Based on a True Story…Again?
By Guest Contributor slb, originally published at PostBourgie
We’ve made no secret of our belief that Hollywood is producing just a few too many paint-by-numbers Black biopics, and this week’s announcement of a whopping four black-themed biopics was just a case in point. According to Rotten Tomatoes’ Weekly Ketchup, all systems are go for an “official” biographical drama on Martin Luther King Jr., with Steven Spielberg at the helm; Will and Jada’s Overbrook Entertainment (in concert with Sony Pictures) has acquired the rights to John Keller’s life story (an ex-Marine who oversaw the rescue of 244 fellow Katrina victims); and Denzel is mulling his third directorial project, a little pet project called Brother in Arms, about “the only tank unit in the European theater of World War II that was manned by all African Americans”–based on a book co-authored by Kareem Abdul Jabbar.
We should note that the latter project has no shooting date–and the Weekly Ketchup writers slyly suggest that, perhaps, this is because there’s already a black WWII flick in the works—a Tuskegee Airmen project, currently filming in Europe.
Here’s the thing: we love heralding Black accomplishments as much as the next guy–and far be it from us to stand in the way of Our Own Stories Being Told. But aren’t most of these films rather indistinguishable from one another? If you’ve seen Remember the Titans, you’ve seen Glory Road. If you’ve seen Ray, you seen Cadillac Records (or parts of it, anyway). If you’ve seen The Rosa Parks story, you’ve seen Boycott. If you’ve seen Ali, you’ve seen… Will Smith in one too many of these vanity projects.***
It isn’t that we don’t endorse Black films being greenlighted; we do. It isn’t that we don’t love our history; we do. It’s that biopics, as a genre, are largely rote oversimplifications of incredibly complex lives. And no matter how nuanced an actor’s performance (or, as in the case of Denzel as Melvin Tolson, how phoned in), the formulaic storytelling impedes any real understanding of the person’s struggles and, more importantly, the accomplishment(s) that warranted a film in the first place. They all sort of bleed together untill you’re like, “You remember that flick where Cuba Gooding’s in the submarine and he’s a cook who manned a gatling gun?”
The best way to know your history is to research it for yourself. All the swelling music and single-teared male stars in the world aren’t going to provide you comprehensive—or even accurate—knowledge of actual events. So these “First Black ___ to Do _____” biopics work best when you go into them with your facts about the film’s subject straight. That way, you’re just watching for entertainment value and voluntary emotional manipulation.
All that said, we have to admit, we’re more than a little bit amped about Josh Brolin’s genius plan to both produce and star in a John Brown biopic. You can never have enough films about bloody, if ill-fated slave revolts.
Carmen Van Kerckhove is co-founder and president of
jen* wrote:
I really don’t want to see an MLK, Jr biopic. Really don’t. I don’t really see what else they can do, anyway.
Know what I wanna see? A Sojourner Truth story. But OMG – if they get Bey to play her too, I think my head will blow up.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 11:02 am ¶
Brothel Poet wrote:
Well, Hollywood has a very bad track record for complexity in its stories. I actually enjoy these movies, despite their formulaic nature because they are often done with so much heart. Also, when you put actors- especially unknown actors- who are exciting, interesting and bring that “flava” to the formula, the stories end up seeming, in a way, less formulaic than they would otherwise. In other words, black people (other than Will Smith) can tip the formula scale- with that cultural energy- for lack of a better term- towards a fresher kind of vibe. (no pun intended)
Black people are playing catchup artistically. I think underdog made good stories are very important, because our “complexity” as black folks has been mined in exploitive ways for so long. A morally ambiguous hero, with breathtaking and minute shifts from good intentions to nefarious ones, has been presented to us by Denzel Washington, Forest Whittaker and Lawrence Fishburn in all kinds of ways many times before. It seems we now have permission to be black and have “feel good” movies and you bet your bottom dollar, I am ready to feel good as a black person, complete with swelling music, gold tinged lighting and fawning cinematography. I think that films that explore the complexity of a historical figure are very difficult to pull off. The nature of biography itself is illusory in its ability to actually capture the fullness of a person’s life. That being said, being black in North America is inherently complex and dramatic fodder for storytelling, and so the complexity is inherent in the subject and shows even in the most “mundanely plotted” script. I actually think that facing racism everyday(and multigenerationally) is such a deeply complex enterprise for the psyche, that the formulas and cliches become the only safety valve through which such stories can exist. And I disagree that Washington phoned in his portrayal of Melvin Tolson. He is more of a movie star and less of shape shifting character actor, which I think worked well for a small movie that was bound to struggle at the box office.
