“Yes Man” Says Yes to Stereotypes
by Guest Contributor Jehanzeb Dar, originally published at Islam on My Side
I really wanted to like this movie.
With its heartfelt message of optimism and living one’s life to the fullest, I thought “Yes Man” would be a film I could enjoy and appreciate after a week of exhaustive finals and papers. Yet it turns out that the film is filled with thoughtless and ridiculous stereotypes that make me feel anything but optimistic.
Before I saw the film, I already detected some suspicion about the film. A good friend of mine had read the book of the same title and told me the author was motivated to “say ‘yes’ more” by an Indian man he met on a bus. The Indian man’s religion is not disclosed, but it could be argued that the Indian man was Muslim since the author searches for him at one point in the book and finds himself in a predominately Muslim part of town. Oh, and did I mention the book takes place in England?
Not only does the film adaptation take place in the United States, but it also removes the Indian and potentially Muslim character. Instead, the man who inspires the protagonist to “say ‘yes’ more” is a White English man played by Terrence Stamp. The producers must have felt that the audience wouldn’t have made a connection with a wise and inspirational Indian/non-White character.
After Jim Carrey’s character starts saying “yes” to everything, we see him checking his e-mail at work and one of the spam messages reads: “Persian Wife Finder.” An Iranian woman wearing a pink hijaab (headscarf) appears on the screen, while puffy clouds are on time-lapse in the background, and says “I am Faranoosh” as if she’s some kind of character you can select from a “Tekken” video game. As she rotates her body to make herself look alluring, the wind blows her scarf into her face, mocking the way Iranian women supposedly dress and drawing ridiculous laughter from the audience.
What was up with that, Jim?
The other pathetic thing about the scene is that Arabic music – not Iranian music – plays in the background of the video (I know because I have that song, it’s called “El B’Nia” by Maghrebika). But who cares; Arabic, Persian – same thing, right? Or is this movie excused since it’s supposed to be humorous?
The problem about that argument is that we see very few positive representations of Iran/Persia in Hollywood cinema, let alone about Muslim women who wear hijaab. Many people don’t know, for example, that there is a significantly large portion of Muslims, including scholars, who believe the hijaab is not mandatory. Regardless if Muslims believe it’s mandatory or not, there is hardly any positive treatment by the media whenever a Muslim woman is wearing hijaab. She is seen as being oppressed, restricted, uneducated, and, as depicted in “Yes Man,” a piece of property. We never see a strong and three-dimensional female Muslim character, especially if she’s wearing hijaab. For example, did anyone hear about the recent report of Lisa Valentine, the Muslim-American woman who was thrown in jail just because she refused to remove her scarf in a courtroom? How’s that for courage?
Later in the film, we see Faranoosh sitting with Jim Carrey’s character at a restaurant, indicating that the two of them got married. Another character asks who the Iranian woman is and Jim Carrey responds, “Oh that’s Faranoosh,” and then simply says he found her on “Persian Wife Finder,” as if any random Iranian woman is going to fly overseas and marry a man she knows nothing about. Iranian and Muslim women are degraded into objects here, as if they can be purchased and easily married off to anyone who clicks “yes” on a computer screen. Faranoosh is a thoughtless and dull character who just sits in the background. She might as well be a clown since every close-up of her only triggers laughter and scoffs from the audience. You know, it’s a point-and-laugh-at-the-backwards-Iranian-woman kind of thing.
At a time when Islam is being constantly vilified by the mainstream media and when Iran is on America’s “axis of evil,” you’d think filmmakers would be more responsible in their representations of Muslims and Middle-Easterners. Every time I saw Faranoosh show up, I wanted her to get off the screen because of the way people were laughing and scoffing at her. Many of the attendees were adolescents, whom Jim Carrey is very popular with, and I can’t imagine what kind of impact this stereotypical and silly representation of a Muslim character will have on teenage Muslims, especially in predominately non-Muslims areas like where I live.
Iranians and Muslims weren’t the only groups that were stereotyped. Koreans and Latinos were also misrepresented. The female Korean character, for example, was shown as a depressed victim of not finding her “special someone,” so at the end of the film, she gets hooked up with Jim Carrey’s promiscuous and sex-crazed friend whom, by the way, she knows nothing about. The Latino character, with his stereotypical accent since, of course, all Latinos have accents, is standing on a ledge and threatening to kill himself.
What would have happened if the film kept the wise Indian character that inspired the author to say “yes” and live life to the fullest? Wouldn’t that be a step in the right direction since all we see South Asian people do in mainstream films and television is run “Quick-E mart” stores and gas stations? The stereotypes are so prominent that it makes me think the discussion at the producers table probably went a little something like this: “You know what? Let’s cut the Indian character out. Let’s make fun of foreigners instead.”
Thumbs down, Jim Carrey. I say no to “Yes man.”
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
serenitynow78 wrote:
I am not surprised, considering this guy cut his teeth on “Handi-Man”…
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 9:16 am ¶
Roseanna wrote:
When I read Danny Wallace’s “Yes Man”, I have to admit I baulked at the epiphanic scene where the Indian man on a bus advises Danny to say “yes” more. To me it seemed to mystify this nameless man, partly on the basis of his ethnicity, an impression only solidified by the protagonist’s later attempts to track him down by following his movements through Brick Lane on the assumption that the manon the bus was, in fact, the Maitreya. Overall I was reminded of so many discussion about the “Magic Negro” motif. However, something about the way the whole thing was done eventually convinced me that the author was actually making fun of himself for persuing a course that relied on the idea that an Indian man on bus would be imbued with mystical powers. Wallace plays the innocent fool and ultimately turns any “Magic Negro” implication on its head.
I haven’t seen the film, and after this I doubt I will, since it seems like it may well lack the kind of subtelty I found in the book…
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 9:50 am ¶
Mary wrote:
@Roseanna: I haven’t read the book (or seen the movie), so I’m glad you talked about the bus driver in the original story. I found myself wondering if it was a form of the “mystical Indian guru” stereotype.
As for Jim Carrey… not surprised. Something about the humiliation of the Latino hoodlums in “Bruce Almighty” really hit me the wrong way. I think because we were supposed to cheer with righteous laughter when Bruce used his god-powers to get revenge… despite the fact that Bruce is a massively self-absorbed jackass and it was hard for me to feel sorry for him or take his side. It kind of felt like since there were few reasons to root for Bruce as a character, the “cocky Latin thugs harassing normal white guy” subtext was brought into play.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 10:39 am ¶
Roxie wrote:
I saw the movie, but I did NOT get the impression that they had been married at all! I percieved it as a lunch date. I also remember Faranoosh being more spunky than I thought she’d be, although not as fleshed out as I think she could’ve have been.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 10:57 am ¶
rust_check wrote:
This is a bit off topic as I have not yet seen this movie, but was wondering if you’ve seen Little Mosque on the Prairie? As I was reading the part in your article where you are bemoaning the lack of positive representations of women who wear hijab I thought of it. It is a middling sort of comedy but it shows a fairly diverse representation of muslim women (some wear hijab, some don’t, some are converts, some grew up in the faith). It is a CBC production.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 11:13 am ¶
Cara wrote:
I really love the book (and agree that Danny Wallace was mocking himself regarding stereotypical beliefs about the Indian man), and was so disappointed when I saw previews for the movie. It clearly had nothing to do with the plot of the book and was starring, well, Jim Carrey. The hilarity in the book rarely comes from physical humor, and I knew the whole thing was just going to get ruined.
I do recommend the book, though. Very funny.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 11:14 am ¶
Rchoudh wrote:
This movie’s premise sounds too much like that other Jim Carrey movie, “Liar, liar” I think it was. Apply, rinse, repeat.
As for the Faranoosh character I don’t know what to think. What are they trying to make fun of here? The mail order bride industry? Muslim women? Muslim women as mail order brides (Is there such a thing???) It seems Hollywood’s slowly including Muslim women characters (as the butt of stupid jokes).
@rust_check
I heard of LMOTP but I’ve never watched it, being American and all. I did hear that they’re trying to make an American version of it. Hopefully it’ll be funny unlike “Yes Man’s” Faranoosh character.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 11:42 am ¶
rob wrote:
Dont you think the scarf flying up into the face thing is just slapstick? I cant see that it is mocking, just a visual gag.
As regards the music for the purposes of the film i really dont see how it matters that the music was not quite correct for the scene. The music is not a message, it is just an aural backdrop for what is on screen. The fact that it is a comedy film definitley reduces demand for accuracy in such areas.
Faranoosh’s role is as a supporting actress to jim carey, so its maybe not suprising the character is not as deep as you may wish.
Remember its a hollywood comedy and everybody knows you dont look to such films for anything other than mild comedy relief. The studios just arent going to make the sorts of films the contributor wants to see. Why not think about learning how to shoot your own films. The cost of equipment is low and all the tutorials are available free on the net. ok so you may only make one short film but if you really love film and are not satisfied by what is on offer have a go.
also, i think the assumption that the indian character is a muslim ma be errenous. I dont know how long ago the book was written but a very large proportion of indians who came to britian in the 70s and 80s were hindu. The muslim population in the uk has increased significantly only in the last 10 15 years.
Mod Note – This is a site that critiques race and pop culture. It is the sole purpose for this site existing. Responses like “you don’t look to such films for…” are unacceptable because pop culture shapes and influences how we see the world. If you do not wish to discuss these topics, I suggest you go elsewhere, but any further comments in this vein will be deleted. – LDP
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 11:52 am ¶
Cynthia wrote:
RE LMOTP: The first season is available on DVD at both the US and Canadian Amazon sites.
Now back to our regularly scheduled program.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 12:18 pm ¶
Roxie wrote:
I believe the website presentation was more a joke about those sorts of website than it was about the character herself. However, she was definitely there to be laughed at (as was the older white female neighbor), that’s undeniable, I think.
@Rchoudh: The premise is not at all like “Liar, Liar” imo.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 12:19 pm ¶
Roxie wrote:
@Rchoudh: Also, I believe you can find clips of LMotP on youtube.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 12:21 pm ¶
Sobia wrote:
Thanks for the review Jehanzeb. I still have not seen the film but have read the book and to be honest had no problems with the ways the book handled race and ethnicity. The film sounds very different from the book.
@rob:
When Danny Wallace goes looking for the Indian man he ends up in a “Muslim section” of town. I am not familiar with the city, but there is mention of a mosque and men with beards. Also, this book is very recent, within the past 5 – 10f years.
And, I have no idea where you came up with the “muslim population in the uk has increased significantly only in the last 10 15 years.” From my understanding Muslims from South Asia have been the UK just as long as Hindus have.
And yes, it does seem you have completely missed the point and purpose of this blog.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 12:24 pm ¶
Jehanzeb wrote:
Thanks for the comments everyone!
@ Roxie – If you remember the interrogation room scene, the FBI agents mention that he married Faranoosh.
@ Rust_Check – I’ve only seen one episode of “Little Mosque on the Prairie,” which was on YouTube. I live in the United States, so we don’t get it here. From what I remember, they portrayed the Muslim women positively. I heard it’s a hit show in Canada, so I’m sure it has done a lot to break stereotypes and misconceptions. Too bad we don’t have anything close to that in the United States.
@ Rob – The problem with saying “it’s just comedy” is that there haven’t been very positive images of Muslim women in Hollywood films. There is no alternative presented to break the stereotypes. In my small suburban town, I remember kids making fun of Asians and South Asians based on the images they saw in television and popular movies. I was bullied by others and called “Apu” throughout grade school. I was asked stupid questions like, “Does your dad own a Quick-E mart” while my Korean friend was called “Mr. Miyagi.” The worst part is that students, especially in elementary school, feel shunned and alienated. Just imagine a young hijaab-wearing Muslim women getting picked on in school based on the images in “Yes Man.” I totally see people asking stupid questions like, “Are you on Persian wife finder?”
And by the way, I *do* make short films. My anti-smoking commercial played on MTV for the month of July in the Philadelphia region, I won $200 for a short film I made in high school, and I’m currently wrapping up a short film right now where you will see a positive depiction of a Muslim woman. My previous student film dealt with racial profiling against Muslims, including a Muslim woman who wears hijaab.
And it doesn’t matter to me if the Indian character was Muslim or not. I just said that he *may* have been Muslim. Regardless, the filmmakers decided to replace the Indian character with an Englishman.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 12:37 pm ¶
Monie wrote:
Would a devout Muslimah randomly date a non-Muslim guy? That’s my first question and I’m assuming that Faranoosh is somewhere in the devout range considering she wears a hijaab.
I suppose that’s a detail that the filmmakers over-looked because of course every (non-American, non-White) woman wants to date an American White guy, right.
Regarding films that portray Muslimahs in a positive way: I thought Monica Ali’s Brick Lane was brilliant.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 12:49 pm ¶
Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! wrote:
Well, that seals the deal for me. Fuck anybody who thinks it’s okay to make a mockery of my fellow Muslim sisters.
I’m so fucking sick of Hollywood and American media. I’ve had it.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 1:18 pm ¶
Ugly Deaf Muslim Punk Gurl! wrote:
@ Rob: why don’t you try to re-read that article? this is RACIST MOCKERY of a minority character in an American film (with a white leading guy), where the audience is probably made up of ignorant, white people who have never met Muslims or Iranians.
on the other hand, if this was done in an Iranian film with Muslim actors, targeted at a Muslim audience, it’ll be a different story. It would be funny in an acceptable way, unlike “Yes Man.”
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 1:20 pm ¶
Phrone wrote:
Yeah, the Iranian mail-order bride in the trailer was a big warning for me. I’ll have to pass.
@Monie: Someone who is actually Muslimah might be better able to answer this, but, in my understanding, there’s not a lot of correlation between wearing hijab and being devout. (A lot of devout Muslimah’s feel that it is not mandatory, some Muslimah’s wear it because it’s what their families want; there’s lots of reasons.) And, if she is a mail order bride then it may be that she simply isn’t allowed to choose or reject offers — I don’t know how the sites are run and I could be wrong, but they don’t seem like they would be very respectful of a woman’s autonomy.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 1:52 pm ¶
Roxie wrote:
@ Jehanzeb: TBH, I cannot recall. All I can say is that I didn’t get that impression from them having lunch. Which how I percieved what was written here.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 2:25 pm ¶
Jenn wrote:
Also, don’t forget the Korean nurse character who buys the motorcycle to help compensate for perceived lack of masculinity due to being a male nurse. Do you really think it was a coincidence that an Asian male was cast in this role of someone with masculinity issues? Cause I don’t.
Faranoosh’s character was less then one dimensional, and she was treated like a piece of furniture by the other characters – with distain. The “joke” really only makes sense if the Faranoosh is perceived as a ridiculously unlikely/undesirable match. Think the producers could have attempted the same joke using any number of supposedly unlikely/undesirable stereotypes (fat/old/Amish/ect…) It was dehumanizing, and very angering.
I hadn’t been to a movie in several months, and was a bit overwhelmed by the number of stereotypes.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 3:58 pm ¶
Erica wrote:
Thanks for the review — I wasn’t planning on rushing to see it in the theaters, but was expecting to stick it in the Netflix queue (thus, at my current rate, watching it sometime in 2011?). I certainly won’t bother now. There are plenty of ways to fill two hours of funny with a guy who has to say yes, why bring in dumb stereotypes?
I enjoyed the few episodes of Little Mosque that I was able to find on YouTube, but they aren’t all online. The sitcom side of things was pretty cheesy and predictable at times, but the characters made up for it. Unfortunately, I’m afraid of what an American version might look like.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 8:54 pm ¶
MK wrote:
Wow, Hollywood portraying non-white people as stereotypes and the butt of jokes? Who would have thought?
Seriously though, this kind of shit does affect people more than is given credit for. I would say much of it is subconscious; subconscious acceptance of negative stereotypes. It also seems to make it OK for any type of person, whether Muslim, Asian, Latino, etc. to be mocked without consequences. It’s like being racist towards them isn’t really racism, ’cause Hollywood and the media says it is OK.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 9:39 pm ¶
Rchoudh wrote:
@Monie
Generally devout Muslimahs whether covered or not as Phrone indicated, would not date and/or marry any men NonMuslim or Muslim because premarital sex and relationships are forbidden in Islam. That is one glaring error the moviemakers didn’t bother noticing.
Posted 05 Jan 2009 at 11:31 pm ¶
yami990 wrote:
i saw this movie right after Christmas and it was had tons of stereotypes in it. i was quite sickened by how many were in there but at the same time i couldn’t help but laugh at some of them. it’s just quite sad that the guys i saw it with wouldn’t even try to understand why i found it so offensive. it was worse then when they accused me of trying to start a fight for thanking the rude girls next to us for ruining the movie with their behavior of coming in halfway and then texting the whole time disturbing everyone with the lights on their phones.
Posted 06 Jan 2009 at 2:53 am ¶
michelle wrote:
maybe if the indian character was in the film then the director would have made him sterotypical. I didn’t find it offensive that a korean character was sad about not finding her mate. or the korean guy felt bad for being teased by his type of career even the spanish character being suicidal. it isn’t a stereotype of korean men to be nurses, in fact it reminds me of ‘Meet the Parents’ where the main character was laughed at for being a nurse. and i never knew it was a stereotype of the spanish to be suicidal or the koreans to be lonely. if u want to nit pick how about the old white lady with no teeth giving BJs for kicks, or his white friend going crazy for throwing a brick at the glass wall and his white colleague being extremely nerdy. can u count those of being unrepresentative of whites?
the persian wife thing was out of line though
Posted 06 Jan 2009 at 9:12 am ¶
Jenn wrote:
@ michelle: Its not stereotypical for a Korean to be a nurse, but it is absolutely stereotypical to cast an Asian male as someone with issues with his masculinity. Asian men are constantly presented in mainstream media as being less masculine then other demographics. I think that putting the Asian male, in the male nurse role and then playing on the misogynic and hackneyed theme that men shouldn’t be a nurse theme – plays into this racial stereotype.
Posted 06 Jan 2009 at 10:08 am ¶
Carol wrote:
For a thorough look at how Muslims and Arabs in general are depicted in U.S. pop culture, I highly recommend the works of Jack Shaheen. He’s been talking about this topic for years. He does focus more on the male Arab, but the critique is interesting. He’s written “The T.V. Arab”, “Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People”, and his most recent is “Guilty: Hollywood’s Verdict on Arabs after 9/11″.
Posted 06 Jan 2009 at 11:41 am ¶
Jehanzeb wrote:
Rchoudh,
I wouldn’t say premarital relationships are forbidden in Islam, there are just certain limits that need to be set (and I’m not talking about having a third person present, I don’t believe in that).
But that is the whole stereotype in the movie: Jim Carrey’s character MARRIES Faranoosh because that’s what Muslims do. They don’t date, according to the stereotypes. They just get married, and get to know each other afterward.
It suggests that all Muslims and Iranians are “backwards people” because they get married without getting to know the person. There *are* more traditional families that are fine with arranged marriages and people live happily, but people need to understand that NOT all Muslims are like that. Arranged marriages are part of culture, NOT the religion of Islam.
@ Michelle – Of course those were stereotypes about White people, but they’re the dominant race in the movie. The protagonist is White (and a very popular actor in Hollywood). Who are we, the audience, sympathizing and empathizing with? The White male protagonist, of course. We’re not sympathizing with characters like Faranoosh.
Posted 06 Jan 2009 at 6:20 pm ¶
Rchoudh wrote:
I should clarify further what I meant. You’re right to say that Muslims don’t all get married through the arranged marriage route. Oftentimes someone may find someone they like through work or friends. In that case what I meant to say was that a relationship can develop between two interested parties provided it is not a casual affair (both parties must be serious about getting married) and I meant to emphasize that no premarital sex should be involved. This is in regards to Muslims who practice their faith properly.
Posted 07 Jan 2009 at 12:35 pm ¶
Rebecca wrote:
Interesting post. I guess I was wearing blinders because I felt like I had a mainly positive experience watching this movie (except during the groan, roll your eyes parts where Jim Carrey was basically playing Jim Carrey). But the part with the Faranoosh character did bother me. It seemed as you say like she was just a set piece that we were supposed to laugh at, like “HAHA FOREIGNERS ARRANGED MARRIAGES HAHA…” It just made me feel awkward. It was supposed to be so great that the Jim Carrey character was saying yes to more things and opening up his life, but I’m sorry it’s no longer endearing when you say yes to basically buying a wife. It’s just creepy.
