Movie 2019 Q3 MOVIE DISCUSSION

[Brian Fowler]

The big problem with that is, right now, trans actors only ever get roles as trans people. It's all fine and good to say "everyone should be able to play any role" but the end result is that the few opportunities that do exist for trans actors are taken away from them.

When trans actors are getting into the same rooms to read the same parts ScarJo is, it's a different conversation. But right now the road only goes in one direction.

[Elsalvajeloco]

6 hours ago, Swiftian said:

In the Scarlett Johansson argument, I keep seeing comments arguing that only trans people should play trans people. I don't think those people are thinking things through though, because the continuation of that argument is that only non-trans people should play non-trans people. In effect trans actors should be pigeon holed into a certain type of role.

If only trans people can understand what it means to be trans, then only non-trans people can understand what it means to be non-trans. That then sets up a slippery slope where only disabled can play disabled, only homosexuals can play homosexuals, only heterosexuals can play heterosexuals, only soldiers can play soldiers, only astronauts can play astronauts and so on and so on.

I remember when some production company was developing Iceberg Slim's Mama Black Widow, and it seemed like a very hot property at the time which several years ago (2008 or 2009). So this is before anyone knew about Laverne Cox or Indya Moore. The names attached were Mos Def, Rihanna (research shows she debunked being attached), Angela Bassett, Anthony Anderson, and Kerry Washington. The problem here is the plot revolves around a black trans woman (any synopsis you find is going to have "drag queen" FWIW) during the Great Migration of African-Americans going from MIssissippi to Chicago. I think besides the normal shit that puts a lot of projects in development hell, I think whoever owned the rights to do the adaptation knew that casting a cis woman or cis man in that role probably wouldn't work even then. Plus, the conversation at the time (which I thought was valid) was black males being emasculated in the entertainment industry. That film would have been premium Oscar bait, and needed someone notable as the lead. Yeah, you could have went Chiwetel Ejiofor since he did Kinky Boots (I don't think Billy Porter would have got the role considering who the rumored cast was at the time) but that also brings the scrutiny of black actors from the UK taking roles from African-Americans which I'll delve a little further into later. It was set to be released in 2011, so you wouldn't have a Twitter to completely lambast the casting of Otis Tilson (the main character). You would have one of the most famous literary works involving a black trans person fast tracked with little to no concern about who would play who. For all the criticism the African-American community receives for being homophobic or transphobic, there ain't been that many complete misfires as it relates to something like that. Maybe that's either because Black Hollywood doesn't actually exist (which I firmly believe given some of the power plays and blacklisting over the years) or if it does, it resides comfortably split from the LGBTQ side (Lee Daniels, Dee Rees, Angela Robinson, Lena Waithe, etc.).

Quote

Acting is the ability to use one's imagination and creativity and skills (and research) to put oneself in another human's shoes to tell a story. It's one of the fundamental basics of storytelling throughout human history. If a writer can only write stories about what they know, then we would only get stories about writers and no other characters and what a dull world that would be.

Ok, here is where we need to define slippery slope going back to the first part of the quote.

At first I was going to mention this last night with @Execproducer but I didn't want to go down this rabbit hole. However, since we're going there, I might as well buy a first class ticket. Here we go.

I am of two minds now. If you can find the right actor or actress (or non binary thespian) for the role, and no one has a valid, legit criticism opposing said casting, then go right ahead. On the other hand, there should be more critical thinking and a little common sense as to what these characters mean to certain people.

I identify as a proud African-American. Not person of color. Not minority. Calling me black is perfectly fine, but you also have to know black is a general term whereas African-American is not all encompassing.

