"The Butler" - A Film Every Citizen Needs to See - Especially the Young! (Some Spoilers)

"The Butler" is a film that cleaned up over the weekend, knocking out numbskull fare like 'Kickass 2' (a film mainly for the mentally challenged) as well as 'Paranoia'. It is that rare blend of a Hollywood movie with class and intelligence that also delivers a critically needed historical perspective for generations (mainly X and Y) that may have only passing knowledge of the civil rights movement, for example. As Harvey Weinstein put it this morning, on CBS' Early Show, his own daughter was nonplussed, asking "Did this stuff really happen?"

Uh, yes it did! The insults (n-words galore) and spitting on African-American sit- in protestors at lunch counters in Mississippi, Tennessee and Alabama, the horrific truncheon beatings and kicks to the head of fallen protestors, and the actual fire bombing of a bus carrying dozens of freedom riders. All of it was all too real, and it all really, REALLY happened! The film doesn't grind the viewer under with such scenes but the exposure is ample to make a dent and impress brain neurons - especially for the Millennials and others who may not had much of it in their American History classes. (Given the way a lot of American history is taught in generic marshmallow, vanilla style).

At the same time, 'The Butler' is much more than a civil rights -historical flick. It also tells the story of how a humble black share cropper - with grit and determination - rose above his original station to become the premier butler on the White House staff, as well as telling a story of father-son conflict. This is because Cecil Gaines' son soon goes his own way, including being directly involved in the civil rights protests, then joining the Black Panthers. At the end he,  like his dad, finds redemption.

Already the right wingers, as per their perpetual grievance shtick, are bitching about the portrayal of Ronnie Reagan. Complaints have poured in that he is depicted as uncaring about the poor, especially blacks, and also impeded constructive racial changes (to eliminate apartheid) in South Africa. But, alas, all of that is true. The screen play writers didn't make it up! The righties, in fact, ought to be thankful the full fell swoop of Reagan wasn't portrayed, including: shuttering mental wards in hospitals - effectively tossing a half million into the streets (who subsequently ended up mainly homeless or in prisons), and his drastic cutting of taxes which savaged domestic support programs. Oh, Reagan is shown doing some good: if black people actually wrote him and asked for money, he'd put a few bucks in an envelope and send it off to them!

LBJ lovers also won't be happy with how he was portrayed, as often using the n-word....even in front of the black butler staff, and showing the clear contempt for people most of us always suspected this sleaze bag to harbor. (A good case can also be made he wanted JFK's job, and was instrumental in changing the motorcade route to make sure Kennedy was taken out and he could succeed.) It was also well known by those familiar with 1960s politics that Kennedy planned to dump Johnson- for the 1964 Democratic ticket -  on account of all the fallout from the Billy Sol Estes scandal.  This LBJ could not allow.

Johnson did do one thing right, as shown in the movie, and that was to pass the Civil Rights Act first conceived by Kennedy. (He also got Medicare passed, another Kennedy proposal from his 1960 campaign, but this wasn't shown) What he absolutely didn't do right was launching the Vietnam War on a false pretext. Martin Luther King eloquently criticized the conflict, and he likely met his end because of it - killed by black op SOG units, see e.g. the book, Orders to Kill, (http://www.amazon.com/Orders-Kill-Behind-Murder-Martin/dp/0446673943 ) by William F. Pepper. Of course, as in the Kennedy case, a lone nut loon - James Earl Ray- got the rap.

My primary complaint with the film was the ridiculous choice of an actor far too young to be a credible John F. Kennedy. I mean, Jeebus, this guy looked more like an escapee from  'Kick Ass 2'  than a credible stand-in for our 35th president (who was 43 in 1960, when elected president). Wifey's theory is that they chose this young kid to highlight the age difference with Gaines, the butler. But I maintain if that was the case, they went overboard. You don't get a de facto frat boy look alike to play JFK! 

To the film's credit, when the assassination occurred you didn't see TV images of Lee Harvey Oswald being paraded, as the supposed killer - nor did the background radio announcements mention him. The film basically left it open. (But you can be sure more films due to appear later  this year won't, including "Parkland", another Tom Hanks co-effort, set to open Sept. 20th.  I will, however, await more credible fare, assuming it appears at all. If not, I'll save my money!)

Arguably, 'The Butler' will be the only decent worthwhile movie at the cinemas for a few weeks at least. A movie that respects viewers' intelligence as opposed to insulting it. I highly recommend the film to anyone, except maybe those right wingers that have a problem with race issues and their role in engendering black inequality.

A SuperBowl Rematch? Yes, But the WRONG One!

