Denzel Washington

Home , Robert Townsend (actor), Sean Penn, The Great Debaters

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS VI INTRODUCTION 1

1 STARDOM AND THE POLITICS OF REPRESENTATION 15 2 AFTER BLAXPLOITATION, BEFORE NEW JACK CINEMA 34 3 ACADEMY AWARD-WINNING ACTOR 62 4 ONE OF AMERICA’S FAVOURITE MOVIE STARS 90 5 BLUES DETECTIVES 115 CONCLUSION 135

NOTES 141 BIBLIOGRAPHY 145 FILMOGRAPHY 155 INDEX 158

INTRODUCTION

Star studies are deceptive. They seem like fun, easy projects, when in reality they are arduous ventures beset by countless pitfalls. The actor (whose creative labour produces the performances) can become obscured by the star (associated with existential qualities). It is difficult to accurately assess the industrial, cultural and aesthetic factors that shape audience perspectives and actors’ careers. There are no straightforward ways to connect star studies with accounts, for example, of African-American cinema. Even ‘star image’ is an ambiguous term. Martin Shingler notes that star studies can (and should) consider a host of issues, including ‘a performer’s star qualities and idiolect, their career trajectory … the significance of collaborators … the emergence of their type and star vehicles’ (2012: 183). Beyond this, these studies will show how ‘stars embody, incarnate or personify social groups or historical moments, [and negotiate] ideological contradictions that emerge within or between social groups’; on the flip side, they also aim to clarify ‘how certain types of audiences or members of a specific social group … have engaged with and made use of stars at particular historical moments’ (ibid.). Juggling disparate visions of stardom, these studies consider how a star functions as ‘an industrial marketing device’, a meaning- producing element within films and a working professional involved in the fields of art and performance (Gledhill 1991a: xiii).

I N T R O D U C T I O N 1

A study of Denzel Washington must also address the vast literature on representational politics, stardom and the entertainment industry, and African Americans’ roles in American popular culture. It should consider his more than forty leading roles in films released over several decades, work that has led to: hours of film; scores of reviews, interviews and articles connected to each film; an abundance of chat show interviews, award show speeches and fan videos. His career and performances are analysed in the popular press, biographies (including several for young readers) and studies by scholars such as Donald Bogle and Melvin Donalson. As in commentary about other film stars, articles by fans and the press tend to discuss Washington’s performances as windows into his actual identity. A small set of details about his personality, beliefs and private life is recirculated by entertainment news, fan clubs and the websites of individual fans. In most instances, fan commentary is consistent with the public image crafted by Washington’s professional publicity team. With fans and journalists focused on the circumscribed and mostly scandal-free details about Washington’s private life, his film roles – and acting awards – are especially important aspects of his public image. With details about his personal life pared down to agent-authorised information, Washington’s off-screen life has not generated a significant distance between the star and his films. Instead, audiences seem inclined to see Washington as a reflection of his well-managed public bio and his films, especially in regular-guy roles. As with other stars, one can, and I will, discuss Washington’s star image as an evolving, figurative, discursive image reflecting ‘film roles, publicity, promotion and gossip’ associated with the actor; his star image can be understood as an ‘intertextual phenomenon born out of the actor’s previous roles, various filmic properties and publicity’, which is distinct from the actor and the fictional roles he has played (Shingler 2012: 183, 43). However, the close connection between Washington’s roles and the public’s ideas

2 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

about him might make it useful for future studies to employ other terms used in star studies, such as picture personality or persona. Richard deCordova makes a distinction between star image and picture personality, which emerges from ‘a history of appearances in films’ and amounts to ‘a personality gleaned [primarily] from those appearances’ (1990: 92). Similarly, Christine Gledhill separates star image from persona. She finds that ‘the major sites for elaborating star personae exist outside films in studio promotion departments, publicity agencies, newspaper and broadcast journalism, TV chat shows, film criticism, and so on’ (1991b: 217). By comparison, the star image ‘is spun off from the persona and film roles, both condensing and dispersing desires, meanings, values and styles that are current in the culture’ (ibid.). Noting considerations raised by Richard Dyer and Steven Heath, Gledhill observes that a star image is not only ‘fragmented and open to contradiction … the rise of particular stars can be traced to their condensation of values felt to be under threat or in flux at a particular moment in time’ (ibid.). Thus, only some stars should be discussed in terms of a star image that can ‘incarnate or embody ideological values, coming to define specific moments in history’ (Shingler 2012: 149). Other studies could examine Washington’s roles and public image to determine if one should discuss his star persona rather than star image. They could consider the degree to which his stardom captures a moment in history, and so warrants analysis as a star image in the narrow sense. Paul Robeson’s multidimensional career has been seen as embodying the complexities of ‘blackness and masculinity’ in the pre-civil rights era (Dyer 1986: x). Sidney Poitier has been seen as ‘an icon of the American postwar integrationist movement and black middle-class masculinity’ (Shingler 2012: 149). Washington could be comparably significant. Donalson sees Washington’s career expanding the complexity of roles associated with ‘black masculinity, achieving [the] normality, depth, and

I N T R O D U C T I O N 3

humanity too often excised from earlier decades of extreme representations’ (2012: 84). I share Donalson’s view that Washington’s ‘contributions to and effect upon the images of black men have been crucial, significant, and historic’ (2012: 84), and see several reasons why his work has had an impact. Looking at Washington’s career alongside the numerous African-American musicians, athletes, writers, politicians and even academics prominent in mainstream American society, one could argue that his star image resonates with many audiences because it reflects the values and experiences of what Trey Ellis termed in 1989 the New Black Aesthetic (NBA), developed by the rising number of cultural mulattoes ‘educated by a multi-racial mix of cultures’ who grew up as the first generation of African Americans not to have their lives defined by legalised segregation (2003: 189). While Washington is on the early cusp of the NBA generation, born in 1954 (whereas, for example, Spike Lee was born in 1957 and Ellis in 1962), his image reflects tropes and conditions entirely different from those shaping the public images of Sidney Poitier (b. 1927) or Bill Cosby (b. 1937). Factors shaping Washington’s career choices have caused his image to reflect a complex intertwining of Black Nationalist and black bourgeois perspectives. Still sharing those values, work by younger NBA artists like John Singleton (b. 1968) sometimes reveals the significant influence of figures like Ice Cube (b. 1969) by focusing on urban environments and the oppositional stance of gangsta culture. Thus, there are various iterations of the New Black Aesthetic; contrasting and evolving perspectives on Washington’s career reflect shifting views of NBA masculinity and identity, which are open to contradiction because they exist ‘somewhere between the poles of … the race man and the nigga, … the true civil rights generation and … the hip hop generation’ (Boyd 2002: 6). I will let others decide if Washington’s public image symbolises, in some singular way, notions of race, gender and sexuality in the

4 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

post-civil rights era, and so is a star image, narrowly defined. However, throughout the book, I will explore the cultural and industrial factors that have led to Washington’s success in mainstream American cinema, and prompted divergent responses to his identities as a black matinee idol, award-winning actor and commercial success. To balance my discussions that frame Washington as a cultural sign, I will also examine his performances as ‘signifiers … that are patterned into structures that have meaning for the spectator’ (Butler 1991: 11). Focusing on any star’s image or body as a single sign obscures meanings created by the actor’s performance choices. Given Washington’s star image, one needs to analyse roles and performances that have led him to be known and marketed as an Academy Award-winning actor. Washington is a star performer and prestige star whose public image, financial success, critical acclaim, cultural significance and industry position are linked in some way to public recognition of his acting ability. I will inevitably discuss Washington as a person with existential traits, if only to acknowledge that like any star, the path to recognition has been ‘long and arduous, requiring patience, stamina and determination as well as talent and star quality’ (Shingler 2012: 120). Yet I aim to analyse Washington as a performer, in a way that is comparable to discussing John McLaughlin as a guitarist or Ozzie Smith as a baseball player. My focus is on evidence of skill, technical proficiency and accomplishments that result from preparation and imagination, as well as the professional’s ability and labour to excel in an area of endeavour. However, more than with guitarists or baseball players, an actor’s work is obscured by comments about a star’s personality and fictional roles. In addition, guitarists and ball players reveal their skill through flamboyant, virtuoso performances, while the crucial aspects of a great acting performance might never catch audience attention. It is difficult to locate salient features of an actor’s performances if the star creates characters using their own repertoire of physical and

I N T R O D U C T I O N 5

vocal expression. Separating stars’ abilities as actors from their personality traits is tricky, insofar as great performances reflect: physical grace; ability to physicalise disparate individuals; commitment to physical and vocal training; imagination to understand characters; discipline to prepare for performances and remain focused during production. Those challenges lead most accounts to discuss personality traits; Douglas Brode opens his study of Washington by quoting the star’s statement: ‘What people write about me is who they are, and what they think I am’ (1997: xi). Brode then explains: ‘what follows should be taken, as Denzel himself would insist, for what it is: one person’s perception of any elusive human being who remains, regardless of what anyone writes, his own man’ (ibid.). Washington’s statement is a reminder that publicity and his roles in historical dramas (often biopics), crime stories (often detective thrillers), action films and family melodramas do not necessarily reveal anything about him as a person. It also suggests the need to study what Washington as an actor has done to establish and maintain his status as a star performer. This includes his off-screen labour surrounding choice of roles, forging good working and business relations with other film professionals, etc. It involves time spent preparing for parts, so that his physical and vocal details in a performance create a distinct character who has identifiable needs, goals and plans. It entails labour on set to ensure that performance choices illuminate the characters’ thoughts and feelings. It involves the ability to identify roles that would allow for moments that create ‘an awareness of a performer’s skills and talents’ (Lovell 2003: 264–5). It also requires an awareness of his brand (high-quality film performer) and the ability to determine when and to what degree his performances should include signature physical markers (smile and stride) so that the roles are legible to fans as belonging to his body of work. Facing the challenge of talking about a star’s work, Chris Nickson begins his book on ‘the consummate actor’ who has become

6 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

‘a bona fide star’ by saying: ‘in telling the story of Denzel Washington, there are really two tales to be told – that of the man himself, his career and life, and also that of the lot of the black actor, and black man, in America today’ (1996: 7, 8). Nickson’s thoughtful observation highlights the thin line separating person as actor and person as member of society. It is also a reminder that star studies of Washington must negotiate complex questions of audience reception. Dyer’s observations about Robeson and his audiences suggest factors to consider; he explains that it was not a matter of blacks seeing Robeson ‘one way and whites the other’, but instead that there were ‘discourses developed by whites in white culture and by blacks in black culture which made a different sense of the same phenomenon’ (1986: 70). Dyer sees a ‘consistency in the statements, images, and texts, produced on the one hand by blacks and on the other by whites, that makes it reasonable to refer to black and white discourses’ (ibid.). He also recognises that ‘there may have been blacks who have thought and felt largely through [white] discourses and vice versa’ (ibid.). In Robeson’s case, blacks and whites seemed to value ‘the same things – spontaneity, emotion, naturalness – yet giving them a different implication. Black discourses [saw] them as contributions to the development of society, white as enviable qualities that only blacks have’ (Dyer 1986: 79). In Washington’s case, the qualities considered by black and white audiences would be quite different, in that he is associated with integrity, personal appeal and self-possession. Although I do consider various associations between Washington’s image and New Black Aesthetic values, the ostensibly contradictory nature of NBA identity makes audience responses to his star image a subject that warrants future research. Similarly, while my analysis outlines ways that different audiences make sense of Washington’s stardom, his career is so extensive and the complexity of audience responses is so great that more studies are warranted. The degree to which Washington’s qualities are seen as signs of

I N T R O D U C T I O N 7

individual achievement also warrants more analysis – to consider the conventions of mainstream stardom, ways that the history of slavery is elided, and the degree to which various iterations and interpretations of black masculinity have influenced (white) mainstream representations of masculinity. For now, it seems important to note that observers employ different frames of reference and interpret Washington’s films differently. Richard Corliss describes Washington’s directorial debut, Antwone Fisher (2002), as having ‘the thoughtfulness, the heroic withholding of rage that Washington the actor has lent to so many of his characters’ (2003: 54). He then compares Washington to other star-directors, George Clooney, Sean Penn, Ethan Hawke, Robert Redford and Kevin Costner, missing comparisons with black actors turned directors such as Bill Duke, Carl Franklin, Robert Townsend and Forest Whitaker. Illustrating a different perspective, Bogle ends a discussion of Washington’s performances in Crimson Tide (Scott, 1995) and Courage under Fire (Zwick, 1996) by saying: ‘Race was almost an afterthought in these Washington films, although African American audiences often saw a racial subtext’ (2004: 424–5). These two examples do not provide the type of straightforward evidentiary information Bogle’s remark might suggest. As in Robeson’s time, in the post-civil rights era there could be African Americans who see Washington in terms provided by (white) mainstream press and white audiences who see him in terms articulated by various black media outlets. As Manthia Diawara proposes, ‘Black spectator’ and ‘resisting spectator’ can be used interchangeably, in that ‘just as some Blacks identify with Hollywood’s images of Blacks, some White spectators, too, resist the racial representations of dominant cinema’ (1993a: 211). Challenging that characterisation, bell hooks argues that ‘resisting spectatorship … does not adequately describe the terrain of Black female spectatorship’, because black women ‘create alternative texts, ones that are born not solely in reaction against’ mainstream

