BALANCE OF POWER: "21 BRIDGES" (2019) AND "MARSHALL" (2017) - THE (UNDERAPPRECIATED?) CHADWICK BOSEMAN COMBO-PUNCH - by CEJ

 

________________________________________________

VAULTED TREASURES: MOVIES YOU NEVER KNEW ABOUT, YOU FORGOT, 

... OR YOU FORGOT TO LOVE MORE THE FIRST TIME AROUND!

21 BRIDGES 

Dir. by - Brian Kirk 

Prod. by - Anthony & Joe Russo, Mike Larocca, Robert Simmonds, Gigi Pritzker, Chadwick Boseman  

Screenplay by - Adam Mervis, Matthew Michael Carnahan Story by - Adam Mervis 

Dir. of Photog. - Paul Cameron

Edited by - Tim Merrill

Prod. Design - Greg Berry

Music - Henry Jackman, 

Alex Belcher

Run Time: 100 mins.  

Release: 11/22/2019

Production Companies - MWM Studios, H. Brothers, AGBO, X-Ception Content 

Dist. by - STXfilms

 

MARSHALL

Dir. by - Reginald Hudlin 

Prod. by - Paula Wagner, Reginald Hudlin,

Jonathan Sanger  

Written by - Michael Koskoff, David Koskoff 

Director of Photography - Newton Thomas Sigel 

Edited by - Tom McCardle

Production Design - 

Tom Meyer

Music - Marcus Miller

Run Time: 118 mins.  

Release: 10/12/2017

Production Companies - Starlight Media, Chestnut Ridge Prods., Hudlin Entertainment

Dist. by - Open Road Films

     It's been asserted by many filmmakers that a damn good score and / or editing can make a bad film okay, an okay film good, and a good film great, ... and the opposite to the same degree with a bad score, bad editing, etc. I've always felt the same about a film's cast. And, as such, I've always thought 21 BRIDGES and MARSHALL as damn fine examples of the former side of the (pun entirely intended) creative bridge.

     I remember when both films opened, and the general consensus among many filmgoers and critics - particularly with 21 BRIDGES - was "Well, yeah, it's okay, but in the end it's a standard police procedural, isn't it?". And my response was always along the lines of, "Well, look at something like REPORT TO THE COMMISSIONER, or hell, even THE SEVEN UPS. There's really nothing overly remarkable in either of those screenplays, in either of those narratives. They're very well / very tightly written screenplays, to be sure. But in comparison to something like, say, THE FRENCH CONNECTION, SERPICO, PRINCE OF THE CITY, or even the later Q&A, they don't have the fire and irony of any of those.", ... once again, in their scripts, at least.  

(top) REPORT TO THE COMMISSIONER (1975) / (bottom) THE SEVEN UPS (1973)

     COMMISSIONER and SEVEN UPS, however, are ignited, and become something truly, TRULY special because of a) the directors behind them, and b) phenomenal cast members who make the characters live and breathe and feel completely sweatily-funkily-nervously-foot-shakingly-lived-in-for-real. Now, I'm not saying that either 21 BRIDGES or MARSHALL will ever (or ever deserve to) become the classics any of those aforementioned films are. But, just as with COMMISSIONER and SEVEN UPS, they're as damn good as they are because of the casts and filmmakers behind them, and the style and voice they all bring to the proceedings. Of course, in the midst of all of this, one can't help but single out a very important element in both 21 BRIDGES and MARSHALL - the star of each, Chadwick Boseman: an actor whose presence and craft helped both films rise to a quality status / level a bit more than what seems to have been in their respective script pages. Damn good actors and damn good directors can do this. 

42 (2013)

Starting out in smaller roles in movies such as THE EXPRESS: THE ERNIE DAVIS STORY (2008) and DRAFT DAY (2014) ... . Oh, and it's (a slight digression here, sorry) still hard for me to reconcile that his role as Jackie Robinson in 42 (2013) was before DRAFT DAY. Hard to reconcile because for me it was with both 42 and GET ON UP (2014, with Boseman as James Brown) that he really became a major star. With DRAFT DAY, though, his name in the credits is way down on the list. But like I said, I digress. It's just one of those odd/weird ones to me, one of those things which bothers me to this day ... and, once again, apologies for the slight turn off course. Anyway, back to the things at hand. 

     After the critical accolades for his performances as both Robinson and Brown, Boseman (of course) became a worldwide cultural sensation / star with his role as T'Challa / The Black Panther in the Marvel Cinematic Universe films. But I love how, in spite of that, he was determined to not fall into the "Connery / James Bond", "Christopher Reeve / Superman" trap of becoming so identified with one character, that he'd forever have a hard time getting people to believe he was capable and worthy of any other kind of role. Connery and Reeve were always capable and worthy as well. They just had to battle for a decade or more to get others to believe / understand / get on the same page with it.    

GET ON UP (2014)

     In Boseman's case, after the acclaim for his roles as Robinson and Brown, he followed them by doing something deliberately off-the-wall-kilter - his delightfully humorous performance as the arrogant ancient deity Thoth in Alex Proyas' GODS OF EGYPT (2016). And 'round about this time even studios started to take note of his chameleon-like diversity - perhaps the most obvious example being how after Boseman's BLACK PANTHER superstardom in 2018, Netflix "re-promoted" Fabrice Du Welz's MESSAGE FROM THE KING - a film they'd picked up after it debuted at 2016's Toronto International Film Festival, and which they started streaming in 2017. In MESSAGE, Boseman goes full "dark night of the soul" as a South African who comes to Los Angeles in search of his sister, learns she's been killed, then burns a hole through LA's underworld avenging her death. 

(L to R) DRAFT DAY (2014) / GODS OF EGYPT (2016) / MESSAGE FROM THE KING (2016)

     Now, love it or hate it, Netflix over the last decade has become a major (hell, even beloved) home for filmmakers whose pet projects would have had a hard time finding major studio theatrical backing - among them Alfonso Cuarón's ROMA (2018), Bradley Cooper's MAESTRO (2023), Guillermo del Toro's FRANKENSTEIN (2025), and even Scorsese's THE IRISHMAN (2019). As such, it's telling (and, hell, I'll say it, even laudable) that the streaming / studio giant would get behind two later day films (not necessarily deemed "commercial") where Boseman got to yet again display his dramatic / chameleon-like chops - Spike Lee's DA 5 BLOODS (2020) and George Wolfe's adaptation of August Wilson's MA RAINEY'S BLACK BOTTOM (2020); the later produced by Denzel Washington, and Boseman's final film before his death in August of the same year. So, yeah, ... 

     Not unlike other great stars ... who were also just great character actors (and I'd count among them people like Gene Hackman, Denzel Washington, Diane Ladd and Diane Lane, Robert Duvall, and others), ... I loved how Boseman never allowed himself to be turned into a self-important "act-tor" of the cliched' sort, nor a commercial pretty boy / action star on the other side of the spectrum - but always remained a damn-good character actor regardless of his star status. All of which brings us to 21 BRIDGES and MARSHALL. 

(clockwise) BLACK PANTHER (2018) / MA RAINEY'S BLACK BOTTOM (2020) /
DA 5 BLOODS (2020) / 

  

     21 BRIDGES is for me one of the best and most enjoyably straight-ahead "modern-day programmers" of the last decade. For those perhaps not familiar with "movie buff" jargon, "programmers" were essentially films produced from the 1940s - 80s which, for all intents and purposes, were done on the cheap (or at least the less expensive end of things), usually intended to fill out the second slot of a double-feature or drive-in "two-fer", and intended and expected (because of the "thrifty" manner in which the studios made them, ... and keep in mind they were usually studio films; so, even while "less expensive", they had a lot at their disposal in the way of technicians, sets and more) to turn a profit within a short period of time. The only thing, though, was they were sometimes so damn well made, that they'd become more popular than the "first half" of the double-bill they were meant to fill-out. 

