OldFriends4Sale said: True, I mean, not that race would be more or less of an issue, but different, not having the same history of America, perceptions of beauty, class etc as well as time period 1940s vs 1980s

*

But it doesn't seem that in the movie race was an issue at all. (actually maybe it was shot correctly to a degree) Because the Europeans didn't make a deal of it, but the Americans (from Miami) did make an issue.

*

Yeah, and the fact that no one else raised the issue of race did seem unreal to me and most of the people that I know. Here is some rich, powerful mercantilist who obviously thinks/understands that all relationships, including social/romantic relationships are about money, and he never once brings up the notion that his daughter is gallivanting around town with…black men. Yes, he calls them bums or something, but to think that a man of his corporate accomplishment who is obviously concerned with whom his daughter marries because he sees it as merely another business transaction would not understand how Christopher’s race wouldn’t affect the company’s (family’s) bottom line is just a bit too idealistic, if not, naïve for me. To be clear, I’m not saying that all white conservatives are racist, but all financially successful conservatives are cognizant of how everything affects the bottom line, especially the notion of one’s daughter socializing and possibly being romantically involved with a black man.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: Are there more gigolos in Miami than in Minneapolis?

*

Having been to both Miami and Minneapolis several times, I would guess yes, but does quantity equate to quality of one’s gigoloness?

*

OldFriends4Sale said: It was filmed on location in and around Nice, France, partly to ensure that there was good weather for filming and also to ensure that Prince was free of American film unions.

*

Wow, so Prince is a union buster. That’s sad to know. But, I guess it stands to reason if one doesn’t want to pay one’s bills one doesn’t want to pay one’s employees.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: Prince drew inspiration from Federico Fellini's 8½ to the slapstick humor of Abbott and Costello (the sequence involving the ladder, the telephone call from Mary to Christopher)

*

I love the comic moments of UTCM. It’s the drama that’s poorly executed. For weeks after we saw the move, I had to put up with my cousin lookin’ all dreamy eyed and then saying, “We sure had fun didn’t’ we,” and then laughing his butt off. The marrying of drama and comedy demands solid writing and acting, and UTCM just doesn’t have enough of either. Though, I still dig.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: According to the original script it doesn't look like race has any involvement, the race of the cop wasn't noted either. There are 2 scenes involving a cop/car and Morris/Jerome 1.) right after they slam the lady into the dumpster 2.)Morris & Jerome were sneaking around the neighborhood ie Prince's home, lurking in the bushes when Morris grabs Apollonia by the throat.

*

Thanks for the script notes, which shows, as you say, that race was probably not considered. However, when creators take a framework or blueprint, such as Abbot and Costello, from one culture and reinterpret it with or by another culture, such as with Morris and Jerome, as a way to use universal notions or themes of comedy or drama, how much of the cultural indexing should be transposed into the reworking? Clearly, “Who’s on First?” and “What’s the Password?” are easily transferable because both address or satirized the problems of language, which is universal. But, referring to my earlier comment about Isaac Sharon, how much of one’s cultural indexing should be suspended for the fantasy? And, again, Sharon never referring to Christopher’s race doesn’t kill the movie for me, but I wonder how much more authentic the film would have been if that would have been included. And, I’m sure that a lot of people will be thinking, “It’s about class and not race,” but race is the universal signifier for class throughout human history. And I wouldn’t be so suspicious, but I can never forget that it is the face of a middle-aged black woman that horrifies Christopher into realizing that he is wasting his life as a gigolo and that love is more important than money. Now, other than Christopher, Tricky, and the two brothers at Mary’s party, the film is a sea of whiteness until the face of horror appears, and it is a black woman.

thanks2joniandu said:

Doalwa said:

thanks2joniandu said:

Actually, Kristen Scott Thomas is one of the best things about the movie.

Amen, Kristin Scott Thomas was great in the movie...god, I adore this woman...I wonder what she thinks of that movie nowadays! I recently rewatched it, could barely watch as Prince almost ate her whole face off during one of their kiss scenes..please tell me he doesn't kiss like this in real life Still, Under the cherry moon is good, if a bit campy, fun...and it's beautifully photographed, some amazing camera work on this one!

She has said (paraphrasing) that she only took the role because she was fresh out of acting school and was afraid that she wasn't going to get any other opportunity to work.

