Friday, August 31, 2012

Who do you call..."For A Good Time, Call..."


For A Good Time, Call… is your “not so subtle” typical, American comedy film that explores the budding friendship between two frenemies Lauren and Katie. The responsible editor Lauren (Lauren Miller) and the uncontainable Katie (Ari Gaynor) are polar opposites. However when both come up short on making ends meet financially their shared gay best friend Jesse (Justin Long) reconnects these past enemies and suggest that they become friends. Considering both ladies have nothing in common, Lauren learns that Katie is working as a sex-phone operator and identifies a potential business opportunity...a phone sex hotline. In the end, these roommates realize that maybe they can be more than just business partners, but good girlfriends.

This movie from Toronto-based filmmaker Jamie Travis takes an approach much like fellow director Judd Apatow as he directs this female-driven rudimentary relationship comedy about two New York women who are trying to discover and find themselves in today’s pressured society. To a degree the film comes across more like an extended version of a television sitcom that provides just enough laughter and entertainment to get you through the entire movie. For the most part, the film has a very simple and somewhat predictable premise.

In it’s own unique way with the combination of an eccentric cast and semi-humorous story, For A Good Time, Call…somehow manages to be both sweet and raunchy all in one. The title alone is a great play on words especially as it relates to the dating and sex talk scenes. Unfortunately this idea of creating a phone sex hotline is a bit dated for 2012; and is also difficult to maintain interest for the entire movie, despite all the attempts at basic and crude humor. Although it should be credited that the conversations, behaviors, and emotions are real, which add some authenticity to the film. As the phone sex business seems to make progress the friendship develops as well. Unfortunately the storyline does not add any originality and is really not any different from any other frenenemy type movie.



What is nice about For A Good Time, Call… is the bursting chemistry from all the characters. Each person, regardless of his or her role brings a fresh, playful and candid personality that stays consistent throughout the movie. Graynor and Miller are so charming together however, it seems as though their relationship and friendship is forced to create a happy storyline. Outside of Miller and Graynor characters, the other most amusing character in the film is Justin Long, their gay mutual friend Jesse, who gives a sarcastic yet charismatic performance. In addition, Lauren's parents (Mimi Rogers and Don McManus), who add another bit of appeal.  They always seem to show up at unexpected moments consistently being surprised by their daughter's unrefined roommate. Then there is also a sweet romance between Katie with her faithful caller client Sean (played by Mark Webber) who she has a playful, yet romantic love connection.

For a Good Time, Call… is your typical independent comedy film that appeals to a mass audience in a way that does not “beat around the bush” or sugar coat the content. However it still brings the typical and predictable Hollywood plot lines to the screen. 
Here is a film that caters more to a particular type of woman, one who is in there 20s and maybe early 30s, anyone beyond that may find it difficult to relate to the material. The film can also be seen, as somewhat dated considering the idea of a phone sex hotline has not really been “hot” since the 1990s. What might bring this film to the next level are more story & character development and originality to truly bring this film to life.

Although it has trouble breaking away from predictability once the initial premise is introduced, this comedy shines and spotlight on two up and coming actresses, Lauren Miller and Ari Graynor. If nothing else you will at least be entertained have a good time watching the film.



Rating: 6.5 out of 10

Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Disappearing Acts: Zoe Saldana as Nina Simone & The Erasure of Black Women in Film


Just had to repost!! 



Disappearing Acts: Zoe Saldana as Nina Simone & The Erasure of Black Women in Film
by  Nicole Moore | HuffPost BlackVoices

"I've never changed my hair. I've never changed my color, I have always been proud of myself, and my fans are proud of me for remaining the way I've always been." - Nina Simone

When I think of Nina Simone I think of her dark chocolate skin, her full lips and her tight 'fro. Her looks were and still are every bit as relevant and powerful as the songs she sang. As a matter of fact, her undeniable African features defined and empowered her musical career. So it's no small wonder that people are outraged at hearing last week's confirmed announcement that Zoe Saldana, an Afro-Latina with a café au lait complexion and fine facial features, has been cast as the High Priestess of Soul in an upcoming bio-pic. The fires were fanned this past weekend when an interview by the film's writer and director, Cynthia Mort, surfaced in "Entertainment Weekly" where she talks about the biopic as something seemingly more inspired by Nina with composite characters than a film about Nina and the real-life characters from her life.

Zoe Saldana, best known for her roles in Avatar and Columbiana, may have the acting chops to play the lead in a feature movie, but when it comes to playing Nina Simone, I'm not so sure. It's not simply that Saldana looks nothing like Simone, a woman who could spit out a truthful and caustic Mississippi Goddamn that reminded you in no uncertain terms that she had been rejected because of her skin color. 

