Race & Ethnicity On TV

[topanga]

 

I have noticed however is that whenever they include a character who's ancestry is from India, they have an extremely thick accent.

 

I wonder if the young actor Karan Brar (Ravi on "Jessie") gets tired of only being able to use that voice. I'm impressed that he's able to sustain the accent over many episodes or entire movies (Diary of a Wimpy Kid movies), but he's an All-American kid from Washington State. Won't he ever be allowed to play a typical American kid, or will actors of Indian descent always have to "play Indian"?

[Rick Kitchen]

Well, there's Danny Pudi on "Community", but his character is Palestinian, and Danny's mother is Polish.

[Ankai]

Yeah, Indian Americans are probably about as likely to play Middle Eastern as they are to play Indian.

[Bella]

In reality TV food competitions, there's this annoying comment that keeps popping up about people cooking to their heritage. They may have trained in a specific cuisine, but they are criticized for not sticking with their roots. For example, a Chinese-American chef whose family has been here for several generations and who has been trained in France and who has her own seafood restaurant may be criticized for cooking some cuisine that isn't Asian.

 

And it seems that Asian chefs take the brunt of this, though not exclusively.

 

It's so wrong.

[galax-arena]

And it seems that Asian chefs take the brunt of this, though not exclusively.

Hmm, what I've noticed is that Asian chefs will often be criticized if they stick with Asian cuisine, because it's too ~narrow a focus and shows no range. It's fine if chefs stick to French or Italian or "rustic American farm-to-table", but Asian? Oh my goodness no! Because it's not like Asia is an entire continent or anything. 

 

Of course, often people will say "Asian" when they actually only mean something like Chinese. And even then, if someone's allowed to be a whiz at Italian cuisine without being criticized for having zero range, why shouldn't the same hold true for Chinese? 

[scarynikki12]

if someone's allowed to be a whiz at Italian cuisine without being criticized for having zero range, why shouldn't the same hold true for Chinese?

 

 

Right?  I loved Fabio on Top Chef and everything he made had an Italian twist.  Makes sense to me, as he's Italian and learned to cook in that manner.  The criticisms of his food came when it wasn't cooked well and no one competing against him ever held his Italian-Only cooking against him.  Meanwhile, Beverly from a later season was heavily criticized for only cooking "Asian food" with absolutely no awareness that a chef who could accurately be described as cooking Asian food (as in: China, Japan, Korea, Thailand, Mongolia, India, Indonesia, Asian-Russia, Singapore, Cambodia, Vietnam, etc) would show more versatility than any other contestant.  Because sticking with what you know is only a bad thing if the style of cooking isn't based in France/Italy (and I'd love to see someone tell a chef from that discipline that he/she cooks "too European".  The expression would be priceless and they'd rightly get pissed because it doesn't make sense and comes across as insulting).  I'd love to see someone try and tell a chef who specializes in Ethiopian cuisine (just typing that makes my mouth water as I LOVE Ethiopian food) and get told that his food is "too African", or someone specializing in Brazilian cuisine get told it's "too South American".  That person would look like a colossal racist dumbass and would likely realize it as they were saying it because it sounds completely stupid and racist, yet doing the same for chefs whose style come from any of the different parts of the Asian continent isn't noticed. 

 

Before I finish, I realize that many on that season had problems with Beverly's personality, which doesn't bother me, but they never just said that.  They dressed it up as being upset that she only "cooked Asian food", with kimchi being a particular offender.  So they took a basic dislike of her personality and turned it into something racist.  Of course they did.  And then they got called on it by viewers and didn't understand what they'd done wrong.  Idiots.

[Bella]

Here's the thing on race and the food shows. Let's say you've got two chefs, whose names I'm making up right now and I hope there aren't real chefs named this: Judy Chen and Craig Murphy.

 

Judy learned to cook from her Chinese-American family. Craig learned to cook from his Irish-American family.

 

Both Judy and Craig are classically trained in Italian cooking, have worked in Italian restaurants their entire professional lives, love Italian food, and have even visited Italy.

 

Who's more likely to be questioned if they offer an Italian dish for a challenge?

 

I'm pretty sure it would be Judy. I think Judy could get a whole set of questions that no one would ever ask Craig. And if Judy decided "screw it, I'm cooking Chinese, since that's what they seem to want from me," she'd probably be subject to another set of comments and critiques, especially if she - gasp! - cooked Chinese two weeks in a row. Craig cooking something he learned from his family would not elicit the same reaction.

