I almost stopped watching soon as...
I saw Mariah Carey. It's really difficult for me to take a movie seriously when I see her in any capacity. Glad to see they barely had her mumble a word.
shareHaha. My reaction wasn't as extreme, but I was cringing as soon as I saw her on screen. To me, the cast took away from this movie. It was too many big names distracting from the story which wasn't all that strong anyways.
I mean, literally anybody could have played Carey's role in this film. Why they went with her is beyond me. She didn't fit at all.
"I'm in the empire business."
[deleted]
[deleted]
Historically speaking there were MANY bi-racial people back then but not because of interracial couples but because of rape. I think the point of casting her there was to show that she had to endure the same thing her mother did when she was conceived. It does not look ridiculous and fits perfectly if you understand what is being portrayed and understand the true historical horror for many black women in those days.
shareExactly. I don't know where people get the idea that there weren't a lot of biracial people in earlier times. I've researched my family history on my Dad's side back several generations. Many of the "slave schedules" which list my ancestors in the early 1800s have the notation "mulatto", the then-common term for people of mixed race. There's never been a time when there weren't plenty of mixed people around. The only difference is that it's voluntary now.
shareWatchAnythingOnce, thank you for resorting my faith in posters. I'm shocked that people do not understand that. Heck, Thomas Jefferson had mixed children, now that was due to a long standing relationship, but MANY mixed children were born as a result of rape. That's why the laws of the states for slaves followed the blood lines of the mother, not the father. The states didn't want the issue of trying to determine if a mixed child was slave or free since so many had white fathers and slave mothers. Easy fix, if your mothers a slave then you are a slave.
shareThe reason I said Mariah Carey doesn't fit in this movie is because she's not an actress. She's a singer, or at least she was 15-20 years ago. Now, she just gets on a mic and annoyingly shows off what notes she can hit. I get the mixed race thing, but I'm saying they could have used just about anybody else to play the role (Thandie Newton, Rosario Dawson? Even Paula Patton probably would have been better *cringes*.), but I guess nobody else wanted such a small role. So, they went with Mariah.
"I'm in the empire business."
You seem to be overlooking the fact that the writer/director is good friends with Mariah, that is probably the only reason she was used. And, with such a small role she did fine. It isn't substantially different from Ron Howard using his dad and/or his brother Clint in many of his movies where the character can be played by almost anyone.
There are lots of other examples like this, no need to mention them.
TxMike
Make a choice, to take a chance, to make a difference.
I wasn't overlooking anything because I didn't know that she was friends with the writer/director, and I still don't care. I think it's one of the biggest problems with this movie: the casting. It's not just Mariah Carey. It was like everywhere you looked, there's another big name. It wasn't necessary, especially when a movie is over-hyped by the media and all the Award Shows and critics, and it doesn't live up to the hype. Frankly, I thought David Oyelowo was the best actor in this movie.
"I'm in the empire business."
It was such a small role that the actress is not significant. If you are using that minor role to bash the movie then you are just nit picking looking for things to complain about.
shareObviously you didn't read very thoroughly because I said, "It's not just Mariah Carey. It was like everywhere you looked, there's another big name."
Even though it was a very small role, and she didn't even have a word to speak (thankfully), her mere presence in the film felt like exactly what it was: gratuitous. So, everybody can say, "Look who that is", which is pretty much how it felt throughout the whole movie. Every few minutes, there was another big named celebrity in this movie. It just felt like everybody who has a recognizable name made an appearance in this movie to take some of the weight off the shoulders of the relatively mediocre story.
I said that the casting was "one of the biggest problems" of the movie, not the only problem or the biggest problem, and I never said the movie was bad. I wasn't trying to bash it either. To me, the story wasn't really that strong. It wasn't truly fascinating, but it was just an interesting story that hadn't been on film (at least that particular story of the butler). It relied on a lot of Civil Rights events which have been seen in numerous movies in the past. I actually thought the movie was going to be boring, dreadful, and overrated, but it turns out that it was pretty decent. I gave it a 6/10 here on IMDb, and if I could, I'd probably give it at least a 6.5-6.8 or so. The 7.1 rating it currently has is pretty fair actually.
"I'm in the empire business."
@chsocfan11
Uh,that's why big-name stars are put into ANY movie--to get people to go see it! That's what Hollywood has always done! That's a silly and stupid reason to whine about concerning a film, what damn near EVERY film that comes out of Hollywood does that.
Uh, yeah, and that's why Hollywood sucks... God forbid if there's an intelligently written story to carry a movie instead of 15-20 big Hollywood names.
I'm not whining about it. I'm just saying that the cast in this movie is to distract everybody from the rather average movie. Robin Williams and Liev Schreiber are both a couple of my favorite actors, but the amount of stars in this movie was almost overkill. You know how many movies are out there that have little to no star power and end up being really greats movies? Much better than this average movie?
"I'm in the empire business."
