Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Tyler Perry''s "For Colored Girls"

The only way I would see this movie is if it was in a theater full of anonymous Datalounge regulars.

by Anonymousreply 7704/26/2014

ROFL!%0D %0D Wouldn't that be fabulous!

by Anonymousreply 110/29/2010

This is not "Tyler Perry's For Colored Girls". It's "For Colored Girls". This is not a Tyler Perry original. I WON'T tell you this again.

THREAD CLOSED!

by Anonymousreply 210/29/2010

It would be hilarious if the phrase "Oh Dear" popped up on the screen after particularly cringe-worthy moments in the movie.

by Anonymousreply 310/29/2010

I wonder if Miss Jackson was a diva on the set of "For Colored Girls".

by Anonymousreply 410/29/2010

"This is not "Tyler Perry's For Colored Girls". It's "For Colored Girls"."

Oh, hon, believe me, it's been Perry-pureed.

by Anonymousreply 510/29/2010

Is Madea in this one?

by Anonymousreply 610/29/2010

people touched me, and my Daddy was mean, and the dirty lady made me touch her hoo hoo AND "FOR COLORED GIRLS" OPENS NOV. 5TH!!!

by Anonymousreply 710/29/2010

I'm pre-lubing my dashiki as I type!

by Anonymousreply 810/29/2010

So many good actresses in this ... and then there's Janet.

by Anonymousreply 910/31/2010

Tyler Perry is my favorite "Colored Girl"

by Anonymousreply 1011/01/2010

For Audiences Who Have Considered Suicide When They Told Tyler Perry, "Enough!"

by Anonymousreply 1111/01/2010

They thought this was going to be this year's Precious (based on the novel Push by Sapphire).

Instead it is this year's Ishtar (made by a ugly -assed man on the down-low).

by Anonymousreply 1211/01/2010

SF Chronicle and LA Times have given it rave reviews.....and yes, for Miss Tyler Perry too!

by Anonymousreply 1311/06/2010

Just saw it today. Beware!Spoilers below!%0D %0D Made all black men look like rapists,child killers,closeted gays and cheaters.%0D %0D Made all black women appear to be shreiking snot- dripping limmerick-screaming alcoholic cult-crazy suicidal sluts.%0D %0D It was very entertaining.

by Anonymousreply 1411/06/2010

Well, I've read some reviews which more or less stated the only difference between this and his Medea movies are that Media doesn't show up, not that she couldn't, given how badly the movie is constructed and the burlesue theatricality of it's characters. And they squarely blame Perry for the mess.%0D %0D (In the meantime, Whoopi Goldberg said she hated her character. Not the usual public statement when someone plays an unflattering role).

by Anonymousreply 1511/06/2010

Those reviewers are idiots then because this story has been around long before Tyler Perry wrote any plays and Madea was even thought about. He simply translated this creation into a movie, a lot of it is in it's original form.

by Anonymousreply 1611/06/2010

*its

by Anonymousreply 1711/06/2010

The reviews are in...and as awful as you might expect. The only kind words were for some of the performances (Jackson excluded). The critics saw it as a clumsy melodrama. And yes, the feeling that Medea was waiting to make an entrance at any time. The reviews DO rave about the movie, just not in a good way.

by Anonymousreply 1811/06/2010

First of all, Perry had no business doing anything related to this movie, other than backrolling it. He should have let the screenplay up to someone else because he does NOT have the chops.

by Anonymousreply 1911/06/2010

"other than backrolling it. "

True--leave the back rolls to me

by Anonymousreply 2011/06/2010

I went to see it this weekend, I wouldn't have heard anything about it if it weren't for this thread.

R14 got it right, I was stunned by how many couples who were obviously on dates went to see this movie. Worst black couple date movie ever.

People were crying all over the place in the theatre at the end. The melodrama worked on the audience, especially the adults.

The worst part: families bringing little children in the theatre. Most of these kids were crying during this movie. I suppose I shouldn't have been surprised that parents brought in little kids, I live in an area where the theatre had to put signs up in the ticket booth begging people not to bring small children in to The Passion of the Christ because of the blood and violence, and begging people not to bring little children in to see Precious. But I thought it was especially cruel and stupid to bring small children into this movie: if you don't know the story I won't spoil it for you, but there is some serious violence on children in the movie, and the kids knew what was going on and immediately began to cry at that particular scene. It was heart-wrenching that these families did not know that it would be damaging to their kids to make them watch this.

I guess I can see that in the 70s when the play/poem was originally performed it was empowering for black women to have a mirror held up to them like this, but these days the families I saw in the theatre were just harming themselves by watching this. A lot of little children who will never be able to trust Mama or Daddy again because of what they saw parents doing during the film.

