Review of Soul Man

Soul Man (1986)
5/10
Seems like they rushed out the script and left out the soul.
21 April 2021
Warning: Spoilers
While there are definitely some very funny moments in this well-meaning social comedy, it fails in 1986 terms, not completely, and the desperation is very apparent in 2021. C. Thomas Howell looks more like a cheap store mannequin in alleged tanning pills as he's overdosed on to look black so he can get a scholarship when his father (James B. Sikking) reveals that he can't afford to send him to Harvard Law School. But once there, he makes himself look like an absolute fool by trying to act the opposite of who he is, and when he gets into trouble, it's difficult to sympathize with him even from the perspective that if he was indeed black, he would be receiving unfair treatment.

When he makes an absolute fool out of himself with single mom Rae Dawn Chong, he comes to realize that he has to try to be more natural, and finds out that some of the white female students are fetishists, as are their rich mothers. That becomes very clear when he is invited over for dinner by Melora Hardin and the audience sees her mother having lustful fantasies while her father, Leslie Nielsen (who owns his apartment building) has racist thoughts and is furious over him seeing his daughter. Julia Louise Dreyfus has a small role as a rather obnoxious student, and her scenes are best dealt with by hitting the fast forward button.

A recurring scene in the film has white male Harvard students telling racist jokes and Howell looking at them and disgust and getting a fake apology, basically responding no problem. It's a thoughtful series of scenes that does help alleviate some of the uncomfortability of Howell's disguise that doesn't really work. He's also arrested for driving his own car, and of course his license has a picture of a white man, so he ends up in prison where he is beaten up for no real reason.

It's a shame that this film fails to work because it certainly is well-meaning. But good intentions are, as you know, a pathway to somewhere nobody wants to go, and what could have exposed bigotry doesn't fully work. Still, it does have the ability to show the ridiculousness of racism, and even if you don't really get that from the script, the thought process after watching the film (or during) can really get that process started. One thing that they got right is that a good percentage of the white characters in this film end up being either ridiculously bigoted or outlandishly liberal and pandering, like an eighties version of Maude.

To add authority to the film, veteran stage actor James Earl Jones plays a Harvard law professor and is strong and no nonsense and strict. It's obvious that most of his students respect him for who he is but he too would face systematic racism if he didn't have the position that he does, and his humanity in dealing with aiding Howell in adjusting is admirable and makes his character more likable. Nielsen is far from his Frank Drebbin role here, a complete jerk.

This film does succeed in making you wonder how much things have really changed, if at all, and the one thing you do see happening is that Howell's character will go from being a real jerk to being enlightened in a way that brings out the hidden humanity deep inside him. I just wish the makeup that they used didn't make Howell look so plastic, but regardless of who they cast, this was bound to create controversy.
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed