Despite some of the concerns expressed in Civilian Voices about Save the Last Dance’s portrayal of African Americans, it topped the weekend with a whopping $20 million plus. Never underestimate the spending power of the teen market. Not faring as well was Double Take. After reading the comments posted in the weekend edition of this column, most of you probably weren’t surprised that the film failed to find an audience. The trailers seemed to do little more than make people, and I quote, "cringe." Vincent starts off today’s column with his contribution to our discussion of African Americans in the movies...

"First let me say that although I agree with most of the comments about the portrayal of African Americans in the movies, the term ‘black culture’ frequently pops up in these discussions, and I feel it is a bit of a misnomer. Culture is learned, not acquired by the colour (spelling note: I’m a Canadian) of one’s skin. My ‘culture’ as a young black male who grew up in small-town Canada is very different from that of a black teen growing up in the Bronx, or even parts of Canadian urban centers like Toronto. If I had been raised in Nepal or Costa Rica, my culture could have been very different although my skin colour would be the same. As an example, I point to some of the white students I went to high school with who embraced American rap culture (surprise: I’m black and I don’t listen to rap). It’s been said by some that those Eminem-lookalikes were ‘blacker’ than me. I don’t speak in Ebonics or own a gun, so somehow I’m not very black. Doesn’t that smack of racism? So, do you see my point about ‘black culture’? I think it’s a very narrow and limiting view. Do white people from the hills of Tennessee share the same culture as white people in New Canaan, Connecticut? If there is no such thing as ‘white culture,’ then why are we so quick to adopt such a circumscribed definition of what it means to be black? I think the term itself aids in eternalizing a hackneyed conception of blacks by linking a few media-driven images to a false universality. Having said that, Hollywood has been only too willing to adopt and perpetuate these stereotypical views in its films. There are very few movies that are representative of my experiences as a young black man, and let me assure you that my friends and I are not simply rare genetic freaks. I’ve never been to jail or witnessed a drive-by shooting; my parents are still married; and my options for a successful life are not limited to basketball or the music industry. I think Robert Bartlett and Terrence Moore’s comments were dead on, and this discussion reminded me of the excellent film Eve’s Bayou from several years ago. It was such a refreshing experience, I think, because it wasn’t a film about black people. It was, for a change, a film about people who happened to be black. Something rarely seen in the movies today." -- Vincent

Absolutely terrific e-mail, Vincent. I couldn’t agree more with your comments about the term ‘black culture.’ It is very often used to describe the collective experiences of a people who may share nothing more than skin color. Hollywood is more than a little guilty of perpetuating stereotypes. The best way to let Hollywood know that this is not acceptable is with your wallet. Something moviegoers did this weekend by not showing up for Double Take.

Sandra B. looks at another way that African Americans are inaccurately portrayed on the big screen...and it starts with "s" and ends with "x"...

"Save the Last Dance probably sucks, but for me at least it has a Black man with a white woman. I want to see the sexual liberation of Black men on screen to be equal to white men who have bedded Black women on screen. Halle Berry and Kurt Russell in Executive Decision. Rae Dawn Chong with a white guy in almost any of her movies when she was making them (see American Flyers, Squeeze Play, Quest for Fire, and Choose Me). Angela Bassett in Strange Days with Ralph Fiennes and in Supernova for no good reason. Alfre Woodard in Miss Firecracker. Thandie Newton with Tom Cruise in Mission: Impossible 2 as well as in Flirting. Robin Givens in the film Exchange Student. Now Black men have been kept at bay in films like Drop Zone with Wesley Snipes, and Bad Boys with Will Smith and Martin Lawrence. In that film, they save a white girl’s life and nada. Pelican Brief with Denzel Washington and Julia Roberts -- can’t have Miss Julia with one them darkies. If it were a Black woman, they would’ve had sex -- off screen or on, but it would’ve happened. One of roughcut’s critics was disturbed by an interracial sex scene in the movie Traffic, where a big Black beds a white girl junkie. The scene disturbed him because white people might think it’s offensive. Well, let it be offensive then. I am long since tired of white supremacy being so overt on screen, where white women are goddesses and everyone else’s women are just up for grabs and that’s normal. In real life, white women screw Black men, and the country doesn’t fall. Seems the old white citizens’ council ghost writes a lot of movies in Hollywood." -- Sandra Berry

Why is Hollywood so shy about showing romantic relationships between black men and white women? Judging from the box-office success of Save the Last Dance, young people are certainly not offended by the idea of seeing this kind of interracial romance on screen. Do you think the success of this film will lead to, as Sandra B. put it, "the sexual liberation of Black men on screen"?

In the weekend column, I asked you to let me know who you feel had been robbed or stupidly rewarded by the Academy. With Oscar’s recent track record, this wasn’t a difficult question to answer. Dave Not Poland is the first to tackle the topic...

