The Upside from Movies That Move We

[richardmurray]

 

 

MORE MOVIES THAT MOVE WE ON AALBC

https://aalbc.com/tc/search/?&q="movies that move we"&type=core_statuses_status&quick=1&search_and_or=or&sortby=relevancy

 

[Chevdove]

 

Sounds interesting. 

Hope to watch it sometime. 

 

 

[ProfD]

The Upside was a decent movie. Another chip in Kevin Hart's ascent to success in the entertainment business. 

[Pioneer1]

Well, when I saw that KEVIN HART was in it....I figured it would be some sort of low-esteem coonishness involved.

I haven't seen the movie but the synopsis is about some ex-con who gets out of jail and struggles to change his life around and -yada yada yada.......


Hmmm. 
I wonder who's playing the ex-con?



We've seen this shit I don't know how many times.

Just a re-enforcement of stereotypes.
The main theme is no matter how "good hearted" the Black character may be, he's still a crook and criminal and not to be trusted.
 

[richardmurray]

@Chevdove it is in the fiscally rich man meets the fiscally poor man mold. It is meant to be a feel good. I can tell you without unveiling the story that in the end, all the main characters and the subsequent characters are happy, deservedly.

@ProfD yeah, well it's a feel good film. It isn't mean tto show much hardship but really overcoming  with  a happy resolution for all

@Pioneer1 This film isn't a comedy. this is a feel good film. There are comical moments but even those are in an unfunny premise. 

Your wrong, the subtext of the film is how people going through different struggles can help each other. In the end of the film, Hart has reversed his fiscal level from the beginning of the film absent any illegal or criminal activity. 

Did you even see the review? 

[Pioneer1]

26 minutes ago, richardmurray said:

 

@Pioneer1 This film isn't a comedy. this is a feel good film. There are comical moments but even those are in an unfunny premise. 

Your wrong, the subtext of the film is how people going through different struggles can help each other. In the end of the film, Hart has reversed his fiscal level from the beginning of the film absent any illegal or criminal activity. 

Did you even see the review? 

So.....
The ex-con  WASN'T played by Kevin Hart?

It was played by a White man?
Or White woman?

Tell me where I was wrong.

 

[richardmurray]

@Pioneer1 I quote what you said that was wrong... in my opinion

Quote

Just a re-enforcement of stereotypes.
The main theme is no matter how "good hearted" the Black character may be, he's still a crook and criminal and not to be trusted.
 

 

[Pioneer1]

richardmurray

Ok......
So a movie about a Black man who is an ex-con and a White man who is a Billionaire does NOT re-enforce racist stereotypes?

-Gotcha

Thanks for the correction.

And here I was mistakenly thinking that the writers could have just as easily made Hart's character a college drop out or laid off construction worker going through the same problems and it would have easily harmonized with the overall plot of the movie....but....obviously that wouldn't have worked.

[richardmurray]

@Pioneer1

It's funny, in the movies that move we review, Nike seconds your sentiment. This is based on a true story, which was made into a french film and then a usa film. In france as in the usa, labor is designed to place people based on phenotype into a solid form, a stereotype. In the real story, the french film or the usa film a key plot point is that he is an exconvict who through opportunity , a rare thing given to exconvicts the world over, is lifted. 

 

If you ask me, does the upside film continue the stereotype of financially downtrodden black men in white european produced film, not all media,not all types of produced film,  but white european produced film? yes. Now I could argue black people need to stop watching white produced film if they don't like how white money usually accepts portraying blacks but... I find all the black images i need in black produced artwork: books/music/graphical representatons/film I don't require white produced art to show black people positively. Sequentially, for me, black excon's isn't a stereotype in the media that matters most to me. 

 

If you ask me, if I was the producer , would I demand the story plot point remain the same? yes. I would not accepted writers making kevin hart a construction worker recently laid off or a college drop out. Not my produced film. Maybe cause in NYC I know fully well what incarceration has done to the black community in NYC, I like a black man from prison, getting opportunity, and using it successfully to a positive end. If a writer says to me, the producer, the money,  they want to change kevin hart's characters background to a  college dropout or construction worker laid off, I will reply no way. A white excon is able in real life but in fiction a black excon can't?  I don't like that messaging and not with my money.