     This is how the 1952 "B movie", THE NARROW MARGIN - directed by a pre-20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA, FANTASTIC VOYAGE, TORA TORA TORA, SOYLENT GREEN Richard Fleischer - eventually came to be known as a noir classic. This is how even earlier, a "B" flick originally titled THE GENT FROM FRISCO, intended to be the directorial debut of a screenwriter named John Huston, became the timeless cinema gem we now know as THE MALTESE FALCON. 

"Programmer" heaven with (clockwise from top) THE NARROW MARGIN (1952) /
WHITE LINE FEVER (1975) / 21 BRIDGES (2019)

     As such, over time, the word (and concept of a) "programmer" morphed from an object of subtle "derision" to a "badge of honor". And later films by directors like Jonathan Kaplan (among them WHITE LINE FEVER, TRUCK TURNER, UNLAWFUL ENTRY, BROKEDOWN PALACE), Peter Hyams (CAPRICORN ONE, THE STAR CHAMBER, OUTLAND), Andrew Davis (CODE OF SILENCE, ABOVE THE LAW), and even the Coen Bros.' FARGO, and more would all come to be known / thought of by many as "modern day programmers". For me, ... 

21 BRIDGES (2019)

     That's exactly what we get in 21 BRIDGES. Back in the 70s it could have, yeah, just been a cool-as-hell drive-in flick or TV Movie of the Week with a bad-assed premise - "Over the course of one fateful night, an obsessed New York detective has all 21 river crossings into the island of Manhattan shut down / blocked in order to box in two cop killers responsible for the deaths of seven NYPD officers responding to a million dollar cocaine robbery". But director Brian Kirk (THE TUDORS, DEXTER, GAME OF THRONES) gives his urban actioner such visual sophistication and style... . And not only that, but because it's performed by a great cast of character actors - along with Boseman, Sienna Miller, the always excellent Keith David, forever awesome J.K. Simmons, FRIDAY NIGHT LIGHTS' Taylor Kitsch, STAR TREK: DEEP SPACE NINE's Alexander Siddig, and others, in the end the film just rises above the Movie of the Week it could have been in lesser hands, and emerges as an old-school "programmer" win of the best sort. 

     In parts I actually get the vibe of some of the films adapted from the novels of former Secret Service agent Gerald Petievich, too - among them Friedkin's TO LIVE AND DIE IN L.A. (1985), '93's BOILING POINT with Wesley Snipes, Dennis Hopper, and Viggo Mortenson (based on Petievich's MONEY MEN), and 2006's THE SENTINEL with Michael Douglas, Kiefer Sutherland, and Eva Longoria. Just a nice wiff here and there of that Petievich vibe. And I think that's wholly intentional.

     In Petievich's yarns (which themselves are cut from the mold of 40s era "programmers") there's one person, one soul (tarnished or not) who becomes our tour guide through the societal maze (often an urban one) of amorality, divided loyalties, double-crosses and more. It's through that person's eyes and world view (often somewhat changed by the story's end because of their experience) that we come to either agree with (or at least understand) this world or reject it. Bogie in THE MALTESE FALCON (perhaps the greatest "programmer" of all time) is such a tour guide for us. And that's Chadwick Boseman's same function in 21 BRIDGES. Now, before you get that look on your face because of me comparing Boseman to Bogie, keep in mind I didn't say that he, or even his character, was the same. I said his and Bogie's characters serve the same function for the audience. 

The World Through Their Eyes: (Clockwise from top) Humphrey Bogart - THE MALTESE FALCON (1941) / Dick Powell - MURDER MY SWEET (1944) / Robert Mitchum - FAREWELL, MY LOVELY (1975) / Keith David and Chadwick Boseman - 21 BRIDGES (2019)

     While primarily a blitzkrieg of an actioner, 21 BRIDGES has still got Bogie, and Dick Powell, and Robert Mitchum and the rest of the boys in its creative DNA. The only thing with Boseman is that he's much less "stylistic and noirish" than the others, and much more real world. He's got a little bit of all of them inside, to be sure. But there's probably more of Nathan Fillion's John Nolan from TV's THE ROOKIE. It's this quality which anchors 21 BRIDGES and helps make it just a bit more than "what the actors say and do". And, hey, one more thing before we leave the Big Apple and its bridges, ...

Director Brian Kirk and Boseman on set

     Also, nice that, just like the best of "programmers", 21 BRIDGES isn't self-important enough to think it needs a running time over 2hrs. to "realize its vision". Nah! Back in the day, most, good, tightly wound, smoothly composed and executed programmers managed to get a helluva-lot-of-narrative-bang-for-the-buck in under 90s mins. And 21 BRIDGES runs just slightly over that. If you include its end credits, it runs just under 100 mins.

________________________________________________

Chadwick Boseman and Josh Gad in MARSHALL (2019)

     Now, interestingly, while based upon real people and real incidents - here, an early, life-defining court case involving Thurgood Marshall, the man who would one day become America's first black Supreme Court Justice - MARSHALL the film chooses to veer from the norm (veer from cliche'?) in not carrying out its narrative as a dry history lesson / social studies class, but more as a (in tone, at least) modern-day "court room thriller / mystery programmer". In this case it focuses on the true story of Marshall as an NAACP-appointed attorney at the center of 1941's earth-shattering "State of Connecticut v. Joseph Spell" trial - where a black chauffeur was accused of raping his boss, a rich white woman. As such - the dark nature of its fact-based story notwithstanding - it's rather refreshingly clever (not to mention daring) that director Reginald Hudlin and his screenwriters wrap the telling of this "look-back into America's dark past" in the blanket of what at times almost feels like an Erle Stanley Gardner, John Grisham, Scott Turow-like page-turner. Now, ... 

Kate Hudson / MARSHALL (2019)

     Telling an historical story in the form of a (for lack of a better term) "popular thriller" is a double-edged sword. On the one side, you get to tell it not as the aforementioned "dry history lesson (of sorts)", but with the emotional fervor of which most of those who actually lived it surely felt, ... but of which most Discovery / History Channel / Nat-Geo docus can't always get across. But you also run the risk of people saying that you're being "disrespectful to the material by 'Hollywood-ing' it up". Y'know, that you're assuming the audience is too dull, and won't "get it" and / or be willing to sit down long enough for a straight-forward docu-drama that doesn't "pander to an audience with the ADD level of a flea".  The thing is, I understand and agree with both sides of that argument. 

Historical effrontery or creative license for the sake of drama?: PEARL HARBOR (2001) /
POCAHONTOS (1995) / ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE (2007)

 

     I mean, I agreed, ... in a huge way!, ...with the former when (and hey, we all have our opinions) I first saw Michael Bay's PEARL HARBOR, which I still feel is the biggest affront in general to anyone who ever served in combat, and the biggest affront to the memory of those actually at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7th, 1941, in particular. But I also realize / vividly remember, too, how over the years there have been more than a few films at the time of their original releases that were brutally criticized for (supposedly) sacrificing drama for the sake of historical accuracy and authenticity. Y'know, they were said to be too accurate and / or too concerned with data to the detriment of being entertaining. Films like Richard Fleischer's THE BOSTON STRANGLER and TORA, TORA, TORA, and Richard Attenborough's A BRIDGE TOO FAR were all victims of such criticisms. 

"Too beholden to data to be entertaining?" (top to bottom) THE BOSTON STRANGLER (1968) /
TORA, TORA, TORA! (1970) / A BRIDGE TOO FAR (1977)

     Yes, it's hard to believe now, in our post-SAVING PRIVATE RYAN / post-SCHINDLER'S LIST era, where BOSTON STRANGLER, TORA, and BRIDGE TOO FAR have over the years become much more respected for "getting it right",... or at least making a sincere attempt to do so. But this wasn't always the case. And, hell, even take a look at more recent years where we've had films like Adam McKay's VICE (2018) - the kind of movie people say they want more of, but don't seem to actually go out to see. And this while (let's call them) more "fanciful historical films" like 300, MARIE ANTOINETTE, ELIZABETH: THE GOLDEN AGE (a film I love), and, perhaps most historically egregiously, Disney's animated POCAHONTAS, emerge as some of the most critically acclaimed and financially successful movies of their respective years. All of this to get across the fact that, yeah, there's gotta be a balance. And if a filmmaker and their cast and crew can get it just right, there's a power / double-punch combo in that balance of memorable storytelling with the ability to elicit from an audience - one which may not have known a damn thing about the historical subject matter beforehand - not only a need to, but a desire to remember and learn more. 

Balance of power: History remembered for some, and for others learned for the first
 time - both through genre / HBO's WATCHMEN recalls "The Tulsa Race Massacre of 1921"

     Remember after the debut of HBO's TV series version of Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons' WATHCMEN, how over the next few weeks almost every conservation you heard at every work water cooler, school lunchroom, inside delivery trucks, or wherever, consisted of people saying, "Wow, I never even heard of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre, before!". So, on one side of the scale you've got history told in one kind of gripping narrative form in SAVING PRIVATE RYAN, SCHINDLER'S LIST and others, while on the other side you've got history being just as grippingly told with WATCHMEN; then somewhere in the middle, under the guise of an Erle Stanley Gardner-like programmer, you've got Reginald Hudlin's MARSHALL, in my opinion one of the better bio-drama examples in recent years to nicely do the same in finding its own "balance of power" - in its case, a blending of entertaining mystery-drama, historical education, and cry for modern-day social activism. 

Young Thurgood Marshall: the left a High School
graduation photo from 1925

     With a film walking such a precarious balance, regardless of how it's directed, edited, scored, etc., in the end the fulcrum point in such an endeavor, surely in this one, becomes the actor portraying the titular character - once again Chadwick Boseman. If you can get the average person to admit it, the only thing they really know about the late Thurgood Marshall is that he was the first African-American Supreme Court Justice. Most know nothing of his early life, that he was an NAACP lawyer, that he traveled across the U.S. defending blacks wrongly / falsely accused of (so-called race-based) crimes which could have had them (at best) imprisoned or (at worst) lynched. To most people Marshall was an icon, ... and not simply a man. 

     So, with the film MARSHALL, its intent becomes three-fold - a) to enlighten the present generation on certain parts of America's not-so-long-ago history, ... of which many young people are still amazingly unaware, b) to humanize Thurgood Marshall, and c) to do both by allowing us to see said world through the eyes and emotional experiences of a young lawyer at the beginning of his career during arguably one of the most dangerous eras ever for the concept of law in the U.S., and the effectiveness, and even survival, of its Constitution, ... an era some might say is running fairly neck-and-neck with our own present one. But making that analogy, ... yes, even a decade before our present state in the U.S., ... was the intent of director Hudlin, Boseman, and the rest - this as ten years ago, or ten or thirty years from now, history has proven that it has, and continually will, tend to repeat itself. 

(L to R) Bruce Greenwood as JFK in THIRTEEN DAYS (2000) / David Oyelowo as MLK, JR.
in SELMA (2014) / Chadwick Boseman as Thurgood Marshall in MARSHALL (2017)

     Actor Bruce Greenwood, in discussing his portrayal of JFK in Roger Donaldson's THIRTEEN DAYS (2000), and David Oyelowo, in doing the same regarding his depiction of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. in Ava DuVernay's SELMA (2014), both spoke of the ease, ... and great mistake, ... it would have been to attempt to imitate such icons of history in their voices, look, and even getting too caught up in trying to duplicate physical mannerisms. They both spoke, instead, of attempting to "inhabit" them as simply men, and in so doing help the audience to relate to the pain and pressure and fear, as well as triumphs, they endured - all of which helped to form our world today. To depict them as icons is to do them a great disservice. Depicting them as human men, however - flaws, screw ups, and all - not only makes them more relatable to us years later. But it also - quite ironically, doesn't it? - make them even more heroic and iconic for doing what they did regardless. 

     Boseman wisely chooses to do the same with his representation of the young Thurgood Marshall. He gives us a man, and in so doing, just like with his earlier depictions of James Brown and Jackie Robinson, here Marshall's real-world humanity makes the time he lived in more accessible to us, and makes the man himself all the more "grippingly fascinating" and, yup, infinity more heroic / iconic because of it. And, oh, by the way, in conclusion, in those "grippingly fascinating" and earlier mentioned "grippingly entertaining" categories, ...

Boseman and Sterling K. Brown / MARSHALL (2019)

     MARSHALL is considerably aided and abetted, and kept from falling into "Preachy TV Movie territory", by its lineup in front of and behind the camera. As for in front of that lens, we've got Boseman alongside Josh Gad - the later in probably his best role ever (hard to imagine him at all here as the "funny sidekick" of the Disney films), Sterling K. Brown as Joseph Spell - the chauffer accused of raping his boss, Eleanor Strubing - portrayed here by Kate Hudson. There's also James Cromwell as Judge Foster, Spike Lee regular Roger Guenveur Smith, Frank Darabont "stock player" Jeffrey DeMunn, and actress / vocalist Andra Day (THE UNITED STATES VS. BILLIE HOLLIDAY) among others. 

     And as if that weren't enough, behind the lens we've got the murderer's row of director Reginald Hudlin (BOOMERANG, THE GREAT WHITE HYPE, THE BLACK GODFATHER, producer of "T"s DJANGO UNCHAINED), legendary jazz / film composer Marcus Miller (SIESTA, BOOMERANG, SERVING SARA, THE BROTHERS, not to mention his years of collaborations with Miles Davis, David Sanborn, Bootsy Collins, Aretha Franklin, George Benson, Jimmy Buffett, and others), cinematographer Newton Thomas Sigel (THE USUAL SUSPECTS, FALLEN, APT PUPIL, X-MEN, BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY, DA 5 BLOODS), and many more. So, nah, ... 

     It's just damn hard (for me at least) to "brush off" either 21 BRIDGES or MARSHALL as "Yeah, okay programmers". In the strictest sense of the word, perhaps they are. But, maybe ironically so, I can't think of a greater badge of honor. And, while at it and speaking of, ... 

     How 'bout all due respect, said honor and love to the memory of the late/great Chadwick Boseman.? 

     Effin' miss you, man!  

                                                                                                          CEJ

Learn about the CHADWICK A. BOSEMAN MEMORIAL SCHOLARSHIP

AT HOWARD UNIVERSITY

________________________________________________

Copyright © 2025 Craig Ellis Jamison. All rights reserved.

TARNATION ALLEY: IS THE FAMILY FRIENDLY "FINCH" (2021) THE YEAR'S BEST FILM? - by CEJ

________________________________________________

VAULTED TREASURES: MOVIES YOU NEVER KNEW ABOUT, YOU FORGOT, 

... OR YOU FORGOT TO LOVE MORE THE FIRST TIME AROUND!

FINCH 

Dir. by - Miguel Sapochnik 

Prod. by - Craig Luck, Daniel Maze, Kevin Misher, Ivor Powell, Jack Rapke, 

Miguel Sapochnik, Robert Zemeckis  

Written by - Craig Luck, 

Ivor Powell

Director of Photography - 

Jo Willems

Edited by - Tim Porter

Production Design - 

Tom Meyer

Music - Gustavo Santaolalla

Run Time: 115 mins.  