 

YMMV, but this is what drives me a bit crazy at times.

[PrincessEnnui]

I remember watching Ted Allen's Chopped a couple of months ago. There was an Asian lady who's first dish was inspired by a restaurant she worked at or frequented. The judges liked the taste and plating, but when they talked to her, they asked how she was reflected in that dish. I seem to remember Ted Allen admitting during a guest host stint on Top Chef, that when people say to put your "soul" in the dish, that meant your dish was more or less flawless.

 

The person that comment was aimed at was Hung, the season (5?) winner. Guess Ted Allen forgot to tell his judges that.

[arc]

There's so much wrong with Lifetime's new Girlfriend Intervention that it's hard to know where to begin. But NPR has a good piece.

Lifetime's new show Girlfriend Intervention is not subtle about its message. Its premise is four black women giving a makeover to a white woman on the theory that, as they put it, "Trapped inside of every white girl is a strong black woman ready to bust out."

Edited August 28, 2014 by arc

[Aquarius]

There's so much wrong with Lifetime's new Girlfriend Intervention that it's hard to know where to begin. But NPR has a good piece.

 

Wowza.  So, so much wrong with that.  How does something like that even get on the air??

[Bella]

Wow. I'm trying to think of a stereotype that's missing here, but they seem to be all present and accounted for. 

 

Ghastly.

[galax-arena]

From another article I read:

(The second episode, for example, involves a 30-year-old woman with a fondness for fantasy and Harry Potter — a hobby in which no self-respecting black woman, it’s stated as gospel, would never indulge.)

What about science fiction, or do they think that Octavia Butler wasn't acting black enough? 

[BoogieBurns]

fondness for fantasy and Harry Potter — a hobby in which no self-respecting black woman, it’s stated as gospel, would never indulge.

 

A fondness for Harry Potter = Reading 

Yeah, no self-respecting black woman reads! Also, when did they poll every self-respecting black woman? Miss me with that.

[SistaLadybug]

A fondness for Harry Potter = Reading 

Yeah, no self-respecting black woman reads! Also, when did they poll every self-respecting black woman? Miss me with that.

Yeah, that's total bullshit.  So says this self-respecting Black woman with a fondness for fantasy (including Harry Potter, who I introduced to my young Black daughter), science fiction and just about every other genre of book.  It's just completely impossible that there are Black female nerds and geeks, huh?

 

I'm so offended by the premise of that show.  I saw a commercial for it and my mouth fell open.  I couldn't believe it was possible.  I'm flabbergasted that any of the women (except maybe Tanisha because ... come on) would want to be associated with it.  Why in the world would they buy into those ridiculous ass stereotypes?  What in the hell does it mean to "bring out [someone's] inner Black woman"?  And what are they sayng about Black women?  Are we all here to help facilitate the "fierceness" of White women?  And why would a White woman accept that she is less than stylish or desirable or confident because she's not like a Black woman?  I mean, those are only a few of the around 85 bajillion questions I have about this shittery but at this point I'm starting to sputter and the keys on this keyboard are just going to fly straight off if I hit them any harder.

 

Have I mentioned that this is bullshit?  It's BULLSHIT.  I'm practically foaming at the mouth.  I'm sure that's my inner angry Black woman coming out.

[GHScorpiosRule]

Is there any such thing as my inner East Indian woman? Because the above is how I felt about Outsourced the television show. The WORST stereo types of Indians EVER.

[Ankai]

Girlfriend Intervention? I guess that Black Eye for the White Girl would have given people the wrong impression?

[ribboninthesky1]

Ah, so Lifetime is giving VH1/MTV a run for its money on the black women stereotypes. But hey, this is the same network that airs Devious Maids, so....
 
I don't know much about Tanisha, though I've read of her reputation.  But I happened to catch an episode of that Marriage Boot Camp show, and she was "coaching" Ryan, a white man who was one of the "winners" of the Bachelorette franchise, on how to have "swag."  So yeah...no surprise she's popped up on this show as a "soul coach."  Which...I can't.  I really cannot.

 

What's even more sad is that there is a market out there for this kind of programming. 

[briochetwist]

All right then, fair enough. I was just throwing that out there because it seemed like a similar situation. I guess my real point was, genetics are a crapshoot, and not all family members look alike.Maybe I need to actually watch Chicago Fire so I can see the actors in person, so to speak.

