AALBC.com’s Founder’s Take on For Colored Girls

I do not think For Colored Girls was a male bashing film. If anything, women could make a much better case for being offended. But I won’t presume to speak for the Sisters in this case — as very few I spoken with seem to mind.

My biggest complaint about the flick was that Ntozake’s poetry seems to have been shoehorned into the film. The movie seemed disjointed during the transition from the dialog to the soliloquies. If you were unfamiliar with the original play, you would have asked yourself, “what the heck is this character talking about” at least until you became accustomed to the technique.  Read the rest of my review: http://aalbc.it/FCGimho


Troy D. Johnson is the President, founder and webmaster of AALBC.com, LLC (The African American Literature Book Club). Launched in March of 1998, AALBC.com has grown to become the largest and most frequently visited website dedicated to books and films by and about people of African descent.

2 thoughts on “AALBC.com’s Founder’s Take on For Colored Girls

  • November 20, 2010 at 7:55 pm

    I’ve read the book, attended the play and now have watched the movie.

    In my opinion, there wasn’t something wrong with the story more than there was something wrong with how Tyler Perry brought it to life. The original work emerged during the feminist movement where the theme of the day was RESISTANCE at all cost. Resistance to practically everything male dominated, ordained and manufactured. . . . those women would not be backing down in the least to their circumstances (sometimes to their own detriment).

    For those of you that keep arguing that Tyler Perry is just resurrecting a story from the past, that’s where you’re wrong. This is a period piece and should have been written as such because that’s where the comparisons end. Yes some of the themes transcend time, but when you use 1960-70’s (feminist) ideology with 2010 values and vice versa something has to give.

    In 2010, enlightened men and women are well aware that they contribute to their own circumstances with their bad choices and poor behavior. If women wanted this to be a movie JUST about women, men should have been left out of the script. There was enough room for interpretation in the original work to accomplish that.

    Did we need a scene of the little girl losing her virginity in the back of a car to understand that it happened? NO. Did we see the man that Kerry Washington caught the STD from to make her sterile? NO. Did we see the man who mentally abused Goldberg and molested Newton? NO, but we did experience his presence and the symptoms of his abuse as if he were in the room. A creative story teller could have brought all these stories to life and kept the emphasis where it belonged on women healing themselves.

    Instead, in another turn away from the original work, the men became part of the story itself. Once that happened, he might as well have assigned those brothers their own color designations and started viewing things from their perspective. If they’re indeed part of the story and the everyday woes of black women, then they MUST be part of the solution.

    However if you want to take it back to self healing, leave them out of the equation altogether, we have enough movies that point the finger of guilt at one another without offering any real solutions. What were the solutions for this movie? Put him in jail, don’t take him back, if you emasculate him check your HIV status, don’t invite him up to your apartment before asking his views on Mike Tyson v. Desiree Washington, if you’re involved with a good man, its okay to wait until after you’ve married to let him know you’re sterile because of a STD because he’ll forgive you and . . . . . . . and most importantly no matter how bad it gets, suicide is a no no!

  • November 22, 2010 at 5:29 pm

    Michael, thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts here. They were thought provoking and interesting.

    Your comment; “…but when you use 1960-70’s (feminist) ideology with 2010 values and vice versa…” say a lot. I felt if the film was set in the 70’s it may have worked better — otherwise if it was going to be set in present day the entire work would be to be re-worked. Doing the former would have hurt attendance and the later would have increased the budget.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *