Movie Review: The Book of Eli

When you see the movie trailers for the Book of Eli, you get a feeling of Mad Max. A post-apocalypic world filled with violence and action. You get a sense of the lone gunsliner (ala Clint Eastwood's famous gunfighter without a name, or even the Samurai his character is based upon) wandering the land spreading a unique mix of justice, vengance, honor, and moral apathy. This is what the trailer brings to mind.

The movie itself is another thing though. It is slow in pace, like Once Upon A Time In America. It's bleak, like so many after the end of the world movies. It's a journey that is dark and harsh, and not quite enjoyable because it's not supposed to be. Which makes complete sense why the film was released in January. Execs didn't know how to market this.

The harsh lighting of the film makes you never comfortable with what you are seeing. Almost making you want to squint as much as the actors. It is a constant reminder that the world has become unpleasant, and brutal.

The soundtrack is filled with interesting notes. It easily matches the feel of the movie as it surges in confrontation and ebbs through transition. It's almost completely unheard, save for 2 songs that will strike a cord for anyone that listens to oldies channels. Personally I think either Classical or 60's rock would have been better, but the choices used make sense.

Book of Eli gives us the mostly silent, brooding hero that is imperfect in a far from perfect world. The early inaction to save a woman from being raped is matched with the compassion of allowing another woman that is bait to live. A good deed that has a reward just as painful as you might imagine it to be.

Early on we know what the book is, though there is a twist to it that you just won't expect. Even so this is hardly a religious film. It's a film about conviction and faith. The faith of Eli to do what he believes he must, and to walk though the valley of death to get it done.

Denzel Washington is not the action hero you would expect for this film. If you are hoping for Mad Max, you won't get it. But you do get a strong character with a presence that stands out in every seen. And you feel the burden of his character in every word and step.

Mila Kunis has a decent role. A far cry from her television personality, the role hints at greater acting depth. Hints at it but never quite makes it. You never get to feel for her character Solaris. You just understand that she is there. Not really helping, or standing out. But not a disteraction either. It's an odd role to fill and if she was intended to be so subdued then she did a great job.

Gary Oldman was probably the least pleasant of all the actors in the film. Not because he is a bad actor, but because he never really gets into the Carnegie character. You know that Carnegie is willing to do whatever it takes to keep control. That he wants power. That he can be ruthless. But you never feel the fear he seems to instill in the townsfolk, nor the loyalty of his key enforcers. He's a bad guy virtually devoid of his evil, like a Stansfield without the energy or panache.

Watching this film you feel like you are always waiting for something to happen. Not in an edge of your seat kind of way, but s in a "something big should happen" kind of feeling. And it never does. Even in the final scenes of the film you never get a sense of completion. It feels empty, like something was missed.

I can't balme the writing or acting, or visuals of this film. None are impeccable yet none are badly done. It's just not compelling. Interesting but not the rush you expect walking into the film.

The Book of Eli is a good film for watching on DVD. To pick at the subtle references, and specific lines. To let it simmer in your mind and to wonder about a world gone so wrong. To consider what price redemption might cost, and how it might be paid.

This is not an action movie fan's movie. This is not a Mad Max sci-fi fan film. It's just odd. Watchable, but odd. Almost like watching Grand Canyon - a film that is more just a moment in time than entertainment.

2010 movies you will want to see

As 2009 is ending it's time to look forward to what movies will be coming in 2010. Like in many years recently past there will be a decent number of remakes and revisioned films, several conversion films, and more than a few major movies that have huge anticipation.

Instead of trying to list every film that will be in theaters in 2010 I will instead hit on some of the best, and worst, ideas that Hollywood has to offer us. I'm sure that I will be as right and wrong on these films as most movie reviewers always are.

The films you might want to see include:

Legion - Though it is a January film - normally an indication of a horrible film - this looks like it has potential. I think this might be a film that will appeal to those who enjoyed the original The Prophesy movie.

The Book of Eli - Denzel Washington is known for his ability to act and to pick quality films to appear in. Which surprises me as this film is slated (last I noticed) for the graveyard of January. I have high expectations for this film, I hope to not be disappointed.

The Wolfman - Benicio Del Toro is a great actor and should be perfect in this remake. The addition of Sir Anthony Hopkins adds to the potential of this being a quality film. The moderating thing is that the film is a remake, which in Hollywood these days is a 70/30 proposition against a quality film. But so far the movie trailers say it will beat the odds.

Death at a Funeral - A remake of a British film of the same name, subject and likely everything else except the color of the cast. That's a good thing as Hollywood writers seem to be the laziest and least creative in the movie making world these days. From the movie trailers I've seen this should be a hit for Chris Rock and Martin Lawrence. Thank you England.

Iron Man 2 - War Machine. That says it all.

Prince of Persia: Sands of Time - A risky bet, but the effects look great. If the Hollywood writers kept the storyline from the video game intact this should be a great video game to movie conversion. If not, which is likely, this will be a revisionist waste of time to capitalize on fans pocket money. But it should be worth finding out in theaters.

The Expendables - There is no lack of hype for this film filled with former 80's (action) stars. Sylvester Stallone, Mickey Rourke, and Dolph Lundgren get to flex their old muscles against relatively younger jet Li and Jason Statham. For action movie junkies this is a must see.

MegaMind - Yes this is an animated film. Yes it's meant for kids. Even so I think this will be The Incredibles of 2010. The concept seems great even though it will feature Will Ferrell and was created by Ben Stiller. If nothing else it will rake in cash.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1 - It's a Harry Potter movie, how can you not see it. Honestly, Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson have really grown into solid actors and this should be very entertaining. Hype aside, this should be the big hit (box office) of the year.

And that's the list of the good. Now comes the bad.

John Q and the Health Care Reform Bill

I was just watching cable when I saw that the film John Q was on. I started to watch the show when I was struck by something. Isn’t it odd that this film, discussing the ills of the health system and starring Denzel Washington, happened to be on TV now?

I know, some will say that it’s just a coincidence. And maybe it is. But it does seem odd that right now, as the national debate is raging over how our health care system will change that this film pops back up. It is an old film, made in 1998. And it wasn’t a massive hit when it first came out. And of the many films that deal with health care in some form, this particular film alone was selected.

I’ve seen this on television a few times since it hit cable. Maybe 4 times in the past 4 or so years. Nothing overly special and not really timed to anything specific that I can recall. One of the times might have been in conjunction with and award for Denzel Washington, I’m not sure.

But considering the love affair that the general media has with President Obama, the pressure from Democrats to pass a health care Bill as quickly as possible, and the fact that over 50% of the nation opposes the Bill in Congress right now, the math adds up. It looks like a coordinated assault on the public. A subtle attempt to sway citizens to think of the Bill as a positive by reinforcing our dislike of the medical health insurance industry. As if we needed one.

There is no questions that health care in America can be better. No one of reasonable mind argues that the system needs to change. But how that change is enacted is the real question. What system and the quality of care it provides is what we need to resolve.

Is the film John Q being used to create a partisan wave of support? Maybe not. But I also noted that at this time there are huge ads running for the current health care proposals, and constant attacks from news media like MSNBC against those that oppose the current proposal. Even the Democrat leadership has maligned those that question the Bill, labeling them Nazi’s and un-American.

So seeing this film today seems far less innocent that it may well be. Then again, the fact that the White House is asking Americans to turn in fellow Americans that have a dissenting view of the Health Care Reform Bill, the fact that the White House has sent emails to various Americans that never contacted the Government – from an unknown and undisclosed list, and the fact that many elected officials refuse to discuss this with their constituents (I still have yet to hear from either of my Senators or House Representative), I perhaps am in a more guarded view of what is on television.

I do believe that ANY President faced with massive opposition to a program, Bill, or action they feel is necessary would use every means possible to them. I recall all the war films that held America in praise after 9/11. I also recall the films attacking the war, and President Bush just as the 2008 election cycle began. To say none of that affected the public even subliminally is a bit naïve, I think.

So take this with a pound of salt. And consider that perhaps, if this isn’t just coincidence, what it does mean. That someone (not necessarily the Government or any elected official – maybe just Hollywood executives that have a political preference) wants you to accept without question. That they want you to resist asking question or gaining more information. If that is true, then planting seeds while you are unguarded and on your couch is a prefect place to strike.

Or I could just be wrong. But what if I’m not?

Movie Preview: Book of Eli

Well the movie trailer has been released and Book of Eli looks like it will be another hit for Denzel Washington.



I have to say that I am impressed. Denzel Washington is not known for his action movies. Actually, other than a couple of fist fights or shoot-outs he has no real action movies. So this is a new departure for him. And from the trailer I would say that he wouldn’t last in a fight against Riddick, but still looks good.

The post-nuclear war world this film envisions instantly draws me to the Mad Max films. It’s gritty, with harsh sunlight, desolate, and unforgiving. It sets the mood of the depressing results of a war no one escaped. So in that the visuals hit the mark.

The fact that Gary Oldman is in this film is another plus. I have always enjoyed his portrayals. My favorite has to be ‘Stan’ Stansfield from The Professional. And while we have yet to see exactly how he is in this film I’d expect a lot. Likely this is a character that crosses say Aunty Entity, Stansfield, and Cornelius Hatcher (for a bit of lightness).

