“Crazy Rich Asians” Tops Hollywood Box Office

With the growing demand to see more diversity in Hollywood films, Michelle Yeoh’s (楊紫瓊) Crazy Rich Asians and Li Bingbing‘s (李冰冰) The Meg performed well at the box office.

After opening with an impressive $26 million in US theaters last weekend, Crazy Rich Asians is expected to be the number one film again in its second week. The film has grossed $51 million in the United States to-date.

Crazy Rich Asians received much media buzz since announcing that a movie adaption of the popular novel was going to be made. The film boasts an all-American-Asian leading cast for the first time in 25 years since The Joy Luck Club.

Under the directorial leadership of Jon M. Chu (朱浩偉), Crazy Rich Asians generated a lot of hype in both the United States as well as in the Chinese market. The film marks an important milestone in the American movie industry, serving as a gateway for more opportunities for future Chinese stars who hope to break it intoHollywood.

In addition, Li Bingbing’s The Meg has surpassed expectations, grossing over $300 million globally.

“Crazy Rich Asians” Trailer

Source: On.cc 

This article is written by Huynh for JayneStars.com.

Related Articles


  1. It’s doing really well! Hope this elevates Asian actors permanently.

    Everyone seems to be talking about it. I had to turn off NPR because they were going to discuss spoilers. My loser (j/k) friends can’t seem to agree on a time to go see it with me so I hope I can finally see it this week.

    1. @potatochip As of today, CRA is at $58 million and counting…awesome numbers right there!

      It’s definitely true that everyone is talking about it, though for me, I’ve been reading / watching everything I can get my hands on about the movie, since I read the book so I already know what happens anyway (even if not, I love spoilers so I would still do the same thing anyway).

      Also, not really a spoiler but more like a fun fact: keep an eye out for one scene (can’t say which scene) that features a ring in it — that ring is Michelle Yeoh’s ring in real life (she lent it to the production crew last minute because she didn’t like the one they were going to use).

      1. @llwy12 she’s crazy rich Asian xD my physio said her sister is disappointed in the movie because it’s too Hollywood 🙁 and it’s not as good as she hoped it to be, soooo don’t have too much high hope >_<

      2. @littlefish Yea, pretty much already anticipated that…like @funnlim said below, from a movie making perspective, the movie is far from “excellent” but to me, the important thing isnt whether it’s a well-made movie but rather the effort and sincerity that was put in to make it. There are many reviews that have said the movie overall is enjoyable and entertaining, but that it does try a little too hard — I’m fine with that, as it’s a rom-com after all so I don’t expect it to be like award-worthy or anything like that. The fact that a Hollywood rom-com features an entirely Asian cast (which is virtually unheard of, as the general consensus amongst Hollywood producers is that American audiences don’t want to see an Asian person as a romantic lead) yet still manages to be universally relatable (you don’t have to be Asian to relate to the relationship woes that Rachel experiences) — that’s really the main objective of the movie.

      3. @potatochip And don’t forget to stay through the closing credits because there is a teaser scene in there for the sequel (the one that is based on book 2, which is currently in development). 🙂

      4. @llwy12 hahaha, that’s good to hear your positive thoughts! I love myself some romcom, too! Can’t wait for it to be out on video demand, as I can’t watch it at the cinema >_< kids and cinema don’t work lol

  2. Michelle Yeoh was awesome. Henry Golding was bland as prince charming but all prince charming are bland. Singapore doesn’t look or feel like singapore. There;s a difference between rich and crazy rich as shown in this movie but nothing is even remotely realistic, not the ending. I am surprised with the storyline of Astrid which was more impactful than the fairy tale love story of our main leads which weren’t convincing not because it isn’t good but not enough time given to it. Too many unnecessary side stories. I know it boasts an all Asian cast and finally maybe chinese playing chinese etc etc especially for Hollywood where we often see Asians as kung fu guy or chick or sexually repressed female in male dominated world. so this movie was a welcomed change but for Asians who grew up on TVB, J drama, and especially K drama and definitely Bollywood movie, we have had our fill of rich guy poor girl chilly mom in law in super duper cheabol world. This movie, a lot of reviews said culture clash as in westernised asian girl and asian asian people. I see it more like wealth clash. Rich is the new royalty and this series makes wealthy rich people seem like a porn film. It at times is just money money money. I was hoping to see more of Rachel and mom or mom with son or mom with mom in law but so many other unnecessary stuff going on it was very touch and go. But the ending was kinda nice but would have hoped for a more “Asian” ending like how Elenor said it even if it is against every core value of Rachel’s life. Nice to see some good bods in this movie.. pierre png was interesting! But I am thinking what does daddy Young thinks of Rachel?

