* Login   * Register
It is currently Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:04 am

View unanswered posts | View active topics



All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic


 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 5:06 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 3:49 pm
Posts: 457
Carlus Magnus wrote:
samsmart wrote:

Which still doesn't mean that studios are racist.

Rather, it means that studios didn't feel the movie was worth the risk.


I disagree.
I see a Hollywood that promotes negative sterotypes of blacks, black men in particular and rewards negative sterotypes.

This is also the opinion of many blacks as well.

Quote:
The bottom line is that since the positioning of racial images is about money, Hollywood thinks it must play to the racial stereotypes, making it the most powerful purveyor of global racism that exists. It educates and reinforces the demeaning racial role that is in the heads of both Americans and foreigners, through the economic power, to commercialize these images through the distribution network of movies and advertising outlets. We should put more of a spotlight on the producers and financiers of these movies who keep alive the negative images of Black people before the world.

~Ron Walters
director of the African American Leadership Institute and professor of Government and Politics
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_2515.shtml


Here's a sample


Yes, all cinematic depictions of African-Americans, especially African-American men, are negative.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lM_AXqlcHY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iK6hI423gcw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-cKPajCEw8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njP6YczRgsA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALU7xlaTfyc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFwXDN3sI8g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP8d6W2lThM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYaOxHjy3Ps

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW2VpTPGim8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvfJieP0KVA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q37xJtuQ24w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaiSHcHM0PA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv8xFI32hJM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:52 pm 
Offline
Contributing Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 4:03 pm
Posts: 427
samsmart wrote:
Carlus Magnus wrote:
samsmart wrote:

Which still doesn't mean that studios are racist.

Rather, it means that studios didn't feel the movie was worth the risk.


I disagree.
I see a Hollywood that promotes negative sterotypes of blacks, black men in particular and rewards negative sterotypes.

This is also the opinion of many blacks as well.

Quote:
The bottom line is that since the positioning of racial images is about money, Hollywood thinks it must play to the racial stereotypes, making it the most powerful purveyor of global racism that exists. It educates and reinforces the demeaning racial role that is in the heads of both Americans and foreigners, through the economic power, to commercialize these images through the distribution network of movies and advertising outlets. We should put more of a spotlight on the producers and financiers of these movies who keep alive the negative images of Black people before the world.

~Ron Walters
director of the African American Leadership Institute and professor of Government and Politics
http://www.finalcall.com/artman/publish/article_2515.shtml


Here's a sample


Yes, all cinematic depictions of African-Americans, especially African-American men, are negative.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lM_AXqlcHY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iK6hI423gcw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-cKPajCEw8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njP6YczRgsA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALU7xlaTfyc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFwXDN3sI8g

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qP8d6W2lThM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYaOxHjy3Ps

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SW2VpTPGim8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvfJieP0KVA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q37xJtuQ24w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OaiSHcHM0PA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lv8xFI32hJM


What about;

The Green Mile, The Legend of Bagger Vance, The Shawshank Redemption, Bruce Almighty, Song of the South, The Black Knight, Bringing Down the House, Trading Places, Hairspray, Money Talks, Head of State, Bullworth, Houseguest, Big Momma's House 2.
?

Oh, and Lucas makes crappy movies


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:09 pm 
Offline
Nomarch
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:22 pm
Posts: 1584
Quote:
Oh, and Lucas makes crappy movies-kabuki


This is like saying "grass is green" and "the sun rises in the east" its a no-brainer and when he does make a good movie (New Hope, Empire, Jedi, Temple of Doom, Raiders, and the Last Crusade); IMO he is usually good when he is paired up with Spielberg (or someone with a lot of clout) while making a movie. This is why I feel that this movie is going to flop.

Does anybody remember how critics and the audience first reacted to Jar Jar Binks when Episode 1 came out? Many people were saying that the character of Jar Jar was racist (because it seemed that he was base on Jim Crow minstrel characters) and he was created to appeal to very young children (which according to my cousin, Jar Jar failed at this job), etc...