 

If you, Pioneer1 are the producer of said film, based on your words, and with the only change left you can make to manipulate kevin hart's characters background, you demand writers make kevin hart a construction worker laid off or college student dropped out, am I correct? your answer in comments please

 

my evidence cause I know among black people in the usa, this is always needed. 

https://www.gala.fr/stars_et_gotha/abdel_sellou

 

 

[Pioneer1]

richardmurray

 

If you, Pioneer1 are the producer of said film, based on your words, and with the only change left you can make to manipulate kevin hart's characters background, you demand writers make kevin hart a construction worker laid off or college student dropped out, am I correct? your answer in comments please

Yes.
I would.
For a number of reasons.......

For one thing, not only do adults watch these movies but BLACK CHILDREN watch them.
And children often watch adults in real life as well as in the movies and on television to LEARN THEIR ROLE in society.

Just like children learn how to talk, groom themselves, and eat by watching adults do the same.....especially those who look like him....
If all Black boys see on television and in the movies are Black men being criminals, felons, and con artists....psychologically he feels this is telling him this is HIS role in society.
He can't picture anything else because that's all he sees when he goes to the movies or turns on the television.

White social engineers and psychologists know and understand this; which is why they used to promote Westerns and G.I. Joe soldier toys during WWII and the Vietnam Era.
To encourage boys to want to grow up and be soldiers.

No sir.

If it's just a movie......
If it's artistic fantasy.....
Then let's imagine and fantasize what WE want to see.....a successful Black billionaire who stoops down into the gutter and helps a poor ignorant White felon.

How about that.....since we wanna play make believe.

[ProfD]

5 minutes ago, Pioneer1 said:

Then let's imagine and fantasize what WE want to see.....a successful Black billionaire who stoops down into the gutter and helps a poor ignorant White felon.

How about that.....since we wanna play make believe.

Hilarious.

 

White folks would not allow Oprah to produce and show that movie on her OWN network.  They would wipe her sh8t clean off the cable feed. 

[Pioneer1]

12 minutes ago, ProfD said:

Hilarious.

 

White folks would not allow Oprah to produce and show that movie on her OWN network.  They would wipe her sh8t clean off the cable feed. 

And why is that?
Because they don't want to see THEIR OWN people being portrayed as monkeys and buffoons before the world.
Not at the expense of a Black man.

You have your Forest Gumps and others, but even those characters have smart successful White folks in the film to balance off the clowns.

Arabs and Indians are the same way.
How many riots have started in the Middle East over movies portraying them in a less than flattering way?

So then the question is, if THEY know the importance of keeping the White character positive and powerful while the Black actor portrays the negative and powerless.....
Then why don't so many of OUR people understand the importance of it?

Say what you want to about the Blaxploitation films of the 70s, but atleast the Black characters would kick the ass of the racists while calling him "honky" and then proceed to screw as many Black AND White women as possible....lol.
Never losing a fight and always getting away with the bag....lol.

Those movies were simple.
Sometimes unrealistic.

But they FELT GREAT.

Brother @richardmurray you want to talk about a "feel good" movie?

Go watch a DOLEMITE flick...or Three The Hard Way.....lol.
It'll make you feel so GOOOOOOOOOOD to be Black!!!!

[richardmurray]

@Pioneer1

Exactly , exactly. The point is whomever is the producer, can override directors /actors or anyone else... the money is in control.  

I comprehend your point completely. If I was the producer of the upside I still would do what i said. but, in parallel, as producer, if I had five movies that I was certain to finance and begin preproduction in 2024, none would be like the upside. 

My five would be: 

1) a high john the conqueror film[you will not want to produce this] - animation +fantasy

2) a fantasy film concerning ancient nubia- fantasy+history+live action

3) I admit, a science fiction film of my own writing:) 

4) a film copying the basic idea of blood syndicate of milestone [you will not finance this film and will probably speak against it in media:) ]- superhero+action

5) and while I don't care to remakes in general. I am a big fan of three the hard way, not a fan of dolemite,  so we can co produce, a new three the hard way. action film, live action

 

In things I would like to produce I have preferences. And i prefer, more positive depictions of black people than in the upside than in white produced media. What you have to comprehend is I grew up with positive black images in media. I realize you and most black people sadly didn't, but I did. 