    Anyway I enjoyed it, even if malaysian censorship kinda almost butchered it but it isn’t an excellent movie like the PR and reviewers love to say it is. It feels lacking and in the end typical. I was disappointed everyone speaks with either american or english accent except for Michelle Yeoh and Pierre Png who sounded authentic. Singapore or even Malaysia were used as backdrop but for me this could have been made in Wakanda and I wouldn’t know the difference. Curse me if you will, it doesn’t feel asian to me. It is just Crazy Rich People to me, those people that the majority will never know. I think more could have been said about Rachel Chu. I don’t see why a super rich guy will want to abandon his family for her but in the end there is a small scene, very small but feels like an afterthought, like how TVB drama will end it.

    But Michelle Yeoh was chilling best. The rest is just kaching.

    1. @funnlim Agreed that Michelle Yeoh gave the best performance— but that’s expected given she’s the only A-list actress in the cast.

      And personally, there’s nothing wrong wth your reaction to the movie —in fact, you actually picked up on the universal nature of the movie (meaning the characters’ experiences weren’t necessarily exclusive to being Asian), which technically was the whole point of the movie (and the book). The movie was actually meant for a non-Asian audience and given the majority of box office sales so far have been largely that audience (in the U.S., only about 40% of the ticket sales so far are from Asian audiences — unprecedented numbers of course given Asians/Asian-Americans typically only make up 8-10% of the audience, but taken as a whole, still majority non-Asians watching the movie).

      Astrid’s storyline will actually be covered in more detail in the second movie (which is already in the works). The director Jon Chu gave an interview where he said they deliberately pared down Astrid’s story in this movie because the intention is for her to get her own platform in coming sequels (hence the teaser during the closing credits).

      Overall, I think the reactions to the movie will be different depending on whether the person watching is Asian or Asian-American (or Eurasian or any part Asian) or not — and in some cases, probably won’t get a true reaction because some people (non-Asians specifically) may be afraid to say anything bad.

      The funny thing is…back when Joy Luck Club came out 25 years ago, the film was widely lauded by critics and majority audiences, but Asian Americans bashed it as an embarrassment…while things aren’t as extreme with Crazy Rich Asians, I’m not surprised to see that the reaction from Asians / Asian-Americans (some not all) is different from non-Asians watching the movie.

    2. @funnlim Yeah, definitely not realistic. Like, who plays 1950s Chinese music at a 2010s party.

  3. Btw…the producers turned down a multi-million dollar deal with Netflix (which not only guaranteed a payout of millions to the cast and crew, but also guaranteed the other 2 books Kevin Kwan wrote would be made into movies as well) — instead of taking a guaranteed payout, they decided to take the risk of releasing the movie in theaters because they wanted to reach a wider mainstream audience. Looks like the risk was worth it given the general acceptance of the movie with mainstream audiences.

      1. @littlefish Me too! To be honest, I’m not too concerned with whether the movie was well-made or not (though I do applaud them for going to great lengths to get things right given the limited budget — for example, the dumpling scene, Jon Chu actually had a dumpling making party at his place so everyone could learn and practice how to make dumplings; also some of the aesthetics such as the spices in the kitchen and stuff, they were careful to avoid stereotypes where they could — I saw an interview that talked about how Michelle Yeoh was walking through the kitchen during setup of a scene and spotted a bottle of MSG and was like, um, no way, that bottle needs to go!). I’m just happy that there is finally a Hollywood production with an Asian cast that doesn’t involve 1) whitewashing (white person playing Asian character) and 2) cultural stereotypes (i.e. kung fu guy, weak subservient Chinese girl, etc.). Also have to praise Michelle Yeoh’s performance — she was very careful not to make her character a “typical tiger mom” Chinese parent…

