MovieChat Forums > Hit! (1975) Discussion > Blaxploitation or not?

Blaxploitation or not?

posted 14 years ago by WarpedRecord
17 replies | jump to latest

Just because this is an action film starring Billy Dee Williams and Richard Pryor, I'm not sure I'd call it blaxploitation. The cast is extremely diverse in terms of age, ethnicity and nationality, the characters are very well developed, and the action is more cerebral than exploitive.

This feels very much like a European film, and indeed much of this was made in Marseilles. Kudos to all involved for making an emotionally compelling, beautifully filmed and professionally acted, directed and edited action movie that deserves to be better known today.

I just wouldn't call it blaxploitation. Would you?

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] WarpedRecord 13 years ago

Definitely black cinema, and a fine example of it. Too bad this film isn't better known.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] WarpedRecord 13 years ago

Yes, I just saw it a few months ago for the first time. I had it for years and finally got around to it. I like the blaxploitation genre, but a lot of the films are so poorly directed and acted than they can be a bit tedious. This film is very well directed and acted, and the cinematography is gorgeous. This would hold up well alongside the action films that Clint Eastwood and Steve McQueen were making in the '70s.

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jejozi 10 years ago

Unfortunately, the heavy use of subtitles doomed it to the woulda, shoulda, coulda file. They should recut it with dubbing.

This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.

[–] activista 10 years ago

@jejozi

Only about an hour of the film is in subtitles---seeing that foreign movies were popular in the '70's, I don't think that had anything to do with it. But,yeah, I do believe that it's obscure because it's not your usual blaxsploitation film with pimps,pushers and drugs (actually blaxploitation films were a little more diverse than they're even been given credit for,but that's my opinion) in fact, it's not really what you would call a blaxploitation film at all. Basically, it was too damn long and took even longer to get to the main action--that's the real reason it flopped. It's still a pretty interesting take on the action genre,though.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] IdiotDomainer 13 years ago

I would never call this Blaxploitation and I wouldn't call it Black Cinema either, its just really Good Cinema period!

I first seen this movie in the 1970s when I was a kid and I just thought it was a cool movie.

I have always thought of this movie as one of the first real mainstream color blind movies ever made.

This is just an all around great cast.

[–] WarpedRecord 13 years ago

You were very lucky to have seen this in the '70s. I was a child then too, but I don't recall this ever playing in my hometown. And you're very right that this film is colorblind. So refreshing!

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] koffeenkreame41-1 10 years ago

I agree, this is a colorblind film, and it was released in the 70's as a colorblind film, which makes it revolutionary when taken into the context of the times. You saw it way before me, I saw it for the first time last year and it blew me away, and Richard Pryor's performance is unforgettable.

Agreed!! What a performance from Pryor!

"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit me!"- Hudson in Aliens.

[–] WarpedRecord 13 years ago

Excellent points. I'll seek out "the Final Comedown" and "Gordon's War." (I believe it was Paul Winfield, not Billy Dee Williams, in the latter one.)

[–] stephen_chow79 12 years ago

I wouldn't call this an action movie, theres barely any action in it

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CaperGuy 9 years ago

Not blaxploitation, just an integrated cast. Awesome film with a theme that is as compelling now as it was in the 1970s.