Soul Man

This picture has the distinction of being the first film I've ever seen on an airplane flight, and I'm sure there was some editing done that I didn't catch. No matter. I really haven't made up my mind about this picture. I mean, I liked it well enough, but I can't figure out whether I'm offended by it or not. C. Thomas Howell plays a white student who dyes himself black to get a scholarship for Blacks to Harvard Law School (why is it always Harvard???). And I guess you can imagine the comic possibilities, as well as the potential complications (which, under the circumstances, I guess, are the same thing). There are some very funny bits, and Howell does a decent enough job though he needs more practice; he is not a natural comedian.

However, the guy (and unfortunately, I cannot remember his name) who plays his buddy is terrific; HE's natural. James Earl Jones is... well... James Earl Jones. And who can fault him? Now, to the ethics. This picture reminds me of something. There are people who are bigoted, and tell racist jokes. Then there are people who aren't bigoted, and may tell recist jokes, but it is innocent. On there other hand, there are people who think they are not bigoted (though they may in fact be) who tell racist jokes to show how hip they are, how cool, how comfortable with the idea of other races, but instead they take it past that point, to the point where it actually just shows that they ARE bigoted. This movie reminds me of that type of person. It starts off with a premise which implicitly suggests that they are comfortable dealing with Blacks (and indeed, at the end the hero has supposedly learned some lessons about prejudices and discrimination) but it derives most of its humor from Black jokes, which at first glance may seem to be innocent because they are acted out by Howell's character, whom we know to be white.

But when you think about it for a minute, that doesn't really excuse it; in fact, the jokes are racist, and just because the filmmakers have a reason for using them doesn't magkm negate that. Indeed, it may only reinforce the stereotypes. It's like the person who uses Black jokes to show how un-bigoted he is, but actually they end up showing that he really is bigoted and doesn't even know it. I'm not really offended by this, because I think it was all done in good faith, but it is kind of interesting to see the quandary you can get into when you start playing around with this stuff. How to show the bigotry without becoming a victim of it? It is a subtle thing. The picture generated some controversy when it came out, and I think I can see why. Furthermone, the ending sends a sort of mixed message too; Howell ends up looking really noble, and even gets to punch out the guys who've been telling '"negro" jokes throuhgout the picture, but he pretty much gets off scot free, making some reparations in time and money (he had to sell his car--real crisis).

Does this imply that it's OK to take advantage of race (whatever race) and other people if it's for a goal you think is important?? I don't know; it's a tricky point, and one I'm not at all sure the filmmakers were thinking about. I may even be making too much of it... nah. Maybe if Howell had really suffered as a Black, and expressed real, honest relief at going back to whiteness, rather than just doing it out of a sense of guilt. Maybe then the picture would have packed more power and certainly might have been more honest. Instead, being Black is made out to look like kind of a lark, something he wouldn't mind doing indefinitely, if it weren't for that conscience of his. And in the end he gets the (Black) girl, the law education, and even the nobility. Still, humor justifies most anything, and there are some very funny scenes. So let's not worry about it, OK?