Failed Empowerment: Why Mulan 2020 is a Potemkin Village

 Mulan 2020 had a lot of controversy surrounding its release due to its star expressing support for the authoritarian Chinese Government and the filmmaker's decision to film in some areas where the Chinese concentration camps for the Uighurs populations are. Beyond all of that, however, there is also the fact that the film is shockingly regressive compared to its animated predecessor which came out 22 years prior. The animated film has a heavy "queer" subtext that is omitted form the live action version. Second, the animated film suggests one can be strong in ways that defy traditional ideas of masculinity. The live action film, however, seems to believe that strength can only come from traditional ideas of masculinity.

One of the most powerful scenes from the 1998 film is the song Reflection. When one listens to the lyrics, one can see how they have a far greater poignancy than just being about a woman who does not fit in. Rather they are for anyone who does not fit in, and especially for people who are part of the LGBTQIAP+ community. Lyrics like "Now I see, that if I were to truly to be myself/I would break my family's heart" make this strongly evident. A simple google search reveals all of those who moved by the song and what it meant to them when it came to coming to terms with their identity. What then does the 2020 version, which makes the bold decision to cut all of the songs, offer instead? Nothing. A simple horse ride is all we get when it comes to Mulan's inner angst. In other words, there is nothing here on a human level that could truly resonate.

Another key part of the 1998 Mulan is how Captain Shang seems to fall in love with Mulan before he realizes she is a woman. Once again the 2020 film dispenses with this intriguing subtext. Here also there is a solder who falls in love with her but the film carefully shows his realizing she is a woman before he seems to have any romantic feelings. In two swift strokes, the 2020 film has eliminated two important parts of subtext to the animated film that not only helped it endure with an oppressed community, but also gave it a multifaceted edge that continues to intrigue. In its place is a depressingly straight forward film. 

Not only does the film eliminate empowerment for members of the LGBTQIAP+ community, but it also eliminates empowerment for women. The 1998 film is about an everywoman who succeeds through two things: determination and intelligence. Both of these are attainable for any woman and if one is a young girl watching it, one can say "I too can do those things." That is empowerment. The 2020 film eliminates that by having Mulan be uniquely powerful with "chi." What is more, in the opening scene she is already a perfect kung fu artist as she performs elaborate acrobatics with a stick to land perfectly on her a feet. Thus the message goes from anyone can do this to "well you can so long as you are uniquely powerful with Chi" which seems to essentially be a magic power so not exactly attainable for people on this earth

What is more, the film is painfully unimaginative in what it believes to be strength. As mentioned in my review of All That Heaven Allows, there are many different kinds of strength than the perceived norm of masculine violence and brute strength. The 1998 film shows this through the exercise of reaching the arrow. Brute strength does not get the arrow, but rather a different kind of strength, intelligence, is what allows Mulan to get the arrow when her peers cannot. Indeed throughout the film, we see her use her intelligence to solve problems whether it be causing an avalanche to defeat the hun army or using fireworks to defeat the Hun leader Shan Yu. The 2020 film primarily ignores this by having Mulan just defeat everyone through expert fighting skills that we also see the men doing. There is nothing that she does that is particularly unique or that shows the viewer there are other kinds of strength. Now one might go, "well why is that so bad? women can be expert warriors the same as men." And that is true, but recall how Mulan is doing this through magic powers she had already honed as a child rather than through hard work. Thus, the film is simultaneously eliminating different kinds of strength AND saying women can only succeed as traditionally masculine strengths if they are born with magic powers. This is failed empowerment.

Magic power over actual empowerment

This failure becomes especially apparent when one compares the respective climaxes of the two pictures. In the animated film, the only way the good guys can save at the end of the day is to dress as women. It is perhaps a comedic scene but the film is also making a pointed comment that sometimes one has to let go of one's traditional ideas of masculinity to save the day. Compare this with the 2020 film which just has everyone still dressed as soldiers and just fight people until they kill all the baddies. Once again, the 2020 film is arguing that traditional ideas of masculinity are the only way to be strong which again is the antithesis of empowerment.

The final nail in the coffin comes in the ending. At the ending of the animated film, Mulan rejects the emperor, and by extension patriarchal control, to make her own choice. Furthermore, the father throws away her war medals to hug her and says that the "greatest gift and honor is having you for a daughter." In other words, the film argues that what matters is not what some patriarchal leader can bestow, but rather who Mulan is as a person. Compare this with the live action film that ends with Mulan seemingly on the verge of becoming a general for the emperor. Her agency is stripped away as instead she just becomes a cog of the patriarchal regime, which the film seems to regard as the most important thing.

If one is not aware, a Potemkin Village refers to an alleged practice, probably one not grounded in reality, of a Russian village that was disguised to look beautiful on the outside while behind these facades were the poor villagers and actual shacks. It seems appropriate to use that metaphor for the 2020 Mulan. Its cinematography is indeed stunning, the acting is mostly fine, and the film seems to have an empowering message. Yet beneath that shiny exterior, there is a truly ugly interior of a film 

that seems to think conventional ideas of masculinity are what should be desired. LGBTQIAP+ identities do not matter and nor do alternative forms of strength. An ocean of ideas is what defines the 1998 film, whereas the 2020 Mulan is just a damp puddle that will presumably dry up quite soon.