MovieChat Forums > Princess Ka'iulani (2010) Discussion > Disgraceful Title

Disgraceful Title

posted 15 years ago by sk4ek
26 replies | jump to latest

Over the course of the past year, I've followed the discussion (in the papers) by the producers of this film about what to call it. After all that, I find it disgraceful that "Barbarian Princess" is the best they could come up with, and equally disgraceful is the excuse given that "...most people...will not be able to pronounce 'Ka'iulani'..."

This hearkens back to the Hollywood of the 30s and 40s, with ersatz "natives" carrying spears and with bones through their noses, tossing white virgins off a crater rim into a raging volcano, and completely contradicts the truth of an educated, enlightened (if naive) representative of the people of Hawai'i.

All the argument about casting--and yes, it wouldv'e been great if they could have found a woman of native Hawai'ian ancestry to play the role, but they didn't (and I don't know how hard they looked)--should fall by the wayside in light of this poorly considered title.

[–] svache 15 years ago

I totally agree, there are probably much better titles to choose from, which they should have. The name 'Babarian Princess' gives people a complete different view on her of what she really was: a beautiful civilized and smart woman.

[–] mfivejude-1 9 years ago

the movie itself explains where the barbarian came from,and it is totally disputed in the film.
as for not having a Hawaiian actress if you googlt the pictures of the princess it is amazing how much alike they looked

[–] nammage 8 years ago

I did give props for that. They look as if they're related to each other.

-Nam

I am on the road less traveled...

[–] UnderPressure 15 years ago

Barbarian Princess is what the US Press called Ka'iulani in the 1890's. I think this title will make people think, especially those who are unfamiliar with Hawaiian history and who don't know anything about the annexation. The title and the poster image contradict each other in a very interesting way, too, that should really make people understand the story of what happened.

"I can bring them all back."

[–] Buddy_Biancalana 15 years ago

UnderPressure is absolutely right. The title is meant to be stirring. The filmmakers are not glorifying the "Barbarian Princess" moniker, they are ridiculing it. And I think it's wonderful that someone is shining a light on the U.S.'s ignorance toward Hawaiian culture at a time when they were overthrowing Hawaiian rule.

To call "Barbarian Princess" an offensive title without seeing the film is almost as ignorant as calling Princess Ka‘iulani a Barbarian Princess.

[–] mamo_a_hina 15 years ago

Do you have the actual paper name? I'm curious to see what they said about her & if that was the case referring to her as a barbarian.

[–] rasmussed001 15 years ago

Aloha kakou!

The title refers to a San Francisco Chronicle article that was published at the time of Princess Ka'iulani's return journey home to Hawai'i after being educated abroad in England - her sojourn there lasted many years and this is the quote from the paper:

"A barbarian princess? Not a bit of it. Not even a hemi-semi-demi-barbarian. Rather the very flower - an exotic - of civilization. The Princess Kaiulani is charming, fascinating, individual."

I understand the title and also the concern over it - but I also know the quote and that it means exactly the opposite of "Barbarian Princess" - I will wait until I've seen the film (next Friday, Oct. 16th) to comment on it - I however am very optimistic and hoping to see a film that will give the wider world a better knowledge of this very beloved ali'i (royal) who is so loved and revered here in Hawai'i - as well as knowledge of the illegal Overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy.

Malama Pono

[–] zyphex 15 years ago

sk4ek,

The only thing I find disgraceful is your ineptitude. Obviously you have no appreciation for irony. I think the title is an artful contradiction.

[–] filmgeekwhore 15 years ago

an artful contradiction can still be offensive.

[–] zyphex 15 years ago

"an artful contradiction can still be offensive."

Disagree. If an individual actually possesses the rational capacity to educate themselves as to why a title could be an artful contradiction, then they would understand the significance of such a provocative statement as "The Barbarian Princess" proves to be. I reject the notion that entitling a work concerning Martin Luther King with a racial slur is equivocal in this sense, but if there were such a work, I would pragmatically consider the implications of such a title rather than vociferously (and trivially) debate the denigrating aspects of how and why the title trademarks the wider African-American community (of whom I have great respect).

[–] james1844 13 years ago

I agree that it is a subtle play on words that gradually and gracefuly proves out it's irony in title. There may have been a better title out there but it seems that people agree to disagree through it all.

[–] nunquam 15 years ago

I agree. It's very disappointing that they'd go with that title.

It'd be like making a film about Martin Luther King and using the N-word as the title because that's how racists saw him. Or less dramatic, making a film about John F. Kennedy and titling it, "Amateur Statesman" because a NYT columnist had called him that once.

You have to assume they had at least a few creative thinkers associated with this production...you'd think they could come up with a better title that would not be offensive to the very people upon whose history and culture they base their movie. If you want to show "irony" as one producer has claimed, show it in the work, rather than simply slapping a provocative title on it. Ka'iulani is not just an historical figure to Hawaiians. Hawaiians have a deep, emotional connection to her and to what she represents...just as Americans have to JFK and MLK.

