comment #1

le corbeau says ...

I want to see the movie about the fat black teenager who can blow up soldiers by glowering at them.

comment #2

Stringer Bell says ...

That is one frightening picture, Jeff.

That picture alone puts me in the 'I'm not seeing this movie if you paid me' camp.

comment #3

Glenn Kenny says ...

Yeah, seriously. Every still I've seen of her she looks like she's literally gonna bite the head off of the next thing or person that gets within chomping distance. Or that she'll do a Mr. Fox on any plate put in front of her. Not really a way to sell a sympathetic character.

comment #4

googs says ...

Which is why winning any award is completely meaningless. It's not about awarding the best work, it's about childish politics.

comment #5

Geoff says ...

The first time I ever heard of Precious was when I saw the trailer attached to The Hurt Locker. It was scary. Fat, destitute, abusive mother torments her morbidly obese daughter, and lots of close ups of fried lard in a skillet.

comment #6

markj says ...

@ Ronald McFirbank - Thanks for the laugh!

comment #7

corey3rd says ...

is Award season supposed to be rigged like an Iranian Election? Here's a little thought - people voting for awards should vote for what they like and not what they predict a schmuck in Hollywood will check on their Oscar ballot.

and why aren't there more people predicting the Razzies? This is a glory year for crap.

comment #8

royalonemn says ...

I love how Jeff's defense of not liking this movie is that some conservative black thinkers believe that the movie caters to stereotypes. "It's not uplifting enough." But these same black "thinkers" have a major issue when a Tyler Perry film--which has tons of sugary, unrealistic uplift--comes out and does well at the box office. Their arguments--and yours Jeff--don't hold water.

Why do black films always have to be about how the white audience is interpreting them? One of the things that I appreciated about "Precious" is that no where in the film was there some white person that she was dealing with. All of the people--GOOD AND BAD--were people of color. Black cinema does not have to be about white people always. This film showed a range of behaviors from minorities. So to say that the movie was not good because Mo'Nique was a monster is just hiding your racial biases. Because Mo'Nique was a monster, the other people in Precious' life were able to shine brighter.

I do have an issue with the fact that the women who were representative of her saviors were all light-skinned, but the world isn't perfect and that's whom Lee Daniels chose to cast.

The people on this site should be supporting the fact that a movie like this--without a bunch of black folks either singing and dancing ("Dreamgirls") or playing sports and being saved by white Christians ("The Blind Side") was able to get made. Lee Daniels put a lot of years and sweat into adapting this novel--remember it's based on a well established piece of FICTION, NOT a biography--for the screen. And to tear it down so casually seems extremely irresponsible for people who seem to care about the state of independent cinema.

No one seemed to have an issue with harsh images when "Requiem for a Dream" came out. An old, out of shape woman getting addicted to weight loss drugs, orgy scene with a double dildo, arm amputations. Could it be because it was a film about white drug users and not black crackheads? Oh, wait, Marlon Wayans was in it...but of course his character was marginalized in the film.

And I'm not contending that "Precious" is a better film (I had some issues with some of the direction)-but the boldness with which it tried to tackle the issues it raises is commendable. Just as "Requiem" had a right to exist on it's own, without politics overshadowing the work of art, same holds true for "Precious".

comment #9

stephen says ...

Glenn Kenny, that's a very prejudiced remark. Is a character's likability or sympathy factor based solely on the shape and structure of their face or body? Seriously. And specifically your comment about chomping off the next thing or person within range is just in extremely bad taste. I'm a bit shocked to read what you wrote, given that you're a well-known critic and not some random blog commenter. I don't think the Precious people are trying to "sell" this movie in the traditional way given that it's not a traditional character or set-up. Therefore, the stills and the posters are obviously not going to show anything other than Precious as she is in the movie.

comment #10

royalonemn says ...

Again, more prejudice comments from people on this site because "Precious" is not a "typical" movie. It would have been easy for Lee Daniels to find a girl who was "film fat" or "cinematically hard", i.e. some model girl who gained 10lbs just so she could give the impression of being "overweight" but he went for a REAL girl who fit the character. AND a REAL mother who looked like she could be her mother as well. Again, something he should be commended for. To say that a character in a poster looks too angry or looks to fat is just shutting yourself off to films that are about things besides the "norm"...very reminiscent of red state conservatives. "I like my movies this way!"

comment #11

sjwhitty says ...

Oh please.

God knows Glenn doesn't need ME to defend him. But now he's prejudiced for saying that every still used to publicize this movie features the lead character glowering at someone?

There isn't ONE still, somewhere -- maybe from one of those fantasy sequences -- where she's smiling? I'm no fan of the film, but Glenn's point is about marketing, not body type or facial features.

