- Forum Clout
- 3,090
Put your prejudices aside for a moment and go with me on this little adventure. I think Denzel Washington is easily in the Top 20 greatest actors of all time category. The man cranks out critically acclaimed hits like Malcolm X and The Hurricane but also does entertaining, audience pleasing revenge thrillers like Man on Fire, The Equalizer, or The Magnificent Seven. He had the foresight to star in Philadelphia in 1993, when the Hollywood gays were still deeply closeted for the most part. His career choices dazzle- he's rarely pigeonholed into one specific thing. He plays a thug with a badge in Training Day, he plays a clean cut submarine officer in Crimson Tide, he plays a drug addict in Flight, and then he twists it around an plays an Autistic pussy in Roman J. Israel Esquire. But something about this man's work from 2007 to 2012 has boggled my mind for the last 12 years.
In 2007, Denzel starred in Ridley Scott's American Gangster. A crime epic that will hold up for the next thirty years. Then, he directs and stars in The Great Debaters which is released later that year. This makes sense to me. American Gangster is black empowerment through the lens of crime. White America never thought a black man would become more powerful than the Italian Mafia, but Frank Lucas managed to fool everyone. In the Great Debaters, a wise, black debate coach trains an all-black debate team to compete with elite, mostly white Ivy League schools before America enters into WWII. Black Empowerment through the lens of academia.
But then, strangely in 2009, Denzel stars in the poorly received remake of The Taking of Pelham 123, which was John Travolta's attempt at convincing the world he's straight. A train hostage movie where money, rather than Islamic Fundamentalism, is the motivation. It's a dud, critically and at the box office. Everyone makes duds. Michael Caine did Jaws: The Revenge. Denzel knows he can't have back to back bombs, so he wows us in 2010 with The Book of Eli. A blind man who identify targets to shoot based off where God moves his hands and knows machete karate? I'm in. Critics and audiences loved The Book of Eli.
Then, things get weird. The same year The Book of Eli comes out, Denzel stars in ANOTHER TRAIN MOVIE opposite Chris Pine in Tony Scott's forgettable Unstoppable. Denzel plays a wise, honest train conductor who heroically stops a runaway train before it goes off the tracks and kills a whole bunch of people. It's a stinker. Critics hate it. Audiences never saw it. Which begs the question, why would Denzel agree to do 2 train movies within 2 years of each other? Most stars rarely do a single train movie... but Denzel did two in a span of 18 months. Someone make it make sense.
I'll take your answers off the air.
In 2007, Denzel starred in Ridley Scott's American Gangster. A crime epic that will hold up for the next thirty years. Then, he directs and stars in The Great Debaters which is released later that year. This makes sense to me. American Gangster is black empowerment through the lens of crime. White America never thought a black man would become more powerful than the Italian Mafia, but Frank Lucas managed to fool everyone. In the Great Debaters, a wise, black debate coach trains an all-black debate team to compete with elite, mostly white Ivy League schools before America enters into WWII. Black Empowerment through the lens of academia.
But then, strangely in 2009, Denzel stars in the poorly received remake of The Taking of Pelham 123, which was John Travolta's attempt at convincing the world he's straight. A train hostage movie where money, rather than Islamic Fundamentalism, is the motivation. It's a dud, critically and at the box office. Everyone makes duds. Michael Caine did Jaws: The Revenge. Denzel knows he can't have back to back bombs, so he wows us in 2010 with The Book of Eli. A blind man who identify targets to shoot based off where God moves his hands and knows machete karate? I'm in. Critics and audiences loved The Book of Eli.
Then, things get weird. The same year The Book of Eli comes out, Denzel stars in ANOTHER TRAIN MOVIE opposite Chris Pine in Tony Scott's forgettable Unstoppable. Denzel plays a wise, honest train conductor who heroically stops a runaway train before it goes off the tracks and kills a whole bunch of people. It's a stinker. Critics hate it. Audiences never saw it. Which begs the question, why would Denzel agree to do 2 train movies within 2 years of each other? Most stars rarely do a single train movie... but Denzel did two in a span of 18 months. Someone make it make sense.
I'll take your answers off the air.
Is something a racist would say.