        One thing I thought most interesting — the most important scene in the entire movie (the mahjong scene), which is the scene that has gotten the most universal praise by both “native Asians” and Asian-Americans alike, actually wasn’t even in the book…I read an article that broke down that scene frame by frame and can’t help but praise Jon Chu and the scriptwriters’ ingenuity with the way they put together that scene…

      2. @llwy12

        One major breakthrough was the addition of handsome and desirable Asian males characters, which is a rarity in typical Hollywood productions. Too bad Godfrey Gao, whose mom is Malaysian Chinese, wasn’t in the cast .

      3. @msxie0714 So true! Though in terms of representation, I also feel that some people are expecting the movie to be all things to all Asians, which is unfair because it’s impossible to achieve all that with one movie. The cast is actually pretty diverse already as far as Asians go, as most of the countries / territories in Asia are already represented in some way from the largely mixed raced cast (members of the cast hail from China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Philippines, Singapore, Malaysia, Japan, Korea, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, etc…and that’s just to name a few…). That in itself is pretty significant.

        I’ve been reading how the movie was able to get multiple generations of Asian-Americans to go watch at the theater. A woman in her 30s (middle class immigrant) said she took her mom and dad to go watch the movie (she had already watched it twice herself) — her parents hadn’t been to the movies in nearly a decade but agreed to go and to her surprise, her dad actually cried during the movie because he was able to relate to a lot of what was going on. Some of the critics panning the movie claim that it focuses on the super wealthy Chinese (the 1%) and so ordinary folks who aren’t crazy rich won’t be able to relate but that’s so not true — a lot of ordinary people are able to relate to the movie in their own ways…like with the character of Rachel, she’s a strong-minded, educated American woman whom people think is a typical ABC but actually she respects the Asian value of putting the family ahead of the individual and that’s reflected in her actions in the story. The story is actually about Rachel’s journey in coming to terms with her own identity as an Asian-American and how it’s possible for both aspects of her identity to co-exist…the crazy rich part with all the extravagant sets and clothes and food and stuff is just the backdrop for the story.

        With all that said, I saw the below article about how “native Asians”and Asian-Americans have different reactions to the movie (which of course isn’t surprising):

      4. @llwy12 “It looks like a film about Asians, but the spirit of it is American. The leading actress is an ABC. The story is about how Asians look in the eyes of the Americans.””

        Lol someone totally missed the point of the movie >_> like it means to be an ABC! And I might not know the book, but it will be American but with Asian values in her way of dealing with things?!!!

      5. @littlefish I actually laughed when I read that article….the movie hasn’t even been released in China yet and already people there are “complaining” that the movie sucks? While it’s true that the reaction from audiences doesn’t have to be all positive, the ones who are hating on the movie need to at least give a sensible argument. The fact that Mainland China translated the title (I make the distinction because the Chinese title is different in places like HK for example, which translated it closer to original meaning) with the word “gold-picking” in it (which reads too close to “gold-digging) to me already shows that no one there read the book and I even question whether any of them actually watched the movie (anyone who read the book and/or watched the movie would know that the story is NOT about a “gold-picking unexpected romance”).

        But overall though, I’m not surprised that “native Asians” living in Asian countries would have a different reaction than Asian-Americans or those living overseas. A movie like this is a “novelty” in the Western world whereas in Asia, it’s just a run-of-the-mill romance similar to what they see all the time. Also, the “native Asian” experience truly is very different from the Asian American experience. Even so though, I still disagree with what that user said because there are definitely Asian (more specifically Chinese) cultural elements in the movie…it’s NOT a movie “how Asians look in the eyes of Americans”…if anything, it’s more of a story of how Americans look in the eyes of Asians (ie: Rachel as an American trying to gain acceptance from Nick’s native Chinese family), lol….

