Shoot the Messenger

Really, anyone who thinks this film is racist clearly has no capacity to look beyond the blatantly obvious and try to understand the real meaning of this stunning story. The fact that a film maker can be so bold and provocative as to verbalise the issues that are explored, and really go deeper into the race question than just "he's wrong he's right", and that someone can ignore political correctness and risk offending people in order to really get down to the gritty issues behind racism and race stereotyping is a testament to what can be done with film these days. I think that this is an intelligent, important and very brave piece of work, that will undoubtedly incur criticism, but that at the very least will remind people that race IS still an issue and that it requires more thought and understanding than is generally applied to it. I think that this is as cinematically close to Studs Terkel as possible.

i watched the movie and thought it was brilliant. i've just been reading some of the reviews and i am amazed at those who say it is a racist movie or the fact that it isn't real. i think the only extreme case in the movie was Joe going mad. every other issue in the movie is as true as the day follows night. the issue theory about the black crabs is also very true. come to think of it, back in those days the black slaves were bought. who sold them to the whites? i've been hunting for the movie to buy not knowing it's not for sale. i think most of the people who disagreed with the movie were born and bred here in Britain or they've been in the country for too long they don't know what is happening in their countries. why should Africa, with all the resources they have-in abundance- suffer the poverty they suffer? answer: the black crabs theory.does anyone reading this have any idea of the amount of resources the DR Congo has? so why aren't the people of congo rich, why are they fighting? the black crabs theory and the fact that the 'average' black person is self-centered. so instead of the black trying to be like the white in the way they talk and dress, we should be thinking like them. think at least one hundred years ahead and take action. talk is cheap. please show it again soon, i've been tyring to buy one from shops not knowing it's not for sale. thank you BBC for showing it

STAR RATING: ***** Jodie Marsh **** Michelle Marsh *** Kym Marsh ** Rodney Marsh * Hackney Marsh

Joe Pescale (David Oyelowo) used to have a good job in IT but gave it all up to become a teacher and try to turn around the lives of the disadvantaged black kids he was teaching. He is the only black teacher in a school of predominantly black kids but he soldiers on regardless trying to make a difference. But it all goes wrong one day when he taps a troublesome pupil named Gemal (David Mnee) on the shoulder, which he blows out of proportion, costing him his job and the venomous spurn of the black community. After a lot of heckling and spurn, he becomes a paranoid recluse and starts imagining that all black people are evil and are out to get him.

As if to whip up controversy like a jelly cake, the original title of the film was going to be F*ck Black People before the conservative BBC decided that would be just a little too provocative and toned it down to the title we have. The film sparked a lot of outrage anyway and was even branded outright BNP propaganda. I can see how people drew this conclusion, as the film plays at times like a none stop rundown of all the various different bad aspects of black culture and the black community, from promiscuous single mothers with many different kids from different fathers to gun crime and failure in the school system. I can see how some may see it as depressing viewing, but I must say I never saw it this way. It's all played in a gritty, pull no punches way but it compels and enlightens you rather than weighing you down. And it's helped no end by Oyelowo in the lead role. The Spooks star delivers a fantastic performance, perfectly conveying paranoia and depression but also giving the film an energetic, enlightening and wryly humorous lead character who focuses on all the negative aspects of his culture in an angry and frustrated but also gleefully cynical way and even offers something of a tip on how things could change. The supporting cast also all shine in smaller roles but as he is carrying the film, he is the main player in making it what it is.

Powerful and hard-hitting, then, and certainly likely to offend some, but it's all (Like it or hate it) true and offers some tough food for thought for all the problems in the black community and the issues it needs to address. ****

This TV film was shocking yet truthful at times. Yes, the film discusses racism and the prejudices facing black people in British society. However, it cleverly illustrates the lack of support within the black community, it shows the lead character, a teacher who believes that by giving his troubled black pupils detention, he can enforce education on them.

