Para Garotas de Cor

This was by far one of the best and most realistic movies I have seen in a long time. I was actually shocked to see bad reviews that were so blatantly disrespectful to those of us who liked the movie. i.e commenting that if we liked it we must think Mc.Donald's is good food. Our goal here is to comment on the movie.

Yes it was graphic, yes it was vulgar and yes it will make you cry. However, the women in this movie all had issues I know myself and most other women of color could relate to in some way. If you were one of the people who may have thought there was just too much going on in this movie to be real I would say praise God you were afforded the opportunity to live in a box your entire life. I am a triple degree college graduate who came from the ghetto and an abused home so I know this stuff really happens. I am just happy for a change it wasn't sugar coated.

This was one of Tyler Perry's best work even if it did make me sad. Sad because I can just think of all the people I know and women who are just like those in the movie living on no hope or false hope. In the end it reminded me I need to do a better job in sharing my Witness the gospel of Jesus Christ. Great Movie!!!!!

This is very much a piece of art. Determining the value of a piece of art is very personal. This movie may speak to some and may bore others to death. This movie needed editing, probably shaving a good 30 minutes off wouldn't have hurt. It has some very powerful scenes and is definitely not a movie to see because you want to just relax and laugh.

That being said, I am very disappointed that one poster decided to comment not about the movie but about their own personal prejudices about black women, and probably black people in general. I'd like to point out, that NOT ONE woman in this film was on welfare. NOT ONE woman in this movie was living off "the tax payers" and NOT ONE woman in this film was living on easy street. If you just want to rant about your own personal prejudices then go to one of the political blogs. This is supposed to be an honest discussion about the movie.

I had very little background on this film before I saw it. Perhaps had I seen the play or read more about the concept of the work, my opinion would be better or worse. But as it stands, I enjoyed it...at least to the point you can enjoy such a heavy piece of work. I left the theater feeling I did when I saw "Precious": glad I saw the film, recognizing it was a special piece of work, but ambivalent about the over-the-top darkness that resonated in the film. Both films try to take you to a place you've never seen on film, a place you didn't even think film would go ie murdered kids and graphic tales of molestation.

The strong: SUPERB acting, from most involved. Rashad, Elise, Devine, and Rose brought Oscar-worthy performances. Perry will get props here for choosing a wonderfully-talented cast to pull off a challenging piece of art. Thandie Newton and Kerry Washingtong both did respectable jobs as did Whoopi Goldberg and the younger cast member whose name escapes me. Another strong element was the concept. I don't know if it was pulled off to a tee, which I will mention later, but I found the poems brilliantly written and delivered and the concept of documenting intertwining lives interesting.

The weak: The exception to the superb acting cast would be Janet Jackson. Once again, Perry tries to force her to be better than she is, and once again, he/she comes up short. As another commenter stated, she just doesn't have it. I will give her props on finding a way to garner up the tears on cue when going through her poem lines, but as a whole, she is stiff and unmoving as an actress. But she does wear her color (I guess they all have colors or something?) red well. Maybe that's why she was chosen for the role? Who knows except Perry why he continues to go that same well for his films. I digress there though.

Another glaring weakness of the film is that once again Perry's lack of good instinct as a director is evident. WHY for the love of all things holy did he have the cast recite ALL THE LINES OF THE POEMS? Did he not watch the film in the edit room and see that the poems were too long-drawn out for a film and could easily be too much for the audience? Where are his instincts? Even movie-watching instincts. It seems he should have recognized that the script needed major tweaking. It's troubling that even now, after all his success in his many films, he still has not captured more sophistication as a director. The film could have easily been sliced down by at least 30 minutes and been just as effective--actually moreso--than it was.

I do not know if this is a weakness of the film or if the original play was written for just this effect, but it is obvious that the author hated men. Virtually all the men were portrayed not just as mean or insensitive, but as devils. And there was no subtlety. The blatancy of the double standard was rather insulting and off-putting. But again, perhaps that is where the author meant to go with the piece.