I say that to say that when Samuel L. Jackson disagreed just a little with the casting of Daniel Kaluuya in Get Out and then John Boyega jumped in to defend Kaluuya who didn't ask for anyone to defend him, I felt a certain way. Then I found out Cush Jumbo made a statement (IIRC in some British tabloid or other news outlet) that black British actors are just better period, I was fucking pissed off. That works fine as a Key & Peele sketch, but not in real life lady. If it wasn't for Sam Jackson, Viola Davis, James Earl Jones, Denzel Washington, Angela Bassett, and countless African-Americans in the past going back to Mantan Moreland, a bum like John Boyega who has been in bomb after bomb in anything not Star Wars and some bland TV actress like Cush Jumbo wouldn't be able to come over to the states to leech off African-Americans. If Hattie McDaniel didn't pay the price with her blood, sweat, and tears, someone from an elite Nigerian background like David Oyelowo (who was probably the 10th best MLK on film just above Paul Winfield and below Clifton Powell) wouldn't able to play a civil rights icon and neither would Carmen Ejogo who was so unremarkable in the film Selma people had no idea she already played Coretta Scott King years before. People think just because Idris Elba did alright as Stringer Bell (I never heard a negro in my years on Earth talk like Stringer Bell but maybe that's just me living in the Deep South forever and not Baltimore) that just having a generic American accent makes you African-American on TV or film. The same energy people have for Jai Courtney being a charisma vacuum I have for British actors who come over just because no real opportunities exist in the UK when there are plenty of African-Americans capable of doing better. RIP to John Singleton and all that, but most of the black folks I know cite Damson Idris as the worst part of Snowfall. They recast a bunch of people on the show before the show ever airs, but not the role being played someone devoid of any type of personality. Moreover, the crack epidemic is something being felt to this very day. They couldn't find ONE black person from Inglewood, Watts, Compton, Pomona, Long Beach, etc. to play that role? I would bet at least one of their family members either dealt crack cocaine or was badly addicted to it. Hell, you can throw a rock in any direction in a room of African-American actors and it will land on anyone with that experience 9 times out of 10. Either way, you would have someone who could use that experience to tackle a role like that. In that same light, I thought Kaluuya was awful in Widows. I had friends growing up in Mississippi whose fathers were either in the Gangster Disciples or Vice Lords (gangs that were started in Chicago by folks whose families came from Mississippi during the Great Migration like Larry Hoover, David Barksdale, and Jeff Fort). There ain't a soul from Chicago who I recall acting like Daniel Kaluuya in that film. When they made him shout the n word dramatically for a long, exaggerated time during his first or second scene in the film, I damn near busted out in laughter in the theater. He is probably one of these dudes who watched one too many episodes of Beyond Scared Straight or the movies Colors, Juice, and South Central and think that is how you act tough. For white people who don't know any fucking better, that's cool. But for me, that don't cut it. So I'm not going watch him do the same fucking thing in Queen & Slim when that comes out. I ain't even bother to watch the trailer that came out during the BET Awards some weeks back. I'll save my money. Thank you.

On top of the Get Out controversy, we have the thing with Cynthia Erivo and her being cast as Harriet Tubman for the film coming out in November. Yes, there have been African-Americans casted as famous non-fictional African people before. You had Don Cheadle in Hotel Rwanda, Forest Whitaker as Idi Amin, Denzel as Stephen Biko, and multiple different people play the Mandelas. However, where I take issue with Kasi Lemmons (funny we were talking about Hard Target earlier) casting Erivo as Harriet is she didn't do the research on Ms. Erivo. I was even happy that Erivo was getting a shot after being heralded on the Broadway stage originally. However, when you do stuff like The Color Purple and get a Tony because of that, don't take that as you understanding the lineage of African-Americans in this country. So when it came to my attention that Erivo took part in social media activity (which was deleted when the controversy of her being casted started) slagging off African-Americans with her Nigerian friends (blogger Luvvie Ajayi, who made herself known recapping the show Scandal when it was on the air, being one of them) who think black people who made it here DESPITE being descendants of slaves here, getting fucked over royally during Reconstruction after a little progress was made, then went through black codes and Jim Crow where their businesses were burn down and people massacred by the hundreds during the red summer of 1919, and a bunch of other extremely detrimental bullshit in the century since then are Akata (Nigerian slang meaning wild animals), I quickly changed my mind on her. If she wants the final piece of her EGOT (she needs the Oscar to do it), she won't have my support. Call it xenophobia on my part, but I don't give a fuck. Yvonne Orji or however you spell her name from Insecure did an interview where she outright said her background being Nigerian taught her to be competitive against any and everyone and she has no real solidarity with African-Americans in terms of opportunity. So when it comes to playing African-American roles or saying something on social media about Sandra Bland or Korryn Gaines or whomever, you are all about that. However, you're solidarity ends there and you don't really fuck with black people whose families go back generations here and opened the door for you to be here. So when Erivo spoke about being protective of Harriet Tubman, I couldn't give less than a shit because you already showed your hand. I don't give a fuck about you being in The Color Purple or whatever anti black male drivel Alice Walker concocted and Steven Spielberg capitalized on. The sincere thing to do would be to apologize for being incredibly ignorant and not associate with people like Luvvie or Yvonne Orji or anybody like that. However, a lot of folks (in the "black" community mind you) believe that if you do the latter that it's essentially giving up your heritage which goes back to what I said at the beginning about my identity. If she wants to stay true and hang out with all her friends in the industry who believe fucked up things about African-Americans (be it Nigerian, Ugandan, Ghanaian, or Senegalese because I throw Issa Rae into that mix as well), then that's fine. She shouldn't have to give up her identity. Be proud of who you are then. The thing is...I won't give up my identity. If you're selective with your love and pick and choose what parts of African-American culture to appropriate (ex. anything that makes you feel like an activist and hip and cool without all the excess "ghetto" stuff), I will be selective with my admiration and love as well and will support your projects as I see fit. As far as it goes with rooting for Erivo to get an Oscar or even a nod, you won't see me doing it especially knowing you have African-American actresses who can play that role exceptionally well. Cynthia Erivo is talented (her accent was very hit or miss in Bad Times at the El Royale and she wasn't that good in Widows besides looking buff as hell), but she is not talented to the point where there are no qualified actresses who are fully African-American (not half like an Issa Rae or parents who both come from the Caribbean like Tessa Thompson) that can be Harriet Tubman a legendary figure for African-Americans. When Paul Mooney did a standup special where he joked that Hollywood would be crazy enough to cast Sandra Bullock as Madame CJ Walker, I laughed because on the surface it's preposterous. However, in hindsight, Hollywood would cast Gugu Mbatha-Raw as Ida B. Wells who documented the brutality of lynchings in the South and brought the much needed attention to that ordeal and that would be just as preposterous in my eyes once you get past skin color. Is Mbatha-Raw talented? Yes, but so is Scarlett Johansson and people got on her for being casted in a trans role. So is Emma Stone who was casted as a native Hawaiian. You can go on for days. 

