Big Momma and Madea

Does it disturb anyone else that there are two movies out (Big Momma's House 2 and Madea's Family Reunion) featuring black men masquerading as heavyset older black women? What is this about?

I didn't see Big Momma's House (and I'm planning not to). I did see, Diary of a Mad Black Woman, which is where the character "Madea" (a bastardization of "My Dear") originated. The latter film was an adaptation of Tyler Perry's "chitlin' circuit" stage play. (Perry is a wonder--he's produced, written and directed several plays with Madea and made a ton of money doing it. HIs acting isn't bad either.)

There is a difference. In Big Momma's House, the masquerade is part of the plot. The man playing Big Momma knows he is a man. I'm assuming this is the less interesting film because such impersonations as plot devices are tiresome (Mrs. Doubtfire, anyone? In fact, I under stand that in the sequel, Big Momma poses as a nanny!)

The Madea character is a woman, not a man in drag. The actor playing Madea is a man. As far as the plot is concerned, Madea is a woman.

I'm just wondering why there are no black women who can play these parts--or at least Madea's part. And why are men originating the characters? Are they vaguely reminiscent of Hattie McDaniel's mammy from Gone with the Wind? Maybe. That character was subservient (but she was a servant), almost childlike creature--though she was superior to many of those around her. Madea, at least, is a confident, funny, self-reliant woman. She is a caretaker and she also knows her own mind. She was one of the best things about Diary of a Mad Black Woman, since the main plot was pure wish-fulfillment fantasy.

Now Madea gets her own movie. Good for her/him, I guess.

---

Here are my impressions of Diary of a Mad Black Woman, which I saw almost exactly a year ago today:

DMBW is an adaptation, by the original author, of a very popular play on the “chitlin’ circuit.” These are broad morality plays aimed at an African-American audience. Indeed, that is the audience that was drawn to the movie theater. Union Station has the only theater in NE DC, and usually has a high percentage of African-Americans in attendance, but for this film, I was the only white person in the audience. I’ve been the only white person on the bus in DC many times, but in the movie theater? This was a unique experience. I also did not seem to be the only solo viewer of the film. The audience had the full age range, and there were quite a few men, but there were also a large number of African-American women “of a certain age” on their own or in groups.

How was the film? It was maudlin and funny and sweet. The subplots were more compelling than the main story, whose characters and actions were cut out of cardboard. I can’t really recommend this picture, but it was entertaining. Some of it was very, very funny. The Christianity was heavy—but also realistic. The best outcome for heroine could only be achieved if she got divorced and forgave her ex-husband. (Guess what happened?) The audience was into it, yelling advice at the heroine, deriding some of her decisions and hollering approval at others. They laughed, they commented, they were part of the show. It is my understanding that the same thing happens at live performances on the chitlin’ circuit. Actually, the hootin’ and hollerin’ phenomenon is common at Union Station, and I have friends who refuse to go there for just that reason. As long as you are prepared for it, it’s fine. For DMBW, it was completely appropriate—perhaps it was the whole point.