Critics are quick to point out that the film genre easily forms stereotypes for the American audience about unfamiliar subjects. For some, the movies are a highly informative resource. What they see on the silver screen sometimes serves to be the most exposure on the extraordinary topics of their lives. Unfortunately, the Asian culture and its people fall under the 'extraordinary' for the average American movie customer. Although Asians have integrated somewhat into the American melting pot, especially in the modern area, the Asian and his culture is still eccentric beyond most white mentality. Whether the reasons for the invisible divide between the non-Asian American public and the Asian one stem from superficiality (xenophobia caused by differences in physical appearance) or something deeper, the fact of the matter is that the divide exists because perceptions of the latter by the former have developed from the romanticized and often idealized film genre.

The development of Asian stereotypes in early film has sparked much criticism among Asians both foreign and 'domestic' ¹, mostly because these stereotypes can be seen as demeaning and degrading. The 'exoticism of the Asian female' and the 'effeminate Asian male' constitute two of them. Yet the makers of modern mainstream feature films, operating from a demographically tight Hollywood community, continue to frame Asians under similar stereotypes even after the first Asians appeared on the big screen in the early 1900's. Back then it was conceivable that Asians be characterized in extremes (such as Fu Manchu, the idiosyncratic Asian madman) because Western exposure to the Far East was limited and the two peoples were not nearly as intertwined with each other as they are today. The easiest way to generalize the Asian people was to build fictional characters of an extreme. However, given the integration of the Asian people into the American social quilt ever since the first Chinese immigrants arrived in America, it is sad to realize that those stereotypes still make up a good deal of honest American perceptions. Perhaps that is a testament to why the Asian American movement has taken shape.

Asian America is an entity caught in between two mainstream cultures, the non-Asian American and the immigrant Asian one². Born and raised on American soil within a familial environment derived from Asia, the Asian American seldom is regarded by either end as belonging to their social category. The non-Asians see the black hair and the yellow skin and immediately associate them with their 'Oriental' lineage. Likewise, the immigrant and non-domestic Asian hears that an Asian is born and raised in America and quickly discern him as American rather than Asian. In this manner, the Asian American is like the unwanted child. Maybe that is why the leaders of the Asian American Movement sought with such passion to promote recognition and gain due respect for Asian Americans: they needed a place and an identity in the American social web.

"Growing from the fervor of the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960", independent Asian American film-making was inspired by the power-seeking struggles which "attempted to...restore cultural identity" ³. From the perspective of a people, cultural identity was key, but from another perspective, that of a professional filmmaker, this was an opportunity to gain entrances into better territory within the business. Thus, the main goals of the independent Asian American film movement were two-fold. Within the first objective, however, sub-goals existed. In order to restore cultural identity (or in this case define rather than restore identity for Asian Americans), fundamental questions need to be answered. Mainly, how did those unfair perceptions come about, what kind of action need to be taken to repair the damage done to the reputation of Asians by these stereotypes, and what is the niche for Asian Americans so they can progressively gain self understanding while redefining the Asian persona for the seemingly uninformed West.

First, and foremost, there needs to be a discussion on the definition of Asian American film. The basic arguments revolve around what whether a non-Asian filmmaker is justified in making an Asian-American film and if so, could it possibly be better than one made by an Asian-American filmmaker. Drawing again from the Black Power movement, radicals believe that in order to attribute a film to a particular socio-cultural demarcational group need to satisfy four conditions: the film must be about 'us' (disbelievers referring to the group), by 'us, for 'us', and near 'us',⁴ Little argument exist against a film which adheres to all four conditions that it can be called Asian-American in nature. What most likely is the opinion of most critics and commentators, however, is that a film need not include all four to deserve that title. A more convoluted set of attributes of an Asian-American film seem to encompass more examples that might be excluded by the first set of rules. A film must 1) present an authentic Asian-American point of view, 2) give a sensitive portrayal of Asian-American characters and communities, and 3) provide a set of culturally specific artistic innovations⁵. Given debates back and forth on each trait to iron out arguable points, this second set of proclamations would situate a more agreeable definition of an Asian-American film.

What then, can be said about the independent Asian-American film movement that will credit their people. with valid appreciation for their awareness and efforts. Members of this movement probably won't want a generalized statement or a 'stereotype' from the public. To articulate just one of their strengths and misrepresent their other ideals would be to deter them from being noble. Many probably have already formed their own generalized opinions about this movement, however, and it is ironic to think that these opinions will probably herald the same type of approval/disapproval duality that Harold Issacs presented so concretely in his book, Scratches on Our Minds, on Western perceptions of the East. Hardline disbelievers of the movement will criticize the grappling-at-nothing atmosphere of yet another demoralized social group trying to climb up the ladder towards equality and recognition. On the other hand, stern supporters (it is admittingly so that there will be more supporters than disbelievers) will treasure the movement for the pains suffered by an artistic group that is paving a new road in the infrastructure of anti-oppressive social movements. The effects of the independent Asian-American filmmaking contingency on the mainstream western film are not easily ignored. Their presence as a separate genre benigns moderate representation of both Asian and American cinema.

1. Domestic here refers to Asians born, bred, and live in America, more often called Asian Americans. Foreign includes immigrants, emigrants, and those who reside overseas.
2. Non-Asian American is not necessarily only of Caucasian decent. It also includes other people of color (African and Native Americans) and other foreign representations. The term distinguishes any person out of Asian affiliation. The term "immigrant Asian" here denotes not only true immigrants, but those who still reside in Asia but have contact with America to a degree of issue awareness.
3. Russell Leong, Moving the Image: Independent Asian Pacific American Media Arts (U.S.; Linda Mabalot, 1991), viii.
4. Jun Xing, Asian America Through the Lens (CA; Alta Mira Press, 1998), 33.
5. Xing, 40.