That said, there are people who are downplaying its success in order to “keep the director in check”. This is disingenuous and racist given who directed the film. There are also people who are calling the movie “the saviour of cinema”. This, too, is also disingenuous and racist. And since both sides are arguing, it’s only fair to explain why I feel they’re doing it a disservice.
Let’s start with the downplaying. Ever since Sinners started doing well, there’ve been numerous articles and editorials calling it a “modest” success. They’re minimizing the impact it’s made, a sort of “yeah, it’s good…but-” scenario. I could go on about how this speculative journalism’s disingenuous, as no one outside of the industry knows how films work, but-oh wait, I already am. Never mind!
If that isn’t bad enough, it also feels racist since Ryan Coogler’s black. Not only that, but he’s talented. Beginning with Fruitvale Station, Coogler’s directed high-profile and well-received movies about the black experience. Even the Black Panther films, arguably Coogler’s most-commercial projects, were excellent, showcasing that he can direct mainstream properties with care. Coogler’s proven himself by now, with Sinners being another example.
Let’s start with the downplaying. Ever since Sinners started doing well, there’ve been numerous articles and editorials calling it a “modest” success. They’re minimizing the impact it’s made, a sort of “yeah, it’s good…but-” scenario. I could go on about how this speculative journalism’s disingenuous, as no one outside of the industry knows how films work, but-oh wait, I already am. Never mind!
If that isn’t bad enough, it also feels racist since Ryan Coogler’s black. Not only that, but he’s talented. Beginning with Fruitvale Station, Coogler’s directed high-profile and well-received movies about the black experience. Even the Black Panther films, arguably Coogler’s most-commercial projects, were excellent, showcasing that he can direct mainstream properties with care. Coogler’s proven himself by now, with Sinners being another example.
So…why isn’t he allowed to own this? Ignoring how Coogler’s earned a blank cheque to do whatever he wants, he won this victory fairly. He should celebrate, and that he’s being shouted down because executives are scared they can’t control him is upsetting and offensive. After all, why aren’t Christopher Nolan or Denis Villeneuve being held down? They’ve proven themselves too!
The obvious answer here’s racism. Unlike Nolan and Villeneuve, Coogler’s a high-profile director who dissects black experiences. Fruitvale Station’s about police brutality and black people. Creed’s about a black boxer. The Black Panther movies are about black Marvel characters in a post-colonial world. And now Sinners is about black jazz singers fighting vampires in the Jim Crow South. It’s clear that Coogler wears his blackness with pride, and that frightens plenty of people. It’s wrong, but it does.
That’s what this is about. Yes, studio executives exist for a reason. And filmmaking’s as much a business as it is entertainment. But that doesn’t mean Ryan Coogler should be held to different standards. He’s earned his success with high-quality productions, and he deserves to celebrate. Not letting him is wrong.
The obvious answer here’s racism. Unlike Nolan and Villeneuve, Coogler’s a high-profile director who dissects black experiences. Fruitvale Station’s about police brutality and black people. Creed’s about a black boxer. The Black Panther movies are about black Marvel characters in a post-colonial world. And now Sinners is about black jazz singers fighting vampires in the Jim Crow South. It’s clear that Coogler wears his blackness with pride, and that frightens plenty of people. It’s wrong, but it does.
That’s what this is about. Yes, studio executives exist for a reason. And filmmaking’s as much a business as it is entertainment. But that doesn’t mean Ryan Coogler should be held to different standards. He’s earned his success with high-quality productions, and he deserves to celebrate. Not letting him is wrong.
I’d end on that triumphant note, but some of this movie’s defenders are also being unfairly-hyperbolic. Sinners might be a great movie, but is it the “saviour of cinema”? Can it “fix” the currently trajectory if people only “give it a chance”? I don’t think Coogler signed up for that. I think he only wanted to make a good movie that was personal to him.
By touting Coogler’s latest as a second coming experience, people are overhyping him. Not that he isn’t great, but he’s human. And he’s flawed. He might’ve consistently made great movies, but that doesn’t mean he’s a god. That’s a big mistake to be making.
Even going by his successes, so what? Two years after The Dark Knight Rises, which people were split on, Christopher Nolan directed the incredibly-divisive Interstellar. Two movies later, he gave us Tenet, a movie mired by the pandemic and his stubborn insistence it remain in theatres. And with Denis Villeneuve, he might be striking it big with his adaptations of the Dune books, but his trajectory has always felt lopsided. I wasn’t a fan of his until Blade Runner 2049, which didn’t exactly set the box-office ablaze.
By touting Coogler’s latest as a second coming experience, people are overhyping him. Not that he isn’t great, but he’s human. And he’s flawed. He might’ve consistently made great movies, but that doesn’t mean he’s a god. That’s a big mistake to be making.
Even going by his successes, so what? Two years after The Dark Knight Rises, which people were split on, Christopher Nolan directed the incredibly-divisive Interstellar. Two movies later, he gave us Tenet, a movie mired by the pandemic and his stubborn insistence it remain in theatres. And with Denis Villeneuve, he might be striking it big with his adaptations of the Dune books, but his trajectory has always felt lopsided. I wasn’t a fan of his until Blade Runner 2049, which didn’t exactly set the box-office ablaze.
While Nolan and Villeneuve are masters of their craft, they’re not flawless. In fact, it’s their hype that’s sometimes their downfall, as they’ve let their egos lose before. If Ryan Coogler’s to be a blank cheque director, there’s a chance he could fall victim to that too. There’s a chance his ego could be his undoing. After all, success is a double-edged sword!
Outside of that, that Coogler has to be the “saviour of cinema” feels racist. Yes, he’s made great movies, there’s no doubt about that. But that doesn’t mean he has to “redeem” cinema. This idea that Coogler’s the next wave of redemption treads a stereotype that harms black creatives more than white ones. Especially since they too are flawed.
You don’t need to look far, either. Ava DuVernay, the director of Selma, received a blank cheque with A Wrinkle in Time, and that movie wasn’t the hit she or Disney wanted. Barry Jenkins made headlines with Moonlight, even winning Best Picture at The Oscars, yet his work on Mufasa turned him away from big-budget productions. Coogler has yet to fall into this trap, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen to him. Especially if he bites off more than he can chew.
Outside of that, that Coogler has to be the “saviour of cinema” feels racist. Yes, he’s made great movies, there’s no doubt about that. But that doesn’t mean he has to “redeem” cinema. This idea that Coogler’s the next wave of redemption treads a stereotype that harms black creatives more than white ones. Especially since they too are flawed.
You don’t need to look far, either. Ava DuVernay, the director of Selma, received a blank cheque with A Wrinkle in Time, and that movie wasn’t the hit she or Disney wanted. Barry Jenkins made headlines with Moonlight, even winning Best Picture at The Oscars, yet his work on Mufasa turned him away from big-budget productions. Coogler has yet to fall into this trap, but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen to him. Especially if he bites off more than he can chew.
Truthfully, I want people to adjust their expectations with Coogler. Yes, he’s a great director. Yes, he’s made consistently-great movies (so far). But he’s not invincible. He too has the potential to crash and burn, and it might not be pretty. So while Sinners might be fantastic, calling it cinema’s “saviour” is a harmful exaggeration. I don’t think it was originally designed to be that, even if Coogler’s definitely earned a blank cheque.
Then again, I could be wrong. Remember, the film industry changes regularly, and I guess only time will tell!
Then again, I could be wrong. Remember, the film industry changes regularly, and I guess only time will tell!
No comments:
Post a Comment