Some Things Never Change
For those who regard the IAT as an untrustworthy gauge of the extent of prejudice in society, how about I offer some market-based evidence instead?
Casting Will Smith’s love interest in “Hitch” was not a simple black or white decision.
Eva Mendes was given the role opposite Smith because the moviemakers were worried about the public’s reaction if the part was given to a white or an African American actress, according to Smith. The actor is saying that it was feared that a black couple would have put off worldwide audiences whereas a white/African American combo would have offended viewers in the U.S.
“There’s sort of an accepted myth that if you have two black actors, a male and a female, in the lead of a romantic comedy, that people around the world don’t want to see it,” Smith told the British paper, the Birmingham Post while promoting the flick overseas. “We spend $50-something million making this movie and the studio would think that was tough on their investment. So the idea of a black actor and a white actress comes up — that’ll work around the world, but it’s a problem in the U.S.”
Eva Mendes — who is of Cuban descent — was seen as a solution because apparently, the black/Latina combination is not considered taboo.
Will Smith is big enough a star to be able to afford such candor, so I have no reason to doubt his explanation for the casting choice; presumably the folks at Sony also know their market well enough to be confident in their judgement on the matter. Money talks, and if it weren't the case that American audiences strongly detest seeing black-white couples on-screen (as also witnessed by the Janet Jackon and Nicolette Sheridan faux-controversies), there'd be far more of them than there actually are. Keep all of this in mind the next time you read some silly poll saying some huge number of whites wouldn't mind seeing one of "them" with their daughters; they can't even stand seeing "them" with someone else's ...
It's funny, when I noticed that Eva Mendes was the love interest here, I guessed that such a calculation had been made - she performed this very same role in the Denzel Washington movie "Out of Time".
"a white/African American combo would have offended viewers in the U.S."
Also, bear in mind that a significant chunk of those "offended viewers" will be black females. African-Americans are a key cinema-going demographic and it is not just white racists who are being pandered to but also the "stealing our men" bunch.
By the way, I doubt very much that the Janet Jackson incident had anything to do with her and Timberlake's racial identity.
Posted by: Frank McGahon | March 11, 2005 at 12:32 PM
"Also, bear in mind that a significant chunk of those "offended viewers" will be black females."
Nowhere near as significant as the white male demographic.
"African-Americans are a key cinema-going demographic and it is not just white racists who are being pandered to but also the "stealing our men" bunch."
Even if African-American women attend the cinema at twice the rate of the rest of the population, they'd still only account for 13% of tickets sold in the US, and that just isn't a large enough share of lost ticket sales to account for the loss of overseas custom going with a non-white female as romantic partner would mean. Also take into account that acceptance of interracial relationships is significantly higher amongst African-Americans as a whole than whites, and we're probably talking no more than 5% of the US viewing audience at risk here.
"By the way, I doubt very much that the Janet Jackson incident had anything to do with her and Timberlake's racial identity."
I don't doubt it for a second: Justin Timberlake was fully in on it, but he didn't get 1% of the flak Janet did for the incident.
Posted by: Abiola Lapite | March 11, 2005 at 12:39 PM
Oh, just another thing, I think this comment is revealing:
"There’s sort of an accepted myth that if you have two black actors, a male and a female, in the lead of a romantic comedy, that people around the world don’t want to see it,"
One shouldn't entirely discount the extent to which these sorts of "accepted myths", particularly if there is no obvious negative effect incurred by flouting them, can be self-perpetuating and self-reinforcing.
Posted by: Frank McGahon | March 11, 2005 at 12:46 PM
I think you overlook the extent to which pandering to black females provides "cover" for pandering to white racists. If someone is going to get flack from rednecks *and* urban women, they might conclude that it's not worth the bother. Also, in dismissing 5% or 13% audiences you ignore the tipping point effect. Word of mouth is what really sells movies and if you piss off two demographics (racists and black women), so "conventional wisdom" has it, you run the risk of plenty of bad word of mouth cutting off the tipping point at the knees.