Here is a few articles and websites about what I am talking:
Source: http://web.archive.org/web/200609200115 ... 5/williams
Quote:
Diary of a Mad Law Professor | posted June 17, 1999 (July 5, 1999 issue)
Racial Ventriloquism

Patricia J. Williams

I know I'm not supposed to read too much into a movie like Episode I: The Phantom Menace, but when you're living with a 6-year-old whose entire generation role-plays and reiterates each and every line, you tend to sit up and take exception when what comes out of those innocent little mouths suggests some not-very-subtle ethnic stereotypes of simpletons and shysters. Let's just take the movie's chief comic relief, the popeyed, brainless Jar Jar Binks, who is, apparently, a black man in frog face. Nothing wrong with that, says Lucasfilm; this is science fiction. Except he's a froggy alien who talks, yet says nothing. And who "lopes" (as per George Lucas's specifications, according to Ahmed Best, who plays Jar Jar) in a prancing, high-stepping cakewalk. He is a "Gungan Chuba Thief," as a Star Wars card in my son's little trading collection proclaims.

Whether intentionally or not, Jar Jar's pratfalls and high jinks borrow heavily from the genre of minstrelsy. Despite the amphibian get-up, his relentless, panicky, manchild-like idiocy is imported directly from the days of Amos 'N' Andy. And whether it were a white man, a black woman or Al Jolson himself beneath the mask, what would still make all the clowning so particularly insulting is the fact that Jar Jar's speech is a weird pidgin mush of West African, Caribbean and African-American linguistic styles.

Jar Jar bubbles with soundbites: "You-sa Jedi not all you-sa cracked up to be." "Me berry berry scay-yud." "We-sa goin in da wah-tah, okeyday?" Or, every time he does something so buffoonish as to require outright sanction: "Why me-sa always da one?" None of the Gungans have mastered much in the way of oratory. Indeed, Star Wars Episode I: The Visual Dictionary, now peddled in bookstores everywhere, assures us that "few Gungans speak the pure Gungan language." Yet English (or "Galactic Basic," as the dictionary calls it) is also beyond their command. The fat-faced, toadlike ruler of the Gungan race, who is called Boss Nass and who seems to be wearing the distinctive West African robe known as a boubou, expresses his resentment of his grammatically coherent planetary neighbors, the Naboo, in the following terms: "Dey tink dey so smartee, dey tink dey brains so big."

The Phantom Menace is filled with the hierarchies of accent and class status. The Jedi knights speak in full paragraphs, resonant baritones and crisp British accents. White slaves (like Anakin Skywalker and his mother) and the graceful conquered women of the Naboo speak with the brusque, determined innocence of middle-class Americans. The "status-obsessed," hive-dwelling Neimoidians, on the other hand--who are "known for their exceptional organizing abilities," and who lead "a labyrinthine organization of bureaucrats and trade officials from many worlds that has insinuated itself throughout the galaxy"--speak like Charlie Chan. (In the dictionary, pictures of the Neimoidians are embellished with explanatory captions like: "underhanded gesture," "wheedling expression" and "insincere gesture of innocence.")

And then there's Watto, the "shrewd and possessive" junk dealer with a "sharp eye for a bargain" and a "dubious squint" who owns the tow-headed Anakin Skywalker. Watto sports a "three-day stubble," has a hooked nose that curves to his chin, cheats at games and doesn't give credit. He speaks in a gravelly Middle Eastern accent. Although a number of groups have protested that Watto is an insulting Arab stereotype, he struck me as more comprehensively anti-Semitic--both anti-Arab and anti-Jew. Indeed, Watto bears a striking similarity to a caricature of a Jewish journalist published in a Viennese magazine called Kikeriki at the turn of the last century. Reproduced in Sander Gilman's insightful book The Jew's Body, the cartoon shows a large-nosed, round-bellied man with spindly arms, bandy little legs and flat feet. An enormous fat chain, perhaps a giant watch fob, hangs across his waist. Wings sprout from his shoulders, and in his left hand he carries a scroll that says "anything for money."

Watto has a similar set of wings. He has an almost identically distended belly (the dictionary says it is "mostly composed of gas"). Watto's arms are spindly, his legs are bandy, and his feet are large and webbed. He has a pocket welder with a long, spiraling power cord that loops across his belly with almost the same degree of conspicuousness. And in the dictionary portrait, Watto's left hand grasps a data pad in which he is "careful to maintain accounting records."

As this movie is distributed worldwide and dubbed into a variety of languages, it will be interesting to see just how the accents are translated. If, as the studio maintains, the voices were assigned without thought to the stereotypes against which they play, the translation process provides an opportunity to rethink all that. If, on the other hand, they are merely reiterated in a multitude of tongues, then I fear this signals a determination to perpetuate some pretty poisonous prejudices on a global scale.