 

I realize I'm coming into this waaayyy late, but this discussion totally struck a chord with me.  I never care if tv/movie siblings resemble each other because in my own life, my kids don't either.  My daughter takes after my side of the family with her red hair and pasty white skin, and my son takes after his father, with his Metis heritage, having dark hair and a much darker skin tone.  They do not look related in any way, shape or form, so I guess I don't really notice any sort of sibling resemblance on tv shows.

[DearEvette]

Yeah, no self-respecting black woman reads! Also, when did they poll every self-respecting black woman? Miss me with that.

 

They were apparently not paying attention to the PEW research organization because according to a recent survey on the reading habits of Americans:

 

"College educated Black women read more (print and e-readers) than all groups."

 

 

love that This article points out that the fashion "expert" did not know what peplum was.

 

This is a fail on every level.  It is a horrible trifeca of the Strong Black Woman/Mammy/Sassy black girfriend stereotypes and in the process manages to dehumanize black women and also insult white women as well.

 

Meanwhile, I will sit over here and read that Brandon Sanderson book I have been enjoying this week.

[ChromaKelly]

One thing that's always stuck out on TV is the lack of Asian - East Asian, Indian, and Pakistani - doctors on television hospitals, or even just doctor's offices. IDK if it's just my area, but doctors of Asian decent are very prevalent here.

And as some others were noting, children of immigrants tend to speak with an American accent, not the accent of their parents.

[Rick Kitchen]

There are lots of East Indian doctors in Southern California, where I used to live, and in Sacramento, where I currently live.  Not to mention lots of Filipina nurses.

[ethalfrida]

 Tanisha is only an expert on being a very loud Black woman. 

[GHScorpiosRule]

And as some others were noting, children of immigrants tend to speak with an American accent, not the accent of their parents.

 

 

And I am living proof of this. Not sure how I made it through Kindergarten, not knowing English, because when I started first grade, I had to take ESOL, to learn English, which I did, very quickly, but I have an American accent. You would never know that I had to learn how to speak English if you met me. It's insulting, actually, whenever I see first or second generation East Indians on television shows, speaking in an accent of those that are not, well, let's just say educated. Because those of my friends and relatives who live in India, speak with the British flavored Indian accent.

Edited September 2, 2014 by GHScorpiosRule

[Bella]

And I am living proof of this. Not sure how I made it through Kindergarten, not knowing English, because when I started first grade, I had to take ESOL, to learn English, which I did, very quickly, but I have an American accent. You would never know that I had to learn how to speak English if you met me. It's insulting, actually, whenever I see first or second generation East Indians on television shows, speaking in an accent of those that are not, well, let's just say educated. Because those of my friends and relatives who live in India, speak with the British flavored Indian accent.

 

Thanks for bringing this up. I can't find the research, but apparently accents are very fluid and don't become fixed until early adolescence. Even then, they can diminish according to the person's circumstances, but children can evidently pick up and/or drop accents pretty easily.

[galax-arena]

And I am living proof of this. Not sure how I made it through Kindergarten, not knowing English, because when I started first grade, I had to take ESOL, to learn English, which I did, very quickly, but I have an American accent.

Me, too! Korean was my first language, but it was quickly displaced by English once I started school. At a certain point, your peers become much more instrumental in shaping your language/accent than your parents.

[Athena]

Me, too! Korean was my first language, but it was quickly displaced by English once I started school. At a certain point, your peers become much more instrumental in shaping your language/accent than your parents.

 

That and television. ;) 

 

I can relate as I did ESL for a couple years in grade school. I took on English well and I loved to read. Most kids can learn languages and accents very easily. 

[galax-arena]

Heh, yes, of course. How could I forget television? I learned English from Sesame Street, after all.

[GHScorpiosRule]

That and television. ;) 

 

I can relate as I did ESL for a couple years in grade school. I took on English well and I loved to read. Most kids can learn languages and accents very easily. 

 

So true! Not to get too off-topic, but I forgot how to speak Hindi after learning English, even though I understood it, and it wasn't until I was 10 when the Bollywood Bug bit me and I relearned everything I forgot by watching the movies!

 

So now I am multi-lingual, thankyeverramuch!