Casting Saldana also attempts, if inadvertently, to erase the memory of Simone's revolutionary ebon image from our minds and history's musical canon. Saldana as Simone specifically challenges the message of Simone's music and undermines the power of her well-documented resistance to conventional ideas of beauty and colorism. Nina's success and appeal had as much to do with her talent as it did with her having big lips, wide hips and that Mama Africa bosom. Unlike Lena Horne, Diana Ross & The Supremes, and Tina Turner whose crossover success was as much a result of having talent as well as having sexy live performances and glamorous good looks, Nina used her experiences with racism, colorism and sexism to ignite her music with strength and resilience heard so defiantly in To Be Yong Gifted & Black for example.

Because Simone's blackness extended as much to her musical prowess as to her physicality and image, it's perplexing that the film's production team, led by Jimmy Iovine, expects anyone, particularly in the black community, to (re)imagine Nina Simone as fair-skinned, thin-lipped and narrow-nosed? I guess if you look at Hollywood's history of casting black female roles, especially in biopics, it's not all that surprising.

With a few exceptions – Angela Bassett as Tina Turner, Halle Berry as Dorothy Dandridge and Beyonce as Etta James – Hollywood  has a long history of giving black actresses the finger by casting white women in the lead of films based on the lives of black women -- most famously Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra. Angelina Jolie was given the green light to portray Mariane Pearl, an Afro-Cuban Chinese, French writer in the 2007 adaptation of Pearl's A Mighty Heart, which we kinda let slide because, well, it was Angie. But then she was cast again in a role based on a black woman character in the film Wanted, an adaptation of the same titled comic book series in which the main character is a black.

And the real kicker came in 2008 when St"uck, the true life story of African-American Chante Mallard, for which Suvari had the nerve to sport cornrows. If it only requires cornrows and a full-lipped box-office bombshell to secure these roles originally penned as black women, then what's to prevent any blonde, brunette, pale-skinned actress from playing black? And if that's the case, then surely Hollywood types also think a light-skinned Black woman can portray a dark-skinned Black woman.

Tim Burton and the other producers behind Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Huntercertainly thought so when they cast Jacqueline Fleming, a bi-racial woman, as Harriet Tubman. And hell, even Aretha Franklin wants Halle Berry, a bi-racial woman, to play her in her own life story. And yes, Halle is the highest paid Black actress in America, but is that reason enough for her to represent every Black women on the big screen? From X-Men's Storm to Zora Neale Hurston's Janie, to Dorothy Dandrige and now possibly The Queen of Soul, Halle's image has seeped into America's (cinematic) consciousness as the face of every Black woman making it seem like we are this monolithic community of sistas. 

If Aretha, known as much for her voice as much for her thickness (and her taste in hats) doesn't even think full-figured, Oscar-winning actresses Mo'nique or Octavia Spencer would be great choices to portray her life story, I'm really not surprised by Zoe's casting. And I get that actors do not have to resemble the famous personas they portray, but when there are so few empowering images of Black women in TV & film, details like weight, skin color and hair become serious sticking points amongst Black folk.

And doors do not open for Black actresses with dark skin as readily or as often as they do for their male counterparts. Actors like Wesley Snipes, Sidney Poitier, Don Cheadle, Idris Elba, Bill Cosby and Sam Jackson do not encounter the same level of marginalization and erasure as Whoopi Goldberg, Regina King, Viola Davis and Alfre Woodard.

Then there's Tyler Perry, who has produced films like Diary Of A Mad Black Woman and a remake of Ntozake Shange's For Colored Girls, and has cast a number of Black actresses in his movies. Unfortunately, when the lead female character in many of these flicks is a gun-toting, outspoken, Bible-thumping, righteous she-ro named Madea-- Tyler Perry in drag-- and the other Black women are depicted as non-sexual or hyper-sexual, emotionally scarred, spiritually bereft women who just need God, Madea and a man to be happy, self-poised and empowered, then even and especially these portrayals affirm the notion that Black women are monolithic, simple and bordering on irrelevant. If a man in a dress with a gun is a box-office hit and popular with Black audiences then Hollywood takes note and actresses who look like Viola Davis or Regina King find themselves disappearing from the big screen.

Since the announcement of Saldana as the lead in Nina's biopic was made, a petition on Change.org has been created, which demands that Saldana be replaced. Supporters of the petition would rather that role go to Lauryn Hill, Adepero Oduye, India.Arie or Viola Davis. The petition, however, has been met with criticism by some who believe the role of Nina Simone is turning into a debate about one actress being "blacker" than another. Those who support Zoe, who is outspoken about being an Afro-Latina, say that her Blackness should not be defined by the color of her skin or the straightness of her hair. The fact that Zoe is Black Dominican is all that should matter. If standards of Black beauty in this country didn't have a history of being valued and de-valued based upon their semblance to whiteness as the standard then maybe it wouldn't matter.