Release: 11/5/2021

Production Companies - Amblin Ent., Reliance Ent., Walden Media, ImageMovers, Misher Films

GullCottage rating

(***** on a scale of 1-5)

                                                         

________________________________________________

     Well, obviously less a question and more a statement disguised as one, far as this guy’s concerned the answer is a resounding “Hell yeah!”. Funny thing, though, is as soon as some of you saw the phrase “family friendly” - admit it - you kinda made that face, didn’t you? Uh huh. But I’m not talking a “so-called” family film in that beat-to-death and clichéd THE BOATNIKS, NORTH AVENUE IRREGULARS, HERBIE GOES TO MONTE CARLO way. And not that those aren’t enjoyable films with lots to offer. But they’re “so-called” in that they’re not so much “family” films as they are “kids” films. Get my meaning? Over time that’s become the defacto … and wholly inaccurate ... definition of “family film” / “family friendly”. And at the outset, before diving into the surprisingly unique, heartbreakingly-magical-and-hopeful-yet-at-the-same-time-dark-and-mature, … and genuinely special! ... FINCH, I’d like us to be on the same page about that.  

(L) Dir. Miguel Sapachnik  / (R) Producer Robert Zemeckis

                                                                     Around the time of the release of BACK TO THE FUTURE III, director Robert Zemeckis, who also happens to be one of the producers of Miguel Sapochnik’s visually and emotionally gripping FINCH – at it’s core a straight up Rod Serling-esque treatise on both the light and dark nature of individual humanity - set the record straight on what a true “family film” should be, … which is (I mean, duh, right?) one in which not only little kids can become engrossed, but one which every member of the family – the young’ens, dark and moody teens, and even Moms, Dads, Grandmoms and Grandpops – can find themselves enjoying. And coming from the guy who knows a thing or two about grabbing the attention of every demographic within a single film – be it with one of his BACK TO THE FUTUREs, ROGER RABBIT, ROMANCING THE STONE, FORREST GUMP, CAST AWAY or whatever – I’d say he hit that nail precisely on the head. 

     This is what we have with FINCH, an often disturbing yet ironically at the same time hopeful post-apocalyptic cautionary sci-fi yarn cum road trip. Think DAMNATION ALLEY without the flesh-eating cockroaches, or MAD MAX: FURY ROAD sans the guitar flamethrower, and with enough LOGAN’S RUN-esque light at the end of the journey to rope in, entertain and, yes, remind all (hey, I did say it’s Rod Serling-esque, remember?) of what in the long haul, both individually and for humanity’s future in general, ultimately matters as being most important. And isn’t this something many have been mulling over and making life change choices about since the COVID pandemic upended every-single-effin’-thing in everyone’s life over these last couple of years? 

     In the not-too-distant future a major solar flare has punched enough sizable holes in the earth’s ozone layer to make the planet uninhabitable for most life - be that life human, animal or plant – with the average daytime temperature reaching approx. 150 degrees F. Among the few survivors within this near literal hellscape is Finch Weinberg (Tom Hanks), a former engineer whose intellect has allowed him to survive for years within the underground laboratory of his former employer company – a bunker out of which he regularly ventures to scour abandoned malls, etc. for food and other essentials that he might sustain the existence (one can hardly call it “life”) of himself, his dog Goodyear, and a small utility robot, kind of an advanced Mars Rover, named “Dewey”. And, oh, a nice shout-out to Douglas Trumball’s SILENT RUNNING there with “Dewey”👍. Anyway, … 

     Not only has the ozone decimation created a mostly scorched earth itself. But it triggers sudden and catastrophic atmospheric pressure shifts – shifts which regularly generate outbursts of hurricane-like dust storms carrying multiple tornadoes and slicing sand and debris within; the combination of which - factoring in the excessive heat as well - can flatten entire city blocks and rip to shreds anyone or anything unfortunate enough to be caught on the streets. In fact the film opens with a wowzer of an action / suspense sequence with Hanks and Dewy scrounging for supplies at the ghost of an old Dollar Store (while Don McLean’s “American Pie” heartbreakingly wafts from the old-school cassette player in Finch’s converted all terrain vehicle) and such a monster storm rolls into the city. 

     Finch and Dewy find themselves in said vehicle attempting to outrace the storm back to the safety of Finch’s bunker as the micro hurricane overturns abandoned vehicles and blasts to bits the remains of entire city blocks. In it’s pacing, editing, tone and uber-realistic realization of it’s visual effects (both practical and CGI) it’s surely among the most breathtaking filmic sequences of the year, and – all talk of Denis Villeneuve’s DUNE aside – this is one scene I truly wished I could’ve seen on an IMAX-sized screen rather than the – yeah, impressive, but not nearly the same thing – HDR tv screen in the home viewing room.  

     Now, while FINCH opens with that impressively nail-biting sequence, and while it does contain a few heart-palpitatingly suspenseful others within the confines of it’s 115 min. running time, it is most assuredly not an action suspense sci fier. So, one shouldn’t enter into it with that mindset. If you do you’ll most likely come away disappointed. Don’t get me wrong, director Miguel Sapochnik sure as hell knows how to wrap his audience around the finger of a killer action / suspense sequence, as evidenced by some of the mind boggling JOHN WICK / JOHN WOO-like razzle dazzle of his underrated 2010 future-world action flick REPO MEN with Jude Law and Forest Whitaker, as well as with some of those grand scale battle scenes he over the years staged for GAME OF THRONES. But FINCH rather quickly reveals itself to at it’s core be a more laid back, character-based “road movie” peppered with a couple of such suspense set pieces rather than an action or suspense film for the simple sake of one. 

Sapochnik's REPO MEN (2010)

     As mentioned earlier FINCH isn't DAMNATION ALLEY or THE ROAD WARRIOR. And, even though it’s certainly more tonal and thematic kin with say David Lynch’s THE STRAIGHT STORY (1999) with Richard Farnsworth, or Roger Donaldson’s THE WORLD’S FASTEST INDIAN (2005) with Anthony Hopkins, it’s not quite as “laid back” as those films either. It falls somewhere in-between – perhaps a little closer on the cinematic tone shelf with John Hillcoat’s 2009 adaptation of Cormac McCarthy’s THE ROAD with Viggo Mortensen, … only not quite as nilhistic. Hope I’m zooming in on the right tone here without giving away anything. Oh, yeah, one very important thing too …

     A few critics have opined that “… while well made, and while Hanks performance is quite good, FINCH brings nothing new to the genre of post apocalyptic films”. But I’m gonna swim against that stream and say this is a superficial and narrow-minded observation born of today’s simplistic Film 101-esque “Wow and surprise me with Tsui Hark action, James Cameron FX, and Rod Serling / M. Night Shyamalan-like plotlines and surprise twists, … or this film isn’t worth it” mindset. No, FINCH isn’t a George Lucas, Christopher Nolan or even Alex Garland-like “narrative freight train” where “This happens, then this happens, then the story shifts in this direction, then this happens, then this happens and if shifts again and …”.  No. And it really doesn’t expand the genre anymore than LOGAN’S RUN, THE OMEGA MAN or THE ROAD did. It has no intentions of doing so. So, if one wants to hang the “doesn’t add anything new” millstone around FINCH’s neck, then you also kind of have to do the same for those three aforementioned (and other) films as well. 