Edited September 2, 2014 by GHScorpiosRule

[possibilities]

Tom Haverford (Aziz Ansari) on Parks and Rec has a story in season 1, where he keeps having to tell people he "sounds American" because was born in South Carolina.

[zillabreeze]

Question for any folks of color- is it just me or does Tyler Perry seem to perpetuate a lot of stereotypical black women? OR as a pasty white chick, do I just not get him?

[jah1986]

Question for any folks of color- is it just me or does Tyler Perry seem to perpetuate a lot of stereotypical black women? OR as a pasty white chick, do I just not get him?

It's not you. His movies have become almost unwatchable for me.

[ribboninthesky1]

Question for any folks of color- is it just me or does Tyler Perry seem to perpetuate a lot of stereotypical black women? OR as a pasty white chick, do I just not get him?

 

No, not just you. He's a bone of contention in many discussions.  While there is nuance, generally the divergent thoughts include: "He's the only major player who consistently casts black people in his productions, so he deserves support" vs "He perpetuates a modern version of coonery, thus he doesn't deserve support." I haven't watched much of his TV productions, but the films I saw permanently turned me off.  

 

So, short answer, IMO, yes, he does. 

 

ETA: I think the fact that he's currently the only major producer of predominantly black productions is the larger issue. Back in the 80s and 90s, there was more variety.  Or at least, more socially conscious productions.  But then, I suppose it could be argued that he provides social commentary as well.

Edited September 2, 2014 by ribboninthesky1

[CoderLady]

Question for any folks of color- is it just me or does Tyler Perry seem to perpetuate a lot of stereotypical black women? OR as a pasty white chick, do I just not get him?

 

I've harbored a possibly irrational hatred for Tyler Perry starting from seeing ads for Diary of a Mad Black Woman, not only for his trademark clownish black female character but because he couldn't even employ an actual woman to play a woman. And ribboninthesky, you have a point about him being the only major producer of black productions now. Not even Spike Lee is as active anymore. I've never watched one of his productions and never will.

[ribboninthesky1]

I've harbored a possibly irrational hatred for Tyler Perry starting from seeing ads for Diary of a Mad Black Woman, not only for his trademark clownish black female character but because he couldn't even employ an actual woman to play a woman. And ribboninthesky, you have a point about him being the only major producer of black productions now. Not even Spike Lee is as active anymore. I've never watched one of his productions and never will.

 

Do not get me started on Madea, Coderlady.  A few years ago, I began to realize the insidious effects of black men "portraying" black women for comedy and entertainment.  I never thought such characters were funny, even as a youngster, but it wasn't until I became an adult that I understood why. 

[DearEvette]

The thing about Tyler Perry is that he his movies have the bones of really good, interesting storytelling.  But when he gets to the meat of it, it gets overseasoned and overcooked.  He goes overboard with caricatures and stereotypes.  If he dialed it back and got some nuance, his stuff could be really interesting.  For instance, The Family That Preys had some real potential to be interesting.  Also it had Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard!  Come on, how can you waste those two?  They completly rose above the material. If he had only managed to edit himself, the movie could have been great. But in the end the story felt simple and mired in amateurish plotting and overwrought characters.  And Eeeevil, bad womens!

 

Maybe it is because he got his start in the new-wave chitlin circuit with religious themed stage plays that he can't get away from those broad themed morality underpinnings that can only showcase black/white (Madonna/Whore) dichotomies. 

 

Edit:  And I am NOT talking about the Madea movies.  That shit is just foul.

Edited September 2, 2014 by DearEvette

[Raja]

I will admit to liking I Can Be Bad By Myself even with the obligatory Madea Bible story and criminal caper.

I thought all of the movies began life as gospel plays? In any case race relations wise he is increasing pushing interracial relationships, especially with the women being black into the main couple's story. Meanwhile with the TV shows running we are seeing different extended family members on screen with the Browns on TV

[BoogieBurns]

I'm not a watcher of the Tyler Perry brand. It would be good for everyone if he had more competition both in TV and movies. 

Edited September 3, 2014 by BoogieBurns

[ribboninthesky1]

The thing about Tyler Perry is that he his movies have the bones of really good, interesting storytelling.  But when he gets to the meat of it, it gets overseasoned and overcooked.  He goes overboard with caricatures and stereotypes.  If he dialed it back and got some nuance, his stuff could be really interesting.  For instance, The Family That Preys had some real potential to be interesting.  Also it had Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard!  Come on, how can you waste those two?  They completly rose above the material. If he had only managed to edit himself, the movie could have been great. But in the end the story felt simple and mired in amateurish plotting and overwrought characters.  And Eeeevil, bad womens!

