Gina Harris's Blog, page 69
March 16, 2020
Control yourself
I guess I have sort of a trilogy here.
Wednesday I wrote about people being horrible (and dumb) to each other - especially in stressful times - and yesterday I wrote about looking out for each other now.
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/03/dont-be-like-that.html
https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2020/03/love-in-time-of-covid19.html
I believe there is a common thread, and that is what I want to get at today.
Let me start by saying that one of the absolute most fun things about this election cycle is how everybody feels free to tell Democrats how to vote and what to do.
It doesn't matter if they have never been Democrats, and scorn the values that might make someone stick with that party. It doesn't matter whether their justification for being able to tell us what to do is Trump, and they were specifically helpful in getting him elected. It doesn't matter if they have made very specific and clear predictions that turned out to be wrong, legitimately calling their acumen into question. It certainly doesn't matter if you have years of experience with activism and fighting for rights, as opposed to being an actress who likes the guy who briefly took part. There is no reason that my own decision-making process can be valid if it results in a different conclusion than yours.
To which my first, instinctual response is "Screw you!", but that would go to some people I really like, along with several I don't.
The good part of that is that I was worried that by not spending a lot of time listening to outright Trump supporters I might be creating my own bubble and echo chamber, which is a concern. Instead, I find that there are a lot of people whom I disagree with that I still listen to, with diverse levels of intelligence and education and opinions. That's probably healthy, even when it's frustrating.
I also find that I have not written as much about politics this election cycle as I did during the last one. I often think about different things, but it feels like currently things are so much more about the problems with the voters than with the candidates. I mean, the candidates have real issues and I could spend a lot of time on that, but it doesn't feel like it would matter unless we got to the root of what is happening with the voters and the talking heads and the people who feel perfectly comfortable calling experienced committed voters low information because they see through your brand of progressivism.
I don't have a post for that yet. It would probably take a series of twenty or thirty sequential posts building the history of civilization and especially United States history and how we became such a bunch of nasty, twisted creatures.
I do have a concept, though: Dominator Culture
I found the phrase recently while reading bell hooks. It seemed to describe something that I had been sensing. That is a great thing to happen in reading: you find out it is not just you. Other people have noticed, they have worked on it, and maybe there is hope.
For people who have worked on it more, the opposite of the dominator model is the partnership model.
If we are constantly in a fight to prove our superiority hierarchically, it's not just that it creates a full bigot tree of abuse flowing down; it's also that we are always in a fight. What if we just decided we were all equal?
So for someone who hoards supplies and hopes to price gouge, or who behaves recklessly to prove they aren't scared (increasing the risks for the medically fragile people in the vicinity), or the people who keep focusing on "bending the knee" (whether they anticipate the knees being bent toward them, or them being forced to bend), what model do you think that is?
Wednesday I wrote about people being horrible (and dumb) to each other - especially in stressful times - and yesterday I wrote about looking out for each other now.
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/03/dont-be-like-that.html
https://preparedspork.blogspot.com/2020/03/love-in-time-of-covid19.html
I believe there is a common thread, and that is what I want to get at today.
Let me start by saying that one of the absolute most fun things about this election cycle is how everybody feels free to tell Democrats how to vote and what to do.
It doesn't matter if they have never been Democrats, and scorn the values that might make someone stick with that party. It doesn't matter whether their justification for being able to tell us what to do is Trump, and they were specifically helpful in getting him elected. It doesn't matter if they have made very specific and clear predictions that turned out to be wrong, legitimately calling their acumen into question. It certainly doesn't matter if you have years of experience with activism and fighting for rights, as opposed to being an actress who likes the guy who briefly took part. There is no reason that my own decision-making process can be valid if it results in a different conclusion than yours.
To which my first, instinctual response is "Screw you!", but that would go to some people I really like, along with several I don't.
The good part of that is that I was worried that by not spending a lot of time listening to outright Trump supporters I might be creating my own bubble and echo chamber, which is a concern. Instead, I find that there are a lot of people whom I disagree with that I still listen to, with diverse levels of intelligence and education and opinions. That's probably healthy, even when it's frustrating.
I also find that I have not written as much about politics this election cycle as I did during the last one. I often think about different things, but it feels like currently things are so much more about the problems with the voters than with the candidates. I mean, the candidates have real issues and I could spend a lot of time on that, but it doesn't feel like it would matter unless we got to the root of what is happening with the voters and the talking heads and the people who feel perfectly comfortable calling experienced committed voters low information because they see through your brand of progressivism.
I don't have a post for that yet. It would probably take a series of twenty or thirty sequential posts building the history of civilization and especially United States history and how we became such a bunch of nasty, twisted creatures.
I do have a concept, though: Dominator Culture
I found the phrase recently while reading bell hooks. It seemed to describe something that I had been sensing. That is a great thing to happen in reading: you find out it is not just you. Other people have noticed, they have worked on it, and maybe there is hope.
For people who have worked on it more, the opposite of the dominator model is the partnership model.
If we are constantly in a fight to prove our superiority hierarchically, it's not just that it creates a full bigot tree of abuse flowing down; it's also that we are always in a fight. What if we just decided we were all equal?
So for someone who hoards supplies and hopes to price gouge, or who behaves recklessly to prove they aren't scared (increasing the risks for the medically fragile people in the vicinity), or the people who keep focusing on "bending the knee" (whether they anticipate the knees being bent toward them, or them being forced to bend), what model do you think that is?
March 11, 2020
Don't be like that
The obvious follow-up to yesterday's post would be to focus the director spotlight on John Singleton, but after two failed attempts to record Poetic Justice it has become personal, and I am going to watch that movie.
Also, I really need to write about Corona virus. That is partly because of things I am seeing in the media now, and also because of a book I just read: Modern Food, Moral Food: Self-Control, Science, and the Rise of Modern Eating in the Early Twentieth Century by Helen Zoe Veit.
During World War I the United States government was sending food to Europe as part of relief efforts. Certain foods were prioritized based partly on nutritional value but largely on how well they shipped. Those foods included beef, pork, and white flour. To keep supplies available, the government requested that citizens used less of those foods. They encouraged more eating of fish and poultry, and more use of cornmeal and potatoes, for example. A lot of what we think of as traditional foods, like meat-and-potatoes in the heartland and casseroles and name brand canned foods really took off here.
That information could be interesting on its own. A lot of the dietary advice was given through extension services, and that resonated for me because I have taught community classes on food safety and how to prepare different foods through extension programs, eighty years later. Cool! However, where I found the book really relevant is how stupidly awful some people were, and how.
For example, there was a recommendation from one non-government source to go through dishwater and salvage left behind morsels. How disgusting that sounds should be reason enough against it, but also, logically, if there is anyone who is leaving that much food on their plates, the real need is instruction on washing dishes. Scrape your dishes first. It will keep the water clean longer so you wash better. The other idea doesn't even make sense.