If there are extreme limitations placed on a production, the story is probably going to suck. I agreed with @Swiftian on that premise. HOWEVER, we are not living in a world where Hollywood has been killed by SJW and liberal media. I'm going to safely assume most of the people in charge (meaning at the very top) are buddies with the guy in office right now. Hollywood has had no issue eating itself from the inside. Second, people were using that same excuse to have Marlo Thomas play a Chinese lady in an episode of Bonanza. We've come a LONG, LONG way since then. That's not a limitation that is going to completely destroy a project. If it is, then you need to rethink what the fuck you're doing and ask if it's worth it. For many people, that involves criticising who should play a trans character. For myself personally, that involves who should or should not be able to play an African-American in film, TV, and stage. You'll never confuse me with being an intersectionalist (AT ALL), but selfish or not, those arguments and discussions are worth having IMO. People may see it as splitting hairs, but if you could walk in those shoes (and you sorta can't), your mindset would be entirely different.

Edited July 15, 2019 by Elsalvajeloco

[AxB]

The thing with Scarlett Johansen is, she's one of those actors who takes roles in movies that are only being made because she agreed to make them. Under the Skin being an obvious example, developed to star Olivia Wilde, but couldn't get funding without a proper A-list star headlining. Similarly, if they'd made Ghost in the Shell* without her attached, the budget would have been a fraction of what it was. So when the twitterstorm forced her to withdraw from playing a trans man in Rub & Tug, the movie itself was cancelled from going into production, and probably won't now be made. 

* Also, the whole point of the role is that her character's body is a construct. They could have built the Major to look like anyone. Just because some Japanese people are building a cyborg, that doesn't necessarily mean they would build it to look a Japanese person.

[Elsalvajeloco]

1 minute ago, AxB said:

The thing with Scarlett Johansen is, she's one of those actors who takes roles in movies that are only being made because she agreed to make them. Under the Skin being an obvious example, developed to star Olivia Wilde, but couldn't get funding without a proper A-list star headlining. Similarly, if they'd made Ghost in the Shell* without her attached, the budget would have been a fraction of what it was. So when the twitterstorm forced her to withdraw from playing a trans man in Rub & Tug, the movie itself was cancelled from going into production, and probably won't now be made. 

* Also, the whole point of the role is that her character's body is a construct. They could have built the Major to look like anyone. Just because some Japanese people are building a cyborg, that doesn't necessarily mean they would build it to look a Japanese person.

It's the same with Dwayne Johnson though. If he didn't take the role of John Henry, I highly doubt it would happen. But because he chooses to be racially ambiguous from film to film (he will be vaguely African with a West African surname in Rampage and then Samoan in Hobbs and Shaw), you're not exactly casting Wesley Snipes from the 1990s or Laurence Fishburne back he was on a roll. If he dropped out, you're not exactly left without any options. If Netflix or whomever decide it shouldn't be done w/o him, that's Hollywood fucking up, not us.

[AxB]

Well, yeah. It's one of those things where there's only one Denzel and one Will Smith et cetera, and there's only so many of them who are headliners who are (perceived to be) capable of carrying a movie. Without one of those handful of guys, films just won't happen. And for some reason, (pre-Black Panther anyway) Hollywood thought that if Will Smith is headlining your movie, there should only be - at most - one other black guy in the cast, or white audiences won't buy tickets.

[Elsalvajeloco]

26 minutes ago, AxB said:

Well, yeah. It's one of those things where there's only one Denzel and one Will Smith et cetera, and there's only so many of them who are headliners who are (perceived to be) capable of carrying a movie. Without one of those handful of guys, films just won't happen. And for some reason, (pre-Black Panther anyway) Hollywood thought that if Will Smith is headlining your movie, there should only be - at most - one other black guy in the cast, or white audiences won't buy tickets.

