Wow, is there a lot to parse in this video of Kirsten Dunst playing "Akihabara Majokko Princess," directed by McG, and produced Takashi Murakami (warning, some of the anime images are NSFW) for a Tate Modern exhibition last year. Among the questions it raised for me: 1) Huh, is this really what Kirsten Dunst's career has come to? 2) What should I make of the continuing appropriation of Harajuku culture by American women, white and black alike? 3) Would this have been better if it was the Liz Phair cover, with its fabulous implications for sexuality?
I do actually want to dive into those first two questions for a minute, because as weird as this video and its racial and sexual implications are (as is the fact that McG is collaborating with Murakami, unless his work with Marc Jacobs was just the start of his efforts to go as lowbrow commercial as possible, or something), I think it actually illustrates some of Dunst's strengths. She's a good, limber, physical actress, and she's often at her best, I think, when she's being a little goofy. It's one of the reasons the first Bring It On movie worked so well: Dunst totally sold her main-character cheerleader, she looked comfortable and genuinely happy dancing around, as she does here. She was good in the also-underrated Wimbledon, where she played a tennis champ, because she was running, or playing, or hooking up with a guy she had chemistry with for a lot of the movie. I think this is a really winning quality. In a time when a lot of Hollywood actresses seem really alienated in their bodies, actresses who embrace their physicality are a rarity. They carry themselves differently on screen. Living the credo that "there is nothing in your body that lies" is hard for women everywhere, but I imagine it's doubly or triply difficult in Hollywood.
I actually thought Dunst was miscast in the Spider-Man movies for precisely this reason. Mary Jane is such an inert role, she's always getting saved. I hate to be contemptuous of that, but I just don't find it very interesting. I think a lot of folks agree that the upsidedown smooch in the first movie is the defining romantic moment in it (okay, maybe the "I've always been standing in your doorway" scene too), and I think it works precisely because it's one of Dunst's most physical moments in the movies. She is the sexual aggressor, rolling down his mask in a clear parallel to fully undressing a lover. It's great. But she hasn't had that kind of opportunity in the other movies, or in her other movie roles, in what seems like a long time. I'd really love Dunst to find her way back into some good roles.
And I'm glad Murakami gave her the opportunity, I guess. I do find the appropriation of Harajuku culture here in the U.S. fascinating. There are a range of these appropriations, of course. Gwen Stefani's Love. Angel. Music. Baby., and her decision to tour with Harajuku Girls re-named for each element in the album's title certainly kicked off the trend. Nicki Minaj, among other identities, brands herself as a Harajuku Barbie, a totally fascinating mashup. I think part of what gets me here is the combination of the song and the imagery. Dunst may be dressing up Harajuku-style, but that doesn't mean she's actually turning Japanese, much less having a meaningful engagement with Japanese culture. I understand that there's value in teaching folks about subcultures, and that individual members of subcultures have the right to work where and how they want. But there's a fine line between engagement with a culture and use of it. I'm not sure where the line falls here. It seems like it's worth looking out for, though.