But if you do want to talk about bias, why not open the discussion to how the African-Amerrican characters who ride to Precious' rescue are light-skinned?

Or how the cinematography, balanced to their skin tones, sinks Precious into shadow, making her even more unreadable and marginal?

Or the rather Alice-Walkerish sexual politics of the film, in which all true salvation lies in a vaguely unreal, painfully poetic lesbian world ("Blu Rain"? Isn't that an air-freshener?) in which heterosexual men are almost completely absent.

I'm sorry, but "Precious" is a badly directed, over-praised film. And I think there's far more bias in it (and in some people's reflexive endorsing of it) than in any criticism of it.

comment #12

royalonemn says ...

So the issue is about how the movie is being marked, not about the film itself?

And I did mention that I had a problem with the fact that most of the saviors of the film were light-skinned women, but you can make the converse argument that those are the actresses he felt could give justice to the roles. Nobody every says "Oh, all the 'good' women in the film were blondes" or "all the bad women were brunettes"--unless it's a movie with black characters. Hold other films up to the same stereotyping standards that you hold "Precious" to. Why does Anthony Mackie in "The Hurt Locker" have to be the uptight, do gooder? Why couldn't he be cast in the Jeremy Renner part? Are black men only good to be sensible and rational (ala Morgan Freeman, early Denzel Washington) or angry and loud (Samuel L. Jackson, late Denzel Washington)?

My understanding is that the character Blu Rain is based on the novelist Sapphire herself, who is a lesbian. So does that make it unrealistic or any less valid because she based a character on her own experiences? The novel is about her interactions as a teacher in the 80s with girls who went through many of the same things that Precious went through. Did it all happen to the same girl? Probably not. But did all the tragedies that happened in "A Serious Man" happen to the same man? If a reality check is being pressed on "Precious" it needs to be pressed on a film like that as well. But again, because it's starring white people, it's not.

comment #13

Unison says ...

It seems crazy to cry foul that Hurt wasn't nominated for Picture by the ISAs last year... It likely wasn't seen by a huge percentage of the nominating body, since it didn't have a commercial run.

Setting up this antagonism, or suggesting that the ISA committee has an axe to grind against a movie it's already given two nominations, seems like a contrived attempt to create a backlash that will harm Precious and paint The Hurt Locker as an underdog.

comment #14

mick hilliard says ...

sjwhitty,

YOU might not like it, but to say that "Precious" is a badly directed film is absurd. I found it to be moving and involving, with excellent performances throughout. This film is so much better than most of the crap that is out there now. There is nothing "reflexive" in my endorsing of it.
And the whole skin tone discussion. C'mon. Her mother's skin was light as well. What bias should we derive from that?

comment #15

le corbeau says ...

"But if you do want to talk about bias, why not open the discussion to how the African-Amerrican characters who ride to Precious' rescue are light-skinned?"

Lee Daniels, the Oscar Micheaux of our time.

comment #16

Glenn Kenny says ...

Jesus. And thanks, Mr. Whitty.

I'm not gonna get too deep into the issues raised here; if Stephen and Royalonemn want to believe I'm "prejudiced" and/or a racist, well, actually, I don't really care. Fact is there's a very significant disconnect between the way Gabourey Sidibe is being marketed within the film (thoroughly miserable and pretty one-note) and the way she's being marketed outside the film (emotionally well-adjusted and happy and delightful regardless of whatever form of diabetes is fixing on her ass).

That Royalonemn feels compelled to bring "A Serious Man" into the discussion indicates that I'm a fool for even responding this much."A Serious Man" and "Precious" have as much to do with each other as "Under The Yum Yum Tree" and "Vertigo" do.

That is all. Except, thanks again, Mr. Whitty.

comment #17

royalonemn says ...

Notice how you (Glenn Kenny) did not contend with the point I was making about certain literary concepts can only be excused by certain writers on this site when it's a tale concerning white people and their issues.

Again, very red state, conservative stance. Don't debate the issue, just deny that it exists.

THAT IS ALL!

comment #18

royalonemn says ...

One more point...Does anyone on this site actually believe that what Lee Daniels was trying to say was that only light-skinned women are a source of good in the world? Come on now! I hope that people are a little bit brighter than that. But again, these kind of points only come up when you have black people starring in movies.

comment #19

corey3rd says ...

Lee Daniels deserves an award for making a film with Mariah Carey that didn't go straight to Blockbuster

comment #20

Glenn Kenny says ...

"Notice how you (Glenn Kenny) did not contend with the point I was making about certain literary concepts can only be excused by certain writers on this site when it's a tale concerning white people and their issues."