However, when a particular student accuses him of assault his own community turn against him. From that he goes on a journey in discovering and highlighting the problems, for example, black single mothers, black troubled youths, black religious beliefs, and so on, do not judge this film, if you have not seen it. I am not going to give too much away, because I do not want to spoil it for anyone. I found it extremely funny and upsetting at times, do not avoid this film .

Joseph Pascale used to be a computer programmer until he went to a small community meeting where everyone seems to be blaming everyone else for the fact that black boys are the worst performers at schools. Teachers were blamed for pushing them towards sports, schools blamed for not running "ethnic friendly" courses for them while others blamed the lack of schools just for black people. When one person blames the lack of black male teachers, Joe decides to give it a go. In his 70% black school he is the only black teacher and he tries to be a role model – encouraging the ones willing to try and trying to force those unwilling. However when he puts a hand on a boy's shoulder to guide him into a classroom, he is accused of abuse.

Originally to be called "F*** Black People" this film uses its title to let us know its intention to start a debate, to get people agreeing with it or get people disagreeing with it. What it says is that the black community has problems and they need addressing. However whether opening with the line "everything bad that has ever happened to me has involved a black person" may or may not have been the way to go (and, yes, I know the line refers to himself and is part of the point about taking personal responsibility, but it did open the gates for attacks straight away). To its credit the film does tackle difficult subjects head on. In the UK we do have a problem with black boys underachieving; is it racism? Why do other ethnic minority groups not have this problem to the same degree? Trying to address the problem we have the laughable CRE led by Trevor Phillips doing just the same thing – blaming everyone else. It is him and not a BBC drama that I want to hear challenging the black community but in fairness I suppose he is only one man and it is easier to point the finger than do anything else.

Of course the fact that a debate is a good thing doesn't necessarily read that this film is. It has moments that have value but the delivery is rather mixed. On one hand it has a story but on the other it has lots of asides to the camera and these two approaches are not married that well together. Likewise it varies wildly between really well made points and lines that are pure controversy baiters ("bring back slavery – we were good at that")not to mention stuff that comedians were doing a decade ago (stuff about "black" names and weaves). And so the good points that are well made and the interesting lines of debate are lost in the middle of stuff with a lot less value and a lot less interest. It is clear across the film that Joe himself has issues he needs to address but the film does a bad job of communicating what these areas are to us and instead just uses it as an excuse to say whatever he wants whether it is right or not. The cop out at the end is a real letdown as well – Joe learns a lesson and admits he is wrong by saying he won't take back everything he has said but the script doesn't allow him to say what points he made that were wrong and which were right. This leaves it all out there where really the film could have used this ending to summarise what it was saying. By saying "so shoot me" it suggests that maybe it is happy to leave Joe's wrong statements out there and not to deliver a message when it could grab controversy instead. The narrative is also pretty extreme and sees Joe jumping from one end of the scale to the other. The script seems to lack the control to hold it all together and Foster's writing needed a lot more work to build a better, more concise argument within a better story.

Kudos to the BBC for showing it though because this is the sort of thing they should be showing – not offensive or racist stuff but stuff that challenges but isn't commercial enough to get picked up by a channel relying on advertising revenue. I would sooner my license fee went on this than some rubbish sitcom that any channel can churn out (yes "My Hero" I'm looking at you). The direction is good though and the cast generally respond well. It belongs to Oyelowo of course and he is convincing from start to finish – what a shame that the material did not give him more consistency and depth to work with. Of the support cast both Amuka-Bird and the guy playing Jamal did well but nobody else really got the material they go (and even they didn't get that much).

Overall then this is an OK film at best. It mixes good delivery with bad delivery; mixes good points with points just designed to inflame; mixes serious points with "points" that a poor man's Eddie Murphy would reject as being too old and mixes a story with general attacks. Personally I don't think it is racist, naïve or any other mud being slung at it. There is a debate to be had and there are things that are wrong (several of them raised in this film), but this film isn't good enough to make an intelligent enough, sharp enough or meaningful enough summary of them.