The Butler | The Boneyard

The Butler

cohenzone

Old Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
18,696
Reaction Score
21,134
Saw this movie today. First thing is, it's way too predictable. It also seems like a make work project for Hollywood, but Oprah certainly doesn't need the money and acting isn't her meal ticket anyway. If I'm a political conservative, I hate the movie if only because of the way Nixon and Reagan are depicted. Pretty over the top negative. John Cusak plays Nixon and Alan Rickman plays Ronnie, both with funky makeup. Also, my wife and I were debating whether Robin Williams was supposed to be Truman or Eisenhower (I think Ike is the correct answer based on the events involved, but he sure looked like Truman), None are major parts of the movie. The flick might have value for younger people who didn't experience the the civil rights era. Almost all of the main events are shown through the role of the butler's son. who becomes radicalized, and is a short hand primer for the unfamiliar in a Forrest Gumpish sort of way.. What is portrayed interestingly is the attitude of the older black generation toward the civil rights movement - some afraid to rock the boat, and some good dramatic juxtaposition of what the son was experiencing while at the same time the father was butlering in the halls of power. I wouldn't say don't see it, because I know some people who liked it a lot. I was luke warm.
 

cohenzone

Old Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
18,696
Reaction Score
21,134
Meant to say, the other thing that conservatives and possibly some others won't like is the casting of Jane Fonda as Nancy Reagan.
 

meyers7

You Talkin’ To Me?
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
23,195
Reaction Score
59,519
Saw this movie today. First thing is, it's way too predictable.
Well it was based on real life events, and a real life butler....soooo.....

If I'm a political conservative, I hate the movie if only because of the way Nixon and Reagan are depicted. Pretty over the top negative.
I'm conservative and didn't hate it, but yea, they kind of tilted it that it was better to work for the liberal presidents than the conservative ones. But maybe that's actually how Eugene Allen felt??? Although they did point out Reagan was the only one to actually do anything for the butler.

Also, my wife and I were debating whether Robin Williams was supposed to be Truman or Eisenhower (I think Ike is the correct answer based on the events involved, but he sure looked like Truman), .
Yea, he did look a lot like Truman, but pretty sure he was Eisenhower because Nixon came into the kitchen as his VP (getting ready to run for president - 1960 loss to Kennedy)

Overall, liked the movie. It went a bit over the top there at the end with the Obama election. But from a black sharecroppers view I can see the point they were trying to make (though they kind of used a sledgehammer to do it.) Thought Whitaker did a real nice job. Oprah was ok too. Thought Terrence Howard was really good in his part.
 

cohenzone

Old Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
18,696
Reaction Score
21,134
Well it was based on real life events, and a real life butler....soooo.....


I'm conservative and didn't hate it, but yea, they kind of tilted it that it was better to work for the liberal presidents than the conservative ones. But maybe that's actually how Eugene Allen felt??? Although they did point out Reagan was the only one to actually do anything for the butler.


Yea, he did look a lot like Truman, but pretty sure he was Eisenhower because Nixon came into the kitchen as his VP (getting ready to run for president - 1960 loss to Kennedy)

Overall, liked the movie. It went a bit over the top there at the end with the Obama election. But from a black sharecroppers view I can see the point they were trying to make (though they kind of used a sledgehammer to do it.) Thought Whitaker did a real nice job. Oprah was ok too. Thought Terrence Howard was really good in his part.

I read where one southern theater owner, a Nam vet, is refusing to run the movie because of Fonda. Other groups are boycotting because of Fonda as well. Not sure if it's Fonda per se or her cast as Nancy Reagan. I though the negative portrayal of Reagan really extended to Nancy. At the dinner, Oprah's character is cynical about why they were invited. I did wonder what the real butler's attitudes were on a bunch of things that are depicted in the movie. As I said, I didn't hate the movie, just left me underwhelmed.
 

JaYnYcE

Soul Brother
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
2,248
Reaction Score
858
I just watched The Butler and thought it was well done. The sit down scene was intense, I can't believe my grandparents would take that abuse.
 

