I Saw A Tyler Perry Film and Didn't Walk Out In the First 15 Minutes ... But Not Because I Didn't Want To
Monday, September 15, 2008 at 4:14PM 
The Snob went to see Tyler Perry's "The Family That Preys," for free, as a guest of a friend. She went with an open mind and that mind was so dulled that it couldn't cut through Perry's horrid dialog, shoddy stagecraft and hysterical directing.
I didn't have high hopes, but I didn't expect what I got.
When I read how others saw this film I wonder if they were grading on a curve. Or maybe his previous films were so poorly executed that by comparison this one was brilliant. But I do know this:
I've watched a lot of black films, many which barely passed as "entertainment." They were what they were, imperfect comedy vessels produced by hacks, but hacks who understood film, if only on a hackery level.
Perry is not good enough to be called a hack.
Compared the producers and directors of such high black cinema as "Juwanna Man," "Two Can Play This Game," "Waiting to Exhale" and both "Barbershop" films, Perry doesn't even come close. To say he is a hack would be to assume that he understood the most basic, crudest elements of filmmaking on a budget.
And from what I saw Saturday morning, this man does not.
Words cannot describe how much I didn't like "The Family That Preys." (Although this review comes close.) The corny, hackneyed mish mash of "Days of Our Lives" and "Soul Food" for a plot could be forgiven. The sickly sweet use of the Lee Ann Womack's relatively recent country classic "I Hope You Dance" could be forgiven. Forcing poor Alfre Woodard and Kathy Bates to go through lines as subtle as a hand grenade. I can even forgive making Rockmond Dunbar's character the dumbest cuckolded man in the history of cuckolds. But I cannot forgive the fact that Perry either does not or refuses to learn the basic elements of filmmaking.
[SPOILER ALERT! If you actually want to be "surprised" by Perry's been-there-done-that plot, please stop reading. But if you watch this film and can't see what's going to happen from a mile out, you obviously don't consume much fiction, whether as a book, TV show, film, music or long form poem.]
Show, don't tell: This was the greatest sin of the whole movie. There's a wedding at the beginning that you never see take place. There is an affair that you never learn any of the "good" parts of -- like the seduction, the courtship, the illicit meetings, any allusions of sex or intimacy between those two characters, allusions of any love or lust between the two. All parts of the affair are learned through a list of talking points uttered by various characters throughout the film.
There's two "children," one per each cheater. One child you only see via the back of his head and the other is invisible, despite both being mentioned. The history of the friendship between Woodard and Bates' characters is verbally mentioned, but not shown. Potential for the examination of class/race issues are offered up but never probed. Woodard takes Bates to an impromptu Baptism when there was no lead-up explaining why Bates would want to be Baptized. There are no conversations between the two about life and death, the existence of God or who Jesus Christ is. Just a Baptism out of nothingness, never touched upon, referenced or explained ever again.
And rather than show through better filmmaking why Sanaa Lathan's character is such a gigantic bitch or why she is obsessed with money, there are jibs and jabs from her sister (who comes off almost equally as bitchy), regular references to luxury items and finally, a blurted out half-assed excuse/motivation for Lathan's nuttiness when she barks at her mother for driving their father away who apparently abandoned them. This is the first and only reference to the man and how his actions affected their family.
Attack of the two dimensional character: There were only two types of characters in this movie -- the good, salt of the earth, working class-to-poor people and the evil, college educated, stuck up rich people.
Does Cole Hauser's William Cartwright have any motivation to cheat on his wife that we know of? No. Do we find out the nature of his marriage? No. Do we learn why he and his mother have such a frigid relationship? No. Do we find out why he loves or does not love his wife or Lathan's character? No. Do we find out why he chose to carry on a years long affair with Lathan's character? No. Do we find out if he had a relationship with Lathan's character's "son" (who Perry -- shock, shock -- outs as Cartwright's son? No. He's just evil.
The same goes for Lathan who is a cold, calculating and cackling witch with no explanation. She also turns into an immature, nonsensical woman who doesn't act anything like a tough, hardworking woman who managed to pull herself up out of poverty and earn an Ivy League education. We don't learn that she had any love for Cartwright until shortly after the film's climax. I'd assumed she was playing him for the money given how "evil" she was, but she tearfully blurts out the most trite and cliched, "He loves me. He's going to leave his wife and marry meeeeee!" bullshit that is even below "The Young and The Restless" standards.
