10 year movie review: Bamboozled

When I read about the fried chicken served at NBC I was immediately reminded of something. A movie that disturbed me. A movie that moved me. A movie that I think should be shown on broadcast television, uncut, every time the nation celebrates Black History Month.

Bamboozled.

I'm sure most of my readers have not seen this film by Spike Lee. It wasn't popular when it came out, and it still isn't. It may well never become so. Which is a testament to the images and meaning the film embodies.

This is a difficult film to watch. It strikes me with anger and shame in equal parts. It upsets me for what I see on the screen, and what those images mean in relation to the real world. It infuriates me with it's reflection of the real world and the societal norms in the nation.

The more I hear of acts like that in NBC, the more I find stories like that of Megan Williams, Oscar Grant, Mauricia Grant and so many more the closer I believe we get to Mantan and the new millienium minstrel show. The more I see Snoop Dogg and the horde of rappers that are excused and praised for their disrespect of women and themselves, the glorification of drugs and violence, the more I see Mantan. The more I hear talk of a post racial America, while States like North Carolina make decisions to edit American history (starting just AFTER the civil war and slavery) the more I see the potential to fall back to the norms of 1950 or 1920, or 1850.

But Bamboozled is not just a movie about African Americans, it's about America. It's not just painful to see what is possible, but what is happening. It's Chris Matthews proud President Obama can be "in a room full of White people" and still be "unaffected". It's the unreported 19% unemployment rate among African Americans. It's the accusations that to disagree with policy is to be a racist. It's the concept that an African American MUST love President Obama and cannot deviate from supporting him.

Bamboozled came out in 2000, and 10 years later it is even more accurate and troubling than when it was made. Yet it is a movie that is unspoken, unwatched and even less fully understood as a statement of right now.

Here are parts of the film, but it hardly is the complete context.







If you don't get Bamboozled, you don't know American history - current or past. If you aren't angry and uncomfortable watching this film, you can't see the world around you. But see this film you should, for many I would even say must.

Tyler Perry Responds to Spike Lee

Recently I provided video from Black Enterprise of Ed Gordon interviewing Spike Lee. In that video Spike Lee was asked about the state of Black culture and coverage in movies and television. The response was very critical.

Specifically, without directly naming him, Spike called the work of Tyler Perry "coonery and buffonery". He found it akin to Amos 'n Andy. I essentially took it that he found Perry's work - no matter the income it draws - little more than the minstrel show. Which for my readers that are not familiar is possible one of the worst things that can be said of any Black entertainer or celebrity.

There was no question that Perry was going to respond. Here is what is available on that response.



I understand the anger that Perry has. At the same time, there are legitimate issues with some of the work Perry has created. The question I suppose is which is the correct stance, or is there some middle ground?

What do you think?

Spike Lee talks with Ed Gordon about Tyler Perry and "post-racial" America

I received an interesting email earlier today. It was from Black Entertprise, a company that I respect and occasionally hear from. The subject was an interview with Spike Lee by Ed Gordon back in May 2009 that I think few have seen before.

I found the interview to be interesting and yet another facet of Spike Lee that is often overlooked by the major media's rush to paint him as simply "controversial". While I do not agree with most of the political beliefs of Spike Lee, I am a fan of his 24 films. I believe that he has a great insight to art and American life that is often missed in the race to be exploitive or ghettofabulous.

Perhaps the most interesting thing I found in this interview are the discussion about Tyler Perry and the "post-racial" claims for America with President Obama at the helm.

I thank Black Entertprise for providing me with this video.

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.

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.

Spike Lee ignores racial diversity

I love the film work of Spike Lee. I like the fact he takes on controversial topics. But his politics are something else.



I am a Black Republican. I support Republican ideals. You know, things like if you work hard you deserve to keep more of what you earn. Being self-responsible instead of relying on the Government. Having a strong militiary is one part of having a safe nation. And so on.

I disagree with the policies that President Obama and the Democrat-led Congress propose. Thing like letting the Government pick my healthcare for me. Having the Government decide how much money I should have. The Government deciding where my money should go instead of allowing me to expand my business or give to a charity or cause of my choice. Talking to nations and groups that have sworn to their God to kill all of us – and increasing their power by doing so, instead of ensuring they can’t hurt the nation and think twice before doing so. Forcing conservation by jacking up electricity costs and closing power plants. Stuff like that.