As a black actor and writer, I definitely welcome these stories. I think they are long overdue, often lovingly done and ought to encourage further investigation, even if they were masterpieces. No film can contain the multiplicities of a person’s existence in many ways. No book or series of books can either. What you receive is a sketch, and I enjoy the sexiness in these sketches (remember when black stories were shown on PBS in February and were so good for you you could vomit). These movies are sexy, with good lighting, and beckon the escapist. I think that’s just fine. The next generation of black artists will inevitably rebel against these storytelling techniques. But we have to enjoy giving them something to rebel against in the meantime.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 11:12 am ¶
Brothel Poet wrote:
And I totally disagree that “based on a true story” is wearisome for black folks. Come on. Look at how we treat ourselves- how we think about ourselves. Look at the music videos and the self hatred and mysogyny that we think is normal. White folks never tire of bio pics about great white people. We are engaged, what with our new black president and all, in a cultural reconditioning, and its long overdue. And using Cuba Gooding is a lark. He hasn’t worked since Tom Cruise movie. So it’s unfair to use him as even a joke. The last I saw him was sitting beside my kid eating chips and watching a Disney movie about dog sleds. No offense to Cuba. No. I think this column is off the mark, the more I reread it. It’s not that we need to tire of these films, but as soon as you open your mouth I think you have to be prepared to create. Welcome what is coming to us and use it as a springboard for further creation and investigation. That’s what white folks do. And why, partly, their children feel more fearless at times than ours when facing academic challenge or things of that nature. We have to build on what is done creatively, even as we might weary of it. I personally am not. Weary of it. As a writer, that’s one more history I don’t have to burden myself with telling, in my effort to get the record straight about just how powerful and central to modern culture and history black folks really are. There is no movie yet about Ida B. Wells, Mary Ann Shadd Carey, Sojourner Truth (as the previous commentor noted) Frederick Douglas, W.E.B. DuBois, Marcus Garvey. All of these are compelling, dramatic, inherently complex stories heretofore relegated to the unsexy and underfunded PBS specials that are so crunchy and good for you. These stories need to become part of the zeitgeist, our collective unconsciousnesses, as pervasively and strongly and reflexively as gun toting gangster black men are a part of our unconscious computer download that happens when you see a brutha on the street. As strongly as the image of Charleton Heston as Moses is in the minds of previous generations. I think we should revel in this true story phenomenon while getting up off our butts and getting onto the next thing.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 11:29 am ¶
Deaf Indian Muslim Anarchist! wrote:
Here’s the thing: we love heralding Black accomplishments as much as the next guy–and far be it from us to stand in the way of Our Own Stories Being Told. But aren’t most of these films rather indistinguishable from one another? If you’ve seen Remember the Titans, you’ve seen Glory Road. If you’ve seen Ray, you seen Cadillac Records (or parts of it, anyway). If you’ve seen The Rosa Parks story, you’ve seen Boycott. If you’ve seen Ali, you’ve seen… Will Smith in one too many of these vanity projects.***
I’ve felt the same way but I’ve never said that out loud, in fear of being told that I’m not supportive enough of POC movies. Glad to know I’m not the only one who thinks this.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 11:40 am ¶
Sarah J wrote:
I’m a white girl and I still shudder at the idea of a Spielberg MLK biopic. I picture schmaltz upon schmaltz. I have zero faith in Spielberg. Yep, I said it.