It's depressing. Given all the money spent on special effects, what would it have taken to have used computer-generated voices, let's say--to create comic effects or menace or innocence by a mixture of accents and tones and inflections and images that were not at the expense of historically demonized groups? It is the fervent hope of many of us of the post-civil rights generation to launch our children into a social galaxy far, far away from all the old prejudices. Yet for all such efforts, the phantom menace of popular culture seeps in through the cracks in the windows, the attitudes in the movies, the games children play with their friends, bearing prejudices at least as complex and pervasive as those of generations past, if somewhat more subtle.

At a moment when the media are being held accountable for all sorts of farfetched conspiratorial causes and violent effects, let's not let them off the hook for what they accomplish most directly. Films provide an expressive lexicon and romanticized reinforcement of cultural attitudes. They endow with mythic status the sight and sound of those whom the camera makes larger than life; they seduce us with, if not instruct us about, whom to love or hate or mock--and how.


A website with quotes from multiple movie critics:
http://www.mindspring.com/~ernestm/jarj ... itics.html

Source: http://www.scifimoviepage.com/jarjar.html
Quote:
JAR JAR BINKS MUST DIE!

Who is Jar Jar Binks? Well, if you're asking this question then you've been spending the past few years in a black hole, safely tucked away from all the hype and hysteria that is the new Star Wars movie. Jar Jar is a character in Star Wars: Episode One - The Phantom Menace.

What makes him unique is that he isn't some guy in a costume like Chewbacca, for example, was in the previous Star Wars movies. Nope, Jar Jar is a completely CGI (computer graphics) rendered character, seamlessly integrated into the rest of the live action of The Phantom Menace. Think Roger Rabbit, but a real life realistic one and you'll get the idea.

Or rather don't. Because while it would seem that Roger Rabbit could make us laugh (like Jessica Rabbit once declared), Jar Jar, supposedly the comic relief in Phantom does nothing of the sort it would seem. He is rather an annoying and irritatingly cute and unfunny creature despised by many a Star Wars fan. Think of audiences cheering whenever an Ewok bit the dust in Return of the Jedi's climactic battle and you'll have an idea of what we're talking about.

The warning signs were there from the start: when the first Phantom Menace teaser trailer came out, the few seconds he was on-screen immediately worked on the nerves of older Star Wars fans. By the time he opened his mouth to deliver only one line of dialogue in the full trailer, the newsgroups on the Internet were already abuzz with pure hatred for him.

Even on printed page (i.e., the novelisation by Terry Brooks), he grated on your nerves.

As one dismayed fan complained after reading the book: "I hate Jar Jar. He is there for comic relief and has WAY too much story-time. He is integral to the plot, though, and is in virtually every major scene, and he WON'T SHUT UP! He speaks in a broken English that grates on you after a while just reading it. I can only imagine what it will sound like in the movie for two frigging hours!"

Unbearable it would seem - because soon after the first preview screenings of the film, the Internet was once again abuzz with negative reviews. The chief sentiment was that fans have been waiting 16 long years since Return of the Jedi to see the story of one Jar Jar Binks!

Things turned nastier when the accusations of racism and racial stereotyping began being flung at Phantom Menace - hardly something new for the Star Wars movies. The first Star Wars was after all criticized for not featuring a single Black face. Also, the triumphant medal ceremony at the end seemed to echo similar shots from Nazi propagandist Leni Rieftenstahl's Triumph of the Will. Getting a "token Black" in the guise of Lando Calrissian (played by Billy Dee Williams) for The Empire Strikes Back did little to waylay further criticism.

After all, as the Black militant in Kevin Smith's screamingly funny Chasing Amy remarked of Return of the Jedi: "Turns out that the baddest Black ass motherf***r in the universe is a whiny old White guy underneath the mask . . ."

Now comes the news that rapper Stormtroopa is laying tracks for a song titled "Jar Jar Binks Must Die"!

Is hatred of this character going too far? As Lucasfilm said in defense of the character: "Nothing in Star Wars was racially motivated. Star Wars is a fantasy movie. I really do think to dissect this movie as if it had a direct reference to the world today is absurd. It's a children's movie. Kids love [Jar Jar]. He's so childish."

That may be so; but still expect several "Jihad Against Jar Jar" and "Jar Jar Must Die" type web sites to spring up soon on the Internet.

After all, it seems that this character is even more hated than that purple dinosaur . . .