You're only distracted if you are easily distractible or if you are looking for something to complain about. I'll take bigger stars because that usually means better performances from superior actors. But minor roles are completely insignificant who plays them
shareOkay. Maybe for the OP it was a huge problem that Mariah Carey was in this movie for a mere 90 seconds or so, but for me, all I said was that it was cringe-worthy. For me, when I was watching the movie and saw Mariah, I cringed because I thought, "Oh, god. She's in this movie?", but once her role was finished and she didn't appear in the rest of the film, I had forgotten about her and gotten over it.
And just because a "star" is more well-known or recognizable, doesn't necessarily make them a superior actor. For instance, John Cusack is in this movie and is one of the more recognizable names in Hollywood; but is he a good actor? Ehhh, that's debatable. Terrence Howard is overrated. Forest Whitaker is good but not amazing. Cuba Gooding Jr. is hit or miss and is more or less 'washed up'. And I don't think anybody really wants to see Oprah Winfrey on-screen for two hours.
A movie is better off if it has a few big names in it, rather than 20 big names in it. Take Braveheart for instance. Aside from maybe 3-5(?) big names, that movie has virtually nobody in it, and it is considered to be one of the greatest movies of all time by many.
All I'm saying is that the story wasn't good enough, so they went out and got all of this star power to plant the idea in people's minds that all that star power MUST mean the movie is great. An All-Star cast doesn't always mean an All-Star movie. In fact, more often than not, it usually means the movie is building you up for a let-down.
"I'm in the empire business."
To each his own but I think Cusack is a good actor, not great in here but he's good. I couldn't really see him playing Nixon but I was glad to see him in this film. Same for Howard, Forest, Robin Williams & Cuba Gooding Jr. All of them did very well in their roles. Howard's performance was just okay, not nearly as good as his performance in Hustle & Flow though. I actually didn't mind Mariah's cameo, she was barely in the film at all. I don't know how the OP could turn it off after seeing Mariah for a couple seconds in the film. I smiled when I saw her because I thought about Precious, I thought Mariah did very well in there and I was glad to see Daniels use her in another film.
"I am the ultimate badass, you do not wanna `*beep*` wit me!"- Hudson in Aliens.
Cusack isn't a bad actor. I just don't think he's particularly great. He wasn't bad in this movie. I don't think Howard is as amazing as most people seem to think. He's a good actor, but not a great one. It's been a while since I've seen Crash, but I remember him being pretty great in that. Everything else I've seen him in, he hasn't really impressed me that much. He's good, but I just don't see why everyone thinks he's this amazing actor. Forest is pretty great, but I have similar sentiments towards him. Robin Williams was very good as usual, and Cuba Gooding Jr. was better than usual I suppose.
"I'm in the empire business."
Did you see Precious? Mariah was terrific in that.
Rachel
i agree with Tone,
Heather and DominicanRedAngel
so true.
just don't let silly post like that get to ya.i love this movie.i am seeing this holiday weekend here where i live on showtime.
Except that at least Clint has an acting background. Granted, not much of one, but he has been acting on and off since he was a kid.
shareFor real.
I nearly stopped reading this thread after reading poster's comment about there not being bi-racial people prior to the twentieth century. (Or whatever.) If slavery as a foundation for this country's founding wasn't bad enough, society that continued to denote people as "quadroon" or "octoroon" should be ample evidence that there has always been bi-racial people in this country, either by rape or by what would have been considered illicit relationships.
As to whether it's Mariah Carey or Thandie Newton in this role, who cares? If it was TN, wouldn't people be screaming, "why cast such a talented actress as Thandie and not give her a bigger role?!?" There's virtually no end to that discussion.
Historically speaking there were MANY bi-racial people back then but not because of interracial couples but because of rape. I think the point of casting her there was to show that she had to endure the same thing her mother did when she was conceived. It does not look ridiculous and fits perfectly if you understand what is being portrayed and understand the true historical horror for many black women in those days.
Exactly, and Mariah Carey is one of the biggest biracial public figures in modern culture. For her to accept such a role shows a lot of humility. Mariah herself has suffered at the hands of racism and ignorance, why not pick her to play the part? share
@mellomoviereview
FYI, bi-racial people have been in this country (and everywhere else on the planet) since different cultures met up and started mixing with each other. They aren't some weird and strange new phenomenon that just popped up the other day. You obviously don't know a hell of a lot about the history of interracial relationships in this country either. Honestly, I wish people (especially white people) would do some research before they make ridiculous assumptions about who and what black people were and should have done or be. I mean,it's Black History Month---you got no damn excuse not to.
Another thing, bi-racial black people were considered black and discriminated against, and treated like s*** by white people in those days, no matter how light-skinned they were. If a people was part black white people didn't want a damn thing to do with you. Hell, Strom Thurmond, the racist bastard Southern senator who fought against desegregation for years,had a black daughter he kept on the downlow for virtually his whole life. He was never man enough to acknowledge her publicly as his daughter while he was alive, the piece of s***t,even though he could have in his old age. She wrote a book about him after he passed---she passed away recently herself:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/strom-thurmonds-mixed-race-daug hter-dies-at-87/2013/02/04/660e074e-6f3d-11e2-8b8d-e0b59a1b8e2a_story. html
So,yeah, it was perfectly okay to cast Carey as the mother. There wasn't a damn thing wrong with it.