RS9999X

There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,628
Reaction Score
562
Ultimately it asks Black men if they could be The Butler, differentiate between an abusive boss who is non racial in their abuse--they abuse everyone, and whether Civil Rights protesters were the answer to the quiet dignity of work

I think much of the message was lost.
 

cohenzone

Old Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
18,696
Reaction Score
21,134
Ultimately it asks Black men if they could be The Butler, differentiate between an abusive boss who is non racial in their abuse--they abuse everyone, and whether Civil Rights protesters were the answer to the quiet dignity of work

I think much of the message was lost.

I don't understand your point. Are you suggesting that if there had been no civil rights protests, just going with the flow would have eventually led to some semblance of equal opportunity? If that is what you are saying, I'd guess you aren't a black person. Rand Paul famously said the civil rights laws went too far in forcing private businesses that were open to the public, such as lunch counters, to require all facilities to be offered on a non-discriminatory basis. To which I say, Rand, if the shoe were on the other foot, you would never feel that way. I am hoping that isn't what you meant.
 

RS9999X

There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,628
Reaction Score
562
I'm not suggesting that at all oh great binary thinker. Try some nuance, shading, and texture.
 

RS9999X

There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,628
Reaction Score
562
Here's some shading for you from a town I lived in 28 years.

At the height of his career in 1941, Paul Robeson and his wife, Eslanda, bought an elegant home in Enfield, becoming the only black family in town. Their son, Paul Jr., remembers his own time in Connecticut with great fondness. Now 70 years old and living in New York City, the younger Mr. Robeson has been intensely involved with planning his father's centennial celebration, just as he was intensely involved with his father's life.

''My father's artistic base was in New York,'' says Mr. Robeson. ''Enfield was his retreat. I experienced no racism there. I have very warm memories of going to Enfield High. I remember the first school dance I went to; one of the most popular girls in school walked all across the floor to ask me to dance, to break the ice.''
 

cohenzone

Old Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
18,696
Reaction Score
21,134
How many Paul Robeson examples do you have from your fond memories of Enfield. Paul Robeson did not go quietly into the night, as the butler was wishing to do until his son rattled his cage. Enfield, hate to report for your shadings, was not Memphis, nor Little Rock. nor Selma, nor Washington DC., nor Philadephia, nor New Haven. You have no clue.
 

RS9999X

There's no Dark Side .....it's all Dark.
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,628
Reaction Score
562
I dont argue the South. The North? NE in particular? A good argument can be made that Black people are worse off in CT than 1963 when the unemployment rate was around 5% for Blacks. The CT economy was 45% manufacturing and 10% agriculture. The incarceration rate was far less. The marriage rate far higher.

Drive down Homestead Avenue and many areas in North Main Street. Its like a time warp to 1963. With even more crime and poverty.

I'm not saying the movement was useless in the North East. It often means nothing more than the sons of the exploitive minority political ward bosses in 1963 are now on the Town Councils and in the Mayors office and openly exploiting the system instead of doing so behind the scenes.

Still no decent answer to poverty from the LEFT except "more of the same" and a drive for more unionized preschool teachers.


'
 

cohenzone

Old Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
18,696
Reaction Score
21,134
I dont argue the South. The North? NE in particular? A good argument can be made that Black people are worse off in CT than 1963 when the unemployment rate was around 5% for Blacks. The CT economy was 45% manufacturing and 10% agriculture. The incarceration rate was far less. The marriage rate far higher.

Drive down Homestead Avenue and many areas in North Main Street. Its like a time warp to 1963. With even more crime and poverty.

I'm not saying the movement was useless in the North East. It often means nothing more than the sons of the exploitive minority political ward bosses in 1963 are now on the Town Councils and in the Mayors office and openly exploiting the system instead of doing so behind the scenes.

Still no decent answer to poverty from the LEFT except "more of the same" and a drive for more unionized preschool teachers.


'
 

Fishy

Elite Premium Poster
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
17,955
Reaction Score
129,175
This kitten fight is more entertaining than the movie was.
 

Online statistics

Members online
769
Guests online
4,123
Total visitors
4,892

Forum statistics

Threads
155,786
Messages
4,031,563
Members
9,865
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom