Is Hollywood ready to produce a BIG BUDGT Epic film starring mostly black people??? (1 Viewer)

[John_Berger]

 

[George See]

I confess to not knowing too much about Black history and culture, however from what little I know of Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad I think a well made epic movie with this as the subject would be very succesfull. It's a moving story that I think would lend itself well to a dramatic epic, and it's got the hero factor down all these big epics need a hero. Also this would be A movie about American history and that should be a lot easier to sell then a movie about African or Egyptian history would be.

Let me just throw something out there...The Holocaust was a terrible event in human history, Slavery was a terrible event in human history...why are there so many more movies about the Holocaust then there are about Slavery?

 

[Paul_Sjordal]

In all fairness, I feel compelled to point out that most of the movies made by us white people are mostly dreck as well. In fact the ratio of good movies to crap is pretty darned small no matter what segment of the industry you look at (Bollywood, anyone?). I'm sure if there were more "black" movies made, the increased competition would force the occasional "grand epic," or at least force the creation of more movies that don't stink.

As much as I agree with your overall sentiment, I think Spike Lee's X fairly well fits the criteria most here set for a black epic. It's huge in scope, has an amazing ensemble cast, great writing, directing and cinematography, and more importantly the filmmakers were black. Yeah, I know, it's non-fiction but it's hard to not call that movie a black epic, not to mention a damn fine film.

 

[Pete-D]

I think the Matrix is pretty close.

I believe Will Smith was originally pegged to play Neo as well, but the Wachowskis ended up "settling" for Keanu Reeves after Smith passed on the project.

I think it really just depends on story and the project.

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon did well even despite being a subtitled film.

 

[EricSchulz]

I agree with all the "Why a big budget film?" arguments. I love seeing movies like "Barbershop" and the "Friday.." films absolutely blow away the "experts" that predict the hit movies. I would rather see ten or fifteen great films than one epic blockbuster.



BTW...isn't that a contradiction? How many "big budget epics" have no-name talents in the spotlight? They are usually made with a "big name" director or cast to help justify the risk in making a big budget epic.

 

[Rex Bachmann]

Paul_Sjordal wrote (post #62):


Of course, I meant the United States, not the Americas. Otherwise I would have said so. (Yes, and in another of those "lawyerly technicalities", it might well be argued that the US, the political entity "America", is no "nation" at all, by strictest definition, despite the politicians' deftest (or daftest) misinvocation of that term to suit their current political initiatives.)

 

[Pete-D]

Things can change though as well.

Twenty years ago, it could be argued that MTV didn't play any black artists.

Michael Jackson changed that.

I think it just takes the right story/cast/timing etc.

The Cosby Show was the no.1 sitcom in America for a while.

Will Smith and Eddie Murphy have enjoyed stints as being the top box office draws not only in the US but across the globe.

Blade is a popular comic book character series, Spawn could probably be even better if they didn't bumble the story.

I do however think making a film bankable to movie goers right now with a majority black cast (not just a black lead) would be interesting to see.

People will always want "exotic, epic, and big" movies, who's to say if done right an epic telling of African mythology could take off.

 

[Paul.S]

Clem et al.:


Quote:



I appreciate the thought out reply.




You're welcome.

I wrote:

Quote:



But let's say you do (stupidly) pony up your own cash. Are you following the story behind the making of The Passion Of the Christ? Just because Mel Gibson--a white guy [duh] who is more of a bankable star in films than Oprah--opened his own wallet to the tune of $25 million does not mean it was easier for him to get a distribution deal.




You replied:

Quote:



I'm not real clear what you are implying here except to make my point. Mel Gibson at great risk both financially and professionally is sticking his (white, duh) ass on the line here. He has great passion for what he is doing and has let neither the lack of financing nor distribution nor constant harassment stop or slow him down.

While I don't profess to know or understand all that's involved from getting a film from idea to screen I do understand business. Money may not be all it takes but damn sure gets the ball rolling. With the incredible media business savvy(not to mention a net worth of over $1 billion) that OW has(I wasn't considering her from an actress stand point) I have no doubt that she can find the right people to get it done.




There is a glass half-full versus half-empty component to our respective points on this.

You seem to be making the point that--regardless of the odds--Mel financed his movie and, although difficult, got a distribution deal. My point is that even Mel--a man who is a global box office star (albeit past his prime), starred in one of the most successful franchises in box office history (the Lethal Weapon films) and has won Oscars as both director and producer for a well-loved film (Braveheart is #80 on IMDb's top movies of all time list)--still had to self-finance his project for lack of other options and get a distribution deal from a second-tier company. Although Charlize's Oscar nomination is going to put Newmarket on the map via attention for Monster, that company by no means has the international connections and exhibitor relationships that one of the big six studios or even one of larger independents such as Lions Gate has.


Quote:



So why in your opinion did . . . Love Don't Co$t A Thing not do well?





Why a film flops (or, conversely, does boffo b.o.) is something just about everyone has an opinion on. Since you asked, here's my 2.5 cents: I'd start by amplifying my comments on Broderick Johnson and Andrew Kosove of Alcon Entertainment. I don't think these guys are creative producers. This town has many often bright, degreed guys (and it IS usually men) who may be able to write a terrific business plan for their production company but who don't understand what makes for a successful movie in the way, say, Jerry Bruckheimer does.

