Perception and reality are two interchangeable states of being that can be alternatively in sync or oppositional (and contradictory). Years ago, a renegade acquaintance and native Angeleno took notice of the gentrification/revitalization of the city’s downtown area, and commented about the problems that might occur since (in his words) “soul brothers like going to the movies.” His insinuation that these prospective theater goers might bring with them a propensity for malfeasance is notable because 1) he is Black, 2) he may share some of the same racial bias of his lighter hued (White) compadres (albeit he usedthe comment for comic effect), and 3) aside from its offensive implications, he is making a statement based on years of practical observation.
That Black folks are some of the most avid cinema devotees is a known fact to anyone familiar with that community’s spending habits. This was officially validated in a 2011 survey conducted by Black Entertainment Television (BET). However, this reality flies in the face of conventional marketing wisdom by the uninitiated which holds that African American movie-goers will likely gravitate to films featuring Black subject matter or performers of color.
The BET study showed that this demographic (which contributed some $6.3 billion to box office coffers in that particular year) made their selections based on genre first and foremost, with the top choices being comedy, action-adventure, and romance in that order. Furthermore, 81 percent of the films selected by African American audiences did not feature a Black cast or subject matter.
This concrete dollars-and-cents data makes the current diversity controversy surrounding the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences especially puzzling. It wouild seem that those who can “greenlight” content would be motivated by the sheer buying power of this contemporary movie audience. The proven economic power of Black culture over the past two decades would also seem to be a sufficient motivator for industry power brokers to embrace in their quest to fill box office coffers.
Alas, this is not the case.
The lot of an aspiring performer in LaLa Land is a hard one, regardless of ethnicity or talent. United Kingdom native Ione Butler, a three-year resident of this “Land of Opportunity,” is among the hopefuls striving for dream fulfillment. The striking-looking actress of Bahamian-British descent made the “leap across the pond” to take advantage of an environment she contends is more hospitable to ethnic minorities, but she is not surprised about the current turmoil swirling around the Oscar nomination process.
For Butler, the industry’s inability/unwillingness to change with shifting tastes amounts to an exercise in self destruction. That attitude, in her words, “devalues and undermines” the Academy, whose leadership is out of touch with the contemporary entertainment consumer base.
This she attributes to the stagnant membership, which has remained complacent over the past few decades. This has resulted in a clash of cultures in which the Academy’s antiquated constituency “refuses to acknowledge the pool of talent,” available to invigorate the industry. The group’s governing body, made up of largely White males, many of whom are above the age of 60, have “… no comprehension of other people’s culture and life,” notes Butler.
Indeed, her sentiments are in sync with proposals to double the number of ethnic and women members of the Academy in the wake of recent criticism about the “ageism” of the current membership ranks (most tellingly, the only curent non-White members of the Academy’s Board of Governors are president Cheryl Boone Isaacs and Japanese American cinematographer Daryn Okada).
To be fair, the current hullabaloo has a historical precedent. In 1970 amidst charges the association had lost touch with the progression of society, Academy president Gregory Peck initiated changes to revitalize its ranks by redesignating members who’d been inactive for extended periods as nonvoting associates. (Voting members are typically active in contemporary movie making).
This redesignation process may be reinstituted in the Academy to counter the natural inclination of these “creatures of habit,” who’ve become set in their ways. But perhaps the larger issue lies within the leadership at the head of the production studios who simularly are compelled to stick with formulaic storylines due to (in Butler’s words) “fear of the unknown” (this in turn may explain Hollywood’s penchant for sequels).
“Of course they’ll make what they wanna make, ’cause that’s what they know,” she explains.
Any problem of this magnitude, of course, has it’s origins in a myriad of sources.
Butler cites a recent session in an acting class where the gender ratio among the attendees was four (males) to 10 (females). As such, the actors were able to perform eight sketches while the actresses were limited to a paltry two. This, in turn, is a testament to the lack of quality writing for female performers.
Yet and still, Butler counts her blessings.
“I feel blessed and grateful to be born in this day and age as an actress of color, where women have more opportunities than before and diversity is being talked about. But we still have a long way to go.”
Producer and writer K-Tusha Croom remembers a meeting early in her 20-odd-year career with a network executive who strongly suggested she remove credits of shows she’d worked on for BET since the he individual thought the industry at large wouldn’t recognize them as legitimate experience.
She suggests this attitude has and has not changed in the interim, and ventures the opinion that big- wig executives “… don’t even review films that don’t appeal to them.”
Speaking specifically about “Creed,” considered an across-the-board favorite by critics and social media outlets alike, Croom called its exclusion from the nominations “… a travesty on three levels.” Director and writer Ryan Coogler, who conceived the reboot of Sylvester Stallone’s now 40-year-old boxing saga, was overlooked by the awards committee, along with the film’s leading man, Michael B. Jordan, as was the movie itself (Stallone was given a Best Supporting Actor nod). Coogler received no recognition for breathing new life into a stagnant franchise and reshaping it into a new and marketable incarnation.
Another sentiment expressed by others, who choose not to go on record, is that to not invest energy into venues where the gatekeepers do not to put out the welcome mat.
“If you don’t want to include me in something, I’m not going to support that thing,” she says, conveying what Croom calls her “knee-jerk” reaction to the situation.
Hovering over all this is the unspoken threat of retribution, in the form of dried up employment opportunities. One notable example of an upstart who went against the establishment is celebrated screenwriter Eric Monte, scribe of Black cinema classic “Cooley High,” and the hit T.V. shows “Good Times,” and “What’s Happening.” His 1977 lawsuit against the television networks for appropriating his ideas eventually resulted in a huge cash payout. But his subsequent “blackballing” by those in control, coupled with a debilitating narcotic addiction led to his financial ruin.
Like Butler, Croom is hopeful about the outcome of this current scandal, but remains a realist.
“I’m hoping and praying that we have matured enough so that we can express ourselves without being reprimanded.”