Well said.
shareYeah, very well said. I was shocked when people on this thread said there weren't any bi-racial people at that time! FFS, everyone's bloodline traces back to Africa any way, according to evolution. The term 'bi-racial' actually leaves me cold. But, I digress... Rape was a frequent occurrence and many children were a result of those rapes. It's disgusting how women and men were treated.
Regarding Mariah Carey - they probably wanted to portray a person who was born out of the oppression and abuse - specifically rape, using a lighter-skinned person for emphasis, i.e. people might see a 'bi-racial' actress on screen and not realise that that actress is partly Caucasian. I thought she did well portraying someone who was traumatised by her experience, having been raped and her husband murdered.
When life gives you lemons, just say '*beep* the lemons' and bail.
Very true. How do they think most blacks got the different skin tones from anyway. Very good movie.
shareSorry, but a LOT of people with slavery in their history have interracial ancestry, unfortunately not by choice. If you look at the timing of these fictional characters, Carey's character would have been around 30ish in 1926. So she was born around 1896. Either her father or grandfather could have been white (probably grandfather to get back to the 1860s). And she could have ended up having an interracial baby from the incident we witnessed in the film. There w
shareI think when they show African American actors or actresses play a role in the 1940s or earlier they shouldn't cast Bi-Racial people to play the part.Agreed. Pre-1940s bi-racial people didn't exist. They just magically appeared ex nihilo during the 50s.
http://1971-reviewae.com/ share
To say you're misinformed is an understatement. What do you possibly know about African Americans in the 20s and beyond? My father was born in 1915. My uncle was very light skinned while my father was dark as I proudly am. No big deal. Do you not recall the simple fact that African American women were either raped or willingly slept with white men since the beginning of time. So, sweetie, you're wrong. Light women existed well before you were a thought in the universe. Do some research and educate yourself before you make such statements.
shareI guess you haven't heard of Lena Horne. I suppose she's too light too?
shareDragon,why bother.
Your not able to get through to stupidity so i m one jewish italian woman who do not bother..
I JUST LOVE THIS MOVIE!
my sister in law,Michelle, and her entire family are a BEAUTIFUL rainbow,of
dark-skin like Rapper 50 cent/MICHAEL JORDAN
to dark brown skin and real light white-fair skin,
to beautiful Light Brown skin,to Medium light brown skin.
yep.
so do not waste time askin her or him bout beautiful LENA HORN,why bother..
"They don't get it."Just enjoy the good movie,the BUTLER i sure do!
Love MARIAH CAREY WAS IN IT,even if a very small part,great movie!
heather...
#TrueStoriesAreBestInLife
Mell,you're flagrantly un-educated,insofar as one's history.
Many fair skin to white skin black and mixed since beginning of time,encompassing many who i know,and have seen from this time,before i was born,where Bi-racial,we now a days call it been going on long before.SMDH.-
To say"most black people were umm, Darker-Tone" SMH such a false-statement
and i disagree.
Mi close amiga,her grandparents,the grand-dad,along with her very beautiful grandmother Rose has fair to white skin beautiful inside and out she was,so there you go,as the grandfather Michael is beyonce Light Golden-Brown skin...
-
I love the fact Mariah being black mixed with irish mom,was in this,
even if it was a minor part.Love it..
LOVE THE BUTLER entirely.
Going to re-watch this holiday right on SHOWTIME
Noches..
adios
----------------
Love The Butler
Love Intersection
Love Less Than Zero..
Love Everything"Historic,in films fictionalized however premise on TRUE-STORY es lo mejor"
----
DominicanRedAngel.hello.
i so agree.
see?like your lighter-skin, light brown skin beautiful skin tone,i would love to have your skin tone in your beautiful photo there.Your gorgeous.
I always love the different skin tone of black and hispanics .
i think Mel comment is well just ignorant and a stupid comment."I am glad i learn history unlike alot of white people here i see have not
about that.
I got the movie on too tonight.Cable.
Heather...
I mean, literally anybody could have played Carey's role in this film.
Any one could have played half the roles really, didn't understand why there was such a famous cast. Like Vanessa Redgrave and her 3-4 short lines. And Alex Pettyfer, his short role could have been played by anyone will the ability to look and act menacing yet they gave both roles to two british people.
And was it vital that all the presidents be played by famous names? Seemed more like these were actors just doing a favour for their friend Oprah, and Oprah probably assumed the more famous faces in the movie, the more likely it was to be a success at the box office.
Ashmi any question
share
You're kidding right???? Black women were constantly raped back then. Were seen as nothing more than servants for whatever need that should "arise".
shareWhat a stupid question. If you would think about why she was cast then.........
share