And you know that Tyler Perry was all about this project because he wants to make himself seem to be better than other down low gays in the black community. The story features a down low gay who gives his wife HIV, explicitly claiming his gayness is his choice. Tyler is all about the idea that his gayness and down low status is merely because he was abused as a child and he has no choice. Really unfortunate distortion of the issues to make himself feel better.

by Anonymousreply 2111/07/2010

This week's issue of The New Yorker has a profle written by Hilton Als of the woman who wrote the original play, Ntozake Shange.

by Anonymousreply 2211/07/2010

Is there interpretive dancing in it?

by Anonymousreply 2311/07/2010

One of Whoopi Goldberg's daughters in the movie is a dancer, and another one of the main women is her dance teacher, so some dancing is there but it is not central to the story.

by Anonymousreply 2411/07/2010

R21--even if you don't know the plot details before hand, shouldn't the R rating tip people off that this movie is not for small children?

I know people routinely let their kids see R rated stuff and it's bad parenting. IMO.

by Anonymousreply 2511/07/2010

Janet Jackson can't act.

There, I ruined the ending!

by Anonymousreply 2611/07/2010

[quote]In the meantime, Whoopi Goldberg said she hated her character.

But she loved the paycheck.

by Anonymousreply 2711/07/2010

[italic]But she loved the paycheck.[/italic]

But it wasn't pay pay.

by Anonymousreply 2811/07/2010

Well, Whoopi did tell the truth - her character is insane.

It's just too bad that someone, Tyler, whoever, didn't have the guts to make the character a Christian insane woman. They had to skirt that issue (of the overwhelming influence of neoconservative fundamentalist Christianity in the black community keeping black women stupid as fuck) by making the character a member of a cult with only the vaguest connection to Christianity.

by Anonymousreply 2911/07/2010

Is Thandie reprising her Beloved role? That would seem very much up Tyler's street. How about his next movie feature Beloved vs Madea?

by Anonymousreply 3011/07/2010

I feel about this movie the same way I feel about our local university's Women and Gender Studies program doing The Vagina Monologues every damn year. Woman 1, show us how fucked up you are, now Woman 2, and now Woman 3. Are women and black women really that regressed, stuck in narratives written 15 to 30 years ago, revelling in wailing, moaning victimhood with no way out and no practical advice about how to live life differently? I would rather see an all black cast do an adaptation of The Holiday. At least that story has more than just a few minutes of hugging after a main character realizes she ought to be the hero of her own life narrative. Damn, damn, damn.

by Anonymousreply 3111/07/2010

R30, Thandie plays Tangie, or Miss Orange. She's the older daughter of Whoopi Goldberg. She's very promiscuous, compulsively trying to take her sexual power back from men, but actually being used by men. She is also drug and alcohol dependent, and has various violent flip-outs with men, with Whoopi, and with her younger sister. She lives in a building supered by Phylicia Rashad, who she also bitches at a lot until a change of heart at the end of the movie. To the extent that her character in Beloved and her character in this movie are sexually out of control and failed by their own mothers, yes, there is typecasting on a certain level.

by Anonymousreply 3211/07/2010

"It was heart-wrenching that these families did not know that it would be damaging to their kids to make them watch this."%0D %0D It's probably no different than what goes on their own homes.

by Anonymousreply 3311/07/2010

I didn't know anything about the movie except for what I saw on The View, which was all glowing accolades of course. They slobbered all over this thing as "empowering" and "truthful" for weeks.

[quote]At least that story has more than just a few minutes of hugging after a main character realizes she ought to be the hero of her own life narrative.

A lot of women don't want to hear that. Most Christians don't want to hear it either because it's all about giving yourself over to Jesus and letting him run your life and take care of you. You can imagine how well trusting your life to your imaginary friend works out for them.

by Anonymousreply 3411/07/2010

Wait and see, R31. Tyler Perry is going to get up in here and write that "black cast The Holiday" just because you suggested it. I can see it now. And the old comedy writer who Kate Winslet meets in LA is going to be played by Billy Dee Williams. Ironically, of course, because we all remember he was the hero of his own narrative and treated Diana badly in Mahogany! Jada Pinkett Smith as Cameron Diaz. It's writing itself.

by Anonymousreply 3511/07/2010

This reminds me of when I SM'd a college production back in 98. It was performed by a cast of white girls.

by Anonymousreply 3611/07/2010

It was far from perfect, but I really liked it, and I am generally a TP decractor. Best TP movie by far. Great ensemble cast, but Loretta Devine, Phylicia Rashad, Kimberly Elise and Thandie Newton stood out.