Source: http://articles.latimes.com/1999/may/26 ... t/ca-40965
Quote:
A Galaxy Far, Far Off Racial Mark?
Commentary
Movies: 'Star Wars' characters like Jar Jar Binks, Nute Gunray and Watto prompt comparisons to insensitive stereotypes.
May 26, 1999|ERIC HARRISON | TIMES STAFF WRITER

Even before the newest entry in the "Star Wars" saga opened last week, a comic-book store clerk in Seattle had organized a group called the International Society for the Extermination of Jar Jar Binks and set up a Web site with an address that sounds like a battle cry: http://www.jarjarmustdie.com.

From all indications, the digital animated character who debuted in "Star Wars: Episode I The Phantom Menace" is irritating moviegoers across North America. A floppy-eared amphibian who speaks a Caribbean-flavored pidgin English, Jar Jar has a snout like a sea horse and an anteater's quick darting tongue. He has been described variously as an annoying distant cousin to Disney's character Goofy and as a racially offensive throwback to Stepin Fetchit.

"I've talked to 100 people and nobody likes him," says John Hernandez, 29, a Los Angeles county worker who was among the first to see the movie. "When I came out of the theater people were talking about how annoying he was. At first I thought I was the only one, but I've heard it everywhere."

Rarely has a movie character--and a glorified cartoon character at that--inspired so much vehemence. Much of the criticism centers on what some see as Jar Jar's stereotypical racial traits. An Internet discussion group dedicated to him on deja.com had more than 13,000 postings as of Tuesday morning, many along the lines of this one: "He's written like a character out of an Uncle Remus story, and does everything but call Qui-Gon (the Liam Neeson character) 'Massah.' "

Some other Internet postings compare Jar Jar to the radio and TV characters "Amos 'n' Andy." One writer says of the movie: "It could be 'Sambo Wars.' "

Lynne Hale, a spokeswoman for Lucasfilm, called such interpretations "absurd."

"There is nothing in 'Star Wars' that is racially motivated," she said in a statement. " 'Star Wars' is a fantasy movie set in a galaxy far, far away. It is populated with humans, aliens, creatures, droids, robots and other fantastic creatures. . . . To dissect this movie as if it has a direct reference to the world that we know today is absurd."

Still, some people say the racial references are obvious.

Audience members have complained that Nute Gunray, the evil Viceroy of the Federation, seems based on Asian stereotypes. And Watto, young slave Anakin Skywalker's sleazy owner, strikes some viewers as an offensive caricature of an Arab. In addition, the Gungan, the primitive tribe of which Jar Jar is a member, is ruled by a fat, buffoonish character, seemingly a caricature of a stereotypical African chieftain.

Even though Jar Jar was performed by a black actor who says he had free rein to create the character, movie reviewer Joe Morgenstern, in an essay last week in the Wall Street Journal, called Jar Jar "a Rastafarian Stepin Fetchit on platform hoofs, crossed annoyingly with Butterfly McQueen."

The complaints call to mind the animated cartoons of the 1930s and 1940s, some of which used animal species knowingly to represent specific racial groups. (Think of the jive-talking, jazz-singing crows in Disney's 1941 classic "Dumbo.")

Todd Boyd, a USC cinema studies professor, says the practice continues in animation today, although in subtler form and sometimes for different purposes. Many American animated cartoons were blatantly, unrepentantly racist before their makers bowed to protests in the 1950s. Today, racial subtexts are more likely to promote brotherhood. Sometimes, though, even those cartoons skate on thin ice.

In "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" (1988) the sympathetic cartoon characters--"Toons," they're called, and they inhabit Toontown--were clearly treated as a racial group separate from the human race. But while the movie did not seem in any way an endorsement of racism, Boyd says he was struck by how much "Toon" sounded like "Coon," a derogatory term used against African Americans.

"It seemed so obviously racial that I didn't want to believe that one could get away with being so overt and not know it and have no one else pick up on it," he says. "It was so obvious to me, and yet it wasn't made into an issue."

He thinks that is because non-human cartoon characters and fantastic settings can obscure the subtextual messages of movies.

"If you take 'American History X' and say the character's a racist, people have no problem understanding that," he says. "But if you were to suggest that 'Roger Rabbit' had issues that were problematic racially the response would probably be, 'It's a cartoon.' The assumption seems to be that if something is geared for children then it couldn't be sophisticated enough to carry those sorts of messages."


My point is, IMO maybe Lucas is trying to make up for Jar Jar, Watto, and the other offensive characters found Episode 1-3.