      6. @llwy12 I somewhat disagree – I am an ABC, and have basically never lived in Asia all my life (although I have visited several times), but I would say that I also think the movie is “how Asians look in the eyes of Americans” (or at least a large part of it).

        There were many silly stereotype things that I was surprised, given the all-Asian cast and numerous Asians working in the crew, no one thought were silly or unrealistic. For example, someone mentioned in the thread somewhere about how unrealistic it is to play 1950s music in a 2010s party – a small thing, but I would say a bit stereotypical since the 1950s music is a lot more “Chinese” sounding than current music to non-Asian viewers. I also found it very strange how they kept on putting up these really old-fashioned Chinese lanterns in events like a wedding… who puts up those lanterns except on Lunar New Year? The vibe I got was that they were making a 90s version of China (just to prove it was in Asia rather than in America) rather than a modern version of Singapore, which was really odd to me.

        I don’t think that it’s much of a story of how Americans look in the eyes of Asians, since no Asian-Asians I know would look down on a university professor… To be fair, they also happen to be crazy rich (haha) so I guess that would be the difference. I think the story was based more around the differences in wealth between the main character as opposed to the differences in culture.

  4. I’m going to watch “Crazy Rich Asians” on Tuesday. To be honest, the trailer doesn’t really stand out and looks to be a very standard rom-com. After reading the feedback above, I can see that my initial impression is correct. But will still support it at the box office.

    1. @jayne the trailer is indeed standard feeling, but Michelle Yeoh makes you want to see it xD keep us an update or review once you finished seeing it please xD

      1. @littlefish I finally got to watch “Crazy Rich Asians” tonight. The film had little surprises in terms of plot, following a pretty standard formula in which Rachel meets objections from Nick’s family and ex, and has a loveable BFF sidekick.

        The film spent a lot of time on the extravagant partying ways of the elite rich of the Young family, and would have benefited with more meaningful dialogue and heart.

        The scenes I liked the most were between Michelle Yeoh and Rachel, and Astrid’s confrontation with her husband. Nick is just eye candy, and seemed to be only a prop in the story as his scenes are all pretty forgetful.

        As the movie played on, and Rachel got more objections from everyone that she and Nick are a poor match because of their class differences, I grew increasingly uncomfortable. The film actually had very little humor and played extensively on the class differences. The ending is expected, but unrealistic especially given how much time it had spent setting up everyone’s objections against Rachel. I think it would have had better closure if there was a confrontational scene between Michelle and Nick, in which Nick did more fighting for the love of his life. Or if Rachel put up a bigger fight. Everyone seemed to be accepting of the cards they were dealt, even Astrid.

      2. @jayne thanks for your insight, Jayne. I thought I saw a bit of fighting between Nick and Michelle in the trailer, but that was not enough? Nevertheless, will still see it, you should write an article about it 🙂

  5. Actually, rather than Crazy Rich Asians, I think that the most appropriate title to describe the book/film is Crazy Rich Chinese Singaporean. Asians is too broad spectrum with many different ethnicity. As Southeast Asian Chinese, I’m curious and want to see the movie, but my friends who are not Chinese, have no interest because they feel the movie doesn’t represent them.

    1. @windy Yes, I agree that the title does not accurately represent the movie itself, but it was used as a great marketing hype to attract a wide range of audiences. Sitting at the theater when the movie ended, I actually felt disappointed for other Asian viewers who came to see the movie, and may have hoped to see other non-Chinese actors/actresses.

      Movie should be titled, “Meeting my Singapore Mother-in-law.”

    2. @windy The only problem with that title is that the movie (and the book) actually doesn’t represent Singapore completely, as people there are complaining that the minority groups of Malays and Indians have only minor servant roles in the movie. It’s basically the reverse of the situation in the U.S. — Asians (more specifically Chinese) are the minority race here in the West (specifically in the U.S.) but in Singapore, ethnic Chinese are the majority race (meaning they hold all the positions of power)…so audiences in Singapore don’t really care about seeing a film about an ethnic group that is already in power over there. Similar setup with most of the other Asian countries / territories, which is why the movie hasn’t gotten as good reception over there as it has here in the U.S. (though so far the movie has grossed over $8 million in markets outside of the US. and Canada, so it’s actually not doing too bad, considering there are still many places where the movie hasn’t opened yet).