Does that make me a White man stuck in the 50's? Does it make Afican Americans like Colin Powell, Ken Blackwell, Condoleezza Rice, Janice Rogers Brown, Erik Rush, Ken Hamblin, Thomas Sowell, Yaphet Kotto, Lynn Swann, Karl Malone, Akindele Akinyemi, T.D Jakes, James Meredith, Vernon Robinson, Stanley Crouch - and I believe Dr. Martin Luther King and Malcom X – among so many others White? Spike Lee seems to think so.

He may not agree with the views of the Republican Party but that does not mean he should insult all Republicans with stereotypical comments. Just as he would be upset if he was stereotyped, or labeled as a liberal, tree-hugging, socialist, racist. I don't think such things can be said about him or most Democrats, but niether should Republicans be blasted.

And most of all I hate the way that Black culture, and American society in general, insists that African Americans must be Democrats. Like we don’t have minds and philosophies of life of our own. Like race is the only issue that we care about.

If Spike Lee makes a new film, I’ll still probaly go see it. But I’m way past tired of being blasted for a choice I make for my own life.

Movie Preview: Miracle at St Anna

Spike Lee has a new movie coming out and I’m sure it will bring its share of controversy. In fact the movie, or more accurately Lee, drew media attention earlier this year. The reason was because director/actor Clint Eastwood found it unimportant to show a single African American soldier in either of his critically acclaimed movies based on WWII.

Miracle at St. Anna is the first film that I am aware of besides A Soldier’s Story and The Tuskegee Airmen that depicts African Americans involvement in World War II. I recommend both movies strongly.

There were over 1.1 million African Americans that served in WWII. These soldiers fought and many died even though America maintained segregation and Jim Crow laws, because they agree that the threat to America was too great to be ignored. They served as bravely and fiercely as any other American or Allied soldier. And in all the movies dedicated and based on the war I can only name 5 (including this upcoming film) that feature or include Blacks. That’s just insulting and ignorant.

Obviously Spike Lee agreed with me.



Miracle at St. Anna is based on the novel of the same name and the Sant'Anna di Stazzema massacre where 560 Italian women, children and old men were killed by retreating SS soldiers. The soldiers in the movie are part of the 92nd Infantry Division which was a real division in WWII that fought in Italy.

The 92nd was called the Buffalo Soldiers, were segregated, fought alongside Black Africans, Morrocans, Algerians, Indians, Gurkhas, Jews and Palestinians as well as with exiled Poles, Greeks and Czechs, anti-fascist Italians and the nonsegregated troops of the Brazilian Expeditionary Force.

The 92nd Infantry Division had the slogan Deeds not Words, suffered 5,000 casualties, and had members receive Medal of Honor-2; Distinguished Service Cross (United States Army)-2; Distinguished Service Medal (United States)-1; Silver Star-208; Legion of Merit-16; Soldier's Medal-6; Bronze Star -1,166; Purple Hearts-1891; Orders of the Crown of Italy-8; Military Crosses for Military Valor (Italian)-17; Military Crosses for Merit in War (Italian)-22; Military Cross for Merit in War (Italian) 92nd Division Colors; War Medal (Brazil)-1.

The 2 men that received the Medal of Honor - John R. Fox and Vernon J. Baker – were given this honor in 1997. That was 48 years after their service, which I think is an absurdly long time to wait to recognize the actions of these men. But it is also common as the surviving members of the Tuskegee Airmen had to wait a similar amount of time to be recognized as well.

Given the history of these men, the valor they displayed during the war, and the massive and unjustifiable disrespect America showed these men before, during, and long after WWII I expect this movie to be very well done. Anything else would be an insult to their memory.

Considering that Spike Lee has 2 uncles that served in the war, I have every reason to believe that he did the best job possible which means a phenomenal movie. If I am correct that also means that Hollywood will likely ignore the film and if it has the luck to gain attention for any awards, it will lose.

Go see this movie. It’s a homage to men that American history has ignored, that served their nation even when it did not serve them. Making this film successful is literally the least that we can do.

And here are Spike Lee’s own words about why you should see the film (and I have to add I don’t agree with his political thoughts).

The growing bandwagon against Spike Lee

Shame on Spike Lee. That’s what it seems Clint Eastwood feels in commenting on the comments of Lee about the absence of a single African American in the nearly 6 hours of film Eastwood created in 2 films about Iwo Jima. And Eastwood is not alone in rebuking Spike Lee.

Amazing. I’ve already made my comment on this issue, where I’ve agreed with Lee and am upset with Eastwood. And yes I do realize that the number of Black troops were less than 1000. Still nearly 6 hours of is more than enough to have one Black face in a background shot at least. Acknowledging the existence of the African Americans that fought and died in WWII is not a lot to ask for. Not that Hollywood has ever cared, as evidenced by the flood of films featuring or including Blacks in WWII films.

