“How is this still a thing?”
Hollywood
White Savior Movies, Ranked
White saviors in film: Because we can’t expect people of color to save themselves now, can we?
Check out the article: White Savior Movies, Ranked – Flavorwire
Is there such a thing as black-washing?
Check out this awesome article: What if People Reacted to These 10 Roles Like They Have to Michael B. Jordan?
The article is by Gina Luttrell at PolicyMic and it details the outcry against the reports that Michael B. Jordan, a black actor, has been cast as Johnny Storm aka. Human Torch, a white character, in the (much needed) Fantastic Four reboot and why this casting decision is important. She goes on to list 10 famous movies that featured blatantly whitewashed characters.
I am curious to know if Marvel’s or Twentieth Century Fox’s PR team anticipated the backlash from the die-hard comic book fans and what they are doing, if anything, to prevent the casting decision from potentially hurting the film at the box office. The reboot is set to release in June of 2015 (so perhaps the protesters will have moved on by then) and is being directed by Josh Trank, who also directed the found-footage sci-fi film Chronicle.
Here are my favorite bits from the article:
“The point here is that the erasure of people of color from cinema has been so widespread, even in recent years, from roles that are originally supposed to be be played by them, that it has done damage to those groups.”
“The fact of the matter is that black people have been booted out of roles that were originally black for ages…Hollywood has a sordid history of whitewashing. It hasn’t gotten better in the last 20 years, and there is very little outcry from those wanting to preserve “source material” when the person being outed is a person of color.”
Image Credit: Marvel
Questions I Have After Watching The Amazing Spider-Man 2 Trailer
First off, amazing trailer. I absolutely loved it. After watching it a couple of times (okay more like ten), I came away with some comments and questions that will likely remained unanswered until that fateful 2014 premiere date. I’ve provided the timestamp for your convenience.
0:02 – Where is he falling from? The plane from 1:54?
0:17 – How did that police car not crush him?
0:19 – Whose grave is he visiting? Uncle Ben? Or….
0:43 – Welcome to the MATRIX.
0:51 – Why does Harry sound sickly?
1:04 – What does sweet ol’ Aunt May know?? She’s being a bit hypocritical here if you ask me.
1:16 – Are those wings? And is that Doctor Octopus’ limbs??
1:25 – Are glowing fire eels really our future?
1:35 – Ew. Gross.
1:35 – Are Peter and Harry ever really friends in this version?
1:38 – Was that the Rhino or Megatron resurrected?
1:49 – What’s with all the maps Pete??
1:51 – Why is Spider-Man on the television?
2:06 – Is this the scene? Is this where Gwen dies?! Is the Green Goblin involved??
2:10 – The best scene, but where are they? Some sort of futuristic electricity forest? Why would Spidey choose to fight Electro there, of all places?
2:02 – Oh no! The future eels!
The Bent Bullet – Another Exciting Film Microsite
X-Men: Days of Future Past has created another viral microsite for the upcoming film. This site details the story of how Magneto was arrested and found guilty for the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. According to the information on this site, authorities believed that Magneto used his mutant ability (he is able to alter magnetic fields) to change the trajectory of Lee Harvey Oswald’s bullet, asserting this so-called “Bent Bullet Theory”. The site itself is interactive and allows you to scroll through a series of panels that chronicles the events that took place. The site uses grainy, full-framed, and sometimes moving images to tell the story. The creators did a great job at giving this site an old-yet-sleek, 1970s-feel and did an even better job at getting X-Men fans (like myself) even excited to see the film – if that is even possible. My favorite part is the tour of Magneto’s prison cell, built courtesy of the great people over at Trask Industries. The narrated informational tour explains in detail how Trask Industries was able to design a cell that is capable of containing a man who can manipulate metal.
Something worth noting here is that I discovered the site after seeing a tweet with a link to an article about it. The website and corresponding YouTube video (below) have already garnered a good amount of online media coverage and will certainly help generate significant social media buzz for the film and its (very slowly…) approaching release date (which is May 22, 2014 – in case you don’t already have it in your calendar).
Check out my screen grabs and the YouTube video that goes along with the site and, of course, the website itself. While you are doing that, imagine how much fun the people behind this site had while making it.
