Now that we’ve heard that Lenny Kravitz will be taking on the role of Marvin Gaye in an upcoming biopic, the interwebz are abuzz about whether or not Lenny is “dark” enough to play the part. This blogger asks the question that if he were a veteran actor would all the talk about “colorism” recede from view? Perhaps.
In the same vein, for weeks now the industry has been talking about the upcoming film starring Zoe Saldana as enigmatic songstress, Nina Simone. Many have also cried “colorism” in casting Saldana for the part since recent photos have shown that the actress has had to darken her skin and wear a prosthetic to be convincing as the singer. How about her acting? Are critics on both sides of the debate wondering about that in conjunction to the color issue? Even the New York Times in their article on the subject has noticed a lack of attention on that part of the controversy.
Few have attacked Ms. Saldana for her virtues as an actress. Instead, much of the reaction has focused on whether Ms. Saldana was cast because she, unlike Simone, is light skinned and therefore a more palatable choice for the Hollywood film than a darker skinned actress.
In the past it would seem that if the actor or actress were talented enough or had the appropriate gravitas to handle the part, any scrutiny focused less on whether or not said actor was aesthetically fit for the role visually. And that makes total sense. Let’s take Denzel Washington’s portrayal of Malcolm X. There is very little resemblance between the two men; however it was Washington’s talent that made the role believable. The only physical attribute added was a little red hair dye and a pair of glasses. Everything else was the actor living and breathing the part. There was no need to rely on anything else. Could this be what is missing from these recent casting choices?
We can also compare Lynn Whitfield’s Josephine Baker and Diana Ross’s Billie Holiday, both cases of darker skinned African-Americans playing lighter-skinned counterparts. With Whitfield, this was another situation where the actor’s raw talent spoke for the role before the film was shown — thereby giving credence to the part. Ross’s portrayal of Holiday was a more risky undertaking since at the time Ross was not known for her acting ability, but notably the gamble paid off. Yet, today, we do not talk about the apparent differences in their appearances or the notion of reverse colorism. However, much skepticism was made of Halle Berry taking on the role of Dorothy Dandridge — not because of how much or less she looked like the dancer and actress — but at the time Berry’s mettle as an actress was as yet untested. Many of Hollywood’s top African-American actresses wanted the role, but lost to Berry, a relative newbie. For the latter two, the majority of the criticism surrounded the notion of talent. Shouldn’t that be an overriding factor?
In recent years we’ve seen a spate of biopics cropping up as a sort of testing ground for singers or other burgeoning actors to make the transition to meatier, heartier roles that could land them on the map. The assumption is that recording artists would have a base understanding of what it would be like to portray one of their own. However, the stories that are most clambering to be told including Beyoncé’s fairly recent turn as Etta James, or Andre 3000’s much beleaguered role as Jimi Hendrix and now Marvin Gaye, are those of artists who lived complex and dynamic lives which would require any actor to dig deep to find the right emotional range to give the performance its due. So in some regard the main focus on whether or not the choice looks the part enough seems a bit thin while possibly overlooking the bigger picture. Can this person act? Will they embody the person enough to capture their nuances beyond the made-up billboard?
Some of us would dare say that belief in Hollywood magic is shallow. We understand the smoke and mirrors of bringing a character to life, but what we take at face value though, is the talent behind the mask. Perhaps the better route is to start there first and maybe you won’t need to alter skin tone or add prosthetics. A good enough actor in a finely crafted role with a great script can largely speak for itself. If given enough good, raw material to work with we’ll see the person without the use of tricks or affectation. After all, actors have been playing Cyrano de Bergerac and Richard III for eons all with the same prerequisites. It is the actors themselves who must reach beyond the nose and the hunchback to set them apart. But if the shortcuts are propping up the whole performance, well, then you have your answer.
Top Image: Indiewire