But I am now hearing how Spike Lee is being called out for his portrayals of Italian Americans.

“Spike Lee is very talented, but I sometimes wish he'd practice what he preaches," Dal Cerro said. "His points about African-Americans are well taken, but, ironically, he does the same thing to Italians in his films.” - Bill Dal Cerro, president of the Italic Institute of America

Oh really?

This annoys me. Unlike the overwhelming number of movies made by virtually every director since movies have been made, the movies by Spike Lee have diversity in them. People of all colors appear in most of his films. They may not be leading characters but they are there. The same cannot be said of Hollywood in general.

But Spike makes Italians look bad? As far as I recall the Godfather was out long before any film by Spike. As far as I can recall Italians have been portrayed as loud, rude, violent, under-educated, mafia members in dozens of movies and television programs for decades. Spike Lee had nothing to do with the Sopranos. He did not direct Andy Garcia or Robert De Niro in the Untouchables. I really don’t need to go on do I.

There is no absence of Italians in hundreds of films a decade. There is no absence of Italian actors in films, television and the theatre of every style and genre an any year. So this claim against Spike Lee is just a grab at attention, and a means to damage his image. It supports Clint Eastwood and the perception that African Americans were anywhere but fighting for America in WWII.

When the critics of the many films of Spike Lee want to take him on, I suggest they first take a look at our media. When they can prove that Black actors and films are not the trend of the year or the forgotten red-headed stepchild of Hollywood I’ll accept the claim that there are not enough Whites in his films. I’ll accept at that time that historical and current portrayals of Italians, Britians, Germans, French and every other nationality of Whites may be insensitive or detrimental. But when we stop listening to the rhetoric and pay attention to the facts before our eyes we realize that such a dramatic change is still a long ways away.

Reactions to Spike Lee on Iwo Jima

Now a few of you may have been wondering why I have been quiet of late. Well the first reason is that I had a cracked tooth, that I finally went and got removed. Thankfully it was in the back of my mouth. The other reason is far more important. I was waiting. Waiting for what? The comments in response to Spike Lee.

Spike Lee recently commented, correctly, that in the multiple movies discussing WWII virtually none (and definitely none that come to mind for me) include even a background scene that includes a single African American.

"Clint Eastwood made two films about Iwo Jima that ran for more than four hours total, and there was not one Negro actor on the screen”

This is a fact, as is the reality that many Black men fought at Iwo Jima, along with over in Europe and the Pacific throughout all of WWII. Oh, let me correct myself. There were a couple of movies documenting the attack on Pearl Harbor that had one Black man, a cook and Naval hero. But those movies just had him.

Amazingly, if you were to go by movies that involve WWII, you would find few that ever acknowledge African Americans in any war in America. Yet we have been in every conflict and war that America has ever had including the American Revolution. And there were many in WWII – just ask any bomber crew that was escorted by the Tuskegee Airmen (the only fighter escort to my knowledge to have never lost a single Bomber).

So when Spike Lee brings up this fact, that other Black figures mentioned when the movies came out, what kind of response do you expect? How will everyone react to the honest facts of the sacrifices African Americans made alongside White?

Spike Lee courts controversy by criticizing Clint Eastwood – title of article in LA Times

“Last time I looked there weren't any blacks in the flag-raising picture. I believe that was due to a policy called segregation which Spike Lee apparently has never heard of…” – comment by John Reece

“Hey Spike, why don't you do a movie about white people?” – comment by techie

“Hey spike, how come "boyz In the Hood" didn't have a single white or hispanic character. there are white people living is south central LA, and hispanics are the majority now, but i didn't see you whine about that. Racists come in all skin colors and you are one, spike lee, and that comes from me, a black man !” – comment by nick

“Undoubtedly, Lee will soon be demanding that one of the flag raisers be portrayed as a black man. Never mind that it was actually five white guys and a Pima Indian.

Maybe we should start complaining about Lee under-representing whites in his movies if he is so concerned about proper proportions.” – E. Burke comment

“Spike Lee launched a bitter attack on Clint Eastwood yesterday, condemning his failure to include a single African-American soldier in his films about the Battle of Iwo Jima.” – Times Online article’s first line

“Eastwood's film is historically acurate, 70,000 US Soldiers landed on Iwo Jima 900 were black, and in all black units. My Father served on the USS Indiana in WWII and told me the only black sailors on board served in the officers mess. Better than being a snipe where my father served.” – comment by Peter Stella

and of course the reaction by Clint Eastwood himself.

