I fought myself on writing about this topic. To me, it’s an issue about a nonissue that altogether should be a nonissue, yet, my writing about it is contradictory and thereby makes an issue of it. Did you get that (I’m not even sure it makes sense)? But sometimes the bile spikes high in the gullet and I can’t hold back. So screw it; let’s make a short issue of it.
I Googled the living shit out of this, scavenging the rankest zones of the web (celeb blogs with pics of Zac “My name is ‘h’ deficient” Efron combing his hair) for “the controversy.” I didn’t find much—maybe I suck at researching and should go work for Fox News. Yes, a few humorless, dense bloggers feel the irrepressible desire to lob some politically correct “I haven’t seen the film, but it’s evil” firecrackers at the film. Yet, these are the same type who’d label me as a homophobic misogynist if I told my wife to “blow me” (when in fact it only makes me a dumb bastard with blue balls for a month). Branding this as a “controversy” is like naming your pet Chihuahua King Kong.
There is no real controversy here.
No major columnist or publication is slagging Tropic Thunder for Downey’s appearance (yet). NAACP isn’t showering magma (yet). Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson haven’t asked Hollywood to banish Tropic Thunder writer/director/star Ben Stiller (yet). Maybe it’s because they’ve read the synopsis that provides context for Downey’s character. In case you’re not in the know, here it is thanks to “Entertainment Weekly”:
Robert Downey Jr. plays Kirk Lazarus, a very serious Oscar-winning actor cast in the most expensive Vietnam War film ever. Problem is, Lazarus’s character, Sgt. Osiris, was originally written as black. So Lazarus decides to dye his skin and play Osiris, um, authentically.”
After reading that, there shouldn’t be an issue whatsoever. Apparently though, there’s a level of nuance here that escapes the mouth breathers slamming the panic button. Stiller’s intention isn’t to use blackface to perpetuate racial stereotypes—that would be insulting. Downey isn’t playing a black character Al Jolson did (which many in this small group of blowhard bloggers seem incapable of figuring out, despite copying and pasting the same text as above). Rather, it appears Stiller aims to comment on the ridiculousness of pompous actors, method acting, and the vulgarity of blackface. It has a point. It’s called satire, the best of which always dances on dental floss between the outright offensive and the slyest of reflective examination.
Yet, even those who do catch the satiric approach attack the film—without seeing it (I really wanted to exclaim that point again)—by decreeing any depiction of blackface is ghastly despite the framework. That’s simplistic thinking. I’ve always found it funny that those who so self-righteously champion their viewing of the world through color, gender, and sexuality blind goggles tend to see so much in, no pun intended, black and white terms.
For centuries, artists (from painters to comedians) have made meaningful social commentary by propping a mirror up to the repugnant elements of society. Yeah, it can be uncomfortable. But it’s not employed for a derogatory purpose. Look no further than the “N” word riddled skits on the brilliantly perceptive “The Dave Chappelle Show”. To regulate the tools of satire is to restrict the avenues of thought.
Now, don’t get me wrong. When Tropic Thunder hits the theaters and if it turns out Stiller and Downey completely hosed the film’s attempt at satire, then it’s perfectly okay to heave the rotten veggies. Yet, if that’s not the case and just because Downey is on the screen looking like Don Cheadle’s twin brother and you’re too dim to pick up on the satire, please—for the sake of my ulcer—keep the superficial bullshit to yourself.