1725topp said:

OldFriends4Sale said: True, I mean, not that race would be more or less of an issue, but different, not having the same history of America, perceptions of beauty, class etc as well as time period 1940s vs 1980s

*

But it doesn't seem that in the movie race was an issue at all. (actually maybe it was shot correctly to a degree) Because the Europeans didn't make a deal of it, but the Americans (from Miami) did make an issue.

*

Yeah, and the fact that no one else raised the issue of race did seem unreal to me and most of the people that I know. Here is some rich, powerful mercantilist who obviously thinks/understands that all relationships, including social/romantic relationships are about money, and he never once brings up the notion that his daughter is gallivanting around town with…black men. Yes, he calls them bums or something, but to think that a man of his corporate accomplishment who is obviously concerned with whom his daughter marries because he sees it as merely another business transaction would not understand how Christopher’s race wouldn’t affect the company’s (family’s) bottom line is just a bit too idealistic, if not, naïve for me. To be clear, I’m not saying that all white conservatives are racist, but all financially successful conservatives are cognizant of how everything affects the bottom line, especially the notion of one’s daughter socializing and possibly being romantically involved with a black man.

*

*

I love the comic moments of UTCM. It’s the drama that’s poorly executed. For weeks after we saw the move, I had to put up with my cousin lookin’ all dreamy eyed and then saying, “We sure had fun didn’t’ we,” and then laughing his butt off. The marrying of drama and comedy demands solid writing and acting, and UTCM just doesn’t have enough of either. Though, I still dig.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: According to the original script it doesn't look like race has any involvement, the race of the cop wasn't noted either. There are 2 scenes involving a cop/car and Morris/Jerome 1.) right after they slam the lady into the dumpster 2.)Morris & Jerome were sneaking around the neighborhood ie Prince's home, lurking in the bushes when Morris grabs Apollonia by the throat.

*

Thanks for the script notes, which shows, as you say, that race was probably not considered. However, when creators take a framework or blueprint, such as Abbot and Costello, from one culture and reinterpret it with or by another culture, such as with Morris and Jerome, as a way to use universal notions or themes of comedy or drama, how much of the cultural indexing should be transposed into the reworking? Clearly, “Who’s on First?” and “What’s the Password?” are easily transferable because both address or satirized the problems of language, which is universal. But, referring to my earlier comment about Isaac Sharon, how much of one’s cultural indexing should be suspended for the fantasy? And, again, Sharon never referring to Christopher’s race doesn’t kill the movie for me, but I wonder how much more authentic the film would have been if that would have been included. And, I’m sure that a lot of people will be thinking, “It’s about class and not race,” but race is the universal signifier for class throughout human history. And I wouldn’t be so suspicious, but I can never forget that it is the face of a middle-aged black woman that horrifies Christopher into realizing that he is wasting his life as a gigolo and that love is more important than money. Now, other than Christopher, Tricky, and the two brothers at Mary’s party, the film is a sea of whiteness until the face of horror appears, and it is a black woman.

it is France in 1940 so I dont know the 'african descendant' population number, nor how many Miamians there were lol

Actually I didnt realize there were as many as I saw years later when i bought the film vs when i 1st viewed it

Its possible that being a gigolo trumps race, if Christopher was wealthy ethnicity would be no issue. But he was a poor working class gigoloe. Christophers mulattoness was also probably acceptable as well. I would say Christopher being viewed as mulatre in France would be easy seeing they created a defined group in Louisiana of Creoles (Princes father being from that group too) as well as other French colonization the terms of identity that were created even for French people not born on French soil ie Creole. In Louisiana Haiti & the Dominican Republic particularly

Lets go to Paris! Where things like that are understood. We'll raise the child there. We'll keep her in Europe all her life. We'll stay in Europe. She won't have to be American-white or American-black. She'll be cosmopolitan-a woman of the world. We'll do that, Paul, you and I. I'll do it gladly, Paul, gladly. -Sampson Raphaelson, White Man(1935)

WB wanted Prince 2 inject conflict into the movie, Prince didnt want it, race or ethnic issues might have been too heavy 4 the lightness Prince wanted... he took it further 4 GB and didnt even want sex or violence in the film

Dont forget the chic beautiful woman of color during the Christopher Traceys Parade section when he is walking thru the market and he picks out the flowers 4 her and kiss her hands. I forgot about the one u mentioned and always remember the 1st one

OldFriends4Sale said: it is France in 1940 so I dont know the 'african descendant' population number, nor how many Miamians there were lol

*

Okay, so let me admit to something that I’ve obviously had wrong all these years. Maybe I just wasn’t paying attention, but the line I most remember about the period of the film is that “the movie was shot in black and white to give it a timeless feel.” I never realized that it was supposed to be literally France 1940. If so, there are a lot of setting and prop inconsistencies, right? For instance, Prince’s Cadillac isn’t a 1940 model is it? All these years I’ve been thinking that they were going for a more timeless dating that may be rooted in a particular period but then merges other periods, such as Ishmael Reed’s Flight to Canada or Blazing Saddles (more toward the end), which was written mostly by Richard Pryor. Now that you tell me that it is literally the 1940s I must watch this through a whole new lens.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: Its possible that being a gigolo trumps race, if Christopher was wealthy ethnicity would be no issue. But he was a poor working class gigoloe. Christophers mulattoness was also probably acceptable as well. I would say Christopher being viewed as mulatre in France would be easy seeing they created a defined group in Louisiana of Creoles (Princes father being from that group too). Lets go to Paris! Where things like that are understood. We'll raise the child there. We'll keep her in Europe all her life. We'll stay in Europe. She won't have to be American-white or American-black. She'll be cosmopolitan-a woman of the world. We'll do that, Paul, you and I. I'll do it gladly, Paul, gladly. -Sampson Raphaelson, White Man(1935)

*

I can’t dispute this, but I would wonder about old money vs. new money and whatnot. And I’ll admit that when it comes to race I generally see the glass as half full, because it usually is, so I’d be more prone to look for and find those African Americans who went to Europe and didn’t necessarily find what they needed. While Richard Wright always stated that Paris gave him what he needed, Baldwin asserted that Paris failed Wright as a writer and that going to Paris couldn’t solve the American problem. Thus, Baldwin thought it somewhat cowardly to remain in Europe permanently when work was to be done in America. So, going to Europe worked from some African Americans and not for others.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: WB wanted Prince 2 inject conflict into the movie, Prince didnt want it, race or ethnic issues might have been too heavy 4 the lightness Prince wanted... he took it further 4 GB and didnt even want sex or violence in the film

*

I would love to hear the conversation between the Prince of UTCM and the current Prince or the Prince that wrote “We March,” “The Exodus Has Begun,” “Uncle Sam,” “Paris 1798430,” “Radical Man,” or “U Will B Moved.” I can see why so many fans feel ideologically betrayed by the new Prince. I don’t agree that they should feel that way, but I can understand it…I guess.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: Dont forget the chic beautiful woman of color during the Christopher Traceys Parade section when he is walking thru the market and he picks out the flowers 4 her and kiss her hands. I forgot about the one u mentioned and always remember the 1st one.

*

You got me on that one. I had forgotten about her. And she’s sexy too. Hell, I’d buy her some flowers too if I weren’t scared of my wife. But here’s my question. Does her scene make as big an impact as the black terror woman scene, especially given the history of race in America? I guess on the one hand we can say that the first scene shows that Christopher can find beauty in all women. But given the centuries of attack and demonization, especially artistically, of the black image, does the latter scene innately carry cultural weight or significance, simply because of historical context? And, I’m asking a question, not making a statement. Or to pose the question another way, is it not understandable that many African American viewers would view the epiphany scene with the black woman as the face of terror and wonder if Prince or the casting agent were being influenced, consciously or unconsciously, by centuries of psychological demonization of the black body? Don’t forget that when Jerome Benton was on BET’s Video Soul promoting the film, one African American female caller stated that she was upset about two black men fighting over a white woman. (Of course Benton stated, in Tricky’s voice, “Honey, I was fighting over my money.”) So, clearly many African Americans would bring a certain set of sensibilities to the film, and I do wonder if Prince or someone should have been more cognizant of those sensibilities when casting and shooting the epiphany scene?

UTCM was supposed to be set in the 1940s? I never knew that.

SoulAlive said:

UTCM was supposed to be set in the 1940s? I never knew that.

Yeah, they'd just invented the boombox back then, so it was pretty accurate.

NouveauDance said:

SoulAlive said:

UTCM was supposed to be set in the 1940s? I never knew that.

Yeah, they'd just invented the boombox back then, so it was pretty accurate.

I hear Porsche 911's were really popular in the 40's too.

and of course,a funky song like "Kiss" has a totally 40s sound,doesn't it?

Heheheheee

mimi02 said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

Prince wanted to die in Purple Rain too, or was it that he wanted the Father 2 die

Yeah, that was brought up on the 20th anniversary dvd set. I got the impression that Prince had a serious fascination with death.

I get that same impression He always wanted someone to die at the end of his movies.

SoulAlive said:

mimi02 said:

Yeah, that was brought up on the 20th anniversary dvd set. I got the impression that Prince had a serious fascination with death.

I get that same impression He always wanted someone to die at the end of his movies.

didn't Aura die in Graffiti Bridge as well

TheDigitalGardener said:

NouveauDance said:

Yeah, they'd just invented the boombox back then, so it was pretty accurate.

I hear Porsche 911's were really popular in the 40's too.

lol yeah these things are interesting, maybe like 1725top said: All these years I’ve been thinking that they were going for a more timeless dating that may be rooted in a particular period but then merges other periods,

I could be a combination of all the above, when it comes 2 Erotic City lol

jazzy piano bars songs like OF4S and etherial carnivalesque songs like Heaven might have worked better than Kiss, the style of Love or Money, does that date from the 1960s or 70's

to me it all feels like 1984PR era Prince in the clothing they wore [metallic urban] & seeing them in 'natural' setting like a Barn or wooden fence out near the water and grass, for some reason it works ...Paisley Park. I never actually looked at how certain things in UTCM were historically out of element 4 the 40's

Kiss AnotherLover & Maybe Love or Money can feel out of place with the movie. The other songs fit easily, but this is Prince

No more than Prince could've helped MDNA

1725topp said:

OldFriends4Sale said: it is France in 1940 so I dont know the 'african descendant' population number, nor how many Miamians there were lol

*

I would love to hear the conversation between the Prince of UTCM and the current Prince or the Prince that wrote “We March,” “The Exodus Has Begun,” “Uncle Sam,” “Paris 1798430,” “Radical Man,” or “U Will B Moved.” I can see why so many fans feel ideologically betrayed by the new Prince. I don’t agree that they should feel that way, but I can understand it…I guess.

I always wonder what Prince would be like if he lived in Europe or France particularly for some years

I would love to have a 'real' talk with Prince about race and identity

Life back home depresses me, just another form of slavery
The cost of freedom is anything but free

There ain't nobody got no chains on me

OldFriends4Sale said: I always wonder what Prince would be like if he lived in Europe or France particularly for some years

*

Prince never struck me as the type of African American who would live in Europe or France for an extended time simply because he was so rooted in African American music, even when experimenting in other forms. I think about the wholesale change of replacing the Revolution with a majority black cast or how he always seems to go full circle culturally, always returning, in some way, to soul and funk, and then venturing more, and, while it is obvious he has love for Europe and is inspired by it, I think that his love for African American music and the authentic culture that produced it would keep his feet longing for American soil. Even the jazz musicians that earned their most money and fame in Europe never took full root in Europe because they needed something that Europe couldn’t give them, and I think the same would be true of Prince.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: I would love to have a 'real' talk with Prince about race and identity

*

Wouldn’t we all? I would like for someone to interview the Revolution and all of his former band members to see just how much race was discussed. I find that sometimes people who have multicultural friendships mistake not discussing race as having solved race. So, it would be nice to see what they would have to say, if they would say anything, about how Prince approached race with them and how his approach changed over time. But, because so few journalists did their jobs, we don’t have a lot of meaningful interviews where race is discussed. In 1983 Carol Cooper (An African American female) writes “Prince: Someday Your Prince Will Come” for The Face, and it is an excellent article where the two of them discuss race and religion forthrightly. In fact the Prince in that interview makes the now muted and cryptic Prince seem almost retarded for lack of a better term , but there are not many more like that one. What makes it a great article is although Cooper narrates the interview there is also real discussion. First Cooper narrates: “For the black media, Prince is yet another in a long line of brilliant young turks getting ready to break his back against institutionalized white indifference…becoming just another statement on how the black man must exaggerate and contort his image (as allegory for much of the gratuitous absurdity of being ‘black’ in America) just to be heard.” But, then she asks forthrightly whether Dirty Mind is really him or just contrived for crossover appeal, and he answers: “[My black audience or anyone listening to my first two records knew] it was coming. ‘I’m Yours’ off the first album was a straight up rock jam…And the second album had ‘Bambi,’ which was also written in such a way as not to give the impression that I was a dilettante. So many black bands in the early Seventies diddled with rock guitar just to prove they could. They had no real conviction, but none of my rock jams are contrived that way.”