“Asked twice by The Times to respond to Lee’s criticism, Eastwood stared out into the audience as the compere refused to accept a question that did not relate to L’Échange. Later, his spokeswoman also declined to comment.”

So in every version of this story I see a couple of common threads. One is that Spike is after money and publicity. It’s true that he is presenting his movie about the all black army unit in Italy right now. Of course this will affect the movies ability to make money. But it’s also true that in the past many African Americans have made comment about the portrayal of Blacks in EVERY conflict America has ever engaged in. The news just wasn’t covered, but in this case they had too since it relates to a film that is in Cannes now, and the world media is coverung his comments too.

Another common thought is racism. Either Clint Eastwood, Spike Lee, or both are racist for what they did and said. Such are the comments of others. I in fact believe neither is racist, though the issue is racial. There were 900 African Americans in the battle at Iwo Jima. That may not be many compared to the total, but it is enough to portray at least one or two somewhere in the background of a battle scene to pay some tribute to the lives lost in WWII by men who could not ride in the front seat of a bus back home.

Acknowledgement does not have to have a starring role, but it does have involvement. That’s not racist, just racial and true.

Of course there are those that want to lump any film made by a Black director into the themes attributed to Spike Lee. It’s part of the expression of anger I see in the comments and reporting. It comes off as ?‘How dare you point out that the media and America in general, have completely ignored African Americans defending the nation. Don’t you know that you aren’t supposed to exist – you have seen Friends, Will & Grace, Cheers, Dallas, and so on. Just be quiet and leave things alone, and we’ll let you have the Moesha, Sanford & Son, Cosby Show. Now be quiet.’

How about this. Black Americans have actively helped to build this nation at every turn. From the early plantations, buildings, and roads built by slaves, to every war and conflict, thru segregations and up to today African Americans have been involved with the growth of America. In fact I believe that it can be said that without Blacks America would not exist as it does today, if at all. So a little acknowledgement seems like a small thing to receive. Especially for those that fought for the freedoms they knew they would not receive but hoped their children might.

But according to the need to make these comments an attack, or by the comments seeking to find justification it saeems that acknolwedgement is too much. America just can’t accept Blacks history in America. Not the true full history anyway.

Kind of makes you wonder about Senator Obama’s chances doesn’t it. Makes you wonder about a lot of things, I hope. And once you are done thinking, what will you do next?

3 parts of real success - 11.26.2007.1

Talent - a person who possesses unusual innate ability in some field or activity.

Work ethic - is a set of values based on the moral virtues of hard work and diligence. It is also a belief in moral benefit of work and its ability to enhance character.

Intelligence - the ability to comprehend; to understand and profit from experience.

Which of those 3 terms is the most important? Does it matter what they are being applied to that makes the difference?

Why might I ask that? Because as I finally took some time to rest over the holiday, I watched a bit of television and spoke to people around the country. I heard several people complain about their work/pay. I heard several tell me how they intend to be stars. I noticed how much attention is focused on individuals in the media. And I realized that almost everyone had no idea about the above 3 items.

Of the 3, I have noticed that most people work on talent. Especially African Americans and minorities. It’s the E-ticket that gets you on all the rides. It’s the get-out-of-the-ghetto card. It’s the single most important factor ever. And it’s a lie.

Talent is like hope in Pandora’s Box. Perhaps the worst thing to afflict people en masse. It’s a tool that far too many without it use to become rich.

When I mention talent, most think of Michael Jordan or Snoop Dogg. They imagine Beyonce or 50 cent. But you don’t hear people say that Oprah Winfrey has talent (not speaking about her acting, but her ability as CEO of Harpo) or John Thompson, Myrtle Potter, Stanley O'Neal, Kenneth Chenault. Why not?

What about intelligence? You never hear that mentioned. You never hear anyone ask Ja Rule, Dr. Dre, Kobe Bryant, or Tiger Woods if/where they went to college. Because they have talent right?

And work ethics are likely the least discussed item of all. It’s like a plague when it is mentioned.

But when you consider the real successes, the people that really are meaningful and at the top of their game you find, more often than not, that they got their with this combination:

• 1. Work ethic
  
• 2. Intelligence
  
• 3. Talent (if any)
  

Best in the NBA? Michael Jordan. Practiced constantly, played with a 103 fever, and gave 110% every game. Mr. Jordan is a college graduate, and a better businessman than sports entertainer. While he may have made roughly 15 million dollars a year as an athlete, Mr. Jordan makes roughly 2x that a year now, with a net worth well in excess of $200 million, without ever touching a basketball.

