I’ve read it’s so over-the-tip on the miserable scale that it has been called “poverty porn”.
To play devil’s advocate here, one could say “having thoughts or ideas” about a story is a postmodern conceit. Perhaps the goal is to simply impose the characters and story on the viewer with a reality-like force.
That technique has been somewhat discredited over the years in film and fiction, in favor of vagueness and indirect implication. But it’s still common in portrayals of social or out-group identity, where there’s a job to do, and grit, at least theoretically, is what gets it done.
That’s a good point, but many postmodern conceits didn’t find their homes in a vacuum - lots of people like to think about the films they see, and that’s probably particularly true for critics. [and those films that don’t care if you think about them do usually announce themselves in advance - the commercials often feature people blowing shit up, or Jennifer Aniston looking winsome].
Going back to the OP, this wasn’t the only critic with this reaction. The New Yorker says almost exactly the same thing
as does New York Magazine
Chicago critics, I’ll note, love the heck out of this movie.
I imagine Chicago don’t do pomo - identity politics are pretty smash-mouth there.
Quick warning, there are spoilers in the following post.
You know, I don’t think I want to see this movie, as I have never been a fan of Sapphire’s writing or poetry at all.
But, I do think that ‘poverty porn’ is probably a good way to describe what I have read about the movie so far.
I mean, the idea that the movie may be ‘too real’ doesn’t ring true to me. I have seen some ghetto stories to make me weep, but I have never seen anything like this. Is it possible that they really did stack it on extra thick to exploit some people’s perception of the hard life of ghetto welfare moms?
I mean, lets count the things that I have read that Precious has stacked against her.
-
Very Dark. Several shades darker than what this society is willing to consider attractive usually (though I find her skin tone gorgeous).
-
Morbidly Obese
-
Poor
-
Sexually abused by dad
-
illiterate
-
Pregnant twice by dad
-
physically abused to the extreme (kicked in the head while giving birth, for instance)
-
sexually abused my mom.
-
gives birth to a baby with Downs Syndrome
-
saddled with AIDS
I mean, 1-3 may be par for the course in the ghetto. By the time we get to number 4, we are talking much rarer in my experience (just from my very limited perspective, of course).
By the time we get to number 6, we can say, "Yeah, that is a bit much for one heroine, but this a movie, so duh, of course we want to find an interesting story to tell.
By the time we get to number 8, yeah…we gotta call this poverty porn, right?
By the time we get to number 10, we got to call it overkill.
She gets AIDS too? Wow! After that list I’m trying to think about where she might be able to say “The Aristocrats!” as a punch line.
Having read the book many of these are a direct result of the other things; it’s not implausible at all. Obviously she’s pregnant twice because of the raping of her father, and also gets AIDS from him. The first child has Downs Syndrome because she’s too poor for prenatal care/her young age at conception/her possible physical abuse while carrying the child. She’s obese both because of abuse-related body issues and poverty-related food issues. She’s illiterate because of how she’s treated in school by the other kids and how she can’t focus because of her home life.
The mom sexually abusing her on top of everything did seem like an afterthought I have to admit.
Ehhh… I don’t know about this.
It may not be unheard of for a girl to be molested, but it is much less likely she will impregnated twice because of it, by her own dad.
Also, the AIDS thing. I mean, it is not unheard of for a young 15 year old girl to get AIDS. It is *much less likely *that she will get it from the dad and grandad of her children.
It’s not uncommon for a very young girl to have a baby with health issues, but it is much less likely that the child will have Downs.
It is not uncommon that a child struggles in school because of problems at home and bullying or whatever. It is much less likely that the child is stone illiterate because of it (and she is stone illiterate. She has to be taught the alphabet.)
It is all of these things working ***in concert ***that really seems overkill for me. I mean, it just seems like…come on. I have seen some stuff in the ghetto. I am not kidding. I have seen some stuff! But I’ve never seen anything approaching what I have read about that movie.
So yeah. I won’t call it ‘too real’. I will just call that ‘too much’. Astro is cracking me up with “The Aristocrats!”
(Emphasis mine.) I haven’t seen the movie so I can’t comment on how plausible any other elements seem in context, but if the movie suggests that these are the reasons Precious’s child has Down syndrome then that is simply incorrect. Down syndrome is a genetic disorder. There is no evidence that it is in any way related to things that happen to the mother during pregnancy. The best prenatal care in the world will not prevent Down syndrome. Prenatal screening can determine whether the fetus has Down syndrome, but there isn’t anything that can be done about it. A young mother is also far less likely to have a child with Down syndrome than an older woman – the rate of Down syndrome goes up dramatically with mothers over 35.