Indeed, Royalonemn, I did not contend with those points. I was doing you a favor, actually, because to contend with said points would have involved bringing up how little you understand about "literary concepts," literature, art, that sort of thing. You've already got your hands full defending Lee Daniels' high-yellow rationales, so I thought I'd do you a favor.

Look, I'm not gonna respond to anything on this thread after this, so let me make this clear: you are entirely entitled to love
"Precious" in whatever way you like, and I'm not trying to stop you. Just like you're not gonna stop me from thinking what I'm thinking. Enjoy.

comment #21

royalonemn says ...

If your understanding of literary concepts are that advanced, I would think that you would not do me a favor and shame me. Sounds like hollow pontificating to me, Glenn Kenny. This is a forum to share your ideas. Share them, if you have the cajones to back up what you think. I'm not saying "Precious" is a perfect movie, but what I am saying is that because the movie stars black people it is being held to a standard of film making that movies starring white actors are never held to.

But if you feel like you are not able to engage in a debate about that issue, that's fine with me. But don't make it seem like you are doing me any favors by responding around the issue that I'm bringing up. IF you really have an opinion that will shut my mouth then make it, otherwise your posts are hollow and you definitely should stop writing.

comment #22

BurmaShave says ...

In the immortal words of Danny Glover: Whatever, who gives a shit.

comment #23

royalonemn says ...

I'm interested to see what Jeff thinks, if he has a comment?

comment #24

Jeffrey Wells says ...

What do I think? If I was in an Baghdad or Afghanistan combat situation and that 15 foot tall Gabby girl came around a corner and started staring down my platoon, ready to burn or blow us all to hell like Amy Irving was capable of doing in The Fury or which Drew Barrymore could do pretty easily in Firestarter, I'd yell "Whoo-whooo....retreat!...take cover!"

Otherwise I know for a fact that Glenn Kenny isn't any kind of racist by whatever definition.

comment #25

the400blows says ...

I'm surprised that Amreeka was nominated for Best Picture. It was very good, but I wouldn't say it was one of the best independent films of the year. However, I would say that (500) Days of Summer and Sin Nombre were one of the best independent films of the year and deserved their Best Picture nominations. I look forward to see The Last Station.

comment #26

royalonemn says ...

So if I get rid of the word "racist", will someone answer why a film starring black actors has to be held to a different standard of cinema than a film starring white actors?

comment #27

Glenn Kenny says ...

I'm not even talking about the film itself, royalonemn. I'm talking about the stills from the film, in which Sidibe is almost always shown making that scrunched-up angry face. I've seen her in other contexts, as in the shoot for The New York Times Magazine, looking quite a bit differently. What the stills convey is a one-note performance. They remind me of how almost every still shot of Dick Cheney (a white person!) you used to see portrayed him with his trademark clenched-teeth grimace.

comment #28

stephen says ...

Glenn Kenny---- "Under the Yum Yum Tree"?! Are you kidding me? You may not like or love "Precious," but it's clearly a movie with serious artistic ambitions, so to compare it to a forgettable old Jack Lemmon comedy seems dubious. How many serious, Cannes-worthy art films made by and about black people, let alone made by a very creative gay black man who makes interesting choices as a director, how many of this kind of film are made? Given that, and given that no one associated with "Precious" has killed your cat or anything, why are you and so many others so hostile towards it? What's your problem? Why can't you talk about it in a sensible way? Movies you don't love are praised all the time.
And another thing: that's a cop-out to backpedal once you're cornered and say, "Oh, I'm only talking about the stills, not the movie, forget that I trashed the quality of the film earlier and implied that it's ridiculous to even compare "Precious" with the likes of "A Serious Man." Newsflash; they should be considered with the same respect and given the same insight and attention. "Precious" was the toast of Cannes, do I need to emphasize this some more? Both movies focus on a particular ethnic milieu and present it in an intensified or exaggerated way for melodramatic and darkly comedic purposes, respectively. Do people go around saying, "You know, that guy in "A Serious Man," he seems anxious all throughout the trailer, I don't know, what's the deal here, why's he anxious so much?" Of course not. And finally, let's pretend for a second that it's credible to call Sidibe's performance one-note, and let's pretend that you're making a point when you say "She's angry in these stills, but she's bubbly in real life, and umm...so, yeah...yeah!" Let's put that aside. Is Mo'Nique's performance a one-note performance? Should she be taken seriously? Was that caliber of performance found in "Under the Yum Yum Tree"? That's what I thought.

comment #29

stephen says ...