8 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

representations (1993: 300). Discussing such debates about spectatorship, Tommy Lott concludes that the ‘disagreement between hooks and [Michele] Wallace over the question of whether black women spectators experienced identification or rupture … indicates the major shortcoming of reception-based criticism, namely, its reliance on quasi-empirical claims, and a-priori arguments, regarding the responses of black spectators’ (1997: 295). Lott’s insight applies to statements about any spectators grouped according to abstract notions of identity. Despite knowing that quasi-empirical claims are suspect, I will inevitably discuss the views of different abstract audiences as I work at the intersection of star studies and representational politics. Yet by analysing Washington’s skills as an actor and businessman alongside the intractable realities of corporate Hollywood and racially divided America, I hope to continue the thread of academic enquiries into stardom, race and performance.1 The book considers Washington’s work in relation to African- American cinema, which has, like American independent film and post-studio-era cinema, been identified with directors. Scholars’ focus on New Black Cinema as a director’s medium, and on 1970s Blaxploitation films and 90s New Jack Cinema as unique efforts to express ‘an authentic black cinematic voice’, has sometimes made Washington’s mainstream stardom seem irrelevant (Massood 2008: 102). Identifying contrasts between New Black Cinema and Washington’s career, Esther Iverem notes that Washington’s ‘general releases such as The Bone Collector, Courage Under Fire, and Crimson Tide [replicate] all of the ebony-and-ivory buddy films with Martin Lawrence, Chris Tucker, Danny Glover, or Wesley Snipes’ (2007: 163). Capturing the often diverging focus of star studies and black film scholarship, Iverem observes: ‘We love Denzel but we wouldn’t call any of those films a “Black” film’ (ibid.). There are times when Washington’s work as an actor (and director) directly intersects with debates concerning black cinema.

I N T R O D U C T I O N 9

David Leonard compares Training Day (Fuqua, 2001) to Antwone Fisher (Washington, 2002), finding that both ‘legitimize the dominant social order … by playing on racialized fears, moral panics, and societal yearnings for discipline and order’ (2006: 24). He sees Antwone Fisher ‘fulfilling hegemonic visions of blackness’ and replicating ‘dominant views of the military as … the source of opportunity for all Americans’ (ibid.: 44). By comparison, discussing the Black film movement’s ‘drive for Black people to tell our own stories’, Iverem argues that this ‘drive is what sets apart films like Malcolm X, Antwone Fisher, and Hotel Rwanda from movies, even if they have merit, such as Cry Freedom, Mississippi Burning, or Monster’s Ball’ (2007: 579). She lists Antwone Fisher as her favourite film of 2002, and includes it, along with Malcolm X and Glory, in her list of ‘the fiercest’ of the ‘New Wave’ Black Films released between 1986 and 2006 (ibid.: 599, 601). Discussions throughout the book will examine Washington’s public image in light of this sort of contrasting opinion. For example, to describe his work and its relationship to New Black Cinema, I discuss ways that perspectives on Washington’s stardom and his roles in Spike Lee’s Mo’ Better Blues (1990), Malcolm X (1992), He Got Game (1998) and Inside Man (2006) reflect conflicting and evolving perspectives on Lee as a director. On the one hand, Washington has been identified with Lee when critics see the director as complicit ‘with the very systems he critiques’, selling ‘movie tickets and [keeping] protests at a minimum by dispensing pseudo-solutions and pseudo-explanations of underclass plight’ (Rhines 1996: 130, 135). On the other, when critics view a film like Malcolm X as ‘a powerful marker of the hopes and possibilities of the new black film wave’, Washington’s work has been valued and the film is thought to represent ‘both Lee’s and Denzel Washington’s best efforts at black filmmaking’ (Guerrero 1993: 201). I will also consider how conflicting views of Washington are related, at least in part, to people’s different perceptions of the

1 0 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

INDEX

Note: Page numbers in bold indicate detailed analyses; those in italics denote illustrations; n = endnote.