Thinking about it I think that the entire film could include a few mixes of characters we have seen before. Denzel is obviously an older Mad Max, Man With No Name (Sergio Leone films), John Smith (Last Man Standing) or Hugo Toorop type of character. Weary and burdened, but willing to be the hero if reluctantly.

The big question is what is in the book? That is what is really bugging me. It is supposed to bring redemption to mankind. Which makes me think it’s a religious tome. But it could be a scientific journal containing a cure to some biological weapon released in the end of the war. Or it could be an agricultural book with farming techniques. It even could be the Declaration of Independence. I mean it really can go in a dozen different directions. Which explains why everyone might want the book, since they don’t know what it is. Kind of like the Book of Life from Circle of Iron.

Based on what the movie trailer is presenting, and the quality of the actors, this should be a must see film. The only real doubt I have on the film is the fact that it is coming out in January. Which is a notorious time for the worst films to be released. Though that has changed slightly in recent years.

I reserve my final opinion until a bit more comes out about the film. For now, the hype is still bigger than the movie. But I will still want to see it, as it does look like a good action/sci-fi film.

Movie news: April 1st 2009

Ok, in more serious news that you may not have noticed today I saw that Calvin Broadus, best known as Snoop Dogg, has joined the Nation of Islam and changed his name to Snoop Y. I would say I am shocked, but then again, its all Fo Shizzle My Nizzle, as he would say.

Also in the news today is the fact that The Hobbit will soon be in brought to fans across the world. But unlike what most have been lead to expect, Peter Jackson has been contracted to make the JRR Tolkein novel into a musical play. There is no news on who will play the vital role of Bilbo Baggins, but so far Paris Hilton has been confirmed to play Gollum. This may be the first role that I think Hilton is thin enough to make look good.

In yet more news that I just cannot fathom I have heard that Denzel Washington is in talks to take the role of Blondie in Spike Lee's remake of The Good The Bad and the Ugly. The Lee Van Kleef role is already confirmed as going to Benicio Del Toro, with the likely role of Tuco the Rat going to either Eddie Murphy or Martin Laurence. I suppose either of the 2 will have to gain weight or wear a fat suit for the role. Still I find it unsettling that the revisioned film, which I generally dislike, will be filmed in modern day Los Angeles with gangs substituted for the Civil War factions. So far Clint Eastwood has denied any comments.

Still I have to say that the Howard the Duck remake is the biggest news of the day. I am amazed that anyone would take on this idea. Stephen Speilberg may be a genius, but I continue to think this is beyond him. I remain against this remake, even as I have learned that several movie studios are jumping at the script. It has to be the fact that somehow Speilberg got Tom Cruise to say yes to play Howard. I never thought there was enough money in the world for that. But at least Cruise will not need an accent.

Given that today is All Fool's Day, I'm taking all this news with a pound of salt, at least. We can all only hope that tomorrow we will wake up and know that this has all been a big joke. Really a big joke.

Movies to see before you die

There is nothing quite like a list of something to get the blood boiling. When that list happens to be of movies, and is called the 100 movies to see before you die, well you can imagine I was like a moth to a flame.

This Yahoo list is pretty good though. In fact I have seen 74 out of the full 100. When it comes to lists of great movies, I normally have far more issue with some of the choices. But this list is very much on the mark.

But they did get a few wrong.

Like Princess Monoke. A very good anime film. But not something you must see before death. I'd substitute that with Akira or Ghost in the Shell. Both are dazzling in the story and art. Far more compelling anime.

They touched on martial arts films, including Bruce Lee's Enter The Dragon. A true classic. But not the only style of martial arts film worthy of viewing. For a story that is completely different yet deep in thought and martial arts try Circle of Iron as an addition to your top 100 list.

I have to be excited about this list as they included one of my favorite films, and one that most people never heard of. M. That is a classic and groundbreaking. It may be old and sub-titled, but it is powerful cinema and that's what matters.

The list leaves out The Princess Bride, which I think is great on a comedic and swashbuckling level. And they did not include a universal classic The Adventures of Robin Hood. How can they not have Errol Flynn's most renown role.

Still the list does have Blazing Saddles and Do The Right Thing. Something I'm glad to see as films starring Black actors or directors normally seem to not exist in these kinds of lists.

Though they ignored Malcolm X, by Spike Lee. There is a reason why this was Denzel Washington's first Oscar nominated role (which he was robbed of), and why the movie itself was robbed of an Oscar Award. Once you see it I think you will agree.

I like that the list includes: the original 12 Angry Men, Alien, Apocalypes Now, Blade Runner, Bridge on the River Kwai, Die Hard, Dr. Strangelove, The Matrix, The Lord of the Rings, the original King Kong (one of the first films I ever saw and remember to this day), Groundhog Day, It's a Wonderful Life, Lawrence of Arabia, M.A.S.H. (yes it was a movie long before it was a television show), Monty Python and the Holy Grail, Animal House, Nosferatu (second film I recall ever seeing), Schindler's List, Seven Samurai, Some Like It Hot, Star Wars (the first of the series in 1977), To Kill A Mockingbird, and Usual Suspects. I find them all to be essential films that everyone should see at least once.

Also included in that list of core movies (besides the others I mentioned above) that everyone should see is Being There. A Peter Sellers film unlike anything he did before it. This is comedy of a cerebral nature yet enjoyable just to watch and eat popcorn with.

Overall this list is very good. One of the better lists to come out of Yahoo. But it isn't perfect. At least to me. And I think if you take the time to compare the movies I would add to the list, you'll see how much better it becomes in total.

Movie preview: Pelham 123

Going to a very different place, with a pace more akin to the tastes of most American fans is the remake of Pelham 123. I’ve spoken about this before [ Movie Preview: Pelham 123 and G-Force] . And yes it is a remake – there can be exceptions to any rule including my own.



Pelham 123 is a remake of the solid Walter Matthau film The Taking of Pelham 123. It stars Denzel Washington and John Travolta, the first time they have both worked together as I recall. Which jumps this into an interesting film on that basis alone.

Washington and Travolta are acclaimed actors with great reason. Both are easily capable of a diversity of characters and film genres. Yet this film is focused on a more subdued presence than anything over the top.

Washington’s character is a very normal everyday civil servant. Good at what he does and just smart enough to be too smart to move up in the ranks. Travolta’s character is a dedicated, calculating, professional that has anticipated every move. At least that’s what the original leads are supposed to be about. The movie trailer seems to convey a respect of that.

Of course the film has been adapted to match the needs of the public these days. So there is at least one big car scene involving a climatic crash. Likely as well are a few scenes of police overreaction, and bullets a plenty. But this is not a shoot ‘em up. It’s a heist film with a brain.

How true this film stays to the original is a big question. Yet I have to believe that with the star power in this film the script must be good. The tension of the film is obvious, what is not as obvious is how the interjection of comedic, and other, moments will work. Like the discussion by Washington’s characters wife insiting he brings home a gallon of milk. Is it supposed to be a funny yet dramatic way of telling him to come home? Does it break the tension, or add to it? You almost feel like you could laugh at that, but then again you understand why you won’t.

Still I am willing to take a chance on actors of this caliber, and a story of worth. The movie trailer implies a solid film, and enough of what most would like in this genre. I expect it to do well and I will probably see it as well.

A discussion of police, race, America, and what to do

This will be in 2 parts. I hope you read it all.

A friend of mine recently contacted me about news of Robbie Tolan. While listening to a NYC sports radio program he learned of the shooting that happened on January 1st of this year. He knew that this is an issue I am deeply concerned about and wanted to make sure I was aware of it.

I clarified that I was aware of the Robbie Tolan police shooting, as well as of Adolph Grimes and Oscar Grant's murder on the same day. My friend had not heard of the Grimes case, and was vaguely familiar with the Grant case. Which is sad since we are nearly 3 months after the facts, but the blame for that I place on the major news media.

Now my friend informed me about the radio broadcast. He told me how the radio DJ reamed a caller who blatantly took the side of the police in this matter, on the basis that the victims were Black. The caller felt that alone justified the use of deadly force - on an unarmed Black male in his driveway that was co-operating with police and I emphasize unarmed.

This made my friend ask the question; what can be done to prevent this from happening again?

My thought on this goes to what I believe is one of the biggest factors in this issue - communication. At this moment most of America is unaware of events of police brutality and overkill against Black males (not to mention Latino/Hispanics and other people of color). I have found that often many side with the police, without ever knowing any of the facts. And the news media is reluctant to display or report these actions - though they are expedient to portray African Americans as criminals at almost every turn.

Thus I feel America must talk about this. Talk about the fact that these "isolated" events are in fact tied together and a pattern. Talk about what is the cause of these issues, and why the news media prefers to mold stereotypes about people of color.

Now my friend does not agree with me on all points of this. He feels that the media is more or less fair. He pointed out the number of African Americans that can be found on any day in various media.

I countered with the fact that 95% of all television and/or films ignore the existence of people of color. And for a majority of the time that they are provided a chance to appear onscreen they are portrayed as violent and criminals. My friend thought this was inaccurate. When I provided the fact that this is based on NAACP studies (most recently as of this year) and my own experiments done and reported over the last 3 years I have been writing this blog, he questioned the veracity of the NAACP findings and assured me that today you could turn on the television and not see Blacks as criminals on any of the broadcast programs (or at least the majority of those shows).