On a larger scale, I think biopics are a symptom of our culture’s obsession with individuals over movements/communities. There’s a reason that the cinematic story arc is largely Campbell’s “Hero’s Journey” written over and effing over again. With biopics, the parts of someone’s life that fit that arc are chosen and the rest left out.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 11:58 am ¶
blip wrote:
LOL, slb.
I’m forever telling folks that way too many black biopics, documentaries, book adaptations, and historical dramas are made. These are almost as stereotypical as black-guy-in-fat-suit films.
Why are we are so afraid of ORIGINAL screenplays about our future?
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 12:07 pm ¶
aimerrouge wrote:
“The best way to know your history is to research it for yourself.”
Very true, but I know many people in the real world (as opposed to cyberspace) – family, friends. acquaintanes, co-workers – who don’t want to do research. It’s much easier to “see the movie.” I think people who do research are the exception, not the rule.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 12:11 pm ¶
Emma wrote:
It’s true, you can never have enough films about bloody, ill-fated slave revolts, but I’d rather watch one about Nat Turner than John Brown. Or even better, how about the Haitian Revolution?
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 12:44 pm ¶
Thom wrote:
Was that the Cuba movie where he yelled, “Show me the money”? I am pretty sure I saw it.
This is an interesting point…and really, it seems like there are phases for minority film making…for a few years it was low brow comedies. Then it was dark edgy characters. Then it was inspirational bio pics. I am not sure what to make of it…it is a confining box, or just “going with what worked” the last time?
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 1:13 pm ¶
Joy wrote:
What’s the problem? Yeah, you can always go “research it for yourself” but clearly young people today of any race are not that into research outside of a school paper. It’s not just “black” biopics that are oversimplified, it’s biopics in general. I think this is just showing equal opportunity oversimplification. If you don’t want to see them, fine don’t. But let the other people who aren’t going to pick up a book anyway (or just feel like seeing a movie) at least get the main points from the screen. And it’s great to provide platforms for new faces since it’s not like they’re likely to be picked up for a “non-black” film anyway.
–Didn’t need another movie about 18th century princesses or whatever, but the Duchess got made anyway.
–
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 1:35 pm ¶
SepiaScreen wrote:
The Spielberg project may not be a go because two of the three King children have not approved it.
What you are describing in your post is what I have defined on my blog as the “quintessential negro” story. See http://thesepiascreen.wordpress.com/2008/09/25/hello-world/
It seems Hollywood assumes that there are no good stories to tell about African-Americans, and other POC, outside of the context of Civil Rights and/or struggles against institutional racism. And while true stories are compelling, not every one is worthy of being filmed.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 1:51 pm ¶
John Jihoon Chang wrote:
I do have to say that with Hollywood’s obsession with biopics, I think it’s fair that at least a representative amount of biopics covering the lives of important black Americans get produced. I don’t think that their presence is the problem. It’s the absence of other genres of film (excepting comedy) that feature black people.
After all, at least there’s parity, since there are a bazillion biopics of the lives of white people.
I’d like to see more drama, fantasy, dark comedy, sci-fi, historical fiction, etc. featuring black lead actors or predominantly black casts. I would absolutely love to catch a (good) fantasy or sci-fi film where not everyone is white except for the token minorities who quickly die a tragic and sacrificial/senseless death.
I think if genre representation were more even when it comes to film featuring black actors, you’d find less reason to complain about yet another biopic about the life of a historically relevant black person.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 2:15 pm ¶
Lisa J wrote:
Beats showing movies that show all black men as thugs and women as ball-busting baby mama’s, fat black mammy’s, or as slinky sexy under-dressed gold-diggers. Besides this is Hollywood where maybe you get a handful of films a year if we are lucky, that are major motion pictures with substance, style and intelligence that do well. Most of what we get is “Hangover”, ” I Love You Man” “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” and that ilk.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 2:27 pm ¶
Queen B wrote:
I think the only reason Hollywood seems interested in doing black bio pics is because they see dollar signs.
For better or worse, there are some Hollywood execs who probably feel that the only way whites will see an all black/majority black movie is if the black main character is famous or a very well known figure in politics, sports, entertainment etc.