That is an extreme example of individuals going overboard. There were women who made uniforms, and women who requested stronger guidelines from the agency, because they just didn't feel secure enough, and maybe the voluntary elements weren't good enough, which may be why some people felt the need to police their neighbors, because other people cannot be trusted.
So, when healthcare workers and medically fragile people can't find masks because people who don't need them have snapped them all up, that sounds kind of familiar. The main recommendation has been hand washing all along. It kind of makes sense that people also want to stock up on hand sanitizer, because you aren't always at a sink, but I suspect that the bare supermarket shelves are not reflecting an informed or reasonable response.
It's that urge to police other people that worries me most. I have heard -- but cannot verify -- that some public officials are encouraging the public to pressure anyone coughing into leaving public spaces. (A good thread on that is linked below.)
https://twitter.com/kristinrawls/status/1235937356588486667
There is a lot to be said for using common sense and not going out in public if you are feeling ill. There are also many issues about feasibility, and people being able to afford to do so, but let's leave that aside for now. There are many other reasons you might cough. Allergies trigger asthma for a lot of people, and coughing can be a symptom. Someone might have swallowed something wrong and need to clear it out. Maybe courteously checking on people can be okay, but I worry more about things like this happening:
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/skbaer/coronavirus-racism-attack-london
Did I mention that there were many examples of appalling racism in the Modern Food book? There were.
Because of all of this, I have some real concerns about our ability to manage this using logic and intelligence in a manner that actually promotes the common welfare. I mean, I guess now I understand better that people were also terrible jerks during World War I, and the accompanying Great Influenza did not cause society to collapse, but while Woodrow Wilson was still pretty racist he was in many ways more competent than the current president, and things like that can matter.
So that's a concern. I want to write one related thing on the preparedness blog Sunday, and a different related thing here Monday.
Also, I really need to write about Corona virus. That is partly because of things I am seeing in the media now, and also because of a book I just read: Modern Food, Moral Food: Self-Control, Science, and the Rise of Modern Eating in the Early Twentieth Century by Helen Zoe Veit.
During World War I the United States government was sending food to Europe as part of relief efforts. Certain foods were prioritized based partly on nutritional value but largely on how well they shipped. Those foods included beef, pork, and white flour. To keep supplies available, the government requested that citizens used less of those foods. They encouraged more eating of fish and poultry, and more use of cornmeal and potatoes, for example. A lot of what we think of as traditional foods, like meat-and-potatoes in the heartland and casseroles and name brand canned foods really took off here.
That information could be interesting on its own. A lot of the dietary advice was given through extension services, and that resonated for me because I have taught community classes on food safety and how to prepare different foods through extension programs, eighty years later. Cool! However, where I found the book really relevant is how stupidly awful some people were, and how.
For example, there was a recommendation from one non-government source to go through dishwater and salvage left behind morsels. How disgusting that sounds should be reason enough against it, but also, logically, if there is anyone who is leaving that much food on their plates, the real need is instruction on washing dishes. Scrape your dishes first. It will keep the water clean longer so you wash better. The other idea doesn't even make sense.
That is an extreme example of individuals going overboard. There were women who made uniforms, and women who requested stronger guidelines from the agency, because they just didn't feel secure enough, and maybe the voluntary elements weren't good enough, which may be why some people felt the need to police their neighbors, because other people cannot be trusted.
So, when healthcare workers and medically fragile people can't find masks because people who don't need them have snapped them all up, that sounds kind of familiar. The main recommendation has been hand washing all along. It kind of makes sense that people also want to stock up on hand sanitizer, because you aren't always at a sink, but I suspect that the bare supermarket shelves are not reflecting an informed or reasonable response.
It's that urge to police other people that worries me most. I have heard -- but cannot verify -- that some public officials are encouraging the public to pressure anyone coughing into leaving public spaces. (A good thread on that is linked below.)
https://twitter.com/kristinrawls/status/1235937356588486667
There is a lot to be said for using common sense and not going out in public if you are feeling ill. There are also many issues about feasibility, and people being able to afford to do so, but let's leave that aside for now. There are many other reasons you might cough. Allergies trigger asthma for a lot of people, and coughing can be a symptom. Someone might have swallowed something wrong and need to clear it out. Maybe courteously checking on people can be okay, but I worry more about things like this happening:
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/skbaer/coronavirus-racism-attack-london
Did I mention that there were many examples of appalling racism in the Modern Food book? There were.
Because of all of this, I have some real concerns about our ability to manage this using logic and intelligence in a manner that actually promotes the common welfare. I mean, I guess now I understand better that people were also terrible jerks during World War I, and the accompanying Great Influenza did not cause society to collapse, but while Woodrow Wilson was still pretty racist he was in many ways more competent than the current president, and things like that can matter.
So that's a concern. I want to write one related thing on the preparedness blog Sunday, and a different related thing here Monday.
March 10, 2020
Still not seeing Harriet
Given what I have posted previously, going to see Harriet should be a no-brainer for me; I like Kasi Lemmons and I like Harriet Tubman.
I can't do it, for a few different reasons.
One reason is the casting of London-born Cynthia Erivo. I am not automatically against giving US roles to British actors, though I think it happens more often than it needs to. (There was a Key & Peele sketch about that.) I mean, after the "Minty" episode of Underground, it's going to be hard seeing anyone other than (Brooklyn-born) Aisha Hinds as Tubman, but other people get to play roles that different people did well. I get that.
(Lemmons has addressed that by pointing out that there was a lot of African-American representation, both in front of and behind the camera, and I respect that.)
However, Erivo has a bit of a reputation of saying messed up things about US Black people. Anti-Blackness is a thing, and it has been a successful export of the US in very disappointing ways, but the way some Black people consume that is by looking down on the descendants of enslaved people and that is not cool. As far as I can tell, the closest Erivo has come to an apology is saying things were taken out of context.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1044181901706178560.html
That in itself might not be enough to keep me from watching the movie, but it also doesn't seem to be enough about Harriet. It introduces a non-historical character who can be killed to up the stakes. It has a white man save Harriet's life by killing a Black man. It adds drama in stupid ways. Harriet Tubman's life was interesting enough without needing to do that. You want action? Include the Combahee River Raid.
I don't doubt that many people have found the movie good and inspiring, and I hope so, I guess, but I also know it could be better.
Here's the thing: writer Gregory Allen Howard started working on the script in 1994, a time when it was suggested that Julia Roberts could play Tubman.
https://ew.com/movies/2019/11/19/julia-roberts-harriet-tubman-studio-exec-suggestion/
That is more interesting to me after having watched Rosewood (1997), directed by John Singleton. It was a mess.
