George Lucas says Hollywood won't support black films‎

[Mark Latimour]

Originally Posted by BBC

George Lucas says Hollywood won't support black films‎

Director George Lucas says it took 20 years to get his latest film made, "because it's an all-black movie".

Speaking on The Daily Show, Lucas said he had to self-fund Red Tails, the true story of a group of African-American pilots who fought in World War II. He claimed major film studios would not back the movie because "there's no major white roles in it at all".

"I showed it to all of them and they said, 'No. We don't know how to market a movie like this,'" he said.

"They don't believe there's any foreign market for it, and that's 60% of their profit," he added.

Lucas co-wrote and produced Red Tails, which which was directed by Anthony Hemingway. It features several well-known names - including Oscar-winner Cuba Gooding Jr, Terence Howard and R&B star Ne-Yo - and shows how the pilots were segregated and kept on the ground for most of the war, until they were called up to fight for their country. The real-life airmen featured in the drama were given a Congressional Gold Medal by then-President George Bush in 2007.


Lucas put $58 million (37.8 million) of his own money into the movie. It will be released by his company Lucasfilm, and distributed by Twentieth Century Fox. He is putting a further $35 million (£22.8 million) towards the distribution costs, said trade paper The Hollywood Reporter.

"It's a reasonably expensive movie," Lucas told Jon Stewart on The Daily Show. "Normally black movies, say Tyler Perry movies or something, they're very low budget.

"Even then, the [Hollywood studios] won't really release his movies, it goes to one of the lower, not major distributors. "This [film] costs more than what those movies make," Lucas added.

Director and actor Perry, whose movies include Why Did I Get Married and the Madea series, is one of the most profitable film-makers in the US. However, he retains the rights to all his work - which plays almost exclusively to black audiences - and has previously stated that his fans are "invisible" to the Hollywood mainstream.

Lucas's comments echo those of Spike Lee, who criticised the lack of black faces in Hollywood war movies in 2008.

Source: BBC News - George Lucas says Hollywood won't support black films‎

I'm surprised that George Lucas couldn't get Hollywood support, regardless of the subject matter. In any event, I'm looking forward to the film.

[Dr. Cheese]

Lucas is just being honest. Black actors may be popular, but black films without significant white roles tend to be niche films. It is key to note that foreign reciepts are a big concern. Films with black stars don't do well abroad. The problem selling these films abroad is actually more of an issue than the US market.

I think Red Tails will probably do well in America because it talks about racism during WWII, not today, and it is also a movie where the black characters are clearly patriotic.

[pedroims]

I am so happy that I would never classify a movie as white or black because the skin color of the people playing the roles. IMO is a shame for the human being that in 2012 we still have this ''white'', ''black'' thing.

[Dr. Cheese]

Originally Posted by pedroims

I am so happy that I would never classify a movie as white or black because the skin color of the people playing the roles. IMO is a shame for the human being that in 2012 we still have this ''white'', ''black'' thing.

What are you so happy about? Sometimes race is central to what a movie is about. Red Tails is about the Tuskeegee Airmen, a group of pilots who served when the military was segregated, and they were treated much more poorly than their white peers. That is their story, to pretend race had nothing to do with it is just dishonest, not enlightened.

Would you watch Schindler's List or Fiddler on the Roof and pretend it had nothing to do with Jews?

[Ripper]

Well Tyler Perry doesn't seem to have any problem doing it.

[MJ5150]

I am excited to see this movie because I love history. Having Cuba Gooding Jr. in it is a bonus for me. The one thing I don't look forward to is I'm sure some of the main characters will die, which will make me sad.

On a lighter note, if all the main actors are black, so much for the "the black dude always dies first" stereotype.

Edit....wasn't there another movie about the Tuskeegee Airmen already with Cuba in it?

-Mike

[Dr. Cheese]

Originally Posted by Ripper

Well Tyler Perry doesn't seem to have any problem doing it.

Did you read what Lucas said? Tyler Perry movies are low budget, and don't have to do Harry Potter level business to be profitable.

[Mark Latimour]

Originally Posted by Ripper

Well Tyler Perry doesn't seem to have any problem doing it.

I think that's addressed in the article:

Originally Posted by George Lucas

"Normally black movies, say Tyler Perry movies or something, they're very low budget. "Even then, the [Hollywood studios] won't really release his movies, it goes to one of the lower, not major distributors. "This [film] costs more than what those movies make," Lucas added.

Basically he's saying that Tyler Perry films arn't released by the major studios.

[pacojas]

much of the story was filmed in Europe and very few locals were familiar with any of the cast according to Ne-Yo. (the lead actors were on 106 & Park this week) i'm sure the movie will do well over several years due to (hopefully) it's historic significance. plus, everyone should LOVE a war flick involving "Mista Hitlah"!!!