In sum, while there were major areas that could have been improved, I have to call foul on some of the critics' assault of this film, and their proclivity to compare it to other--admittedly weak--Tyler Perry works. Though Perry's fingerprints are all over this film, including the garden variety Madea-esquire funny lines from the resident overweight character to the stoicism of the well-to-do professional with the troubled marriage (Jackson's character is practically a mirror image of her character in other Perry films), I do think this film is of better quit than most of his offerings, and he should be given credit for elevating his game a little bit. Perry knows his audience well and though it can be argued that he sometimes seems to "dumb down" for laughs or whatever, he has to be given credit for being loyal to his fans. Time and time again, he gives them what they expect--a safe thing to do yes, but an amazing show of loyalty nonetheless. This film should not have a score as low as the 3.6 it has right now. The great acting alone carries it to at least the mid-way mark. Though I want to give it a 6.5 and could thus go for a 6 or 7 on the IMDb scale, I am going to up-rate it to counter what I believe is unfairly low number at the current moment.

Tyler Perry has performed a little miracle in transferring Ntozake Shange's exquisite play "For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide When the Rainbow Is Enuf" into an opened up and expanded film. The dialogue still is deeply embedded in Shange's poetry but the narrative Perry added makes the stage experience a flowing cinematic story: the result is a powerful film that happens to be populated by some of the finest actresses of today.

The plat cannot be faithfully summarized, as it is a cluster of vignettes of ten women in crisis. Each character is given the name of a color of the rainbow, but they also have real names and the men in their off track lives actually do appear. It would be unfair to single out any one of these actresses as best because their roles are all different and make demands on the actresses in different ways. Whoopie Goldberg is the religiously inclined mother of Thandie Newton (a woman of physical needs that cannot be satisfied despite nightly change of partners) and Tessa Thompson (a high school girl with aspirations crushed by an unwanted pregnancy); Janet Jackson is a bitter, wealthy magazine editor married to the Down Low Omari Hardwick; Loretta Devine is a community service giver in a relationship with the undependable Richard Lawson; Kimberly Elise (breathtakingly magnificent!) is paired with the war-torn PTSD alcoholic and abusive Michael Ealy; Kerry Washington works for child services despite her infertility in her marriage to Hill Harper; Anika Noni Rose is a lovely innocent dance teacher brutally treated by Khalil Kain; Phylicia Rashad is the tenement house manager who is the central mother confessor to her tenants. How these women's lives are interconnected is fascinating as a story/screenplay: how these gifted actresses deliver the poetry of Shange is beyond anyone's expectations.

There are many issues this film deals with - single mother, violence against women, death, loss, partner abuse, etc - and each of the issues is poignant and keenly defined and acted. How this film slipped under the line for awards is anyone's guess. It is not to be missed.

Grady Harp

Let me start off by saying that I am NOT a fan of Tyler Perry's past movies, television shows, or plays. They are not funny and over the top. Just not my cup of tea. However, I thoroughly found this movie worth the $10.50 I paid to see it on opening night. Some of the other reviews were surprising. At no point did I feel the movie to be slow. In fact, I thought the movie constantly pounded on our emotions to almost a point of exhaustion. I also thought that the prose to fit fairly well with the dialog. There were times when two people were talking at the same time that made it difficult to follow, but I understood the intent and liked the effect. Tyler has made progress in his directing abilities. He still has work to do, but this was by far his best work. I look forward to seeing this movie again.

As for the acting...Rashad, Devine, Elise, Newton, and Rose were the standouts. In fact, I cannot see anyone except Loretta Devine in that role now...she owned it! Whoopie is still a superb actress. I agree with many other reviewers, Janet Jackson just does not have it. I question Tyler's judgement in picking Janet for a fairly meaty role. Clearly she patterned much of her part from Meryl Streep in "The Devil Wears Prada" and did not pull it off. She looked terrific though! Other seasoned more proved actresses could have done a much better job with that role. Halle, Vivica or even Robin Givens anyone? Bring your tissues. Pay attention. It is a good movie.