It was based on a true story, had a director I like, and tells an important story, in this case about a massacre similar to Black Wall Street though smaller in scale. With all of that material to use, it focused way too much on the white people, like shopkeeper Jon Voight, who harries two guys with a train to rescue people, then makes them go faster than they can - breaking the train - and then helps them fix it. Hero! It did not look at all like the kind of stupid masculinity that gets people killed in the name of macho. (Also, when other refugees were coming and it was a concern that the train would get too full, they shot at them. I thought that sent a poor message.)
I would complain that none of the Black characters are given meaningful character development, but the white ones don't really get that either. Maybe Jon Voight's wife does. She earns the approval of her stepchildren by defending them with a shotgun. (Yes, normally a job for a white guy, but he was busy breaking the train.) But that Black girl Jon Voight was sleeping with? She had to die, and she had to die because she was too ashamed to take shelter in his house.
Otherwise, a triumphant ending to so many Black people dead or displaced is that Loren Dean goes home and beats his cheating wife whose lying set off the killings, and the gross old racist's son rejects his teaching and leaves home.
It may not be a coincidence that one of the running themes in Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995) is that Samuel L. Jackson keeps assuming Bruce Willis is racist, and he is wrong every time. That's just Black people having a chip on their shoulder. Apparently the 90s were about being over racism but not everyone getting the memo.
Don't get me wrong; I don't think a single one of those movies had bad intentions. Intent just isn't enough. It is also important to be able to de-center, and to be able to remove pet ideas when they would be inappropriate to the greater work.
To be fair, there are many movies that I don't see, but this is one I would have liked to have been able to root for. I don't know that I blame anyone involved - it's a tough industry, and they may have done things to make it better - but I can go see other things.
I can't do it, for a few different reasons.
One reason is the casting of London-born Cynthia Erivo. I am not automatically against giving US roles to British actors, though I think it happens more often than it needs to. (There was a Key & Peele sketch about that.) I mean, after the "Minty" episode of Underground, it's going to be hard seeing anyone other than (Brooklyn-born) Aisha Hinds as Tubman, but other people get to play roles that different people did well. I get that.
(Lemmons has addressed that by pointing out that there was a lot of African-American representation, both in front of and behind the camera, and I respect that.)
However, Erivo has a bit of a reputation of saying messed up things about US Black people. Anti-Blackness is a thing, and it has been a successful export of the US in very disappointing ways, but the way some Black people consume that is by looking down on the descendants of enslaved people and that is not cool. As far as I can tell, the closest Erivo has come to an apology is saying things were taken out of context.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1044181901706178560.html
That in itself might not be enough to keep me from watching the movie, but it also doesn't seem to be enough about Harriet. It introduces a non-historical character who can be killed to up the stakes. It has a white man save Harriet's life by killing a Black man. It adds drama in stupid ways. Harriet Tubman's life was interesting enough without needing to do that. You want action? Include the Combahee River Raid.
I don't doubt that many people have found the movie good and inspiring, and I hope so, I guess, but I also know it could be better.
Here's the thing: writer Gregory Allen Howard started working on the script in 1994, a time when it was suggested that Julia Roberts could play Tubman.
https://ew.com/movies/2019/11/19/julia-roberts-harriet-tubman-studio-exec-suggestion/
That is more interesting to me after having watched Rosewood (1997), directed by John Singleton. It was a mess.
It was based on a true story, had a director I like, and tells an important story, in this case about a massacre similar to Black Wall Street though smaller in scale. With all of that material to use, it focused way too much on the white people, like shopkeeper Jon Voight, who harries two guys with a train to rescue people, then makes them go faster than they can - breaking the train - and then helps them fix it. Hero! It did not look at all like the kind of stupid masculinity that gets people killed in the name of macho. (Also, when other refugees were coming and it was a concern that the train would get too full, they shot at them. I thought that sent a poor message.)
I would complain that none of the Black characters are given meaningful character development, but the white ones don't really get that either. Maybe Jon Voight's wife does. She earns the approval of her stepchildren by defending them with a shotgun. (Yes, normally a job for a white guy, but he was busy breaking the train.) But that Black girl Jon Voight was sleeping with? She had to die, and she had to die because she was too ashamed to take shelter in his house.
Otherwise, a triumphant ending to so many Black people dead or displaced is that Loren Dean goes home and beats his cheating wife whose lying set off the killings, and the gross old racist's son rejects his teaching and leaves home.
It may not be a coincidence that one of the running themes in Die Hard with a Vengeance (1995) is that Samuel L. Jackson keeps assuming Bruce Willis is racist, and he is wrong every time. That's just Black people having a chip on their shoulder. Apparently the 90s were about being over racism but not everyone getting the memo.
Don't get me wrong; I don't think a single one of those movies had bad intentions. Intent just isn't enough. It is also important to be able to de-center, and to be able to remove pet ideas when they would be inappropriate to the greater work.
To be fair, there are many movies that I don't see, but this is one I would have liked to have been able to root for. I don't know that I blame anyone involved - it's a tough industry, and they may have done things to make it better - but I can go see other things.
March 9, 2020
Living a moment
I could have easily fit some brief praise for Talk to Me into the post on Kasi Lemmons, but there was one specific thing that stuck out, especially in light of something else I saw recently. That is why there is a separate post.
Talk to Me was invigorating. It starts with the words "Wake up Goddammit!" and those are repeated a few times, and felt needed. Featuring Don Cheadle as DC deejay and former convict Petey Greene, he is well-matched with Taraji P Henson as his love interest, Vernell, and Chiwetel Ejiofor as Dewey Hughes, his manager at one time, but an important part of Greene's career before and after.
I have no idea how closely it follows the actual life events of Petey Greene; the movie never shows children but Petey had four, and his wife's name was Judy, not Vernell. I suspect some things were simplified. What you do get is an idea of how much you can love and need someone and still be frustrated by them, personally and professionally. Ideally, you learn not to throw people away because of the things that make them difficult.
But that's not why it needed its own post.
Some of the personality clashes and difficulties come to a head at the radio station where you are expecting a knock-down-drag-out fight, and then a message comes in, and everything stops. Martin Luther King Jr. had just been assassinated.
The movie does cover how it affected the city, and that is history, but what struck most was those individual reactions, as they were caught so completely off guard and devastated.
The assassination was also treated in a play I saw recently, Who I Am by Shalanda Sims:
http://www.shalandasims.com/
In the play, you hear part of King's speech from the March on Washington. It does not get to "I have a dream" - perhaps that would be too cliche - but the words are still familiar. Then shots ring out and the other actors scatter and King falls.
Obviously, that is not how it happened, but it brings home the tragedy in a way that a regular depiction could not. It would have been so easy to mess up that moment, and they handled it really well.
Seeing those two depictions close together made it more obvious how visceral my response was.
Dr. King has been dead for longer than I have been alive. I have never known him not dead. I remember starting to feel a heaviness coming over me when I was reading Ralph David Abernathy's biography, And the Walls Came Tumbling Down, as we were getting closer. I still felt emotion about the death, and it mattered, but there could not be any shock.