A acting methods cont. African-American film Academy Awards Stone, Robinson executives 15 African-American (Fordham African-American actors and actresses University) 45 musicians as model 19, 39, 63 Tucker, Patrick 107 of performance controversy action films 6, 30, 89, 23–4 surrounding The 91, 92, 102, 104, African-American roles Hurricane 29, 63–4 107–9, 113 in film debates about award acting style 104–8 influence of US Office for Training Day actor, in relation to star of War Information 63–4 1–2, 5–7, 9, 13–14, 37–8 significance for 26, 52–3, 61, 75, 95, limited casting Washington’s star 97, 136, 137 opportunities 44 image 15, 18, 28, 29, African-American see also censorship; 30, 58, 62, 68, 72, cinema 1, 9, 65, studio era 89, 136 115 Allen, Flo 36 Academy of Motion Black film 9, 10, 11, American Conservatory Picture Arts and 22, 66, 116, 119, Theatre (ACT) 46, Sciences 15, 68, 91 132 49 acting methods Black New Wave American Gangster Adler, Stella 27, 91 65–6, 116 (2007) 31, 33, 58, compared to New Black Cinema 9, 62, 90, 92, 98–100, Sanford Meisner 10, 22, 29, 60, 65 101, 108, 113, 117, and Lee Strasberg New Jack Cinema 9, 136 45–6 34, 120 Antwone Fisher (2002) Ball, William African-American crime 8, 10, 15, 93, 136 (American fiction 122–3 see Aronson, Ruth 36 Conservatory also ethnic crime Attenborough, Richard Theatre) 46 fiction 49

1 5 8 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

B Blaxploitation 9, 22, 60, Clooney, George 8, 11, Baker, Houston A., Jr 71, 99, 119 19, 52 116 blues detectives see Corliss, Richard 8 Ball, William 46 black noir Cosby, Bill 4, 36, 64 Baraka, Amiri 20, 66 Bogle, Donald 2, 8, 26, The Cosby Show Berry, Halle 22, 63 30, 35, 48, 68, 86, (1984–92) 40 Bingham, Dennis 67, 87 Courage under Fire 68 The Bone Collector (1996) 8, 9, 28, 32, biopics 6, 27, 31, 46, (1999) 9, 28, 32, 90, 90, 93, 108, 109, 66–8, 77, 78, 80, 89, 116, 117, 121–4 110–12, 112, 113, 91, 92, 113 The Book of Eli (2010) 136, 139 Black film see African- 15, 92, 136 Crimson Tide (1995) American cinema Boyd, Todd 11, 21, 66 8, 9, 16, 28, 30, 32, black masculinity 3–4, Boyz N the Hood (1991) 90, 91, 102–4, 104, 7–8, 11–12, 23–5, 29, 36, 120 114 26–7, 60–1, 123, 139 Brando, Marlon 23, 99 Cripps, Thomas 66 Black Nationalism 2, Breen, Joseph 38, 40 crossover 27, 104 see also New Brode, Douglas 6, 18, directors 20 Black Aesthetic 28, 42, 141n1 films 20, 66, 92 black noir 115, 119–20, (Ch. 2) stars 11–12, 19–21, 121, 123, 125, Brown v. Board of 30, 64–5, 139 126–7, 129, 130–1, Education (1954) 38, Cruise, Tom 28 134, 136, 143n1 39, 60, 129 Cry Freedom (1987) 10, (Ch. 5) 18, 27–8, 31, 36, 45, acting style 117–19, C 49–50, 50, 52–3, 55, 124 Cagney, James 99 59, 65, 68, 71, 92, black perspective in Carbon Copy (1981) 20, 136 115–17 36, 42–4, 43 blues detectives 115, censorship, of D 116, 118–19, 123–4 miscegenation and Dandridge, Dorothy 38, contemporary black black romance 141n1 (Introduction) cinema 119, 120 38–40, 52, 54, 56–8, Davis, Viola 51 detective thrillers 72, 74 deCordova, Richard 3, 122–3 Checkmates (1988) 50 117 ethnic crime fiction civil rights era, Déjà Vu (2006) 31, 32, 119–20 movement and values 91, 96, 102, 107–8, silent and studio-era 4, 37, 39, 57, 71, 74, 107, 113 films 119 142n2 Demme, Jonathan 32, Washington’s roles in post-civil rights era 121 115–18, 121–31, 4–5, 8, 14, 139 Denby, David 97 133–4 pre-civil rights era 3 De Niro, Robert 19

I N D E X 1 5 9

detective thrillers see family melodramas 6 The Great Debaters black noir see also middlebrow (2007) 15, 17, 31, Devil in a Blue Dress dramas 92, 93, 133–4, 136 (1995) 12, 20, 29, Fences (2010) 18, 51 Guerrero, Ed 68–9, 32, 115, 117, 118, Flight (2012) 18, 62, 118 120, 121, 129–32, 92, 97–8, 113, 136, 131, 133, 137, 144n2 143n4 (Ch. 4) H Diawara, Manthia 8, Flory, Dan 82, 83, 84, Hanks, Tom 17, 18, 28, 120 119, 120, 121 33, 51, 74 Donalson, Melvin 2, 3, Fonda, Henry 60 Harris, polls on 4, 25, 67 Fordham University 45, America’s Favourite Duke, Bill 8 46, 49, 86, 142n3 Movie Stars 17, 90 Dyer, Richard 3, 7, 37 For Queen and Country Hawke, Ethan 8, 12, 24, (1989) 36, 55–8, 56, 81–2, 85 E 57, 65, 71 Hays Code 38, 40 see Ebert, Roger 54, 110 Foxx, Jamie 19, 39, 63 also censorship; Edwards, James 38 franchise films 33, 102, studio era Ellis, Trey 4, 40, 64 see 138, 144n2 Heart Condition (1990) also New Black Franklin, Carl 8, 20, 32, 42, 71, 110 Aesthetic 115, 120 He Got Game (1998) The Equalizer (2014) Freeman, Morgan 18, 10, 25–6, 26, 29, 29, 32, 90, 92, 144n2 19, 35, 63, 122, 31, 32, 33, 132, 136 ethnic crime fiction 132–3 Hernández, Juano 38 31–2, 116, 119–20, Fuller, Charles 47 Himes, Chester 116, 129, 143n1 (Ch. 5) Fuqua, Antoine 32, 85 119–20 see also black noir hip hop 4, 21, 25, 27 G Hoffman, Philip F Gabbard, Krin 11, 22–5 Seymour 19 Fallen (1998) 32, 116, gangsta rap 25, 36, 99 hooks, bell 8, 9, 72, 73 117, 121, 122, 127–9, Gledhill, Christine 3 Horne, Lena 38 128 Glory (1989) 10, 18, Hudlin brothers 71 family 31, 44, 53, 72, 27–8, 32, 33, 34–6, Hughes brothers 71 74, 76, 80, 99, 100 35, 52, 55, 58–9, 63, The Hurricane (1999) black family dramas as 65, 71, 92, 136, 18, 29, 32, 62, 63, American family 141n1 (Ch. 2) 64, 65, 77–80, 79, 80, dramas 113 Goldberg, Whoopi 20, 86, 91, 93, 136 black family life 29, 22, 63, 71, 143n2 58–9, 110, 111, 127 Gooding, Cuba, Jr 22, I importance for blues 63 Ice Cube 4, 29, 36 detectives 123, Gossett, Lou, Jr 63 independent films 9, 11, 125–8 Grant, Cary 27–8, 110 19, 22, 36, 119, 136

1 6 0 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

Inside Man (2006) 10, M Muni, Paul 27 32, 33, 90, 96–7, McDaniel, Hettie 61 Murphy, Eddie 18, 19, 113 McDonagh, Maitland 20, 33, 60, 72, 141n1 Isaacs, Cheryl Boone 105 (Introduction) 15 Mailer, Norman 23 Murray, Albert 116 Iverem, Esther 9, 10, Malcolm X (1992) 10, 35, 63, 90–1, 93, 96, 18, 28, 31, 32, 62, N 112 63–4, 65–70, 69, 70, NAACP 37, 44 71, 77, 113, 120, 136 Image Awards 18, 34, J The Manchurian 133, 143n3 Jackson, Samuel L. 19, Candidate (2004) Nair, Mira 58 92, 122 30, 32, 121, 136 Negro Ensemble Jewison, Norman 32, Man on Fire (2004) 12, Company 47 47, 66, 77 32, 90, 91, 105, 113, New Black Aesthetic John Q (2002) 90, 91, 136, 143n1 (Ch. 4) (NBA) 4, 7, 25, 27, 93, 108, 109, 112–13, Mapp, Edward 63, 41, 57, 64–5, 67, 73, 113 142n1 85, 88, 89, 104, 139 journalism, colour Marshall, Penny 110, New Black Cinema see barrier in 73 143n2 African-American Julius Caesar (2005) 50, middlebrow dramas 6, cinema 51 64, 66, 68, 78, 80, New Jack Cinema see 109–14, 133 African-American K The Mighty Quinn cinema Kauffmann, Stanley 99 (1989) 36, 53–5, 54, Newman, Paul 19, 28 King, Barry 137, 138 56, 57, 58, 65, 71, 92 Nickson, Chris 6, 7, 34, Klawans, Stuart 137 Mississippi Masala 35, 49, 60, 70–1, (1991) 12, 32, 36, 141n1 (Ch. 2) L 58, 59–60, 71, 92, 136 No Way Out (1950) 38, LaSalle, Mick 78, 80, Mitchum, Robert 54, 119 99 118 Lee, Spike 4, 10, 25, Mo’ Better Blues (1990) O 28, 32, 33, 50, 58, 10, 12, 28, 32, 36, Obama, Barak 18 63, 66, 67, 71, 120, 50, 58–9, 59, 71, 92, Out of Time (2003) 32, 132 136 93, 121, 136 Leon, Kenny 51 Mosley, Walter 32, 115, Leonard, David 10, 83 129, 132 P Limato, Ed 36, 52–3, Much Ado about Nothing Pacino, Al 99 55, 71, 85, 92, 137 (1993) 41 The Pelican Brief (1993) see also Washington, Mundy Lane 28, 30, 65, 72–3, 74, agents and managers Entertainment 15, 76, 77, 86, 90, 92, Lott, Tommy 9 110, 115 102, 136, 139

