Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

another Spike movie people really seemed to like*--BlacKkKlansman.

*I didn't think much of it.

I saw Sorry To Bother You a few days before BlacKkKlansman, and I thought it was so much stronger.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

As TM says, the choice of perspective, of putting the white character at the center and making the black character peripheral to him is a choice. One could make movies about black men, but Hollywood doesn't do that so much, Black Panther excepted.

I’m pretty up there in the story world. But I really think I’ll grow from what the two of you have explained. Neither of you have seen the movie but your insights are really helpful for me. Thank you both.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

This is it for me. After this No mas.

All I said was that MAYBE the main character choice was driven by how odd/complex the piano player was, and how it would appear that switching it up would be perhaps challenging. I'm not trying to PROVE anything other than that.

I agree he seems a fascinating character, and I might actually go see a movie about him. I suspect that movie would be at an art house, not a multiplex.

I invited the people who say the movie SHOULD have been different to provide evidence of how you could back fill in his life in a short period of time. I ain't got the burden. If you say the movie SHOULD have been different you got the burden.

You demand proof of why the story should be told a different way. People tell you that it's a classic Hollywood approach to make the white person the focus of the story, relegating an interesting black character to a supporting role presumably either (i) to make it palatable to white target audiences or (ii) because the creators actually saw the white character as more interesting.

The supporting character was a musician and a gay black man trying to navigate The Fucking South in the '60s. The white guy was a lout who drove his car. As far as I'm concerned, all the evidence you need is in front of your face. You counter with, "But the movie I saw has limited back story, interaction, evidence that the supporting character could be the lead." I say, "That's because in the movie he isn't the lead." You demand more evidence.

"No mas" is right.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

I’m a fan of 25th Hour, and this love poem to TCOTU.

I find that Ed Norton goes from excellent to infuckingsufferably arrogant and self-satisfied very quickly. He is often unwatchable.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So you're not up for a Bernie Sanders biopic?

I might be, but Bernie seems to have chosen to mostly avoid black people, no?

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I saw Sorry To Bother You a few days before BlacKkKlansman, and I thought it was so much stronger.

Are we comparing these two movies because we're on the topic of movies with black male leads?

I want to see it. It's weird, though. The reactions have been all over the place, like with Vice. That one I don't think I'll watch. I've had enough of Dick Cheney for two lifetimes.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I’m pretty up there in the story world. But I really think I’ll grow from what the two of you have explained. Neither of you have seen the movie but your insights are really helpful for me. Thank you both.

This is hilarious.

TM

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

I might be, but Bernie seems to have chosen to mostly avoid black people, no?

TM

Maybe, but he has still managed to explain to John Lewis what's good for black folks.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I’m pretty up there in the story world. But I really think I’ll grow from what the two of you have explained. Neither of you have seen the movie but your insights are really helpful for me. Thank you both.

You're welcome.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Watch: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sdC6RxaY-Q

TM

*I didn't think much of it.

Also: https://ew.com/tv/2019/02/22/green-b...-savior-movie/

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Also: https://ew.com/tv/2019/02/22/green-b...-savior-movie/

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Are we comparing these two movies because we're on the topic of movies with black male leads?

I want to see it. It's weird, though. The reactions have been all over the place, like with Vice. That one I don't think I'll watch. I've had enough of Dick Cheney for two lifetimes.

I'm comparing them because I saw them within a couple of days, and I don't see a lot of movies. I walked into both movies not knowing anything about them. Sorry To Bother You felt fresh and unpredictable, and it definitely had a lot to say about race (and capitalism), things that do not often creep into mainstream movies (if it is a mainstream movie -- I saw it at an ordinary movie theater). It reminded me a little of Do The Right Thing in that it felt honest and different and informed by the view about how things play out in a very specific place (Oakland instead of Brooklyn). Obviously there are huge differences between the movies and I'm not sure I would make that comparison if I hadn't seen Spike Lee's movie a few days later, but I did. Sorry To Bother You has some bad actors, but there is no question that the movie is about systemic exploitation on a number of fronts.

BlacKKKlansman, by contrast, felt somewhat stale to me, establishment. What happened to Spike Lee? The message of the movie is that the face of racism is a few back-country hicks, and that if you can get the police department to hire a black and a Jew then they will get the job done. Black activists like the female lead need to just trust the cops. The tidy ending to the internal PD conflict was completely wrong. Do The Right Thing Ends shows you a cop killing Radio Raheem, with no justice. In BlacKKKlansman the racist cop does his thing earlier, and the rest of the cops take care of him in the end -- seriously, a fantasy Hollywood ending. In contrast, Lee doesn't do anything with the mysterious higher-ups who tell the police chief to close the investigation and destroy the files. The movie has no reckoning with systemic racism -- it's view is that racists are a relatively small number of pathological bad guys who the system can get rid of. In that context, the tacked-on documentary footage at the end seems to suggest that there are just more of them now.

If the problem with the Green Book is that it tells a heroic story about racism from a white perspective, the problem with BlacKKKlansman is that it tells a heroic story about racism with a black hero that turns racism into the exception, not the societal rule. If you want a movie that white people can go to confirm their (self-serving) belief that racism is not them, it's a few hicks with guns with hoods, there's your movie. It's an up-to-date feel-good movie about racism.

eta: And seriously, what happened to Spike Lee? I turned on Fresh Air a few weeks ago and Terry Gross was interviewing someone who was telling clicheed, uninteresting stories about visiting his relatives in the South as a kid, and turned out to be Spike Lee.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

Also: https://ew.com/tv/2019/02/22/green-b...-savior-movie/

I re-watched Gran Torino the other night and posted something about it on FB. Then a friend posted, "That is a racist movie and another white savior cop out." The friend is a guy who actually came here from Guatemala, crossing the border in the trunk of a car. He travels the country doing pro-immigration story shows- and that's how I know him. He has rather strong views as one might imagine.

Anyhoo, I think it is a movie about a racist, not a racist movie. But I had never thought of the white savior thing about it- but damn- Gran Torino isn't just a white [s]avior movie; it's an actual SAVIOR movie. He is a full blown Christ figure.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

This is it for me. After this No mas.

All I said was that MAYBE the main character choice was driven by how odd/complex the piano player was, and how it would appear that switching it up would be perhaps challenging. I'm not trying to PROVE anything other than that.

I agree he seems a fascinating character, and I might actually go see a movie about him. I suspect that movie would be at an art house, not a multiplex.

I invited the people who say the movie SHOULD have been different to provide evidence of how you could back fill in his life in a short period of time. I ain't got the burden. If you say the movie SHOULD have been different you got the burden.

I'm pretty sure that the main character choice was driven by the fact that he was the screenwriter's father.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

The 1800s would like to have a word with you.





e

My mother tells stories about moving from her Italian mother's home base in Pennsylvania where she had tons of family and went to the catholic school to rural West Virginia where her family was one of three or four catholic families in the county. They are not welcoming stories.