First there was Ray, followed by Dreamgirls and then Cadillac Records. Washington was Malcolm X, Smith was Ali and Whitaker was Idi Amin. I do not know who they will get to play MLK. The top three contenders: Jamie Foxx, Denzel Washington and Will Smith have already done bio pics.
I’m not against black bio pics but I would love to see great movies about ordinary black people who live ordinary lives.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 4:24 pm ¶
GueraLola wrote:
What about Bessie Coleman? I feel so so underexposed and so underrated. She wanted to study aviation she had to go to France and Germany to learn to fly a plane “She could not gain admission to American flight schools because she was black and a woman. No black U.S. aviator would train her” either.( from wikipedia) On June 15, 1921 Coleman became not only the first African-American woman to earn an international aviation license from the Fédération Aéronautique Internationale, but the first African-American woman in the world to earn an aviation pilot’s license.
heck yeah! I would total see a movie about that!
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 4:37 pm ¶
GueraLola wrote:
oopa I meant to type she is so underexposed and so underrated.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 4:38 pm ¶
Mr. Noface wrote:
“If you’ve seen Remember the Titans, you’ve seen Glory Road. If you’ve seen Ray, you seen Cadillac Records (or parts of it, anyway). If you’ve seen The Rosa Parks story, you’ve seen Boycott. If you’ve seen Ali, you’ve seen… Will Smith in one too many of these vanity projects.***”
The same could be said for other (read white) historical pieces and biopics.
If you’ve seen Saving Private Ryan you’ve seen Band of Brothers. If you’ve seen Tombstone you’ve seen Wyatt Erp. If you’ve seen Capote you’ve seen Infamous. The public seems to love Biopics and “based on a true story” films, I see no reason why they shouldn’t be treated to films with People of Color (in a positive light for a change).
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 4:46 pm ¶
inkst wrote:
When I first read this post, I found myself nodding my head and cringing at the mention of Spielberg doing MLK. He has turned out nothing but crap for the last decade or so.
Then I read Brothel Poet’s comments (number 2 and 3), and they made a lot of sense.
I think that part of the reason that my eyes glaze over when it comes to a biopic on a person of any race is because they really are all pretty trite and oversimplified. There are exceptions, but generally, they are all the same story as folks have pointed out in the thread. Also, when it comes to POC biopics, the white-washing is nauseating. Gandhi swept me away when I saw it as a young teenager, but when I watch it now, I can’t help but think that it’s a bunch of westernized drivel.
But, Brothel Poet, you make a great point. Right now, Hollywood-esque movies are digestible for people. It’s what people are told to like, and what they buy tickets for. On one hand, it makes sense to “go with the flow” and get POC characters in that same flood of information if for no other reason than to influence the broader conceptions (or misconceptions) of society.
However, I would like to see all stories, whether they be fiction or not be ratcheted up in their complexity and real sense of humanity. It would be incredible if POC directors, writers, and actors were on the forefront of pushing the watered down Hollywood trend in a different direction. White people wrote the script for the old Hollywood, let People of Color write the new one.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 4:55 pm ¶
Brothel Poet wrote:
I am having such a strong reaction to these posts and to this column and must suss out why. Probably because I have been following this stuff for a long time- wrote and acted professionally in NYC and LA for about fifteen years. The first audition I ever lost was to Jada Pinkett in 10th grade, for a PBS special and I remember thinking- “God I hate this script.’” Was playing someone stuck on the Under Ground Railroad waiting for Harriet Tubman to save me. It felt so cliche and boring to me, which is why I decided to write. The character was crying and needing to be saved. I thought- is this all there is? also I grew up in Baltimore where the Wire was done, and couldn’t watch it past the first episode. So for me, coming from city in which our elegance and beauty and artistry is pretty much ignored, I would welcome a biopic about Billie Holiday, who was born in my city. Instead of stuff about thugs.