Posted 08 Jan 2009 at 10:19 pm ¶
Peter Pan wrote:
Great post, horrible stereotypes by Jim.
Posted 09 Jan 2009 at 5:53 pm ¶
audacity wrote:
“We never see a strong and three-dimensional female Muslim character, especially if she’s wearing hijaab.”
Watch “Paris, Je Ta’ime.” Might cheer you up a bit (not that that movie was mainstream).
Posted 10 Jan 2009 at 12:34 am ¶
Sam wrote:
“Faranoosh”? That means “FRENCH KISS”.
Wow.
Posted 14 Jan 2009 at 10:27 pm ¶
Persian Belle wrote:
Dear writer of the article,
THANK YOU!!! MY FEELINGS EXACTLY!!!
I rented “Yes Man” to watch… I thought it may be a nice film… however the racist undertones (which apply to Iranians as well as Koreans) remind me of two of Jim Carrey’s previous titles: “Dumb…” and “Liar…”
After the Islamic Revolution in Iran which took place in 1979, there has been a mandatory Islamic dress code in effect in Iran, even though this is NOT the way Iranian (Persian) women dress at home outside of Iran or even in Iran in their homes. In the recent movie “Yes Man”, an Iranian woman living in the USA is portrayed as a woman who wears the hejab (generally not true) and even described as “strange”. She is not seen by the other characters (and as a result by the viewers of the film) as a woman with worth and dignity. She is this “strange” woman who dresses in a peculiar way and tolerated a non-exclusive dating relationship who is taken on a date but “totally not his type”. Her role in the movie only provides the background for the police to question Jim Carrey about having links with terrorists. The Persian dating website in the movie features women with scarves on their head… Very disappointing for filmmakers who live in North America and “hopefully” have seen how Persian women dress when not under the gun in Iran!!
This is a huge insult everyone of Iranian/ Persian descent. “Yes Man” portrays a Persian women as an Islamic fanatic, worthless, strange, uninteresting, and a possible link to terrorism.
One must wonder what is on the agenda of the makers of this movie… and WHY???
Posted 12 Apr 2009 at 2:44 pm ¶
Sobia wrote:
@Aryan:
WTF??? Why are you bringing your hatred of Persians here? And on an anti-racist site of all places! How did this one get through??
“But in real life, Persian people drink alcohol, eat pork and loose their hijab (scarf) [that is forced by the government] as soon as their flight takes off from Tehran.”
Where did you get this information from? Where is the research showing this? You need to back up your rude comments with some evidence. And anyhow, doing those things does not mean the person is not Muslim. If some people do, its none of your business.
“Look at the Persians outside Iran to see real Iranians. You may see Arabs, Pakistani or Indian people wearing hijab or covering their hair. ”
Headscarf is NOT a sign of a Muslim. MOST Muslim women do not wear the headscarf. That does NOT make them less Muslim. To say you know a person’s religiousness by a piece of cloth in their heads is ludicrous at best, self-righteous and arrogant at worst.
“there is a BIG difference between Persians and Arabs,”
So? Who cares? What’s your point here? I’m a South Asian Muslim woman who does not believe the hijab is mandatory and I show my ankles! By your assessment I would not be a Muslim.
By your assessment then only Arabs are true Muslims, because they can “understand” the Qur’an (even though the Qur’an is in classical Arabic which no one speaks nowadays). Anyone who does not speak or understand Arabic is not really a Muslim. Well, you do know that the vast majority of Muslims do not understand Arabic, right? Arabs are only 20% of the global Muslim population. Oh right, but only Arabs are real Muslims according to you so I guess they are 100% of the Muslim population.
Aryan, you have broken nothing to us all except that you’re hateful person.
