Willis and Foxx are Kane & Lynch

So what do you get when you take a video game, 2 a-list celebrities, and decide to make a movie? Well you can either have a great movie (probably Prince of Persia), a good movie (Resident Evil, Hitman, Max Payne), or you can have crap (BloodRayne, Super Mario Brothers, Double Dragon, ect).

In this case the video game is Kane & Lynch. If you aren't familiar with the game it can be summed up by this video.



Yep, this is a game all about the massive kills, explosions, and mayhem that can be done with a modern video game system. And like most video games these days there is a solid backstory, character development, and solid graphics.

The one thing the game does not have are any real heroes. Both lead characters are scum. Neither is honorable, justified, or innocent. Which makes the copious amounts of violence understandable, as no hero would inflict this kind of pain on innocents.

Now take that and imagine this on the big screen. It's just not possible. Especially when you consider that Kane will be played by Bruce Willis, and Lynch is reported to be Jamie Foxx.

I'm not saying either actor is incapable, because they can definitely act. It's that the characters, as they exist, are just too violent and despicable for movie theaters. Willis and Foxx have also built up reputations as playing good guys, or at least the most good person in a movie of very grey characters. The roles of Kane & Lynch will dent those on-screen images. Which might be a reason for the actors to take the roles.

Still I see massive rewriting in the film version. I expect that at least Kane, possible also Lynch, will be toned down. The characters will be made less homicidal, and given a heroic cause for the mayhem they will create. Possibly even a bit of redemption too. Which could destroy the feel of the movie, or could cause viewers to cheer on the leads. It all depends on the writing.

And writing is something that Hollywood has been skimping on these days.

Whichever way the film goes, it will be interesting to see how it all comes together. Plus watching Willis and Foxx in an action movie sounds fun. Like the match up of Willis and Damon Wayans in the Last Boyscout (a good film by the way), but with a lot more action.

Figure it will be 1 - 2 years before the film is out. Until then, you can play Kane & Lynch 2 (out in August) and just imagine the film to come.

Jamie Foxx - the apology

This didn't take long


(sorry for the quality, it's the best I could find)

So what did you think of the apology?

For me it was mostly heartfelt, though the sting of future Hollywood movie loses and advertising dollars floating away seemed to be right up front too.

I say that because the first thing that Foxx does is excuse his actions. He tries to justify what he did. He compares himself to Howard Stern. He blames the incident on comedy. He reminds us that this was a private radio station and that his radio programs content is 'blue'.

Then he gives the audience an apology. Only after that does he turn to the camera and apologize to the only person he needs to apologize to.

I did not accept it when Michael Richards excused his racist rant on being a comedian or a comedy act. I did not accept the excuses of shock radio excess and incredulity from Don Imus. I did not believe the sincerity of Dog the bounty hunter on national television. I see no reason to accept the reasoning of Jamie Foxx either.

The only reason that I don't believe that Foxx should be fired is because he is on Sirius Satellite Radio. These were not public airwaves, and to a minimal degree his target is a celebrity. The First Amendment and the ability of an entertainer to respond in kind or publicly are the only things that save Foxx. Barely.

He is wrong and he knows it. Had anyone said such things about his own daughter, he would have been incensed. I fully doubt that pleas of comedic license, and private radio exclusion would be enough to calm his anger. I doubt that his daughter would find solace in the First Amendment, or hearing that it was all just a joke.

So was this an act of contrition or preservation? I believe it was both. Was it enough? Only Miley Cyrus and time will tell. But I am left with a severely diminished view of Jamie Foxx. I thought he had more class than what he showed. I thought he was raised better, in fact I am sure of that at least. Extreme talent does not preclude a boorish demeanor.

Jamie Foxx may be at the top of the box office pay, but he now resides with the lowest class of entertainers and celebrities in my mind now.

Jamie Foxx vs. Miley Cyrus - Foxx is a loser

"It takes a lifetime of work to create a reputation, and mere moments to destroy one."

I think we all have heard some variation of the above quote. Everyone except Jamie Foxx it would seem. Honestly, I know his grandmother taught him better than that.

Yes I am speaking about the attack that Jamie Foxx made against Miley Cyrus. Carried on Sirius Satellite Radio, it contains massive profanity and horrendous comments.

**Warning, the following has language not suitable for young visitors.**


Now I am no fan of Hanna Montana or Miley Cyrus. In fact I have never heard or seen a thing she has done. But she is a young child. She does not deserve this. No child does.