That's absolute bullshit though. You're telling me Disney couldn't make a new Star Wars without John Boyega, who I doubt anyone I know could pick out of lineup, playing the equivalent of a minstrel show space janitor eunuch? They won't going to make a new Star Wars movie? If you're making a movie, you might be better served not paying Denzel to sleepwalk through a role ala Roman J. Israel, Esq. for $15 or $20 million. Hell, the point Sam Jackson was making about people like Kaluuya is British actors come cheap. Whether it's true or not (I doubt anyone not named Idris Elba is making top dollar regularly), that can be up for debate with people more in the know. However, you're telling me Sony is above paying David Oyelowo a fraction of that especially if it gives them a chance to break even? The movie was budgeted at $22 million (most of that probably went towards Denzel) and the movie grossed $13 million altogether. Yes, SOME movies probably won't get made. However, that's not a hindrance to an industry cranking out useless movies week after week. Some of the biggest actors especially African-American/black/whatever term you wanna use aren't even averaging two films a year. That ain't stopped anyone from doing a shitty Shaft remake/sequel or Superfly or whatever movie no one asked for.

Edited July 15, 2019 by Elsalvajeloco

[Brian Fowler]

Also, in the past decade or so, the idea that "a-list stars open movies" has pretty much died. There is no actor who singlehandedly brings in audiences anymore, regardless of role.

[Elsalvajeloco]

1 hour ago, Brian Fowler said:

Also, in the past decade or so, the idea that "a-list stars open movies" has pretty much died. There is no actor who singlehandedly brings in audiences anymore, regardless of role.

Hollywood has gotten their way to the point where the property is infinitely more valuable than whoever they get to star in the film. Jennifer Lawrence hasn't made a slew of hits since Hunger Games, but she is golden if you put her in another franchise like Hunger Games. When was Charlize Theron in a film that wasn't a bomb and wasn't something like Fast and the Furious or Mad Max? She is outright box office poison when it is not an animated film or a tentpole. However, she is still Charlize Theron.

[odessasteps]

9 minutes ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

Hollywood has gotten their way to the point where the property is infinitely more valuable than whoever they get to star in the film. Jennifer Lawrence hasn't made a slew of hits since Hunger Games, but she is golden if you put her in another franchise like Hunger Games. When was Charlize Theron in a film that wasn't a bomb and wasn't something like Fast and the Furious or Mad Max? She is outright box office poison when it is not an animated film or a tentpole. However, she is still Charlize Theron.

Do you consider Atomic Blonde a bomb ($51m domestic, 48m foreign)? 

 

Edited July 15, 2019 by odessasteps

[Swift]

Thanks for the reply @Elsalvajeloco. I appreciate the insight into an opinion I didn't know existed (that only black Americans should play black Americans) and wonder how detailed you get in that argument. You're arguing that a black British actor doesn't have the same life experiences as a black American actor and obviously that's true. For you though, does it matter if a black New Yorker plays a particularly southern black role for instance? Or a black theatrically trained, university educated actor plays an LA gang member? That they have to have lived a certain life in order to portray that life on screen? In the case of British actors, have there been times where you think "man, this dude is good" only to then find out afterwards that he was British and fooled you with his performance?

You touched on western actors playing African roles earlier. Does that bother you or not as much? How do you feel about white British actors playing white American roles? 12 Years a Slave seems like a good example to bring up as it has black and white non-Americans playing American real life figures. Did Ejiofor being cast bother you? What about Fassbender or Cumberbatch? I'm not trying to catch you out here. If you only care about the black portrayal, that's fine. Apologies for all the questions too, I just find this topic fascinating.

[Elsalvajeloco]

Just now, odessasteps said:

Do you consider Atomic Blonde a bomb ($51m domestic)? 

Yeah, there were people who wrote articles asking why it didn't draw that many people to the theater. It was the same thing recently after Booksmart didn't do well when it went wide. IIRC there was an article titled "We're Seeing the Wrong Movies" or something to that effect. If you specifically have one of these strong female protagonist leads kicking everyone's ass (we can even use Red Sparrow as an example going back to Lawrence) and it doesn't draw a dime, you're going to hear about it now. Plus, you had so much noise being made about Furiosa getting her own movie. Yet, people didn't go out and support Atomic Blonde when it's most likely the only role she will probably get on that level with George Miller and Warner Bros. being at odds (Miller also isn't a spring chicken).

[Brian Fowler]

It's a shame, too. Atomic Blond was really good.

 

[Elsalvajeloco]

8 minutes ago, Swiftian said:

Thanks for the reply @Elsalvajeloco. I appreciate the insight into an opinion I didn't know existed (that only black Americans should play black Americans) and wonder how detailed you get in that argument. You're arguing that a black British actor doesn't have the same life experiences as a black American actor and obviously that's true. For you though, does it matter if a black New Yorker plays a particularly southern black role for instance? Or a black theatrically trained, university educated actor plays an LA gang member? That they have to have lived a certain life in order to portray that life on screen? In the case of British actors, have there been times where you think "man, this dude is good" only to then find out afterwards that he was British and fooled you with his performance?