I N D E X 1 6 1

Philadelphia (1993) Schultz, Michael 20, 42 T 32, 65, 72, 73–6, 76, Scorsese, Martin 18 The Taking of Pelham 77, 86, 90, 92, 102, Scott, Tony 32, 91, 102, 123 (2009) 32, 91, 110 105, 107–9 93, 97, 108–9, 109 Poitier, Sidney 3, 4, 20, Shingler, Martin 1 Taylor, Clyde 48 22, 38–9, 42, 54, 55, The Siege (1998) 28, 31, Taylor, Regina 111, 63, 85–7, 92, 119 32, 76–7, 136 143n3 post-studio era 9, Singleton, John 4, 36, Thomas, Billy (Boys 10–11, 14, 15, 19, 71 Club, Mount 32–3, 137, 138, 139 Smith, Susan 141n1 Vernon) 87 see also studio era (Introduction) Townsend, Robert 8 Power (1986) 42 Smith, Valerie 42–3 The Tragedy of Richard The Preacher’s Wife Smith, Will 18, 19, 20, III (1990) 50 (1996) 108, 109, 22, 92, 141n1 Training Day (2001) 10, 110, 113, 136 (Introduction) 12, 18, 24, 30, 32, Pryor, Richard 20, 44, Snipes, Wesley 9, 29, 62–3, 65, 80–5, 83, 60 39 85, 90–3, 100–1, 121, Soitos, Stephen F. 116 129, 136 R A Soldier’s Play Travolta, John 11, 109 A Raisin in the Sun (1981–3) 44–5, Tucker, Patrick 107 (2014) 51 47–8, 60 2 Guns (2013) 16, 17, Redford, Robert 8, 28 A Soldier’s Story (1984) 92 Remember the Titans 32, 44–5, 48–9, 48, (2000) 30, 31, 90, 53, 55, 59, 77, 104 U 92, 93–5, 94, 114, Spacey, Kevin 29 Unstoppable (2010) 32, 117, 136 star image 1–5, 37, 60 91–2, 97, 108 Ricochet (1991) 32, see also Washington, US Ofﬁce of War 42–3, 71, 121 star image Information (OWI) Robeson, Paul 3, 7–8, star studies 1, 3, 7, 9, 37 12, 20, 39, 142n2 13, 141n1 Robinson, Bill (Introduction) V ‘Bojangles’ 27 Sterritt, David 19 Vasey, Ruth 40 Rudin, Scott 51 Stone, Robinson 45 Virtuosity (1995) 32, Streep, Meryl 18, 19 116, 117, 121, 122, S studio era 27–8, 37–40, 124–7, 126 Safe House (2012) 30, 42, 43, 52, 54, 58, 90, 92–3, 100–2, 113, 67–8, 138 see also W 114, 136, 143n1 post-studio era Washington, Denzel (Ch. 4) Subers, Ray 97, 98, Academy Award- St Elsewhere (1982–8) 100 winning actor 5, 33, 13, 41–2, 44, 52 Sung, Wendy 63 62, 85, 102, 142n1

