Darkness cannot drive
out darkness — only light can. —Martin Luther King, Jr.
This is a truly strange movie, at times deliciously
entertaining, while at other times one is simply aghast at the ineptitude, where
mixed signals are sent throughout, partly tragic, partly comic, where for
several moments one had to wonder if this could possibly be a subversive
attempt to actually send a message to America, but instead it comes across as a
toned-down Disney movie of the week, where the narrative style unfortunately
resembles Uncle Remus storytelling at the White House, told in the supposedly
inoffensive manner of Disney’s SONG OF THE SOUTH (1946), which is really one
long American narrative as Uncle Remus takes us through the Civil Rights era of
history, as seen through the eyes of a long-serving White House butler, Cecil
Gaines (Forest Whitaker). Rather than
deal with anything remotely resembling the present, it appears that today’s movies
prefer to remain stuck in the past, continually conjuring up stories that deal
with an era of loyal black servitude and obedience, like The Help
(2011), Django
Unchained (2012), 12
Years a Slave (2013), and now yet another, as if the drumbeat of showing past
transgressions will somehow alter the course of today’s history. If that is the desired effect, it’s not
working. One has to wonder who decides
which black stories are told, or how they’re told? And why do we continue to project the same
negative stereotypes that only reinforce images of black subservience? Black talents like Viola Davis and Forest
Whitaker have received critical acclaim for playing maids and butlers, while
British black actor Chiwetel Ejiofor is the odds on favorite for an Academy
Award for playing a kidnapped free slave sold into the brutality of slavery. Why is Hollywood retelling the same story of
black oppression and subjugation? Because
the formula makes money, so it appears the only work blacks can obtain in
Hollywood these days is enduring the unending racial abuse inflicted upon them
and then somehow it’s considered a victory if they survive. No one likes to be reminded of the times when
they were terrorized and subjugated and forced to live in fear, but black
Americans have to relive this experience seemingly forever and then watch
people applaud this as art.
Adapted from an article written by Wil Haygood that appeared
in The Washington Post just a few
weeks after President-elect Obama won the election on November 27, 2008, A
Butler Well Served by This Election - Washington Post, providing a profile
of White House butler Eugene Allen and his wife Helene. While the article placed its focus upon the painfully
slow addition of black officials working in various White House
administrations, this story is ignored by the movie. It should also be stated that Allen didn’t
have a militant son, or a cotton plantation childhood, as these were Hollywood
constructions needed to fabricate an epic storyline like this one, which is a
doozy, as it weaves one man’s family through a greatest hits of Civil Rights
history, including Brown vs. Board of Education, the freedom riders, the
Birmingham boycotts, the Little Rock school crisis, federal intervention sent
to integrate southern schools, the Civil Rights legislation, the assassinations
of John Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, and Malcolm X, the cities
burning, the Black Panther party, before then reaching across the ocean to
Apartheid in South Africa. That’s quite
a mouthful, enough to make one wince at the utter superficiality that each
historical event receives. Making
matters worse, the name actors portraying the United States Presidents are
caricatures that one presumes are unintentionally comic, where guffaws in the
audience are simply based upon casting choices and the physical mannerisms used
to play each President, as they resemble Saturday
Night Live comic portrayals. And the
casting of Jane Fonda as Nancy Reagan,
how is that not subversive? She’s
exquisite, by the way, in her own hilarious way.
The casting of Whitaker as the butler is a good one, as
after all, he already won an Oscar for portraying Idi Amin in THE LAST KING OF
SCOTLAND (2006), and he was Jim Jarmusch’s Zen-like high priest in GHOST DOG
(1999), so we know this guy’s capable of just about anything. Oprah, on the other hand, as his wife Gloria,
will always be seen as Oprah, no matter what anybody else says, as she’s too
big a celebrity and personality, where all attempts to act are just that,
pretending to be something she isn’t, where in the early part of the picture
where she plays a drunk, she simply channels Mo’Nique from PRECIOUS (2009), and
yes, it’s really that obvious. They have
two sons, where the oldest, Louis, is played by David Oyelowo, who becomes a
fierce young militant who literally takes us through every stage of history
from the freedom riders to the Black Panthers, all of which he experiences
himself, including being in the same motel room as Martin Luther King just
before he got shot. Say what? How is that possible if he was not part of
the inner team, all names that are familiar to us by now? Well, the truth is, it’s not, but this is a
Hollywood recreation of history, and they can do whatever they want so long as
they think it will sell tickets. Which
brings us to why is Lee Daniels name in the title? Screenwriter Danny Strong was hired a year
before Daniels signed on as the film’s director, a picture purchased by Harvey
Weinstein, so one would suspect that Daniels, the last one hired, had the least
amount of control over the picture, even when it comes to naming rights. The official story is that The Weinstein
Company could not get the MPAA’s Title Registration Bureau (TRB) to authorize
the use of the title, even under appeal, because of an existing 1916 Warner
Brother’s short film by that name, charging Weinstein with willful violation
and ordering a $400,000 fine. As a
result, they put the director’s name in front of the title, causing a certain
amount of consternation to Daniels, who felt people might think he was drawing
too much attention to himself.
What is particularly powerful about the picture is the
portrayal of black father and son relationships, established in the opening
shots of the film in 1926 Georgia at an existing cotton plantation where Cecil
(as a child) and his own father worked, which was run exactly as it did during
the slavery era, no difference whatsoever except they didn’t shackle
slaves. Blacks were still routinely
killed by whites, calling them “niggers,” even by judges in court, and whites just
as routinely got away with it, using the violent threat of lynchings and the
KKK if anyone had any other ideas. In
another casting misadventure, Mariah Carey plays Cecil’s mother in the fields,
where after her own sexual assault, they both witness the shooting of her
husband, after which Cecil is led from the fields into the house under the
tutelage of none other than Vanessa Redgrave to become the subservient “house
nigger.” He learns so well he eventually
becomes the White House butler serving 8 different Presidents from Truman to
Reagan, where the rules are identical, as he is never to display any emotion,
react to anything seen, or engage anyone other than his boss. The irony here is that his oldest son runs
off to college and becomes a campus militant, the polar opposite of his father,
where viewing American black history from the 20’s through the 80’s through the
shared father and son experiences is simply too much, as it’s too great a
cultural divide. For instance, we learn
about what happened to Emmett Till over the dinner table as a drunken Gloria
is serving food to her family, where that’s the extent of the experience,
mentioned in much the same way as idle gossip.
Both parents are convinced that having left the South, they have
obtained security for their family. But
Louis will not rest until blacks have the same rights as other American
citizens, joining the freedom riders where he is routinely assaulted, beaten,
spit upon, and arrested. Because of
these offenses, Cecil disowns his son and refuses to speak to him, which is his
way of deluding himself about his son and history.
In much the same way, it’s interesting how the Presidents
engage in private conversations with their black butlers about the ‘black”
problems, where Eisenhower doesn’t get how his experience growing up on a farm isn’t
the same as Cecil’s, or LBJ’s profusive use of the word “nigger” to his own
cabinet and staff somehow evolves to the word “Negro” on national television,
JFK coolly describes to Cecil (who had no idea) that his son has been arrested
15 times, before television photos of the firehoses turned on peacefully
demonstrating blacks in Birmingham cause he and his brother to have a change of
heart on the race issue, while Reagan (played by the Harry Potter wizard
specializing in the Dark Arts) second guesses his own shortsightedness on the
post Civil Rights race relations, something one sincerely doubts, since the
Reagan Republicans have consistently attempted to all but legalize racial
discrimination, playing the race card in political ads ever since that
cynically appeal to white votes. But in
this film, the theme of the film comes from the prophetic words of Martin
Luther King, Jr. spoken to Louis just moments before he would be shot, “Domestics
play a very big role in our history. In
many ways they are subversive without ever knowing it,” suggesting they break
down negative racial stereotypes by demonstrating steady employment, also by
performing their jobs with grace and dignity, showing that they can be trusted,
all of which defies the inherently distrustful views of racial bigotry.
But the arc of the story leads to a reunification of father
and son, to President Obama, and the mistaken belief that things are finally so
much better for blacks in America, where the film’s tagline, “One quiet voice
can ignite a revolution,” is simply ridiculous.
Who are they kidding? Then why
are so many black men (over a million) languishing in prisons at the
moment? And why is it legal to arrest a
black and a white man for the exact same drug offense, yet the sentence for the
black is so much more severe than the white, who with a lawyer may never serve
any prison time at all? Whites use drugs
5 times more than blacks, yet blacks are sent to prison for drug offenses at 10
times the rate of whites. Blacks
constitute more than 80% of those incarcerated under federal crack cocaine laws
and serve substantially more time in prison than do their white counterparts,
despite that fact that more than 2/3 of crack cocaine users in the U.S. are
white or Hispanic, so it’s now perfectly legal for the police to exclusively
target black neighborhoods for drug raids and for the court system to exhibit
racial discrimination in court sentencing, and no one says a word. But while blacks no longer have to sit at the
back of the bus, progress has been slow going, with all too many reminders of
the vicious cycle of racial hatred that continues without end from generation
to generation.
While the picture has some well known blacks promoting and
participating in the making of the movie, the question must be asked, is this a
black movie? Borrowing from the website Racism
Is White Supremacy: Is
“Lee Daniels' The Butler” (Really) A “Black Movie?” | Racism Is ...
1. Who wrote the screenplay for the movie, The Butler?
Danny Strong, Screenwriter for ‘The Butler,’ who was hired to write “The Butler” in 2009, a year before Daniels even signed on as director.
2. Who Owns the (Distribution) Rights to the movie,
“Lee Daniels’ The Butler”?
Harvey Weinstein (Co-Chairman – the Weinstein Company)
David Glasser, Weinstein Co. COO
3. Who are the Producers, Executive Producers and
Co-Producers of “The Butler?”
Laura Ziskin – Executive Producer (deceased)
Hilary Shor – Executive Producer
Adam Merims – Executive Producer
Buddy Patrick – Producer
Shelia Johnson – Producer
Lee Daniels – Producer
Cassian Elwes – Producer
How, then, is this considered a “black” movie? This is Hollywood’s portrayal of a black
movie, which is an altogether different thing, as the creative minds and
financial power behind the film are almost entirely white. So one must keep in mind that this is still
how white people view blacks even in contemporary society, where it’s a
continuation of a white Hollywood racist fantasia that’s been the corporate
business model for well over 100 years, where leading black roles of continued
submission and obedient servitude to whites are the ones more likely to be accepted
by white audiences and nominated for Academy Awards.