Anyway, I think the ent. industry has come a long way, and i afgree w/ Joy and the other young man – I think what is being railed against is the reductive, formulaic aspects of Hollywood. But there are some interesting indie bio pics out there. Has anyone seen Basquiat? BUT- I still welcome some of the formula stuff because I think some of it is good, despite the paint by numbers aspects of the scripts. However, I don’t think we need less biopics- I still think we need MORE! More of everything- fantasy, sci fi, romance, experimental-more, more, more. And yes, it ought to be better done, but so does everything in Hollywood. But I think strategically as artists we have to be grateful for Will Smith as well as independent filmmakers of color. It’s all good. It all serves our purpose and opens the way. Seriously. I only see half the stuff mentioned- will never see Remember the Titans because anything with football or sports in general turns me off. And that’s true of the audiences out there. I do think we have to be very alarmed if Spielberg does E.T.-oops I mean, MLK. And we are not necessarily afraid of original scripts. But our history is still unearthed treasure in terms of mainstream film. I did an indie film in NYC that launched an LA career of the writer- (attracted the attention of Madonna) and my role was a girl in the hood killing some guy as he went down on her. And this was a romantic comedy, albeit dark to be sure. When iw as in NYC you couldn’t find anything BUT roles demanding I get undressed or get “street” in terms of independent films. In LA, there was not ONE biopic for which I saw a script with the exception of the lifestory of Fifty Cent. So seeing these biopics, as someone inside the industry means a lot to me. I did a sci fi thriller and did not die at the end, but there was not one black or poc saving me. We were all there to be rescued by the whitish savior alien guy. Again.
So- people should write. James Baldwin, Langston Hughes- some lush, incendiary and wild and gorgeous films could be made about them. My fatigue has led to action and I promise that within the next five years, I will try to put something else out there in mainstream Hollywood. I think it’s a promise we should all make to each other. In addition to discerning what’s wrong with the status quo.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 5:28 pm ¶
HoneyGirl wrote:
I’m syked up for this ‘John Brown’ Biopic for two reasons 1)Luv Josh Brolin, such a strong Fine Actor & DAMN he’s handsome, 2) A John Brown Bio is fresh & different from what’s been produced by hollywood in the past 10 years on slavery! Brown was a complex man who was against slavery but torn about himself & fighting the Civil War. I’m betting on Brolin’s fierce talent to pull this off better than anyone else!
Well I agree with the writer, too much of a good thing can be damaging to our thirst for knowledge! Hollywood please stop with the Tuscagee Airmen & MLK Bios. How many movies are we gonna see on these same topics? Unless it’s from a fresh perspective to keep our interests. But what about Martin Luther King Jr. don’t we know??
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 5:34 pm ¶
B. Canseco wrote:
I’m surprised by this post… I don’t hear similar complaints over the glut of Jewish-related flicks or Jane Austen/anglo-as-hero/heroine flicks…
If there’s a beef to be had with all these so-called indistinguishable black movies it should be (1) That they have to go through a capitalistic entertainment system that conflates profit-potential with quality storytelling and accurate cultural portrayals.
(2) For all our post-racial Obama euphoria the fact remains, the images and stories of black life and black identity regardless f the film/music genre remain in the hands of mostly non-black consumers and entertainment corporations.
Consider: for all the complaints about Will Smith’s Ali—that movie doesn’t see the light of day without a bankable crossover (white-friendly) star like Smith. Same goes for Hurricane, and most of Denzel’s movies.
Spike Lee had to borrow money from practically every black person in america to finish Malcolm X—and it still didn’t come out the way he wanted it to because he ran out of money for reshoots. And that was WITH Denzel.
I would never tell any culture or ethnic group that their stories don’t deserve to be told or that they’re too “boring” and should be changed.
But this is how far too many see black movies, black characters and black identity—as entertainment properties that need to be reworked beyond their core truths to appeal to folks who couldn’t care less either way.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 6:31 pm ¶
The Czech wrote:
How about a movie featuring a non-stereotypical black woman?
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 8:11 pm ¶
Nappy Mind wrote:
I too would love to see Bessie Coleman’s story on the big screen. Her life is very inspirational. I’d also like to see Winnie Mandela’s and Queen Mother Moore’s stories.