When this starts off, I was not instantly offended. Celebrities and entertainers all learn to have thick skins quickly as they are all critiqued and subjects of comments both fair and foul. While it's in poor taste to take on a child about their looks, as a celebrity it's not much different than when an entertainer walks the red carpet and hoards of bloggers and the media harshly comment about the clothes worn.

But the fact that someone would call the child a B**** just because of something they overheard about her is harsh. Even worse is that anyone would say that about a child because they don't like the child's choice. Such action is low, and speaks poorly of the person who does so. Even if they are in the Hollywood industry.

It's when Jamie Foxx starts into his tirade, calling for Cyrus to

"..make a sex tape and grow up. Get like Britney Spears and do some heroin... Do like Lindsey Lohan and [garbled] lesbian and get some crack in your pipe... Catch Chlamydia on a bicycle seat; That's what I want."

I just lost all respect for the man.

He is goading the child to do drugs. To ruin her life - professionally and personally. To become physically ill. What real man says these things to a child?

I somehow doubt that comments like this were the reason for Foxx's success. But such arrogance and insensitivity could likely be a cause for his failure. No matter how good he has proven himself to be, such behavior is unconscionable.

The difference between these comments and those of Don Imus are minor. While Cyrus is a celebrity and thus open to public comment, she is still a child and deserves respect and a modicum of decency. And the only real saving grace for Foxx is that he is on private radio. People made the choice to pay for this service and to hear such language and commentary, drivel really. Thankfully this is not something available on public airwaves. Had it been so, I would demand his being fired and a boycott, just as I did with Imus.

But while Foxx may save his work for now, his image is tarnished forever I believe. And he can only blame himself for this. His ego has written a check that his ass is going to cover to his detriment.

The thing that I don't get is that listening to Foxx speak about the lessons he was taught by his grandmother would seem to be diametrically opposed to the behavior he has displayed on the radio. I don't think its Cyrus that has something to fear but Jamie Foxx. He sounds like a man falling into the trap of quick fame that has claimed the lives and careers of countless Hollywood stars and entertainers.

That Oscar will not make fans, nor drive people to see his movies. That chip on his shoulder will not encourage people to see his portrayals in theaters. The audacious and blatant disrespect for a minor will definitely light a fire in families and kill ticket and DVD sales for a long time to come. And he deserves every bit of such retribution and displeasure.

If a man said such things about Jamie Foxx's sister, or grandmother, I bet he would be in a rage and want to kick their ass. How are his words any different? If a White man said such things about a Black woman, there would be an outrage among liberals across the nation. This there should be. But that same righteous indignation deserves to be directed at Jamie Foxx now.

"Stupid is as stupid does"

Living proof of that can be found in the words of Jamie Foxx and his cohorts on the radio. This isn't a Black/White thing. It's a dumbass thing.

Jamie Foxx needs to get on national television and apologize sincerely to Miley Cyrus. Because he should at least be man enough to do that. I'm sure his grandmother raised him well enough to know that.

Blame It - Jamie Foxx's new music video

No matter what you may think of the skills of Jamie Foxx as a singer, you have to give him credit. The man is big enough from his acting career that he is able to pull out the stops. His latest album features the song Blame It - the video of which puts many entertainers to shame.

The music video is a collection of some of the top entertainers of the past several decades. Ron Howard, Morris Chestnut, Jake Gyllenhaal, Samuel Jackson, Quincy Jones, Forest Whitaker, among several other stars all appear prominently in the video. Oh, there is also T-Pain, who sings on the track. There are enough stars in this one music video to start an awards show.

But having the power to attract big names for a music video does not mean that the song itself is good. Luckily Foxx can sing. Which elevates the song. It has a message which unlike contemporary songs is not overly graphic or over the top with sexual lyrics (though it's not a choir boy song either). That is up until T-Pain starts his part. Then it gets far more graphically explicit.

The title gives you a pretty good idea where the song is going anyway so there are no real surprises. Still the video avoids the mostly naked, butt gyrating theme most videos of this lyrical nature would inspire. A bit of class never hurts, and can be among the reasons so many stars agreed to be available.

The beat is smooth and reminiscent of older R&B, nothing hits you to glaringly - except for the dramatic shift during T-Pain's section. Then again, that's what T-Pain is on the song for. While this may not be the top selling song of the year, I can see how this can do well in a club on Saturday night. I have no doubt it will get people on the dance floor, and massive airtime on the radio. There is just one riff - the stuttering of the word alcohol - that just irks me. But that is a personal irritation, which many may not even notice.