As far as I know there is no connection between incest/inbreeding and Down syndrome either, so if a real girl in Precious’s situation had a baby with Down syndrome I’d think it’s just more bad luck rather than a result of her environment. Well, her environment would impact her ability to get an abortion, but beyond that there’s nothing she could have done after conception to avoid having a baby with Down syndrome.
But we’re not talking about implausible. Sure, you can concoct a narrative where these things all interplay. But the complaint is that it’s still unlikely for EVERYTHING to happen.
It becomes a story not about a member of an underclass, but a story about a literary whipping boy. She’s not unfortunate; she sounds the least fortunate person in America.
Which can make for an interesting story in and of itself, but if the “point” of a narrative (as it seems to be here) is to open eyes to suffering, it seems like you’d be better off using a more average sample of that suffering.
The point could possibly be: “Sure, it’s over the top. What’s happening to underclass Black females as a group is over the top.” America has to have a least fortunate group, and as things are, they’re a pretty damn good candidate.
The goal may be a deep emotional empathy, whatever the cost in “literary” qualities, or indeed false impressions of reality. Radical art is about the end justifying the means, and even, sometimes, justifying unintended outcomes.
I also get the feeling that they’re trying to make us feel guilty for not being THIS bad off. I mean, no one is as bad off as Precious. It’s like, “Your puny first world problems are so puny and…first world, how can you complain? At least you can read and don’t have HIV and aren’t being raped by your father!” It just makes you feel like, okay, this person pretty much exists to try to eke out some white or rich or whatever guilt from you.
Plus, is it really art if it’s not that good? I’m not saying Precious isn’t. But the sheer act of making a movie about a girl who’s this awful victim isn’t inherently radical, in my opinion. If people are criticizing it, I don’t think you can respond with, “It’s radical art.” I guess for me, a book/movie has to be good–it has to take me somewhere before I can feel anything. I have to like the characters or think the plot is worthwhile before I can decide it says anything thematic or whatnot.
I’m also wary of being manipulated. I hate the idea that I’m supposed to go in and feel horrible for this class of people just because you make sad things happen to this one character. I mean, you could write a glurge about a sad little boy with a sack of leaves for a body, and I’m not going to do anything but laugh. For me, if the story itself isn’t worthwhile, then that’s my reaction. It doesn’t matter if what the characters are going through is hellish–if it’s got the literary level of a Lurlene McDaniels novel, then even if they have cancer and are dying and whatnot, I’m still going to laugh at them.
Nothing to see here, Lamia already said it.
Forgive me, but has anyone in this thread that is talking about what they think the message or tone of the movie is actually seen the movie yet?
Nope. We are all discussing what we think about it from the viewpoint of what we have heard or read about it.
Once people actually see it, I am sure a thread will be started about that.
I can’t wait for the director’s cut DVD! Packed with ten more maladies and misfortunes “too real” for the theaters!
Thank you for setting me straight. I wasn’t aware of any of this, aside from it being more common in older women’s pregnancies. I admit I was jumping to conclusions through…something. 
(Still, I thought the book was very well written.)
You may have been confused because prenatal testing (not treatment) for Down syndrome has improved in recent years. There’s some risk of miscarriage with these prenatal tests, but it’s safer now than it used to be so more pregnant women have it done. Something like 90% of all diagnosed Down syndrome fetuses are aborted, so the number of children actually born with Down syndrome is much smaller than it used to be.
I shouldn’t have said I wasn’t aware of ANY of it. I knew about the chromosome thing but like a lot of stuff in life you learn and forget it many times over. (Or half-learn/learn it incorrectly.)
I actually just got back from seeing it and wasn’t sure if I ought to start a new thread about it.
I really liked it, but I can see the complaints of heavy handedness. It’s definitely a story that needs to be told, IMHO. It’s one that you never see–because I don’t think anyone really wants to look too hard at a life like this. It’s just so painful.
Mo’Nique was really good–she truly got into the part of this monster that is Precious’s mother.
At the end I was kind of left wondering–is this a happy ending or a sad ending? Or just an ending?