tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post2393613563797359834..comments2023-04-22T15:15:21.275-07:00Comments on Hitchcock's World: When is a Film a Product of its Time?John Hitchcockhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13373653979400552490noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-31331576541535884722014-07-20T08:00:10.101-07:002014-07-20T08:00:10.101-07:00Really? With all the layers of makeup I never woul...Really? With all the layers of makeup I never would have guessed that there was an African American under there. <br /><br />I'll probably take it in steps. I think my best bet is to just start with the first big Craig film (Casino Royale, plus it was a review of that which got me thinking about this in the first place) and see how I react to that. If it's as good as people say I'll try out the other two.John Hitchcockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13373653979400552490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-16217356088727343962014-07-20T07:25:04.413-07:002014-07-20T07:25:04.413-07:00The short version of black actors in blackface is ...The short version of black actors in blackface is that it was the only way black performance troupes of post-Civil War America would be accepted by white audiences which is where they made more money. The audiences enjoyed the performances that, like the white troupes, approached plantation life from a heavily stereotypical viewpoint. In blackface was an extremely viable way for black performers to achieve financial success throughout the Vaudeville era, only really falling out of favor during the Civil Rights Movement. The book I mentioned in my other comment is "Darkest America: Black Minstrelsy from Slavery to Hip-Hop" by Yuval Taylor and Jake Austen.<br /><br />Sidenote: the gentleman in blackface in the pic in your post is himself African-American. His name is Bert Williams.<br /><br />As for Daniel Craig's Bond films, I highly recommend them. They really are an examination of everything about the character and a humanization of him. Sure, there's outrageous action and even "Bond girls" (almost no gadgets, though), but it takes the franchise in a completely introspective direction. I thought Casino Royale was good, Quantum of Solace was 'meh', and Skyfall was downright brilliant. Dellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05634519605152190304noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-39354333474802243322014-07-18T05:36:12.741-07:002014-07-18T05:36:12.741-07:00Really? I thought blackface was something that was...Really? I thought blackface was something that was purely done by white actors. I've seen one hilarious instance where in a parody of the whole thing a black actor donned whiteface but Bamboozled sounds like a strange take on it.<br /><br />With regards to your Bond comments, I guess I can see where you're coming from. One comment I have heard on why so many people still enjoy Connery's Bond is that they get distracted by the crazy gadgets and attractive women and don't think too much about the underlying implication. I could especially see that affecting children of the time period.<br /><br />It it is any consolation I have recently been considering giving the Craig films a chance. I managed to find a low-priced copy of Casino Royale, which I've been told gets better about the issues of sexism (and makes a heck of a lot more sense than the 1967 version). I know they were getting better about it during the Prosnan Era and if it is as good as people say I might write a follow-up discussing how I felt about it.John Hitchcockhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13373653979400552490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3797386216465468233.post-90186086510366219962014-07-18T05:01:15.289-07:002014-07-18T05:01:15.289-07:00I'll start with the fact that I'm a Bond f...I'll start with the fact that I'm a Bond fan, but not a die-hard. I can freely admit that it is a sexist franchise. However, that's only one of the many flaws. To be honest, most of them are things I didn't realize until I got older. By that time, I had literally grown up Bond flicks. I hate to date myself, but my mom actually took me to see Moonraker on the big screen. Granted, I was a child so I may not have had privy to such discussions, but women didn't seem to have a problem with him so in my childish mind he was fine. The biggest complaint I ever heard about Bond was that it was too unrealistic. That was usually spoken with regards to the action and the gadgets, two things I couldn't get enough of back then.<br /><br />As I grew older, I started to notice more of those things. My outlook on life formed and reformed several times over. I watched tons more movies. Aside from that the Pierce Brosnan Bonds hit and the series went full on cartoon which irked me. Still, there was always that nostalgic aspect of it that kept me giving the franchise a pass. As illogical as it seems, "but it's a Bond flick" is the standard excuse in my mind. It's "supposed" to be like that. Sad, but true.<br /><br />As far as the filmmakers go, I think both being a product of their time and a male fantasy do apply. If you watch the old ones, there are lots of things that go on that just wouldn't fly if the movies were made today. It is also male fantasy because it's all about saving the day and getting the girl. True, some of the specifics have been unsavory, like the rape in question, but the overriding theme has remained the same. So I don't think lots of men (or boys) sat around fantasizing about raping women, but they did wish to be the hero with the hot babe. The rest is just details they can fixate on or ignore at their leisure.<br /><br />Should the powers that be have changed things sooner? Sure. Why didn't they? Some of that responsibility has to fall on us, the movie going public. Just as they are, we're talking some hugely successful movies as far as the box office goes. Right or wrong, people making money hand over fist have little incentive to change the product that's lining their pockets. Is that a poor excuse? Yup. It's still absolutely valid because that's the way business works. Come up with an idea and sell it until you can't make money from it.<br /><br />That brings me to the Daniel Craig Bond flicks. The three of them put together are really a deconstruction of the franchise. Casino Royale and Skyfall make particularly pointed commentary on the character and his place in the 21st century. This is why I like them far better than the older pictures in the series. Are they perfect with regards to sexism? No, but they're far more enlightened than anything else in the canon. Why have things suddenly moved in this direction? It's simple, the Bond franchise was falling out of favor at the box office. They still made money, but the tide was clearly turning away from them. Again, sad, but true.<br /><br />Sorry for my rambling comment, John, but you've got a really interesting article, here. By the way, there is a long, complicated history of black actors donning blackface also. Very interesting topic to read up on. Not long ago, I read a book on it myself, but the title escapes me at the moment. I'll post it when I find out what it was. For a movie modernizing this issue, see Spike Lee's Bamboozled.Dellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05634519605152190304noreply@blogger.com