Search This Blog

Showing posts with label boots riley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label boots riley. Show all posts

Friday, August 14, 2026

I Love Boosters (1/5 Stars)



Writer/Director Boots Riley's first and last movie was Sorry to Bother You in 2018. In my review of the same, I stated that the movie felt like a half-decade worth of material backed up wrestling for position at the floodgates of creative fulfillment. On an originality scale from 1 to Being John Kaufman it was around 8 or 9 Charlie Kaufmans.

This applies to I Love Boosters too, a second feature that inexplicably took another 8 years to make. (Having said that, he did write/direct/produce a TV series in 2023 that I did not see). In addition to my original comment about the creativity and originality of Boots Riley, I will add a favorite observation of Roger Ebert, which is that the worst movies are made by the best directors. A bad director usually puts out a boring, mediocre product. Only a truly talented director can take a bad idea and run it right into the ground.

I Love Boosters is a bizarre movie that doesn’t make any sense in the beginning and somehow makes even less sense by its end. It is about a group of shop-lifters, named the Velvet Gang (played by Keke Palmer, Taylour Paige, and Naomi Ackie) which target (exclusively, I think) the high-fashion stores of Christie Smith (played by Demi Moore). The stores are mono-chromatic, which means all the clothes in any particular outlet are all the same color. This looks cool but lacks practicality. After stealing all these same color clothes, Keke Palmer then hits on men in clubs at night and takes them to her place. At that point, she explains that she is not interested in sex and tries to sell them discounted shoes. This is arguably the worst business plan I have ever seen on a movie screen.

The high-fashion stores of Christie Smith do not appear to have any customers. Instead, Christie Smith seems to make her money by requiring her employees to buy the clothes she is trying to sell, which cost like $2,000 for a set. This too is an extraordinarily bad business plan. Christie Smith works out of a tilted, but somehow not collapsing, skyscraper. The metaphor, if it is one, is never explained.

About halfway through the movie, the Velvet Gang gets hired to work in one of the Christie Smith stores, and as they are working up their plan to steal all the clothes, the clothes get stolen first by a Chinese woman with a strange technological device. What she has, depending on what knobs are twisted at what point, is something that can either 1) teleport objects/people/whatever back to China; 2) Shoot continuous blasts of liquid (water?) that Deconstructs whatever has been blasted; or 3) Shoot continuous blasts of liquid (water?) that Resolve Contradictions in whatever has been blasted.

And now maybe we can piece together why this doesn’t make any sense. Boots Riley is trying to implement the ideological tenets of communism. Just because someone is a communist, doesn’t mean that they can’t make good movies. Boots Riley’s first feature was a good movie. I took exception to his rosy view of slavery but otherwise liked the movie. But communists who try to make communist movies generally make terrible movies because the ideology is so wrong about people, about history, about everything. You can knock your head against the wall and try to make sense of ideology, but you ultimately never will. It's just so stupid.

Let’s take a fairly good example of how dumb this movie (and communism) can be. The United States is a democratic/capitalist country. China is a communist dictatorship. Christie Smith is an American fashion magnate whose clothes are manufactured in China. The Chinese people who manufacture the clothes work in poor conditions, even having to sand-blast denim without proper protections. They are also underpaid. Boots Riley lays the blame for this at the feet of Christie Smith and capitalism. That is stupid.

Safety regulations for businesses are imposed by governments. In America, our democratic government imposes these regulations on businesses because the people demand it and elect representatives to make the laws. In China, the government does not impose these regulations on businesses because the people don’t have a say in their government and can’t elect representatives to make the laws. If poor working conditions were the outcome of capitalism, it would be America that would have poor working conditions, not China, which is communist.

Boots Riley seems to think that the workers should unionize and go on strike to get better working conditions and better pay. That is something that can happen in a democratic and capitalist country where the government, management, and labor are separate entities and the people have constitutional rights to free speech and assembly. Boots Riley doesn’t seem to understand that workers can’t go on strike in China because the government is both management and labor and the people have no constitutional rights to act independently of the government. The government, management, and labor are all headed by the same people and not surprisingly, the people that represent management don’t have the interests of labor at heart. The fact is that workers in China have poor working conditions because their government dictates that they should have poor working conditions. If working conditions were controlled by American businesses, then you would expect the same, nay you would expect even worse working conditions to exist in capitalistic America. But they do not. It is the other way. Try to resolve that contradiction, dipshit.