You touched on western actors playing African roles earlier. Does that bother you or not as much? How do you feel about white British actors playing white American roles? 12 Years a Slave seems like a good example to bring up as it has black and white non-Americans playing American real life figures. Did Ejiofor being cast bother you? What about Fassbender or Cumberbatch? I'm not trying to catch you out here. If you only care about the black portrayal, that's fine. Apologies for all the questions too, I just find this topic fascinating.

Brian Tyree Henry is a great example. He is Yale educated and sounds nothing like Paper Boi from Atlanta (or any character he has played so far in a film given he has been a lot recently). I was shocked listening to an NPR interview he did right before the second season of the show Atlanta. 

Giancarlo Esposito (half Italian born in Denmark) was phenomenal when he was working with Spike Lee earlier in his career (he was intense as fuck as one of Malcolm X's assassins and he had no lines at all), but at the same time his mother is African-American from Alabama. You listen to the guy and he doesn't seem anchored in anything typically black, but his talent is such that he doesn't seem out of place whether his mother passed down those experiences or not.

Gbenga Akinnagbe is Nigerian from the same elite area of Maryland/DMV area that gave us Issa Rae and other African immigrants, but I bought him completely as Chris Partlow.

As far as British actors go, Delroy Lindo was great as Rodney in Clockers even if he sounded weird at points with his accent. The scene where he stuck the gun in Mekhi Phifer's mouth for talking to Harvey Keitel's character who was a cop was great. However, if Spike Lee wasn't probably down on Sam Jackson for working with Tarantino or w/e beef he had with Sam at the time, Sam would be better as Rodney than Delroy Lindo. Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje is generally pretty good, and I think he has an overall better command over accents than Idris Elba. I dunno what the fuck Idris was going for in Prometheus. Staying on Oz alum, Eamonn Walker is pretty good.

Ruth Negga is technically Irish and not British, but her accents are way more authentic than 95% of the people trying to do the same thing. I can get lost with her playing American characters or specifically a black woman from America. I think the problem with black British actresses (since I already went over Kaluuya and others on the male side) in general especially if you watch a lot of TV shows/films is they go for white housewife (Erivo went from soul sister to sorta valley girl all throughout Bad Times at the El Royale and it was a bit distracting) in her 30s-40s from middle America or they barely try at all (ex. Carmen Ejogo recently in True Detective whose character was suppose to have been raised in Northwest Arkansas her whole life). The chick who played the groupie/mistress character (a Google search shows Deborah Ayorinde) in Girls Trip was great and I had no goddamn idea she was British. She put forth a good effort at least. Madeleine Mantock is solid from what I seen. Naomie Harris was okay in Moonlight, but she was putting a little extra on it for an Oscar nod. I wasn't really blown away. I hardly remember Thandie Newton in Beloved and stuff like that so I need to do some research. However, with films set during American slavery or Jim Crow like Beloved, the first thing people do is go over the top so that's not specifically on British actors (I thought Ejiofor was good as Solomon Northup and Oyelowo was decent at the beginning of Lincoln FWIW). I like Thandie more in non-American roles anyway especially in something like Westworld where has a great presence about herself. Same with Sophie Okonedo.

Cumberbatch being an actual descendant of slave owners is a bit problematic but that's not a discussion I want to get into. I think with white actors having most of the roles, there isn't the type of competition you see between black actors who are African-American, Caribbean, or African. I think the problem a Steve McQueen has being British is he is a bit tone deaf by his early success. If Ejiofor didn't give an earnest performance and without Lupita getting universal acclaim, it's basically tragedy porn from someone not anchored in an African-American experience. You can see the same tone deafness on a slightly different level from Amma Asante doing a Nazi-black girl love story with Where Hands Touch. Based on Widows tanking at the B.O. with momentum he had despite not doing a movie for years, McQueen couldn't make that next move up the ladder because he didn't have that performance that was going to save the film. He was probably better off doing a UK remake of a UK work than doing it in Chicago. It's clear he had no entrance way into American blackness other than Viola Davis. Even though Erivo didn't have much to do in the film other than stare at Michelle, the white woman whose name slips my mind, and Viola and run from place to place like FloJo, I didn't buy her as a hairdresser from Chicago who was a struggling single mom. The girl working in the shop with her who was an under five was more convincing. Then, you had Brian Tyree Henry in the same space as Kaluuya who was not good at all as the enforcer. You can't have Viola and Cynthia sharing the screen and then have a guy who has shown range enough that he can play someone like Paper Boi and a detective recently in Child's Play and someone like Kaluuya whose acting chops a lot of the time seem to be on par with a made-for-TV movie on BET from 2004. That tells me you got lucky with 12 Years a Slave, and how the dominoes fell in your favor.