In 1966, the woman born Eunice Kathleen Waymon penned The Four Women, which begins, "My skin is Black/ My arms are long/ My hair is wooly/ My back is strong/ Strong enough to take the pain/ Inflicted again and again." Nina had the posture, past and physicality to make this song not only brazen, but also believable and therefore revolutionary in it's telling. How can Saldana possibly bring the pain in an afro-wig and, God-forbid, dark makeup? The producers may as well cast Madea because if it's going to be all about make-up, wigs and fat-suits, ain't nobody bringing it like Mr. Perry.

***

Nicole is the Founder and Editor of theHotness.com. Follow her on Twitter:www.twitter.com/thehotnessgrrrl

Tuesday, August 21, 2012

DVD Releases 8/21/2012


Here are this week's DVD releases...

The Dictator (R)
Chimpanzee (G)
A Separation (PG-13)
Bernie (PG-13)
Freelancers (R)

Stay tuned for next week...

Saturday, August 18, 2012

DVD Releases 8/18/2012


One is the loneliest number, but in this case it works out for this movie...

The Hunger Games (PG-13)

And let's not forget all the controversy and the fact that it stayed #1 for 4 weeks straight!!

Wednesday, August 15, 2012

Throwback Flick: Together Brothers (1974)

Here is a film that a friend of mine recommended that I watch since I am a fan of Blaxploitation films (another story). Together Brothers is classic tale of brotherhood, sexuality, class, race, and gender. Thirty-eight years later this film is still very much relevant. 

Together Brothers is a drama filled, gritty film that offers a portrayal of ghetto life within the wave of the 1970s Blaxploitation era. Set in Galveston, Texas a teenage gang comprised of Blacks and Chicanos, ‘the Brothers’ learn that a police officer, Mr. Kool (Ed Bernard), who was seen as a mentor has been found brutally murdered. The twist of the movie is that the only witness is the leader’s 5-year old brother who becomes mute due to what he has seen. As a result of this crime, the group lead by H.J. (Ahmad Nurradin) sets on a mission to track down those responsible for the murder of the popular police officer, as well protecting his little brother from any further harm.

Together Brothers is a sympathetic film that explores ghetto life, from various perspectives. On one end you feel a since of anger for what is seen as a senseless murder, and then there is a torn feeling of sadness and what is considered fair treatment towards a human being. When all else fails whom does one depend on for compassion and safety, their family and or their community? But what if neither is available? 


Together Brothers is not only a film that provides an intriguing story full of twists and surprises, but a naturalistic amateur cast. Director William Graham was brilliant for choosing a group of young, inexperienced actors to help make this picture more authentic and effective. H.J. (Ahmad Nurradin) offers an engaging mix of resourcefulness and bravery as the gang's leader and Tommy (Anthony Wilson) delivers a marvelously expressive turn without any dialogue as the little brother who witnesses the murder. In addition to the younger cast members, adult cast members Ed Bernard is both charming and authoritative as the police officer that the kids secretly admire; and Glynn Turman who although has a brief role plays a vividly drawn and compelling doctor who tries to lend a helping hand to the film's ‘hero’. Marking the first appearance of a transgender person of color in a motion picture, the character of Billy Most (Lincoln Kilpatrick) is presented as your typical deranged and “confused” murderer trope-type character. (S)he is essentially viewed by the neighborhood as a insignificant individual who committed a crime of murder, seemingly for no reason. Each character in their own unique and clever way draws you in with their credible and expressive performances.


As one watches this film, you realize that this intense, urban crime drama opens a serious dialogue regarding self-identity, sexuality, brotherhood, and embracing childhood even when it is viciously taken. This film, content wise, could even still be relevant in 2012 as it also addresses issues of police brutality, class, urbanization, and racial conflict. Even though Together Brothers is considered a Blaxploitation film it does bend the rules of the typical format by ushering a challenging story with characters that are actually allowed to be people instead of one-dimensional, overly-violent or sexualized caricatures. Imagine a film that truly allows for feelings of happiness and sadness from real people, here is a film that does just that.


All in all, Together Brothers is a film that offers an unusual mix social commentary, a street-wise story, and a soulful soundtrack. Some may even say this film was ahead of its time considering it discussed such issues as homosexuality and transgenderism. As a whole, this film is a well-crafted hidden gem that is worthy of rediscovery from fans of the Blaxploitation film era and those interested in a complex, daring and provocative narrative.

Rating: 8 out of 10 stars

Tuesday, August 14, 2012

Dear Hollywood....

Now I could not resist this re-post, this is so very problematic on so many levels. As I was strolling through my Facebook I came across a picture and commentary from Bougie Black Girl that stopped me cold in my tracks... Check it out for yourself...  


It has been reported that Zoe Saldana will replace Mary J. Blige in the role of Nina Simone. Nina Simone was a real life person. We know what she looked like and well it looks like Hollywood is at it again. I for one am outraged. There are far more actresses in Hollywood who could have taken this role.

Let me also say that this is not a slight at Ms. Saldana. She is a great actress but Ms. Salda
na in no way shape or form even looks like the legendary Nina Simone. Nina Simone was a Black woman from Tryon, North Carolina and not a Latina.