*

The biggest disappointment with so few insightful articles like Cooper’s is that we will never get a real notion or understand of his transformation or the narrative arc of his transformation. I think we all accept that there is a percentage of Prince that is truth and a percentage that is schtick, and the balance or percentage of each changes as Prince needs them to change. But, good journalism would have been able to narrow that percentage and get more at the truth. Even during that three month period in 80 or 81 when Prince couldn’t keep the lie straight about the race of his parents, I don’t remember reading one article where a journalist asked him about the inconsistencies. And so because the Prince of 2012 may be so different than the Prince of 1978 or 1980 or 1985, the lack of in-depth interviews keeps us from fully knowing this ideological journey. However, I can hope that one day he’ll decide to really address his racial and religious journey. I don’t care to know about his sexual affairs, but, like you, I’d love to have him discuss, in earnest, his racial and religious journey. I do think it will give more insight to the work, unless this has all been just a show, and he is the ultimate puppet master. But, I’ll provide two more quotes from Cooper’s article about religion that show that Prince was more liberal, of course, in the past but even then there was the notion that he could become more traditional as he is today. “In many places in the world today you’re not supposed to fuck just like you’re not supposed to think. Part of thinking for yourself is avoiding people who are going to give you diseases—mental or physical.” “…in ‘Free’ I talk a little more about the freedom of choice between good and evil. No government gave you that, God did. But governments don’t want you to remember that—which is why they put conscientious objectors in jail. But in the war that’s coming there’ll be no way to abstain. Whatever you do you’ll have to be behind one flag or another. My flag is freedom, purple, unconditional love.”

jpnyc said:

Madonna would have made UTCM utterly unwatchable. She’s a horrible actress. The only role she’s managed to pull off was the lead in Evita, which was just a really long Madonna video. If Madonna and Prince collaborated on UTCM it would have been the worst film of the 1980s.

Neither of them are good actors Madonna should have stopped after Evita.Prince's only good movies are Purple Rain and Sign O' The Times.

SoulAlive said:

jpnyc said:

Madonna would have made UTCM utterly unwatchable. She’s a horrible actress. The only role she’s managed to pull off was the lead in Evita, which was just a really long Madonna video. If Madonna and Prince collaborated on UTCM it would have been the worst film of the 1980s.

Neither of them are good actors Madonna should have stopped after Evita.Prince's only good movies are Purple Rain and Sign O' The Times.

I thought she did stop after Evita? and Prince really didn't do any of the small acting parts in SOTT did he? it was mostly the 3 dancers, so it worked lol

SoulAlive said:

jpnyc said:

Madonna would have made UTCM utterly unwatchable. She’s a horrible actress. The only role she’s managed to pull off was the lead in Evita, which was just a really long Madonna video. If Madonna and Prince collaborated on UTCM it would have been the worst film of the 1980s.

Neither of them are good actors Madonna should have stopped after Evita.Prince's only good movies are Purple Rain and Sign O' The Times.

Exactly!! One he wasn't a director and the other he wasn't an actor!!!!

Still love me some Prince, though.....

OldFriends4Sale said:

SoulAlive said:

Neither of them are good actors Madonna should have stopped after Evita.Prince's only good movies are Purple Rain and Sign O' The Times.