And then there was. That is the magic of film and theater, that something so familiar can become new and feel different.
With Eve's Bayou, Lemmons reminded me how beautiful film could be, in conjunction with Julie Dash and Daughters of the Dust. With Talk To Me - in conjunction with Sims and Who I Am, I have been reminded how transforming film can be.
That is pretty cool.
Related posts:
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/03/director-spotlight-kasi-lemmons.html
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2019/08/watching-movies.html
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/02/black-history-month-2019-and-2020.html
Talk to Me was invigorating. It starts with the words "Wake up Goddammit!" and those are repeated a few times, and felt needed. Featuring Don Cheadle as DC deejay and former convict Petey Greene, he is well-matched with Taraji P Henson as his love interest, Vernell, and Chiwetel Ejiofor as Dewey Hughes, his manager at one time, but an important part of Greene's career before and after.
I have no idea how closely it follows the actual life events of Petey Greene; the movie never shows children but Petey had four, and his wife's name was Judy, not Vernell. I suspect some things were simplified. What you do get is an idea of how much you can love and need someone and still be frustrated by them, personally and professionally. Ideally, you learn not to throw people away because of the things that make them difficult.
But that's not why it needed its own post.
Some of the personality clashes and difficulties come to a head at the radio station where you are expecting a knock-down-drag-out fight, and then a message comes in, and everything stops. Martin Luther King Jr. had just been assassinated.
The movie does cover how it affected the city, and that is history, but what struck most was those individual reactions, as they were caught so completely off guard and devastated.
The assassination was also treated in a play I saw recently, Who I Am by Shalanda Sims:
http://www.shalandasims.com/
In the play, you hear part of King's speech from the March on Washington. It does not get to "I have a dream" - perhaps that would be too cliche - but the words are still familiar. Then shots ring out and the other actors scatter and King falls.
Obviously, that is not how it happened, but it brings home the tragedy in a way that a regular depiction could not. It would have been so easy to mess up that moment, and they handled it really well.
Seeing those two depictions close together made it more obvious how visceral my response was.
Dr. King has been dead for longer than I have been alive. I have never known him not dead. I remember starting to feel a heaviness coming over me when I was reading Ralph David Abernathy's biography, And the Walls Came Tumbling Down, as we were getting closer. I still felt emotion about the death, and it mattered, but there could not be any shock.
And then there was. That is the magic of film and theater, that something so familiar can become new and feel different.
With Eve's Bayou, Lemmons reminded me how beautiful film could be, in conjunction with Julie Dash and Daughters of the Dust. With Talk To Me - in conjunction with Sims and Who I Am, I have been reminded how transforming film can be.
That is pretty cool.
Related posts:
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/03/director-spotlight-kasi-lemmons.html
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2019/08/watching-movies.html
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/02/black-history-month-2019-and-2020.html
March 4, 2020
Director Spotlight: KASI LEMMONS
Had already seen: none
Watched for this: Eve's Bayou (1997), The Caveman's Valentine (2001), Talk to Me (2007), Black Nativity (2013)
Have not seen:Dr. Hugo (short, 1996), two episodes of television, and Harriet (2019)
I really liked Lemmons' work for the most part. Even when I had more mixed feelings about it, I had empathy.
I have exclaimed about Eve's Bayou already: https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2019/08/watching-movies.html
Since writing that, I realized that one reason it is easy to miss how beautifully everything is set up visually before the end is that you are following a story with a pretty clear plot. The other film in that post, Daughters of the Dust, had images were set up to be striking more than it had moments to clarify what was going in. In that way, it may make more sense to compare Julie Dash to Barry Jenkins, at least for that film. (We will get there.)
There were still some unusual touches in Eve's Bayou, used as ways of treating visions, curses, and fate. Those may have made Lemmons a good choice for The Caveman's Valentine, where it was necessary to give a way of understanding and sympathizing with paranoid schizophrenia.
I am still not sure if that was a good portrayal, at least in terms of portraying schizophrenia realistically. For almost twenty years ago it was probably pretty reasonable. It was inventive and gripping and sometimes very off-putting, but it would have to be. There were touches that reminded me so much of people I have seen on the street. I think it was mostly effective, and it does make me curious about the book.
Black Nativity was the messiest, but it was trying to do a lot. Maybe it was too much.
One goal was to honor the tradition of the play by Langston Hughes. Play might not even be the right word for his Black Nativity; it might work better to call it an African-themed Christmas pageant. The film could have simply filmed that, but the music and the energy is important, and doesn't always transmit. In many areas it is a community tradition, where the wise men might be prominent community members, and the audience might recognize other members of the cast from being local.
To get more of that feeling, the movie creates characters with their own plot lines and problems, and includes a dream sequence to bring home that point more. In addition, for all of those characters, there are downright Dickensian (so still very Christmas appropriate) connections and coincidences, that also represent problems and schisms within the Black community.
That is a lot to fit in, so that is how it gets a little messy and sometimes loses cohesion, which is noticeable. I can't criticize that too much, because I want the mega-happy ending, for those individuals and for the community. I want everyone who choose paternalism and respectability and those who choose materialism and gangster rap and especially everyone who doesn't get much of a choice to be reconciled and healed.
That is why I say I have empathy for the times when I have mixed feelings. The heart is in the right place, and when there are things that are distracting, that is a choice that was made for good reasons. I'm not going to be cynical about that.
So, you may notice issues with The Caveman's Valentine and Black Nativity, and that is fair but does not negate the good in those movies. Black Nativity is the weakest, but it still has value. It could be a reasonable Christmas tradition, though if the Langston Hughes version happened more, that could be even better.
Eve's Bayou and Talk to Me are really gripping films. That is a combination of story, cast, and directing, where everything works together well.
I am going to write some more about Talk to Me in another post, and compare part of it to a completely different thing. Let me just say now, though, that it was a really good movie.
Watched for this: Eve's Bayou (1997), The Caveman's Valentine (2001), Talk to Me (2007), Black Nativity (2013)
Have not seen:Dr. Hugo (short, 1996), two episodes of television, and Harriet (2019)
I really liked Lemmons' work for the most part. Even when I had more mixed feelings about it, I had empathy.
I have exclaimed about Eve's Bayou already: https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2019/08/watching-movies.html
Since writing that, I realized that one reason it is easy to miss how beautifully everything is set up visually before the end is that you are following a story with a pretty clear plot. The other film in that post, Daughters of the Dust, had images were set up to be striking more than it had moments to clarify what was going in. In that way, it may make more sense to compare Julie Dash to Barry Jenkins, at least for that film. (We will get there.)
There were still some unusual touches in Eve's Bayou, used as ways of treating visions, curses, and fate. Those may have made Lemmons a good choice for The Caveman's Valentine, where it was necessary to give a way of understanding and sympathizing with paranoid schizophrenia.