As for Janet, take a counterfactual - do you maintain that if her partner had been, say, Nelly or Usher that there wouldn't have been the same fuss? Or alternatively, if it had been Justin Timberlake with Christina Aguilera? The ridiculous fuss was about breast exposure, in this particular case.
Posted by: Frank McGahon | March 11, 2005 at 12:53 PM
"One shouldn't entirely discount the extent to which these sorts of "accepted myths", particularly if there is no obvious negative effect incurred by flouting them, can be self-perpetuating and self-reinforcing."
It would be nice if it were true that it's just a "myth", but I don't think it is as far as America is concerned, and Will Smith's just being diplomatic phrasing it this way.
I've been getting Google hits from the post I wrote a while back about the whole "Bianca Trump" nonsense, and following some of the referrals back, I discovered the existence of forums called "Adult DVD Talk," "Mr. Marcus" and "XXX Porn Talk", on all of which discussions were raging about women in the porn industry who wouldn't work with black performers, *despite* being willing to engage in degrading acts like fisting, violent sex and even urine play. It takes real prejudice to think being with a black man is worse than being urinated on by a white man old enough to be one's grandfather, but that seems to be the mindset for well over half the women who enter the business, women in their early 20s - and therefore presumably less prejudiced than older generations.
"Also, in dismissing 5% or 13% audiences you ignore the tipping point effect. Word of mouth is what really sells movies and if you piss off two demographics (racists and black women), so "conventional wisdom" has it, you run the risk of plenty of bad word of mouth cutting off the tipping point at the knees."
Black women generally don't move in the same circles as the racists, and they're hardly going to share their gripes about, say, Denzel kissing a white woman with all the white folks at the office, so negative word-of-mouth from them can't be taken seriously as a factor. I see the black women angle as nothing more than a useful cover for the much, much larger audience of whites who don't like seeing innocent white flowers with dangerous black bucks.
"As for Janet, take a counterfactual - do you maintain that if her partner had been, say, Nelly or Usher that there wouldn't have been the same fuss? Or alternatively, if it had been Justin Timberlake with Christina Aguilera?"
Yes, in fact I do; in the first case, at least, *both* performers would have been nailed to the cross by the media. How is it that a man can grap a woman's breast, tear off her garment, and yet it's the *woman* who gets pilloried by the press and the public? It's hardly as if there wasn't a tsunami of commentary to draw upon in fingering race as a major factor in this controversy either. Do you suppose it's an accident that Timberlake suffered no visible consequences for the incident, while Janet was disinvited from the Grammys, and her sexual history raked over with a fine comb?
Posted by: Abiola Lapite | March 11, 2005 at 01:05 PM
Your market-based assessment (and Newsweek's) seems pretty weak to me. The black/white relationship in Monster's Ball was entirely a non-issue as it has been in several films in the past ten years. I won't deny that race influences casting decisions in Hollywood, but Hollywood has gotten pretty broad-minded of late, as I argue on my blog's post on the Newsweek story:
http://www.grandviewdv.com/makingthemovie/2005/03/racism-or-just-good-business.html
Posted by: J. Ott | March 11, 2005 at 01:59 PM
"Your market-based assessment (and Newsweek's) seems pretty weak to me. The black/white relationship in Monster's Ball was entirely a non-issue as it has been in several films in the past ten years."
How many of those were big-budget blockbusters with studio management asses riding on the line? It's easy to take big risks on indie productions with modest budgets, but something else altogether to cast a black man and a white woman in bed together in a $100 million budget flick.
"I won't deny that race influences casting decisions in Hollywood, but Hollywood has gotten pretty broad-minded of late, as I argue on my blog's post on the Newsweek story"
Hollywood is fine with casting black-latino couples, but that isn't the pairing Americans find most problematic anyway: why should a white guy care overmuch if a woman not of his race hooks up with a black man? It's the thought that "this could give my daughter ideas!" that worries such people.
Posted by: Abiola Lapite | March 11, 2005 at 02:07 PM
Factoring strongly into this kind of sentiment is the idea that Blacks are incapable of Romance, which takes a certain intellectual creativity - at least, not intracommunitywise - but they are capable of the carnal motions surrounding sex etc.
Its part of the incompleteness of blackness...I suspect there are very interesting reasons as to why a Black couple would have put off audiences worldwide.
Posted by: Chuckles | March 11, 2005 at 02:35 PM
It takes real prejudice to think being with a black man is worse than being urinated on by a white man old enough to be one's grandfather, but that seems to be the mindset for well over half the women who enter the business, women in their early 20s - and therefore presumably less prejudiced than older generations.
There are probably only a handful of actresses who would do a shoot for Max Hardcore or Khan Tusion and wouldn't do interracial. Taylor Rain is the only one who springs to mind, but you are onto something on the perverse arrangement of priorities. I doubt that "interracial" is seen as "more extreme" than the golden showers stuff, but it definitely is seen as "more extreme" than activities which would seem extreme to the vast majority of the non-porn population, anal sex, "double penetration" etc. Plus there is this really curious phenomenon whereby some actresses are happy to have sex with black women, but not black men, which suggests to me that it is the mindset of their sleazy, older "suitcase pimp" boyfriends which is operational, and not their own.
As for Janet, you might well be correct that she got the abuse because she is black and Timberlake escaped censure because he is white, but that is not the same thing as saying she got the abuse because she's black *while* he is white. While there is still this ridiculous issue attaching to black male/white female pairings* in America, you don't see the same with white male/black female pairings.
* And I'm not prepared to concede that the reaction of black females is a red herring. For example: Eriq LaSalle from ER demanded that his character's relationship with a white women be ended because of the amount of criticism he received from black females - "How come Benton's relationships with black women never work out?". Denzel Washington has also been vocal about not wanting to be paired with a white love interest because of the reaction from black women. Plus, it is more acceptable for this type of sentiment to be aired than for the "this could give my daughter ideas" type of stuff.
Posted by: Frank McGahon | March 11, 2005 at 02:44 PM
Interesting conflict here because:
"So the idea of a black actor and a white actress comes up — that’ll work around the world..."
So Eva Mendes must be "White" anyway to appear as the solution of the initial problem ("Black/Black movie couples don't sell").
But:
"... but it’s a problem in the U.S.”"
So she isn't White from the point of view of USA population!
One is pressed to ask how much are USA Hispanics really non-Whites (or Whites, for that matter)!
The question of markets in their relationship to racism at large (your focus was "market" as an "indicator" of "racism"; but there are other sides as well) remembers me of what is now happening in my home country, Mozambique.
Recently, Mozambique is witnessing a boom in its touristic industry, and a not negligible part of it is managed by South African operators who came to benefit from the overall openess of our market to everybody, native or foreigner alike.
But some practices are really ingrained in one's mental setup and are difficult to erase. So, in some seaside areas South African managers/owners were already found guilt of trying to prevent Black tourists to enjoy their resorts (what is illegal of course!).
A friend of mine, working in the Ministry for Tourism, when trying to explain the situation and lighten the real prevalence and importance of this phenomenon, told me that I should understand that sometimes the owners were not trully "racist" themselves, but in order to mantain an upscale status for their investment they didn't want the Blacks around, because most tourists would come from South Africa, Australia and Europe anyway, and many of them share racist beliefs in some degree. So the presence of Blacks could possibly lessen the prospects of a rise in the number of those "hard-currency" tourists, or so run the explanation given to me.
Beside the legal aspect of this issue (which must be resolved by the authorities in each occurence, and the law is clear!) this makes me wonder about the relationship between market-driven practices and ethics/moral.
So, I have a philosophical question for "market believers": should really business practices be constrained by outside moral imperatives and how much, or the market is in itself a force behind the establisment of a sound moral framework of a society?