Much the same can be said of Spike Lee, Tiger Woods, Oprah Winfrey and most every CEO that the average public couldn’t name if you paid them $50 a name. Each of them worked hard, every day with a plan in their heads. Each of them had an advanced education. Allowing them to understand business, contracts, money management and more.

If you want to know the difference between real success and a fad, look at the work ethic and education. 50 cent will be lucky to be around in 5 years, odds are. Tiger, Oprah, Michael Jordan, Stanley O'Neal, Kenneth Chenault, and others will be making money years after they are dead by contrast. And more of it.

So if you want to know how to become successful, there you are. Make a plan, work at it every day and get an education. If you have a talent you will just help boost your odds. But if you think that you bounce a ball, hum a tune, or sashay better than anyone and that’s all you need, be prepared to be let down.

Only 1 in 10,000 make it to professional level sports, even worse odds to make it in music or acting (how many people get rejected in the first 3 qualifiers of American Idol every year?). A professional entertainer has a career of maybe 7 years, regardless of the realm. Why limit your chances? Why give someone else the upper hand?

Why bust on Tyler Perry? - 6.13.2007.1

Have you heard about the apparent controversy with Mr. Tyler Perry? I had not heard of it previously, but it seems the Houston Press is right on top of it. Honestly I just don’t get it.

It would seem that Mr. Perry has caused a bit of outrage with his new cable television show Tyler Perry’s House of Payne on TBS. Not that Mr. Perry has never been attacked for his material before.

"[It] generates contempt for and ridicule of and erasure of black women as complex and substantive”

All of this drama and yet Mr. Perry made $110 million dollars in his latest films, Diary of a Mad Black Woman and Madea's Family Reunion, and garnered a television show contract. I have to believe that some are watching the program. Thus I can’t understand why anyone would be upset with the man. He makes play, movies and now television programs that target an audience, what’s wrong with that?

I realize that Mr. Perry is not making films the quality of say Mr. Spike Lee, or Kasi Lemmons, Mr. Stanley Nelson, or Mr. John Singleton but why does he have too? Every movie, television show, or anything for that matter does not need to be critically acclaimed and award winning in quality. It simply needs to entertain. That’s it. If people like what you make you get to make more. How much money have actors like Mr. Sylvester Stallone, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Mr. Wesley Snipes, made on films that were weak on plot, long on action and had guns that NEVER needed reloading.


If Mr. Perry can make money with his gospel-heavy, southern-styled, and perhaps stereotypical projects, good for him. I say that for 2 reasons. The first is that few other groups besides African Americans have any interest in the material he covers. It’s just too specific to experiences we either live or know about. Obviously many African Americans have no objection to the material. The other reason is that without Mr. Perry how many qualified Black actors and actresses would not be working today? I would never take food and opportunities out of the mouths of anyone on the basis of something as trivial as ‘I don’t like the work you do’.

For those that don’t like the work of Mr. Perry, do as Ms. Vivica Fox and I have done. Don’t see his work. It’s like when I was young, I recall ads on television in the Bronx for You’re Arms Are Too Short To Box With God [why are the Black theatre play’s titles so long?]. I had zero interest in seeing it, but I was glad that it was out there. To treat Mr. Tyler any different is wrong.

I’ll even go one better. For those that dislike his work enough to complain, go out and make your own film/play/movie/television show. It won’t be easy, you may not make money, but at least you will be doing something. And I’ll be happy to know you did it, whether or not I see it.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Spike Lee to direct film on 'hidden' heroes - 6.8.2007.2

As justice once again weighs heavily on the frail and spoiled shoulders of Ms. Paris Hilton, I will return back to the more important and interesting issues of late. One of the more important items I saw recently is the comments of Mr. Spike Lee.

Mr. Spike Lee will be working on a new film, to be made in Italy. The subject of the film is something that few are taught about in basic American history, yet was as much a factor in the existence of the nation as what is taught. I am speaking of the soldiers that fought in World War II. To be more specific I mean the African American soldiers, men that have been barely recognized and only recently discussed in depth.

Some have heard of the Tuskegee Airmen, an all Black unit that flew support to American bombers and the only unit to never lose a single escort. Recently the surviving members were honored with the Congressional Gold Medal; 60 years after their historic and unmatched efforts took place. But they were not the only Black Americans to fight on behalf of America, even though as Mr. Lee states,

“Despite the fact that they had been slaves for more than 300 years and that they were still at the time subject to terrible forms of discrimination, black men fought like heroes. They behaved like patriots while their brothers were lynched or at best considered second-class citizens.”