     Nah, FINCH is much more 1970s and 80s era old-school in that, just as back then how writer / filmmakers such as Robert Towne, John Sayles, John Milius and others used “Old as the hills and twice as dusty” tropes like film noir, westerns and more to make clever (and often pointed) commentary / observations on issues of the day, … and how, y’know, LOGAN’S RUN used the post apocalyptic genre to at it’s core tell an old-fashioned love story of one-to-one commitment during the era of “free love”, how THE OMEGA MAN used it’s “Last Man On Earth” post apocalyptic scenario to comment on the need for individualism in an increasingly “homogeneous” world, and how SOYLENT GREEN quite literally spoke to “social cannibalism”, etc., … . Yeah, so to also does FINCH use the tried and true (some might say “played out”) post apocalyptic filmic milieu / genre to do what is essentially a more intimate and sci fi-ish take on the biblical story of Noah’s Ark – one which, lo and behold, happens to perfectly dovetail with more than a few global warming issues of the day as well as a number of sociological concerns of our COVID era. But like LOGAN'S RUN and OMEGA MAN it does it in an entertaining and non-preachy way. Well, ... like LOGAN'S RUN does, anyway - haha! 😉

     Early on in FINCH, … in fact right after Finch and Dewey outrun the hurricane / sandstorm and make it back to Finch’s underground bunker, … we learn that Finch has been digitizing books while constructing an android, an android which later chooses as it’s own name “Jeff”. Jeff has been created so that if anything should happen to Finch, Jeff can become a receptacle or “message in a bottle” (if you will) of certain things – and one task in particular! (no spoilers here) – concerning mankind’s past / existence. While Finch is in the midst of doing so, weather detection indicates a massive hurricane / dust storm is on the verge of rolling in, a storm the likes of which has never occurred. Estimates are that it will last not for a few hours, as is the norm, but for 40 days, … and you don’t get more Old Testament biblical than that! Realizing he, Dewey, Jeff and Goodyear won’t be able to outlast the storm within the bunker, Finch makes the decision to load up a retrofitted (and truly bad-assed) RV / mobile home – sort of a less militant version of DAMNATION ALLEY’s “Landmaster” – and to head north towards San Francisco, a city which, for some reason hinted at via old postcards from family, holds personal significance for Finch. 

     Finch, the dog and the bots load up in the RV, head north and, while braving deadly storms, human marauders and (perhaps the most dangerous of all) crippling memories from Finch’s own past, Jeff is taught how to drive (some truly funny sequences there!), how to care for dogs, and (kind of as if Pinocchio or STAR TREK’s Data had received a crash course) not only taught how to sort / sift through voluminous amounts of factual material concerning physics, biology and human history, but about the nature – both light and dark – of what it truly means to be human. In essence, while not doing the “bringing two of each animal species aboard the ark in order to replenish the earth” thing, Jeff becomes the “two by two” vessel which, in the ultimate event of Finch’s demise (and he’s only human and will die one day) will help to replenish (“Be fruitful and multiply” if you will) a sense of old-world humanity into a currently cut-throat, socially (and at times literally) cannibalistic, violent, “I got mine - you get yours”, “dog eat dog” world. So, once again a very sharp / on-point analogy (intended or not, who knows?) in the COVID era where a year ago people were ready to one up, roll over, out jockey and physically fight one another for something as simple as toilet paper. Heaven help us if we ever got / get beyond TP and to the point of basic survival supplies like food and shelter as most of the world of FINCH finds itself.

FINCH's "road movie" thematic kin: (top) DAMNATION ALLEY (1977 / dir. - Jack Smight) /
(bottom) THE ROAD (2009 / dir. - John Hillcoat)

      So, all said, if one wants a “new” twist on the post apocalyptic genre, well, this is a remarkable one – a character and biblically thematically based one! I’m from the 1970s where – from CHINATOWN, to BLAZING SADDLES, to THE GODFATHER and even STAR WARS -  this kind of “using a cliched genre to make a new point” was the purpose of so many films. And FINCH, co-written by ALIEN / BLADE RUNNER producer Ivor Powell and (truly a Hollywood success story) Craig Luck – who just a few years ago was an on-set assistant / go-fer on films such as MISSION: IMPOSSIBLE – ROUGE NATION, SOLO, DOCTOR STRANGE and ANNIHILATION - deliberately harkens back to that 70s brand of uber-intelligent and subtextual sci fi filmmaking we got in movies like the aforementioned LOGAN’S RUN and THE OMEGA MAN, as well as others like SILENT RUNNING, the original PLANET OF THE APES series, ROLLERBALL and more.  

FINCH's "road movie" tonal kin: (top) THE STRAIGHT STORY (1999 / dir. - David Lynch) /
THE WORLD'S FASTEST INDIAN (2005 / dir. - Roger Donaldson)

     As for the intriguingly “family friendly” aspects of this film … . Well, first off, nailing down the casting of Tom Hanks is a super important primary aspect as he automatically brings an honesty and integrity to the proceedings even before he opens his mouth. He’s an actor (and perhaps even more so nowadays) a personality / persona which, Walter Cronkite-like, is – across ethnic, political, religious and geographical boundaries - beloved and trusted by men and women of all ages and from all walks of life, and with whom children (even very young ones) have a natural affinity and warmness towards; those last qualities a large part of the reason for the success of films like the TOY STORY series and even the otherwise kinda / sorta creepy THE POLAR EXPRESS. But the stunning realization of the android Jeff is another all important family friendly aspect as well.

 

   I remember working at a large independent video store in Philadelphia back during the 1980s / early 90s. And, while it was expected that kids would come in with mom and dad, glance over the shelves and go sugar-happy-ballistic-bouncy seeing the boxes for THE LITTLE MERMAID and AN AMERICAN TAIL, etc., it was genuinely surprising to see them almost have the same reaction to seeing the box for Fred Schepisi’s 1984 drama ICEMAN with John Lone, Timothy Hutton, Lindsay Crouse and Danny Glover; or Carroll Ballard’s THE BLACK STALLION from 1979. These weren’t / aren’t “kids movies”. But the main characters in those films - from John Lone’s 40,000 year old man revived and alive in the modern world, to the titular wild Arabian horse of Ballard’s film, are primal “outsiders” among more (so-called) “have it together” adults. And there’s a connection / familiarity / point of identification which small children had / have with them.

     This is a rare and ethereal thing because you never really saw that kind of “affinity” from kids for Jeff Bridges’ similarly primal and childlike STARMAN. But you do also see it in how to this day small children react to the character of THE INCREDIBLE HULK (the most popular comic book character with very small kids) and even to Robert Zemeckis’ CAST AWAY, … in particular the “character” of Wilson the inanimate volleyball – who (well, actually which) is brought to “life” more from Tom Hanks’ performance opposite him / it than anything else. The same exact thing with Hanks and the android Jeff. 

     Jeff is essentially a newborn child who has to learn everything. And as such he’s got a zillion questions, is often eager to please – sometimes dangerously too much so, occasionally impetuous, has his feelings easily hurt; and needs the patience, understanding … and at times firm hand … of a loving parent. Realized as partially a live on-set performance by X-MEN: FIRST CLASS / GET OUT actor Caleb Landry Jones in a “robot suit”, and partially via motion capture and CGI, in FINCH Jeff not only emerges as arguably the most engaging and lovable android since R2 and 3PO escape-podded their way into our hearts almost 45 years ago. But the relationship between him (yes, I'll use that word) and Hanks becomes the perfect eternal Father’s Day gift from the cinematic gods (yeah, this definitely goes on the “Best Father’s Day” movies list alongside A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT, A BRONX TALE, THE PURSUIT OF HAPPYNESS and LIFE IS BEAUTIFUL) as both kids and adults can - perhaps paradoxically - tap into the reality at hand within a larger than life science fiction based tale. The reality of love, protection and direction from a very imperfect parent seeking to prepare loved ones for a day when the parent will no longer be there, and the young’ens will have to care for themselves in a harsh / cruel world.      

     Suspenseful, funny, mysterious and scary, and with a dog, robots and more! ... .  Hey, that’s a road movie for the entire family. And in it’s intelligence and heart – for me at least – one which just might rate as the best film - sci fi or not, for families or otherwise - of the year period. 

                                                                                                               CEJ 

________________________________________________

More @ ...