He went on to state that African Americans are not all just portrayed as criminals anymore. He pointed to Denzel Washington, Cuba Gooding Jr., and Samuel Jackson as examples. But I pointed out that while in the last decade they have improved their stature, virtually all major African American actors had to start their careers as criminals or antagonists before they could become anything else. Samuel Jackson came to be known for his portrayal as a crackhead, Lawrence Fishburn played thugs (a la King of New York) before moving on in his adult career, Wesley Snipes had to portray a drug kingpin, Chris Rock was a crackhead, and so on.

Now my friend countered that not all Black actors have had to have this kind of start. And that I was unfair because this was like saying that DeNiro and Pacino were negatives since they played gangsters to start their careers. Which is not the same as there were dozens of films at the same time, and multiple characters in the same films that were showing an opposite and positive image for Whites. The effect is not the same, the same impression is not being made. When you primarily are shown one facet of a people, if they are shown, then people tend to believe it is true over time.

But we felt that this was a digression from the main point. Which I felt was that to have things change we must delve into the fact that there is a problem. That police wantonly abuse their power without reason, and the media covers for them in these cases.

Continued in part 2...

Tom Cruise - Denzel Washington. Can it work?

If you could pick 2 of the biggest celebrities in Hollywood and put them into a movie, would anyone go see it? And I’m not talking about the paparazzi inspired Jennifer Lopez – Ben Affleck kind of pairing. I mean in the order of Tom Cruise and Denzel Washington.

As I provided in the example above, the answer depends deeply on who exactly is being called a star celebrity, their talent, and the movie they are in. If you want to have Hilary Duff, or Jessica Alba, or Shia LeBouf well you can’t really expect much even with material as good as The Maltese Falcon. They may be popular, especially with teens, but they just aren’t quality actors.

But quality is not enough either. Burt Reynolds and Clint Eastwood are both notable, exceptional actors. They both are legitimate mega-stars. But if you saw them in City Heat, well let’s say that I hope you watched it on broadcast television where it didn’t cost you more than time.

And sometimes it’s just so close but not there, like Russell Crowe and Denzel Washington in Virtuosity. Or Al Pacino and Keanu Reeves in Devil’s Advocate.

On the other hand, match up Robert DeNiro and Al Pacino (in Heat); Cary Grant and Tony Curtis (in Operation Petticoat); Steve McQueen, Yul Brynner, Robert Vaughn, Charles Bronson and James Coburn (The Magnificent Seven); Marlon Brando and the entire cast of the Godfather; Kathryn Hepburn and Spencer Tracy (Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner – also including Sidney Poitier) or Humphrey Bogart (The African Queen), and now with the proper script you have a movie. A big movie. A movie people want to pay to see, and will enjoy the experience.

So I come back to the question at hand. Is the pairing of 2 of the top A-list actors, with a decent script enough to have a blockbuster movie?

Well in 2010 we may well find out. Because that is the proposed release date for a spy-thriller, The Matarese Circle, featuring Tom Cruise and Denzel Washington. The deal is not final yet, and production has yet to start. But if this is the line up the next question has to be the script.

The script is from the same mind that created the Bourne series of books, Robert Ludlum. So I think the question of how good it might me is no longer in doubt. Add to this the fact that the director of this proposed film is David Cronenberg known for his films The Dead Zone, The Fly, Crash, and Scanners. So that front should be solid as well.

If this film can capture the unique spark that was in say Collateral, then this film will top the charts. One might expect that this could become an Oscar contender. Mostly due to Washington. Especially if the issue of accents are removed as we all know that Tom Cruise can’t do one.

Either way, if this comes to fruition as it stands now, this will be a must see film. I am eagerly awaiting the early trailers.

Forbes recognizes the obvious about Will Smith and people of color

Oh how shocking. Will Smith is the most bankable entertainer in Hollywood. With the record for the most movies grossing over $100 million in a row, who could have guessed?

Honestly I am not amazed. But I really hope that the executives in Hollywood are paying attention to the numbers. Because it flies in the face of the notion that

“American audiences want to only watch people similar to themselves.”

That is the industry code words for the functional equivalent of “White only” - to me - which is present in the overwhelming number of television shows, movies, and even work behind the camera.

In fact, according to Forbes, the top of the Star Currency list includes Denzel Washington at number 8. On the Celebrity 100 list the start is with Oprah Winfrey and Tiger Woods. That list goes on to include Beyonce Knowles and Jay-z in the top 10.

Yet for all of that, and the many other people of color that made each of the lists, Hollywood avoids us. Which is odd for an industry that is best known for copying anything that is successful to death.

Just look at the 30 remakes that are going to hit screens or announced so far in 2009. Look at all the copycat stories that fill the television screens and theaters; they even copycat success from other countries (Life on Mars, Leverage, Bangkok Dangerous, ect.). And there is hardly any escape from some form of reality programming on every network including cable television. There are few original ideas in the industry, especially over the last decade or so. Except if it involves people of color. Then there are really none.

Will Smith, Denzel Washington, Laurence Fishburne, Samuel Jackson, Jamie Foxx and Eddie Murphy are the key male African Americans that fill screens and bring in revenue. Halle Berry and Queen Latifah are the Black female counterparts. Several of them have been doing so for decades. Yet Hollywood ignores the majority of Black actors, preferring to fill the ranks of new actors with virtually only White faces. And it’s not because there is a lack of a potential pool of actors to select from.

Television shows like the Cosby Show, A Different World, My Wife and Kids, The Fresh Prince of Bel Aire dominated the small screen. And once they were off the air nothing even close replaced them. The various networks didn’t even try to copy the shows.

It’s not that I expect every show to have people of color in them. I don’t want to see a television schedule of crap that is made to have people of color fill the screens and then be rejected with a casual ‘well we tried.’ But to honestly expect that in the 21st century, as people are declaring the era of “post-racial America”, we see almost the same number of African Americans, Latino/Hispanics, Asians and so on in any medium you wish to chose as were around in the 70’s. It’s deplorable.

Perhaps I wouldn’t get as upset if other aspects of the media were better. But news media still loves to depict people of color as violent and guilty of any wrong-doing or lack of success whenever a video is needed. And it is conspicuously remiss in reporting any news event that identifies people of color as victims of crimes via police brutality or other circumstance.

Just look around for the coverage of Oscar Grant, Adolph Grimes, or Robbie Tolan. All you will see is continuing coverage of Casey Anthony and the Petersen case in Ohio. Or how about the last time you saw national attention of a Black child that was missing?

But at least Forbes is taking notice that America loves it’s celebrities and entertainers of color as much as anyone else. Hopefully one day Forbes might just get involved in entertainment and things will improve. Or the racially blind execs in Hollywood will be replaced by open minded people. If only.

An Obama effect in Hollywood is insulting

There is something that’s been nagging at me for months. The Obama effect on media and television. The very statement is an insult. Let me explain why.

An effect is a reaction to a stimulus. As long as the stimulus is around the effect continues. Once it is gone the effect fades. An Obama effect is a temporary shift in a long held belief system. And I don’t want to accept that as good enough.

Since before, and massively since, the election President Obama has been used as a reason for media to remember that African Americans have been a vital part of this nation since inception, are a rather large part of the population, and an enormous factor to the prosperity of the economy.

Television and movies have long ignored all of that. With the exception of the Cosby Show and a few programs that were on broadcast television at that same time, the small screen in everyone’s living room is devoid of people of color. In fact, once the Cosby Show went off-air (ending the Cosby effect), the executives in Hollywood seemingly scrambled to eliminate what they had created. Proof that Americans will watch a good program no matter the color of the stars.

At this point, the 9th year in a row, the line-up of television features 2 programs with Black actors as lead. They are on the smallest and least seen public television broadcast network, and hold the worst time-slot possible. Beyond this, there are 2 prominent Black actors in drama ensembles. And then there are 2 programs on cable television that feature Black casts. That’s it, out of over 120 programs just looking at broadcast television alone.

But President Obama will cause all that to change. Kiss my ass.

I do not need, nor should it take, the leader of our nation to be Black to make me aware of the abilities of tens of millions of Americans. There have long prior been examples of success in front of and behind cameras. There has long prior been proof of our viability. And to claim that only now people can see or accept this is insulting to generations of African Americans and the American public at large. To say nothing of the even less acknowledge or seen Latino/Hispanic and Asian communities.

Back in November of 2008

“It may say something about the state of American television that there is one more black president-elect of the United States than there are black actors with individual lead roles in a network television drama.”

Recently Bill Cosby had this to say about the supposed Obama effect and television

“No, because these people are stupid," he says, referring to network bosses. "Look at how NBC is struggling. You would think they would make some changes and be talking about trying to get another 'Cosby' kind of show. But they would probably die before putting another show on about a black family and black pride."

And Bishop T.D. Jakes stated

“I think sometimes the only images we see of people of color are the images that Hollywood projects: the hip-hop, the gangs, the street life. Now, it would be wonderful for them to recognize what has always existed in the African-American community and what Obama's presidency suggests: middle-class African-Americans who are articulate, intelligent and thoughtful."

And that is the issue. Hollywood wants African Americans to be limited to gangsta rappers or such ilk. President or not, African Americans are supposed to be bad guys, poor, uneducated and in need of a hand-out. Adding more African Americans because of President Obama is just that. And once he is out of office, just like with the Cosby effect, they can go back on message.

That is insulting. I don’t want laws to tell me that I am equal. I don’t want executives in Hollywood to portray African Americans in a movie or program because they want to enlighten me to success. These things should be obvious to anyone that looks around or reads more than a high school book on history.