 

Maybe it is because he got his start in the new-wave chitlin circuit with religious themed stage plays that he can't get away from those broad themed morality underpinnings that can only showcase black/white (Madonna/Whore) dichotomies. 

 

I have to confess, from what I've seen, the man is a crappy screenwriter.  So serious question - what is it about his films that you feel have potential?

[zillabreeze]

Thanks to all regarding Tyler Perry! It is a shame that he doesn't have more competition. His box office $$$ have always been a mystery to me; y'all really explained a lot. The Madea type roles and weird screechy old women I see in his commercials have always seemed insulting.

I am very active on the "The Have and The Have Nots" forum, but we all watch to snark on the horrendous dialog. TP's anti-gay sentiments are really obvious on that show, too. Everything is so over the top, that the stereotypes are a small part of that train wreck. Funny thing is TP & OWN prob think people are watching seriously and not for the hysterical camp that it is.

[Popples]

I am very active on the "The Have and The Have Nots" forum, but we all watch to snark on the horrendous dialog. TP's anti-gay sentiments are really obvious on that show, too. Everything is so over the top, that the stereotypes are a small part of that train wreck. Funny thing is TP & OWN prob think people are watching seriously and not for the hysterical camp that it is.

 

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but that person is my mother. She thinks "The Have and the Have Nots" is the best fucking thing on television after "Scandal." After an episode is over she can't wait to give me a scene by scene breakdown of the entire thing (if it were anybody else, I'd tell them if I gave a shit, I'd watch the show, but one can't say that to their mother). She also thinks the entire world loves Tyler Perry; just a couple of weeks ago she was trying to remember Spike Lee's name and was telling me "you know that guy who hates on Tyler Perry", to which I replied, "that includes a lot of people", then she said, "EVERYONE loves Tyler Perry!" I'm sorry mother, but they don't (including me!).

[SistaLadybug]

Add my close friend to the list of people who love Tyler Perry and his programming/movies.  She cannot fathom that I generally can't stand Perry's work and am not at all interested in hearing about the latest episode of "The Haves and the Have Nots" (which, BTW, has to be the stupidest name for a television program this side of Glory).  Perry is insanely popular.  He's partly why OWN is still afloat and that's why Oprah keeps adding program after program of his dreck.

[DearEvette]

I have to confess, from what I've seen, the man is a crappy screenwriter.  So serious question - what is it about his films that you feel have potential?

 

 

At it's basics, his stories are good domestic drama.  There are universal themes of love, betrayal, ambition and family.  And the plots can be interesting.  Sure they trend toward the soapy, but a lot of good stuff is.   I saw August Osage County and frankly I felt it was a Tyler Perry movie but better written and with white people. 

 

Also some of the individual characters and the plot dilemmas he places them in are intiruging.  I thought the Sanaa Lathan character & her plot in The Family That Preys could have been wonderful if she hadn't been written with such broad strokes.   The whole subplot with Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard going on a road-trip felt fun.  And there was this really great quiet scene with Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard in a hotel that really showcased how two really good actresses can lift a scene.  It was one stand-out scene in the whole movie and it hinted at some depths in the writing that the rest of the movie frittered away.

 

The Jill Scott character and plot in Why Did I Get Married also was a potentially good.  If he had used some restraint in telling it, it could have been great.  The reason it was even as good as it was was all because of Jill Scott herslf.  But again, he had to hit us with anvils all over the place. 

 

I really think he is an ideas man when it comes to character and plotting and the ideas are very good and they strike a chord.  He just can't execute them well.  So I am left thinking what could have been.  Admittedly, I have not seen a TP movie since The Family That Preys.  I read the synopsis of the movie with Jurnee Smollett and stayed far, far away.  I love her and would happily watch her in almost anything.  But not even for her could I watch that.

[SistaLadybug]

I think that's a valid point about Tyler Perry.  He has talent as a creative mind but he is a God-awful writer.  He destroys his own creations because he can't hand them over to someone better suited to bring them to life.

 

And there's also his issues with women and homosexuals ...