The "good" characters are just as awful. Dunbar's "Mr. Cuckold" is the stupidest wronged spouse in the history of wronged spouses. He is written as so weak and so witless he defies belief. When he learns his wife has a separate account with more than $280,000 in it and asks her about it, she castrates him telling him he has no business looking at her money and that she gets the cash from "bonuses."
She also has a "bonus" car given to her by the company and a "bonus" house, also from the company.
Yet, Dunbar's character doesn't figure it all out until the very end where he uncharacteristically slaps Lathan so hard that she flies over a diner counter top. While this got a lot of laughs from the audience, no doubt under the guise of "she had it coming," I was still disturbed as it wasn't necessary and gives the impression that there is a justification to physically assault another person, especially a woman, if she had it coming.
Wildly gesticulating caricatures: Perry does not understand how you can't direct actors for film the same way you'd direct actors for stage. Too often he has instructed his talented actors to "overact," as you would do for a stage play. On the stage you have to make wider gestures to fill the open theater void. Film is an intimate medium. Actors have to dial back so the dialog and interactions seem real. But the actors weren't dialed back, so they all sounded like cartoons, especially with such unimaginative dialog.
Repetitiveness: Apparently Perry was worried I wouldn't get a few points, so he had his characters repeat them over and over. For Lathan, "I get bonuses!" From every character to Dunbar about his dream of his own construction company some variation of," You need to get your head out of the clouds and be thankful for what you have!" Everyone except Woodard's character, "I need a drink." Having a fresh from work (and two fresh from cheating) threesome return home needing a shower almost immediately. Largely because Lathan and Hauser's characters, hint, hint, wink, wink, did the nasty that day. Perry's character just needed a shower because he was funky from work.
Perry is a lazy screenwriter: I could go all day naming plot devices that did not work or make sense, but if I had to pick one, the most maddening would be how Dunbar's character finds out about the secret account flushed with cash. He learns of it from a bank teller while trying to make a withdrawal. By this point, he and Lathan have been married for four years. The teller asks him which account and he is confused, asking the teller where the extra account came from and what is in it.
How dumb is Lathan's character if she didn't have the presence of mind to open her "secret" account at a different bank? Or if she had to have it at that bank, why would she have her husband's name listed on it? Because that's the only way the teller would say "which account." Because he gave his name only accounts with his name should have come up. Plus, this undercuts the fact that they've already been married for four years and we are to assume that he has never gone into the bank to make a transaction not once when his name is on his wife's secret account.
What the hell, people: Out of all these things I've mentioned, I guess my biggest disappointment was with the audience.
I don't have a problem in people liking and enjoying Perry's stage plays and films, but let's not fool ourselves. This is some piss poor film-making and everyone in that audience should have known it. THESE are the same people who saw "Dreamgirls," who watch "CSI: Miami," who read "Waiting to Exhale" and whose favorite films are "The Color Purple," "The Best Man" and "Bad Boys II." These are people who have seen both excellent cinema and some of Hollywood's finest hackery, yet they applaud something they have to know is a vastly inferior product when compared to "CB4," "Hitch" or "New Jack City."
I can understand why someone would love "Beauty Shop," the boring sequel to the "Barbershop" films, or "Glitter," that "A Star Is Born While a DJ Saved My Life" nightmare by Mariah Carey because as bad as those movies were the people making them understood the basic elements of filmmaking. That way, you could focus on the REAL problems of the film. Not get stuck on elementals you should have learned in either film school or via virtual film school -- a la Quintin Tarantino, a cinephile who consumed mass amounts of movies as he taught himself the craft.
I mourn what could have been -- a watchable melodrama on the subjects of marriage and infidelity featuring black performers.
Seeing actors I like (Rockmond Dunbar, Alfre Woodard, Kathy Bates) and love (Sanaa Lathan, Cole Hauser) wasted in a work undeserving of their talent drove me mad. To have an affair movie with no dramatization of the affair was ridiculous. I wasn't expecting a dry humping sex scene, but would it have killed him to shoot some passionate kissing, a fall on a bed and a fade to black? Give me the seduction. Give me the thickness of the drama. I want to understand what makes a marriage breakdown. By the end of the film, I learned nothing about commitment, family, love or loss that I couldn't find in a fortune cookie.