There is this sort of weird dynamic/identity clash going on with black actors in Hollywood I don't think you ever saw with white actors before. Let's look at Tiffany Haddish for example. She struggled for a LONG time as a standup in Los Angeles and really didn't make it until Girls Trip. The problem is her schtick is to be an over the top black girl who is ratched. So that's what she does in everything because that's what she gets paid to do. What does she do at the Oscars in 2018 IIRC? She shows up in an elegant Eritrean dress to honor her deadbeat dad who was never in her life because she is part Eritrean. Yeah, Black Panther had just came out and all that. Look at the other side of the coin though. What does she do at the Met Gala back in May? She shows up with a bucket of fried chicken and trying to act ghetto. On one hand, you represent the African diaspora (in which you're BARELY attach to) with some level of regalness and prestige. When it comes to African-American culture specifically, it is hot ghetto mess time. That's extremely problematic and only makes the bad casting decisions as it relates to black actors even more glaring.

 

[Swift]

Again thank you for the informative responses. It's always good to see from another perspective.

[Ace]

I never knew Delroy Lindo was British.

 

[AxB]

11 hours ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

That's absolute bullshit though. You're telling me Disney couldn't make a new Star Wars without John Boyega, who I doubt anyone I know could pick out of lineup, playing the equivalent of a minstrel show space janitor eunuch? They won't going to make a new Star Wars movie?

Well, no, the A List star of a Star Wars movie is the phrase "Star Wars". Although with Force Awakens, whilst none of the four featured new actors needed to be established names, if they'd cast Kylo, Finn, Rey and Poe to all be played by white actors, that would have led to a PR nightmare. #StarWarsSoWhite and so on. Boyega himself probably was a draw to nobody except the most fanatical Attack the Block fans at that point. And pretty much at this point as well. He's had two opportunities to become a legit star and neither time has it actually happened, for whatever reason.

Quote

If you're making a movie, you might be better served not paying Denzel to sleepwalk through a role ala Roman J. Israel, Esq. for $15 or $20 million. Hell, the point Sam Jackson was making about people like Kaluuya is British actors come cheap. Whether it's true or not (I doubt anyone not named Idris Elba is making top dollar regularly), that can be up for debate with people more in the know. However, you're telling me Sony is above paying David Oyelowo a fraction of that especially if it gives them a chance to break even?

No, it's a known fact that British actors are cheaper than Americans. Charles Dance claims that Hollywood used to refer to British performers as "White Mexicans" (which is awfully racist, but let's not get into that). The only reason he was in Last Action Hero was because Alan Rickman put his rate up after Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves.

Quote

The movie was budgeted at $22 million (most of that probably went towards Denzel) and the movie grossed $13 million altogether. Yes, SOME movies probably won't get made. However, that's not a hindrance to an industry cranking out useless movies week after week. Some of the biggest actors especially African-American/black/whatever term you wanna use aren't even averaging two films a year. That ain't stopped anyone from doing a shitty Shaft remake/sequel or Superfly or whatever movie no one asked for.

My point was that something like Hancock or After Earth only happens if Will Smith (or another star perceived to be on his level) wants it to happen. Fences only happens if Denzel wants it to happen (I don't know anything about Roman J Israel, Esq.), whilst something like the Equaliser movies could have starred Val Kilmer or Kevin Costner, and still happened. Only not been as good. But if the biggest name they could find who was willing to play the title role in the Equaliser was like, Michael Madsen or Matthew Lillard, some other supporting actor for life guy, that's a low budget straight to DVD movie. With Denzel, that's a nationwide cinema release. Although a few Bruce Willis movies seem to go straight to DVD now, so maybe I'm just talking bollocks.

[Elsalvajeloco]

2 hours ago, AxB said:

Well, no, the A List star of a Star Wars movie is the phrase "Star Wars". Although with Force Awakens, whilst none of the four featured new actors needed to be established names, if they'd cast Kylo, Finn, Rey and Poe to all be played by white actors, that would have led to a PR nightmare. #StarWarsSoWhite and so on. Boyega himself probably was a draw to nobody except the most fanatical Attack the Block fans at that point. And pretty much at this point as well. He's had two opportunities to become a legit star and neither time has it actually happened, for whatever reason.

Well, if he was suppose to draw in black people of any background, they know largely his character is a bumbling idiot with little to no agency you can find in any Stepin Fetchit film from the 30s and 40s (Jovan Adepo was basically Finn in the film Overlord if you want to be honest with the same level of acting ability). At best, his inclusion is for the representation matters crowd and black nerd population. Other than that, he isn't going to galvanize anyone who isn't already going to see Star Wars in theaters. It's a pop culture phenomenon to the point where you're not even a nerd if you go see it.

 In the film Detroit, which I liked, you can erase Boyega's character from the film and nothing would be lost from the movie. His main job was look slightly confused and befuddled (sound familiar?). There was no power or conviction in anything he did. You can replace him with a white character and nothing changes. So it wasn't the script. It's him as an actor.