Communist ideology results in heartless evil outcomes. One of this movie’s parodies involves the weeping of an unnamed black woman on the nightly news. She believes that there is too much crime in the neighborhood and wants more police protection. Boots Riley does not believe that this type of person is anything but a capitalist pawn. In one particular scene, she and a few other like individuals are ordered at gun-point to remove their expensive Christie Smith suits. They not only strip off their clothes, but their skin as well. They are not humans. They are things wearing human suits. I’m not sure you can get a better demonstration of how communist ideology dehumanizes its ideological opponents. Boots Riley believes that the police are a capitalist conspiracy. So, anyone that complains about high crime must not be fully human. With this sort of thinking, you begin to understand how communist governments justified the wholesale murder of tens of millions of their own people in the 20th century.

One thing that doesn’t seem to be communist related is the Lakeith Stanfield character who pops up with a french accent and repeatedly tries to seduce the main character. Apparently, he is a demon that sucks the soul out of women via the vagina while performing oral sex. We see an extended and disgusting scene of this and I could not begin to tell you what it had to do with the rest of the movie. For that depraved scene alone, I would suggest not watching this movie.

Tuesday, August 14, 2018

Sorry to Bother You (5/5 Stars)





Sorry to Bother You has lots to say and uses its time wisely. This is one of those movies that you can spend much time afterwards discussing what it had to say. On an originality scale from 1 to Being John Malkovich, it is around 8 or 9 Charlie Kaufmans. It starts off in a new place and then half-way through goes completely crazy.

Sorry to Bother You was written and directed by Boots Riley. Never heard of him, but the way this movie plays, it feels like he’s had half a decade worth of material backed up in his system wrestling for position at the floodgates of creative fulfillment. Sorry to Bother You is about many things: wealth and poverty, capital and labor, ambition and community, individuality and conformity, weird art, wrong-headed genetic experiments, and slavery.

Our hero Cassius Green (played by Lakeith Stanfield) starts with an existential crisis. He lives in his uncle’s garage and hasn’t a job. He is simply surviving. What will his life amount to future generations? (Even when the movie is small, it is big.) Cassius Green lands a soul-crushing seemingly impossible job at a telemarketing firm. They will hire anyone who walks in the door. He is not doing well. Then, a fellow colleague played by a wonderful Danny Glover (still alive!) gives him great advice. Use your white voice he counsels. “White Voice?” asks Cassius. Glover explains what he means. Its not just sounding nasal. It means sounding like you don’t have student loans, that you pay all your bills on time, that you don’t have a care in the world. You are who the other person on the phone wants to be like. Oh, that white voice. Cassius Green gives it a shot. (He sounds remarkably like the actor David Cross, best known as Tobias Funke the therapist turned actor in “Arrested Development”.) This apparently is what black people think white people sound like. Like the movie in general, it’s too funny to be truly offensive.

Pretty soon, Cassius’s telemarketing career takes off and two subplots run right along side his growing success. The first is that the telemarketing center tries to unionize. This is led by a guy named Squeeze, played by Steven Yuen, who stages a work stoppage during prime calling hours. As one character remarks, it is some very Norma Rae shit. Having seen that movie, I agree. The second is that after Cassius gains a promotion he starts selling a product called “Worry Free” labor. “Worry Free” is a company that contracts with regular people to provide guaranteed food and shelter in exchange for otherwise unpaid labor. Its not necessarily slavery but Sorry to Bother You wants to liken it to such. Obviously, Cassius, being black, has some qualms about selling slavery to anyone, even if the slaves are of all races. But he also doesn’t want to be poor loser anymore and what exactly is his responsibility to everyone else?

Then there are weird art show, at least one riot, and the horse people. But I’m not going to get too far into that. It would be impossible to explain here. Two more points. First, this is the second movie this year that puts Oakland, California on the map. The first was Ryan Coogler’s “Black Panther”. It is beginning to feel like that place is the next hot place to make great movies. If one more great movie from one great new filmmaker springs from there in the near future, it would be fair to say its a trend.

Second, is a philosophical qualm. Unlike Boots Riley, I don’t believe slavery is a particularly profitable or productive way to run a business. Here, “Worry Free” is making cash hand over fist by this type of business practice. History disagrees. As the Adam Smith would say, the problem with slavery (besides all the evil) is that, because there is no hope of bettering their situation, the workers are not incentivised to worker smarter and/or harder. Rationally, a slave will work just as hard as they can to avoid punishment. I’ve heard this weird argument flitting about that the wealth of America was produced through slavery. That is a bit like saying the economy of South Korea was built by North Koreans. If slavery produced wealth, the world would have been a whole lot richer a whole lot longer ago. This the truth of the matter. Having said that, Boots Riley made a great film and Lakeith Stanfield, well, his character reminded me of some great white characters like Peter Gibbons from Office Space and C.C. Baxter from The Apartment.