It’s about time more is said on this subject. I am a former Marine, my father was a Marine fighting in Viet Nam (he volunteered), and my great-grandfather served in the Army during WWII. Each of us deserve the recognition and appreciation that every solider, during times of war or not, deserve. The blood sacrificed in defense and support of this nation is no less worth than that of ANY other American. That is something that needs to be acknowledged. Far too many movies and stories of WWII, Korea and other wars fail to mention the contribution Black Americans have made. There are far too many movies like Letters from Iwo Jima and Flags of Our Fathers (both happen to have been directed by Mr. Clint Eastwood), and Saving Private Ryan as I recall that completely ignore or blow past the existence of Black Americans during the war.

Far too often movies, and classes in school, give an image of the past that is more similar to a Seinfeld or Friends image of the world. Too often little is said about those that helped pave the way, and secure the freedoms we enjoy now. For all of these reasons I’m glad Mr. Lee will have this new movie out. With luck the film will get the attention, and media dollars, that this subject deserves.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Screen Actor's Guild Award winners - 1.29.2007.2

Excuse me for a moment as I take a second to give myself a bow. Yes I got 5 out of 7 right – 71% - which I call pretty respectable. If you are wondering why I’m so pleased with myself, of the guesses I made on January 9th for the Screen Actor’s Guild Awards [Bad films and Screen Actors Guild Awards hopefuls - 1.9.2007.1] I came pretty close to a clean sweep.

Not too bad for a regular guy. Perhaps the Oscar Award voters are paying attention. They should be. Considering how they have completely disconnected with the public, again, in not nominating Dreamgirls for Best Picture. I would love to hear the reasoning on why it was not nominated. I will give the SAG Awards the benefit of doubt on Little Miss Sunshine, at least they recognized the talent in Dreamgirls by giving them a nomination for best ensemble (basically best picture).

The snub really irritates me. 8 Oscar nominations, but not best picture. Never in 79 years has the leading nominated film not been a best picture. If it is so highly regarded how can it not also be best picture? This reminds me of the fear in 1993, when Malcolm X was not nominated for best picture, nor Mr. Spike Lee for best director. Yet there was large critical acclaim for the film, it won several awards (lesser ones but still won all the same), and Mr. Denzel Washington was easily recognized for his portrayal. In that case though I think the political commentary of Mr. Malcolm X was too much for the predominantly liberal white Oscar committee. [By the way I think this was the reason Mr. Washington won the Oscar. Often the Oscars will give a deserving actor/actress an award in a later good movie for a phenomenal role they were passed over on previously.]

The excuse for Dreamgirls escapes me. It’s popular, making money, still in movie theaters, well done and critically acclaimed – even before the Oscar nod. The only reason I can see for it to get snubbed as it has is a horrible and deplorable reason. I can only hope that isn’t the reason.

But to get back to the point of this post, I am sure that my winning choices will win the Oscar Awards as well. The choices that apply anyway. My congratulations to the winners, Mr. Hugh Laurie (you really should see him play the title character House. Biting wit and sarcasm matched with intense ability. Well written and balanced by an excellent cast), Mr. Forest Whitaker (a long time favorite of mine. His work in Ghost Dog is especially good, though his role as Idi Amin is even better), Mr. Eddie Murphy (I spoke about him in What does Eddie Murphy make you think of? - 12.22.2006.1), Ms. Jennifer Hudson and all the other winners.

Now let’s see how I do for the Oscars.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Historically bad Oscar omission, great Razzie choices - 1.23.2007.1

Ok, I’m shocked. This took me completely by surprise. Whoever is on the nominating committee for the Oscar’s should be checked for drug use, in my opinion they are acting like they are on crack. Perhaps that’s too harsh but I still think the dramatic move away from tradition is severely unwarranted. Of the few historic moments in Oscar history, this is not the one most might have hoped for.

I’m speaking about the omission of Dreamgirls from the Best Picture category. I’d love to hear the justification for this. In 79 years, the total time Oscar Awards have been around, there has never been a leading nominee not also being in Best Picture. It’s more than an a snub its an insult. Perhaps those that chose felt a Golden Globe win was enough, or that Mr. Martin Scorsese has earned a win. I would hate to think it was a remnant of the ‘old boys club’ mentality.

With 8 nominations I think Dreamgirls deserves the nomination. I am not shocked with the nominations of Mr. Eddie Murphy and Ms. Jennifer Hudson. I had picked them earlier in the month to win the Screen Actors Awards and the Globes. I feel Mr. Murphy will get the win, as he has had many films over the years and most have been well liked. In addition it’s time that recognition be given to his ability, as I mentioned in December he has played more characters in a single film more times than any other actor to my knowledge. Mr. Murphy’s current portrayal is just the feather in a cap of a career filled with memorable roles.