The 2 things that I left the video with are: Who is the Panda? Yes there is a person with a panda head dancing in the video - how often do you get to see that? And if I read it right, the little sister of Jamie Foxx was just introduced to the world in this video as one of the featured dancers of the video. Which I though was a sweet thing to do.

Movie inspires feeding the hungry

Here’s a story I saw the other day that I wanted to mention. It covers the music, a movie and people who are having a difficult time right now. It’s a message of the better nature we all can have.

The movie is The Soloist. This is a film that I think will be huge. It was originally supposed to come out in 2008 but instead will open in April. I can only hope that it has been delayed so that it can capture the bigger spring-summer market.

The film is based on the true story of an exceptional cellist who becomes homeless, and an L.A. reporter who befriends him. It’s a very uplifting story, and stars Robert Downey Jr. and Jamie Foxx. Based on the trailers I have seen it will be an early contender for Oscar nominations next year.

But it is this movie that has inspired orchestras across the nation to reach out and help the communities they are parts of. There are some 163 orchestras that are currently planning food drives just prior to the release of the film. The food is to be distributed locally to Americans in need by Feeding America.

Orchestras that will be involved, and dates of specific events include:

• Rhode Island Philharmonic and Music School on March 19 and 21
  
• Detroit Symphony on March 27
  
• New York Philharmonic on March 28
  
• Gemini Youth Orchestras on April 19
  
• Louisiana Philharmonic on April 22
  

Considering that orchestras in 45 states are involved in this drive to help those in need, I expect that there is likely an event coming up near most of my American readers. So if you have the ability, I hope you can become involved. No family should ever have to starve, especially children.

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: The Soloist

Movies are the pictures of stories in our minds brought to life. They can be inspirational, or allow us to escape our daily lives. They can also be boring, and waste our time. Great stories and great actors often can combine with solid direction to provide a film that can withstand the test of time. To those films that achieve the greatest of these accomplishments an award, the Oscar, is presented (though sometimes Hollywood politics interfere with what and who actually wins). I believe that The Soloist may be of that kind of caliber.



In just watching that video clip I feel you have to be moved. If the film is only half as good as the whispers and the trailer infer then this is an Oscar worthy movie.

Some movies inspire our lives, and sometimes life inspires a movie. In this case we have the latter. Real men that have embodied the best parts of the human condition. And to portray that this film has combined 2 of the best actors in this generation.

There is no question that Robert Downey Jr. is a great actor. He has been able to portray drug addicts to comic book super heroes with a sense of honesty and credibility so consistently that you can believe each was not just a character but him in his daily life. He has the almost unseen ability to add to each film he is in and make it better with his presence.

Jamie Foxx has come into his own in the acting world. He has astounded many that could not see his potential back in his days on the television show Livin Color. He has been able to perform along side some of the best (Al Pacino) and most popular (Tom Cruise) and hold his own to say the least. He is only now starting to get the respect and roles a leading man of his caliber deserves.

Both of these men have been able to convey the lives of great people to the world. Downey in Chaplin, Foxx in Ray. They gave a piece of themselves and the results were riveting experiences that you could not take your eyes away from. So when I see that these great talents are working together, again taking true lives and presenting them in a larger than life format while rooting it in the essence of life we all live, I get excited.



I have only one fear about this film at the moment. I believe that if I am correct, and the trailer is what it is supposed to be – a tease – then we are looking at the hands down Oscar winner for the year. The fear then is that both Robert Downey Jr. and Jamie Foxx will both be nominated for the Best Actor award, and I cannot imagine choosing between the 2.

If I have to guess, and I am correct in what I have postulated, then I have to say that Robert Downey Jr. wins. Not because he is better, or that either actor is not at the best of their performances, but because of Hollywood politics. Because Jamie Foxx has won an Oscar already, and Downey has not, he gets the nod this time. If I am right, or wrong, I cannot say that I will be disappointed as both are deserving.

I’ve said a lot in favor of this film. I am a harsh critic and can often tell if a film is worthy of watching or not just by the trailer. Not everyone will agree with me, but I’ve noticed that the box office’s tend to match my feelings. So I am not fearful that if you see this film you will not be mislead. But either way I will review the film in November when it comes out and give you my honest opinion, even if it means I need to eat crow.