I realize this film was supposed to be some sort of departure for Perry, going with a biracial cast of characters with a grab for serious drama. But he really demonstrated his limitations as a director and it's hard to "cross-over" when you know that you can't screen your films for critics. And this is likely because Lion's Gate, which put out this film, knows it wouldn't even fly as a film student's freshman experiment. They know Perry can't direct and don't care, because they know black people who know his films are overacted with lots of shortcomings, love Perry anyway and focus on the good more so than the crappy.
So I applaud Perry for his ability to sell his vaudeville to a black movie-watching public who is willing to forgive his egregious sins of cinema because they are so starved of visions of us on screen. So starved that they are willing to pretend like "The Family That Preys" is "Unfaithful" meets "In Living Single" when it's really neither.
It seems I am too big of a snob for Tyler Perry films. My desire for the film fundamentals of A + B = Basic Filmmaking to be met are so strong that not even the power of blackness can override it.
Try harder.
Reader Comments (67)
well I have liked the Tyler Perry films and plays I have seen and I plan on seeing The Family that Preys. When I read critiques of Tyler Perry's work there is the insinuation that the people who like this films and plays are uneducated/ low class/ghetto; that is simply not true. I don't see anything wrong with liking all forms of entertainment/ art; from low-brow to high-brow.
Wow, Danielle, why don't you tell us how you really feel about Tyler Perry? And don't hold back. Let's face it, with the exception of Denzel Washington, Spike Lee and a few others, there's a lot of schlong in black filmmaking. I would guess that while Perry may not have much talent, his movies make money so far and that's why his projects get produced. You can be the worst director and screenwriter in history, but if people are buying the movie tickets, you've got a nice career in Hollywood. Unfortunately, black audiences are less discriminating and will pay to see too many crappy movies, so you can't blame the studios--they're only following supply and demand. Danielle, you forgot to mention one thing. Tyler is also a bad actor. He really bites the big one.
After I saw "Meet the Browns" I said I would never go see another Tyler Perry film. Thank you for reinforcing that sentiment and helping me feel better about not making time to see it this weekend. Don't get me wrong. I love the idea of a black director with the power and financial backing Perry gets employing black actors and telling stories with black professionals at the center, (ie. Why Did I Get Married (outside the horrible scenes w/Janet and Malik). But quite frankly I don't have the two hours or $10 to waste on another regurgitated storyline & considering folks go see anything he puts out, he probably won't miss me anyway. I really did hope for Preys when I saw the cast list and learned that Madea was no where to be found.
I am seriously considering taking screenwriting classes and moving to Atlanta to help Tyler out. Seriously. He has resources and an audience most black film makers would kill for & he is pissing them into the wind because nobody will stand up and say "Tyler, that's wack. We already saw that in 3 films."
Oh my goodness, Snob. How long have I spent complaining about Tyler Perry and his hideous "movies"! I have *never* been able to figure out why Oprah throws herself all over him.
There's a lot of reasons I hate (and yeah, I said it, hate) his films. First and foremost is that he appears not to respect black women, or more specifically, black women who don't fall into the mammy-baffoon stereotype.
If you are an educated black woman and in his film, you are either woefully single or in a tragic relationship with a man who does not love you. Either way, you're messed up and have near-insurmountable amounts of "drama" in your life that only the love of a poor, but humble working-class brother can resolve.
This attitude is so pathological in his films it makes you wonder what woman done him wrong in the past--
Don't even get me started on how he conflates being a spiritual black woman with being a doormat/ selfless "giver." The whole "redemption" angle in the end of a "Diary of a Mad Black Woman" left me outraged for days. Wait, so this dude screws me over, and before I can truly move on I have to take care of his wheelchair-bound, broke-down self? Please. Thanks for the message that to truly be holy you have to go back and help your emotional abuser.
Why does a man have to play Madea? Because no self-respecting black woman would play such a character. It's not a far walk from Madea to Big Momma's House...
He's got a lot of fantasies about what strong women look like, but they sure do not match reality.
So why do I watch? Because his movies are free on TBS or BET and a little righteous anger is a nice distraction from my dissertation.
BTW: Perry was on Conan, and said the reason he doesn't preview his shows is that the one time he did, it got panned by the critics (gee, wonder why). So now he just makes his movies "for the people." So I think Lion's Gate just goes along with his edict.