[jah1986]

The other thing with Tyler Perry movies is that most of his characters have no real depth. They're either completely evil or completely good or just need the love of a good black man to set them straight. The black men are never wrong unless they are completely evil like Jill Scott's husband in Why Did I Get Married or TPH's boyfriend in I Can Do Bad All By Myself.  It's always the black woman that doesn't know what she's got and needs to be rescued.

 

I've got to stop or my pressure will go up.

[ribboninthesky1]

At it's basics, his stories are good domestic drama.  There are universal themes of love, betrayal, ambition and family.  And the plots can be interesting.  Sure they trend toward the soapy, but a lot of good stuff is.   I saw August Osage County and frankly I felt it was a Tyler Perry movie but better written and with white people. 

 

Also some of the individual characters and the plot dilemmas he places them in are intiruging.  I thought the Sanaa Lathan character & her plot in The Family That Preys could have been wonderful if she hadn't been written with such broad strokes.   The whole subplot with Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard going on a road-trip felt fun.  And there was this really great quiet scene with Kathy Bates and Alfre Woodard in a hotel that really showcased how two really good actresses can lift a scene.  It was one stand-out scene in the whole movie and it hinted at some depths in the writing that the rest of the movie frittered away.

 

The Jill Scott character and plot in Why Did I Get Married also was a potentially good.  If he had used some restraint in telling it, it could have been great.  The reason it was even as good as it was was all because of Jill Scott herslf.  But again, he had to hit us with anvils all over the place. 

 

I really think he is an ideas man when it comes to character and plotting and the ideas are very good and they strike a chord.  He just can't execute them well.  So I am left thinking what could have been.  Admittedly, I have not seen a TP movie since The Family That Preys.  I read the synopsis of the movie with Jurnee Smollett and stayed far, far away.  I love her and would happily watch her in almost anything.  But not even for her could I watch that.

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.  I generally disagree, but I like to read and consider counterpoints.  I do agree that actresses can elevate the material, though I tend to separate that from the writing itself.  I suppose to me, in terms of screenwriting, how you execute the idea is as important (or perhaps more important) than the idea itself, especially in context of universal themes.  In addition, I have a fundamental issue with the religious/moral themes of his writing, as I'm particularly sensitive to how he portrays black women in his productions.  Perhaps because I'm Georgia-born, Baptist-raised, now atheist, and I've seen how, in real life, said themes disproportionally hamstring black women and girls to their detriment. 

 

ETA: Ditto, jah1986.

Edited September 4, 2014 by ribboninthesky1

[SistaLadybug]

The other thing with Tyler Perry movies is that most of his characters have no real depth. They're either completely evil or completely good or just need the love of a good black man to set them straight. The black men are never wrong unless they are completely evil like Jill Scott's husband in Why Did I Get Married or TPH's boyfriend in I Can Do Bad All By Myself.  It's always the black woman that doesn't know what she's got and needs to be rescued.

 

I've got to stop or my pressure will go up.

Not only does she need to be rescued but she usually needs to be rescued by a lightskinned man.  Or Tyler Perry himself.  Which is another thing - he is a frightfully bad actor and yet he continues to cast himself.  Not only is he a bad actor in general but he is particularly unsuited for the romantic lead roles and yet he somehow thinks we buy him in those parts.

[DearEvette]

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts.  I generally disagree, but I like to read and consider counterpoints.  I do agree that actresses can elevate the material, though I tend to separate that from the writing itself.  I suppose to me, in terms of screenwriting, how you execute the idea is as important (or perhaps more important) than the idea itself, especially in context of universal themes.  In addition, I have a fundamental issue with the religious/moral themes of his writing, as I'm particularly sensitive to how he portrays black women in his productions.  Perhaps because I'm Georgia-born, Baptist-raised, now atheist, and I've seen how, in real life, said themes disproportionally hamstring black women and girls to their detriment. 

 

ETA: Ditto, jah1986.

 

I think we are kind of on the same page, but I think I give him a tiny bit more credit, LOL. 

 

I do think, other than his ham-handed writing, that his biggest issues is with morality.  He does have a problem with women & sexuality.  Or with women in general, actually.   I think he is ok with what he perceives as 'maternal' women because they are perceived as 'good'.   Hence, that is why I think his writing for Bates & Woodard was heads & shoulders above his writing for anyone else ever. 