Can the Wayans make it on VH1

**This post can also be seen at All American Blog, where I am a contributing author.**

Do we need another celebrity reality series? Is there any reason for another ‘reality’ program of any sort? Obviously network television executives think so. And one of the upcoming programs has potential. That is the potential to by abysmally bad, or astoundingly good. My bet is towards the bad, and mark my words, there is no middle ground.

Why are there so many ‘reality’ programs? They are cheap. They are dumb. They embarrass, in general, individuals and more commonly these days’ celebrities. The first 2 reasons are attractive to networks because it means they are easy to profit off of. No real sets, smaller crews, no writers (sort of), and no debates on renewing contracts. But all the profits of a successful show even if it’s only in the lower half of all programs on television.

The last reason is self-defining. The public loves to watch entertainers and celebrities fall. Add into the mix the fact that these shows tend to emphasize the bottom tier of notables, those with lesser or barely existent talents and the envy gives way to mean spirited laughter at their expense. That’s the honest answer why most watch these things. It’s not humor with, but at those on the program. It’s the most base and scraping the bottom of the barrel common denominator in television since it was invented.

This reminds me of what Senior Drill Instructor Sgt. Williams used to call television, ITV. Meaning idiot television. 20 years after the fact he is more correct than ever before.

But there are moments of real human interest. Like when Flava Flav would up in a relationship with Bridgette Nielsen, who would have guessed that? Or that Christopher Knight would wind up marrying model Adrianne Curry. But such real and warm moments are fleeting.

Then there are the programs made to emulate the reality of life, with a twist. Like the show Entourage. I’ve never seen it, so I have no clue on its appeal or quality. But I trust the multiple sources that state it’s wonderful. Even moreso because it seems that the Wayans’ family will be involved with a similar (possibly rip-off) version of the program. You know you are doing well in Hollywood when others copy what you are doing.

Now the word is that this will be on VH1. And thus we see how it could be great or horrendous and nothing in-between. VH1 LOVES celebrity ‘reality’ programs. They love to talk about anything involving un-scripted celebrity life. Entourage is right in that vain. And as one blogger mentioned (Whudat.com) if it’s about the lives of the various Wayans clan that could be interesting.

But on the other side are the issues. VH1 is owned by Viacom, the company responsible for the programming at Black Entertainment Television (BET) for years. VH1 is home of the various Flava Flav programs like Flava of Love. To say it succinctly, Viacom has shown a repeated, company wide, ideology of portraying African Americans in the worst light possible.

Add to that that the last several project headed by Shawn Wayans, Lil Man and White Chicks, have neither been the most successful or highest quality to come out of the family. While there is a relationship with Viacom (the old WB program headed by Shawn and Marlon is shown regularly on BET) that is not to say it’s a great one. And if this Entourage-esque program is just their written work, given the standards and expectations of Viacom, horror seems a big potential.

Now I have nothing against the probably most successful Black family in television and movies. I like the work that Keenan and Damon have done, generally. There’s even been one or 2 things that Shawn and Marlon have done that was of some interest. And I love the fact that they provide more work for more African Americans and minorities than roughly a dozen other programs or films, in front of the camera and behind it.

But I still have reservations. Will I see what the program is like when it’s announced? Surely. Will I be happy to know that they are employing so many that every other studio and Production Company seems to be oblivious to, definitely. Would I look at the minor characters and sideline people for up and coming stars? Without doubt, as the family has a knack for finding and developing talent everyone else ignores. [Where did Jim Carrey, Jennifer Lopez, Tommy Davidson, and Jamie Foxx all come from?]

So I will wait and see what VH1 goes with. I hope for a great show, which is quite possible. But I also will steady myself if Viacom is true to its unspoken corporate policy and the program is horrendous. At least we know what the odds are.

BET and it's new program line-up - 7.4.2007.1

I was speaking about the 2 faces of Black Entertainment Television (BET) the other day, and I mentioned that I wanted to go over their new television line up. This seems like a good time to discuss it.

BET is known for its late night music videos. I don’t mean the ones on MTV or VH1. No we are talking about serious booty shaking, barely clothed, derogatory images that even the MTV network won’t touch. This is kind of funny since I recall that MTV and VH1 are owned by the same company that owns BET.

Isn’t it odd that a channel that is supposed to provide programming to African Americans that targets the needs and desires of this community also leads the cable television industry in proliferating content that espouses violence, drug addition, misogyny or in other words the self-destruction of the people it ‘serves’. That’s something you just can’t get on any other channel. And people have to pay to get it. Nice trick.

