells themselves are initially distrustful of Lin. Lin and Zijuan, who has a special connection to the Dragon Emperor, have been guarding places that could be used to bring the Dragon Emperor back to life and power. Not surprisingly, Lin is also a love interest for Alex. The Europeans' involvement under the pretext of fighting a threat (the Dragon Emperor) to the whole world coincides with Lin's letting her guard down and falling in love with Alex (and escaping a tyrannical Chinese man). Rick and Evelyn originally thought they were just helping Britain to return an artifact to China for diplomatic reasons. The O'Connells were tricked into helping resurrect the emperor, but their intentions and involvement with the events that ensue in China are presented as being good, even if motivated by ego. Rick and Evelyn were getting bored with retirement and were a little foolish in rushing to go on another adventure, but are a force for good. The couple begin with a kind of diplomatic mission, with a supposedly peaceful aim, that happens to need extra security, but end up participating in a war.
"Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" has been getting bad reviews, on the surface for artistic reasons. The colonial white savior with a romantic interest is a story that has been played out a thousand times before, and MIWS can see why amerikans might be bored and focus on the cheesy computer-generated yetis. With the Beijing Olympics so close, though, to the movie's release (on August 1 and August 6 in many First World countries), one has to wonder what "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" means in terms of diplomacy and public opinion. Beside some marketing that directly connects "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" to the Olympics, anti-China rhetoric has been heating up in the united $tates. The timing of "Dragon Emperor" and another China movie starring Jet Li, "The Forbidden Kingdom" (2008), is interesting as they appeared when old and new questions about China were already on people's minds.
"Dragon Emperor" seems intended to please everyone in the First World, from people who want to invade China over Tibet to people who oppose anti-China jingoism as getting in the way of business interests and tourism. Tibet isn't mentioned explicitly, but pivotal moments are centered around "Shangri-La." Upon seeing the mythical lush paradise, treasure-hunter-turned-club-owner Jonathan Carnahan (John Hannah) declares that he would like to build a casino there. This does not put the Europeans in the best light, but it fits Carnahan's comical personality. Few in the First World would see this point in the movie as having redeeming value, and this speaks to how difficult it is for First Worlders to get anything of scientific value out of a movie. Brendan Fraser's character himself is an amerikan, and amerikans will likely identify with him, rather than the English Jonathan Carnahan character.
The emperor on which Jet Li's character is based died well more than two thousand years ago. However, ignorant and vulgar amerikans, including so-called leftists, see China as an essentially unchanged authoritarian society and even an "imperialist" society from ancient times to the present day. With the media criticizing China, naturally this has some reflection in the left wing of amerika. This takes the form of so-called leftists' and progressives' calling China an imperialist country without applying scientific definitions in a substantive analysis, and also calling Tibet a victim of Chinese imperialist oppression or Chinese conservatism and lifestyle prohibitions, with surrounding ideas about Tibet and the Himalayas being a mecca for white pot-smoking New Agers and climbers who want the ultimate high. Without sustained attention to their country's own parasitism and other features of imperialism, the nature of these amerikans' attitudes to China is chauvinist. Treating China as an imperialist country goes with defending the privilege of the Euro-Amerikan "working" and "middle" classes supposedly oppressed by both "globalization" and allegedly unfair Chinese economic policies.
At this time, there is renewed attention to China's "human rights" record with a focus (for certain reasons) on political repression and imprisonment (rather than other areas of "human rights" concern). That is with little attempt to discuss the First World's own prisons or how the First World benefits from repression in exploited countries like China. To be sure, First Worlders have privilege and are generally exploiters and oppressors, and most haven't been imprisoned. When a movie, such as "Dragon Emperor," raises the issue of historical and contemporary government persecution China, though, without any acknowledgment of the degree of imprisonment in the united $tates and historical and ongoing repression of colonized people both inside and outside u.$. borders, chauvinism toward China is the default reaction.
"Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" is partly set in Shanghai after Japan's defeat in World War II. Europeans have returned to Shanghai. When one thinks about whom the Chinese people actually fought and defeated in China between 1946 and 1949 in the real world, maybe the movie has some redeeming value. The opportunist General Yang character (Anthony Wong Chau-Sang), who wants to "unify" post-Japanese surrender China and be the Dragon Emperor's general, resembles some portrayals of Chiang Kai-shek. In the short time before the Olympics, MIWS would tentatively say that "Dragon Emperor" tries to be neutral toward or sympathize with the current Chinese government, which claims as part of their history the communists during the war of liberation and the war of resistance against Japan. The communists were opposed by u.$.-backed Chiang Kai-shek. To explicitly portray the conflict between 1945-1949 as between Nationalists and/or warlords, on the one hand, and communists would have been offensive to anti-communist amerikans. However, while steering away from being openly anti-communist or openly sympathetic, "Dragon Emperor" contributes to the image of the Third World as a violent, divided place in need of First World intervention. "Dragon Emperor" mixes ancient history, post-World War II history, and fantasy and myth, in such a haphazard, but narrow way, that many viewers will be left with no reference point and means for understanding the General Yang character and his second-in-command, Choi (Jessey Meng), other than as typical Third World tyrants.
