The Forrest Whitaker movie, The Butler was on Showtime the last night and I taped it and watched it in two parts today. I don’t usually do movies here, but I was surprised at how sad it was. The more I watched the more I realized this movie was a good movie but far removed from reality. To say it was “based on a true story” would be akin to saying The Wizard of Oz was a movie based on a tornado in Kansas. Both are good movies but to say they were based on a true story would be a stretch.
Also, can we talk about Oprah’s role? I didn’t think she was very good at all and I love Oprah. She was oddly better in the scenes later in the movie than in the earlier parts, but maybe because I watched How To Get Away With Murder earlier today, I kept thinking that Viola Davis would have been perfect in the role.
Anyway, the book was based on a Washington Post article, not a book. Pretty much everything was made up. They changed the name of the real butler, I suppose to avoid lawsuits from the family.
It was all overly dramatic and sad. But still I would recommend you see it if you are like me and waits for stuff just to show up on cable. Click through for a cut and paste from Wikipedia (consider the source, but still) regarding the truth versus fiction. 
Regarding historical accuracy, Eliana Dockterman wrote in Time: “Allen was born on a Virginia plantation in 1919, not in Georgia…. In the movie, Cecil Gaines grows up on a cotton field in Macon, where his family comes into conflict with the white farmers for whom they work. What befalls his parents on the cotton field was added for dramatic effect…. Though tension between father and son over civil rights issues fuels most of the drama in the film, [Eugene Allen’s son] Charles Allen was not the radical political activist that Gaines’s son is in the movie.”[54]
Particular criticism has been directed at the film’s accuracy in portraying President Ronald Reagan. While actor Alan Rickman’s performance generated positive reviews, the screenwriters of the film have been criticized for depicting Reagan as indifferent to civil rights and his reluctance to associate with the White House’s black employees during his presidency. According to Michael Reagan, the former president’s son, “The real story of the White House butler doesn’t imply racism at all. It’s simply Hollywood liberals wanting to believe something about my father that was never there.”[55][56][57] Paul Kengor, one of President Reagan’s biographers, also attacked the film, saying, “I’ve talked to many White House staff, cooks, housekeepers, doctors, and Secret Service over the years. They are universal in their love of Ronald Reagan.” In regard to the president’s initial opposition to sanctions against apartheid in South Africa, Kengor said, “Ronald Reagan was appalled by apartheid, but also wanted to ensure that if the apartheid regime collapsed in South Africa that it wasn’t replaced by a Marxist-totalitarian regime allied with Moscow and Cuba that would take the South African people down the same road as Ethiopia, Mozambique, and, yes, Cuba. In the immediate years before Reagan became president, 11 countries from the Third World, from Asia to Africa to Latin America, went Communist. It was devastating. If the film refuses to deal with this issue with the necessary balance, it shouldn’t deal with it at all.”[58]
Political commentator Ben Shapiro wrote: “There is no question that the film itself is full of historical inaccuracies. The Butler has virtually nothing in common with its source material, the life of White House butler Gene Allen, except for the fact that the main character of the film and Allen were both black butlers in the White House. The film’s title character, Cecil Gaines, sees his father murdered and his mother raped by a white landowner; that never happened to Allen. The movie’s title character has two children, one who goes to the Vietnam War, the other who becomes a Civil Rights pioneer; Allen actually had only one son.”[59]
See also this TIME Article if you are interested.
And if you saw the movie, I’d love to hear your thoughts in comments. I love going to movies alone, but this one, I sort of want to talk about.
I keep meaning to watch this but for whatever reason I haven’t.
Do you realize all the dam people you quoted are republicans? Of course, they are going to defend Reagan. Lol
As far I’m concerned anything that comes from a spawn of Reagan – especially DEFENDING him – is going to be just as fictitious as a 2am Lifetime movie.
Not that I can blame someone for wanting to defend their parents, but that biological bias is even more reason IMO.
And when it comes to ANY political party blaming something on a broad paranoia induced “agenda”…
I think it is a good movie too — Forrest Whitaker is a really good actor so, IMO, the movie is worth seeing for him.
You are SO right about Viola Davis being perfect for Oprah’s part. Sorry, but I don’t think Oprah is a good actress — but I admit it could just be that she’s so well-known that I have trouble seeing her acting as someone else — but whatever it is, I haven’t enjoyed her in a performance since The Color Purple (not that she’s been in a ton of stuff).
I read a quote from either the real Allen or his son that he always voted for whoever the POTUS was when he was working in the White House because of personal, friendly relationships he developed with ALL of them. Not only does that speak highly of the real Allen’s character, it shows how much b.s. the movie has in it trying to bring the filmmaker’s political opinions onto the different Presidents.
Also read his “favorite” POTUS was Gerald Ford (!) because he ate breakfast every morning in the kitchen with the staff after his morning swim.
I liked this movie. Forest is a great actor in most of his work. Agreed that Viola would do well in this. She’s another that’s good at most she does. I found many inaccuracies as well. So I tried to just enjoy it for a movie quality because it was not a ” true story “. I also really loves 12 years a slave I don’t know if you watched or all ready wrote on this cause I’m rather new but that’s a great movie.