Zoe Saldana describes herself by saying "I’m just Zoe. Not a little bit Dominican, not a little bit Puerto Rican, none of that silliness… I am what you want me to be if that’s what it takes for you to overcome your insecurities. As a Latina, I think we should be very proud of our heritage. We tend to look for European roots and reject the indigenous and the African, and that is disgusting. Being Latin is a mix of everything. I want my people to not be as insecure, and to adore what we are because it’s beautiful.”

Nina Simone was a beautiful dark skin Black woman.

Once again Hollywood shows no regard for authenticity when it comes to Black women. In the recent movie called Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter the character of President Abraham Lincoln was portrayed by an actor who looked like one of our nation's greatest presidents. Unfortunately, when casting the role of Harriet Tubman the casting director diverted from this and chose a biracial Dutch actress to play the role of one of America's greatest heroines and former Black slave Harriet Tubman.

I wonder is Hollywood that oblivious to their blatant colorism they display when casting Black women but only conscience of authenticity when it comes to white characters. Only They know they truth.

Black people images have power. This is why it is imperative that we Black women speak up and let our voices be heard. The most powerful thing we can do is control our image if not others will shape it for you.

I can think of four different people who could play this role WAY SO MUCH BETTER (Nicole Beharie, Rutina Wesley, India Arie, Naomi Harris)!! 

What are your thoughts?!

 

 


Monday, August 13, 2012

"Celeste and Jesse Forever" -Guest Film Review

Is it possible to marry your best friend, divorce, and stay friends? If Celeste and Jesse Forever were a real-life story, then it proves that it’s the most complex of situations. However, it shows that it’s also believable. Co-writers and co-stars Rashida Jones and Will McCormack have been there in a way: The two dated for a few weeks in the late 90s, but felt that they were better suited to be friends more than lovers. Jones and McCormack’s shared history inspired their first screenplay (as individuals and as collaborators). The film is already being lumped in the romantic comedy genre, but the fact that it focuses more on the heartbreak side gives it the realistic edge and makes it a difference-maker in the field. Its unpredictability, authenticity, delightfully crude humor, and multidimensional characters give heart to a solid and highly engaging effort by cast, and crew alike—and bring something new to audiences seeking a laugh but also a serious and somewhat heartwrenching narrative.

Jones plays the female protagonist she penned—a busy, motivated, and successful Los Angeles media consultant named Celeste. Scenes of her and Jesse (Andy Samberg)—a talented but unemployed and slightly lazy illustrator—open the film, featuring the two of them affectionately and playfully speaking to each other in fake accents. After a botched double date, their mutual friend Beth (Ari Graynor) blows up at them, that it’s weird that they’re still so comfortable with each other even though they’re separated and on their way to a divorce. This sets such a great stage for the story and in showcasing the unconventionality of Celeste and Jesse’s relationship. However, that level of comfort is diminished as the two of them try to move on with their lives and with other people. They begin to question their true feelings about each other and wonder if it is indeed possible to maintain their friendship. Behind them is an oddball cast of supporting players: Beth, her fiance Tucker (Eric Christian Olsen), Celeste and Jesse’s pot dealer buddy Skillz (McCormack), Celeste’s flamboyant co-worker Scott (Elijah Wood), and Riley (Emma Roberts), a young airheaded pop star who clashes professionally with Celeste.

The film is a bit lopsided in telling more of Celeste’s side of the story: There is a lot more exploration of her outings, her work life, and her interactions with her friends, colleagues, and suitors, yet Jesse, on his own, doesn’t seem to be around much for the audience to see. However, this perspective does allow Jones to showcase her acting talents, and bring to life the fascinating and emotionally conflicted character she wrote. Unlike many romantic comedy heroines whose sole goal is to find and keep love, Celeste has much more depth to her, and it’s clear that she’s a career woman, even in her heartbreak and desire to mend her heart. One of the funniest plot points is Celeste and her firm’s marketing of Riley’s latest record, and how a hilarious album art mistake leads to a frenzy. Though it’s random, in this film, it’s small points like this that make a big statement about a character. Jones’ performance as Celeste is also a highlight, if not the big highlight of the film. Known more for her comedic roles in films and TV shows (I Love You Man, Parks and Recreation), Jones is effortless in her delivery of sarcastic, sharp-tongued humor. She really stretches herself in emoting the building angst and frustration Celeste lives with in dealing with her separation from Jesse and in her other relationships. It’s one of her most authentic performances to date and it’s difficult to picture someone else in the role. Samberg, also more known for his roles in comedy (Saturday Night Live), turns in a very respectable dramatic effort as Jesse. He does benefit from the lovable and natural chemistry he shares with Jones—the two performers have known each other for a long time through the stand-up comedy circuit.
Aesthetically, Celeste and Jesse Forever’s portrait-like cinematography (featuring the beautiful landscapes of Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Rhode Island) and mellow soundtrack give it a true indie feel.  However, the real spirit comes from how the film takes on a different kind of love story—one that isn’t necessarily one of romance, but one of letting go. It’s one that’s layered and refreshing. Somehow maybe, ‘forever’ is still possible in the most unexpected way.
Rating: 8 out of 10

Guest Film Review: "Hope Springs"

Check out this guest post from my fellow sister site Medium Rare for the film Hope Springs...

