Le majordome

I am an educator and the theme in the "Butler" is another piece of history which should be edified and enjoyed by everyone, especially the next generation. Most of the respondents so far seem to have lost sight of the fact that our American history must constantly be told and retold since the contributions and sacrifices of many minorities have previously been distorted or omitted. An appreciation of the cause and affect of historical events is always empowering and it should teach us all to be more tolerant and understanding of others in the future. A good analogy is that as an African American child growing up in the 1950's Charles and I always rooted for the cowboys in the movies to defeat those "savages" known as Indians. In truth, Native Americans were forced from their land, their families separated, many killed and placed on reservations where some remain today living in poverty. Does this sound anything like Nazi Germany? When we see the "Butler" we should all say "wow" I never knew that; I hope our young people understand that becoming and maintaining a great Nation and living in a democracy requires sacrifice and hard work constantly. Remember, "Those who have no knowledge of history, are destined to repeat it." Not my words.

A great and talented cast is largely thrown away on a script that starts and stops relentlessly. As one who has lived through all the historical periods portrayed, I was regrettably bored by large segments of the narrative, which seemed didactic in the extreme. That is not to diminish its important social and cultural significance to a younger audience, only that I personally found all the Presidents as played much smaller than in life than I remember them. Robin Williams as Eisenhower and Alan Rickman as Reagan seemed oddly miscast, though John Cusack as Nixon caught the essence of the man nicely. The parts showing home life among the main characters was a highlight, however.

In short, a good but not great film, perhaps better with fewer intrusive star-studded cameos and less overt moralizing.

I'll start by stating that I'm a 62 year old white male. I did not grow up in the South - but I did live for a year in Louisiana in the early 70's. I lived through every news event that was portrayed in the movie - that is, I saw and read about them in the actual news when these things happened. Many posters on the boards say that the movie is inaccurate. Then they go on to say things like: His name was changed, he didn't have 2 sons, he didn't look anything like Forest Whitaker, Nixon was miscast, etc. True, the details of The Butler's family life have been dramatized. That is called movie making. The movie was historically accurate in every important way. I don't say that every single detail was true, nor am I saying the portrayal of these historical events was 100% exactly as portrayed. But it is far more accurate (and important) than your average popcorn POS that pervades the theaters these days. I want to state that I have rarely, if ever, been as emotionally affected by any movie. It is brilliant, provocative, artistic, and has a social purpose. Like it or not, persons of African descent have been victimized, downtrodden, brutalized, persecuted, tortured, lynched, raped, and murdered - and only because of their skin color. HOORAY to Lee Daniels for making this movie! Hooray to Forest for being a sensitive, intelligent, highly gifted actor. Hooray to Oprah, whose performance is beyond stellar. Hooray to anyone involved with this movie. Not to say that ALL movies have to take you to the places that this movie does. I guess there is a place for Pacific Rim and Wolverine. So if you think that movies have no business delving into our racist and brutal history, then see one of those movies. But to say that this movie is irrelevant or inaccurate - well, as I said I lived through it all. It is not. What it is, is an exceptional, mature movie for those that want a little more than monsters (the fictional kind). My wife and I went through a whole packet of tissues - we were blubbering like fools. BRAVO!!!!! 9 (rather than 10) stars only because the 10 star reviews are often discounted as over- the-top hero worship. But if Ironman, The Avengers, etc are 10 stars (and I liked those), this movie rates 100 stars - because it is 10X better, more important, more relevant, and more thought provoking.

There is a bit of great acting in this vaguely historic film, but Director Lee Daniels uses so much made-up and absurd pseudo-history that the story trips over his heavy-handed political lessons. Why is Lee Daniels' name above the title and who gave him this much license to re-write history after only one other film we've heard of?

That said, Forest Whitaker is compelling as the lead in this story about a White House butler that had an amazing life, but it is 90% made up. While there was a butler who served many presidents, the screenplay is actually fiction. While somewhat entertaining, these comical characterizations of U.S. presidents often feel like a made for TV, kids history channel special.

Oprah plays his wife and there are a dozen or so entertaining cameos with some unique acting choices. The cameos kept it interesting even when the story of The Butler dragged on.

If Lee Daniels had let go of the politics and heavy-handed directing, this pseudo-history lesson may have earned an Oscar nomination for Forest. But, in the end, you can see why the Academy cannot reward this artificial and revisionist history tale. With this much effort to tell us a 60 year history lesson, I just wish we knew if more of it were true. Instead, it's a mixed bag. 7/10.

The Butler (Daniels, 2013, B+)

This should have been a punchline. At least, that's what I was walking in expecting. From the overblown marketing to the downright bizarre cast, it had all the trimmings of a pure turkey. Here's the thing, though... It's not. The film is not a facsimile of historical events, it is an invigoration of them and despite the relatively classical style on display, Lee Daniels brings a real brio to the proceedings. It helps that he has Whitaker to make it all stick as the film's unfailingly warm and engaging center. Even in the first 20-30 minutes when the film is struggling to find its legs, his performance is an unmannered beauty. The rest of the actors are also galvanized into action, proving that verisimilitude is not the highest criteria for historical fiction. This is a film as powerful, as beautiful, as unlikely, and as raggedly imperfect as the country it chronicles.