I finally watched this about a week ago and I enjoyed it but because of the nerd I am, I just HAD to go and google Allen! Even though Forest was great, it kind of takes away from the movie for me being that most of the best parts of the movie never happened at all. Kinda wish they didn’t even say it was inspired by actual events and just let it stand as the work of fiction that it is.
I was not in a mad rush to see this movie, It is on my list and will now move to the top of that list after reading your post. Hate to hear it is sad, but I will watch it. Thanks for the post about it.
Having read previously of the inaccuracies in this movie, I never had a desire to see it. This continuing infatuation Hollywierd has with rewriting history to perpetuate racial tension is now just plain old stale. Good or bad this is just old liberal, shame the white man, gibberish. Time to move on.
Nope…not another shame the white man movie…not saying that those movies do not exist, but this was not one of them.
Everything Oprah touches has some white-man-violence/rape/torture/murder-against-a black person. They are always exaggerated. She has a need to throw these racial injustices in our face whether it’s appropriate or not. In this case it was completely made up even though things like this happened occasionally, it really had no place in this movie because it was untrue and because it made the movie darker then I thought it was meant to be. It’s the inspiring story of a man who succeeded, a story I loved.
Yeah, I totally expected more of an inspirational movie, from nothing to the White House kind of thing. It was way darker than that. Which is okay. Just not what I thought I was gonna spend over 2 hours watching.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Most of the presidents shown in this movie actually were portrayed as doing quite a lot in improving the situations during this time for black people. It was shown even though it was not popular they were willing to try to change things. It was not a bash the white man movie. It did include the civil rights movement which is sometimes difficult to watch and a bit about slavery. The only white man that should feel shame from this is the one that participated in or still does in discrimination or any other race of people that does.
I was expecting more about life working in the white house, more Upstairs Downstairs and less civil rights. I could have done without most of the Louis storyline for more focus on THE BUTLER. I thought it was weird that the character was supposedly from Georgia and they skipped over Jimmy Carter’s administration.
I’d still recommend the movie. It’s just not the movie I thought it was.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:24 AM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
I really thought this was closely aligned with his life. Good movie, but disappointed to find that out.
Exactly. The civil rights issue in our country will always be important…especially as there are now generations who haven’t lived through the 60’s. Like you, I was more interested in learning about the White House itself and the stories between all the Presidents and the employees. I was saddened that they had to revise someone’s life to make a movie. Guess we should be use to that by now…Hollywood likes to hype up any topic to sensationalize something in order to make money. They play on any group whose story either angers them or brings the press into play for ticket sales….why else would they change a story?
I agree about Carter that’s one of the things me and my husband said when we watched.
Well, at the time I believed the butler was from Georgia. I don’t know why they had to make up the state he was from. It also makes more sense that he would have lived in Virginia. Much more likely to have been found by Washington DC there than in Macon, GA for fucksake.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
The best part of the movie was that eye candy Lenny Kravitz. The whole Oprah-Terrence Howard relationship was awkward. (google Terrence Howard interview regarding baby wipes and have a laugh)
Please read the commenting rules!
I think I missed the scene where Oprah and Terrance made out. I’m not sure how I missed it.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
Omg, that was one of the best parts and early on in the movie
Watched The Butler on a JAL flight from Saigon to Tokyo. I thought it had some good historical information but overall thought the movie was very contrived. Almost like the black version of Forrest Gump. How somehow Whitaker’s character “coincidentally” and conveniently tied to every significant event in the Civil Rights Movement, Vietnam war era, Black Panther era up to him watching Obama being elected as the first black president. Forrest Whitaker is such a great actor though. Hated the stuff with Oprah and Terrence Howard. I’d give the movie a B-.
OMG It IS a black Forrest Gump.
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Tamara Tattles wrote:
>
That is a great comparison! I never picked up on that til now. I did cry at the end when his wife died. I’m a softy for a sad scene in a movie.
Watched that just last week, both my husband and myself thought it was very good and we both cried several times throughout. Disagree, I liked Oprah
It was okay. It is not one of those movies that if I see it on again that I will re-watch.
Watch 12 years a Slave. You will not be disappointed.
I hated The Butler. I can’t stand Oprah, but love Forrest Whitaker. I agree with what some others commented, the storyline was contrived. I wanted to like the movie, but thought it meandered, had too much fluff and little substance.
I did see American Sniper yesterday and actually thought is was pretty good. For a 2hr20 minute movie it moved fast. It reminded me of Hurt Locker in how it impacts the soldiers long term.
I actually knew a guy that did 2-3 tours in Iraq/Afghanistan from mid 2000’s to 2010. He didn’t see as shell shocked as the characters in the movies, but he couldn’t wait to get back to a war zone.
The movie is kind of similar to Forest Gump in the sense that it tells the story of American culture and politics throughout the mid 20th century to present day except for the focus is black history. I agree that a lot of it was a stretch but at the same time captured some truths of the times at the very least. It’s worth seeing just as a survey of our recent national history.