Front Page
Tour of Prison Cell
10 Movies That Were Better Than The Book
In most cases, movie versions of beloved books fail to live up to their printed counterparts. However, every once in a while, Hollywood gets it right — so much so that the movie adaptation garners even more critical reverence than the book. Making a quality film from a piece of literature is a tall order for any screenwriter. Translating lengthy source material and condensing it into a two-hour film often requires the screenwriters to downplay supporting characters, simplify storylines, and make countless changes that allows the story to be ‘filmable’. Of course, to devout fans of the book, this is the ultimate betrayal and many will heavily criticize the film for not including what they considered to be a fundamental part of the book; from the back story of their favorite-yet-fairly-obscure character to a slightly different re-imagining of a key scene. I’ve been this person several times. I feel their pain. However, it’s important to remember that most of the time, the filmmakers aren’t trying to fulfill the audiences desires. Their job is to use the source material as a launching point and create the world in their own image.
Making a film based off of a book is, in my opinion, an art form. For example, imagine if you were asked to create a painting of an apple. The point is not to make an exact, two-dimensional duplicate (because then you’d simply use a camera and take a photograph). The point is to interpret the color, shape, texture and other visual qualities of the apple in your own, unique way, and then share this interpretation with others. I love seeing people become so passionate about their favorite stories, but it’s disheartening to see that passion turn into stark hatred of the film version, especially when this hatred stems not from the quality of the film, but from the filmmakers unique interpretation of the story.
On the bright side, as I mentioned before my mini- “filmmaking is art” rant, some movies have had the rare privilege of becoming more well-loved than the book. The article below was written by Jason Bailey for Flavorwire back in 2011 and was re-posted this past October in light of an upcoming page-to-screen release (Ender’s Game, I believe). I think while its rare for a movie to out-shine a book, it’s even rarer to actually hear about this occurrence, especially considering all the backlash these types of movies have received in recent years. As an avid lover of movies based off of books, I loved seeing these types of movies finally being acknowledged in this article and getting the credit they deserve for pulling off the impossible.
Here is the article:
10 Movies That Were Better Than The Book
Jason Bailey / www.flavorwire.com
May 30, 2011
Original Article
One of several slight disappointments at the box office last week was The Lincoln Lawyer, an adaptation of a Michael Connelly novel with Matthew McConaughey in the lead. We haven’t seen the film, but based on the poster, it appears to be about a lawyer who works from the hood of his car. Yeah, we’re gonna go with that. Anyway, it came in fourth for the weekend, so whoever approved McConaughey wearing a shirt in the poster is surely fired already. But the film met with warm reviews, garnering an 82% at Rotten Tomatoes and positive comparisons to the source material (even from the author himself).
Though many would consider Connelly’s books to be serviceable genre potboilers rather than fine literature, this may very well be a case where the movie is better than the book — the exception to the rule. Or is it? The notion that film adaptations of novels are always inferior to the original isn’t always borne out by the facts. Join us after a jump for a look at ten movies we think were better than the book.
Stand By Me
As you may have noticed, we love this movie. Based on the novella The Body in the Stephen King anthology Different Seasons (which also included the source stories for The Shawshank Redemption and Apt Pupil, which could have easily made this list as well), Rob Reiner’s 1986 coming-of-age drama gave King’s nostalgic tale a timeless pulse and immediacy, aided immeasurably by a pitch-perfect period soundtrack and a quartet of unforgettable performances by Wil Wheaton, Corey Feldman, Jerry O’Connell, and the late, great River Phoenix.
A History Of Blackface In Movies: From ‘Birth of a Nation’ to ‘White Chicks’
This article was written November 1 by Youyoung Lee at the Huffington Post in light of some controversial Halloween costume choices that had been popping up in the media. I came across it just after my African American Studies professor discussed it in our class and decided it was worth sharing. One thing I’ve noticed is that this timeline features old classic films that are considered timeless and were highly revered at the time of their release (Of course, this kind of in-your-face racism probably wouldn’t fare too well in cinema today). Articles like this make me wonder how many films I enjoyed without realizing that some underlying racial stereotype is being used.
I try to always watch films with a critical eye but, in my opinion, the moviegoer culture today tends to view films more as an “escape” from having to think critically. With reading, you have to use the words to build the visual of the story in your mind, whereas with movies, the filmmakers have essentially created the visual for you. In this sense, if I were to compare the act of reading a book to watching a movie, I’d say that reading almost requires a more active mind than what is necessary for watching a movie. Simply absorbing a visual that is presented to you ready-made form can allow you to shift your mind into a passive state, making you less aware of the content you’re taking in and and inherently less critical of the messages that lie beneath it.
Another aspect of moviegoer culture I’ve noticed is a abhorrence towards critical discussion of films. Oftentimes when I begin to analyze and critique films after watching it with others, I’m met with resistance. I’m told that I am “over-thinking” things and I’ll get responses like: “It’s just a movie, don’t ruin it” and “It’s not supposed to provide social commentary/uphold social equality/embrace ethnic diversity…it’s just supposed to entertain you.” When it comes to reading, I think the general population has this perception books are meant to challenge us and, therefore, we are allowed to openly analyze and critique them. I hope more people will start thinking about films with the same mindset.
Hmmm I got a little off-topic there. Anyways, I enjoy reading articles in either of these subject areas (film and race studies) and it’s always a treat when I get to see them converge.
Here is the article:
A History Of Blackface In Movies: From ‘Birth of a Nation’ to ‘White Chicks’
By Youyoung Lee / www.huffingtonpost.com
November 1, 2013
Original Article
Julianne Hough’s ill-advised Halloween costume reignited the question: Is it ever OK to appear in blackface? Perhaps those defending the 25-year-old actress have forgotten the painful history of blackface in entertainment and media. Classic films often serve as a reminder of our nation’s ugly racist past whenever we dust off our VHS tapes.
But “blackface” appears in many forms. At its crux, it’s most offensive when one ethnicity attempts to mimic another, reducing a character to the color of his or her skin, and worse, perpetuating stereotype. In this spirit, we’ve included other examples of egregious racial typecasting in Hollywood. Below, take a quick history lesson of blackface in Hollywood, in all its incarnations.
1. “Birth of a Nation” (1915)
Not only was the first-ever feature-length film a cinematic triumph, it was also astonishingly racist. Director D.W. Griffith’s saga, which ran over three hours and was shown in two parts, followed a South Carolina town during the Civil War and pitted white men in blackface against actors playing the Ku Klux Klan protecting the “Aryan” cause. According to this New Yorker article, the movie “proved horrifically effective at sparking violence against blacks in many cities.”
2. “The Jazz Singer” (1927)
“The Jazz Singer” follows Jakie Rabinowitz (Al Jolson), who rejects his Jewish heritage in order to pursue his dreams of being a popular jazz singer — in blackface. The film was generally received positively by white and black critics alike, with Harlem’s Amsterdam News writing, “Every colored performer is proud of [Jolson].”
Hollywood’s Tanking Business Model
Illustration by Jasper Rietman
My commentary: I came across this great article written by Catherine Rampell for the New York Times the other day and I felt it was worth sharing. Rampell’s article highlights how major film studios overuse the strategy of releasing their blockbusters during the summer months. According to the Rampell, 31 films ran on over 3,000 screens across the country this past summer, the most ever. She examines the thinking behind Hollywood’s reliance on this model and why it is becoming less and less effective, especially when considering how many of last summer’s releases flopped. Rampell also dives into the nature of the film industry and how studios attempts at avoiding risk can have an adverse effect on tickets sales and may be the reason of the countless sequels and remakes in production today. I’ve always been curious about the summer blockbuster theory and how major studios decide on the best times to release their films. I think Rampell provides an interesting perspective on the subject, one you can’t find (*deep movie-announcer voice*) in the theatres nearest you!
Here is the article:
Hollywood’s Tanking Business Model
By Catherine Rampell www.nytimes.com
September 3rd, 2013
Original Article
Nearly 40 years ago, a great white dorsal fin sliced through American cinemas with its ominous, minor-second-interval leitmotif, and a new business model was born. “Jaws,” which cost $7 million to make, was deemed a good fit for a June release in 1975 partly because it took place at a beach around Independence Day. But its extraordinary success — the movie went on to earn $471 million at box offices worldwide — subsequently helped spawn Hollywood’s now-conventional wisdom that if you’re going to make a blockbuster, then summer, when kids are out of school and people are in search of industrial-strength air-conditioning, is the best time to release it. After “Star Wars” became a huge hit two summers later, all the big studios seemed to take notice.
In the years since, those studios have crammed more man-eating marine life, aliens, pirates, superheroes, robots, dinosaurs and car chases (and their exploding iterations) into an increasingly crowded season. A decade ago, there were 22 films that each ran on 3,000 screens during the summer. This year, there were 31, the most ever. A lot of them, however, bombed. “R.I.P.D.,” “Turbo,” “Lone Ranger,” “Pacific Rim” and “White House Down” all cost more than $100 million, only to tank at the domestic box office. After a bit of soul searching, several explanations have been suggested — Ryan Reynolds’s inability to open a movie, why anyone would want to see the “Lone Ranger” in 2013 and so forth. But a number of economists are coming around to a more unsettling idea: The summer-blockbuster strategy itself may have tanked.
sweet somethings 