Upcoming projects by Danny Glover and Joslyn Barnes are at
http://www.louverturefilms.com/ss/projects
Among other stories, Glover and Barnes are working on a film about Toussaint Louverture (Haitian Revolution) and another one about the friendship, based on their shared activism, between Albert Einstein and Paul Robeson. I welcome any story on Paul Robeson.
Haile Gerima’s film “Teza”, co-produced with his sister Selome Gerima, looks interesting.
http://www.tadias.com/2009/03/09/qa-haile-gerima-and-aaron-arefe/
Since Haile Gerima’s “Sankofa” is the only film I’ve seen that shows organized resistance to slavery in this country, I look forward to the John Brown story. Likewise, I’d like to see Nat Turner’s and/or Denmark Vesey’s stories.
Posted 08 Jun 2009 at 9:33 pm ¶
Lindz wrote:
With Hollywood only making movies that are remakes, sequels, dumb comedies or based on a true story, why should there be a difference in what is being made with black people?
I love a good sports movie. Glory Road needed to be made so to counter the one problem I have with Hoosiers: the only black people are the big, bad, scary black players from the big city school.
Also, there are hundreds of movies about white troops pre-integration. And what black war movies are there? Glory, which was really about the white Col. Shaw, whose diary was the extent of the crew’s research. It was Go for Broke! (about Asian-Americans in WWII) except that Go For Broke had the benefit of using the actual soldiers from the 442nd and the excuse of being made in the 50s.
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 12:10 am ¶
illament wrote:
World War movies have been over done as well as Vietnam time period. You want something original and not noted in the U.S History books and is pretty much a long forgotten war. My ideal for a great Movie would be about David Fagan and his struggle in the Philippine American war of independence. Betrayal, love, pride and action. This part of history has it all and is still relevant to the issues soldier’s face today in Iraq. History tends to repeat itself as do old prejudices.
http://www.commondreams.org/scriptfiles/views03/1117-11.htm
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 1:24 am ¶
SepiaScreen wrote:
@Brothel Poet I have Basquiat in my personal video collection and that was my first intro to Jeffrey Wright who I think is one of the best actors out there. I’ve read that Vin Diesel has been trying for years to make a movie about Hannibal, the Carthaginian general. I’d love to see that epic come to fruition. It could be on par with movies like Troy and Gladiator and would depict POC in a positive light.
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 10:07 am ¶
bdsista wrote:
I totally disagree, I am a middle school media specialist and our children -hell everyone’s children need more history. They need more films rated G and PG that tell about Black people’s lives. I work with students whose PARENTS haven’t seen Malc0lm X! So if they don’t see some of these films in school they won’t see them at all. But they have seen all the gang, thuggy, men in fat women films, but don’t know who half the people are in the civil rights movement. I squeeze as much in when I can, before the morning announcements on closed circuit TV, etc. I am trying to get the Great Debaters approved for their grade level. They soooo need to see people who have struggled and overcome and achieved and become leaders. Its NOT cliche’ it builds their dreams and sense of self. I have students who now truly believe they can be President because they see someone who looks like them. I hope Hollywood makes more and more. I hope Speilberg makes the MLK film. I thought Amistad was a masterpiece and I read the entire trial transcript in my law school library as well as Barbara Chase Riboud’s book Echo of Lions which was the basis for the screenplay. If he eventually gets to work with the King kids, then it might be something more than the documentaries I have on my shelf. Also for the record, I used to work in ATL for SCLC. There are tons of speeches Dr. King made that no one has ever heard. He was a brilliant man, despite his shortcomings. There is never enough about him that cannot be said and I did the research! I teach children how to do research and most folk are not going to bother.
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 10:07 am ¶
bdsista wrote:
I meant, men in fat woman suits
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 10:07 am ¶
Rob wrote:
If Vin Diesel was going to make a movie depicting POC in a positive light, wouldn’t he have to admit to being one?
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 10:25 am ¶
SepiaScreen wrote:
@Rob. I don’t think Diesel hasdenied being biracial. But whatever your feelings about Vin Diesel, my point was that an epic film about Hannibal would be great.