I am still not sure if that was a good portrayal, at least in terms of portraying schizophrenia realistically. For almost twenty years ago it was probably pretty reasonable. It was inventive and gripping and sometimes very off-putting, but it would have to be. There were touches that reminded me so much of people I have seen on the street. I think it was mostly effective, and it does make me curious about the book.
Black Nativity was the messiest, but it was trying to do a lot. Maybe it was too much.
One goal was to honor the tradition of the play by Langston Hughes. Play might not even be the right word for his Black Nativity; it might work better to call it an African-themed Christmas pageant. The film could have simply filmed that, but the music and the energy is important, and doesn't always transmit. In many areas it is a community tradition, where the wise men might be prominent community members, and the audience might recognize other members of the cast from being local.
To get more of that feeling, the movie creates characters with their own plot lines and problems, and includes a dream sequence to bring home that point more. In addition, for all of those characters, there are downright Dickensian (so still very Christmas appropriate) connections and coincidences, that also represent problems and schisms within the Black community.
That is a lot to fit in, so that is how it gets a little messy and sometimes loses cohesion, which is noticeable. I can't criticize that too much, because I want the mega-happy ending, for those individuals and for the community. I want everyone who choose paternalism and respectability and those who choose materialism and gangster rap and especially everyone who doesn't get much of a choice to be reconciled and healed.
That is why I say I have empathy for the times when I have mixed feelings. The heart is in the right place, and when there are things that are distracting, that is a choice that was made for good reasons. I'm not going to be cynical about that.
So, you may notice issues with The Caveman's Valentine and Black Nativity, and that is fair but does not negate the good in those movies. Black Nativity is the weakest, but it still has value. It could be a reasonable Christmas tradition, though if the Langston Hughes version happened more, that could be even better.
Eve's Bayou and Talk to Me are really gripping films. That is a combination of story, cast, and directing, where everything works together well.
I am going to write some more about Talk to Me in another post, and compare part of it to a completely different thing. Let me just say now, though, that it was a really good movie.
March 3, 2020
Director spotlight: BARRY JENKINS
Had already seen: none
Watched for this: Moonlight (2016), If Beale Street Could Talk (2018), Tall Enough (Short, 2009)
Have not seen: several shorts and television episodes, as well as one film I did not know about, Medicine for Melancholy
There is a way in which it feels right to pair Jenkins with Coogler. Their career timelines are roughly parallel, even though they come from opposite coasts.
Their styles are quite different. Coogler was consistently entertaining; Jenkins requires more work.
His films move slowly, perhaps a better fit for the art house than the cineplex. I would almost say the right comparison is Terrence Malick, but when I watched a Malick film, I just kept waiting for things to happen, and later when I remembered it, still wondered why you would intentionally make a film that slow and irritating. It is not like that watching Jenkins.
First of all, things do happen, sometimes shockingly. More than that, though, there are always layers of meaning that come back to you later. Oh, that was because of this. Of course it would have meant that.
The situations that the characters have to deal with involve great wrongs and heartbreak; that can't be avoided. Signs of hope still appear, and when they do they are because of love and human kindness.
Moonlight was the most interesting for that. Structured in three acts, each act has the main character (Chiron) at a different age, played by a different actor, and is titled with a different name that the character is going or has gone by (so not always Chiron but I will refer to him as that for consistency). Early on, Juan (Mahershala Ali in an Oscar-winning performance) tells Chiron that you can't let other people decide who you are. Chiron is called "Little" at the time, and picked on for that, and called another slur that you don't even hear him say, even though you know what it is.
That leads to one of the most frustrating things about the film. Spoilers follow, but they aren't major spoilers for a little while longer, so I will put another notice there.
It feels like all I had heard before seeing the film was about gay sex, and that is what I was asked about after I saw it. That should not have been that big of a deal.
The scene was short, and less graphic than the sex scene in Say Anything, a classic teen film from 1989. It was less graphic than a scene in a PG-13 film I saw last week.
It's not that I can't believe that people got hung up on that; I am familiar with people. I am disturbed at how much was missed by focusing on that.
It is a huge thing that the brief act there was the only intimacy that Chiron had ever experienced. It is a big deal to see how Chiron chooses to embrace masculinity and what he thinks that means, and what life that leads him too. It is tragic.
That tragedy is not separate from a world where people see a nuanced portrayal of how childhood conditions influence adulthood and come away thinking "gay sex".
Here are the things that really stayed with me, and thus the real spoilers.
One really powerful thing for me happened after a confrontation between Chiron's mother and Juan. Juan berates her for her neglect and drug use and she counters that his drug dealing enables her. After that you do not see Juan again. It is not that Chiron never saw Juan again, but the audience does not see it, and that stark cutoff that is felt. Despite all the encouragement and the food and the safe bed when needed, Juan is a part of the bad conditions that hurt Chiron. That limits how much of a positive influence he can be.
It is easy to believe that Juan would never tell Chiron to attack his bully (that was a shocking moment), or want him to become a really pumped drug dealer, but those things happen and by his own life choices Juan has no ability to prevent it.
I also keep coming back to two scenes between Chiron and his mother Paula. In one, she is happy to see him when he arrives home from school and speaks affectionately. He is so shocked, and vulnerably hopeful, but she is really hoping for some cash off of him in pursuit of her next high. (Also, I think she had locked herself out.) I hurt for him, to want that love so badly, and to not be able to get it. That is why the other scene keeps coming back, when she apologizes for not loving him when he needed it.
If I say it was a powerful scene, that sounds like it was a moment of great reconciliation and catharsis. It was more sad. She apologizes, she would like to do better, and he does not reject the apology, but can it be enough? What does enough look like, after all that has happened?
I don't even know, but I want that child to be loved and to feel loved. I want that teenager to be loved and feel loved. Does that mean I want that drug dealer to be loved and to feel it? He needed it more then, or at least maybe he deserved it more, but if he had gotten the love then... and that's what lingers. Sadness, and compassion, and still some hope.
Watched for this: Moonlight (2016), If Beale Street Could Talk (2018), Tall Enough (Short, 2009)
Have not seen: several shorts and television episodes, as well as one film I did not know about, Medicine for Melancholy
There is a way in which it feels right to pair Jenkins with Coogler. Their career timelines are roughly parallel, even though they come from opposite coasts.
Their styles are quite different. Coogler was consistently entertaining; Jenkins requires more work.
His films move slowly, perhaps a better fit for the art house than the cineplex. I would almost say the right comparison is Terrence Malick, but when I watched a Malick film, I just kept waiting for things to happen, and later when I remembered it, still wondered why you would intentionally make a film that slow and irritating. It is not like that watching Jenkins.
First of all, things do happen, sometimes shockingly. More than that, though, there are always layers of meaning that come back to you later. Oh, that was because of this. Of course it would have meant that.
The situations that the characters have to deal with involve great wrongs and heartbreak; that can't be avoided. Signs of hope still appear, and when they do they are because of love and human kindness.