But to say that is all the channel provides would be a lie. Of the wealth of information available on the internet, DVD’s, and the vaults of entertainment companies, Viacom believes that a steady diet of Soul Plane (possibly a step below the Toxic Avenger series of movies), the Wayans Brothers (that never worked for me), 106 and Park (discussing rap and hip hop predominantly), The Jamie Foxx Show, In Livin Color, interviews with rappers and hip hop entertainers (like 50 cent – the admitted drug dealer that was shot several times, nice role model), and gospel. That is essentially the best that can be provided for African Americans. Bunches of UPN reject shows and one of the worst films ever.

It’s not like there were ever shows staring black entertainers before UPN, you know like Fresh Prince of Bel Aire, A Different World, Cosby, Sanford & Son, The Jefferson’s, or I Spy. Not even any where an intelligent, important supporting character was on every week, like Mission Impossible. Nor any with women like say Star Trek.

Not like anyone at Viacom could go to Blockbuster or Amazon.com and get a DVD of a movie staring African American actors above the D-list. You know, if there were movies like Blade, How Stella Got Her Groove Back, Tyler Perry’s Madea, or Malcolm X. Since this is the line up for the Fourth of July I wish there was a movie starring black actors that had to do with something heroic in American history, maybe like Glory, or The Tuskegee Airmen. Hell I’d even settle for a movie about African Americans in the military, like A Soldier’s Story or Platoon.

But Viacom knows there aren’t things like that available. Does it sound like there are no Black executives at Viacom?

Well if you were wondering, here is one of the highlights of the NEW line-up coming to BET this month. HOT GHETTO MESS. Doesn’t that title sound black? Just makes you want to get a 40 and watch the network with your stolen cable.

Continued in Part 2...

Award shows

So I am just getting ready to go to bed when I recalled something that I though was worthy of note. Yes I get ideas at odd times, I'm a nite owl. I can't take credit for this, David Spade on his show The Showbiz Show had spoken about the plethora of Black/African American themed Award shows.

He did hit a cord on that one as he is right. With the Oscars, finally, acceptance of the fact that there are a number of Black actors worthy of recognition, such as Denzel Washington (though not for that role in my opinion) and Jamie Foxx (definiately for that role), is this the time to splinter off and have exclusive Awards?

Yes, 30 or more years ago, even 10ish years ago I could see the need. But now after making strides and getting the confirmation of peers long overdue, what's the point. Do movies like the remakes of the Honeymooners, Who's Coming Home to Dinner or original movies such as whatever Friday is the latest or Soul Plane really deserve to be given awards? Yes, the oversights (or slap in the face if you preffer) to movies like Spike Lee's Malcolm X are hard to forget, but where have the serious films worth consideration gone.

I doubt if any of the rappers-can-act-too-I-think movies are anywhere above a bad rating, and far from an Oscar caliber performance. The actors who deserve the opportunity to shine, like Morgan Freeman, Queen Latifah (a rare exception to the rapper rule) and others shouldn't be bogged down by the drive of major studios to cash in on the "If it stars Black actors we have to see it and support" attitude prevalent today.

Increasing the number of Award shows (which now includes Black Movie Awards, BET Awards, Source Hip Hop Awards and Vibe Awards - yes not all movies but the point still stands) does not help increase the quality of movies made, nor the ability of good actors getting the roles they deserve. I think it hinders them by reinforcing the notion in the public eye that Black actors can't pull off leading roles in non-Black oriented movies. If the public fails to see these movies the actors, directors and everyone else involved just had their chances drop precipitously[sp? not sure if its a word].

I mean to say that there aren't alot of movies for these Award show to present, of truely high caliber just as there aren't many for the Oscars. I mean a show where the Honeymooners lead is compared to Don Cheadle in Crash or Terence Howard in Hustle and Flow is sad.

And what does it say to the masses? That the best that can be offered is the occasional stand out actor - (I'm not forgetting the women, the list would be too long) like Mr. Howard, Foxx, Washington, Cheadle, Jasckson (Samuel) and Freeman - in the occassionaly stand out movie... but the meat and potatoes of black acting is Get Rich or Die Trying, Beauty Shop, or Guess Who?

I think we should expect more. I think that putting out Award shows, or movies for that matter, with the only goal of making quick cash from a cheap production because it's known that the culture wants to support and nurture and grow its talented people is sad.

What do you think?