How can anyone NOT suspect that it is an attempt to exploit Hawaiians and the hurt and anger they'll feel? The filmmakers had seen that initial response months ago, and someone obviously thought "cha-ching!" They knew what they were doing...and it's exploitation, pure and simple. If they had taken more time and care with the title, they could've had something that Hawaiians might've stood behind. Now, for a Hawaiian to support, or even to view this movie, they'd have to swallow the bitterness of insult and shame, as they've had to so many times before.

[–] DeadlySinner 14 years ago

"It'd be like making a film about Martin Luther King and using the N-word as the title because that's how racists saw him. Or less dramatic, making a film about John F. Kennedy and titling it, "Amateur Statesman" because a NYT columnist had called him that once."

No, it's nothing like those, because "ni*ger" is just another word for black person, albeit an offensive one, and it's not readily apparent that JFK was not an amateur statesman (and people probably still believe that he is.) You would have to demonstrate throughout the movie that he wasn't. In contrast, one look at Kaʻiulani, and you can easily tell that she is not a barbarian. There is no contesting the matter.

I don't see how anyone, besides the most ignorant, could look at the title if it were on the current poster and not see it as ironic.

Required reading for theater patrons:
http://tinyurl.com/shutheeffup

[–] nunquam 14 years ago

No, it's nothing like those...

It's exactly like those. Your view of the "Barbarian Princess" title controversy is myopic - it's not just about one title of one movie. You may be ignorant of that fact that the term "barbarian" is an insult to many Hawaiians. There's a 200+ year history of Hawaiians being exploited or oppressed by people who denounced them with terms such as barbarian, savage, cannibal, heathen, etc.

Anyway, they've changed the title.

[–] mickey_blue1976 14 years ago

You backward morons jump on anything don't you as long as there is opportunity to whinge and show people how sheltered your mind is!
Completely overlookng the fact that it was called "Princess Kaiulani" in the first place and only changed to "Barbarian Princess" for a festival. Any opportunity to be a sour tit!

And do you even know the meaning of barbarian before spouting your putrescence? "A tribal society as seen by an urban civilization" What were the Hawaiians? A tribal frigging society! Nothing like you are suggesting and not racist. It's people like you who have nothing to do with the subject matter and have miserable lives that stir this hatemongering crap up.

People like you have turned being ignorant into an art form!

[–] burtonwhite 15 years ago

Aloha,

I have had many discussions about this as the film is having its world premiere at the Hawaii Theatre this evening, on Ka`iulani's birthday.

Could another title have been found? Most certainly. Could a better title be found? Arguably.

A poll last evening in Honolulu asked if the title controversy would keep one from seeing the film or make one want to see the film. Over 70% said that it would prompt them to see the film.

More than a film about Ka`iulani, this film addresses a story seldom heard and taught on the American mainland. A story of the overthrow of the Hawaiin Kingdom (and the complicity of US agents with local missionary progeny), the ensuing displacement of the Hawaiian culture, and racism. If the title controversy brings these aspects to light also, I wonder if the greater good of the Hawaiin people isn't better served.

The Hawaiians I count as friends are strong, staunch, and are teaching the younger generation not to fall into the trip of being "victims," but rather to take responsibility, find their voice, their culture, and their land so that the aloha spirit will never cease.

I appreciated the film and am happy that the story of the Hawaiian Kingdom will finally see the light of day outside of these Isalnds we call Hawai`i.

Me ke aloha kakou.

[–] nunquam 14 years ago

You make very good points about the opportunity for the story of Ka'iulani and Hawaii to be seen and heard, especially in an arena to which gaining entry is so difficult. I'm happy about that too. I hope it's a good film.

The Hawaiians I count as friends are strong, staunch, and are teaching the younger generation not to fall into the trip of being "victims," but rather to take responsibility, find their voice, their culture, and their land so that the aloha spirit will never cease.

I may be mistaken, but it sounds as though you're implying Hawaiians "fall into the trip of being victims" for speaking out against something like the (previous) title of the film. I believe Hawaiians can be and can do all of the things you wrote, and at the same time can speak out about something they feel is unjust, including how they, and their culture and history are portrayed by others. Ka'iulani is a good example of this.

[–] bigislander72 14 years ago

Well it looks like you got what you wanted. They changed the title after all, due to the pressure.

I was a bit disappointed that they didn't go with the original. Very provacative, yes, but the reasoning is sound as some posters have attested to. I think it would make a very fitting as well as memoriable title.

[–] luisreyestiki-1 14 years ago

The filmmakers should of spent more time on making a good movie. This movie sucks. It is slow moving , amateurished acting, badly written and directed. Princess Kaiulani deserves better. a great story that is badly executed as a film.

[–] WarpedRecord 14 years ago

Far be it from me to judge a movie by a poster, but I'm getting a "Princess Diaries" vibe here. Hopefully this is better than "Barbarian Queen," at least.

[–] immanji 14 years ago

I TOTALLY AGREE> I don't want to ever watch this PIECE of TRASH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]