Within this past week, my professor has shown us a film in which talks about the the Overthrow of Hawaii. When first hearing about the film itself I immediately thought the Hawaiian people and how they protest that the Hawaiian islands is not associated to the United States. In which part of it was correct, but not all of the film was about.
Before I talk about my reaction. Let me tell you a little bit about the film. The film was produced in 1993, directed by Puhipau and Joan Lander. In the beginning of the film, it portrays Hawaii as a tourist attraction, such as showing Waikiki and showing old Hawaiian traditions such as taro farms and hula. Based from the beginning, the film will be based on a Hawaiian’s perspective of the island and what happens from their viewpoint. The film includes expertise who know about the history and give insight of what it was like for the Hawaiian people. Once more, the film talks about the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii which begins in 1893, against Queen Lili’uokalani by foreign residents. These foreign residents include United States citizens, and subjects of the Kingdom of Hawaii. The foreign residents ultimate goal was the annexation of the islands to the United States, which occurred in 1898. Not only has the annexation was something based on the past, but is also issued in today’s world. Especially to the Hawaiian people, how much they’ve been through today and back then.
Watching this film, my first reaction to this film is that it’s very two-faced. Regarding the editing, I thought that the film was pretty good editing and cross-cutting based on the fact that it was produced in 1993. As well trying to give the effect that you were in the scene as if you were experiencing the moment. However, there were some parts of the film in which there were angles in the film that seemed to appeal that it wasn’t from the perspective from the Hawaiians. Such as the perspective of one of the experts of Hawaiian history looked as if she was naked, but in fact that she was wearing traditional clothing wear. Especially when the camera angle was in a lower position.
The other perspective is that the overall goal is having the perspective from the Hawaiians, but it seemed as though the foreigners perspective was demonstrated more in the film within the middle of the film. Especially the parts, when they demonstrated the Hawaiians in the cartoons as “stupid” and savage like. Personally I think that says something about the film, that it is still portrayed as the Hawaiians “savage” and “uncivilized". This film is still portrayed as the outlook from a foreigner’s perspective, but the goal of what the Hawaiians had to go through. Anyways that was the only thing that I have to say about the film and I really recommend it to other for those who want a different. perspective about the overthrow of Hawaii. Just be cautious of the things that I’ve mentioned and maybe you could recognize the things that I was talking about.