Sadly, I don’t think Ms. Hudson will win for the same reason that Mr. Scorsese, Mr. Murphy and Mr. Forest Whitaker will win. They all have a body of work with many powerful performances behind them. Mr. Jamie Foxx has already won, deservedly for Ray, and Mr. Will Smith has been nominated before.

I will say that it is interesting to note how many deserving African American actors are getting noticed for the roles they should be noticed for, since the win by Mr. Denzel Washington. After decades of being ignored, en masse, it’s refreshing to see the change. Still I think Dreamgirls is being affected by the same thing that hit Mr. Spike Lee’s Malcolm X, it’s a subject the Academy doesn’t want to look at.

On the other side of the movie industry, there are the Razzie Awards. How they were able to whittle down the numerous losers from last year it’s hard to say. One pick I had thankfully forgotten was Little Man. Mr. Keenen Ivory Wayans is a great director, and his comedic instinct is usually on the mark. Still there is only so much that can be done with material like the stuff of that movie. Then again it was a far better film than the forgettable Basic Instinct 2.

But it was a bad year for big names overall. Many of the normally steady actors made choices I have to imagine were just for the money being offered. Mr. Robin Williams, Mr. Tim Allen, Mr. Nicolas Cage all had films that just didn’t match up to the films they usually work in. Well anyone can make a mistake from time to time. Of course the people greenlighting films like Larry the Cable Guy: Health Inspector, The Shaggy Dog (remake), and the multitude of needless sub-par remakes [mentioned in my recap of the worst films of 2006] get it wrong far too often. There should be Razzie’s for worst greenlight, most remakes okayed without any idea what the original was, and most likely to buy an ice cube in Alaska during a snowstorm in winter (executives and movie companies only).

This is what I think, what do you think?

Movies for 2007 and beyond - 12.27.2006.5

Even as the year ends and we mourn the surprising losses of political, artistic and musical giants some things keep moving ahead. There have definitely been losses that will be felt in every medium. Mr. Peter Boyle, Mr. Joe Barbera, Mr. James Brown, and most recently Mr. Gerald Ford have all passed in this month, and signaling a changing world. Yet there are some things in the works to help us keep our memories of these great figures alive.

Much like the cartoons of Hanna/Barbera (and the generous license taken by the likes of the creators of Harvey Birdman - Attorney at Law), the syndication and movies with Mr. Boyle (Young Frankenstein and Everyone Love Raymond), and the Oscar winning cinematic portrayal of Mr. Ray Charles and Mr. Malcolm X, the life of Mr. James Brown is already in the works. Mr. Charles had already been working with noted producer Brian Grazer. Adding to the excitement of the project is the fact that renown director Mr. Spike Lee has taken the helm. Mr. Lee is no novice to creating a biopic movie, the acclaimed Malcolm X film starring Mr. Denzel Washington was his creation. [Why that film did not get an Oscar nomination, nor did Mr. Washington get one escapes me completely.]

This is a film that I look forward to seeing. I can’t imagine right now who might be portrayed as Mr. Brown. There are few Black actors that have enough skill to sing the part (that I know of), and there is no singer that has the acting ability (with the exception of Mr. Will Smith but I don’t think he looks the part and he is more of a rapper than singer). Yet given the fact that Mr. Lee has an eye for talent there may be a new surprise for everyone in this role.

On the other spectrum of upcoming films is the news that Mr. Willie Nelson will be lending a hand for Ms. Jessica Simpson’s latest film. Of course the film is to be a remake, or “revisioning” of an older film – Working Girl. I am left without any anticipation or interest in this latest endeavor. It’s not just that I think that Ms. Simpson has little acting talent, but that the film being copied is not classic enough to warrant a redo. It was a decent film, helped in large part by the abilities of Ms. Melanie Griffith, Ms. Sigourney Weaver and Mr. Harrison Ford. Taking out these highly talented entertainers and replacing them with the comparatively pop fluff likes of Ms. Simpson and Mr. Luke Wilson (who was quite good in The Royal Tenenbaums), and Mr. Andy Dick.

I especially have no love for the work of Mr. Dick nor his recent actions [What I feel about Andy Dick - 12.6.2006.2]. Perhaps if Mr. Dick were completely absent, and the role of Ms. Simpson were miniscule I would consider seeing this film. That is not the case though. I’m sure the concept of the film will be interesting enough to the 15-24 demographic of women movie-goers to capture a profit. Perhaps even a sequel. Yet I still have to think it will just be another addition to the extremely long list of remakes and flops once it arrives.