America does not need an effect. We need respect. For those that work everyday, that contribute to the prosperity of the economy, of those that aren’t living the commoditization of Black culture. We need to acknowledge that without African Americans, America would have failed before it could have started. And that right this second, there are tens of thousands that are qualified and capable but overlooked because they have a permanent tan.

Jaime Foxx, Denzel Washington, Laurence Fishburne, Bill Cosby, Richard Pryor, Eddie Murphy, Sidney Poitier, Angela Bassett, Terrance Howard, Gabrielle Union, Oprah Winfrey, Spike Lee, Bill Duke, and so many others are not an Obama effect. They are not an effect at all. They are representatives of a far larger, more diverse community that has been right here for as long as America has been around – they have just been mostly ignored.

Trying to placate this vital segment of America with insincere transitional leftovers is not the answer. Though it does answer a sincere question that often is asked and I think best stated in the movie The Tuskegee Airmen.

“Lt. Col. Benjamin O. Davis Jr. – Andre Braugher -
…I ask myself the most difficult question everyday. How do I feel about my country… and how does my country feel about me.”

A lie said by millions

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." - Inigo Montoya - Princess Bride

Yesterday I was speaking about Good Hair, the upcoming documentary by Chris Rock. After having written about this subject I was brought back to an old pet peeve of mine. A common saying that is obtuse and an oxymoron. And everyone has heard it.

In countless films, emails, books, and nowadays internet dating sites you have seen

“Tall, dark, and handsome”

Now because of the conditioning of the media most will imagine Cary Grant, Mel Gibson, Leonardo DiCaprio or some other famous White guy. But that is completely counter-intuitive. It just is stupid.

Dark defined as:

Black, shadowed or black, having a dark hue, colored: having skin rich in melanin pigments

Since the meaning of the word is definitive, and in no application equating to white, light, pink or pale, I am at a loss of how the hell anyone can take that phrase to mean a White male of any sort.

It is solely through the manipulation of the media and Hollywood that anyone might confuse what the hell is being said. Such that “tall, dark, and handsome” should in reality bring up thoughts of Denzel Washington, Jamie Foxx , Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, or Michael Clarke Duncan and so on.

It is so absurd as to be absolutely common. And I doubt many non-people of color ever thing twice about how stupid that statement is.

Is this a big deal? No, not in a change of life sense. But it does say something about long-term depictions of people of color and subtle unconscious preferences in the nation. At least I think so.

Billions are spent every year for people to go and “get some color”. Tens of millions travel the globe to have their skin darken, though temporarily, and gain a “healthy tone”. And the search for eternal love is often filled with the above statement. At every turn it is a statement of the beauty of people of color.

Yet to consciously state such in public is abominable. Instead we get so much media influence that the obvious is now the wrong answer. Talk about love and hate. No wonder western society is so screwed up.

And before I get the hate-mail, or those trying to justify the phrase, those from Mediterranean backgrounds are not dark. When I stand next to an Italian man, he does not look like me. He is not confused as Black. He may be more pink or tan than some, especially after being out in the sun, but there is no question as to whether he is Black.

Look this is not about race as much as it is about language and the meanings American society places in those words. It is a wake up call that some things are just too stupid for intelligent people in the 21st century to do. It is a reminder that if we allow such obvious blatant falsehoods to continue unabated and unquestioned, we equally allow the breeding grounds for racism and prejudice to grow,

So it’s obvious. The next time you use that phrase indicate that you are speaking about a Black person. And if you overhear a friend use the term incorrectly, remind them how dumb they are being. Because I really am beyond annoyed at hearing it used as it has been.

America likes quality not color in movies

I just want to back track for a moment. At the end of 2008 there was a top of 2008 list that I think most have never heard of nor are they aware of who made the list. While this list is mostly for acting entertainers, movie studios and movie theaters it bears worth mentioning.

The Quigley Poll has been around for 76 years. It surveys movie theater owners and asks them whom they feel was responsible for the most revenue generation in the year. This is important to Hollywood as it confirms or changes how much an actor/actress is worth, and who they want to star in additional films. And it also influences what films will be made, indirectly. If an actor/actress who is know for dramas brings in enough to top the list for drama films, Hollywood with their tunnel-vision will make more of those types of films especially with that entertainer.

In 2008 Will Smith topped the list. Now that is very significant. He is only the second Black actor to top the list in 76 years. The last time an African American topped the list was 40 years ago, and he was Sidney Poitier. Just imagine that.

That means that all the success of Denzel Washington was not enough. Samuel Jackson didn't count. Even Jamie Foxx was not seen as successful enough. Not to mention Don Cheadle and many others over the decades.

This also means that Will Smith (the first and only actor to have 8 films consecutively gross over $100 million) has attained a level of acceptance in America not seen in 2 generations. In the late 60's America was forced to open it's eyes to all the people in the nation. Leading that charge on screen was Poitier. He opened doors that had been closed for the better part of a century. Then America looked away again.

This is important because Hollywood uses the excuse

"White people won't go to see a film or television show starring Black people. They can't connect with them."

That feeble attempt at justification enables television to mirror the 1950's mentality, and denies opportunity in front of and behind the cameras to thousands of qualified and non-White Americans every year.

But Will Smith has given just cause for that excuse to die. He again proved that America wants to be given quality, not just repetition, in their entertainment. It is the American spirit of competition that says the best demand equal time regardless of race or any other superficial factor.

I love quality Black cinema. I hate Soul Plane and other such trash. And I enjoy equally as much quality work of any capable actor/actress in multiple genres. But I cannot say that I will begrudge Hollywood if they finally join the rest of most of America in the 21st century. Will Smith is just one example, as is Spike Lee, Bill Duke, Denzel Washington, Don Cheadle, Forest Whitaker and on and on.

Americans go to see the top actors/actresses in the top films. It's time that Hollywood look around and see who really is in the A-list, regardless of color.

Movie Preview: Pelham 123 and G-Force

The year starts off with an interesting take of a couple of films. On one hand we have a film that is a remake, and on the other we have a film that sounds like it's a conversion of a classic cartoon. Let's start with the remake.

The Taking of Pelham 123 is a film from 1974. It was well acted, with the leads being Robert Shaw (some may recall him best from The Sting) and Walter Matthau (maybe best know for the film version of the Odd Couple). It dealt with a subject that was foreign in America in 1974, but today is a constant thought in the backs of minds of New York City subway riders everyday. It's not often that a film could hit a subject so well decades before it becomes a national focal point.

Suffice to say that they story is about a hijacking, of a NYC subway car. Sounds odd? Perhaps too incredible? Not really, and even more of a question in these post 9/11 days.



The question you face in the film are:

Can they really do this
Can they get away with it
What can the various departments of New York City do about this

These questions were real in 1974, and today are even more pressing. So the task for Denzel Washington and John Travolta are daunting. They need to make this feel real, scary even, yet not so much as to cause people to give up on the subway. They both have to live up to the performances of the original film, while new scenes of explosions and car chases inevitably will be thrown in for modern audiences. Maybe even overcome some CGI too.

I believe that Travolta will be the bad guy. The character is kind of a mix of roles he took in Broken Arrow and Face/Off. For Denzel as the good guy we will probably get a mix of his characters from Training Day, Inside Man, and perhaps a bit of Virtuosity.

Done on location, I think this remake only has to fear one thing. The tendency of Hollywood writers and studios to revision a great film and lose the meaning and intensity of the original.

On the other spectrum of the films we will see later in the year is G-Force. This is not a conversion of the Japanese cartoon Battle of the Planets. If it were I definitely would want to see that. Instead we have a CGI film from Disney. Prepare to get more depressed.



Yes this is another cute animals film. Guinea Pigs (a mole and a fly) are our heroes in this film. It seems that an animated hamster, cat, dog, and pigeons demanded a one-up by Disney. While these kinds of films can be cute, occasionally, Disney feels the need to grab the kids with cute animals as opposed to a storyline.

I for one am getting bored with all these films with cute animals that can talk and do stunts. I have never really been a big fan of CGI. And I think this is just a cheap tactic as opposed to really original films that might be done. Then again, the film is not targeting single male intellectuals in their 40's.

I'm sure it will bring in a slew of kids, make tons of money, and guarantee a sequel - with even more furry critters than the first. And I don't doubt that this will be a decent choice for parents that don't want their kids exposed to the violence of Terminator:Salvation or the glorification of drugs, violence, and degrading of women this is Notorious. But for the adults out there, don't expect this film to be the Incredibles. You will likely be the least entertained in your family.

Celebrities and entertainers that should retire

Things in Hollywood tend to happen in 3’s. Whether it’s a franchise of movies (before everyone stops caring about the series of films), celebrity deaths, or now early retirement. The current news flash about the silver screen is that Joaquin Phoenix, Angelina Jolie, and Nicole Kidman have all lost the acting bug. But does it matter?

What happened to the old days where good actors and actresses worked until they stopped getting roles or just sucked so bad that they stopped trying? When did entertainers publicly announce the fact that directors and Hollywood execs had lost faith, or found them too problematic, and stopped taking their calls?

Now this may not be true of each of the above movie stars. Angelina Jolie still packs in the crowds and her movies have been quite good of late. WANTED was a good film and made decent money (though she was way too skinny). Changeling seems to be doing alright in theaters, Beowulf and Kung Fu Panda don’t count as they were animated. And she was nominated twice for her work in A Mighty Heart. So to see her give up film work is a bit of a loss. Then again no one is really looking forward to Lara Croft 3.