Posted by: João da Costa | March 11, 2005 at 02:50 PM
"Eriq LaSalle from ER demanded that his character's relationship with a white women be ended because of the amount of criticism he received from black females - "How come Benton's relationships with black women never work out?"."
I was aware of Eriq LaSalle's remarks when he first made them, and the thing that struck me and other black male acquaintances of mine at the time was just how unusual his stance was - and how in keeping with his reputation for being "difficult."
"Denzel Washington has also been vocal about not wanting to be paired with a white love interest because of the reaction from black women."
And yet that is just what he did in "He Got Game", with Milla Jovovich.
"Plus, it is more acceptable for this type of sentiment to be aired than for the "this could give my daughter ideas" type of stuff."
This is the real meat of the issue, in my opinion; it's more acceptable to blame black female resentment than it is to acknowledge that a lot of white American males get apoplexy at the sight of black men with white women. Vivid Video and Playboy understand the market they cater to, and it is reflected in their policies - "No IR" (which is interpreted to mean "no black male-white female", as if white men with Asian women weren't engaged in interracial sex ...) This market is one which substantially overlaps with the "mainstream" movie-watching audience - one might even say it *is* the mainstream in these days when porn is ubiquitous - and Hollywood honchos can't be that far off the mark in their assessment of realities.
Posted by: Abiola Lapite | March 11, 2005 at 02:54 PM
I should clarify that I'm not "blaming black female resentment", as if it were the only factor. It probably is the case that in terms of sheer numbers, white racists matter more. Just that you can't just discount this reaction as a chimera, there are plenty more sources other than Eriq LaSalle, it is an oft-repeated sentiment. As for Denzel, I think he might have made the comments in relation to the Jovovich pairing or it might have been an earlier one with Michelle Pfeiffer) but the point was that he agreed to them under sufference.
Posted by: Frank McGahon | March 11, 2005 at 03:00 PM
"I should clarify that I'm not "blaming black female resentment", as if it were the only factor."
I didn't think for a second that you were; my point is that most people involved with the film business who use such excuses are talking crap. If they're so concerned with the black audience, why don't they take the black *male* segment's feelings into consideration? I find it insulting to watch a movie like "The Pelican Brief" knowing that if it were a white male lead they'd have gotten down and dirty, and I know lots of other black guys who feel the same way. The market for black men who aren't reduced to eunuchs is at least as large as the "angry black female" one.
"As for Denzel, I think he might have made the comments in relation to the Jovovich pairing or it might have been an earlier one with Michelle Pfeiffer) but the point was that he agreed to them under sufference."
Sufferance or no, he still agreed to them, and the very reason why black guys like Denzel stand out is that they're so rare; Lawrence Fishburne and Wesley Snipes also have interracial romances, after all, as did Harry Belafonte, Sidney Poitier and other black stars, with no visible harm to their base of black female admirers. Black women simply aren't a significant driver of the dynamic we see - it's the "No Negroes in our schools and neighborhoods" contingent that's almost entirely to blame.
Posted by: Abiola Lapite | March 11, 2005 at 03:11 PM
Hollywood is is extravagant in everything, including caution, and this may be one case where they don't know their market too well (Note the low turnout for the movies that Hollywood as a community gave Oscars to.) There is no denying there is an racist demographic that will not go to see a movie involving an interracial couple, but those people are write-offs anyway. Movies are not the mass entertainment they used to be. "Rednecks" are pretty narrow in their film tastes and people who would be put off by Will Smith and Gwyneth Paltrow would go see that kind of movie whoever was cast in those parts. Does "Hitch" center on cars or an-angry-rebel-fights-the-system? If not, the movie would be turning away customers who aren't customers in the first place.
Posted by: Jim | March 11, 2005 at 04:52 PM
The thing that I find pretty funny is that Eva Mendes, to me, looks pretty European. Certainly when I've been to Spain (Andalucia especially) I've seen a lot of girls who look like her. She definitely looks a lot more European than the Mexicans/Central Americans that make up half the neighborhood I live in. But that's wandering off the topic.