I think the too broad variety of films this small company has attempted is telling. They appear to be throwing a variety of different types/genres of movie at the wall (the Oscar pedigreed The Affair Of the Necklace, the teen romp Dude, Where's My Car?, the remake of the Norwegian thriller Insomnia and now the "urban" teen pic Love Don't Co$t . . .) and hoping something sticks.

I was out-of-town the weekend Love Don't Co$t . . . opened and saw the film opening night in a predominantly white Phoenix suburb at a mall multiplex. It was an eye-opening reminder of how skewed my perceptions might be seeing 95% of my movie diet in usually urban and sometimes suburban single screener or multiplexes in L.A. The sparse audience was composed almost exclusively of white teenagers. Most were moving together in groups. Many had cell phones. Many were talking incessantly on said phones during the film (even if just to convey snack/drink requests to friends in the concession line). Many moved in and out of the theater repeatedly throughout the movie.

I think bad word-of-mouth hamstrung this movie. Teenagers are so connected today via chat rooms, instant messaging and text messaging on cell phones in ways that simply did not exist when I was a teen. I think if you are going to make a teen movie these days--not unlike other kinds of films, but especially one targeting today's savvy teens--you can not underestimate/pander to your audience. Although I really enjoyed admiring the scrumptious Christina Milian ("Don't even look at my booty"), there was little in this film other than Steve Harvey's humor in general and his heart-to-heart conversation with his son in particular (played by star-in-the-making Nick Cannon) that was remarkable. If you are going to remake a beloved teen classic, the script has got to be better than this.

John_Berger:


Quote:



Maybe I'm just fortunate that I don't care about skin color. It has no bearing on my impression of someone else. In the IT field I've had to work with such a diverse group of people that I couldn't care less about skin color. So, maybe that fact that I've become racially numb is why I don't see this as being so important. That can only be a good thing as far as I'm concerned.





God (or whomever) bless you, John.


Quote:



. . . it still comes down to making a movie that has an appeal to all.





Cultural transcendence in movies is a dicey issue. But I hope you acknowledge that--as alluded to previously in this thread--the cultural politics of making a picture that appeals to all people presents larger burdens for "black filmmakers." "White filmmakers" have historically taken the issue for granted, whereas for "black filmmakers" the issue is virtually unavoidable. We are, in this historical moment right now, just entering into a period wherein most moviegoers don't even know that, say, Antoine Fuqua is black. It should be understood that he is standing on the shoulders of men before him who could never forget it even if they wanted to.


Quote:



Such movies, such as "The Color Purple", have a depth to the story, emotional strength, strong plot. Skin color of the actors is irrelevant as is how much was spent on the movie.





Another dicey one, John. Let's set aside for a moment that Purple is based on an Alice Walker novel that was written specifically with black characters in mind. As mentioned earlier in this thread, Purple got made largely if not only because Spielberg directed it. This was a controversial issue at the time and deservedly so IMO. Another facet which complicates this issue (a big budget film with a largely or exclusively black cast) is that historically it has been white men who have been allowed to tell (direct) stories that socioculturally were/are specifically black.


Quote:



Personally, I really don't think that most Americans care about skin color. They care about whether or not the movie is enjoyable.





So dicey it hurts, John. I will just briefly say that I vehemently disagree with you. You're basically saying that the reasons people go see films are meritocratic and I think why people go to or avoid some movies is a complicated bitches brew that is very, very subjective.


Quote:



Not only is the public ready but the public needs to understand that there's more in the experience of being a person of color than The Parkers, or XXX2 with IceCube.






Quote:



We do understand that.





Be careful with appropriating the right to speak out on everyone's behalf, John. I think some people understand.


Quote:



I just feel that the emphasis on such a movie as this thread avocates will have more of an impact on collective pride than it will any serious social benefits.





I won't get into a sociological deconstruction of how this statement is a non sequitur IMO (in other words, I think a group of people feeling greater "collective pride" has MAJOR social benefits that are as important as they are difficult to quantify). Let me just more briefly say, "Amen brother!" Yes, for me personally and I suspect many others this issue does have a lot to do with pride. My question to you is, "what's wrong with that?" Not a damn thing IMO. Think about the psychosexual impact of a minority population growing up seeing disproportionate representations of often attractive blond folks flirting, hooking up, f*cking, and falling in and out of love. Now consider the ramifications of children (and adults) seeing more balanced representations during the times they spend in darkened theaters and living rooms. I hope you understand where I'm coming from when I say that the "social benefits" of this are of gargantuan proportions, impacting self esteem and having a ripple effect on manyof the things people do or do not accomplish based upon their feelings of self-worth or lack thereof. Oops, I said I wasn't gonna get too sociological . . . Just consider reading Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye if you haven't done so.

I am literally moved to tears every time I get to the end of Braveheart (please see my comments about the disparate cultural politics of transcendency above). I've talked to Scots who feel the same way. What's wrong with a more socioculturally black story being told in similar grand scale?