It was horribly and incredibly ba as evidenced by your blog. I have enjoyed tyler perry in the past like "Why Did I get Married" and "Diary of a Mad Black Woman". With, "Why Did I get Married" being best.
But, this one was by far the very worst Tyler Perry production! It had absolutely no working plot. Just random scenes. I agree the slap was very disconcerting. You helped me determin exactly why the film was so bad.
His movies irritate me not because they are bad, but because they are bad with a large budget and A-list-ish actors and actresses (As AList as black actors can get these days)... with his current resources he could really do something awesome that Blacks from all walks of life can really appreciate and love. I hate when people have the stage or platform to really make a mark but insist on puttng out lackluster material, so it is not just about hating onTyler Perry, I'm an equal oppurtunity hater, lol.....
I think the black community should support black film makers but I think we should also demand superior film making. I am tired of less than mediocre films by and about black people.
When Diary of a Mad Black Woman came out just the name alone turned me off.
i try to be supportive of black films whenever i can, but i approach most of tyler's films with my fingers over my nose...they just make me cringe...i will not go to the theatre to see tyler's movies, i usually get to see them either on cable or someone will lend me a movie...all i have to say is tyler is on the forbes list and about to hit the billion dollar mark...that being said, i will still wait for the cable version and then, i keep the remote nearby just in case...
anonymous 6:30 p.m.: Take some solace in the fact that I don't think Perry's films are "ghetto" or that only people of a particular class like them. I just think they're poorly made. That's why I spent the bulk of my post comparing his film with similar black films that with the notable exception of my "The Color Purple" reference are not known as high art, but fun, popcorn flicks.
Perry's popcorn hath no butter and is burnt for he doesn't know how to properly pop popcorn. The fundamentals are not sound. You can make cheesy crap, just be able to meet the minimum threshold of the craft.
Draven7 and others: My lack of understanding why it had to be so slipshod was what drove me over the edge. I understand why people like melodrama and vaudeville because even I get into the mood for it from time to time, but whatever good that movie could have been was wasted in the fact that he couldn't even take the time to take the art form to at least a hack level. I mean, hack level. That's "give a shit" level. Not rocket science. That's a Tamra Davis* level.
Tamra is a "hack" director who directed "Crossroads" (starring Britney Spears), "CB4," "Half-Baked," "Billy Madison" and several episodes of "Grey's Anatomy." She doesn't make much art, but she can get shit done and there is always work for a good, solid hack who knows her basics and keep things moving.
If Perry could just get himself up to hack quality, my God, he could probably get money out of me and many other "film snobbish" black people as I own CB4, "don't hate" Billy Madison and love Grey's Anatomy.
Consider it, Perry! If you can't do it yourself. Just hire Tamra Davis! She's a hack and that woman has never met a screenplay she wouldn't attempt to make lemonade from.
Dang, I guess I won't be seeing it this weekend with my friends. I love how everyone knows it's just going to be a variation of the same storyline, but we go see it anyway. I guess I should break the habit.
Lamentably . . . I agree Snob. I enjoyed the movie because I knew what I was getting into and consequently was able to "look past" certain things. I think he's a bit lazy and inattentive to detail but gives his "audience" what they're looking for. He can predict the parts that will garner the "Oh no he didn'" or "Oh, My, Damn!", etc. I also enjoyed "Why Did I Get Married" and "Diary of a Mad Black Woman" but I found the same flaws with them as well. Ah well . . .
artchess: No! Go see it. I need people to discuss it with. I want to know if it was just me! And if I am right, I need everyone to sign onto my new campaign to persuade Tyler Perry to take it up a notch.
I'm going to call it:
"Dear Tyler Perry, please let Malcolm Lee direct all your films from now on(Or Tamra Davis or Paul WS Anderson). Yours truly, people who would watch your films if you'd let someone who drove past a film school and saw 'Pulp Fiction' once direct."
He already makes money, but he'll make more this way. Trust me. And there will be a lot less bitching from people like who go into fits when there's not enough character development or if the thing is shot and chopped bad.
And once again, it is OK to like his films. I just want to encourage him to consider using hacks. They work cheap! And he might crossover, if that is what he so desires!
There is really no excuse for his lack of technique and laziness, but I guess since he struggled for years and was briefly homeless he just doesn't want to hear it. I wonder if the resistance he got from Hollywood initially stemmed from racism or the poor quality of his films. I think racism had a lot to do with it because there are a lot of crappy movies with poorly written scripts out there.