I thought she did stop after Evita? and Prince really didn't do any of the small acting parts in SOTT did he? it was mostly the 3 dancers, so it worked lol

Madonna did two movies after Evita.....The Next Best Thing (1999) and Swept Away (2001).I can see why you don't remember 'em.Nobody else does,either

SoulAlive said:

OldFriends4Sale said:

I thought she did stop after Evita? and Prince really didn't do any of the small acting parts in SOTT did he? it was mostly the 3 dancers, so it worked lol

Madonna did two movies after Evita.....The Next Best Thing (1999) and Swept Away (2001).I can see why you don't remember 'em.Nobody else does,either

lol oh right, lol yes I certainly forgot about those

She did good in Girl 6 though;-)

Next Best Thing was week

Swept Away I think she directed/produced from an old Italian classic

the directing was good but she wasn't warm enough, she was in her Brit mode then too

TheDigitalGardener said:

NouveauDance said:

Yeah, they'd just invented the boombox back then, so it was pretty accurate.

I hear Porsche 911's were really popular in the 40's too.

Let's not forget the neon telephones.

steakfinger said:

TheDigitalGardener said:

I hear Porsche 911's were really popular in the 40's too.

Let's not forget the neon telephones.

Now now, jokes aside, Miles Davis' 'You're Under Arrest' specifically dates the film as taking place in 1940.

eyewishuheaven said:

steakfinger said:

Let's not forget the neon telephones.

Now now, jokes aside, Miles Davis' 'You're Under Arrest' specifically dates the film as taking place in 1940.

Um, ok.

UTCM must be where Napoleon Dynamite's writers got their inspiration from, because that is definitely another movie where the characters act/look one decade while having items of another. They dressed like the 70's and early 80's, but Summer danced to NSync. IDK

mimi02 said:

eyewishuheaven said:

Now now, jokes aside, Miles Davis' 'You're Under Arrest' specifically dates the film as taking place in 1940.

Um, ok.

The emoticon that looks like this: indicates that the preceding statement is not intended to be taken seriously.

1725topp said:

OldFriends4Sale said: I always wonder what Prince would be like if he lived in Europe or France particularly for some years

*

Prince never struck me as the type of African American who would live in Europe or France for an extended time simply because he was so rooted in African American music, even when experimenting in other forms. I think about the wholesale change of replacing the Revolution with a majority black cast or how he always seems to go full circle culturally, always returning, in some way, to soul and funk, and then venturing more, and, while it is obvious he has love for Europe and is inspired by it, I think that his love for African American music and the authentic culture that produced it would keep his feet longing for American soil. Even the jazz musicians that earned their most money and fame in Europe never took full root in Europe because they needed something that Europe couldn’t give them, and I think the same would be true of Prince.

*

OldFriends4Sale said: I would love to have a 'real' talk with Prince about race and identity

*

Wouldn’t we all? I would like for someone to interview the Revolution and all of his former band members to see just how much race was discussed. I find that sometimes people who have multicultural friendships mistake not discussing race as having solved race. So, it would be nice to see what they would have to say, if they would say anything, about how Prince approached race with them and how his approach changed over time. But, because so few journalists did their jobs, we don’t have a lot of meaningful interviews where race is discussed. In 1983 Carol Cooper (An African American female) writes “Prince: Someday Your Prince Will Come” for The Face, and it is an excellent article where the two of them discuss race and religion forthrightly. In fact the Prince in that interview makes the now muted and cryptic Prince seem almost retarded for lack of a better term , but there are not many more like that one. What makes it a great article is although Cooper narrates the interview there is also real discussion. First Cooper narrates: “For the black media, Prince is yet another in a long line of brilliant young turks getting ready to break his back against institutionalized white indifference…becoming just another statement on how the black man must exaggerate and contort his image (as allegory for much of the gratuitous absurdity of being ‘black’ in America) just to be heard.” But, then she asks forthrightly whether Dirty Mind is really him or just contrived for crossover appeal, and he answers: “[My black audience or anyone listening to my first two records knew] it was coming. ‘I’m Yours’ off the first album was a straight up rock jam…And the second album had ‘Bambi,’ which was also written in such a way as not to give the impression that I was a dilettante. So many black bands in the early Seventies diddled with rock guitar just to prove they could. They had no real conviction, but none of my rock jams are contrived that way.”