Joaquin Phoenix is still riding high off of his work on Walk the Line (which was excellent). But his work on Gladiator, Ladder 49, and Hotel Rwanda easily cover the lesser known Two Lovers and Reservation Road. And the fact that he is Puerto Rican (which most do not seem to focus on) is a bonus to me at least. But like many actors, music is a drive that is currently consuming him.

Nicole Kidman though needed to retire years ago. Seriously, her retirement is more the fact that she does not deserve the pay she makes. The last success she had was Happy Feet, which was animated. It could be argued that Cold Mountain was a hit, but you really need to go back to The Hours or Moulin Rouge – roughly 8 years ago. Her career seriously peaked in 1990 with Days of Thunder, which former husband Tom Cruise (and the NASCAR cars) had more to do with.

But if every one of these actors stopped making films, who would care? Besides their fan clubs, not many. These are not the Humphrey Bogart’s, John Wayne’s, Lucille Ball’s, Lena Horn’s, or Katherine Hepburn’s of film. 2 of the 3 are very good, but not a single one is great. Their loss really amounts to nothing.

It’s not like the masses are losing anything. And telling the world that you won’t make another bad film we wouldn’t watch on DVD (mostly in Kidman’s case) only means we have something to look forward to, not lament.

No what this really says to me is that Hollywood is sitting on it’s laurels too much. That too many are overhyped. That the dearth of real talent is more obvious today than perhaps at any point in movie history. And that many of the more bankable and successful actors and actresses are still not going to get the attention they deserve.

If anything I hope this leads to a flood of retirements among the current crop of entertainers out now. Perhaps the following could retire and save us the movies, trailers, and DVD’s that flood the market now. I’d love to hear that the following are going to avoid smiting my eyes in 35mm

Johnny Knoxville
Vince Vaughn
Jennifer Lopez
Halle Berry (yes she has an Oscar, but name the film she won for. Or a great role she has done? Or a great film she was in.)
Jennifer Aniston
Ashton Kutchner (he was bad on television. Take away Demi Moore and you have nothing worthwhile about him)
Topher Grace
Ben Stiller
Leonardo DiCaprio (over-hyped)
Jessica Alba (looks but no talent)
Hillary Duff
Lindsey Lohan
Jean Claude Van Damme
Steven Segal (his time is passed)
Beyonce Knowles (stick to singing)
DMX
Ja Rule
Virtually every gangsta rapper
Cedric the Entertainer
Ben Afflect

The list is not perfect (there should be more on it) but in each case it is clear that the people here are each in need of serious acting classes, or at least better screening of the scripts they agree to.

I’m sure some will not agree with at least a few of these choices. Every actor that makes it to the big screen has a few fans. And looks trump talent these days. But not one of these actors or actresses can match up to real talent – thankfully they don’t even appear in movies where real talents appear. As I recall none of the above have performed with

Denzel Washington
Jamie Foxx
Robert Downey Jr.
Terrence Howard
Michael Douglas
Al Pacino
Benicio Del Toro
Johnny Depp
Kiera Knightley
Susan Sarandon
Tom Hanks
Forest Whitaker
Morris Chestnut

I don’t think I need to go on.

But if you could pick anyone to remove from movie screens and television forever who would you pick? Do you agree with my choices, and who might I have left out?

Celebrity donations - some numbers and organizations you may not know

Recently I had the opportunity to share my thoughts about how Reuters deliberately diminished the generosity of Oprah Winfrey, and the lack of major media attention to the kind and helpful donation of Tyler Perry. That got me wondering, who is giving back to the public and not getting any attention – or worse being diminished – for it.

Well my first stop was at The Giving Back Fund. I looked at the donations made by celebrities for 2006 and 2007 (the last full years of donations reported). In addition I wanted to see how many African American celebrities and entertainers were on the list, as I feel they are the least reported or acknowledged of all high-profile donors.

For the prior 2 years Oprah Winfrey set the bar high. She donated the single most of all celebrities each year, and combined. Her donations totaled $118 million. That 66% of the total of the top 12 White celebrities combined.

The total donations made the top 16 celebrities and entertainers combines to $316.5 million dollars. That’s a huge amount of money. This money went to help prevent and cure HIV/AIDS, provide scholarships, cancer research, Katrina relief, hospitals, day cares, organizations that help various groups and nations in Africa, and more.

Another interesting thing of note is that the top 4 Black celebrities and entertainers’ donations are equal to 77% of the top White celebrity and entertainer donations.

I mention that last part because one of the points of notables making these donations is not only what they can do but also the attention they can being to an issue, and the fans they can inspire to do the same. The more that is mentioned about these donations, the more these issues get attention over Miley Cyrus career decisions or the outing of Clay Aiken – which really don’t matter.

In addition I feel it’s important that African American celebrities and entertainers are symbols of success and inspirational in the Black community. They have broken the stereotypes, and excelled in an industry that affords them few opportunities. And when they do something as important and beneficial as the donations I’m mentioning, they often are either ignored (like Tyler Perry and Don Cheadle), or are diminished (like Oprah) by the major media.

Out of all the donations made in 2006 and 2007, only 9 made donations each year (for a total of $183.6 million) out of over 48 from both years. Those consistent and vital personalities are listed below.

• Oprah Winfrey - $118 million, Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy,
  Oprah's Angel Network
  
• Barbara Streisand – $22 million, Barbra Streisand Foundation
  
• Tiger Woods – $10.8 million, Tiger Woods Learning Center, Earl D.
  Woods Sr. Scholarship Fund
  
• Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt - $10.8 million, School and Community Center in
  Swakopmund in Namibia, Daniel Pearl Foundation, Namibian hospitals, Doctors without Borders, The Jolie-Pitt Foundation
  
• Rosie O’Donnell – $9.2 million, Katrina Relief, day care centers, Habitat for Humanity, Broadway Kids Initiative
  
• Lance Armstrong - $5.5 million, Lance Armstrong Foundation
  
• Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson - $3 million, University of Miami
  
• Andre Agassi - $2.3 million, Andre Agassi Charitable Foundation
  
• Denzel Washington - $2 million, Save Africa's Children, Wiley College
  

I hope you take a moment to look into the causes that they each have made donations to and if you agree make a donation yourself.

Movie Preview: Don Cheadle starring in Traitor

The rise and fall of the stars in the entertainment industry is always fickle. Often this or that actor goes unrecognized for decades sometimes, though their work is of the highest quality. And all too often other factors restrict an actor as well.

Harry Belafonte made huge strides until his politics interfered, Rob Lowe was untouchable for a decade, alcohol and/or drugs has stopped careers of Mickey Rourke, Forest Whitaker, David Hasselhoff and many others for years if not forever; and for some drugs and/or alcohol ended their lives – Anna Nicole Smith, Marilyn Monroe, John Belushi, Heath Ledger, and on and on.

But perhaps the worst reason an actor may be overlooked is because Hollywood decides that the actor just isn’t “leading” material. In some cases that is true, but I think that for one performer it is way off. Don Cheadle.

Don Cheadle is a great actor. His performances have won huge acclaim, and even the smaller more artistic films he has been in have done modestly well. Hotel Rwanda was a performance that would have rocketed any other performer to the top of the A-list in both pay and movie roles. But perhaps the vocal and humanitarian efforts of Don Cheadle, to help end the 5 years and continuing genocide in Darfur, Sudan [efforts that I strongly support] scared too many execs. Or perhaps the fact he is Black has kept leading roles from him, as they once were for Denzel Washington and Sidney Poitier.

But he may get his chance to start getting the leads I think he deserves after his latest film Traitor comes out this month. This is the first film where Cheadle will have the leading role to himself in a big budget film. Up til now Hollywood execs have been fearful and only allowed him to co-star with other actors, which I feel he often out shone. His only other leading roles were in far smaller, limited release films – Talk To Me and Hotel Rwanda (which he was nominated for an Academy Award Best Actor).

This film is a topical one, dealing with the all too real difficulties of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, American influences in the Middle East, fanatical Islam and world politics. Prior films by Hollywood trying to depict these issues in the last 3 years have all failed both due to slipshod acting, and heavy handed scripts that were more self-aggrandizing political commercials than entertainment. But Cheadle has been very good at picking his films, and performing well in them.

The trailer gives us a hint that we may find a more Jason Bourne style look at these issues. Not just action for its own sake but a plot driven drama that uses the violence and confusion of war as a vehicle for the character to become greater than his surroundings. And the biggest question is if Cheadle’s character really is on our side or not. I expect that the film may well end without ever clearly defining an answer, just as the actual reality is equally undefined or clear in its outcome.

If my expectations are correct this will be a defining film for Cheadle. Like what Jason Bourne did for Matt Damon, and In the Heat of Night did for Sidney Poitier, this movie may well establish his rising star as not only the A-list actor he is, but a leading man with the ability to entertain all of us.

The movie trailer makes a bold statement that this will be a movie to capture you for at least its time on the silver screen. Don Cheadle makes that trailer promise far more tangible. I’ll see it and let you know more.

Forbes best paid actors - my version

On a less important and trivial note, news came out today on the top paid actors in America. Now this list has nothing to do with talent per say. Several people on the list are horrible if you ask me. So even though they may have made money I want to present the list in the order of quality each actor on the list has, and I’ll throw in a movie I think that justifies my though.