"The thing is, at least Marisa Tomei has done good work since her win. Just because she hasn’t been in any big movies doesn’t mean she hasn’t given any worthy performances. However, Mira Sorvino has done NOTHING. I don’t know if that came across properly. NOTHING. Not one thing. Not one performance in any movie that she has made since Mighty Aphrodite, with the possible exception of Beautiful Girls. Even then, hers was the weakest of the bunch. On top of this, the movies she chooses are crap. The Replacement Killers, At First Sight, Mimic. That is, and will be for some time, the most glaringly bad choice the Academy has made. Another is giving Roberto Benigni the Best Actor award for Life Is Beautiful. My feelings about the movie aside, at least Mira Sorvino played a character somewhat different (we hope) from herself. And you’re telling me that Benigni was better than Tom Hanks, Ian McKellan, Ed Norton, and Nick Nolte. By the by, Nolte deserved it the most. Sure, Roberto’s a funny guy, and we love watching him run and jump and laugh. It makes for good TV. And while we’re at it, Shakespeare in Love doesn’t get my wrath because it’s a wonderfully made and acted movie and I strongly support Gwyneth’s win, but the movie will never be remembered or looked upon with such regard as Saving Private Ryan, which clearly deserved it. Others are nominating The Cider House Rules and The Green Mile; two average at best films, for Best Picture. The year 1999 has been hailed, and rightly so, as one of the best years for movies in a while, but you wouldn’t know it by looking at that list of nominees. Of the five, The Insider was the best; followed by The Sixth Sense; American Beauty (while still good in parts and admirable for its message, one of the most obvious social commentary movies in a long time); Cider House Rules; and The Green Mile. In addition, Denzel Washington deserved the Best Actor award over Kevin Spacey. Also, Ed Harris deserved the award for Supporting Actor for Apollo 13 over Spacey for The Usual Suspects. Not that Spacey is not a great actor...he is, but Harris and Washington were, I feel, the best in those categories. Those are the most recent screw-ups. But I am a staunch supporter of the Oscars and get really angry when people suggest that they’re all rigged and that it’s all about getting ratings. The Oscars are all about celebrating movies and performances. But this year guys, get it right." --Dave Not Poland

In Ian O’s opinion, it’s all about Mr. Hanks...

"For me, there have been two great tragedies in recent Oscar history -- and both involve Tom Hanks. The first travesty was Hanks beating Liam Neeson for Best Actor for their performances in Philadelphia and Schindler’s List, respectively. This was Hollywood liberalism at its worst, awarding Hanks for taking on a ‘difficult role’ (for which he simply played himself anyway). First of all, it was Denzel Washington who provided the outstanding performance in that film. Secondly, Liam Neeson was magnificent in a supremely difficult role. He managed to take Schindler away from martyrization and make him beautifully human. The second was Forrest Gump winning anything in 1994. Not only was Pulp Fiction vastly superior on character, story, and direction (as much as I love Robert Zemeckis), but Gump’s horrifyingly conservative message should make all those who fought for change in the 1960s and 1970s shudder (and no, I was not around at that time). Gump’s central message was if you don’t change anything about yourself, then you can succeed in the world. Characters like Robin Wright Penn’s Jenny (who was unjustly ignored) open their minds to experimentation and new possibilities, and they get AIDS. This is not the type of film I would want to see win an industry award. And I am willing to take on anyone who claims that Shakespeare in Love was not justified in taking home its Best Picture over Saving Private Ryan." -- Ian O Sullivan

I’m with you, Ian. Shakespeare in Love is a perfect movie. Great script, great acting, great score, great production design, great everything. I’m not knocking Saving Private Ryan -- it is an important film. But was it perfect? No. Even though I think he gives a great performance in the movie, I distinctly remember musing "Wow, Matt Damon is doing a really great job with this monologue." I don’t think such things when I’m watching a perfect movie. Moving on, Johnjihochan has concerns that a certain summer popcorn movie will win the big one...

"Well, let’s see...2001: A Space Odyssey didn’t win, and neither did Citizen Kane for Best Picture, and those are two of the clearly greatest movies of all time. Sixth Sense was nominated last year, although ultimately, it was nothing more than another film with an incredible box-office draw for a summer scary movie. Hoop Dreams wasn’t nominated in the Best Documentary category, and I question that as well. And as far as this year is concerned, I’m shocked at the prospects Gladiator may have come Oscar time. I saw it several times myself. Watching it the second time, I realized how mediocre the script was and that the dialogue survived as credible in the film only through skillful actors. Direction was mediocre, the score was mediocre, and the artistry of the film submitted itself to drawn-out and sanguinary violent scenes that were there because...well...we are, after all, talking about a film that was intended as nothing more than a summer audience’s money-grossing piece of succulent candy." -- Johnjihochan

Once again, I side with a Civilian Voice. Gladiator is pretty entertaining and Russell Crowe and Joaquin Phoenix give great performances. But overall it is a pretty mediocre move. In a year as weak as this one, though, it just might make it to the final five. Sad, sad, sad.

Jay gets into the mix with his picks for the overlooked and the undeserving...