Moonlight was the most interesting for that. Structured in three acts, each act has the main character (Chiron) at a different age, played by a different actor, and is titled with a different name that the character is going or has gone by (so not always Chiron but I will refer to him as that for consistency). Early on, Juan (Mahershala Ali in an Oscar-winning performance) tells Chiron that you can't let other people decide who you are. Chiron is called "Little" at the time, and picked on for that, and called another slur that you don't even hear him say, even though you know what it is.
That leads to one of the most frustrating things about the film. Spoilers follow, but they aren't major spoilers for a little while longer, so I will put another notice there.
It feels like all I had heard before seeing the film was about gay sex, and that is what I was asked about after I saw it. That should not have been that big of a deal.
The scene was short, and less graphic than the sex scene in Say Anything, a classic teen film from 1989. It was less graphic than a scene in a PG-13 film I saw last week.
It's not that I can't believe that people got hung up on that; I am familiar with people. I am disturbed at how much was missed by focusing on that.
It is a huge thing that the brief act there was the only intimacy that Chiron had ever experienced. It is a big deal to see how Chiron chooses to embrace masculinity and what he thinks that means, and what life that leads him too. It is tragic.
That tragedy is not separate from a world where people see a nuanced portrayal of how childhood conditions influence adulthood and come away thinking "gay sex".
Here are the things that really stayed with me, and thus the real spoilers.
One really powerful thing for me happened after a confrontation between Chiron's mother and Juan. Juan berates her for her neglect and drug use and she counters that his drug dealing enables her. After that you do not see Juan again. It is not that Chiron never saw Juan again, but the audience does not see it, and that stark cutoff that is felt. Despite all the encouragement and the food and the safe bed when needed, Juan is a part of the bad conditions that hurt Chiron. That limits how much of a positive influence he can be.
It is easy to believe that Juan would never tell Chiron to attack his bully (that was a shocking moment), or want him to become a really pumped drug dealer, but those things happen and by his own life choices Juan has no ability to prevent it.
I also keep coming back to two scenes between Chiron and his mother Paula. In one, she is happy to see him when he arrives home from school and speaks affectionately. He is so shocked, and vulnerably hopeful, but she is really hoping for some cash off of him in pursuit of her next high. (Also, I think she had locked herself out.) I hurt for him, to want that love so badly, and to not be able to get it. That is why the other scene keeps coming back, when she apologizes for not loving him when he needed it.
If I say it was a powerful scene, that sounds like it was a moment of great reconciliation and catharsis. It was more sad. She apologizes, she would like to do better, and he does not reject the apology, but can it be enough? What does enough look like, after all that has happened?
I don't even know, but I want that child to be loved and to feel loved. I want that teenager to be loved and feel loved. Does that mean I want that drug dealer to be loved and to feel it? He needed it more then, or at least maybe he deserved it more, but if he had gotten the love then... and that's what lingers. Sadness, and compassion, and still some hope.
March 2, 2020
Director spotlight: RYAN COOGLER
Had already seen: Black Panther (2018)
Watched for this: Fruitvale Station (2013), Creed (2015), Locks (short, 2009)
Have not seen: Shorts Fig (2010) and The Sculptor (2011)
Coogler has become one of my favorite directors.
Of course I had already seen Black Panther and written about it in terms of its success as a comic book adaptation, celebration of African culture, and political commentary. I also had some interest in watching Fruitvale Station and would have probably gotten there eventually. But without this, there was no way I was ever going to see Creed.
I have never seen any of the other films in the Rocky franchise, nor have I wanted to. I don't like boxing. A lot of people praise Rocky itself, but indicate that the films go downhill after that. I felt no need.
I really liked Creed.
I may not have seen any of the previous films, but they play enough of a role in pop culture that everyone knows things about them. I appreciated the way the callbacks to the film managed to be original.
It is pretty well known that Rocky's eye got all swollen in the first film, and they had to cut it with a razor. Cringe! Creed started having eye problems in his big fight... uh oh, where is this going? Not there, but they still did have a vision problem and had a creative way of solving it. Creed's training montage reminds you of Rocky's, but it has its own twists.
It is impressive that he has done so well - twice - building on an existing property, as well as adapting something from life. It is more impressive how different each film feels, as well as the different scales. Fruitvale Station is a fairly intimate film and set in Oakland, Coogler's home turf; you would not necessarily guess that he could do so well at creating Wakanda.
He also maintained a good balance of interest and dread with Fruitvale Station, despite knowing the conclusion. When that fatal shot is fired, it is still a shock.
Creed feels sporty; the introductions for the individual boxers helps with that. There is also a deeper theme of motivation and compulsion. All three main characters have things that they need to do and good reasons not to do them, but they still have to. It doesn't overshadow the main arc, but it is emotionally compelling.
In retrospect, seeing the previous films makes Black Panther more impressive, because it is such an increase in scale, but Coogler demonstrated a sure hand. He gets storytelling. That he also has writing credits on each film may give an indication of how he makes things come out right, but it is no guarantee. Having watched his earliest short now, yes, film school has made him better at running things smoothly and making them look good, but his sense of story and empathy for the characters has been there.
There are lots of different ways to make movies and I can appreciate a lot of them. Coming from this, though, I will tend to trust Coogler to take good material and then do good things with it.
I look forward to seeing what he does next.
Watched for this: Fruitvale Station (2013), Creed (2015), Locks (short, 2009)
Have not seen: Shorts Fig (2010) and The Sculptor (2011)
Coogler has become one of my favorite directors.
Of course I had already seen Black Panther and written about it in terms of its success as a comic book adaptation, celebration of African culture, and political commentary. I also had some interest in watching Fruitvale Station and would have probably gotten there eventually. But without this, there was no way I was ever going to see Creed.
I have never seen any of the other films in the Rocky franchise, nor have I wanted to. I don't like boxing. A lot of people praise Rocky itself, but indicate that the films go downhill after that. I felt no need.
I really liked Creed.
I may not have seen any of the previous films, but they play enough of a role in pop culture that everyone knows things about them. I appreciated the way the callbacks to the film managed to be original.
It is pretty well known that Rocky's eye got all swollen in the first film, and they had to cut it with a razor. Cringe! Creed started having eye problems in his big fight... uh oh, where is this going? Not there, but they still did have a vision problem and had a creative way of solving it. Creed's training montage reminds you of Rocky's, but it has its own twists.
It is impressive that he has done so well - twice - building on an existing property, as well as adapting something from life. It is more impressive how different each film feels, as well as the different scales. Fruitvale Station is a fairly intimate film and set in Oakland, Coogler's home turf; you would not necessarily guess that he could do so well at creating Wakanda.
He also maintained a good balance of interest and dread with Fruitvale Station, despite knowing the conclusion. When that fatal shot is fired, it is still a shock.
