Posted on February 1, 2015 at 8:00 am
I’m a big fan of Mike Epps, and am excited about “That’s Racist!,” his new web series on AOL. It is a provocative look at racism and stereotypes. Are Asians bad drivers? Are Jews cheap? Do African-Americans all like fried chicken? These and other stereotypes are explored by experts and people inside and outside of the groups who confront the assumptions, both positive and negative.
And here’s the first episode:
Posted on October 16, 2014 at 5:25 pm
B+| Lowest Recommended Age: | Mature High Schooler |
| MPAA Rating: | Rated R for language, sexual content and drug use |
| Profanity: | Very strong language including racist terms |
| Alcohol/ Drugs: | Drinking, drug use |
| Violence/ Scariness: | Tense confrontations |
| Diversity Issues: | A theme of the movie |
| Date Released to Theaters: | October 17, 2014 |
| Date Released to DVD: | February 2, 2015 |
| Amazon.com ASIN: | B00OMCCJIS |
Before I turn to whitesplaining this film, I will begin by suggesting that you read what Aisha Harris at Slate and what my friends and fellow critics Travis Hopson and Stephen Boone have to say first. If I did not have enough humility before seeing the film about my ability to provide some insight into a movie about racism, the best evidence of the power of the film’s message is that I have more now — and that I recognize it might still not be be enough. I liked the film very much and want to encourage people to see it, so I am going to weigh in with some thoughts and hope that if they come across as disrespectful or ignorant, it will lead to some good conversations and, I hope, to greater understanding.
The focus is on four African-American students at an Ivy League school called Winchester University. Sam White (a biting but layered performance by standout Tessa Thompson) is the host of “Dear White People,” a controversial radio program with stinging, provocative commentary along the lines of “Dear white people: The official number of black friends you are required to have has now been raised to two. And your weed man does not count.” Coco (Teyonah Parris) is an ambitious woman who wants to be selected for a new reality TV series, even if that means creating a fabricated backstory and becoming more confrontational. Troy (Brandon P Bell) is the handsome, accomplished BMOC (and son of the dean) who says he has never experienced prejudice and is under a lot of pressure from his father to succeed. And Lionel (Tyler James Williams) is something of a loner because he feels he does not fit in with any of the rigid categories of the campus hierarchical taxonomy. He is invited by the editor of the school newspaper to go undercover to write about race relations at the school.
Each of these characters’ identities and conflicts is represented in their hair. Sam has tight, controlled coils. Coco has long, straight hair. Troy’s hair is cut very close to the bone. And Lionel’s hair is a marvel of untamed frizz that seems to be a character of its own. Each of the characters will face challenges to his or her carefully constructed identity, and all will be reflected in changes of hairstyle.
The dorm that had previously been all-black is now integrated following a race-blind room assignment policy. Sam takes on Troy in an election for head of house, never anticipating that she might win. But she does. This leads to some changes, including a confrontation with the arrogant frat-bro Kurt (Kyle Gallner), son of the white President of the university and leader of the school’s prestigious humor publication. Kurt is the kind of guy who expects to be allowed to eat wherever he likes, even if he is not a member of the house. He also explains that we live in a post-racial world because Obama is President. And he thinks it is a great idea to plan a “ghetto” party, with white students dressing up as gangsta caricatures.
Just to remind us that, while the movie may have a heightened sensibility for satirical purposes, it is not outside the realm of reality, the closing credits feature a sobering series of photos from real “ghetto” parties held on campuses across the country.
It is refreshing, provocative, and powerfully topical, respecting and updating the tradition of “School Daze” and “Higher Learning.” It deals not only with questions of race but with broader questions of gender, class, identity, and the way we construct our personas, especially in our late teens and early 20’s. Writer/director Justin Simien has created a sharp satire with an unexpectedly tender heart.
Parents should know that this film includes very strong language including racial epithets, sexual references and situations, drinking, drug use, and tense confrontations about race, class, and gender.
