MovieChat Forums > A Raisin in the Sun (2008) Discussion > Well it Was a Good Try, But...

Well it Was a Good Try, But...

posted 10 years ago by scottsteaux63-735-780576
3 replies | jump to latest

I am not a huge fan of remakes, particularly when the original is as iconic as the 1961 A RAISIN IN THE SUN. But this is a worthy effort, particularly considering it was made for television.

I think casting Sean Combs as Walter Lee was a mistake; he lacks the intensity that Sidney Poitier exhibited in the original, and in fact at times seems uncertain as to how to play the role. But the producers have buttressed his performance with some heavy duty talent: Phylicia Rashad as Lena, Audra McDonald as Ruth, and Sanaa Lathan as Beneatha.

Yet despite all this there is a curious lack of energy to this production. Rashad tries hard, but she does not have the gravitas that Claudia McNeil brought to the role. McDonald tries even harder, but all I can say is she's no Ruby Dee and perhaps the comparison is even a tad bit unfair. As for Lathan, she's the only one with a certain amount of energy, but I found her deliberate imitation of Diana Sands, right down to the way she read some of her lines, irritating and unworthy of an actress whom I suspect is more talented than that and simply chose to cut corners.

The sole improvement on the 1961 film is the role of Asagai. Not so much David Oyelowo's performance, though he's fine here, but in the original film the role was severely cut down from the stage version and this production replaces an important speech delivered by the character to Beneatha after the money has been lost. Pity that Ivan Dixon did not get the chance to deliver this speech in the 1961 film.

On a four-star rating scale I would probably give this one two and a half; as remakes go it isn't bad, but I still was left with the feeling "Why did they bother?"

Never mess with a middle-aged, Bipolar queen with AIDS and an attitude problem!
roflol ><

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] scottsteaux63-735-780576 10 years ago

What did you think about the first remake with Danny Glover and Esther Rolle?

It's been quite some time since I've seen it, but if memory serves Esther Rolle was more powerful as Lena than Phylicia Rashad but less so than Claudia McNeil. And by the same token Danny Glover's Walter was much better than Sean Combs though honestly who could touch Sidney Poitier? The main problem that film had was that aside from Walter and Lena the supporting roles were indifferently cast. And the production itself lacked energy, though you could say the same thing for the 2008 version: neither one had the tension and urgency of the original.

My memories of this version are all over the map and I might be surprised if I saw it again, but frankly only Glover and Rolle made any impression on me. Though it was fun to see John Fiedler reprise his role as Lindner.

Never mess with a middle-aged, Bipolar queen with AIDS and an attitude problem!
roflol ><

[–] kascha-klaussen 9 years ago

Although I can see what you're getting at, I think the real question would be why did you bother to compare the two casts?

Of course the remake cast is not going to equal the cast that put the movie on the map. To watch the remake with the onus on the actors and actresses to make the audience forget the originals is to completely short change them and not give them any sort of fair shot, and to call their effort irrelevant.

That scene where Rashad reacts to Combs losing the money just about broke me apart. She is a phenomenal actress, and I felt every ounce of what she was feeling there. How to hate, pity, love, and grieve all at the same time. It was incredible acting, and that stands up without having to wonder how Esther Role or Cicely Tyson or anybody else would have played it including how it was played in the original.

I also didn't waste time trying to decide whether Sanaa looked 18 or 19 or whatever. There are plenty of actors and especially actresses who are older than the roles they play and in this case it had nothing to do with anything, especially the point. And that point was that no matter how she looked or acted or thought she came off as, her knowledge of both the world and of herself lacked the way a child's would lack.

Puffy did okay, for someone who is not a seasoned actor. He has been in exactly two movies of note to me and those are this one and Monster's Ball and this is the first time he's had to carry such major weight in a movie. He did just fine and conveyed what he needed to. I don't look at him on film and wonder why he's not Denzel.