      I saw the below MSNBC clip from a few Asian commentators about the movie and I have to say I agree with what they are saying in that the point of the movie is not to represent the ENTIRE Asian community or to tell the story of every single Asian out there — instead, what this movie does is open the doors and provide more opportunities for those Asians to tell their own stories in the future.


      Sidenote: As of today, the domestic (U.S.) total for the movie is around $77 million, which is fantastic! 🙂

  6. Watched it in Canada last wk. Didn’t like it.

    IF it’s a Cinderella rom-com – there are wayyyy more enjoyable entertaining ones in the HK and Korean movie world, which leave the warm-fuzzies. This one didn’t, sorry.

    *spoilers ahead*

    1) it is a feather in the Asian-American world maybe. I definitely preferred Joy Luck club – it had way more depth and meat to think about.

    2) while a beautiful free ad for Singapore (yes the night scenes are that beautiful) – it’s hardly a true reflection of Singapore. where is the unique melting pot of cultures/languages?

    3) sure, we have the very rich but it’s so shallow and kind of pretentious portrayal. Singapore has really kick-ass capable educated career women … no one burns bras there but feminism is very much alive and kicking. We have vocal women, and women at the helm rise based on meritocracy.

    3) cringed at all the Brit accents. It’s like a movie showcasing ABCs and CBCs.

    4) enjoyed Awakarfina most … at least this is one person who is self-aware and self-deprecating, amidst the pretentious rest.
    all that education – for shopping, gossiping, spas and WTF … putting dead bloody fish in someone’s bed?! SG women put to utter shame.

    5) as for Astrid … so much for being the one held in such high esteem. what does she do with herself, besides read to her child? hide Jimmy Choos and go shopping for $1.2 million only earrings?

    6) all the Law degrees on show only for dowry purposes? I under Eleanor (many tai-tais were just the women behind) but Astrid on the pedestal too? she comes across as a flower vase.

    7) there’s a come-uppance vibe to it which may be long a-coming (up yours the Colonialist mindsets and marginalization Asian-Americans experience) but yet I find the London scene kind of distasteful (the smugness). Graciousness is more classy.

    8) And I am left questioning the confusing cultural identity to it all. If one knows Singapore – no one ever baos jiao-zi 包饺子 (dumplings) – it’s a very China thing my China friends here would more likely do. The locals would more likely wrap po-piahs (our local very delish Spring roll) – I grew up in childhood with po-piah parties.

    And jiao-zi is Northern China at that. Heck, we hail mainly mostly from South China in Singapore. We do not eat much dumplings. Even if we eat dumplings … it will be more likely soupy silky wontons!

    That is 1) so a very first generation thing, and 2) few old grandmas of that first generation (Lisa Lu) speak Mandarin – they would speak their own individual dialects, be it Hokkien Teochew or Cantonese (I speak all 3, thanks to Singapore) and yes English and Malay too, if Peranakan. I am 4 generations in Singapore … and none of my grandmas and great grandmas ever spoke Mandarin. 😛

    9) Not normally a fan of Michelle Yeo (her accent would pass off in CRA as a Hongkonger, rather than local Singaporean) but her acting was top-notch decent. Henry Golding was pretty blah. My other favorite person was Awkarfina, lol … the “Asian Ellen”.

    Watched this movie mainly because I am Singaporean and supportive … but went in expecting it to be somewhat vapid, and didn’t leave dissapointed. It was very Hollywood. And rather than Crazy Rich Asians … maybe it was tongue in cheek for Crass Rich Asians?

    1. @nomad822 Actually Michelle’s accent is authentic Malaysian. HK-ger speaks even stranger accent, more lazy. Since singapore and Malaysia is close, I will say her accent sounds like Singaporean.

      I thought Singaporeans do speak Mandarin? I am not sure what sort of race Mr Young (the father) is, but since they are crazy rich, I assume they will get their education and accent from England. Just that this movie shows a very tiny section of Asians, those super rich.