 

And I would oppose financing a film where a black billionaire helps a white felon. Not my money. 

 

well, to the films that involved black people in the 1970s. first, most of those films were written or directed by whites. I made whole post in this community, But from a fiscal perspective, most were what we will call today independent films. What i think you miss is that as black wealth in the usa increased, the larger studios made black films, but larger studios come with a less genre based style. 

You talk of three the hard way, that movie wasn't made by paramount or disney or mgm or universal or 20th century fox or columbia pictures. 

Sweet sweetback independent, distributed by small distributor.

Cotton comes to harlem, samuel goldwyn, small producer

Shaft which is from a white author which black people seem to not realize, was small too, mgm distributed. but they didn't finance.

foxy borwn, american international pictures, again small

uptown saturday night produced by first artists 

cooley high, american international again

corn bread earl and me, american international

Even the wiz was produced by motown , distributed by universal

sparkle was independent like sweetback

superfly was independent produced, warner bros distributed.

 

So I hope I proved my point. You speak of the 1970s films usually financed or written by whites that involve black characters, but most of the post 1980s films that have black characters are not produced by small studios, these are major studio films and with that comes a different angle. Major studios are not going to make films like small independent studios. That has always been the truth. And to be blunt, black movie goers, don't help. whereas black movie goers in the 1970s were willing to see superfly. They were not as interested in low budget meteor man I think no less quality than foxy brown but had an epiphany with black panther. So independent films don't resonante with the modern black film going audience as in the 1970s. 

 

@ProfD

I have been fortunate to learn a little bit about the film industry. The blunt truth is, Oprah/Pioneer or anyone black could produce that movie. I know it could be produced in NYC 100%. 100%. Now would it be circulated in theaters, advertised all over the world? that requires far more money than making the film in a lot of cases. Making films is in parts. Getting the money to finance to make a film is doable, even for black wealth. But getting the movie advertised plus shown is .. expensive. The barbie movie for example, spent more money on the advertisement and campaigns than the movie. And, to the OWN network, well, networks work by advertisers. The OWN network is a poor example to use. But, online their are film hosting sites for nollywood or owned by black people. They could easily host the film. But will it get advertised. Will people buy subscriptions for this one film. I don't know. BUT, the film, black billionaire+ white felon, can be made. Remember, white man's burden 1995 is functionally in the same zone as the film pioneer1 talks about producing. MAking films is not as hard as people think but it is the adveritising, the showing all over the world which is very expensive, really doubles the money and for non special effects laden films, most producers/advertisers/accountants will oppose as the revenue on return is usually calculated as not good enough

[Pioneer1]

richardmurray

 

 

The Mack and Superfly weren't the only films of the 70s.
They were the ones most popularized by the dominant media.

Like I said, you had Dolemite, Richard Pryor films, Bill Cosby films, and a wealth of films by Jim Brown, the Shaft film series, and other films written, produced, and directed by Black people who portrayed Black people in a positive and/or successful light.

 

Even when they were the "bad guy"....atleast they were successful and weren't playing a damn fool or clown.

 

 

 

And I would oppose financing a film where a black billionaire helps a white felon. Not my money. 

 

Think of it as an INVESTMENT.
You're investing in a PR campaign that dignifies the image of your people and makes US look like the successful, kind, and saintly ones instead of the criminals and beggars.

Most wealthy White people don't HELP people of color.
Infact, most of them have gained their wealth HARMING people of color.
But they understand the power of image and using the media to make themselves look like generous and charitable benefactors who go around helping humanity.

 

Think of the Peace Corps.

 

 

 

White people promote these images for a REASON.

 

 

 

 

 

[richardmurray]

@Pioneer1

If both of us have money + the willingness to finance movies, I will finance the ones I want and you will too. And both are acceptable. Both will have an audience. Why doe you treat that as a problematic scenario? 

I will not finance such a film. BUT, I will support you financing such a film with your money. Wish it the best. See it if in truly interest me. 

And second, what are the other four films you will produce? 

I stated my five, why can't you state yours. 

 

[Pioneer1]

richardmurray

Sorry, not sure what you mean.

[richardmurray]

@Pioneer1

I hope you get a chance to produce films you want seen.