There are two beloved science-fiction films set in 2019. The first is Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner, adapted from Philip K. Dick’s novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. The 1982 masterpiece is set on an ecologically devastated Earth that has mostly been abandoned as humanity reaches for the stars, colonizing space through the use of genetically engineered slaves called replicants. The other is Katsuhiro Otomo's Akira. Adapted from his own 2,000 page manga—which was halfway done at the time—the1988 animated feature was set in a future dominated by militarized police, working class anarchists rioting against crony capitalism, and the constant threat of terrorist violence.

RELATED: Akira Creator Initially Thought Anime Adaptation Was a ‘Failure’

The dystopian cyberpunk futures of these two films proved far more prescient than the nuclear-powered, flying car fantasies of science-fiction’s golden age. Their influence is enduring. In a few weeks, we’ll be treated to Blade Runner 2049, a direct sequel to the 1982 original, directed by Arrival helmer Denis Villeneuve, produced by Scott, and co-written by Hampton Fancher, who also scripted the original. And if we’re to believe the rumors, Thor Rangarok director Taika Waititi is in talks with Warner Bros. to direct a two film live-action version of Akira that will encompass all six volumes of the original manga, unlike the anime, which only covered the first three.

Deadline Magazine broke the news about Waititi, who is the latest in a long list of names that have been attached to the project, including -- most recently -- Get Out’s Jordan Peele, and Star Trek Beyond’s Justin Lin. But excitement over the news that Akira may have finally left development hell was quickly replaced by disappointment and anger about whitewashing: The film is described by Warner as taking place in “the rebuilt New Manhattan where the leader of a biker gang saves his friend from a medical experiment.”

There are sound economic reasons for adapting established properties like Akira, and revisiting the worlds of beloved films like Blade Runner. These projects have built-in audiences, and if done correctly, fans of the originals will flock to the sequels and the remakes. Get them wrong, or overestimate the extent of their appeal, then you’re in for a world of trouble, and a guaranteed flop.

RELATED: Paramount Blames Ghost in the Shell’s Failure on Whitewashing Controversy

Is Warner Bros. still looking to Americanize Akira? If the recent box-office failure of the live-action Ghost in the Shell, starring Scarlett Johansson as Major, is any indication, American fans aren’t willing to embrace whitewashed versions of beloved Japanese properties.

Filmgoers are also increasingly mindful of the whitewashing of Asian roles in film. Ed Skrein—the British actor who was cast as the Japanese-American marine Ben Daimo in Neil Marshall’s Hellboy reboot—stepped down upon learning of the character’s ethnicity (thanks to online outrage) and was replaced by Daniel Dae Kim.

The recent Americanized version of Death Note -- about a high school student who discovers that he can kill people by scribbling their names in a mystical notebook -- tanked. Stripped of its Japanese setting and aesthetic, it became a cookie-cutter exercise in the teenage horror genre. Both fans of the original and newcomers were equally unimpressed.

Page 2: [valnet-url-page page=2 paginated=0 text='Akira%27s%20Greatest%20Story%20Strengths%20are%20Rated%20in%20Japanese%20Culture']



Such recent commercial failures, and audience reactions to racially insensitive casting suggest that stripping beloved stories of their ethnic character is not only ethically unacceptable, but economically unsound. And if the former can’t convince studios to do the right thing, maybe the latter will.

Perhaps the most troubling aspect about all of this is that the same film industry that believes science-fiction fans will lap up stories about blue-skinned Pandorans, bug-eyed Greys, hairy Wookiees, and mechanized Cylons, also believes they’ll reject a film with Japanese protagonists.

Talk about adding insult to injury. But then again it cuts both ways. Online outrage about female leads, gender-swapping, and the introduction of characters of color in fantasy, science-fiction and superhero films is rampant.

Akira made such a big splash in 1989 precisely because it was so different. Of course, it wasn’t the first anime to hit the United States An Americanized version of Speed Racer was a huge hit in the 1960s, eventually inspiring a less-successful 2007 live-action film by the Wachowskis. The film was adapted from the dub and whitewashed the cast’s ethnicity, but was faithful to the hyperkinetic visuals and pop art madness of the manga and anime genres. But Speed Racer was a kids’ show, and Akira, despite its teenage protagonists, is anything but.