Creed feels sporty; the introductions for the individual boxers helps with that. There is also a deeper theme of motivation and compulsion. All three main characters have things that they need to do and good reasons not to do them, but they still have to. It doesn't overshadow the main arc, but it is emotionally compelling.
In retrospect, seeing the previous films makes Black Panther more impressive, because it is such an increase in scale, but Coogler demonstrated a sure hand. He gets storytelling. That he also has writing credits on each film may give an indication of how he makes things come out right, but it is no guarantee. Having watched his earliest short now, yes, film school has made him better at running things smoothly and making them look good, but his sense of story and empathy for the characters has been there.
There are lots of different ways to make movies and I can appreciate a lot of them. Coming from this, though, I will tend to trust Coogler to take good material and then do good things with it.
I look forward to seeing what he does next.
February 28, 2020
Album Review: Watching a Garden Die by Berwanger
Released last year, Berwanger's fourth album, Watching a Garden Die, stands out in its maturity. There is still rock you can move to, especially "Bad Vibrations". I like the riffs on "Friday Night".
Beyond that, there are deeper themes that I keep going back to because they require more thought.
That's not at the expense of the music; the instruments on "The Business of Living" are gorgeous. Still, an album that has a song, "When I Was Young" has some thoughts about not being young, and change and mortality.
So I think what I like best about the album as a whole is the way it ends.
Honestly, the album feels like it starts abruptly with "Long Way Down", as if there is no lead-in and you are just there, all at once. Then you are on that journey, and it gets melancholy. Maybe the thoughts that come with that are overwhelming. Maybe you with you could stop those thoughts, but worry about what else you would lose.
With all of that, it is ultimately encouraging. "I Keep Telling Myself" is sweetly reassuring, and the final admonishment is "Remain Untamed". Even in the midst of setbacks, there is learning and an enduring you.
I recently read an article about what Tom Petty might have written next if he had lived, and the loss of not getting that album contemplating the end of life. We may not have enough great albums about death, but we do have albums at various stages of life, and bands that think and grow. That is pretty wonderful too.
Band links:
https://www.facebook.com/Berwangermusic
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_QXf9nN6oSOoL351Jyv7ZQ
https://twitter.com/joshuaberwanger
Previously reviewed:
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2015/09/concert-review-josh-berwanger-band.html
Interview with Josh Berwanger:
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/02/interview-5-questions-with-josh.html
Beyond that, there are deeper themes that I keep going back to because they require more thought.
That's not at the expense of the music; the instruments on "The Business of Living" are gorgeous. Still, an album that has a song, "When I Was Young" has some thoughts about not being young, and change and mortality.
So I think what I like best about the album as a whole is the way it ends.
Honestly, the album feels like it starts abruptly with "Long Way Down", as if there is no lead-in and you are just there, all at once. Then you are on that journey, and it gets melancholy. Maybe the thoughts that come with that are overwhelming. Maybe you with you could stop those thoughts, but worry about what else you would lose.
With all of that, it is ultimately encouraging. "I Keep Telling Myself" is sweetly reassuring, and the final admonishment is "Remain Untamed". Even in the midst of setbacks, there is learning and an enduring you.
I recently read an article about what Tom Petty might have written next if he had lived, and the loss of not getting that album contemplating the end of life. We may not have enough great albums about death, but we do have albums at various stages of life, and bands that think and grow. That is pretty wonderful too.
Band links:
https://www.facebook.com/Berwangermusic
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_QXf9nN6oSOoL351Jyv7ZQ
https://twitter.com/joshuaberwanger
Previously reviewed:
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2015/09/concert-review-josh-berwanger-band.html
Interview with Josh Berwanger:
https://sporkful.blogspot.com/2020/02/interview-5-questions-with-josh.html
February 27, 2020
Interview: 5 questions with JOSH BERWANGER
Josh Berwanger has been rocking for twenty years, playing in The Anniversary, The Only Children, and now in Berwanger. We will be reviewing Berwanger's latest album, Watching A Garden Die, tomorrow, but for now here are five questions that Josh answered for me via e-mail.
When asked, I say the best concert I ever went to was Berwanger, The Hotelier and The Get Up Kids at the Hawthorne Theater in Portland, September 2015 . That was where I first saw you. To me, it felt like each act built on each other, and it brought the audience and the bands together. What makes a great show for you, and which ones stand out in your mind?
I think shows that are diverse in music but also gel with each other are the best. A few that come to the top of my mind that were life changing would be James Brown, I saw the Ramones 3 times, Beastie Boys, Ozzy, Guns n' Roses, the Dead Milkmen, who were one of the first bands I saw at a club, I think I was a sophomore in High School, definitely got in trouble that night for being out way too late.
Five years and three albums later, what has changed for you and what remains the same?
I try to keep on a path and not stray from it. Which means continuing to evolve and stay in touch with new music. I've definitely been in the boat of "why is this band/music popular" but the only thing that does is make me doubt what I'm doing. Embracing new music and focusing on creating my own new music is what I focus on. One could go on all day about what's changed in the music industry but I think that is somewhat focusing on negatives because we can always say "oh, it was so much better back in the day..."
I think every Berwanger album title and cover could work for a horror movie, but Watching A Garden Die seems like more of an existential horror. What does the album mean to you?
I've been very fortunate to work with a lot of great artists like Jay Shaw, Aaron Moreno and Mike Mitchell who did Watching A Garden Die. WAGD to me is a bit out of my comfort zone with a few songs being more personal then I tend to write. I tell myself it's a sad album that has a hopeful meaning behind it, but I might be lying to myself about that.
On the topic of horror, could you tell us a little about your relationship with the movie Troll 2?
Troll 2 is just a classic piece of cinema, if a person hasn't seen it I recommend them watching the documentary on it first called Best Worst Movie. The doc title alone gives you a little insight what you are getting into.
What are your hopes for the next five years?
I'm currently working on a new project with Carly Gwin on lead vocals along with my guitarist Ricky Salthouse and Jarod Evans (he produced my album The Star Invaders). I'm really excited about this and will be focusing mainly on that in this next year. I have two albums of Berwanger material written I just need to start recording it. I'd like to refer to my hopes more as my determination. So in the next 5 years I'm determined to get this new project off that ground and work to make it as successful as can be.
Berwanger will be playing with Soul Asylum and Local H tomorrow night at the Madrid Theater in Kansas City, Missouri.
https://www.bandsintown.com/e/1019500312-berwanger-at-madrid-theatre
When asked, I say the best concert I ever went to was Berwanger, The Hotelier and The Get Up Kids at the Hawthorne Theater in Portland, September 2015 . That was where I first saw you. To me, it felt like each act built on each other, and it brought the audience and the bands together. What makes a great show for you, and which ones stand out in your mind?