I guess it helps that I wasn't that familiar with the source material. I can understand purists not being happy with any adaptation to the screen, but some of the really negative reviews I just don't agree with.

I would agree with "there are some flaws, but overall this is a good film", but just don't see "there were a few strong points, but overall this is a poor film."

by Anonymousreply 3711/08/2010

I am confused by the info at R21. How was this performed in the 70's featuring a story line about HIV?

by Anonymousreply 3811/08/2010

The down low/HIV story line seems almost tacked on. It is a real and important issue within the black community, but it didn't seem to be fully developed.

TP lays the groundwork early. We see what I assume to be Janet Jackson's husband being blown by another guy in a casual tryst in his car. Then we see him walking down the street talking to JJ on the phone and turning to check out a guy. Then he checks out the guy at the opera. So, the foundation was there to explore the issue fully.

But, JJ's husband's character isn't fully drawn out, and the real JJ storyline is her change from being cold and distant to being more caring and sympathetic once she sees her assistant's children killed. In a broader context, I took this to represent that all women have the maternal, caring, nurturing instinct in them, but sometimes it gets lost.

This overshadowed the issues with her husband which only came to light at the very end during their conversation in the bedroom.

by Anonymousreply 3911/08/2010

Reminds me of the best typo correction ever:

"This blog post originally stated that one in three black men who have sex with me is HIV positive. In fact, the statistic applies to black men who have sex with men."

by Anonymousreply 4011/08/2010

If made about $20 million, decent for a non-Madea TP movie, but not his best showing for a non-Madea movie.

The budget was $21 million, so it will make money.

Again, I really enjoyed it, though it had its flaws.

by Anonymousreply 4111/08/2010

Tyler Perry is a piece of dog shit.

by Anonymousreply 4211/08/2010

r41 this movie does not deserve comparison to any "Madea" movie.

by Anonymousreply 4311/08/2010

I'm not comparing it to a Madea movie. I was actually comparing the box office to other non-Madea movies.

by Anonymousreply 4411/08/2010

This is a film that LIVES and BREATHES.

by Anonymousreply 4511/08/2010

Did Phylicia ever fuck Bill Cosby... for real?

by Anonymousreply 4611/08/2010

I went into the theater fully expecting the throw up right there and then as soon as the first scene started, but I was really surprised I didn't. I didn't hurl until the second scene.

He's really getting better.

by Anonymousreply 4711/08/2010

Thandie Newton's performance in BELOVED was beyond embarassing and rightfully should have ended her acting career. I have rarely alternately howled with derision and stared at the movie screen mouth agape at the sheer absudity of what I was witnessing.

by Anonymousreply 4811/08/2010

[quote]I have rarely alternately howled with derision and stared at the movie screen mouth agape at the sheer absudity of what I was witnessing.

MARY!!!

[quote]absudity

Oh, dear.

by Anonymousreply 4911/08/2010

Whoopi is rather awful in this but that's only a small part of the movie's problems. The material is worthy of a much better director and, unfortunately, it ended up in the hands of someone who's even incapable of directing a mediocre sitcom. In essence, the problem is Tyler Perry's cinematic literacy or, rather, the lack of it.

by Anonymousreply 5011/08/2010

Manohla Dargis of The New Yrk Times gave this film a rave.%0D %0D I trust her more than I trust the trolls on this thread.%0D %0D We all know why you have a problem with Mr. Perry...%0D %0D He is a true talent and he is growing and learning and we need to nurture that. %0D %0D

by Anonymousreply 5111/08/2010

Manohla Dargis calls it a "thunderous storm of a movie" and give it 3 out of 5 stars.

by Anonymousreply 5211/08/2010

I don%E2%80%99t think that the direction is the movie%E2%80%99s problem. For me it was the story that spoiled the fun. It has a very misanthropical attitude. Feminism was a relevant movement in the seventies, but society has developed. This strict women vs male attitude in a black & white concept is just outdated and not contemporary anymore. What made the movie watchable were indeed the performances. There were clearly scenes in it that were written for the actresses to shine. And they delivered. Needless to say there were hardly any moments for the male actors to shine (except some very nice shiny ass cheeks). Maybe the deranged veteran. I suppose from an actor%E2%80%99s point of view you can consider that character rewarding. Every other male character was just way too one-dimensional to be interesting. Btw, where does the hate for Phylicia Rashad come from? What did I miss?

by Anonymousreply 5311/08/2010

F&F r54. Took you long enough. This movie has a very low percentage on Rotton Tomatoes so I guess there are a lot of unpolitically correct reiewers out there.%0D %0D But for the reviewers that I trust - like Dargis, etc. - it was a rave.%0D %0D Get off this site. You don't belong here.

by Anonymousreply 5511/08/2010

R51, of course only a true talent could come up with "Meet The Browns" and "House of Payne".