[Chebass88]

All issues of race aside - I view this as a question of the available market and the demand for a given type of movie. According to wikipedia, the US population is 63.7% "white", and 12.2% "black". If you assume that the movie-going / movie-purchasing crowd is represented by the same demographics, this suggests to me that movies appealing to most 'white' audiences would account for ~2/3 of movies, while 'black' movies would be approximately 1/8 of the movies produced.

If you were being asked to fund a project with many millions of dollars, whose subject deals with 1/8th of people who are likely to attend such a movie, with limited foreign sales, would YOU back it financially? I certainly would not. I would stick with the same tripe that is guaranteed to make me more millions.

The same reason that "black movies" are not as well funded / received is the same reason why we don't have significantly more "Mr. Bean" movies, or why modern movie remakes do not include the Marx Brothers "Duck Soup", or Tony Curtis / Jack Lemmon's "The Great Race". Not enough demand for them.

[nutdog]

News flash, Lucas. Hollywood already made a very successful film about the Tuskegee Airmen. I think it was called, let's see, "The Tuskegee Airmen".

[Mark Latimour]

Originally Posted by nutdog

News flash, Lucas. Hollywood already made a very successful film about the Tuskegee Airmen. I think it was called, let's see, "The Tuskegee Airmen".

Are you referring to the HBO TV movie? I don't recall their being a Hollywood film on the same subject.

[MakiSupaStar]

I saw the trailers for this film, and it looks cool, but one thing that drives me nuts is when they put modern music (in this case dubstep style stuff) in to accompany a time piece film.

[nutdog]

Originally Posted by Mark Latimour

Are you referring to the HBO TV movie? I don't recall their being a Hollywood film on the same subject.

I didn't know who produced it, but a quick Wikipedia check says yes. It also says HBO invested a reported $8.5 million, "the largest investment in a telefilm project to date".

There are many points in this article to question. Here's a few:

Isn't Hollywood supposed to be a forward thinking, civil rights promoting hot bed of free expression and ideas?
Could there possibly other reasons that companies didn't think the movie would do well?
Does anyone think that blacks aren't well represented in American entertainment?
Could this be an attempt to generate publicity for a new release?

FWIW I don't go to the movies, but I'm sure I'll rent or see the new Lucas film on TV in a few months.

[BurningSkies]

If you saw the interview, you could see how the conversation was making John Stewart a bit uncomfortable...and he rightly points out that it bothered him that the studios had no interest in whether the movie was good or not, just what the foreign BO would be...

[Chebass88]

Originally Posted by nutdog

I didn't know who produced it, but a quick Wikipedia check says yes. It also says HBO invested a reported $8.5 million, "the largest investment in a telefilm project to date".

There are many points in this article to question. Here's a few:

Isn't Hollywood supposed to be a forward thinking, civil rights promoting hot bed of free expression and ideas?
Could there possibly other reasons that companies didn't think the movie would do well?
Does anyone think that blacks aren't well represented in American entertainment?
Could this be an attempt to generate publicity for a new release?

FWIW I don't go to the movies, but I'm sure I'll rent or see the new Lucas film on TV in a few months.

Hollywood is a business. They will produce whatever is demanded by their customers. While they may have a particular slant, for the most part, they produce what sells. If enough people do not approve of a given type of movie, they do not go and see it. Enough losses means that type of movie is not made again. If enough people demanded Tyler Perry movies, Tyler Perry movies would make George Lucas-type profits.

Regarding how blacks are represented in entertainment - it should be as much as the customers demand. And it depends on how you define "entertainment". What about the disproportionate numbers of blacks vs. other races in professional sports? Popular music sales?

[aborgman]

Originally Posted by Dr. Cheese

Did you read what Lucas said? Tyler Perry movies are low budget, and don't have to do Harry Potter level business to be profitable.

I'd say the fact that so many movies have to do Harry Potter level business to be profitable is the problem.

[nutdog]

Originally Posted by BurningSkies

If you saw the interview, you could see how the conversation was making John Stewart a bit uncomfortable...and he rightly points out that it bothered him that the studios had no interest in whether the movie was good or not, just what the foreign BO would be...

"If you saw the interview"...Now that's funny.

I've been overseas. Their concern about foreign body odor is well founded.

Seriously, it seems it's not about Hollywood not supporting black films, but foreign audiences not supporting black films. If indeed he is correct. But if his film makes big bucks overseas, I predict a torrent of big black Hollywood movies.

[bass12]

Ironic, given that "blaxploitation" films helped get Hollywood back on its feet in the 70s.

[MatticusMania]

Originally Posted by MakiSupaStar

I saw the trailers for this film, and it looks cool, but one thing that drives me nuts is when they put modern music (in this case dubstep style stuff) in to accompany a time piece film.

Trailers are often made before a film has finished production, and not always by the studio releasing the film. A lot of the time current popular music is used in trailers to help draw attention, but they dont necessarily reflect the music that is used in the movie itself.