Family discussion: Where do the people in this movie get their ideas about race, gender, and class? Which character surprised you the most and why? Do you agree with what Sam said about racism?
If you like this, try: “School Daze” and “Higher Learning”
Posted on March 26, 2012 at 9:06 pm
It’s inevitable that any movie as high-profile as “The Hunger Games” would be grabbed for political advocacy by all sides. My friend Rebecca Cusey writes in Patheos:
It seems “The Hunger Games” is a bit of a Rorschach test for people politically. Do the districts represent #Occupy protesters? Ayn Rand workers oppressed by their government? Fodder for meaningless wars? Or something more?
Some will argue that the rebellion against the totalitarian state in “The Hunger Games” trilogy is an allegory for conservative principles in favor of limiting the role of government. Others will argue that it is an allegory for progressives fighting for the rights of the oppressed. That’s part of the strength and the appeal of fiction. The same thing happens with many powerful films. People are still arguing about whether the original “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” was an allegory of the fight against communism or the fight against McCarthyism.
It makes me sad to see the increasing efforts to impose reductionist templates Procrustean-style, making everything into “us” or “them.” The good thing is that the more both sides claim ownership, the clearer it is that fiction transcends such pettiness.
Speaking of pettiness, there were also some unfortunate problems with idiotic tweets from fans of the book who were disappointed that some characters were played by black actors. Hunger Games Tweets on Tumblr has a selection along with some funny responses. My favorite was “I hear that Donald Trump is trying to prove that Rue wasn’t even born in Panem.” Rue was my favorite character in the book. She was my favorite character in the movie. Amanadla Stenberg was perfect for the role. It is a tribute to the power of these books that some people project their own ideas of what the characters look like (in some cases disregarding the author’s descriptions) and are unable to accept the reality of the movie version. But it is unfortunate that these projections can reflect conscious or unconscious bigotry and even more unfortunate that they have the bad judgment to make it public.
Posted on March 25, 2012 at 8:00 am
From the New York Times:
There was no question that “Mad Men” would get around to the civil rights movement. From the start, racism was the carbon monoxide of the show: a poison that couldn’t always be detected over the pungent scent of cigarettes, sexism, anti-Semitism, alcoholism, homophobia and adultery, but that sooner or later was bound to turn noxious.
That promise was made in the opening scene of the premiere episode of Season 1. The first face on screen is a black one in profile, that of a waiter carrying a tray of cocktails across a bar crowded with white, mostly male customers. The camera closes in on Don Draper (Jon Hamm), scribbling ideas on a napkin for a Lucky Strike campaign. Asking for a light, he notices that the busboy, an older black man, smokes Old Gold, and Don asks him why he is so loyal to that brand.
“Is Sam here bothering you?” a white bartender interjects before the busboy has uttered a word. Shooting the black man a warning look, the bartender tells Don, “He can be a little chatty.”
It was the dawn of the 1960s, and that kind of humiliation was so commonplace that both Don and the busboy shrug it off.
What I find especially interesting about this is that, contrary to most depictions of the racism of the era, there is no attempt to portray the white characters as aware of or concerned about the casually bigoted arrogance of the time. Don Draper is only interested in how to help his clients. But I suppose that reflects an element of self-interest that played a role in the era’s changes as well.
Posted on November 16, 2009 at 2:44 pm
I thought there was nothing that the awful movie “Couples Retreat” could do to be more offensive. I was wrong.
According to the Huffington Post, the blockbuster comedy has eliminated one of its four couples in its non-US posters. It is the black couple, played by Faizon Love and Kali Hawk.
The studio has “retreated” from this position and issued a statement saying that they made the decision only to emphasize the stars most recognizable in the international markets. Of course, you don’t get recognizable by being left off the poster. Now, if I had been in this movie, I would ask to have my name, face, and performance excised from the film. But this decision, insensitive at best, overtly racist at worst, is terribly unfair to the performers and insulting to the audience.