ARTICLES / LINKS - 

* Variety: HOW "FINCH"'S VISUAL FX TEAM COMBINED PRACTICAL ELEMENTS TO BUILD TOM HANK'S DROID (11/11/21 - by Jazz Tangcay)

* Hollywood Outbreak.com: "FINCH" TOOK TOM HANKS INTO THE GREAT OUTDOORS (11/11/21) 

* Deadline: APPLE LOVING TOM HANKS AS NEW RELEASE "FINCH" ECLIPSES "GREYHOUND" TO BECOME STREAMER'S MOST WATCHED OPENING (11/10/21 - by Mike Fleming, Jr.)

________________________________________________

VIDEO FEATURETTES - 

 FINCH trailer (2021 / 2:41 mins.)

MAKING OF "FINCH": BEST OF BEHIND THE SCENES, 

AND ON-SET INTERVIEW WITH TOM HANKS (2021 / 8:42 mins)

*Spoilers*

"FINCH" DIRECTOR REVEALS THE ORIGINAL ENDING OF 

THE FILM AND WHY IT CHANGED (2021 / 16:25 mins.) 

Jimmy Kimmel Live: TOM HANKS ON GOING TO 

SPACE, NEW MOVIE "FINCH", AND THE PASSING 

OF HIS DEAR FRIEND PETER SCOLARI (2021 / 17:55 mins.)

________________________________________________

Vaulted Treasures is part of The GullCottage / Sandlot - a film blog, 

cinema magazine, growing reference library and online network 

"Celebrating The Art of Cinema, ... And Cinema As Art"

Explore The GullCottage / Sandlot @

http://www.gullcottageonline.com

ARE PHRASES LIKE “CANCEL CULTURE” & “VIRTUE SIGNALING” GREAT WHITE HYPE, … AND MERELY THE CRIES OF THE CUCKOLD? WHAAAA? - by CEJ

 

________________________________________________

VAULTED TREASURES: MOVIES YOU NEVER KNEW ABOUT, YOU FORGOT, 

... OR YOU FORGOT TO LOVE MORE THE FIRST TIME AROUND!

     With trenches being dug in recent days over the “canceling” of everything from Pepe LePew and that handful of Dr. Suess books, to THE MANDALORIAN’s Gina Carano and more, an intriguingly apt (if somewhat off-color) analogy occurred to me the other day – cuck porn. For those unfamiliar with the term (… or those pretending to be unfamiliar with it), I’ll let the esteemed GQ magazine define it as their verbiage is considerably more “journalistic scholarly” (or at the very least more polite) than mine. 

     “Cuck has its roots in cuckold, an old-fashioned term for a man whose wife is having sex with another man. Because everything is porn eventually, this soon became an X-rated genre of its own with a (usually white) guy watching impassively while his wife has sex with another guy, who's often, but not always, black. Porn with racial tension that plays to a white man's insecurities about his ‘possessions’ being taken from him?” 

     Now, we could end this piece right there and the point would be made quite clearly. But let’s add another link to this chain – an economic / historical one. After 9/11 Paramount Pictures decided to yank DVD copies of it’s 1976 Dino DeLaurentiis’ version of KING KONG from stores, and to replace the jacket sleeve image - that famously awesome John Berkey poster art with Kong astride the World Trade Towers, surrounded by helicopters and fighter jets, with Jessica Lange in one hand and an exploding plane in the other - because it felt that image might be uncomfortably troublesome for many still sensitive to the September 11th, 2001 terrorist attack. So, was that “cancel culture” (long before the term was coined), or a corporate decision by an intellectual property owner maybe partially doing it out of genuine altruistic social concern, but certainly, ... undoubtedly, ... and mostly concerned about how the marketability of their product, if unchanged, would now fare in a world which had changed? 

     We could end right there too. But for the hell of it let’s add even a few more links. At any rate, none of this is new, and, contrary to the cries of many - in regards to (so-called) "woke-ness" and the demand for a more balanced depiction in media regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation -  not much has actually changed over the last 50 or so years. If anything it seems that only the colors, be they white, black, yellow, … but mostly green, … have.  

Original 1976 KING KONG poster campaign (art by John Berkey)

 VIRTUE SIGNALING, P.C.-NESS. AND KOWTOWING, ...  

OR LOOKING OUT FOR ONE'S OWN MUTLI-BILLION DOLLAR CORPORATE ASS?

    I stand 6’5”. Years ago I worked at a restaurant as a waiter, and there was a span of about three months where I noticed that whenever I entered the kitchen I was stooping because some of the large ventilation and air conditioning duct work was ever-so-slowly beginning to lower from it's ceiling brackets. Over the weeks (and months) I noticed I was stooping more and more, and I mentioned this, ... and that concerning duct work ... to management, yet nothing happened. Well, nothing happened until, ... haha! I was off for about three days, came back, noticed the duct work had finally been corrected (and it looked damn nice!), and I made what I thought was a joke, saying, “What happened, did it finally get low enough for one of the managers to hit their head, and they decided, ‘Yeah, we’d better get that sh*t fixed?’”. When everyone looked at me with that look I realized that’s exactly what had happened. OOPS! So, yeah, it’s kinda unfortunately the lamer part of human nature to not really notice (or sometimes even give a damn) about something until it affects us personally. Which brings us back to the “cuck” analogy. 

The LGTBQ lifestyle is "dangerous" and "not to be trusted" in
FREEBIE AND THE BEAN (1974) and CRUISING (1980)

     Many - and, yeah, some of you reading this right now - love bitching and moaning about how  “nowadays” movies and audiences do (or don’t do anymore) this or that. Y’know, looking back fondly on a time before (how does it go?) “Hollywood became the home of chickenshit, apologetic, cancel culture virtue signaling”, etc. But I gotta tell you it cracks me up how (I’ll use the word too) nowadays many of these same people - most often white hetero men - put their ignorance on display by “fondly looking back” on a film industry time which existed before many of them were even born, and of which they've only recently become "aware" because last night they happened to catch a film on TCM, Showtime or Prime that got them all fired up. Yeah, there are older whiners too, also usually white hetero men. But the younger ones are really hilariously irritating in proving the old adage that "A little bit of information can be a dangerous thing". 

    Case in point, in the last year I’ve read a few postings by people who after recently seeing films such as Richard Rush’s FREEBIE AND THE BEAN (1974) or William Friedkin’s CRUISING (1980) went on hubris-filled, piss-and-wind tears about how “In today’s Hollywood, with all the virtue signaling, you just couldn’t make a film like this”. Well, I love FREEBIE AND THE BEAN too (not so much CRUISING), but technically you really couldn't make those films back then either. I mean, I remember when they opened. Both were box office bombs, critics tore them apart as being among the worst films ever made by those respective filmmakers (particularly CRUISING, which was kind of the flip side of Friedkin's acclaimed THE BOYS IN THE BAND ten years prior), and both were very publicly and loudly protested for their depictions of the gay community. So was the 1968 Frank Sinatra film THE DETECTIVE, by the way. The only difference is that back then no one gave a leapin’ sh*t about the opinions of those doing the protesting.

THE DETECTIVE (1968)

     Today, however, it’s not just the “white heterosexual male dollars” which drive the economy. And if there’s any kind of “woke”ness going on, it’s simply the age-old one of companies waking up to the fact that certain demographics – be they Black, women, Asian, Latino, LGTBQ, etc. - represent a huge buying block which (because of skewed metrics) they never realized or chose to acknowledged before. So, not taking anything away from those in corporate leadership positions who truly want to enact more positive social change. But more than anything, though, it’s a simple "1+1=2" matter as to why now corporate entities are more open to listening to the concerns of those demographics when once upon a time they weren’t nearly as inclined to do so. It’s more about bottom line bucks than it is about “wokeness”. So, how ‘bout deleting that lame-assed defacto argument from your gueue, because it's a rather impotent one these days? 

AUNT JEMIMA brand's (at the time) newly revamped ad campaign,
launched at the 1933 World's Fair

     The same exact thing with other “problematic” corporate properties like THE SONG OF THE SOUTH, the name “Washington Redskins”, the depiction of the do-ragged, mammy-like AUNT JEMIMA, Christopher Columbus statues, Confederate flags outside state and federal office buildings and more. None of these protests are new. People have been raising Cain about them for decades and beyond. Only now, with an acknowledgment of the economic power of the dollars of these once ignored groups, have these concerns finally reached a point of being addressed. So, just like with the duct work in the restaurant and the managers, just because you may have only now noticed the controversy behind some of these things because it’s had an effect on something close to you, doesn’t mean any of this is new or represents “wokeness”, “kowtowing”, “virtue signaling” or anything else. It just means you didn't know, weren't aware and / or just didn't give a damn either way until today. So, that's more a factor of your own personal ignorance, and not that of a suddenly "woke" society. Let's be very clear on that. 

(left) SONG OF THE SOUTH - 1946 / (right) Well, ... you get the idea. 

     Once again this brings us back to the “cuck” analogy wherein it’s all about “a (usually white) guy watching impassively while his wife has sex with another guy, who's often, but not always, black. Porn with racial tension that plays to a white man's insecurities about his ‘possessions’ being taken from him”. Only in today’s entertainment industry the analogous “wife” is the corporate entity / studio, the “black man” is the demographic previously ignored but now pleasuring her to multiple orgasms, and the insecure “husband” terrified at his loss of what back in “the good ‘ol days” was his power is / are those who are “fondly looking back” on a time when that economic power / influence wasn’t (oh, what the hell) as flacid as it is today. Yeah, perhaps a bit too Freudian an analogy. But it’s not an entirely inaccurate one, is it? Don’t take my word for it, though. How ‘bout we crunch some actual numbers? 

THE LAND WHERE DEAD PRESIDENTS RULE (THAT'S MONEY, 

AND NOT THE 1995 FILM, BTW)

     Once upon a time  (back in the 50s - 60s, and even to a degree into the 70s and 80s) the world media economy catered to what it felt was it's largest and most powerful demographic - those aforementioned white heterosexual males. Y’know, the bread-winner. The one who put the gas in the car. Hell, the one who bought the car, the lawn and the lawnmower and the house upon which it all stood and / or around which it was all centered. But in recent years the world has become much smaller – one where (as we’re primarily talking the entertainment industry) the average studio film will now pull in 70% (and sometimes more) of it's revenue from countries outside the U.S. In fact in 2018, the year of A STAR IS BORN, BLACK PANTHER, BLAKKKLANSMAN, INFINITY WAR, BOHEMIAN RHAPSODY and GREEN BOOK, of the $41.66 billion taken in at the global box office, $29.8 billion of it was non-domestic (came in from foreign territories). (2014) How the global box office is changing Hollywood - BBC Culture / (2019) 2018 Global/Overseas Box Office Studio Rankings, 2019 Forecast – Chart – Deadline . Also keep in mind that recent economic projections have been zooming in on the fact that the continent of Africa and the region of Southeast Asia have been deemed two of the largest potential growth markets of this century in general, and not just in relation to the entertainment industry, ... which (of course) in time ultimately becomes a part of that assessment. 

2018's record breaking BLACK PANTHER

     In the U.S. it doesn’t take Sherlock Holmes or Miss Marple to deduce how the conception of economic demographics has drastically shifted over the last, hell … 20 years. Simply take a look at how many prime time TV commercials (and not just those on “specialized” networks like BET, LIFETIME, etc.) are selling everything from cars to pizza to home mortgages with spots featuring interracial, same sex, Asian, Latino and other non-white / non-hetero couples. Yeah, once upon a time corporate industry and media felt it didn't have to give a damn about the complaints of many “minority” groups. But now to continue to adhere to that ancient attitude is economic suicide. Many have been protesting and raising hell about GONE WITH THE WIND, Pepe Le Pew and more for the last 50 years. This isn't new. The only thing that is new is that corporations are finally starting to take those complaints seriously because they now know where their financial bread is buttered. And, oh, hey, I hate, hate, hate to say it, … but it’s an age thing too. Yup, we're talkin' about those goddamned Millennials! 

     Say what you will about that smartphone-addicted, “touchy, feely” cultural cabal of young’ns born after 1980. But did you know that in 2020 Millennials surpassed the Baby Boomers as the largest living adult population, and clocked in with a buying power estimated to be approx. $1.4 trillion annually? As the old saying goes (my old generation’s saying, I guess), “That ain’t chicken feed”. And while, yes, you certainly have Millennials as culturally tunnel-visioned as any of their parents or grandparents, on the whole they tend to be more open minded and desirous of change when it comes to social, racial, environmental and economic issues. As such, one has to realistically ask “Are the changes happening now simply ‘virtue signaling’ and uber PC-minded ‘cancel culture’”, or are they- like Paramount’s decision on it’s KING KONG World Trade Center imagery - simply wise corporate decision making? 

     Let’s be totally straight-up, common sense for real here, huh? With over $40+ billion annually at stake, and most of it coming in from so-called “minority” demographics (LGTBQ, women, Black, Asian, Latino, etc.) around the world, do you honestly think any rational and intelligently thinking corporate exec will risk a nickel of that because of the dumb-assed statement or action (using the “N” word, referring to someone as a “f*g”, being busted as a sexual harasser, flying a Confederate flag on their social media page, making a joke about rape, take your pick – there are so many!) of some actor, singer or other individual? Would you risk it with your money!? Going back to those many years in restaurants, I can pretty much say, “Hell, no!”, most wouldn’t. The average Joe or Jane Schmoe (and not just some Hollywood corporate exec) is pretty damned particular, careful, ... and often downright stingy ... when it comes to their own hard earned nickels and pennies. Hell, I’ve seen customers poorly tip the waiter because they were pissed they were seated next to a table which was too loud (something outside the waiter’s purview), or who refused to tip - or even wanted fired - the hostess or coat check girl because they felt she didn’t smile enough. And this is for a check under $100, and not a $41 billion corporate purse. So, can we please just knock off the faux righteous indignation posturing? Oh, and in conclusion (yeah, finally – haha!), as for that ever-recurring bitch / moan, faux "just and righteous" complaint about how “All of this ‘virtue signaling’, ‘cancel culture’, etc. is the death of artistic integrity”... . Please! Do you wanna really go there? Okay, ... 

WHITEWASHING, TRULY CANCELED CULTURES, … 

AND THE “RUBBERBAND EFFECT” 

     It’s ultra-ironically-hilarious (that is, when it’s not so enraging) to hear cucks … . I’m sorry, I mean to hear those complaining about “virtue signaling” and “rampant canceling” attempt to use the final option, “Hail, Mary”, can’t-pull-anything-else-out-of-the-basket excuse of how this “new culture” will be / is the death of artistic integrity and free speech, and that it’s censorship, blah, blah, blah. Ehhhh, … no. Cut the b.s. and back up off of that! As said earlier, none of these complaints concerning the depictions of minorities, gays, women, etc. is anything new. They’ve been around since forever. You and others just never gave a damn until they finally started to threaten the status quo of something you enjoy. So, there’s that. But when you try to fly the “artistic integrity” and “anti virtue signaling” flag when a film is remade or a franchise character’s race or gender is altered from previous versions, … but you never said a damn thing about how until Antonio Banderas in 1998 the character of Zorro had never ever been portrayed by a Latino (but by white actors) in an American film or tv series, … . Or how (with a few notable exceptions) Shakespeare’s legendary Moor character OTHELLO was seldom portrayed by a black man, but rather by white actors in blackface (such as Olivier, Welles, etc.) in both major filmic and stage productions over the last century … . Or how Jules Verne’s Captain Nemo from 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA had in every major American film until 2003’s THE LEAGUE OF EXTRAORDINARY GENTLEMEN been altered / changed from Verne’s conception of a character of Indian ethnicity to an erudite Englishman portrayed by the likes of James Mason, Herbert Lom, Michael Caine, etc. ... .  And how it wasn't until after nearly 100 years of Nemo being portrayed in film that THE LEAGUE finally featured an Indian actor - acclaimed stage and screen performer / director Naseeruddin Shah - in the role ... .  Well, if you really want to talk about truly canceled cultures, then, yeah, okay, let's do so. And we can start right here and now by asking the question "Where were your 'artistic integrity' concerns while all of this and more was going down every time you turned on the tv or bought a movie ticket over the years?". Artistic hypocrisy's a cold and ironic little bitch, isn't she?    