2 hours ago, AxB said:

My point was that something like Hancock or After Earth only happens if Will Smith (or another star perceived to be on his level) wants it to happen. Fences only happens if Denzel wants it to happen (I don't know anything about Roman J Israel, Esq.), whilst something like the Equaliser movies could have starred Val Kilmer or Kevin Costner, and still happened. Only not been as good. But if the biggest name they could find who was willing to play the title role in the Equaliser was like, Michael Madsen or Matthew Lillard, some other supporting actor for life guy, that's a low budget straight to DVD movie. With Denzel, that's a nationwide cinema release. Although a few Bruce Willis movies seem to go straight to DVD now, so maybe I'm just talking bollocks.

There is a strong upper to middle tier between Leonardo DiCaprio and say D. B. Sweeney or Colm Feore that doesn't exist with black actors. If Leo says no (he just got replaced by Bradley Cooper not too long ago in the remake of Nightmare Alley) because he only does a film every 4 or 5 years, you can get anyone of the other 5-10 guys on your shortlist. The Lionsgate Premiere type stuff was meant to go straight to DVD. I haven't heard of too many big time projects in recent memory where they just couldn't find anyone to star in it, and it wasn't mostly on the script was just horrendous, directors kept dropping out, or there was a massive shakeup at the studio (ex. the Disney/Fox merger where Disney execs pick and choose what to keep). When Tom Cruise couldn't do Once Upon a Time in a Hollywood, they replaced him with Brad Pitt. The thing with black actors is besides The Rock (who again plays racially ambiguous that can largely be swapped out) and maybe Kevin Hart, no one guy is big enough to warrant films not getting made or specifically get replaced by someone else anyway. Yes, Denzel was extremely passionate about Fences to the point where he cried he didn't get the Oscar but August Wilson's plays are still out to be made. He is the most famous black playwright in recent times. His work isn't going anywhere. Native Son got made after all these years and that didn't have anyone notable besides the kid from Moonlight and he isn't a big star anyway and damn near 50 year old Sanaa Lathan. With vanity projects, yeah you probably need the person whose main goal is to get it done. However, Hollywood is rolling on regardless of who is and is not available. Dwayne Johnson has committed to movies til like 2025 or some ridiculous timeframe along with doing TV shows and reality shows. They know damn well he likely isn't going to be available. What the studios are betting on is if he isn't available that the content and marketing push will be strong enough to support it being in three to almost four thousand theaters across the US. Or just plain ole stupidity. They're not going to tuck tail just because one guy can't do something. 

Edited July 16, 2019 by Elsalvajeloco

[Brian Fowler]

Fences probably doesn't get made without Denzel because of Denzel's passion for it. But I think, had he wanted to, he could've gotten it made with him only directing and not starring in it (which, to be clear, I thought he gave a fucking tremendous performance, quite possibly his best work in the last decade)

After Earth was a complete vanity project for Smith, wanting to work with his son (I think they even had story credits on it, but I'm too lazy to double check that) but it was also a massive bomb, and I'm not sure the world is a worse place if it doesn't happen.

Johnson is arguably the biggest star in Hollywood right now, but that didn't really help Baywatch, Skyscraper or Fighting With My Family breakout. 

There has been a big shift in what draws audiences in the last decade or two, and even stars like Johnson, legends like Washington, or even a guy who in many ways is both in Will Smith, can't fill a theater on name alone anymore. Ditto for Tom Cruise, RDJ, J-Law, ScarJo, or whoever is the new hotness.

[odessasteps]

I’d have thought Denzel could get low budget vanity projects made if he wanted. Maybe by doing what Sam did: do mainstream stuff to pay for doing things  like The Red Violin and the Caveman’s Valentine. 

Maybe he did. I admittedly do not really know the ins and outs of his filmography. IMDb tells me the film of his I saw was 2 Guns, which I only saw since I am internet pals with Steven Grant. 

Edited July 16, 2019 by odessasteps

[Brian Fowler]

20 minutes ago, odessasteps said:

I’d have thought Denzel could get low budget vanity projects made if he wanted. Maybe by doing what Sam did: do mainstream stuff to pay for doing things  like The Red Violin and the Caveman’s Valentine. 

Maybe he did. I admittedly do not really know the ins and outs of his filmography. IMDb tells me the film of his I saw was 2 Guns, which I only saw since I am internet pals with Steven Grant. 

Fences is a great play, adaptated as faithfully as you can ever expect, with an all-time cast. I can't recommend it highly enough.

[Elsalvajeloco]

9 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said:

Fences probably doesn't get made without Denzel because of Denzel's passion for it. But I think, had he wanted to, he could've gotten it made with him only directing and not starring in it (which, to be clear, I thought he gave a fucking tremendous performance, quite possibly his best work in the last decade)

After Earth was a complete vanity project for Smith, wanting to work with his son (I think they even had story credits on it, but I'm too lazy to double check that) but it was also a massive bomb, and I'm not sure the world is a worse place if it doesn't happen.