Yes, Hollywood/The Media is a business and the studios would only greenlight a movie if they think it will make money (that would be the business end of movie making). I have no idea if this is true, I do know that [quote=http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1347153/]Tyler Perry[/quote] is able to make an all black cast movie (he has made a few already), etc... Plus a movie about the Tuskegee Airmen was already made by HBO in 1995 and had an limited release in movie theaters and was aired on TV (via HBO). It also had Cuba Gooding, Jr. and basically half the cast of Red Tails in it.

But unless someone confirms what Lucas said I really don't know what happen behind the scenes. In addition, the exact words of Lucas were "studios receive 60% of their profit from overseas, and the studios feel there is no market there for films with all-black casts." So, according to Lucas, the studios were worried that people (in other countries) would not go to see it because it has an all black cast. So, I would interpret this as that the American studios believe foreigners would not accept an all black movie.

Another thing is I am reading multiple movie reviews for Red Tails and it is receiving a lot of negative feedback for its poor and hackney writing and overdone CGI.


Last edited by Penner on Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Wed Jan 25, 2012 9:13 pm 
Offline
Hetairoi
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:32 am
Posts: 9639
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa
Red Tails isn't "too black" for Hollywood. It's too black for the common public. The unwashed masses.

This isn't so much a reflection on Hollywood, as it is on ourselves.

_________________
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Sun Jan 29, 2012 3:31 pm 
Offline
Nomarch
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:22 pm
Posts: 1584
Here is a 27 minute, 51 second movie review of Red Tails, and yes they do talk about what Lucas said and racism in Hollywoood.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 4:10 am 
Offline
Nomarch
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 1:28 am
Posts: 1539
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Penner wrote:
Here is a 27 minute, 51 second movie review of Red Tails, and yes they do talk about what Lucas said and racism in Hollywoood.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I love those guys. Her's an embed:

_________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. - Vecna


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:15 pm 
Offline
Satrap
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 2:55 pm
Posts: 4943
Penner wrote:
when he does make a good movie (New Hope, Empire, Jedi, Temple of Doom, Raiders, and the Last Crusade)


New Hope was a train-wreck until the people he was working with laughed at his edit and re-did it. He didnt direct or write Empire. He had almost nothing to do with Empire, having had a nervous breakdown and being sick.

His movies get progressively worse the more control he has over them. As an idea man, he's fine. But a filmmaker? One of the worst.

_________________
Oh, the humanity...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 3:24 pm 
Offline
Hetairoi
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:32 am
Posts: 9639
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa
The Mad Zeppelineer wrote:
As an idea man, he's fine. But a filmmaker? One of the worst.

This is pretty much his ultimate summary. He needs to take on the role of trusted advisor, rather than the role of cinematic king.

_________________
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 7:23 pm 
Offline
Nomarch
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:22 pm
Posts: 1584
Waleis wrote:
The Mad Zeppelineer wrote:
As an idea man, he's fine. But a filmmaker? One of the worst.

This is pretty much his ultimate summary. He needs to take on the role of trusted advisor, rather than the role of cinematic king.


I'll bet that even in the role of an advisor, Lucas, wouldn't be good. What he really needs is someone who can put all of his stupid ideas in check. Instead of hanging around with "yes men" he needs people who can openly (without fear of being fired), to say that his ideas and scripts do suck, and he needs to rethink/rewrite his ideas and scripts.

The Mad Zeppelineer, was right, Lucas' original ideas of New Hope sucked and they seemed pretty stupid and out their in left field (I heard that he want the character, Hans Solo, be a a lizard man but someone talked him out of it). If you watch the Mr. Plenkitt's Star Wars Prequel movie reviews, this is explained. They seem to make the case that Lucas isn't the great film maker that everyone thinks he is; instead they make him out to be a hack that is living off the money, from the Star Wars franchise, by marketing it nonstop.

Hastur wrote:
Penner wrote:
Here is a 27 minute, 51 second movie review of Red Tails, and yes they do talk about what Lucas said and racism in Hollywoood.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I love those guys. Her's an embed:


Love the Mr. Plinkett's reviews, they are right to the point and the side stories are golden.

My order of favorite reviewer are (in no order):

SFDebris
Mr. plinkett
ConfusedMatthew


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:09 pm 
Offline
Nomarch
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 1:28 am
Posts: 1539
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Penner wrote:

Love the Mr. Plinkett's reviews, they are right to the point and the side stories are golden.