     Now, are there those who take P.C.-ness to ridiculous heights? Of course there are. And there have always been such people. I remember growing up in the 70s when there were parents groups circulating petitions to get THE THREE STOOGES banned (or at least edited) on local tv because of the “violence” in them.  And certain groups have since forever been attempting to have books like THE CATCHER IN THE RYE, THE ADVENTURES OF HUCK FINN and others banned. This isn’t new either, but has been going on damn near since these classics were first published. But for every one bass-akward school district or library which attempts to do so, another 20 libraries and school districts celebrate those and other novels by having annual "Banned Books Celebrations" to encourage people to read them for themselves. But that's not what you see or read within the echo chamber of social media when the cucks complain about “cancel culture”. No, to them this is all a new (and therefore dangerous) phenomenon. The same with movies being presented with some kind of contextual introduction.                                                                                                            

     Anyone remember the "disclaimers" which ran during the first network tv airings of THE GODFATHER (in November 1977) and DePalma's SCARFACE (January 1989) - placed there when Italian-American and Cuban-American groups raised concerns about the films’ depictions of the respective races? Even during it’s production SCARFACE was something of a socio-political hot potato – especially in the Miami, Florida locations where much of it was filmed. It’s amazing how these relatively not-too-long-ago examples are conveniently forgotten when bitching and moaning about the “alarming new trend” of “virtue signaling”. (April 2018) Revisiting The Controversy Surrounding Scarface (vulture.com) . And as for films presented / broadcast with a contexualized introduction, and how such an intro is supposedly “demeaning to the audience, and assumes they aren’t sharp enough to ‘get it’ on their own”, well … 

(left) THE GODFATHER - 1972 / (right) SCARFACE - 1983

     That’s what they've been doing on TCM and other networks for the last 30 years with every film anyway - y'know, with intros by Ben Mankiewicz, the late Robert Osborne and even guest hosts like Martin Scorsese, Sydney Pollock, Ellen Barkin, Spike Lee, Hugh Hefner, Tom Ford, Whoopi Goldberg, Alec Baldwin, David Mamet and others. Ever step out of your narrow social media echo-chamber where everyone speaks the same thing, I mean, just long enough to hear Scorsese talk about the racism of John Wayne's character in THE SEARCHERS? Or about the technical mastery but thematic / philosophical disgust with the racism of D.W. Griffith’s BIRTH OF A NATION? This ain't new. And Scorsese - since his career began - has always been very vocal about the need to view these kinds of films within the proper context. And he loves THE SEARCHERS! It's one of his favorites. 

     So, how 'bout we not just automatically toss everything under the convenient (and wholly inaccurate) umbrella of "cancel culture" or “virtue signaling” when the actual accurate truth is that every situation is unique unto itself. Yeah, I know actually taking the time and effort and energy to really, genuinely think sometimes in shades of gray, and not just simplistic “either / or” black & white, can be cumbersome and time consuming, … and may even ruin a great meme which on the surface seems to roll off the tongue. But if you really want to make a valid point (and not just guzzle your own backwash), then that kind of critical thinking is a necessary adjunct. And as for those occasions when sometimes over / uber P.C.-ness seems to be taking things to extremes? … 

(left) John Ford's THE SEARCHERS - 1956 /
(right) D.W. Griffith's BIRTH OF A NATION - 1915

     Yeah, on those occasions you call that extremism out. But you do it intelligently – using history and economics and more - and not just by whining like the proverbial little bitch because you heard talk through the grapevine, or you read a posting that someone shared … which was shared by another, then shared and shared again ad infinitum like the online version of whispering something to the person next to you on the school bus, … that a cartoon or movie you last saw maybe twenty years ago is having an intro attached to it. By “intelligently” I’m also talking about understanding that umbrella of what I’ve over the years come to refer to as “The Rubberband Effect”. This is when things have been to one extreme for sooo long, that when that bias is finally snapped, things tend to catapult to the opposite direction to an equal extreme until eventually over time reaching a real world / actual / accurate / mid-point stasis. 

"The Rubberband Man" (1976) - The Spinners, ...
Sorry, couldn't help it - haha! Now you've got the song running
through your head, don't you?

     Take for example how for many years Blacks were depicted in films as mammy maids and midwives, “Stepin Fetchit” types, railway porters, bug-eyed comic relief in old-school zombie flicks, and members of what Mario Van Peebles once referred to as the “Moteesa” tribe, … as in those shuffling, slow-witted butler characters in movies who always said “Mo’ tea, Sir?”. But when SWEET SWEETBACK’S BADASSSSS SONG and SHAFT snapped that cord, things went to the opposite - but equally extreme and unrealistic - end of the cinematic arena with (what Richard Pryor once called) the “Super Nig*er” movies of the 70s blaxploitation era. This till finally reaching a more equal / more realistic depiction of a race and culture in tv shows like LIVING SINGLE, BLACK-ISH and others. 

(left to right) From Stepin Fetchit (1934),
to BOSS NIGGER (1975), to BLACK-ISH (2014)

     We see the same “Rubberband Effect” paradigm with the depictions of Asians in film - going from buck-toothed FU MANCHU-esque villains, comic relief laundry boys and asexual buffoons (remember Mickey Rooney in BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY’S? 😳), to super martial arts kick-asses, then finally to more realistic depictions in films like THE JOY LUCK CLUB, THE FAREWELL, and tv series such as FRESH OFF THE BOAT. The same with Native Americans, Latinos, LGTBQ characters and more as well. To a degree we’ve go to expect / anticipate a certain amount of “The Rubberband Effect” as part and parcel of social (and by extension entertainment industry) evolution – remembering that by definition evolution is a series of (sometimes traumatic) mutations which eventually converge to make the species (and, in this particular case, artistic industry) stronger as a whole. 

(left to right) From BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S (1961), 
to ENTER THE DRAGON (1973), to THE FAREWELL (2019)

     Anyway, those are my points in regards to this whole “cancel culture” discussion. And while you may still not agree, I think you have to admit that I’ve made some of those points in a pretty damn valid manner. I welcome any discourse and / or disagreement. But if you do I demand that you too also use actual historical, economic and other precedents to make your point, and not just run off on a-not-very-well-thought-out emotional tangent. Because, be it concerning politics, religion, contemporary culture or whatever, … 

     Contrary to what many believe today, saying something loudly and with a great deal of sincere conviction isn’t the same thing as making a valid point or being right. 

     Let’s try to remember that as we often limp and stagger into a more evolved future. 

     Peace. ✌️ 

     CEJ

© Copyright 2021 The GullCottage / Sandlot 

________________________________________________

Vaulted Treasures is part of The GullCottage / Sandlot - a film blog, 

cinema magazine, growing reference library and online network 

"Celebrating The Art of Cinema, ... And Cinema As Art"

Explore The GullCottage / Sandlot @

http://www.gullcottageonline.com

and

https://www.facebook.com/GullCottageOnline