"When I read how others saw this film I wonder if they were grading on a curve. Or maybe his previous films were so poorly executed that by comparison this one was brilliant."
*DEAD*
I've been telling folks this about Tyler Perry films for years but I always fall short of damn near being stoned to def. It's nice to see that we share a similar opinion. Actually, you can take this same review but change the name of the TP flick and replace character names accordingly for each of his films. Same ish different story (literally).
Dang Snob.
I saw it over the weekend and I loved it. I'm not crazy about all of Tyler's films; but I figured out a long time ago that he wouldn't be Spike Lee.
It's the Pandora's box. He can either be a critically acclaimed director with little box office return or Tyler can be who he is and create a happy medium for the majority of black folks to enjoy.
I understand your frustration as The Snob and the *cough elitist cough*. Hell...the hubby and I went to see "Vicki Cristina Barcelona" by Woody Allen and we loved it. It was awesome. But trust we were the only black folks in that sold out theatre.
Most black folks aren't on the "film" tip. Most of us watch "movies." We wanna laugh, cry, sing music, rejoice, show emotion, and feel good when we spend our $10; not be served a Master's Thesis.
Most black directors get in where they fit in. And with the exception of Spike Lee; most have chosen to go the "blockbuster" route because it just doesn't pay to go all "high and mighty" with black audiences. You will lose them every time. After "RoseWood" John Singleton didn't play around cause serving black audiences with a sprinkling of interested YT's is the pits. I think about great films such as "Get on the Bus","The Great Debaters" and "Love Jones" and their disappointing box office numbers. It's got to burn to know that as a whole your own people are simply just "not that interested."
Filmaking boils down to business. And there's something to be said about funding a fiim and Return on investment. Let's just see how well "Miracle on St. Anna" does.
BTW Snob.
Wasn't that White Guy in Tyler's film the a most bloated unattractive poor man's Marlon Brando?
No apologies here. He is fug.
Danielle, I'm in total agreement with you on Perry. Also, for the record, I made a big typo in my last comment. I said "schlong" when I meant to say "schlock," which made the whole sentence incomprehensible. Maybe it was a Freudian slip or maybe I shouldn't try to use Yiddish since I'm not Jewish, although I'm a quarter German. At any rate, the other phallic reference was completely intentional. Tyler's movies do bite the big one.
You got me scurred to see it. I've never been a fan of Tyler Perry but I still love Diary of a Mad Black Woman if for no other reason than Kimberly Elise could convince me to eat Salmon eventhough I know the allergic reaction could kill me.
Get Togetha: But wait! I don't want or expect Perry to be Spike Lee! I just want him to follow the bare minimum rules of storytelling or at least hire a hack director, one who will still institute his vision of the project, but at least knows film well enough to make sure things make sense. That's ALL I'm asking. The majority of films I reference in this piece (with the exception of The Color Purple) are not high cinema. They are the works of hacks, but manage to be entertaining because you're not distracted by sloppy storytelling and glitches you wouldn't even find in a Lifetime movie.
I mean, "Two Can Play That Game?" He can't rise to the level of "coherent" storytelling and craftsmanship of "Two Can Play That Game?" Or "The Brothers?" Or "The Preacher's Wife?" It's not that hard! That's what I'm upset for, the complete disregard in learning how properly utilize film as a medium to tell his stories.
He doesn't have to be Spike Lee. He could be Malcolm Lee or the aforementioned Tamra Davis or Paul WS Anderson or hundreds of the other hack directors who can shoot and chop a film to a C- grade. They're not great directors, they're not good, they are merely satisfactory when it comes to formulating the bare minimum on film.
So Perry can still do everything he already does, he could just do it competently! His films are the equivalent of novels with run-on sentences and typos. He could aspire to a "Booty Call" level of hackery! I'd actually enjoy his films if he could just learn Filmmaking 101! I can't get over the laziness and poor ass covering in the story lines!
That said, Cole Hauser did look like he's been sucking down a few hot dogs since I saw him on K-Ville more than a year ago.
And he seemed hotter on K-Ville.
He was not shot in the best light (and didn't have enough make-up for the pockmarks), although not all of the makeup crew was phoning it in. Sanaa Lathan's hair was shot and styled fantastically. For me, it was the best part of the movie.