My order of favorite reviewer are (in no order):

SFDebris
Mr. plinkett
ConfusedMatthew

I'll check those out. My favourite appart from http://redlettermedia.com/ is Mark Kermode of Mark Kermode and Simon Mayo's Film Reviews. I never miss a show.
Kermodes blog

_________________
An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur?

It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye. - Vecna


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 8:56 pm 
Offline
Nomarch
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:22 pm
Posts: 1584
Hastur wrote:
I'll check those out. My favourite appart from http://redlettermedia.com/ is Mark Kermode of Mark Kermode and Simon Mayo's Film Reviews. I never miss a show.
Kermodes blog


I hope you do those reviews are pretty good. Although, you should know that SFDebris only reviews Star Trek, other science fiction TV/Movies, and fantasy TV/Movies while ConfusedMatthew tends to review movies (although, he has dabble with different types of reviews). As with RedLetterMedia you know what their reviews are like and do you like their Half In the Bag shows?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 9:15 pm 
Offline
Satrap
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 2:55 pm
Posts: 4943
Nice to know Half in the Bag is getting a lot of love out there. Many were up in arms because they were doing it themselves and not as the character. But its really matured. I almost never visit Thatguywiththeglasses.com for reviews anymore. Redletter is just so good and original.

_________________
Oh, the humanity...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:03 pm 
Online
Hetairoi
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 2:10 pm
Posts: 7617
Location: Cascadia
Many have claimed that the studios turned down this all Black Action movie due to economics, well that doesn't wash. Because stories like this with more conservative message make more money than liberal movies. As found in a recent study.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/08/movieguide-conservative-movies-make-more-money-than-liberal-ones/

I still believe it's racism, meant to keep black men in stereo typical roles and bit parts.

_________________
Molon Labe


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 12:05 pm 
Offline
Hetairoi
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 4:32 am
Posts: 9639
Location: Dragonstone, Iowa
"When 5,700 fifth-grade boys in Dallas' public schools recently went to see a movie about black fighter pilots in World War II, the girls stayed in school and saw a different movie instead.

One of the pilots is among those asking why.
"

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... z1m6bTPE1R

_________________
"No man grows rich by kindness."-Jorah Mormont

"True heroism is you, alone, in a designated workspace. True heroism is minutes, hours, days, year upon year of the quiet, precise, judicious exercise of probity and care, with no one there to see or cheer." The Pale King, by D. F. Wallace.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Red Tails Too Black for Hollywood
PostPosted: Sun Feb 12, 2012 5:21 pm 
Offline
Nomarch
User avatar

Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 4:22 pm
Posts: 1584
Carlus Magnus wrote:
Many have claimed that the studios turned down this all Black Action movie due to economics, well that doesn't wash. Because stories like this with more conservative message make more money than liberal movies. As found in a recent study.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/02/08/movieguide-conservative-movies-make-more-money-than-liberal-ones/

I still believe it's racism, meant to keep black men in stereo typical roles and bit parts.


I really don't know why the studios wouldn't make this movie. A movie like this (which is about black men overcoming racism during WWII) sounds like something that studios would jump on because it has the words "Oscar winner" written all over it. There is a joke that states that Holocaust and WWII movies are usually "Oscar gold" (like what Ricky Gervaise joked about on his show, Extra):


(I love it how Kate Winselt said the line "Oscars our of their ass")

Although, it is untrue that this is the first, and only movie about the Tuskegee Air Men. There was the HBO movie and it did get a limited release in theaters. I have a feeling that part of what Lucas said about this movie being the first about the Tuskegee Air men was to get hyped (or that he didn't know about the HBO movie) for this movie.


Waleis wrote:
When 5,700 fifth-grade boys in Dallas' public schools recently went to see a movie about black fighter pilots in World War II, the girls stayed in school and saw a different movie instead.

One of the pilots is among those asking why."
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nationa ... z1m6bTPE1R


Quote:
A spokesman for the Dallas Independent School District said officials took only boys to see "Red Tails" Thursday because space at the movie theater was limited. Jon Dahlander told The Dallas Morning News that leaders of the district also thought boys would enjoy the movie more than girls.



All I can say is that the school felt that the girls wouldn't like a movie about WWII fighter pilots (which sucks). IMO, as girl I would most likely go see and pay for an action and/or sci-fi movie over a drama and/or romance movie (although, I did recently saw the Decedents and its not bad).

I have to blame this on social biases.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  


Post new topic Reply to topic

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group


Home l Common Sense l Hardcore History l Donate l Community l Merchandise l Blog l About Us