It is typical of revisionist "Marxists" and other "leftists" nowadays to say positive things about Chinese communists before the Great Leap Forward and/or the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution, but get off the train when it comes to the Great Leap or the Cultural Revolution. Revisionists may accept or reject the current Chinese government as a revolutionary government, but emphasize pre-Cultural Revolution or pre-Great Leap gains. Even if "Dragon Emperor" were openly pro-"communist," it would be problematic. "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor's" ambiguity in regard to the current Chinese government may contribute to decreasing anti-China chauvinism and decreasing anti-Third World warmongering and hatemongering in general, but scientifically it should be understood that there is nothing objectively and specifically pro-communist about the movie. And, in being friendly to both amerikans and revisionists in the Third World, "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" is useful in the long term for building support for neo-colonialism.
"Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" and "The Forbidden Kingdom" have some similarities. One difference is that "The Forbidden Kingdom" directly refers to Chinese communists for a brief moment. If MIWS is not mistaken, Cultural Revolution-era Mao Zedong paraphernalia appears in the old man's shop in Chinatown where Jason Tripitikas buys kung fu videos and encounters a golden staff. If "Forbidden Kingdom" is better than the "Mummy" movie, though, it is because "Forbidden Kingdom" doesn't bother trying to combine fantasy and real world history. Jason magically travels in space and time between the united $tates and a mythical ancient China, but that is partly a plot device, a way to have a white youth be in that setting, and "Forbidden Kingdom" for the most part stays in fantasy land. At this time, the random movie that will get First Worlders excited about Chinese culture designed for tourists and Western consumption is probably better than the random movie that tries to be politically or historically relevant. Although, no influential movie about China released today will be politically neutral.
It is common to find items and various products bearing Mao Zedong's image and even the "red book" in gift shops and tourist markets. "Tourism" characterizes the nature of most First Worlders' individual engagement with things related to the Third World. The vast majority of First Worlders do not and will not side with the oppressed in any decisive struggle. Division of First Worlders, not unity of First Worlders, benefits the oppressed. First Worlders relate to the Third World through colonialism and neo-colonialism and by enjoying "culture" as tourists and colonizers. First Worlders travel to Asia and Latin America for food, the sights, and shopping, and for sex and/or to find a girlfriend. Others go to the Third World as businesspeople, Peace Corp members, academics, and activists, often thinking they are doing some kind of good, but carrying out imperialist objectives, when not sightseeing, having sex with "exotic" people, and engaging in other tourism. Westerners will travel to China for the Olympics and leave without being more enlightened about politics and economics.
Even Westerners who are not likely to travel to Asia fantasize about going to Asia as an exotic place and view Asian culture in a particular way. It is what leads to religion's or a mountain's coming to mind first when thinking about Nepal, and thinking of emperors and dynasties first in the case of China, as principally reflecting a certain culture. This culture-centered way of thinking about Asian places represents a tourist mentality. Westerners know about cultural things, disproportionately and removed from concrete and specific political and economic contexts. It has different consequences. In the specific case of Tibet, an alleged culture of authoritarianism of ancient origin is contrasted with a supposed, suppressed culture of religious freedom to rile up Western chauvinists against China and get them to support maneuvers against Third World nations. Something that "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" does that is somewhat unusual is directly combine a focus on Chinese emperors with a theme of struggle and war in recent, real-world history. "Tomb of the Dragon Emperor" evokes a tourist museum experience; unlike in an "Indiana Jones" movie, in "Dragon Emperor," artifacts that are discovered are found in a country that is itself central to the events of the movie, not just the land where important objects happen to be found. This may reinforce the connection between Westerners' knowledge of culture and actions toward another nation in a Chinese context.
With dragons, yetis and other fantasy in "Dragon Emperor," people years from now may argue for not taking the movie seriously, even as a movie released just before the Olympics. Also, some things that might be significant are arguably just plot devices, themselves not too important, or derived from the previous "Mummy" movies. Furthermore, a movie about a white family's almost singlehandedly saving the world (even if that involves an army of the undead) is both problematic, and common and to some extent unremarkable. At this time, however, "Dragon Emperor" serves short-term and long-term political needs.