While a religious debate swirls around "The Da Vinci Code" as the movie premieres worldwide, another controversy surrounding another summer blockbuster has opened a can of worms in China, which may put in peril its fate in the market where the story is partly set.

"Mission: Impossible III" is under special scrutiny from the authorities because some media outlets have reported that it contains scenes that "tarnish the image of Shanghai."

That sounds weird. Hollywood filmmakers are bending backwards to enter the Chinese market, and who in his or her right mind would deliberately offend the audiences they are trying so hard to woo? It simply defies logic.

The Tom Cruise flick features three major locations, Shanghai being one of them. About 20 per cent of the scenes were shot in the Chinese metropolis, using several landmark buildings as backdrops or sites of action sequences.

The reportedly "offensive" scene catches traditional Shanghai homes hanging laundry outside the window.

What's so offensive about it, I wonder.

Doesn't Shanghai, or any other Chinese city, have such sights? Unless one isolates oneself in the kind of apartment buildings with an enclosed balcony, these are commonplace in traditional low-rises.

Does it reflect badly on a city?

I don't think one should be ashamed of hanging out cleaned-up laundry. Unless you live in a dry place like Beijing, you'd have to dry it in the open or buy a dryer, which is still rare in China. Sure, those who live in such quarters are not as well off as residents of brand new and squeaky-clean apartment buildings, the practice is fundamentally different from spitting or jaywalking. It's something people do to keep hygienic, for God's sake.

This reminds me of the early 1980s when some of my countrymen were affronted when foreigners photographed Beijing's hutong.

"It's sickening you would take interest in this kind of dilapidated housing and choose to ignore the high-rises," they argued.

Suffice to say, it was difficult to convince them that the concrete boxes erected during that time were aesthetically unpleasing, and the hutong, rundown as they were from decades of neglect, had a quiet beauty that we, as insiders, were blind to.

The hypersensitivity toward how Chinese are portrayed in foreign films is rooted in a thinly veiled inferiority complex. Yes, there are movies that put us in a bad light, and yes, there are certain elements in foreign movies that may not suit our audiences.

But if we hold every foreign production to the unique yardstick of a tourism publicity film, pretty soon people will avoid us and there will be no cinematic representation of our city on the international screen.

There is a possibility that some people think this is a good way of "driving away" foreign competition in Chinese cinema. If this is true, they are way too naive.

First of all, there is a quota for the annual number of foreign imports. If one film is cancelled, there will be a replacement.

Second, when the film in question turns into a hot potato and needs "re-evaluation," its scheduled release date is changed. When that happens, the domestic distributor, who has invested millions in promoting it, may lose much of the value of paid publicity. The movie will also lose momentum and yield a significant portion of the market to bootleggers.

Worse yet, the movie, once approved again, may take another opening slot, which is usually planned in advance by some domestic release. That Chinese film, according to one of the biggest distributors in China, will lose all of its investment in marketing, since now it will unexpectedly face a Hollywood juggernaut.

About the only party who will benefit from this kind of hullabaloo are the movie pirates, who do not pay royalties to the filmmakers or taxes to the state coffer.

Email: raymondzhou@chinadaily.com.cn

(China Daily 05/20/2006 page4)