      1. @funnlim

        Canto-speaking KL Msian maybe? It has a Cantonese tinge to it. Many of the old-timer Hkgers here (been in Canada for the past almost 30 yrs) kinda speak English like that.

        Yes I speak and write Mandarin fluently but that came from school … NOT my parents/family background. My mom was quite horrified when I came back from Pri 1 with a 1 or zero in Chinese spelling actually! Hence came along all the many yrs of Chinese tuition teachers – but it was really through years/wkends of watching sappy Taiwanese movies in the 70s that I picked up most of my Mandarin. And through related songs, and later Taiwanese dramas 😛 I managed to get through O Levels with A in Mandarin, and B at A Levels … from that first O.

        I am Peranakan … and armed with Teochew, Hokkien, Cantonese, and Malay too … all those came from family, nannies etc. but certainly NOT Mandarin. Neither maternal nor paternal families had Mandarin.

        Which makes it weird there too – bec the Youngs are supposed to be many generations into SG too. So at least 3-4 generations 😉 Or this Aunty here, is a fossil.

        Yes Sporeans speak Mandarin but it’s a much later thing. Post 65 (SG Independence) … Mandarin was made Mandatory in school (which is why also many left for international studies abroad after Sec 4/high school – SG’s oversight. NUS was stringent with Mandarin being part of Uni admissions, and which is why most of us are bilingual, if not trilingual – my cousins picked up French, Japanese etc in their SG schools).

        Wise LKY saw Mandarin as a future bonding tie to do business with upcoming China back then.

        The older generations spoke Dialects which were gradually eradicated – they’re bringing it back ironically btw. bec without, it’s kinda colorless.

        Mandarin – whether the proper or pasar/market versions older folks/hawkers etc picedk up … became the more common language spoken by those who didn’t speak any English.
        But that was much later, I’d say 70s and beyond Even to this day, many of the older (and some stubborn) Seniors do NOT speak Mandarin but varying dialects. And all hawkers will know those Dialects, beyond the ‘unifying’ Mandarin.

        And I’d say few – if they hailed all the way from generations ago (as mine did) would bao jiao zi (that’s a very Asian American thing and it’s northern China. Msian/Sporeans are from South China). Even the HKgers here would not bao jiao zi (bao Wontons maybe? :P)

        Which makes the cultural identity of the setting really weird for me. On top of those somewaht pretentious Brit accents. 😛

        And the regretful lack of what I consider one of Singapore’s successful beautiful qualities – the multicultural harmonious ‘rojak’//salad of cultures was NOT shown.

        Having lived abroad – each yr I head back home to SG – I see Spore as so much more colorful beyond the glitz – not just multi-languages, but the actual harmony amongst the different races who know about each other’s cultures – religions, festivities, food etc. That real multi-cultural exposure. (have way too many instances of Asian friends here, or CBCs asking me weird things about Indian food – like do they wash their hands, or displaying total ignorance about Muslims).

        When they say Diversity in Canada – they actually mean WHITE-washed Assimilation (kinda like how Rachel Chu is) or in older generations … Segregation

    2. @nomad822 I’m confused about making dumplings scene too. Who in the world do that in Southeast Asia except for maybe newcomer from mainland. I don’t know about Singaporean. But all old rich Chinese I know here play bridge (in fact, the richest man here is bridge athlete for Asian Games 2018). I almost never hear about mahjong. And yeah, the old generation will probably speak Teochew or Hokkien dialect at home.

      But this is only movie, catered to global audience and certainly not for reality.

      1. @windy you never heard of mahjong? Like… how could you never not heard of mahjong lol. Idk about SG but any HK family would know mahjong, and there are a lot of HK aboard lol. I’m not even a Chinese, but Vietnamese, and got taught how to play by a white guy who date a HK girl for 10yrs. Apparently mahjong is their pass time game.

        Anyway, dumpling is indeed more a Chinese thing, I notice a lot more dumpling making scenes in Chinese drama/movies than anywhere else. I don’t know the book, so maybe the family came from China? Just because it’s not common, doesn’t mean it couldn’t be true?

