Dumb, but better.

>No, the "theory" goes back to dozens of other posts
>about Tyler Perry authored by
>Basaglia.

I'm familiar with the theory. I disagree.

>Basaglia consistently argues that Perry is, if anything,
>a positive force for black actors, actresses, and
>black america at large.

Yeah, I get that. I asked for examples of this at play. One guy who already gets work getting another job is a weak example.

Simply hiring Angela Bassett for one of his movies means squat.


>Basaglia highlighted this note because its a very specific
>example of how someone used a Perry-directed film to note the
>range that a respected, but neglected, actor had, using said
>performance to give said actor a prominent role.

Yes, one example. Forgetting for a moment that Blair Underwood works steadily and is hardly "neglected," you need more than one example to make the case for this "theory."

>
>Again, that is a very specific example of the grander
>point that Basaglia constantly makes:
>
>Tyler Perry is not a "coon," and is not "setting Black
>America back," and is not "making black people look bad."

I never said he was a coon. I said he was a terrible filmmaker.


>In which case my Angela Bassett example works perfectly.
>

I'm waiting for you to explain how her getting this one job "furthers" her career. Besides just getting her another paycheck.

I understand how someone might think Blair Underwood's career was furthered by being in a TP movie. But until we see what happens to Angela's career AFTER this movie, you can't say her career has been furthered. All she did was get another job. Some might say this is a step backwards for her career. That might be going to far.


>Actually, its very expensive to pay for a commercial on ABC,
>even during black programming, in which case you're still a
>dumbass, because the only reason I pointed out the commercial
>
>was to reinforce my other point that the Perry movie starring
>Angela Bassett was a major studio movie, which it is.
>
>If it wasn't, the studio wouldn't be paying for ABC
>commercials.

Hold on. THAT'S your point?

L.

Since when is Lionsgate a major studio? It's no rinky dink operation, but come on.

But disregarding that for a moment, are you really going to make the case that this movie is a big deal because they have commercials on TV? Lesser movies have commercials on TV too. I've seen commercials for movies playing in two cities.

Wow. We all know TP movies make money. It has long since been established that Lionsgate is making big money off his movies. What does having a commercial on TV mean? Is this the first TP commercial you've seen?

Seriously. They have a commercial, must be a "real" movie. Lame.

>In which case I'm curious as to why you pressed the
>commercial point at all.

Because having a commercial for a movie is no big deal. The fact that they advertise a black movie during a black movie is really not worth mentioning. I was curious why you mentioned it all. Now I realize it's because you're idiot.

>
>Nice analogy, moron.
>
>Except that Hennessey and Cadillacs are not
>black-authored entertainment venues, neither of them black
>owned, and their advertisement in poor inner-cities is
>largely indicative of spending problems and bad habits
>in the black community.

Who made it is irrelevant. My point was about who you expect to buy it. If you're selling stuff black people buy, you advertise where the black people are.

Then there is also the point that, just like Hennessy and Cadillacs, people buying Tyler Perry movies is indicative of bad habits in the black community.

That bad habit is supporting movies of inferior quality.

Geez. You act like white people don't see cognac and malt liquor ads. But how many of them buy?

Ask your non-black, Ivy educated friends how many of them plan to see MEET THE BROWNS.

RED
http://arrena.blogspot.com