"I agree that Marisa Tomei’s Oscar win in 1992 was not a travesty. She’s an underrated actress who should also have been nominated for Unhook the Stars and Slums of Beverly Hills. But let’s face it, the Oscars, as fun as they are to debate, have about as much meaning as such high school awards as ‘Most Likely to Succeed’ and ‘Best Personality.’ The Academy is a clique whose opinion is colored by many factors, only one of which is quality. Anyone who always agrees with the Academy’s choices obviously doesn’t see many movies. Most years, my favorites don’t even get nominated, either because they’re ‘difficult’ or subtitled. The history of the awards is rife with undeserving winners and overlooked excellence. As much as I enjoyed Tomei in My Cousin Vinny, I would’ve given the trophy that year to Alfre Woodard for her un-nominated performance in Passion Fish. How did Don Ameche, charming as he was in Cocoon, defeat Klaus Maria Brandauer in Out of Africa? And does anyone who knows anything about acting really believe Dustin Hoffman’s performance in Rain Man is superior to Max Von Sydow’s in Pelle the Conqueror? And of course, there’s always the Academy’s sentimental tendency to give belated honors to actors whose best work was unrewarded in the past. Michael Caine, Sean Connery, and Paul Newman are the most notable examples. Critics’ groups and other organizations can sometimes remedy the most egregious oversights (in 1986, Bob Hoskin’s triumph in Mona Lisa garnered every available award -- except the Oscar). But it’s impossible to satisfy everyone. The recently announced Independent Spirit Award nominations feature a number of laudable choices, but why no Ed Harris, Jeff Bridges, Colin Farrell, Famke Janssen, etc.? Well, it’s simple, really. Not everyone can be nominated, and not everyone agrees on what constitutes excellence. Duh." -- Jay

And finally, I’d like to end the column with an e-mail that tackles a bunch of topics featured in recent editions of Civilian Voices. Iconoclast Matt covers the Golden Globes, AntiTrust, Pearl Harbor, and...boom mikes?...

"First, I have to agree with Beth A. about the Golden Globes. I have not read Peter Travers’s article in Rolling Stone yet, but the Hollywood Foreign Press Association really does play the popular card a little too often. I do like the fact that the films are nominated by category, but I can’t take an organization that awards Pia Zadora too seriously. The acceptance speeches, such as Hugh Grant for Four Weddings and a Funeral, are pretty fun, though. Come to think of it, what was nominated for a Golden Globe this year? The AntiTrust trailer? All I got out of it was a January release date. The commercials? All I got was no ‘legitimate’ pull quotes for its ads. I learned my lesson with January release dates way back in 1987 with a movie called Over the Top (I was fourteen at the time and didn’t know any better). I am not making that mistake again. Also, this is the third year in a row that MGM has dumped a film in January: At First Sight (which was pushed up from Valentine’s Day), Supernova (enough said -- has anybody actually seen this film?) and now this. At least when Tim Robbins makes a film of this caliber, he then turns around and makes something worthwhile. After all, Arlington Road, a film that I did enjoy, begat Cradle Will Rock, another film I really liked. I’m still waiting for him to make up for Nothing to Lose, though. The Pearl Harbor trailer does look pretty. But all it does is encourage me to go to the concession stand or use the bathroom. I’ve seen this trailer in front of everything since October or November, and trailer overkill is probably going to do me in for this one. I do like Randall Wallace though, so it might be a dollar-theater film for me. There hasn’t been a trailer that’s made me excited for a movie in a long time. It’s been three months since I first saw the trailer for Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. And I finally get to see that on Monday, which is also my birthday. Not a bad way to spend a birthday, huh? One final comment. Has anybody noticed an increasing number of boom mikes in their moviegoing experiences? I counted seven instances during You Can Count on Me and two in Vertical Limit. Or have I been patronizing theaters with lousy projectionists? Civilian Voices Rocks! -- Iconoclast Matt

Yes, Matt, Civilian Voices does rock. But only because you folks have been sending me such great e-mails. Keep ’em coming. Need a topic? How about this one -- Sean Penn recently said in a press conference for The Pledge that actors who make bad "commercial" movies to support their desire to appear in low-budget films never emerge from the former experience unchanged. Do you agree? When Michael Caine appears in Jaws 4, does he lose some of his credibility as an actor? When Tim Robbins does Nothing to Lose, does he make up for it by directing Dead Man Walking? Is the "one for them" and "one for me" mentality a good thing or a bad thing? Does another movie topic have you ranting or raving? Send me an e-mail, won’t you?

 

Send your submissions to civilianvoices@roughcut.com

No purchase necessary. Void where prohibited. Must be age 16 or older to submit a story. Stories will be edited for length and content by representatives of Roughcut. Not all stories will appear online. By submitting this story you agree that Roughcut has the perpetual right to use the submitted story, in any and all media, without limitation, as Roughcut may determine in its sole discretion. You also acknowledge that you will not receive any monetary compensation for the use, if any, of your story.