And another thing: Sidibe isn't being "marketed" as bubbly outside the film; that's how she actually is! It's not marketing, she came to the audition like that. That's the whole bloody point. She created a portrayal of a brooding, sad, miserable person in the film. It's a transformation, it's an embodiment, that's not who she actually is. She, along with Lee Daniels, created this character. It's called art. The way she is in the movie and thus the stills is acting and costuming and make-up (or lack thereof)!

comment #30

Glenn Kenny says ...

Oh, I see. I'm supposed to genuflect before "Precious" not because it's any good, but because it was made by "a very creative gay black man who makes interesting choices as a director." Thanks for straightening me out, and for welcoming me to the world of movie assessment based on identity politics.

comment #31

George Prager says ...

Lee Daniels' "The Women Who Stare at Doughnuts"

comment #32

stephen says ...

The quality of Mo'Nique's performance has nothing to do with identity politics. The direction of the movie would be commendable regardless of the director's identity. Identity politics should not be a determining factor in assessing any work of art. However, there's something fishy in the way you and others dismiss the movie as not art cinema, as not serious cinema, when it certainly is. It commits the cardinal sin of not being familiar, not being white, or not politely non-white, of not being reminiscent of high-brow literature, and worst of it all, it has a humanist message and a hopeful ending.

comment #33

stephen says ...

The Coen Brothers' "The Men Who Stare Approvingly at Hollow Comedy"

comment #34

Gordon27 says ...

"I'm not saying "Precious" is a perfect movie, but what I am saying is that because the movie stars black people it is being held to a standard of film making that movies starring white actors are never held to."

That's an awfully strong blanket accusation to make without offering any evidence whatsoever. I mean, not even circumstancial or anecdotal evidence. Just say that anybody responding to the movie with less than 100% "It's brilliant" is a total racist. Usually, I'd think that was a wonderful way to shut down conversation, but this thread actually looks pretty lively.

comment #35

royalonemn says ...

The anecdotes that you seek are in the postings on this site that have trashed the film and what comments are posted from the "scholars" who are analyzing the film. I have yet to see on this site one comment concerning Lee Daniels directorial decisions. Most are about the evilness of Mo'Nique's character (which is supported by the source material), the way "Precious" is being marked (big, mean black girl), the "stereotyping" of the black community in the film, the lack of uplift because she doesn't escape the ghetto. All comments that I don't believe ANYONE would be making if this movie starred the girl from "Hairspray" and Rosie O'Donnell as her mom.

The next time Jeff or somebody else posts a "negative" comment about the movie, ask yourself would this comment hold true if we were discussing a movie with white characters, and if you're honest with yourself--and not just being closed off to the point I'm trying to make because you don't want to be proven wrong--your answer will be "no". The standard is different.

I'll be perfectly honest with you, I saw the movie and I said "That was good. I don't think it lives up to ALL the hype that people are praising on it, but I enjoyed it and appreciated the experience." The witch hunt that is going on over it on this site is unfounded because no piece of art is perfect. I felt "Precious" was truthful and alive as the director saw it and as an audience member I felt that. But tearing art down for the sake of tearing it down serves no one and just makes you look foolish.

If you're upset about the hype the movie is receiving (which, honestly, is what Jeff and most of the haters are really upset about--"everyone's talking about 'Precious' but the waitress at the restaurant has never heard of 'The Hurt Locker'"), then attack the Hollywood machine, not the content.

Not a perfect movie, but definitely not deserving of the venom that has been thrown at it over the past few weeks.

comment #36

Gordon27 says ...

"All comments that I don't believe ANYONE would be making if this movie starred the girl from "Hairspray" and Rosie O'Donnell as her mom."

So, you're saying that the evidence that this movie would be "more fairly" treated if it were a white story exists entirely in your head? That seems pretty flimsy to cry "racist" for. The obvious counter-argument is, I remember a whole vocal segment of critics going after, say, Harmony Korine or Todd Solondz for making depressing, one note movies (which were about white people).

comment #37

dd says ...

Here's a little thought - people voting for awards should vote for what they like and not what they predict a schmuck in Hollywood will check on their Oscar ballot.

Designer Handbags

comment #38

mbt walking shoes says ...

Inspired by the Masai tribe of walking habits, the researchers designed a MBT walking shoes. They found that Masai tribe can go long distances and very long day. MBT shoes sale strengthens the core muscle, strengthens and decides the melody foot and the ankle, the calf, the hamstring, upside and the intrinsic thigh, the buttocks, the stomach and behind. Women's MBT chapa sale including you should not miss the stunning style. These shoes by the wonderful full or split grain leather, knee high top made. You will become strong and toughness through put on the cheap MBT womens shoes to carry out your daily activity.