And, yes, the direction is a problem. Even the scenes shot on actual streets of New York looked like cheap sets, that place in Harlem where they go for an abortion is a ridiculous stereotype of where "undesirables" live, the shots of female faces are very unfortunate, and he seems unhealthily focused on the brutality of the male/female interaction throughout the movie, almost reveling in it.

by Anonymousreply 5611/08/2010

[quote]What made the movie watchable were indeed the performances. There were clearly scenes in it that were written for the actresses to shine. And they delivered.

I agree 100%.

by Anonymousreply 5711/08/2010

R55, you're an ass. Just because someone expresses an opinion that you don't agree with, you react with anger. You must be a liberal.

by Anonymousreply 5811/08/2010

Did it have a laugh track?

by Anonymousreply 5911/08/2010

Thandie, Anika and Elise gave amazing performances. Too bad the film didn't hold up.

by Anonymousreply 6011/08/2010

Black people, the intended audience (though I'm sure he wants a broad audience) have been surprisingly negative (well maybe not that surprising since TP tends to evoke love-hate reactions). And, I'm considering a broad cross section of sources. Black publications like Ebony and Essence, black websites and blogs. There are reviewers who loved it or thought it was merely okay, but many others really panned it, either because it didn't do justice to the source material, or because it was too simplistic, or, most often, because it is yet again a TP movie that depicts black men as nearly universally evil and the source of all black womens' problems. Too simplistic, no nuance.

Black viewers, most of them women, as evidenced by comments sections in newspapers and blogs have been more positive, many loving it, but still no shortage of people who thought it was anywhere from flawed to horrible.

I definitely see the flaws, but thought it was good, by no means horrible. Many of the performances really do shine.

I see it as ambitious and TP being over his head.

by Anonymousreply 6111/09/2010

r55 - Dargis did not think it was a great movie.

by Anonymousreply 6211/09/2010

I think people just are not in the mood for a depressing movie a la Precious.

by Anonymousreply 6311/10/2010

That dreadful Oprah is all over Tyler like a bitch in heat.

by Anonymousreply 6411/10/2010

I'm guessing Oprah and GAYle suggested he do this movie, during one of their all-girl pajama parties. I doubt if he even reads, and certainly not plays or poems. And I doubt he directed this solely on his own- no matter what the results are (reviews are mixed, to say the least).

by Anonymousreply 6511/13/2010

You're close to the truth, r65. Here's the scoop:

TP had not even heard of the book "For Colored Girls..". Another director, (a black female, btw)Nzingha Stewart, had been in discussions with the author, Ntozake Shange, and with Lionsgate for like 5 years and had the rights to develop.

The script came to the attention of TP, and he reportedly had a revelation from God that he was supposed to direct it. Being that he, (TP, not God) is responsible for 25% of Lionsgate's profits, they yanked the film from Stewart and gave it to TP.

Stewart was given Exec Prod role, and no doubt, a gag order and a healthy pay check. You can see Stewart's name in the credits.

by Anonymousreply 6611/13/2010

These "Boondocks" parodies are funny -

by Anonymousreply 6711/13/2010

Another -

by Anonymousreply 6811/13/2010

r62, Dargis did indeed give the movie a rave.

by Anonymousreply 7011/16/2010

"The only way I would see this movie is if it was in a theater full of anonymous Datalounge regulars."

I think you're onto something, OP. I'm thinking a cable show on the lines of MST 3000.

by Anonymousreply 7111/16/2010

This movie was epic

by Anonymousreply 7211/16/2010

I am watching it on cable at the moment. Now this is some fine drama. oh dear.

by Anonymousreply 7308/25/2013

Janet Jackson equates acting with whispering

by Anonymousreply 7408/25/2013

It was so awful, so, so awful. I expected Janet to be bad, and she was, but Loretta Devine and Whoopi Goldberg were equally wretched and hammy.

by Anonymousreply 7508/25/2013

Loretta Devine was too loud and shrill. I thought the mother of the 2 little kids was the best in this.

by Anonymousreply 7608/25/2013

I finally watched this and I found it terrific. Very moving. His stuff is usually such shit too.

by Anonymousreply 7704/26/2014
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.