This is what I think, what do you think?

Blacks behind the camera, porn on stage, Rush Limbaugh and Anna Nicole Smith

Just a couple of thoughts I was thinking about over the weekend. First off is that the abysmal show, Battlestar Galactica (the revisioned version on SciFi channel) is not only looking like it will continue, but that it is spawning a prequel. Now I have mentioned before how little I like this cable television show, due to the loss of its significant African American actors, the introduction of a female Starbuck character and weak storyline. I just don’t find it involving with the exception of the Baltar character in his interactions with the female cylon lead. If you don’t know what this means, you haven’t missed much. This is just another budget rate program from SciFi that copies a good idea and make a horrendous program out of it. Examples such as the movie on the world killing hurricane, or the generous remake of the failed movie Deep Core, or programs such as Black Scorpion, Lexx or Witch Hunters and Scare Tactics. But as I mentioned they are taking a step in a worse direction, with a prequel to Galactica. I can’t wait to see if they might find one or 2 more cast members that might be African American or Hispanic. It won’t help the writing or acting (with the exception of Mr. Edward Olmos, or the above mentioned actors of interest) but it might at least give the impression that the alien worlds they are speaking of have more than a handful of people other than white. This series is more isolated than virtually all of network television programs, so much for diversity and freedom from the confines of the regular programming that science fiction promises.

On a somewhat related note, it seems the government is looking into another issue that Hollywood pursues with vigor. That issue is one of equal opportunity initially behind the camera. It is common knowledge in the industry that while Black African Americans. Hispanics, Asians and other minorities are occasionally used in various programs and movies (I would bet that if a survey were done the percentage of actors of color would be so far out of proportion to the population as to be insulting) there are even fewer (I’ve heard estimates placing it around the low single digit percentage) behind the cameras doing the work that makes these movies and programs possible. While I am no fan of Affirmative Action and I feel employment should be based on capability, the fact that the disproportion of any minority group being represented needs to be addressed. I doubt that anyone can make a case that there aren’t enough directors, cameramen, grips and others out there. Mr. John Singleton, Mr. Spike Lee, Ms. Kim Fields and the few other names I can mention now are hardly the only ones capable in this nation.

Since I mentioned acting and unique ideas in entertainment, here is one I would probably watch at least once. This is, believe it or not, a reality show. It will take place in Britain though on the BBC. The concept is that a group of porn stars will be selected and they will have to perform a regular play for a normal London crowd. The show is to be named “My Bare Lady.” This could be quite entertaining, and it would be wonderful if there is true raw talent that becomes exposed. Like Ms. Traci Lords, who has moved into mainstream work and has had decent results. I believe that there may be others who are capable of more than just a few words of bad scripting and flexible moves. Not that I’ve ever seen porn, and I’m sure no reader of mine has either. That’s why the industry made more money than all the movies in Hollywood combined last year. LOL

Much like porn stars making a move up to the stage, Ms. Anna Nicole Smith continues her fight to move forward on help claim for part of the inheritance of her late husband. Helping her in that effort was the Supreme Court. It was a nice reminder that anyone has the right to appeal to the highest courts in a legal matter they feel has merit. While I am sure this particular battle is silly and should have been settled long ago (tens of millions are plenty to receive as a benefit derived from nothing more than marriage to someone who had attained roughly over a billion beforehand) the lawyers must be happy for the fees they will garner that will be highly profitable. Still this case has more merit that placing hot coffee between your exposed legs in a moving vehicle, and blaming someone else when it spills in your lap. Or blaming someone for your childs’ extreme obesity when you take them to eat fast foods for every meal, and ensure they get no exercise, not that that could be your own fault. But I digress.

Lastly, since I am discussing the law, Mr. Rush Limbaugh has reached a deal on his legal battle. This man, who was found to have gained 2000 painkillers from 4 doctors in six-months, has had his single charge for 40 pills worked out such that he gets random drug-tests (which he already is undergoing), continue undergoing treatment, and cannot own a gun. This is stated as the normal deal for a nonviolent offender on the first drug offense. Though how or why the counts were dropped from 2000 to 40 has not been explained. Mr. Limbaugh has stated that the case was not strong, thus his punishment, though he fails to mention that the limited charges were enough to gain him a conviction. And I find it interesting that this (former) drug using talk radio host, who had no problem making accusations and insults about a mother and alleged rape victim he does not know on her choice of legal profession, cannot make a more honest or sweeping statement on his own problems. If I were him I’d shut up before accusing an alleged rape victims of being a ‘ho’, as he shouldn’t throw rocks inside his own glass house.

This is what I think, what do you think.