1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why no MLK biopic?

Discussion in 'Anything goes' started by Steak Snabler, Jan 23, 2008.

Page 2 of 3
  1. NoOneLikesUs

    NoOneLikesUs Active Member

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0255851/

    This was pretty good.
     
    NoOneLikesUs, Jan 23, 2008
    #13
  2. Rumpleforeskin

    Rumpleforeskin Active Member

    That could work, but I think Denzel would play a better King.
     
    Rumpleforeskin, Jan 23, 2008
    #14
  3. DanOregon

    DanOregon Well-Known Member

    Doing the movie would require the family's approval, and from what I've read Coretta was a saint, but the kids are more interested on cashing in on their dad's legacy.
    Terence Howard would be fantastic in the role me thinks.
     
    DanOregon, Jan 23, 2008
    #15
  4. Ace

    Ace Well-Known Member

    It would require the family's approval for PR purposes?
     
    Ace, Jan 23, 2008
    #16
  5. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    Even that would be no guarantee. David Michaelis got the approval and cooperation of the Schulz family for his Peanuts/Charles Schulz bio, and since they saw the final galleys, they (particularly Monte Schulz) have been all over the place ripping Michaelis and his book.

    EDIT: To be fair, the family wasn't expecting a hagiography, but they were shocked at what they saw as rafts of inaccuracies and Michaelis portraying Schulz as mostly emotionally distant.
     
    Bob Cook, Jan 23, 2008
    #17
  6. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    I actually think if they made this, Jamie Foxx would be the first person they should call...

    It will never happen... As someone else mentioned, no A-list star/director would have anything to do with a true account of his life and nobody wants to star in one that skips over those parts either...
     
    Mizzougrad96, Jan 23, 2008
    #18
  7. Rumpleforeskin

    Rumpleforeskin Active Member

    What makes the story so different in making a MLK Jr movie and a Malcolm X?
     
    Rumpleforeskin, Jan 23, 2008
    #19
  8. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Malcolm X is widely viewed as a controversial figure. MLK is seen by many as almost Christ-like. It's a lot easier to point out Malcolm X's flaws than it would be Martin Luther King...

    Also, for the most part, historical bio pics cost a lot to make and don't make much money... That may be the biggest problem...
     
    Mizzougrad96, Jan 23, 2008
    #20
  9. Rumpleforeskin

    Rumpleforeskin Active Member

    You rang?

    [​IMG]
     
    Rumpleforeskin, Jan 23, 2008
    #21
  10. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    Stone is actually making a Bush movie...
     
    Mizzougrad96, Jan 23, 2008
    #22
  11. Mizzougrad96

    Mizzougrad96 Active Member

    If anybody does it, King's flaws will be swept under the rug... They'd be better off doing it like Ray, where all of the problems were out there, but that will never happen... Do you honestly think Spike Lee would make a movie where MLK looks like anything other than a saint?
     
    Mizzougrad96, Jan 24, 2008
    #23
  12. Ben_Hecht

    Ben_Hecht Active Member

    They don't play it straight, and the question from Blazing Saddles will linger in the air: "Where da white women at?"
     
    Ben_Hecht, Jan 24, 2008
    #24
Page 2 of 3
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page