Hope Springs is a fun but forgettable romantic comedy about a couple whose relationship has lost its spark. Kay (Meryl Streep) would like to get back the magic in her thirty-one year marriage with Arnold (Tommy Lee Jones) and has enrolled the two in couples counseling with Dr. Feld (Steve Carrel) in the tiny remote city of Hope Springs, Maine. Though enjoyable as a whole, the film is divided into two distinct parts: the first and the second half. The distinction being that the first half drags and the second half is actually enjoyable.


The overarching problem in the first half is the film’s one dimensionality: Kay wants a change and Arnold doesn’t. This seems to be the only thing going on. Arnold makes no attempt to change his ways and spends his time badgering Kay: “How could you bring me here?” “What did I do to deserve this?” “How can you call 31 years ‘not a real marriage.’” Kay, on the other hand, spends this portion of the film looking longingly at the man she loves wishing he would change. Clearly the film makers wish to drive home just how dysfunctional the relationship is but they do so in excess. The point is clear early on, so each new scene illustrating it feels a bit excessive. At some point the viewer has to wonder how these two are together at all.
This one noted-ness also, unfortunately, applies to the comedy of the film. Although it gets slightly better in the second half, the movie is never really that funny. All of the jokes seem to be about the same thing: Arnold and Kay’s awkwardness around each other. Look at these old people trying to be sexy with one another, the film seem to suggest. They can’t even say the words “oral sex!” Isn’t that funny? Yes, at first, but the novelty of adults behaving like cootie-phobic children gets old fast.
Hope Springs finally picks up in the second half after an emotional therapy session between Kay and Arnold. When you learn that Arnold feels that Kay also had a part in the breaking of their marriage a new dimensionality is added to the film. Finally the movie is not just about one character wanting something and the other being reluctant to give it, but about two characters trying to figure out what went wrong and how to change it together. The film is at its best in this second half as we get to watch the characters, in some very touching scenes, remember exactly how it was that they loved one another and what it felt like to do so.
As you could imagine from the cast list for Hope Springs – Streep, Jones, and Carrel – the acting is great. The script occasionally forces the stars into the melodramatic but the cast is always able to tone it back before things get too ridiculous. Streep and Jones show great chemistry and are able to realistically convey how two people could be in love but still so very unhappy. All three of the stars are masters of on screen subtlety, quickly conveying things to the audience with a shift in posture or a sideways glance. Unfortunately, these talents are used a bit too frequently and what should have been subtle often becomes rather blunt. Seemingly afraid the audience will not get it, director David Frankel (The Devil Wears Prada) always uses two strokes when one would do.
At the end of it all the audience is left with a very sweet though not very funny film. Writer Vanessa Taylor clearly has a lot to say about the subject and is able to convey her message in a heartwarming enjoyable way. The actors, always welcome on screen, do a good job and the chemistry between them feels real. Though Hope Springs flounders in its opening, the second half finds its legs and the audience is left with a tender and enjoyable experience highlighting the trials and tribulations of marriage. It’s a shame, though, that it isn’t a bitt funnier.

Rating: 6 out of 10

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

REPOST: "Freeing (Black) Science Fiction From The Chains Of Race"

While doing my daily reading of Shadow and Act, I came across this very intriguing article discussing sci-fi writer Octavia Butler and possible/potential film adaptations. It was such an engaging article that I just had to do a repost on Black Savant Cinema!! Check it out, and trust me you will not be disappointed!!