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 11:24 am ¶
pololly wrote:
“If Vin Diesel was going to make a movie depicting POC in a positive light, wouldn’t he have to admit to being one?”
HA!
You are making me look bad in my office!
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 12:06 pm ¶
Joseph wrote:
@B Canseco
Just because you don’t hear people complaining about Jane Austen/white girl bonnet-porn and (I am gonna assume by “Jewish-related” you mean “Holocaust” stories because it is not as if there are a glut Jewish-themed stories outside of that context onscreen)… doesn’t mean they aren’t. There have been articulate arguments against the representations in both of these genres for years.
But even if there weren’t–as far as I can tell that is not really the point here.
The subtext of “Black History Month” type films is that “good” black people only exist in the past. When the only contemporary black stories being told are bullshit “gangsta” epics the message becomes clear: there are two kinds of African Americans a) Noble, long suffering types whose greatness was squashed by white people who are all dead now and b) criminals and potential criminals. That dichotomy lets white audiences cluck their tongues over “racism” as a phenomenon of the past, without ever looking at these dynamics in the present (or theorizing about its future).
So I think the true audience for black biopics is white people who get to exercise their guilt in a way that does not interfere with their present privileges.
@brothel poet
I hear you. But I would argue that the creation of African American stories set in the present and, significantly, the future are key to moving black representations forward. I am no fan of Tyler Perry (whose churchy conservatism makes me a little nauseous) BUT the reason he has become so successful is that he has tapped in to a desire to see contemporary stories about regular black people. The creation of Lt. Uhura (who embodied the future of Black Power and Beauty) in the middle of the last century is still so significant because all this time later there are almost no black characters in sci fi (despite the fact that there is a huge black audience for that genre). The recent post about the Martha Washington graphic novels reminded me what I thought when I read them about ten years ago “Why isn’t anyone making a movie out of THIS?” Imagine what Spike Lee (or perhaps YOU) would do with that story?
Fantasy films are also lily-white and often replicate the racist tropes that are better-hidden in other types of narratives in a more overt way. I barely got through the Lord of the Rings movies because of the racist and colonial crap that runs through those stories like fat in a hunk of meat. My question is, where is the PoC Lord of the Rings? That is, a fantasy story that doesn’t depend on fucking romanticizing colonialism by acting it out with fucking elves and fairies already? Why do these stories always draw on Anglo-European mythologies?
When I think about PoC (including African American) representations in films these are the things I think about.
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 1:41 pm ¶
Winn wrote:
I was going to offer my perspective on the difficulties I had with this post, but Brothel Poet, B Canseco and bdsista have broken it all down for me. Thanks guys, and cosign on your thoughts!
Oh, and although I’d rather see a Nat Turner bio too, the John Brown project sounds promising. If anyone can do it justice, Josh Brolin probably has the passion and commitment to do it right…
Posted 09 Jun 2009 at 2:09 pm ¶
meeno wrote:
@sepiascreen and @pololly – youtube Vin Diesel’s multi-facial.
Posted 10 Jun 2009 at 9:56 am ¶
SepiaScreen wrote:
@meeno Not sure what you intended my referencing Multi-Facial, but I think that proves he has not denied his black heritage. That he struggles to be an “actor” rather than a “black actor” I don’t believe is a repudiation of that part of his racial identity. I think that speaks of being a POC in Hollywood and being forced into roles that are ethnic caricatures. That’s a whole other topic than what may make a good biopic. So, I’d also encourage others to take a look. Maybe we should be critiquing Vin Diesel on his acting skills rather than whether and how much he identifies as a POC. Just my 2 cents.
Posted 11 Jun 2009 at 1:32 pm ¶
Hibbs4Prez wrote:
I love folks who claim making a MLK film is unnecessary because too much has been done on him. Fact is that there has never been ONE feature film that focused on the life of MLK, one of the ten greatest Americans of all time. His story being told on the big screen is way overdue. There are a lot of famous white people we know about too thinks to history books and TV and yet thir stories get told all the time in film.
Posted 19 Jun 2009 at 6:25 pm ¶