1 6 2 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

Washington, Denzel Washington, Denzel Washington, Denzel cont. cont. cont. acting ability 5, 15, box-office success fans 2, 6, 17, 28, 18, 22, 35–6, 43, 45, 16–17, 30, 51, 80–1, 51–2, 135 55–6, 59–61, 78–80, 90, 95, 112, 113, high-quality brand 97–8, 136 134 6, 33, 62, 65, 90, ability to establish career in the 1980s 91, 95, 97, 98, 102, emotional intimacy 15, 33, 36–61, 64, 68, 138 28, 52, 72, 91 72, 92 impersonations of ability to establish career in the 1990s 18 point of 12, 13, 19, 21, 25, mainstream American identification 28, 58, 61, 64, 67, cinema 5, 11, 33 64–5, 75–7, 110, 71, 92, 116, 119, and Malcolm X 27, 112, 124 122, 139 46–8, 67–70, 89, 104, acting approach career since 2000 135 45–6, 49–50, 77–8, 16, 30, 90, 92–3, matinee idol 5, 27, 36, 81–3, 87–8, 91, 95, 138 see also 41, 52, 54, 57, 61, 99, 102, 104–5, 107, Academy Awards, 72, 135, 139 117–18, 124, 136–7, significance for and Melvin Tolson 140 Washington’s star 31, 133, 135 acting awards 2, 16, image most trusted people in 18, 33, 34, 47, 51, classic movie star/ America 18 62, 72, 89, 90 stardom 16, 26, 36, New Black Aesthetic and actors with 53, 55, 61, 134 image and prodigious talent crossover star 11–12, masculinity 4, 7, 25, 19 19–20, 30, 64–5, 27, 41, 57, 64–5, 85, African-American 139 88–9, 139 cinema 9, 65 director 8, 9, 15, 19, prestige star 5, 62 agents and managers 133–4, 136 producer or executive 2, 13, 19, 36, 45, diverse audience 17, producer 15, 110, 52–3, 55, 71, 85, 92, 41, 101, 108 115, 136 137 diversiﬁed portfolio public speeches 2, 16, America’s favourite 72, 92, 114, 115 36, 85–6 movie star 17, 90, entertainer of the year romantic leading man 91, 114 16 15, 18–19, 26, 27–8, bankable star 15, 17, entrepreneur 15, 36, 52–4, 56, 58–61, 51, 134, 139 138 65, 72, 92, 108, 135 black urban Everyman or regular and Rubin Carter 29, professional 42, 72, guy 2, 74, 76, 108, 77–80, 89, 135 73, 77, 89, 102, 123, 109–10, 111, 112, ‘sexiest man alive’ 16, 139 114, 139 135

I N D E X 1 6 3

Washington, Denzel Washington, Denzel Whitaker, Forest 8, 19, cont. cont. 20, 39, 63 signature or trademark television 13, 19, Wilkerson, Isabel 137 6, 16, 45, 95, 101 41–2, 44, 45, 52, 60 Willis, Bruce 11, 77, star image 2–5, 7, 27, theatre 36, 44–8, 50–1, 105 36, 39, 60, 62, 64, 60, 85, 88, 138–9 Wilma (1977) 45 91, 115, 137, 139 Washington, Pauletta Wooten, Sara McIntosh star performer 5, 6, 135 45 18–19, 26, 33, 52, 62, Waters, Ethel 38 64, 65, 91, 95, 97, 102 When the Chickens Come Z and Steve Biko 27, Home to Roost (1981) Zwick, Ed 32, 36 31, 49–50, 78, 138 46–7

1 6 4 D E N Z E L WA S H I N G T O N

List of illustrations

While considerable effort has been made to correctly identify the copyright holders, this has not been possible in all cases. We apologise for any apparent negligence and any omissions or corrections brought to our attention will be remedied in any future editions.

He Got Game, © Touchstone Pictures; Glory, TriStar Pictures; Carbon Copy, Hemdale Holdings/RKO Pictures/First City Films; A Soldier’s Story, Columbia Pictures Corporation/Delphi Productions; Cry Freedom, Universal City Studios Inc.; The Mighty Quinn, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Pictures Inc./Star Partners II/A & M Films; For Queen and Country, Zenith Productions/Atlantic Entertainment Group/Working Title Films; Mo’ Better Blues, © Universal Pictures; Malcolm X, © Warner Bros./© Largo International N.V.; The Pelican Brief, © Warner Bros.; Philadelphia, © TriStar Pictures; The Hurricane, Azoff Entertainment; Training Day, © Warner Bros./© Village Roadshow Pictures; Remember the Titans, Disney Enterprises Inc./© Jerry Bruckheimer Inc.; American Gangster, © Universal Studios; Crimson Tide, © Don Simpson/© Jerry Bruckheimer Productions/© Hollywood Pictures Company/© Walt Disney Pictures and Television; Déjà Vu, © Touchstone Pictures Inc./© Jerry Bruckheimer Films; The Taking of Pelham 123, © Columbia Pictures Industries Inc.; Courage under Fire, Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation/Fox 2000 Pictures/Davis Entertainment Company; John Q, New Line Cinema/Bourg/Koules Productions/Evolution Entertainment; Virtuosity, © Paramount Pictures Corporation; Fallen, Turner Pictures/Atlas Entertainment; Devil in a Blue Dress, © TriStar Pictures Inc.