However, I do seem interested in digging into issues related to Black representation on film this month, as evidenced by that post and now this one. The unspeakably awful decision by Trump to post the racist video of the Obamas was just the cherry on top -- and should be the cherry on top of his disqualification as president, but we know it will just be on to the next scandal, soon forgotten.
The thing that triggered the current post was Gaspar Noe's Climax, though I'm using the poster for another movie because I just used Climax on a different post two days ago.
First off let me say that the representation of Black characters in film is very complicated. I don't need to go into the whole history here, which I did as recently as three years ago. So yeah, this isn't the first time I've written about issues like this on the blog. But we've gone from representing them carelessly, leaning into pernicious stereotypes, to representing them way too angelically, such that a Black character in certain movies can't even be guilty of an impure thought, let alone an impure action.
The good news about maybe the last ten to 15 years is that we've landed somewhere in the middle, where we recognize the disservice we're doing with either extreme, and actively seek to find a middle ground. In other words, to make these characters real human beings.
But there's that part of us that's still in there, that worries when a film seems to be making them too human.
Take Climax, for example.
I don't think you can say that Noe is racist, or if he is, he's hidden it so well that he's been able to use Black actors to compose a third or more of his primary cast of about 20 in Climax. Or really, Black dancers, I should say, because the cast are dancers first, actors second.
But let's consider what some of these Black characters do in this narrative, and again in this post we have CLIMAX SPOILERS.
The character Dom repeatedly kicks and knees a woman in the stomach, even after the woman has just said she's pregnant. Dom believes this woman has spiked their punch with acid -- she didn't drink any due to the pregnancy -- but it's a pretty big and callous gamble on the idea that the woman is lying about her pregnancy. Dom also participates in an effort to eject a man out of the building and into the snow. That man later dies.
The character Taylor is obsessed with the romantic life of his sister, five years younger, and as the evening goes on, we learn that this obsession goes beyond that of the standard overprotective brother. He's actually got a sexual interest in his sister that he acts on under the influence of the acid, in addition to telling her that he loves her -- which we take to mean that he's in love with her. He's also just led the lynching party of the man who was ejected from the building with the accusation that he spiked the punch, simply because this man has been dating (and having sex with) his sister.
The characters Kyrra and Cyborg, in the early stages of the evening, have a conversation in which they talk humorously about their sexual prowess and what they would do to various women there. It's humorous to them anyway, and seems harmless at the time despite the graphic content -- it could just be "locker room talk." But later, we see them carrying out these desires -- not necessarily without consent, but with dangerous abandon, and in the middle of the dance floor. These two are also part of the lynch mob of the man they expel from the building, Omar.
To be clear, the remaining characters in this movie are also pretty rotten in their own ways. There are only a few characters who are actually harmless, actually possibly good people either under the influence of LSD or not. And the character who actually spiked the punch is not one of the Black chraracters.
But assaulting someone with the possible outcome of causing them to abort their fetus, whether you believe the prgenancy is real or not? Framing your sister's boyfriend so you can have sex with her? Talking about violating women and then proceeding to actually do it, whether it's consensual or not?
Yes, these are not good looks for these four characters.
I should say that there are at least three other Black characters who aren't guilty of any shocking behavior, and then there are a number of others who are mixed race. But the four characters above are quite clearly of African descent, on both sides of their heritage.
There is certainly a fair amount of conversation about this on the web. People pointed this out in their reviews at the time. For me, I was so caught up in the other crazy things this movie was doing to really focus in on these unfortunate characterizations.
But it brings us back to our original idea about how to find the middle ground between portraying Black characters as barbarians and as saints. Surely it would be okay for one or two of these characters to behave abominably. But when Noe has negative behaviors he wants to dole out between multiple characters, and he has nearly 20 to choose from, couldn't he have given some of these plotlines to white characters?
I'm not sure how seriously this cuts into my feelings about the movie, but it cuts into them enough to go public with my thoughts about it.
The reason I've chosen The Ballad of Wallis Island as the poster for this post is that there is a different sort of uncharitable characterization of this film's only Black character, one that gave me enough pause that it ate away at me a bit, and made me wonder whether the movie truly belonged in my top ten of 2025.
Just to briefly summarize the relevant plot points, the characters Herb McGwyer and Nell Mortimer, both white, were once part of a successful folk duo, and were in a romantic relationship as well. That was maybe a decade ago, but they've been summoned to the same small island off the British coast to play together once more -- and maybe, at least McGwyer hopes, to rekindle the romantic relationship.
The only trouble is, Motimer already has a husband: Michael, who is a Black American. He doesn't represent unfortunate stereotypes in the way the Climax characters do; he's an intellectual who favors bird watching.
But as the story goes on, we also realize that he's bitter and mean. He has one vindictive speech where he dresses McGwyer down for being a has-been, or a never was, and he does it with cruel relish. In a movie with essentially five main characters -- including two who live on the island -- he's the only bad guy.
The fact that these two movies leave a bad taste in my mouth for two very different characterizations of Black characters gives some idea just how deeply complicated this issue is. I don't want Black characters to be shown as violent and aggresive with insufficient empathy, but I also don't want Black characters to be effete and intelligent ... with insufficient empathy.
So empathy is the crux of the issue here, isn't it? What these five characters have in common is that they engage in cruel behavior thoughtlessly. They are being mean for its own sake, I would say, whether that meanness is actually of a criminal nature, or just emotionally toxic.
Clearly there is a greater risk of Noe being a racist -- the web has other examples of his perceived deficiences in this area -- than the director (James Griffiths) and writers (stars Tom Basden and Tim Key) of The Ballad of Wallis Island. The latter are making a more genteel sort of film to begin with, and they respond to a commendable desire to add some diversity to a cast that might have just as easily been all white. The only problem is, the role they had available for this diversity was the one functioning as the antagonist within the context of the film, and not just an antagonist because he's providing a narrative impediment to the protagonist's goals. He's providing actual malice, some would say unwarranted malice, toward the protagonist.
But then we're back to our original question. Should these characters be saints? Can Black characters never be villains or bad actors?
I think it is a "know it when you see it" sort of thing. If a film leaves you with a bad taste in your mouth, maybe that's reason enough to suspect that there's been an insufficient amount of nuance applied to the representation.
If you don't get the bad taste until your fourth viewing -- or you still name the film as part of your top ten, even with the bad taste -- then I guess that tells you how much work on this we all still have to do.
But it also recognizes the inherent complexity I've touched on multiple times. Artists should have the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, and maybe, in trying to make this a more diverse world as represented on film, they just haven't done it as delicate a job as they might have.
No comments:
Post a Comment