Live-action adaptations result in forms of improper cultural appropriation

The argument

With the rise of anime has come Hollywood's interest in them. They have set out to make live-action versions of those anime to cash in on the new craze. But when Western studios take over Asian media, they run the risk of improper cultural appropriation and whitewashing their casts. Unfortunately, that fear has become reality multiple times. Scarlett Johansson was famously condemned for taking the role of the Japanese protagonist of Ghost in the Shell. Netflix's adaptation of Death Note was similarly decried by taking the Japanese characters and making them mostly white Americans. And while debate still continues on whether or not it is actually anime, the adaptation of Avatar: The Last Airbender received similar criticism for having white actors portray what appeared to be Asian or Asian-inspired characters in the original show. All of these egregious examples put a stigma on Western studios, and with how recent Netflix's Death Note was, they don't have the excuse of not knowing better. Western studios getting their hands on Japanese stories has a whole host of problems that comes with it. Not least among these is the danger of improper representation. Representation of all people in media is an important ideal in today's society. But the practices of these studios show that they fail in this regard.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Mistakes have been made in the past, certainly. But there's no reason why other studios can't learn from those mistakes and do better in the future. The success of movies like Crazy Rich Asians (another adaptation, this one of a novel) shows that Hollywood can make successful movies and get representation right. The same can be done of adaptations of anime. To say that they shouldn't adapt anime because some movies whitewash them negates the numerous possibilities that future studios, and future actors, have to bring these beloved franchises to the big screen.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Commercial motive is not an objection. Adapting a property for profit describes nearly all film production, including the adaptations that are well received, so this premise cannot distinguish the cases the argument objects to from the ones it does not. [Rejecting P2] "Run the risk" is the honest formulation, and it concedes the argument's difficulty: a risk is a reason for care in casting and production, not a reason the category should not exist. The premise establishes a hazard and the conclusion treats it as a certainty. [Rejecting P3] Three examples, one of which the argument itself concedes may not be anime, cannot support a general claim, and all three turn on one specific failure — casting — which is a decision each production makes rather than a property of adaptation as such. As the counter-argument notes, the inference also forecloses the outcome the argument wants: adaptations cast and made well are precisely how the representation it values would be achieved.