By Andre Seewood


Having just finished reading African-American science-fiction author Octavia E. Butler’s short story,” BLOODCHILD,” the temptation to adapt the work for the cinema brings forth a host of complexities within the material that go far beyond the race of the author.  Ostensibly, BLOODCHILD is the story of human beings who have left earth, due to rising violence and the threat of enslavement, to share their lives on another planet populated by arthropod-like creatures.  
The price for peaceful co-existence between the two species is that selected male humans must be impregnated and bear the children of the aliens in an excruciatingly painful and bloody gestation process.  One male child has discovered that for all of his life he has been groomed for impregnation and if he refuses then the lives of his siblings and loved ones will be held in jeopardy.
In the afterword by the author, Butler makes explicit the themes and context of the story.  She states that on one level BLOODCHILD can be read as,” a love story between two very different beings,” and that its context is that of,” a coming of age story in which a boy must absorb disturbing information and use it to make a decision that will affect the rest of his life,” and finally she confesses that,” Bloodchild is my pregnant man story.”(1)  
Butler’s reason for explicitly detailing the themes and context in her afterword to the short story was driven by a central difficultly in the creation and critique of any science fiction by an African-American author: the certain tendency to see all science fiction by African-Americans as a metaphor or commentary about slavery or racial inequities past and present.  As Butler matter-of-factly asserts,” it amazes me that some people have seen “Bloodchild” as a story of slavery.  It isn’t.” (2)
Yet this overarching and obsessive need to see all science fiction by African-Americans as a metaphor or commentary on slavery or racial inequities tends to make the question of race a central theme within the work (whether it is actually there or not) to the exclusion of all the other prominent themes as Butler pointed out in her afterword to BLOODCHILD.  In placing the racial frame upon the science fiction/fantasy/or futurist work of African-Americans we too hastily discard the genuine scientific, fantasy or futurist aspects of the work, which in turn, weakens and /or perverts the author’s original intent.  In fact, many African-Americans use race as a default critique when we approach science-fiction solely as a means of side-stepping the science within the fiction no matter what the race of the author.
For example, many African-American film scholars (Ed Guerrero, Eric Greene, Adilifu Nama), critics and viewers insist upon reading Frank J. Schaffner’s PLANET OF THE APES (1968) as,” a dense racial allegory,” where a white male is,” a signifier of black victimization,“ that obscures the central scientific themes and historical source material of PLANET OF THE APES which were the 1925 Scopes trial, the concept of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, and the concept of time dilation in space travel.(3)  
Although later PLANET OF THE APES sequels did deliberately enhance the racial allegory with the saga, perhaps owing to the financial incentives of the Blaxploitation genre that was growing in popularity at that time, the original PLANET OF THE APES, adapted from French author Pierre Boulle’s 1963 novel by Rod Serling and Michael Wilson, is a stunning exploration of skepticism about the theory of evolution and the fear of knowledge that contradicts established beliefs in the face of mounting empirical evidence from an inverse perspective [that the superior apes are derived from the lowly humans].  These over-racialized readings of PLANET OF THE APES demonstrate how convincingly one can discard the “science” within the fiction to make the subject of race a central theme within any science fiction film or story.    
Returning to Octavia E. Butler’s BLOODCHILD, her insistence that BLOODCHILD is not a story of slavery in her afterword is a direct consequence of the over-racializing of the work of African-American science-fiction authors as metaphors or commentaries on slavery or racial inequities.  Neither Butler nor her characters in BLOODCHILD ever mention their race within the text.  In effect, to see BLOODCHILD as a metaphor about slavery is to deliberately obscure the more profound and disturbing aspects of the work which is of course the notion of male pregnancy and a boy’s coming of age on an alien planet where the adults have made a political accommodation to peacefully co-exist with their alien hosts that has troubling moral, physical and psycho-sexual consequences.
This is the “science” within the fiction that cannot by itself prohibit a racial critique but it certainly reveals how using race as a default critique of science-fiction by African-American authors perverts their themes and chains these authors to the topic of race no matter how much freedom they have within their chosen medium of artistic expression.              
For African-American filmmakers the over-racializing of the themes within a science-fiction story (whether an original story or adaptation) is ultimately inhibiting because those scientific, speculative or fantasy aspects that attracted you to the work in the first place can easily become obscured, diluted or discarded as “race” insidiously poisons the well of the fictional context and content.  It is a poisoned well that makes us all potentially see the genre of science-fiction,” through a glass darkly,” so to speak.  To put the matter plainly, the perceptual frame of racial inequality (past or present) can be applied to any story or film regardless of the author’s central themes; race is a catch-22; a prison house of interpretation from which it seems there is no escape or satisfying resolution.
For example, if you as a filmmaker omit African-Americans from the science-fiction story altogether then the critical concept of “structured absence” allows your critics to use any other non-white race, animal, or object within your film as a symbol of minority otherness and then “interpret” a racial commentary where you had not intended such a commentary to exist.  One needs only to read Ed Guerrero’s devastating analysis of Joe Dante’s GREMLINS (1984) and GREMLINS 2: The New Batch (1990) in his book Framing Blackness.(4)  
In regards to the absence of African-Americans in the GREMLINS films, Guerrero interprets the Gremlins themselves as symbols of minority otherness and asserts that,” the film’s socially repressed fears have to do with non-white minorities gaining political power, as Gremlins 2, satires the political subtleties of an increasing influential “minority discourse” in contemporary American life more than it plays upon latent anxieties over racial otherness.” (pg.65)  Although it could alternately be argued that many White American filmmakers were omitting African-American characters from their science-fiction films in a naïve and erroneous attempt to avoid racial issues and keep those issues from stealing focus from their central themes.
Conversely, if you place African-Americans in lead, co-lead or supporting roles in a science-fiction film, the critics can use the concept of “token presence” to suggest that the actors are performing blackness as a general commentary on race relations (contemporary, historical or speculative) as author Adilifu Nama does with his analysis of Will Smith in Alex Proyas’ I, ROBOT (2004) in his book Black Space.  In regards to more African-American actors gaining lead and co-lead roles in science-fiction films, Nama asserts that,” In the wake of September 11th, black representation in the science-fiction films of today may function to assuage an acute case of domestic paranoia.” (pg.40)