 

But with every other woman his writing is really quite problematic.  All the rest of the women in his movies suffer.  The 'Good' ones suffer nobly.  They are given tribulations they must overcome and they do triumph in the end.  This is the 'Strong Black Woman' trope burdened with a Madonna complex.  She is pure and good, but she has to overcome.  She will be rewarded (usually with the love of a good man).

 

The 'Bad' ones, though, they just plain old suffer.  And not just in the plotting but in the characterization.  They are loud, ratchet, buffoonish & slut-shamed.  They are an object lesson:  Black women this is what you must not be or you'll end up alone and broken and shunned.

 

Admittedly this is a large part of the themes in his films as this is revisted over and over again in various iterations, but if you remove the judgemental piece of it, again, I think he has some interesting ideas. And he is insanely fortunate in the casts he gets because they do elevate his material.  Of course, this is mostly because there are so many talented black actors who aren't getting enough work elsewhere.  If anything, it is even more a testament to how good some of them are because they make Tyler Perry's work look not terrible.

[ZaldamoWilder]

You all have been making me nod, laugh and check my own pressure for the last page or so.   I would've agreed with all of you had it not been for an interview I heard Tyler give on the radio a few years ago.  As a result of it (now that I understand what he said he's trying to do), I have to say that I disagree that he's not a good screenwriter, we'll get to acting in a second lol.   He addressed the coonery criticisms (personally, my biggest issue with him) by saying that 99% of his productions, stage play and film, are meant to appeal to a very specific demographic.   In a snap, just like that, I quit hating the player.   He's writing to, for, about and featuring bible toting, outspoken, big mamas everywhere and by design, isn't even trying to appeal to us.   What he says is the benefit is that a largely unaddressed niche sees themselves or people they can relate to represented on screen, where a *voice* for this audience simply didn't exist before.  The real benefit imo is of course that if and when that niche turns you into a gazillionaire you've got a a platform to say and produce what you really want to do for the rest of us (that's still my issue with him, if he's got a message I wish the hell he'd get to it).

 

The man makes a valid point though.  In the history of black cinema (and trust, I hate that he will be included in this category), this audience has not been catered to.  Blacks as domestics or sexy knife wielding action heroines or quippy non threatening sidekicks or sad souls waiting for an inevitable white hero are the genres that have been covered.   The roles Tyler Perry has made a point to create for black actors (as leads) are still somehow rare in 2014.   That's what's sad, he's virtually alone in what he's trying to accomplish.  Is he syrupy and heavy handed as hell? Yup.   But again, I beseech you not to be too mad at him, he's not targeting us.   He says this is no different than the dudes who make the same version of a stupid ass frat boy or stoner kid movie that hollywood supports year after year but nobody questions those directors about the quality and delivery of their message.   

 

Didn't mean for this to sound sermony, I just wanted to tell ya'll I used to sideye him as well, but in good conscience I can't anymore because a) he was never checking for me, b) he keeps black hollywood working and d) I can't knock the man's hustle, it's clearly a working model that has made him financially successful.  

 

Spike Lee told Oprah he buried his hatchet too for pretty much the same reason, whether you agree with his content or not, he made himself a key player in a field that was (and still is) largely closed.  And Spike, as an example is someone who should know.  Damn near all his stuff was about something and it took him 25 years to become a crossover household name.

 

Ok so about the acting.  If you wanna talk about me being salty as shit that somebody cast Tyler as Alex Cross in one of John Grisham's movies, I'm here for you all day.  #couldnotbefurtherfromthetruth

[jah1986]

I enjoyed your post ZaldamoWilder (btw, love your name). My only hesitation in accepting his reasoning is that while he may be targeting a certain previously unrepresented population, he wants all of our money.  He wants everyone to go to his movies and if you don't then you're a hater or not supportive etc.

[ZaldamoWilder]

^^ lol thank ya luvie! 

 

I hear you, I do.   I would say that he knows his stuff isn't for everybody and add that in order to support a TP production, knowing what we know about his model, being a fan is a requirement.  I'm in a won't knock the hustle but not paying for it sort of category.  I agree that he wants all of his demographic's money but I also think that there are more than enough in that fan base that he doesn't need to care about those who aren't.  

 

It's sort of the way I would guess the big tobacco giants feel about advertising in Asia.  If they could just get all of China to start smoking, I promise you they'd give not one hot damn if every American on the face of the earth never picked up another cigarette again.