Mod Note – Ooh, sorry Sobia! Early morning moderation means we didn’t read that one as closely as we should have and didn’t notice the “Arabs” comment. It’s been removed. – LDP
Posted 13 Apr 2009 at 9:04 am ¶
Persian Belle wrote:
From the point of view of someone of Middle-Eastern descent, TWO main issues when it comes to us:
1. That’s now how Persian women dress outside Iran (in Iran, there is mandatory Islamic dress code in effect, enforced by the Islamic government). That’s not how they meet guys or marry!!!
2. Regardless of the ethnicity of the character “Farnoush”, she is someone who wears the hejab and is dressed like a muslim.
If at least her character were treated with dignity, then I would say that the only problem would be the previous issue that I mentioned above (#1). But this muslim woman (regardless of her ethnicity) is seen as someone who is just looking for a husband, seen as “strange”, and treated like a very unimportant character… Almost comical… To show us that, hey, you don’t just say “yes” to everything; you may end up on a date with an Iranian woman!!!
It’s a shame that Hollywood allowed this.
Posted 13 Apr 2009 at 9:49 am ¶
Jehanzeb wrote:
Persian Belle,
Thanks for commenting! I’m glad others feel the same way about the movie. I just wanted to say that I had an Iranian friend who wore hijaab (and she lived in the United States). She was nowhere near a “religious fanatic” and she told me that when other Iranians see her, they think she works for the government, lol.
I would probably say that most Iranian women don’t wear hijaab, but that doesn’t mean they’re not Muslim either. In the movie, they make it look like (1) this is how all Iranian women dress (which we know most do not dress that way) and (2) all Muslim women who dress that way are fanatics and can’t think for themselves.
@ Sobia,
Wow, it sounds like someone went on an anti-Persian tirade. Good job calling him out on it!
Posted 13 Apr 2009 at 10:27 am ¶
Sobia wrote:
@ Latoya:
No worries. Thanks for removing it. In some ways its good that there was an opportunity to challenge his/her assertions.
Posted 13 Apr 2009 at 11:22 am ¶
sara wrote:
I could not agree more, I was so upset when I saw the movie. It was as if the persian woman had no value, as if she was not even a person, and there was just no chance that jims charachter in the movies friends could believe that she was “jims” girlfriend. She was humorous just because of her origins and culture.
I just cant understand the reasoning behind the racist plot of the movie. I am a Persian woman myself and this movie really offended me. I am very happy to find that others agree with me.
Posted 13 Jun 2009 at 2:55 pm ¶
Christopher wrote:
While I do agree that the portrayal of muslims (especially middle eastern) is quite negative in Hollywood, I found this movie’s intention to be comedic, not stereotypical.
Noone’s upset about the elderly promiscuous woman, or the stereotypical tough guy in the bar, the awkward nerdy boss, or the overly artsy hipster female lead?
Obviously not here, because they are all white. This follows the old rule that it’s okay to make fun of yourself, but not other people’s ethnicities.
If you’re making a comedy and you have a diverse cast, people may see minority characters as racially insensitive, but I think it’s more racist to have an all white cast.
Mind you, I am a black American male.
Here’s the impression I had of Faranoosh. Being a former theater student, I simply found it a remotely funny situational bit about how saying yes can get you in an awkward situation.
There are many ethnic dating sites and while the name persian wife finder may have unfortunate connotations, I couldn’t think of a name that sounds more outrageously ridiculous (as in, this obviously isn’t a real website).
Did anyone catch that the other website was for penis enlargement? That’s certainly not stereotypical at all for white males… not the least bit…
anyhow, when Faranoosh was on the date with Jim’s character, she really looked pissed off, as if she assumed Jim was Iranian or muslim and seemed clearly displeased to be in the situation, but she warmed up to him when he showed kindness to his friend’s fiance.
to me, it struck me as situational comedy where he ends up on a blind date (he didn’t marry Faranoosh) with someone completely opposite. There aren’t much more opposites then western american and middle eastern cultures. The only other way for the joke to work would have been to have been on a date with a very plus sized black woman and believe me, that joke has been done to pieces.
that’s the impression I got from the movie, it didn’t make me want to go out and make fun of muslims or anything like that, although I empathize with the author’s concerns.
my personal impression from the movie was that all the characters in the movie (except maybe the best friend and his fiance) were there to be laughed at
Posted 26 Jun 2009 at 5:54 am ¶