So that even with an African-American in the lead role of a science-fiction film the concept of token presence maintains race as a central theme to the exclusion of the “scientific” themes within the film.  Idris Elba’s supporting role as the space ship captain in Ridley Scott’s PROMETHEUS (2012) can be viewed as a commentary on race if we are willing to sweep aside and obscure the film’s central themes on the origin of man, inter-planetary bio-warfare, and the old filthy rich miser who desperately wants to cheat death at the expense of the lives of others.
Token presence can also allow us to use Bokeem Woodbine’s supporting role in Len Wiseman’s re-imagining of TOTAL RECALL (2012) as a racial commentary that can obscure the compelling political and psychological themes that are central to the work of celebrated science-fiction author Phillip K. Dick upon which the film is based.      
The full title of Nama’s book is revealing of the catch-22 of race: it is called BLACK SPACE: Imagining Race in Science-Fiction film. The title itself begs the question are we “imagining race” in science-fiction film as a means of obscuring the science and other themes that do not support a racial interpretation within the work?  As a filmmaker approaching the science-fiction genre with the ambition of casting African-Americans in your film, you will have great difficulty in finding a middle ground between the racialized poles of “structured absence” and “token presence”.  It would seem that as it concerns race in the genre of science-fiction, one is damned if you do and damned if you don’t cast an African-American.
“One of the most difficult obstacles African-American writers and filmmakers must face when approaching the genre of science-fiction is whether or not to continue the pessimism of present day racial inequities in their visions of the future or whether or not to project an optimism into their visions of the future where racial inequities have been solved. It is literally a choice between a dystopic future and a utopian future where racial conflicts have either been solved as in a utopia or remain unsolved as in a dystopia.
The most pertinent question that might help in making the choice is: Are blacks treated better, worse or fairly in the future than they are today? This choice is of great importance because if the racial inequities have been solved then the writer/filmmaker must find conflicts within the drama beyond race which given the narrow perceptual frame through which many African-Americans view cinema, might be no easy task.
For example, in director Ridley Scott and writers Dan O’Bannon and Ronald Shusett’s science-fiction film ALIEN (1979), racial inequities were carried forward into the future by the character of African descent named, Parker (Yapet Koto) who held a mechanical engineering job that was on a lower pay scale than the other whites on the interplanetary mining ship, Nostromo. A fact that can be understood from his concern about their bonus pay which he was told would be revoked if they didn’t fulfill their mission directives. Moreover, he was a subordinate in the chain of command to nearly all of the other whites on the ship besides his fellow white co-engineer, Brett (Harry Dean Stanton). Parker’s death at the hands of the violent space creature was made all the more tragic since he was killed in a futile effort to protect a weak and hysterical white female crew member.
By contrast, Brian DePalma’s MISSION TO MARS (2000) projects an optimistic future where racial inequities, it is at least implied, have been solved by the example of the Luke Graham (Don Cheadle) character’s unguarded interaction amongst his white peers and colleagues as well as his command of the first human colony on Mars. It is clear that an optimistic perspective brings the science of the fiction to the forefront and allows the filmmakers and the writers to establish dramatic conflicts through those basic human qualities and frailties that transcend race.” (pgs. 50-51, Slave Cinema)
For African-American filmmakers approaching the genre of science-fiction, whether through an original screenplay or an adaptation, I would suggest that if you carry racial inequities forward into the future of your story context you might still be able to keep race from obscuring the central “scientific” themes of your work if you utilize what I call the development strategy.  As I detail in my book, SLAVE CINEMA,” The development strategy usually features an African-American character that is first seen in a minor supporting role, but through successive events and circumstances that reveal his or her cunning, intelligence, sensitivity, wisdom, strength, beauty or empathy this minor supporting role is developed into a lead or co-lead role within the story.
Roland Emmerich’s INDEPENDENCE DAY is one such film that employs the Development strategy concerning the African-American Air Force pilot Capt. Steve Hiller as performed by Will Smith. This character was first seen as a small part of a large multi-racial ensemble cast and the character is developed through the course of the film’s events and circumstances into a hero.” (pg. 70)  The Development strategy is particularly effective with integrated casts and with actors who are not well known.
Alternately, if you do not want to carry racial inequities forward into the future of your story context you just simply have to cast an African-American in the lead role and concentrate on the dynamics of the central “scientific” themes within the story.  For all intents and purposes once you’ve cast that African-American actor in the lead role or you have decided to use the development strategy to move an African-American character from a supporting role to a lead “heroic” role in a science-fiction film you have already effectively made a powerful and inspiring commentary on race regardless of the story context and theme.  
In choosing either path you can “side step” the catch-22 of race and the racial critiques of “structured absence” [no blacks at all] and “token presence” [one black as a commentary upon all blacks] by remaining faithful to those aspects that are specific to the genre you have chosen.  In short, you explore the “science” within the fiction instead of obscuring that “science” through a glass darkly with race.
And if seems as if it’s a question of money that is keeping African-American filmmakers from breaking out into the genre of science-fiction then we should take inspiration from the fact that many of the great science-fiction films of cinema history have been made with budgets far less than one would expect.  Consider films like La Jetée (1962) by Chris Marker, Alphaville (1965) by Jean-luc Godard, THX 1138 (1971) by George Lucas, The Man Who Fell To Earth (1976) by Nicholas Roeg, Stalker (1979) by Andrei Tarkovsky, The Last Battle (1983) by Luc Besson, The Brother From Another Planet (1984) by John Sayles, and They Live (1988) by John Carpenter; these were films all made by filmmakers who manipulated the formal structure and sound design of their films rather than high production budgets and expensive Computer Generated Imagery.(5)  
Even Ridley Scott’s Bladerunner (1982) saved money by recycling sets and miniature models from George Lucas’ Star Wars (1977) as well as utilizing cost saving measures like matte paintings and blue screen processing.(6)  
Creativity and imagination can always trump a high budget and lack of originality every time in the cinema.        
Knowing that there are many African-American scientists, physicists, explorers, engineers and astronauts that live and breathe in the world today as they did once throughout history (I am reminded of the great Lonnie George Johnson the inventor (SuperSoaker) and engineer and Valerie Thomas the scientist and inventor of NASA’s the illusion transmitter) we should guide ourselves through the genre of science-fiction with the notion that our “afro-nautical” characters are exceptions that prove the entire notion of black inferiority untrue by their very existence.  Therefore, we can concentrate on those scientific, fantasy, or speculative aspects of the genre that we enjoy without guilt, remorse or trepidation.