I think shows that are diverse in music but also gel with each other are the best. A few that come to the top of my mind that were life changing would be James Brown, I saw the Ramones 3 times, Beastie Boys, Ozzy, Guns n' Roses, the Dead Milkmen, who were one of the first bands I saw at a club, I think I was a sophomore in High School, definitely got in trouble that night for being out way too late.
Five years and three albums later, what has changed for you and what remains the same?
I try to keep on a path and not stray from it. Which means continuing to evolve and stay in touch with new music. I've definitely been in the boat of "why is this band/music popular" but the only thing that does is make me doubt what I'm doing. Embracing new music and focusing on creating my own new music is what I focus on. One could go on all day about what's changed in the music industry but I think that is somewhat focusing on negatives because we can always say "oh, it was so much better back in the day..."
I think every Berwanger album title and cover could work for a horror movie, but Watching A Garden Die seems like more of an existential horror. What does the album mean to you?
I've been very fortunate to work with a lot of great artists like Jay Shaw, Aaron Moreno and Mike Mitchell who did Watching A Garden Die. WAGD to me is a bit out of my comfort zone with a few songs being more personal then I tend to write. I tell myself it's a sad album that has a hopeful meaning behind it, but I might be lying to myself about that.
On the topic of horror, could you tell us a little about your relationship with the movie Troll 2?
Troll 2 is just a classic piece of cinema, if a person hasn't seen it I recommend them watching the documentary on it first called Best Worst Movie. The doc title alone gives you a little insight what you are getting into.
What are your hopes for the next five years?
I'm currently working on a new project with Carly Gwin on lead vocals along with my guitarist Ricky Salthouse and Jarod Evans (he produced my album The Star Invaders). I'm really excited about this and will be focusing mainly on that in this next year. I have two albums of Berwanger material written I just need to start recording it. I'd like to refer to my hopes more as my determination. So in the next 5 years I'm determined to get this new project off that ground and work to make it as successful as can be.
Berwanger will be playing with Soul Asylum and Local H tomorrow night at the Madrid Theater in Kansas City, Missouri.
https://www.bandsintown.com/e/1019500312-berwanger-at-madrid-theatre
February 26, 2020
Black History Month 2019 Overview: Black Directors
I have recently started doing my blog composition at night because I can't take that amount of time away from my mother during the day. Last night I wrote all about Denzel Washington and Fences, and realized that I should have watched the other movies he directed, and no other director felt right to start, partly because I want to group some together, and partly because a few still aren't done. (Also, I am me, but that part can't be helped.)
Clearly what is needed is an overview; then we can get down to individuals.
Here is the overview in no particular order.
Julie Dash
Watched Daughters of the Dust (1991) and The Rosa Parks Story (2002).
Amma Assante
Watched Belle (2013). Had already seen A United Kingdom (2016).
Ava Duvernay
Watched 13th (2016). Had already seen Selma (2014) and A Wrinkle in Time (2018). Still waiting on When They See Us.
Jordan Peele
Watched Get Out (2017) and Us (2019), plus seasons 1-3 of Key & Peele.
Kasi Lemmons
Watched Eve's Bayou (1997), Talk To Me (2007), and Black Nativity (2012). The Caveman's Valentine is waiting on my DVR.
Denzel Washington
Watched Fences (2016). Just requested Antwone Fisher and The Great Debaters from the library.
Ryan Coogler
Watched Fruitvale Station (2013) and Creed (2015). Had already seen Black Panther (2018).
Barry Jenkins
Watched Moonlight (2016) and If Beale Street Could Talk (2018).
John Singleton
Watched Boyz N The Hood (1991), Shaft (2000), and Rosewood (1997). I have Poetic Justice set to record on March 6th.
Robert Townsend
Watched Eddie Murphy: Raw (1987), The Five Heartbeats (1989), B*A*P*S (1997), and The Hollywood Shuffle (1987).
There were also some one-offs that were related. For example, seeing Eddie Murphy do comedy inspired me to watch Pryor: Here and Now (directed by Richard Pryor, 1983) and The Original Kings of Comedy (directed by Spike Lee, 2000), but I really want to compare that to Nanette, something more modern and more female.
I did watch How Stella Got Her Groove Back (1998), directed by Kevin Rodney Sullivan, and I thought about watching more of his films, but in terms of what I could find and what I was interested in watching, it just didn't work out.
Access was an issue. It is amazing how many pay streaming services there are now, with unique content that you can't get in other places. A lot of that can't be helped, but I am going to sign up for the free trial month of Netflix soon and go through that list of things I have been waiting to see.
Anyway, when I start writing about these next week, this is what I am working with.
Other one-offs during the time period include seeing Little (2019), directed by Tina Gordon, and I am going to see The Photograph tonight, directed by Stella Meghie.
Clearly what is needed is an overview; then we can get down to individuals.
Here is the overview in no particular order.
Julie Dash
Watched Daughters of the Dust (1991) and The Rosa Parks Story (2002).
Amma Assante
Watched Belle (2013). Had already seen A United Kingdom (2016).
Ava Duvernay
Watched 13th (2016). Had already seen Selma (2014) and A Wrinkle in Time (2018). Still waiting on When They See Us.
Jordan Peele
Watched Get Out (2017) and Us (2019), plus seasons 1-3 of Key & Peele.
Kasi Lemmons
Watched Eve's Bayou (1997), Talk To Me (2007), and Black Nativity (2012). The Caveman's Valentine is waiting on my DVR.
Denzel Washington
Watched Fences (2016). Just requested Antwone Fisher and The Great Debaters from the library.
Ryan Coogler
Watched Fruitvale Station (2013) and Creed (2015). Had already seen Black Panther (2018).
Barry Jenkins
Watched Moonlight (2016) and If Beale Street Could Talk (2018).
John Singleton
Watched Boyz N The Hood (1991), Shaft (2000), and Rosewood (1997). I have Poetic Justice set to record on March 6th.
Robert Townsend
Watched Eddie Murphy: Raw (1987), The Five Heartbeats (1989), B*A*P*S (1997), and The Hollywood Shuffle (1987).
There were also some one-offs that were related. For example, seeing Eddie Murphy do comedy inspired me to watch Pryor: Here and Now (directed by Richard Pryor, 1983) and The Original Kings of Comedy (directed by Spike Lee, 2000), but I really want to compare that to Nanette, something more modern and more female.
I did watch How Stella Got Her Groove Back (1998), directed by Kevin Rodney Sullivan, and I thought about watching more of his films, but in terms of what I could find and what I was interested in watching, it just didn't work out.
Access was an issue. It is amazing how many pay streaming services there are now, with unique content that you can't get in other places. A lot of that can't be helped, but I am going to sign up for the free trial month of Netflix soon and go through that list of things I have been waiting to see.
Anyway, when I start writing about these next week, this is what I am working with.
Other one-offs during the time period include seeing Little (2019), directed by Tina Gordon, and I am going to see The Photograph tonight, directed by Stella Meghie.