        Same with the mandarin speaking thing, either her family came from China, or that, as part of business, they have to speak mandarin so they just use it. And for simplicity sake, they would pick mandarin as there are more people speaking mandarin than one of the dialects. Remember this is a movie made for a wide audience, not just for SG.

        So maybe they pick the mandarin for the family and try to establish they are Chinese, and that’s why they need to do the dumpling scene.

        Also isn’t Michelle Yeoh Malay/SG? I have a few SG friends, and she sounds fine to me

  7. Spoiler alert.

    As an Asian American, I liked the movie. The protagonist is an American born Chinese. The movie was about her journey to Singapore and her experiences trying to get her boyfriend’s rich Singaporean Chinese family to accept her. It didn’t matter to me how “Hollywood” this film was, as it was made in Hollywood in America, and catered to the typical Hollywood movie goer. The glitzy larger than life scenes are in many Hollywood movies, which may not reflect reality but it may be what some audiences enjoy seeing. That’s why there are so many reality shows featuring rich people and celebrities, where some of the drama is made up or exaggerated.

    Some people wished that there were more scenes about family values and that the culture shock that the main character had, had more to do with financial disparities rather than race and identity. I think it has to do with both. Finances, yes, that’s why the movie is called Crazy Rich Asians. Ideas about the importance of family are also there. Michelle Yeoh explained that she teaches the family how to make dumplings to remember the work and sacrifices it takes to raise a successful family. Sacrifices that may include not marrying the person you love (Henry Golding giving up Constance), staying in Singapore to run the family business, instead of being free to selfishly pursue one’s passion in the states (as Constance said she was very passionate about her job). She didn’t think Constance would make a good wife because she didn’t think she will make those sacrifices for their family. Constance proved her wrong when she was willing to give up Henry Golding and his wealth for the sake of Michelle’s Yeoh’s family and Henry’s happiness (not having to choose between Constance and his family). Constance showed that she loved him enough to sacrifice her own happiness, and that she was courageous enough to tell Michelle she was doing so not because she was scared, but because she loves him. Also that she had the upper hand (on the mahjong table, and in their relationship with Henry), but was willing to give it all freely to Michelle. I think that already says a lot about Chinese culture, familial duties, and sacrifice. People who want something more in depth can watch Asian dramas, as you said there is more of that there. It’s also hard to compare an Asian drama that is many episodes long to a 2 hour movie. Also, most people watch romantic comedies just expecting a good time and entertainment, which is the type of genre this film is. It never set out to win an Academy Award.

    I think this movie did what it wanted to accomplish. The book on which this movie was based, was written by an author who grew up in the states. This is his story told through his lens. The movie made headlines in the media because it has been 25 years since the last Hollywood movie with an all Asian cast. It’s not meant to represent all Asian minorities out there, nor all different types of Singaporeans. Henry’s family is Singaporean Chinese, and rich as the title describes. Also, anyone of Asian descent in the states are classified by non-Asians as simply “Asian”, as most people can’t tell the difference between the different ethnicities of Asians. I think that’s why the author named his book Asian, instead of Chinese. As for other types of Asians, or those of non-wealthy backgrounds, there can be other movies featuring the stories of those people. It’s really hard for a movie to represent all Asians and all financial backgrounds in 2 hours and that’s not what the book was about. When the book was written, he didn’t expect it to be made into a movie. This is the story he wanted to tell. It’s sad that this movie is subject to so much criticism because of the hype of it being an all Asian cast.

    Also, most people feel this movie was a success because the goal was to create a Hollywood movie that non-Asians can enjoy and relate to, so that directors will cast more Asians in movies in the future. It was not meant to be an epic film, but to show Americans that a normal romantic comedy can feature an Asian cast, and still be enjoyable to watch. As of now, even Asian characters are played by Caucasian actors and actresses in Hollywood movies. Hopefully, in the future, race won’t be a consideration in any casting director’s mind as he creates his cast, even in movies that don’t feature martial arts, or anything specifically Asian. I hope the world can see that Asian Americans can also represent the American experience and perspective on common every day life experiences.

Comments are closed.