Perhaps the only thing keeping us as African-Americans from adapting the work of Octavia E. Butler, Samuel R. Delany, Andrea Hairston, even Phillip K. Dick or casting an African-American in the lead role of a science-fiction film is our fear of letting go of race as a central theme and embracing those other themes that transcend race and make us all human.  After all, if there is any truth to those famous words attributed to psychoanalyst Sigmund Freud,” Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar,” in reference to that certain tendency to over-analyze the inconsequential then perhaps the same is true in film,” Sometimes a man is just a man no matter what his race.”
Andre Seewood is the author of SLAVE CINEMA: The Crisis of the African-American in Film
NOTES
(1)Pg. 30, BLOODCHILD: and Other Stories 2nd Edition by Octavia E. Butler, Seven Stories Press, New York: 2005
(2) Op. Cit.
(3) Pg. 127, BLACK SPACE: Imagining Race in Science-Fiction Film by Adilifu Nama, University of Texas Press, Austin: 2008; See Also: Pgs. 11-17, PERFORMING WHITENESS: Postmodern Re/constructions in the Cinema by Gwendolyn Audrey Foster, State University of New York Press, Albany: 2003; “PLANET OF THE APES” as American Myth: Race, Politics, and Popular Culture by Eric Greene, Wesleyan University Press, New Hampshire: 1996.
(4) FRAMING BLACKNESS: The African-American Image in Film by Ed Guerrero, Temple University Press, Philadelphia: 1993.
(5) All production budget numbers are from imdb unless otherwise indicated.  Costs have not been adjusted for inflation, but the point is that the costs are low relative to the Hollywood average budget for a science-fiction film. La Jetée production costs are unavailable but we can assume they were low since the film is comprised of still frames photographed from a Pentax 35mm SLR camera and an Arriflex 35mm film camera that was borrowed for one hour, according to the director Chris Marker (see, La Jetée “Notes on Filmmaking” in liner notes the Criterion DVD Edition), Alphaville 220,000 francs, THX 1138  $777,000, The Man Who Fell To Earth $1.5 million according the producer Michael Deeley in his book “Blade Runners, Deer Hunters, and Blowing the Bloody Doors Off: My Life in Cult Movies” Pegasus Books 2009 , Stalker (unavailable), The Last Battle 600,000 francs/91,389 euros, The Brother From Another Planet $300,000, They Live 4 million dollars.  
(6) FUTURE NOIR: The Making of Bladerunner by Paul M. Sammon, Harper Books, New York: 1996
You can also find the original post on HERE on Shadow & Act.

G-Breezy's Favorite Movies

  • Bourne Identity/Supremacy/Ultimatum
  • Die Hard series
  • Do the Right Thing
  • Fracture
  • Idlewild
  • Imitation of Life
  • Inside Man
  • James Bond series
  • Love Jones
  • Malcolm X