I don't doubt for a second that white uncomfortableness with black male-white female relations is at the heart of this. Sure, there's probably a little bit of an element of black women being angry about white chicks 'taking our men', but every survey I've ever read on the subject has shown far far higher rates of acceptance of inter-racial couples among black Americans than among white Americans (and I'd guess that white acceptance is probably overstated anyways - racism is considered today's greatest secular sin, so probably a lot of people who dislike it keep it inside and claim they have no problem with it).
Posted by: Pearsall Helms | March 11, 2005 at 06:18 PM
"Apologies for the double post. It didn't seem to be going through the first time."
No problem; there actually does appear to be something wrong with Typepad at the moment.
Posted by: Abiola Lapite | March 11, 2005 at 06:27 PM
Oh, and I've also gotten dozens of hits in the last week off of searches for Wendy Iwanow.
Posted by: Pearsall Helms | March 11, 2005 at 06:31 PM
Wait a minute...Arent a lot of the people who go to see these movies self described "liberals"? Wonders will never end.
Since last I checked, the conservatives were going to bomb Hollywood after they got done with the axis of evil.
It makes you shudder when you think that this market sense might acutally be driven by social liberals.
Posted by: Chuckles | March 11, 2005 at 08:57 PM
Until this post, I never knew Eva Mendes was not white. To me, she looked white.
Posted by: Jeffery | March 11, 2005 at 10:02 PM
Jeffery, I'd assume she's white as well (she's from a Cuban background, and Cuba's population is descended from European immigrants and African slaves - and she doesn't look at all mulatto). I think it's just this weird American idea of 'all Latinos are non-white'.
Posted by: Pearsall Helms | March 11, 2005 at 11:00 PM
Pearsall,
'all Latinos are non-white' - the final sludge left over when people treat these categories as if they have some ultimate reality. Latino activistss have made a real push in recent years 1) portray themselves as a unitary bloc abd 2) so that they may distinguish themselves politically from Anglos. If Anglo is White, then Latino is non-White. That's what you get when you let your labels do your thinking for you.
This is more of an issue in the East, where a lot of "Latinos" are of Caribbean origin and can look a little exotic.
What reinforces this is the bogus designation of Mexicans, who indeed are non-white (most of them) as Latino, which a lot of Mexican people really resent. Check out some of the Aztlan and MECHa sites for this side of the discussion.
This is how silly it has gotten - in a lot of places where there are set-asides and preferences for "Spanish-surnamed" people, people from Spain don't qualify for them! Too "white". Policy-by-lobotomy.
Silliest of all is the term Latino itself. Italians don't qualify either. Surreal.
Posted by: Jim | March 11, 2005 at 11:56 PM
I guess we can refer Louis Gates documentary on how much progress African Americans have made since the civil rights era. If I recall correctly, he visited an Hollywood honcho, and the chap was very upfront in explaining while very few inter-racial or black/black romantic relationship ever make it to screen. They are scared they will lose money on it!
Someone has to break the mold. If a good movie falls through and grosses enough money, believe me Hollywood will take notice.
Posted by: tmex12 | March 12, 2005 at 01:26 AM
On the third season of 24 the black president had a white girlfriend and that didn't stop it from being one of America's most popular shows.
Posted by: Pearsall Helms | March 12, 2005 at 01:46 AM
"The thing that I find pretty funny is that Eva Mendes, to me, looks pretty European. Certainly when I've been to Spain (Andalucia especially) I've seen a lot of girls who look like her. She definitely looks a lot more European than the Mexicans/Central Americans that make up half the neighborhood I live in"
Pearsall, I´m Spanish, and do not believe she´s fully Spanish in origin.
Take a look at this side picture:the prognatism is the give-away,if you needed any more clues:
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0386588/Ss/0386588/DF-08687.jpg?path=pgallery&path_key=Mendes,%20Eva
She´s probably 20 % African.
Posted by: eufrenio | March 13, 2005 at 05:11 AM