Lisa: No. I implore you to see it! I need to know I'm not the only one who couldn't even enjoy the camp factor of the film because they could not get over the shoddy filmmaking.
I just want things to be competent! I own "CB4." That's not high art, but there's a beginning, middle and end with sufficient climax and character development. With those things out of the way I could focus on determining whether or not Khandi Alexander's portrayal of blackmailing gold digger was offensive or not. Or if Chris Rock was "funny." Or if Allen Payne could be more delicious.
I decided it was all funny even though, it's not really the best movie. But it's fundamentals are sound and that's what you need to get right first. That doesn't stop you from being as over-the-top or as sappy as you'd like -- it makes your over-the-top sap better!
Tyler has a new production company deal with Lionsgate and that company will produce films written by other people.
The exec running the company is Matt Moore who used to be at New Line.
I'm curious to see what type of movies Tyler will produce vs. the ones he directs.
Tyler is self taught and he had made so much money nobody can tell him anything. His TV series is printing money even though it received the worst reviews I've ever read.
Hollywood doesn't care about the quality of his films because as you know we (black people) have no taste and will see anything, except good dramas like Antoine Fisher. I've had white executives say this to my face.
I'm happy for TP and that so many people get to work. I do however, wonder what is up with the females roles? Black Snob you def. picked up on something.
t
nyc/caribbean ragazza: I'm happy for them too (although I'll probably never watch another film by Perry). I don't like to see my black actors go unemployed even if it means reading lines from an old teleplay from "Melrose Place."
Per the women folk, I really wondered what was up with EVERYONE considering the broad brush they were painted with, but I just didn't get the demonization of college educated people (although they did have Robin Givens, "good" professional woman, as a balance.)
I also couldn't get over how it was painfully obvious that Perry did not research into the business world he had his characters operation in. Listening to people make up business lingo and contract particulars was highly distracting.
Once again, "Booty Call" has a better understanding of its source material and of basic filmmaking fundamentals than Perry's film and "Booty Call" is a borderline reprehensible piece of crap.
I can tell he's self-taught. That's obvious. But I don't think there's anything wrong with saying that if this were a Meg Ryan film and it was this poorly staged, no one, white or black, would watch it. But Perry has a built-in audience/cash machine that is willing to forgive the huge gap in his learning curve. And I know these people know there's a gap because anyone who watches scripted television and popcorn flicks on a regular basis understands tangentially what is and isn't supposed to be in a movie.
These people know there are some things lacking and choose to love him otherwise. That is beautiful, but drives me nuts as a lover of both the high and low-brow in film.
After all, "Big Mama's House," which I also hated, made sense and made me laugh at least four or five times. I laughed once during "The Family That Preys" and spent the rest of the time wondering why the plot holes had to be so gaping and why the dialog was unnatural and why everyone was doing so much shouting and eye rolling that I thought there would be seizures.
This could have been really good camp. Like "BAPS" or "Sparkle." Sigh. What a waste.
I hear you Ms. Snob. I thought Pottie Tang was funny and we know that is definitely not high art. ha
As long as TP movies make money Lionsgate will keep making them. I went to a screening of Diary of Mad Black Woman at the studio.
A black manager/producer I know was so angry about the movie he went off on one of the LG execs.
At the premiere, a famous black congresswoman said it was one of the best movies she's seen because it was the truth. uhm okay.
Tyler knows his audience really well. I went to see Madea's Family Reunion at the Kodak Center. My co-worker and I were invited by his agent.
It was like being in a very fun church. The crowd was so into it. His movies are very preachy but his audience loves it. There is some wish fulfillment (look at that big house!) and his audience gets to enjoy watching elitist negros who have strayed from the Lord get smacked down.
...Perry's popcorn hath no butter and is burnt for he doesn't know how to properly pop popcorn...
Well said. :-)
I saw the movie and I liked it, I do have to say, that I do still agree with the lack of proper info, the whole time I was wondering w.t.f? Like he was really hitting on her at the wedding? and why did she have such disdane for her "people" I do wifh it would have gone into much more but still I did enjoy it if only because Ms Lathan and Ms, Givens were flawless lookin in it to me. Anywho, I do hope that he (Perry) steps it up and gives us something to truly look foward to instead of just black movies.
Peace and Love.