Jacking the American Gangster

I get my hair cut every week for reasons attributed to vanity, insecurity, and habit, among others. Last week, I went to get my haircut and American Gangster was playing on the television. But the movie didn't come out in the movie theaters until yesterday. The picture was clear, the sound was exact, and there were no people eating popcorn in the microphone or people walking in front of the screen to go to the bathroom or get Twizzlers or whatever. It was like I was eight months in the future and watching the DVD.

My initial reaction was, "This is bad." Not the movie. The fact that I was watching the movie a week before its release date in theaters. In a barbershop. Clearly. I thought that was bad. But now I'm not so sure.

As a proponent of black people supporting black businesses, my initial reaction focused on the damage the bootleg copy could do to Denzel Washington. He is an accomplished, well-paid, much-sought-after actor. But he is also black. There are those in the black (and white) community who think it unquestionable that Washington is the best actor making movies today, and think that he is still somehow underappreciated. It is important, therefore, in the eyes of these people that movies that Washington makes are well attended, particularly by blacks, when they are released. Especially on opening night when a movie's success or failure is often cemented. If Washington attracts huge numbers on opening night, the argument goes, his clout, prestige, marketability, cache, etc. become increasingly more undeniable or subject to devaluation. There is a subtle, if not unspoken, energy among blacks when a "black" movie or a movie starring one of our cinematic heroes opens that urges us to represent in the theaters in support of the movie or its star.

But if the movie is playing and being sold in black barbershops one week before the movie opens, then chances are that energy urging us to go out and support the black film or the black star is undercut by the ability to cop the movie for 5 bucks around the way. The interplay between the notion that blacks should support other blacks in the public eye and the notion that a person (black, white, or other) would be silly to pay top dollar to go to the theater to see a movie that you can buy for 1/3 the cost and watch in your house got me thinking.

What motivates blacks to go see "black" movies? I heard on the Steve Harvey Morning Show the admonition when "Why Did I Get Married" came out a few weeks ago that blacks should go support the movie, especially on the first weekend when the numbers were all important. At one level, blacks going to see black movies is a form of supporting black business. But the cat selling "American Gangster" in the shop was black too. As between supporting black business, must we not adhere to practical consumerism and take advantage of the best value? Additionally, it is an open question how much of the money blacks spend at the movies actually goes into the pockets of the stars or movie makers we go out to support. If American Gangster makes $46.3 million this weekend, how much of that will represent Denzel's share? Conversely, when a patron cops the bootleg for $5 the money goes directly in the pocket of the black dude selling the copies. No, really; I saw him put the money in his pocket.

It occurred to me therefore that there is more going on than just supporting black business when blacks urge others, as Harvey did, to go to the movies. I think that there is a notion at play that we want to look supportive (if not unified) of one another in the public eye. It is a communication to the majority culture that our movies and our actors are just as good as yours. See, we paid our good money to go see them. This notion empowers the Tyler Perrys and Denzel Washingtons of the world to point to their black supporters and leverage that support into advantages on their end.

But when will blacks stop putting on our best face to look good for others? When will we "progess" into a fully functional, self-interested group of consumers like others in American society? I mean, I heard people in the barbershop saying that they were not going to buy the bootleg copy because they WANTED to support Denzel and go see it in the theater (and expressly not due to the illegality of buying bootleg movies)! Are we playing a different game, or just by different rules?

Voter maternalism/paternalism

Today is the primary for the mayoral race in Philadelphia, which I do not vote in since I do not live in Philadelphia. However, I have been following the race closely for several reasons; not the least of which is the fact that Philadelphia politics is the ultimate reality show. I am intrigued by numerous comments that I have heard made by voters explaining why they plan to vote for who they plan to vote for, because the comments seem quite maternalistic/paternalistic. The comments go like this: "I'm not voting for Evans because he'll do more good in the State House." Or "I'm not voting for Fattah because he'll do more good in Congress." Other commenters---black commenters mind you---say they'll vote for Brady of Knox because they are white and will bring the cache of whiteness to Philadelphia.

All of these comments seem weird to me because they are endorsements in the negative. That is, they are decisions about who to vote for that have nothing at all to do with how well the candidate will do in the job of mayor. Additionally, they seem resoundingly judgmental. Is this informed voting? Is it a good idea for voters to base their decision on factors that run counter to the candidates own choice to run? Should we vote based on issues pertinent to the job at hand, or should other factors enter our voting decision?