Johnson is arguably the biggest star in Hollywood right now, but that didn't really help Baywatch, Skyscraper or Fighting With My Family breakout. 

There has been a big shift in what draws audiences in the last decade or two, and even stars like Johnson, legends like Washington, or even a guy who in many ways is both in Will Smith, can't fill a theater on name alone anymore. Ditto for Tom Cruise, RDJ, J-Law, ScarJo, or whoever is the new hotness.

I think because he already drew praise for his work on the stage in the revival which led to the film, I doubt he was going to replace himself. That and Denzel's personality and overall demeanor just screams you gotta take the torch from my dead cold hands. He wasn't going to pass the ball off to a Mahershala Ali or Jamie Foxx or a Chadwick Boseman to play Troy Maxson. He's not that type of guy.

5 minutes ago, odessasteps said:

I’d have thought Denzel could get low budget vanity projects if he wanted. Maybe by doing what Sam did: do mainstream stuff to pay for things like The Red Violin. 

Maybe he did. I admittedly do not really know the ins and outs of his filmography. IMDb tells me the film of his I saw was 2 Guns, which I only saw since I am internet pals with Steven Grant. 

There probably isn't a whole bunch of directors he trusts. Look at his filmography since 2004 starting with Man on Fire. It's Tony Scott, Jonathan Demme, Ridley Scott, The Hughes Brothers, Daniel Espinosa, Dan Gilroy, Robert Zemeckis, Baltasar Kormákur, Antoine Fuqua, and himself. Two of those dudes are deceased and one of them represents four of those films before he passed away. NONE of those guys were/are lower level independent filmmakers. With Denzel getting up there in age, I doubt he wants to put in all that work especially if he feels like it won't be recognized. These studios are ruthless. I can't imagine Denzel doing an A24 or Annapurna Pictures film only to be put smack dab against a behemoth like Frozen 2 or The Rise of Skywalker. Fences went wide during Christmas in 2016 but that's with Paramount behind it.

[Brian Fowler]

3 minutes ago, Elsalvajeloco said:

I think because he already drew praise for his work on the stage in the revival which led to the film, I doubt he was going to replace himself. That and Denzel's personality and overall demeanor just screams you gotta take the torch from my dead cold hands. He wasn't going to pass the ball off to a Mahershala Ali or Jamie Foxx or a Chadwick Boseman to play Troy Maxson. He's not that type of guy.

 

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't have expected him to give it away, I'm just saying I think he can get a mid budget drama made as a director if he so desired.

Speaking of Ali, I was kinda shocked to realize he's already 45. Looking at it, I realize he spent a decade doing TV and film roles before becoming an overnight sensation. 

[Elsalvajeloco]

7 minutes ago, Brian Fowler said:

Yeah, I certainly wouldn't have expected him to give it away, I'm just saying I think he can get a mid budget drama made as a director if he so desired.

Speaking of Ali, I was kinda shocked to realize he's already 45. Looking at it, I realize he spent a decade doing TV and film roles before becoming an overnight sensation. 

Boseman is FORTY ONE and doesn't look a day over 26. The only time he looked it was when the pictures of him looking tired doing the Wakanda Forever arm gesture surfaced. Traveling and promoting these Marvel films is no joke.

[Brian Fowler]

Just now, Elsalvajeloco said:

Boseman is FORTY ONE and doesn't look a day over 26. The only time he looked it was when the pictures of him looking tired doing the Wakanda Forever arm gesture surfaced. Traveling and promoting these Marvel films is no joke.

Yeah. Insert "don't crack" here.

And those Marvel press tours look like hell.

[Casey]

The Man Who Killed Hitler and Then the Bigfoot is a really jumbled up movie. There's the flashbacks to the story of Sam Elliott's character in World War II killing Hitler, the actual hunt for Bigfoot, a subplot about the main character and his brother (played by Larry Miller), and another subplot about Calvin Barr (Elliott) and his "lost" love from before he left for WW2. If they could just focus on one or two plot threads for the entire movie, this would have been really good. Why are the brothers so distant? It never really explains that. The love storyline is confusing as all fuck, or maybe it's because I watched it at 3am.

The WW2 parts were pretty cool, especially the gun bit. I wish that was the movie, but I understand that's the backstory to set up why the government wants him to track Bigfoot. Speaking of Bigfoot... it looks more like a caveman zombie than what we've been taught to think Bigfoot would look like.

Overall, it's not a C level movie like I was expecting. It's more drama than anything else, which surprised me given the title, and most of the "action" happens towards the last back-half with the Bigfoot, and even then it only lasts for maybe 10 minutes. It's basically a bunch of existential stuff, like how soldiers deal with relationships and what they did in combat when they come back home. Which is fine, but I don't know if the Bigfoot plot was needed. Sam Elliot's Calvin Barr being the man to kill Hitler, and living with that secret for all of these years, and how he deals with relationships like with his brother, and the girl he wanted to marry, was probably a better way to go than what ended up happening in this movie.