Other Japanese imports followed Speed Racer in the 1970s and early 80s, but they were often bowlderized. Stripped of their cultural specificity and sanitized for younger audiences, productions like Battle of the Planets (originally Science Ninja Team Gatchaman) retooled story elements to comply with the dictates of North American children’s television. Among other things, violence was toned down; swearing and references to sex and alcohol were removed entirely; stories were simplified. (This trend continued in the 1990s with Sailor Moon, which excised, among other things, Sailor Neptune and Sailor Uranus’s lesbian relationship.)

Akira was a hit because it wasn’t localized. The dubbed version maintained its Japanese specificity, not only in terms of names and places, but also in terms of story and structure. Nearly 30 years after its release, viewers are still scratching their heads and asking, “What the hell happened?” (Unless, of course, they’ve read the manga.) When was the last time a Hollywood blockbuster allowed such an ambiguous ending? That kind of thing is usually left for art house films and, well, foreign movies.

Thematically Akira is very Japanese. Like Godzilla, in the 1950s, it is a reflection of the country’s trauma over the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima at the end of World War II, and of the subsequent military occupation, and rebuilding.

Stylistically, the film’s ambiguity is also very Japanese. The films of Hiyao Miyazaki may stick to a standard three-act structure, but his animated realities are often surreal and adhere to an inscrutable internal logic. The slipstream novels of writers like Haruki Murakami and Banana Yoshimoto not only cross genre boundaries, but can also be vague. Like Miyazaki’s works, and Akira, novels such as Murakami’s Hardboiled Wonderland and the End of the World, and Yoshimoto’s N.P. rely more on providing emotional closure than tidily wrapping up a story.

The folk tales of poet and writer Kenji Miyazawa—whose novel, Night on the Galactic Railroad, was adapted into a 1985 feature-length anime, and whose life was the subject of Patlabor creator Shoji Kawamori’s short Spring and Chaos—are equally obtuse. His short stories echo the fables of Aesop and the Brothers Grimm; and are meant to impart valuable moral lessons to children. But they read more like blank verse than fairy tales, and leave readers with the impression of a resolution rather than a clearly defined conclusion.

When American audiences turn to creators like Miyazaki and Otomo, they are not seeking the familiar, which is precisely why fans of the original Akira are likely to reject an Americanized version set in New Manhattan.

Page 3: [valnet-url-page page=3 paginated=0 text='Even%20If%20an%20Americanized%20Akira%20is%20a%20Financial%20Hit%2C%20It%27d%20Be%20a%20Failure%20on%20Another%20Level']



Of course, there have been cases of successful transliterations of works to and from Japanese. Legendary director Akira Kurosawa adapted Shakespeare’s Macbeth and King Lear into Throne of Blood (1957) and Ran (1985), setting both in Feudal Japan at roughly the same time as the plays. Likewise, American director John Sturges adapted Kurosawa’s 1957 film Seven Samurai as The Magnificent Seven (1960), setting it in Mexico.

RELATED: Godzilla: King of Monsters Director Shares First Look at the Beast

Gareth Edwards’ successful 2014 American Godzilla reboot tied into the Japanese original in terms of storytelling and the kaiju’s look. Roland Emmerich’s 1998 version, which felt like Jurassic Park in Manhattan, saw limited box office success. It was universally panned, derided by fans, and quickly forgotten.

When it comes to the question of name recognition, which is often cited as an excuse for whitewashing characters of colour, and replacing them with well known caucasian actors, the logic just doesn’t stand up. Warner Bros. has often cast actors who lack marquee recognition as leads in well-known franchises. Richard Donner’s 1978 Superman: The Movie made Christopher Reeve a household name. More recently, Patty Jenkins’ Wonder Woman, which featured Israeli actor Gal Gadot—a relative unknown—as the lead, outperformed both Man of Steel, and Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice to become the highest grossing film in the DCEU (domestically).

While it may be possible to Americanize Akira, doing so would rob the film of its distinctly Japanese identity. This would also alienate the built-in audience that wants to see a live-action adaptation of the beloved anime and manga, which would defeats the whole point of adapting the property.

Were Waititi and producers Andrew Lazar, Jennifer Davisson, and Leonardo iCaprio to move ahead with a film set in New Manhattan, and starring a blue-eyed, blond protagonist, then perhaps they had better change the title to something anglicized, like Bobby, remove all the culturally specific elements, and give the protagonists American names.

But then, where’s the fun in watching a couple of dudebros screaming “Willard!” and “Bruce!” at each other instead of “Tetsuo!” and “Kenada?”