OJ Movie |
Posted by
pancho
(Moderator)
- Sunday, July 24 2016, 18:42:20 (UTC) from *** - *** Mexico - Windows NT - Safari Website: Website title: |
Just watched the OJ movie taken from a book by Jefrey Toobin called American Crime Story....several things stand out, but the most interesting to me was how the makers betrayed themselves in their choices for actors for major roles. They took great pains to find actors who looked very much like the major players...Cochrane, Clark, Darden, Ito, the father of Nicole, all the actors chosen bore a striking resemblance to the actual people...except for what you would think of as the star of the show....somehow the actor they chose to play OJ loked nothing like him...not even close, not in any way. Cuba Gooding Jr is a fine actor, but at this stage of his life he looks seedy, puffy and sneaky....whereas at the time of the trial OJ was still the beautiful Black man...why be so obvious? Would a more handsome Black actor who looked like OJ have "prejudiced" the audience for this movie? Did the producers want to emphasize the point that they believe OJ did it by choosing an actor who looked like he DID do it? It´s a minor point, but maybe not. Had all the other actors been as badly cast you wouldn´t think about it....but when in all other case such an effort was made to pick to type, you have to wonder. Were there NO handsome Black acors to choose from? The guy who played Darden was handsome enough...and the real Draden was indeed handsome...it´s not like the Gooding had to act much...he had very few scenes and fewer lines...you mean there wasn´t a single Black actor who could have done the job and who looked at least a little like OJ? But the major problem with this effort is that it makes too much of what they called hard evidence in the case...the whole point was that the police evidence was tainted...sure, if you believed that what the tapes revealed, not about using the word nigger but about the instances when Fuhrman admitted planting evidence, you would walk away believing all the police said...but that´s the problem, you CAN´T ignore the evidence of addmitted police planting of evidence, not unless you insist that OJ MUST be guilty. In her summation to the jury Clark stressed the "overwhelming" evidence and facts pointing to OJ...but that evidence all came from the police...and Ito didn´t allow the jury to hear all the tapes...barely two senetences out of 13 hours of taped comments by Fuhrman when he let his hood down and told how it really was and is in the LA police department. To sum it up, white cops believe niggers are guilty, period...just because they can´t find the evidence to back them up, doesn´t mean the nigger isn´t GUILTY. That´s just a minor detail, a stroke of bad luck...but every nigger they can kill, or lock up, is a "victory"...is a job well done...it keeps America AMERICA. The movie also made it obvious that the only reason the first two hold-outs switched their votes to not guilty was because the Blacks on the jury scared them...there we have it again, there we have what runs through all white society...their FEAR of the retaliation they KNOW they deserve at the hands of Black America...white people KNOW they have wronged Blacks and still do...and they expect retaliation...because whites know damn well what THEY would do if the roles were reversed: they would reach out and murder anyone close by, and their family...that´s what they did to Iraq...they wanted to get back at SOMEONE, anyone, and started with Iraqis. Toobin played the same game white-America always plays: "We have done NOTHING to deserve or cause what bad things come our way". --------------------- |
The full topic:
|
*** |