*

The biggest disappointment with so few insightful articles like Cooper’s is that we will never get a real notion or understand of his transformation or the narrative arc of his transformation. I think we all accept that there is a percentage of Prince that is truth and a percentage that is schtick, and the balance or percentage of each changes as Prince needs them to change. But, good journalism would have been able to narrow that percentage and get more at the truth. Even during that three month period in 80 or 81 when Prince couldn’t keep the lie straight about the race of his parents, I don’t remember reading one article where a journalist asked him about the inconsistencies. And so because the Prince of 2012 may be so different than the Prince of 1978 or 1980 or 1985, the lack of in-depth interviews keeps us from fully knowing this ideological journey. However, I can hope that one day he’ll decide to really address his racial and religious journey. I don’t care to know about his sexual affairs, but, like you, I’d love to have him discuss, in earnest, his racial and religious journey. I do think it will give more insight to the work, unless this has all been just a show, and he is the ultimate puppet master. But, I’ll provide two more quotes from Cooper’s article about religion that show that Prince was more liberal, of course, in the past but even then there was the notion that he could become more traditional as he is today. “In many places in the world today you’re not supposed to fuck just like you’re not supposed to think. Part of thinking for yourself is avoiding people who are going to give you diseases—mental or physical.” “…in ‘Free’ I talk a little more about the freedom of choice between good and evil. No government gave you that, God did. But governments don’t want you to remember that—which is why they put conscientious objectors in jail. But in the war that’s coming there’ll be no way to abstain. Whatever you do you’ll have to be behind one flag or another. My flag is freedom, purple, unconditional love.”

I just watched most of the movie again, u should prop check it out. There are blacks colored mulattoes throught the movie

1,) the mulatta type waitress at the Venus de Milo where Christopher works, the one who Tricky kept sending messages thru, shes seen during the Alexis de Paris scene as well

2. ) you can see them throught the daytime & night-time birthday party 4 Mary Sharon

black man playing bass/guitar in the band, colored woman standing behind Mary after she plays the drums, and many more

...oh forgot the mulatto type boy with the other kids playing ball

3.) the mulatta dancer at Venus de Milo also seen in the Girls & Boys section & video Alexa Fioroni

4.) shown about 4 times always together labelled The Jaded 3:colored woman looks almost Indian, French woman & Italian man seen at Marys party, Christopher buys their car 4 Sharon etc

mimi02 said:

eyewishuheaven said:

Now now, jokes aside, Miles Davis' 'You're Under Arrest' specifically dates the film as taking place in 1940.

Um, ok.

UTCM must be where Napoleon Dynamite's writers got their inspiration from, because that is definitely another movie where the characters act/look one decade while having items of another. They dressed like the 70's and early 80's, but Summer danced to NSync. IDK

was there Versace in 1940s?

because Tricky was trying 2 figure out if he was going to wear his...

also were there telephone voice message machines then?

eyewishuheaven said:

mimi02 said:

Um, ok.

The emoticon that looks like this: indicates that the preceding statement is not intended to be taken seriously.

Ok, thanks for sharing.

I just saw UTCM last night on cable. Am I the only one who likes it better than PR? I mean, you can look at both as absolutely ridiculous, but for some reason I prefer UTCM more. I like the attempt to be something more, love the black and white, love Jerome as a supporting character, and prince seems so much more relaxed and a better actor than in PR (not that that's saying much). It's more grand, funnier. I still love PR, of course.

SoulAlive said:

Diana80 said:

Why was Prince always so obsessed with wanting to work with Madonna's limited-talent ass?

First he wanted her to be in UTCM, which she turned down. Then he finally convinces her to do a duet, which became "Love Song" for her Like a Prayer album. Then after that, he wanted her to be in Grafitti Bridge, which she declined. And then in the late 90's, he wanted to duet with her again but she turned him down (hence the daggers in his eyes and refusing to clap when she won a VMA at the '99 VMA Awards).

I just don't get why he wanted to work with her so much. Was it a case of him being used to everyone telling him yes, and when someone actually turned him down, he couldn't handle it?

Prince was/is a huge fan of Madonna.But it makes sense that they didn't work together too often.They both have strong egos and personalities,which could have resulted in alot of ugly drama.Prince likes women that he can control and I don't think Madonna is that kind of woman.

But that's my point - why is it Prince is/was always eager to work with people with limited talent, yet when someone with amazing talent like MJ wanted to work with him, he turned him down? Even if he didn't like "Bad", he could have done something else with him.

It comes off as Prince being scared of competition or someone out-doing him.