Let me know if you agree.

• 1. Will Smith. Forbes had him at #1 and he deserves it. He made $80 million in the past 12 months and has a record-setting 8 consecutive films breaking $100 million to show for the salary. Sci-fi, drama, action, you name it and he can act his ass off. So much for those that argue that White audiences cannot connect with a leading actor that is of a different race. – See Ali, Hancock, Independence Day and so on to see what I mean.
  
• 2. Johnny Depp. Another great actor, capable of a range that equals anyone else on this list. He may prefer esoteric roles like What’s Eating Gilbert Grape, but when he wants to go mainstream it’s like a day in Tortuga. Forbes had him in 2nd and I would say it’s as close as his $72 million makes it look. – See any Pirates of the Caribbean.
  
• 3. Bruce Willis. Here Forbes goes by the numbers and I go by quality. Of the remaining actors and actresses he tops the list. He is the everyman that gets the job done with style. He may be the oldest and only made $41 million for Die Hard 4 (which made $380 million) but he most importantly delivers entertainment. – See Hudson Hawk, 5th Element, or any Die Hard film
  
• 4. Nicolas Cage. While you wouldn’t imagine that he was paid $38 million from movies like Next and Ghost Rider, he still can get it right more often than not. He is another of the versatile entertainers on this list. – See National Treasure
  
• 5. Mike Meyers. He is still coasting of the success of Shrek and Austin Powers. And he needs to considering his turn as the Cat in the Hat (thankfully Dr. Seuss was dead before the movie was made). Still Shrek is funny, though not worth the $55 million that he made. – See Austin Powers, or the first Shrek
  
• 6. Eddie Murphy. I would put him higher as he has more lasting power than most on the list, and he has enough talent to do nearly every role in a movie. But his last couple of films were not that good – Norbit and now Meet Dave. Yet as an entertainer he can wow the audience with roles like Dreamgirls (he was robbed of the Oscar plain and simple). His $55 million is like paying a couple of actors each, and it would have got him over his Shrek co-star but his overly family friendly films don’t work above the age of 11. – See Dreamgirls and be amazed.
  
• 7. Keira Knightley. The first lady on the list. She only makes it one step above her Forbes ranking in terms of cash, but she is miles ahead of the next closest female entertainer. She’s sexy, smart, and can do a bit of action – yet none of it over the top. For $32 million I think she is getting underpaid. –See Star Wars episodes 1,2,3
  
• 8. Adam Sandler. While his low-brow comedies are a hit or miss proposition he is more than where he started from. He has grown to do quality serious roles like in Reign Over Me (with a good dose of help from Don Cheadle – massively underpaid) which helps us all forget films like Little Nicky. My guess, his career will grow, and his pay of $30 million, if he stays away from dumb comedy like The Gong Show (yes I know it’s a television program). - See Spanglish.
  
• 9. Leonardo Di Caprio. Basically I put him here because I dislike the rest of the actors even less. I don’t find him all that good and I wouldn’t pay the price of admission to see any film he starred in as sole lead. But he made $45 million so some Hollywood exec must think he is worth it, though some exec greenlighted Soul Plane too. – see something he is in. I wouldn’t know.
  
• 10. Will Ferrell. I liked Elf. Moments in Ricky Bobby (or whatever it was called) were funny, though most of it was exactly what most of America tends to think of when they think of NASCAR. Sadly though he has been paid $31 million to keep playing the same sort of character found in both those movies, over and over again. Semi-Pro didn’t do well because of this, Stepbrothers probably will fare the same. He needs to change or the entertainment career will be like his work on Saturday Night Live, a flat bomb. – See Elf.
  
• 11. Cameron Diaz. She only precedes the next guy because she is a lady and I thought I’d be nice. I don’t find her funny, attractive or talented. Seriously she is ugly and needs to gain weight. I believe the only funny film she was in was Something About Mary (and luckily it was an almost good film for Ben Stiller too) and any other work she has done is too vapid to remember. The $50 million she was paid needs to seriously be spent on other actresses. – See the revisioned remake of Charlie’s Angels, you’ll go to sleep but it’s better than the next guy’s films.
  
• 12. Ben Stiller. He came from a comedy family. He’s been in films with huge talents. He was paid $40 million. Yet this guy cannot stop playing the same insipid character in every movie. I will say this for him; he has mastered the art of doing the same thing badly and getting paid well for it. – See The Royal Tenenbaums, not because he is in it but because everyone else in the film is great.
  
• 13. Last and least of all the entertainers on Forbes list of the best paid (and some of the most overpaid in my opinion) is the #3 woman on their list, Jennifer Aniston. Simply put she needs to eat some food and stick with unrealistic television sitcoms. – See Friends because you won’t have to focus on her and it’s slightly better than the Charlie’s Angels remake.
  

Since no list should go to 13 I will add one more I think deserves to be on the list – Denzel Washington. If he is not the highest paid actor per film he should be. He is quality and can act against anyone on this list and make them all look good via osmosis (yes even Aniston and Stiller).

So that is my take on Forbes. How would you rank them? Who would be your 14th entertainer on the list?

Wesley Snipes unfairly sentanced to 3 years, Willie Nelson free

So I was wrong. Not by a lot, but wrong all the same. Wesley Snipes was sentenced today to 3 years of prison by a judge in Florida today. I had expected him to receive no jail time and probation.

“Mr. Snipes was found guilty of 3 counts of not filing a tax return. Those were misdemeanor counts. He was up for 16 years in prison, that pundits were sure he would be convicted for, and based on the misdemeanors he will almost assuredly spend no time in prison.”

Given that the various pundits were nearly demanding his incarceration I found it interesting that he was found innocent by a jury, and that it was not publicized. There was massive media in convicting Snipes before the trial ever started as I have written. Now that he has been unfairly penalized, the media is all over this in a manner they have avoided on the positive news of this case.

Mind you that before the sentancing many entertainers offered letters defending his character. Some of those included Denzel Washington, Woody Harrelson, and Judge Greg Mathis. At least in the case of Judge Mathis, the hope was not in obtaining leniency but in ensuring a fair sentancing. That obviously did not happen.

Unlike Willie Nelson who lost a case with the IRS, owing $32 million, and received no jail time or probation Snipes was placed in jail. This reminds me of the various cases where crack dealers receive severely harsher penalties while those convicted for cocaine receive lesser punishment. In these examples of what is known to occur commonly, we see that being Black virtually ensures the longest jail sentances.

Remember that in this case we have Snipes with no prior criminal record, this is a non-violent crime, it’s a misdemeanor, and he’s a celebrity (which usually helps). Add to that that the IRS paid Wesleyt Snipes a full $7 million dollar refund, and waited 5 years for the red flags to go up.

At what point is this not the Government picking on a Black man? They used tax loss even for years in which Snipes was acquitted of failing to file a return. And the fact is criminal tax prosecutions are relatively rare. The judge in this case wanted to make a point and hurt Mr. Snipes, not unlike the courts and juries that went after OJ Simpson after he too was found innocent. They just couldn’t let the African American man walk away when they knew (in their minds), and wanted him to be found guilty and suffer in jail. Again, if you think I am wrong just refer to Willie Nelson and his freedom though he was found guilty for $32 million.

And I have to ask, why must the media play up the negatives of this case. From day one they framed this, in 30 second soundbites, to enhance the presumed and pre-convicted guilt of Mr. Snipes. Similar in the way that 35 years of sermons of Rev. Wright were summarized into five 10 second polispeak soundbites to be used against him and Senator Obama.

The media seems to take great joy in promoting any image or story that presumes guilt of African Americans. Yet they are remiss in dealing with obvious events of Whites commiting atrocities and repugnant racial attacks. Just look at all the news coverage given to Megan Williams as compared to Bobbie Cutts or the manner in which the death of Sean Taylor was covered, or the brief coverage of Michael Richards, or the unabashed and unrelenting proclamation of innocence of the Duke Lacrosse team, or the 3 month long coverage of Anna Nicole Smith as opposed to the virtual fleeting coverage of James Brown’s death. And I can go on.

With this kind of media coverage, is there any question why Senator Obama gets such strong polling, and yet reflectively few White votes? Or that Wesley Snipes is now going to serve 3 years in jail for something a comparable White entertainer didn’t spend 5 minutes in jail for?

Hell, Paris Hilton had petitions and multiple pundits proclaiming she was unfairly sentenced – though she flaunted the law and was a menance to the lives of the public on roads. Yet I’ve heard only Judge Mathis on the news media saying the same thing (the sentancing) for Wesley Snipes.

What a world we live in. And what major media we have telling us about it. Keep your eyes open because the America they are selling us isn’t the Friends they want us to believe in, but a more colorful and diverse reality. Until they get a chance to spin the polispeak against us.

M V Consulting, Inc. reports growth in 2007 - 1.9.2008.1

New York (PRWEB) January 9, 2008 -- M V Consulting, Inc. announced today that the final numbers for the entire year of 2007 have been tabulated with phenomenal results. The Company's websites have grown at a remarkable pace, exceeding expectations and indicative of positive acceptance by internet users. In addition the Company's sites were involved with several promotions and events that could not be anticipated, and display the impact that has been made to date.