Quote:



But it still comes down to the question of does it really matter if all of the sides are shown? Why is there no concern for an all-Asian movie (made in the U.S.)? Why is there no concern for an all-Indian movie? Will any such movie really, really matter in the grand scheme of humanity?





Oh but there is concern for other minority representations, John. I had very high hopes for Justin Lin's Better Luck Tomorrow. I'm happy to see Paramount/MTV signing off on the major studio debut of a young Asian-American director starring a predominantly Asian-American cast (too bad I didn't like the film though).

I loved and was happy to see Naturally Native a few years back.

Just because the Asian/Asian-American and Indian/Native American film cause have not been previously mentioned in this thread does not mean that those matters are not issues as well. Les started a thread specifically focusing on the cinematic circumstances vis-a-vis an epic pic with a black cast.

-p

 

[Ricardo C]

Well, if you don't respect yourself after your rant, I certainly do Replace "black" with "latino" and you've pretty much stated my feelings regarding the portrayals of hispanics in mainstream Hollywood films.

 

[CoreyII]

Because the Holocaust wasn't America's fault and it has always been easier for this country (specifically,White America) to point the finger at someone else (Nazi Germany) and say "hey, look how evil you people were".

But ask White America to look at the monster in the mirror and you will get a different reaction, one that doesn't want to see films like Amistad or any other movie that makes America the villains.

 

[Jacinto]

This is a really good thread. Kudos to all who have participated. Given my background, the historical epic I've always fantasized about seeing on the big screen is the Spanish decimation of the Inca Empire for gold. It would be amazing to see any number of f/x houses let loose on recreating the look of the empire from the ruins we're left with today. You could go ahead and cast some really big name stars to draw the crowds, but cast them as the villains, willing to destroy one of history's most amazing primitive civilizations out of sheer greed.

 

[Holadem]

I caught Coming to America on TV yesterday, and in the spirit of the thread, was amazed by how vastly underrated that movie was. Here is an utterly charming romantic comedy, mixing exotic (if over the top) locale with familiar environments, a lively cast, an intelligent script, great music...

At the very least, it should have the same "darling" status as The American President (you know, one of those movies that show up fairly regularly on cable, and that you find yourself watching whenever they are on). But I don't think it does outside of the black community.

Maahwell...

--
H

 

[Herschel]

That's funny, because for me, Coming to America is one of the few films that I always find myself watching whenever it's on cable, while I never seem to do that with The American President...

 

[Dome Vongvises]

I need to get Coming to America. One of the funniest movies I've seen.....period.

 

[Ruth_F]

unfortunately that is the case - look at a film like antwone fisher and it's lukewarm results. the color purple is the closest we've come.

 

[Ruth_F]

your argument is only partial correct - films starring blacks have made major money - that is why we have barbershop 2 this weekend, and beauty shop later this spring ---- as well as THREE other beauty shop type films (made by different studios).

THE PUBLIC generally will rush to see blacks sing or tell jokes - but not dramas. Unfortunately this is true even in the black community. last night i saw BS2 and it was funny, not nearly as funny as the original but for the young SOLD OUT audience it became almost unbearably bored as the movie tried to deal more with issues in the storyline rather than through humor as the first film.

 

[Ruth_F]

Max said:



Because movies are the most signifcant form of art America general shares with the world - and the lack of others in signifcant films (oscar type movies) demonstrates in a subtle way the perceived insignifance of non-c.

 

[Ruth_F]

Kyle said:



actualy there are plenty of black writers - they just don't have jobs in hollywood except to make drivel like head of state or sitcoms.

Also, i want to know when blacks with more than enough $$$$$ and some measure of clout will come together and at least form a solid independent company? Denzel, Will, Martin, chris, Magic, Michael Jordan, Tiger woods, ice cube, sean combs etc.

i will give ice cube credit at least he is making movies with his own sense of story and HIRING first timers. Tim reid owns a studio in VA - and has made a few movies and works at distributing them himself - only problem is they are not that good. if only others would join in then they would find out - they don't ABSOULTELY have to have hollywood.

also I can't wait to see a black movie of note - that is not about being black or slaverly - just a story aobut people. antwone fisher was one, but fox searchlight so screwed up the distribution on that film they destroyed it.

if you've never seen it - rent it. derek luke is wonderful.

 

[Ruth_F]

not sure i understand - why does it have to be a historical movie? i'd rather see another soul food or antwone fisher than just black history. or is your point that only historical films gnerally fall in the epic genre - if so i understand.

 

[Mike-M]

I just saw a special about Race and Hollywood. They interviewed a Black filmaker. His name was Reggie Rock Bythewood.

He was saying how he had a good idea to do a movie featuring a black cast for an action movie. He said it could be done for little money (around 15 mil). Then, after many talks, the budget kept increasing and increasing.
After a while, the execs at the studio he was pitching this action movie too said the movie had too many black people. They wanted him to change the cast to make them white.

He decided to not back down on his stance. After a long drawn out process, he finally got his way, but they clipped his budget quite a bit. That movie ended up being "Biker Boyz" with Lawrence Fishbourne and Derek Luke.

Just goes to show you the mentality of the people in power.