Baltimore Ravens' field goal kicker Billy Cundiff walks from Gillette Stadium Sunday in shock and dismay after missing a game-tying 32-yard FG. In fact, Ravens' receiver Lee Evans was the real cause of the Ravens' not getting to another Superbowl!

All the pundits from every sports news nook and cranny are bloviating about the impending SuperBowl "rematch" between the New York Giants and New England Patriots coming on February 5th. This, of course, would reprise the match for Superbowl XLVII where the surprising Giants took down the then perfect (18-0) Pats, by a score of 17-14.

But not so fast! The real rematch ought to be reprising Superbowl XXXV between the Baltimore Ravens and the Giants, which the Ravens won handily in Tampa, 34-7. So what happened, and how did a bogus rematch replace the one that should have been?

Basically, one player mucked up what had been destined to be a Baltimore victory on Sunday, in the AFC Conference Championship. Truthfully, the Ravens had outplayed New England on both sides of the ball. The much maligned Ravens' Quarterback, Joe Flacco, actually had bested the Patriots' ace Tom Brady - he with three Superbowl rings already. The numbers don't lie: Flacco had two passing touchdowns, Brady 0, Flacco passed for some 306 yards, Brady only 239, and Flacco had only 1 interception to Brady's 2.

More pertinently, with barely 1:33 left, Flacco had steadfastly driven the Ravens from their own 21 yard line to the Patriots' 14, with the Patriots ahead by a field goal, 23-20. Clearly, it was Flacco's game now to win or lose in the classic two minute drill. Then with barely 20 seconds left, Flacco hefted a nicely thrown pass straight into the right edge of the end zone with receiver Lee Evans there to catch it and end the game with a 27-23 win for the Ravens.

Except that Evans boffed the catch! He evidently forgot or never bothered to apply what every 10 or 11 year old Peewee football player is drilled on: SECURE the ball first in any end zone play! You have to expect any defender worth his salt will desperately try to bat the ball from your hands, so you must ...in Michael Irvin's words...."hug that mother like your life depends on it"! Well, Evans failed to do that and paid the price when a subsititute corner named Sterling Moore knocked the ball from his grasp.

Instead, according to sports guru Woody Paige, dean of Denver Post sports writers, Evans "non-chalanted the catch and missed it". While Warren Sapp, on the NFL Network, opined: "he had the winning TD but he relaxed too soon!" Indeed, and Evans and the team paid dearly for this unacceptable miscue which can be seen in the clip below:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qxx0PLn9aLI

Within about five nanoseconds, thousands of man-hours of preparation and team labor was thereby flushed down the proverbial toilet. The game was still not lost, since kicker Billy Cundiff only had to make a 32-yard FG to tie the game and at least keep the Ravens' chances alive though Evans mucked them up. But, he shanked the ball wide left! Patriots fans then became delirious realizing that their team's unearned victory had been snatched from the jaws of defeat and they were heading for their 7th Superbowl and not the Ravens. The missed FG can also be seen at the end of the short clip.

Do I blame Cundiff like most pundits do? Not really. Because if Evans makes the TD catch he had all set up compliments of Joe Flacco, Cundiff becomes a non-issue. And by all counts, and football justice, Evans should have made that catch....no excuses! At least he was inconsolable after the game and accepted blame for the loss, as well he should. Because making that single play would have sent the Ravens on.

While his team mates talked the usual politically correct banter of being a "team sport" we know differently and also that they had to be bitterly disappointed at his incompetence at a time when elite players are supposed to make big plays...not boff them. The fact of the matter is that when a key player makes a misplay that essentially cedes victory to the opponent, it is that player's miscue or misplay that has in the space of a second or les destroyed all the thousands of hours of prep , blood, sweat and toil of the TEAM for the year. In the same sense, Kyle Williams has to accept responsibility -- as he has-- for the Giants' winning in the later NFC game ....by boffing a key punt and letting the Giants recover in overtime, to make the winning field goal.

No, it is absolutely not right that a lot of SF fans tweeted him threats, including death threats according to the San Francisco Chronicle - but that doesn't absolve him of the responsibility of making the most critical error of the game nor does it justify conflating all the players' errors (including Vernon Davis' two 15 yard penalties) in order to dilute his most critical one. Yes football is indeed a "team sport" but that doesn't mean one player can't - by himself- turn the team's chances of winning to nil by one misplay. This is something all football lovers need to admit, especially the players.

So the Superbowl coming up in 2 weeks really has the inferior AFC team playing vs. the Giants. In my football crystal ball I can see only one outcome here: The Giants again beating Brady and his Patriots, just like they did four years ago. Is it better to have lucked out and thereby gotten to a Superbowl -- and lost- than never to have gotten there at all? That's a question Mr. Tom Brady and his team mates will have to answer in two weeks, after they finally get their comeuppance when their luck runs out.