"2007 was a great year. The blogs of the company grew by over 100% in virtually every metric that can be identified. The give away contests sponsored by the company were well received, if predominantly regional. We were surprised and pleased to receive the opportunity to work with TV One on live coverage of the Heartland Presidential Forum on December 1st 2007. That's something you just can't predict and we are thrilled about it, while looking forward to working with TV One again in the future," stated M V Consulting, Inc. President Michael Vass.

Actual performance numbers are considered proprietary by the Company, but percentile growth and other metrics are available for the public. Some of the most important metrics are:

• Visitors to the site tend to be 41% men, and 59% women
  
  
• 46% of visitors tend to be between the ages of 25 - 54
  
  
• 51% of visitors are college educated, with 37% having no college education at all
  
  
• Visitors to Black Entertainment USA for the 12 months ending December 31st 2007 increased by 156%.
  
  
• Individual pages viewed by visitors on Black Entertainment USA increased by 367%
  
  
• The number of visitors from countries across the globe increased by 35%
  
  
• At the Vass site the breakdown was (this blog only existed for the last 4 months of 2006):
  
  
• Visitors for the full year increased by 5900%
  
  
• Individual pages viewed by visitors on Vass increased by 9700%
  
  
• While the number of countries remained relatively flat. The lack of growth in countries outside the USA may be attributable to the increased focus on the Presidential race and candidate's campaigns throughout 2007 as well as the limited time of existence in 2006.
  
  The M V Consulting, Inc. corporate homepage was launched in May 2007 and therefore has no comparative numbers. Growth was solid and comparable to the first 7 months of either blog, reaching on average 48 countries across the world.
  
  The Company also owns an online store which features 12 separate and distinct clothing lines, as well as providing custom designed mugs, mouse pads, Teddy bears, gift cards, journals, postage stamps and more. Individual sales figures for this division are not reported.
  
  Results of the Company's SEO division are not reported and considered proprietary.
  

Other events

Several other events occurred in 2007 that were of significant importance. The Company created and sponsored 3 separate contests in 2007.

Robin Roberts book - From the Heart - in association with Authorsontheweb.com

Dinner at the Instinct Restaurant - in association with Instinct in Endicott, New York

$1000 for the holidays - run by M V Consulting Inc. with a $100 bonus added to the winning prize given to Cheryl W of New York State.

In addition to these contests, the company was contacted by TV One, which reaches 40 million people via its cable network channel. On December 1st 2007 TV One had a live webcast of the Heartland Presidential Forum, for which it selected 5 political bloggers to comment on live. Of the thousands of potential bloggers available, President Michael Vass was selected for his writing at the Vass blog, and was invited to join the event as one of the 5 bloggers. The company accepted, creating over 9 posts related to the event (prior and after the event) including 6 live during the event.

TV One and M V Consulting, Inc. cross-promoted the event via the individual websites of each company.

Additional items

To date, the various blogs of the Company have created nearly 1000 posts in total. In 2007 alone there was an increase of 201% in the number of posts. The blogs had a total number of posts that exceeded the number of days in the year, thus exceeding publication rates of virtually every other media format and/or syndicated author.

The blogs of the Company have dealt with some of the most topical issues of the year, if not several of the most controversial in perhaps 100 years. Those topics included the death of Anna Nicole Smith and James Brown. The scandals surrounding Don Imus, Duane 'Dog' Johnson, Michael Vick, and Megan Williams. The Presidential candidates of both political parties. Also news involving entertainers and celebrities such as Paris Hilton, Wesley Snipes, Will Smith, Denzel Washington, Oprah Winfrey, George Clooney, and more. Not to mention reviews of restaurants, movies, books, and video games and information about Darfur and the Child Solider Prevention Act.

President Michael Vass is also a contributing author for the 1800blogger.com family of blogs. Mr. Vass writes for a total of 8 additional blogs on a regular basis besides those of the Company.

Mr. Vass stated, "This is only the beginning. Growth has exceeded all expectations and for 2008 we have raised the bar. While visitors to the various sites of the Company equaled or exceeded several metropolitan areas of the United States, our goal now is to reach the equivalent population of the major urban centers of the nation, if not New York City itself. Expect to see our clothing lines in colleges across the nation. And we are looking to lock down 2 exclusive sponsors for the various sites, further minimizing advertising clutter and providing an immersive and non-distracting atmosphere near term. Expect more news on other events soon."

For additional information please contact M V Consulting, Inc. President Michael Vass at info@vassconsult.com or 718-344-6921.

About M V Consulting, Inc. and Michael Vass:

Mr. Michael Vass is a former securities industry account executive of good standing, and currently works in the field of investor relations. He has served in the US Marine Corps Reserves, as well as worked and studied in such diverse fields as entertainment, communications, philosophy and chemistry. He has lived abroad, in Moscow and Tbilisi, as well as in various cities throughout the United States.

Mr. Vass is President of M V Consulting, Inc. a diversified private company that maintains divisions in search engine optimization, an online store, political and entertainment celebrity blogs.

It is the combinations of these unique experiences that have led Mr. Vass to the creation of M V Consulting, Inc. The Company owns Black Entertainment USA (www.blackentertainmentblog.com), VASS (www.mvass.com), a corporate website (vassconsult.com), and an online store (cafepress.com/nova68).

39th annual Image Awards nominations announced - 1.8.2008.1

Amid all the conversations of Senator Barack Obama leading or slightly trailing Senator Clinton in the New Hampshire primary other things are going on. I must admit my own failing here because I have been dedicating a huge amount of time on the ongoing Presidential race. I’ve been following it all since December of 2006, and you can hear my comments on all of that at my Vass site.

[By the way, a Google search today shows that I rank higher than answers.yahoo.com and the heraldtribune.com for Republican pros and cons and wiki.answer.com on Democratic pros and cons. I also am 3rd, 4th, and 5th under pros and cons of Presidential candidates, 2nd – 5th for pros and cons of Republican Presidential candidates, 2nd – 4th on pros and cons of Democratic Presidential candidates. I suggest you take a look at why.]

So what else has been happening? Well the 39th annual Image Awards nominations are out. And while there are no clear surprises, there are no serious letdowns either. The choices on television whittled down a bit, and there were fewer choices among movies, but several items stood out.

There will be a special tribute to Stevie Wonder who will be inducted into the Hall of Fame.

The Great Debaters, about the history making group of Black youth that beat the Ivy Leagues in debates in the 1930’s and were denied their place in history, received 8 nominations. This film also stars Forest Whitaker, and Denzel Whitaker (no relation) who is garnering a lot of acclaim.

Best Picture nominations included Talk To Me, with the inspiring and very talented Don Cheadle, I Am Legend, starring the equally talented Will Smith, American Gangster, another good film starring Denzel Washington again, and Why Did I Get Married?, by the ever popular Tyler Perry.

Everybody Hates Chris and Girlfriends again gathered multiple nominations as they did last year. Joining them are 30 Rock, Tyler Perry’s House of Payne and Ugly Betty - again.

Dramas included Grey’s Anatomy (again),House (again), K-Ville, Lincoln Heights and The Unit.

The list for best actor/actress and several other nominations follow below:

Actor in a Motion Picture

Columbus Short - Stomp The Yard
Denzel Washington - The Great Debaters
Don Cheadle - Talk To Me **My choice
Terrence Howard - Pride
Will Smith - I Am Legend

Actress in a Motion Picture

Angelina Jolie - A Mighty Heart
Halle Berry - Things We Lost In the Fire
Jill Scott - Tyler Perry’s Why Did I Get Married?
Jurnee Smollett - The Great Debaters
Taraji P. Henson - Talk To Me **My choice

Supporting Actor in a Motion Picture

Chiwetel Ejiofor - Talk To Me
Denzel Whitaker - The Great Debaters ** My choice
Forest Whitaker - The Great Debaters
Nate Parker - The Great Debaters
Tyler Perry - Tyler Perry’s Why Did I Get Married?

Supporting Actress in a Motion Picture

Janet Jackson - Tyler Perry’s Why Did I Get Married? **My Choice
Loretta Devine - This Christmas
Meagan Good - Stomp The Yard
Queen Latifah - Hairspray
Ruby Dee - American Gangster

Documentary

Bastards of the Party
Darfur Now **My personal pick
Desert Bayou
Price of Sugar
Sicko

Directing in a Dramatic Series

Darnell Martin - Law & Order: CI: Bombshell
Kevin Hooks - Lincoln Heights: Pilot
Paris Barclay - CSI: Meet Market **My choice
Roxanne Dawson - Heroes: Run
Seith Mann - Friday Night Lights: Are You Ready For Friday Night?

Directing in a Motion Picture (Theatrical or Television)

Denzel Washington - The Great Debaters
Kasi Lemmons - Talk To Me **My choice
Preston Whitmore - This Christmas
Sunu Gonera - Pride
Sylvain White - Stomp the Yard

Song

Beautiful Flower - India Arie
Just Fine - Mary J. Blige
Like You’ll Never See Me Again - Alicia Keys **My choice
Stronger - Kanye West
Umbrella - Rihanna feat. Jay-Z

Album

Alicia Keys - As I Am
Chris Brown - Exclusive
Kanye West - Graduation
Mary J. Blige - Growing Pains
Seal - System (Warner Bros. Records)

Literary Work - Fiction

Blonde Faith - Walter Mosley
The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao - Junot Diaz
Cion: A Novel - Zakes Mda
Knots - Nuruddin Farah
New England White: A Novel - Stephen L. Carter

The list goes on, but that gives you a cross section of who has been recognized. The Awards will be given out on February 14th, Valentine’s Day. Good luck and congratulations for everyone nominated.

You can see the full list here.

Allegations against Will Smith - 12.26.2007.1

So I’ve read the response of Will Smith on the allegation that he claimed “Hitler was a good guy”. It is complete idiocy. How someone can come to that conclusion is beyond comprehension to me.

Let’s take the actual quote made by Will Smith.

“Even Hitler didn't wake up going, 'let me do the most evil thing I can do today.' I think he woke up in the morning and using a twisted, backwards logic, he set out to do what he thought was 'good.’”

Now when you think about that, I find it hard to see that as an endorsement. You really have to reach to come to any conclusion that is positive about Hitler. Add to that fact that Mr. Smith is an actor, and a very good one.

I do not know how many times I’ve heard actors discuss the motivations of their characters. From Forest Whitaker discussing playing Idi Amin, to Denzel Washington discussing his crooked cop in Training Day, to Gary Oldman in the Fifth Element or The Professional. You can go on and on, but the consistent thought has always been that an actor needs to find what motivates their character. And for the bad guys it’s often that the character does not see their actions as bad or evil. Often that character views their actions as a positive, either for themselves or the world at large.

This applies to the Will Smith lead character Neville in I am Legend. For those that are not familiar with the original book, or the prior 3 movies, Neville is the bad guy. He is the monster in the night that kills people in their sleep. He is the Dracula, or Frankenstein’s monster. He is the thing under the bed. Net result, he is the bad guy that the people of the world fear, and speak of in legends and ghost stories late at night.

But Neville does not realize this, and the audience is not given that perspective until the end of the movie and book. It’s a perspective few films take on, and it changes the view of the world and our traditional views of it.

Thus in looking at the motivation of the character, and preparation of the role the actor must look at it in a manner where you would say “he set out to do what is good.” And there are far too many real life figures that did the same. Vlad the Impaler (who is a positive figure in his native land), Genghis Khan, the first emperor of China, Idi Amin, Alexander the Great, and yes Hitler all thought they were improving the world. That fact that they were repulsive, to at least parts of the world if not all the world, does not change their motivations. To say this is not to endorse their actions but to state a truth of their mind set, and a motivation for actors portraying them.

So when a writer states, immediately before Mr. Smith’s quote,

“Remarkably, Will believes everyone is basically good.”

That is out of context and an insult to Mr. Smith. It’s an attempt to sensationalize a common acting tool and a historical truth. It’s a twisting of words for the monetary gain, and an attempt at international fame for the gratification of the Daily Record writer. And it offends me.

There is no reason to slap the image and personal character of Will Smith. It’s an affront I have never seen made of any other actor. I have heard dozens of actors of note that have made similar statements when portraying questionable or reviled characters. None have ever been accused of promoting the base nature of the character they portray.

You have never heard say Kevin Kline advocating animal cruelty or violence (Fish Called Wanda), or Al Pacino advocating devil worship (The Devil’s Advocate). How about Al Pacino being a role model for cocaine use (Scarface), Sir Anthony Hopkins being Hannibal Lecter (Silence of the Lambs), or Henry Fonda as an assassin for hire (Once Upon a Time in the West). Of course not. To claim such a thing is ridiculous. But if you look at each character you can see where they have a motivation that is positive (from the bad guys perspective) and that makes the character engaging and deeper.

Some might say this is a racial thing. I feel it’s more an American thing, and a rich thing. Will Smith is a successful American, and Black. Overseas there are many that would love to poke at Americans, and the wealthy. The additional fact that Mr. Smith is African American is just another bonus. It’s a trifecta for a mean-spirited and self-aggrandizing writer. And it has no place in fact or criticism of Mr. Smith and his acting ability.

If anyone believes that Will Smith advocates or excuses the actions of Hitler, they are far too small minded to understand actors portraying roles or the difference of a personal motivation and the actual effect of those actions. It would appear that the Daily Record employs such a writer. I feel bad for the readers of that publication as they are being given a disservice.

I can only hope that the American major media stand by Will Smith, and recognize the insulting and defamatory nature of this writing in the Daily Record. And I ask the Daily Record print an apology to Mr. Smith for the actions their writer and editor allowed to appear in their publication. It’s the least they can do.

The movies of 2007 in retrospect - 12.12.2007.1

As 2007 is coming to a close I looked back on the films of the year, and the actors that made them what they were. It’s quite the mixed bag, with far too many massively overpaid for underperformance. Quite a few are, in my opinion, without the ability to justify the pay they receive, while others are a bit surprising in the modest pay they receive, relative to Hollywood payouts. Thankfully there are many that are worth the money that are a bit long in the tooth, making ‘older’ folks like myself feel a bit better I suppose.

In terms of the films that were hits, that lived up to the hype we all seemed to have. Included in that list The Bourne Ultimatum, Live Free or Die Hard, Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, Saw IV, Harry Potter, 300, Spiderman 3, I Am Legend [I include this because the storyline has been good enough to make this the 4th version of the film, and I have that much confidence in the ability and choices made by Will Smith] and to a lesser amount Hitman.

There were several films that failed, and most were no surprise to me. That would include Underdog, Fred Claus, The Mist, The Comebacks, Halloween, Code Name: The Cleaner, Alpha Dog, Hannibal Rising, The Hoax, Rush Hour 3, The Brothers Solomon, Lars And The Real Girl, 30 Days Of Night, The Invaders and a few others.

And then there are the special mentions like Aqua Teen Movie, Red Line, Georgia Rule, Ocean’s 13, Talk To Me, Bratz Movie, Rendition, Darfur Now, Lions For Lambs, Redacted, This Christmas, and American Ganster.

The leading films all boasted great casts with some of the best in the industry. It’s no surprise that Johnny Depp made a reputed $92 million this year. The same can be said of the $32 million for Matt Damon, the $23 million paid to the top 3 in Harry Potter and the unknown amounts for Bruce Willis and Will Smith (I would guess in the range of $20 million a piece). As for 300 or Spiderman, every dollar spent on the effects was worth it as that was the real stars. And Saw is just what you expect so it did its gore fest above par.

The worst films, which the list is hardly complete for, were all bloated poorly written refuse that amazed me someone greenlighted. Underdog proved that not every show or cartoon from the past needs to be remade or done live action. Stephen King continued his long streak of failing to convert his quality and success from books to film. Rush Hour, and Hannibal show that making sequels just for the money doesn’t always make money, and Cedric may be an entertainer, but he’s not an actor. Didn’t anyone get the clue from the horrendous Honeymooners movie? They just need to stop making him the lead in movies. The rest were just really bad ideas that turned into really bad movies.

The list of movies that qualify under that last sentence is too long to write. I’m sure we all could think of a couple of those movies, if we wanted the torture of thinking about that. The good news is that 2007 is over and they can only be reseen on DVD, if you get bored burning $20 bills. (The bad news is that 2008 will probably have at least as many gruesome failures – at $20 million a film Nicole Kidman is burning buildings full of them)

As for the last category of films, well they are special. Aqua Teen Hunger Force is a special interest – mostly targeting college kids up late watching cartoons that are distracting and meaningless (which is why we like them). Georgia Rule deserved to fail because of 2 things Lindsey Lohan and Hanoi Jane. I cannot fathom any film that contains the America hating Hanoi Jane that deserves to make a single dime. I dislike her and revel in her failures, personal and professional. [And I don’t care if anyone likes her for any reason, I despise her.] Equally fathomless is the concept that a film based on anorexic dolls could work. Seriously, anorexic dolls with attitudes?

I equally reveled in the failure of equally America hating films Rendition, Lions For Lambs, and Redacted. The abject failure of these films to garner any interest is a testament to the good taste of everyone except the people who greenlighted them. I can only hope that the actors in these films were doing them for the paychecks and not their political views. I would also say that if the producers and writers of these films feel that strongly (especially Mark Cuban) give up your citizenship and move to Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or any other nation that will take you. I will not mourn your loss or the money you have.

But there are also films that should have gotten real attention and distribution. Talk To Me and Darfur Now were thrown to the wayside, the corporate execs sleeping well at night because they got them into theaters. In fact both were solid films deserving of recognition for what they had to say and the performances. Luckily both have Don Cheadle in them, though he is only acting in one. I have to wonder, considering the wide release of Cedric’s movie, that execs fear promoting a film with a Black actor that makes any serious political and social statement. You can’t pay a major media company to acknowledge Darfur has been going on, least of all for 4 years, and America has yet to do ANYTHING about it. We can run around the world and help fix everyone’s problems, but forbid we even distribute a movie about a genocide we can do something about.

Lastly there is American Gangster and Ocean’s 13. Denzel Washington is a solid, brilliant actor. The film is quite good (even with 3 rappers in it). But I have a problem with the promotion of a negative style of life for African Americans. Far too many will see this as a vindication or motivation. The mindless find inspiration in odd places, thus the film upset me. And Ocean’s 13 just proved that sometimes you can make a sequel just for the money and it’s ok.

So there are my thoughts on the films of 2007. Get the DVD’s of those you like, target shoot the ones you hate and get as a gift. And gird yourself for 2008, because Carrotman (it’s an old obscure comic book character) the movie hasn’t been greenlighted, yet.

[Again I say, Iron Man will be the massive big winner of the year.]