George Lucas recently stopped by The Daily Show to talk about his new film Red Tails, which is about the trials and triumphs of the first all-black aerial combat unit, the Tuskegee Airmen.

Lucas, who is one of Hollywood’s biggest names, says that even he (despite his influence) had a difficult time trying to get this film made. Lucas has been working on the project for over 23 years trying to convince studios to give it a chance; however, many have been hesitant to back an action film because of its black cast.

Instead, Lucas poured $93 million of his own money into the film and forced the the studios to reconsider.

During the interview, Lucas explained why it’s so difficult for black films to find their way to box offices. As most of us already know, it boils down to one thing: money.

Studios do not want to invest the resources into high-quality films with black casts because they don’t think their investments will be returned in the form of large box office numbers, here or abroad. With Red Tails, Lucas hopes to prove them wrong.

So why did George Lucas use nearly $100 million of his own money on this film? He said that he made Red Tails to show teenage boys that there are real, inspirational American heroes.

Although many black filmmakers don’t have $93 million to get a film made, perhaps the success of Red Tails will finally open the door (and the box office), to more well-crafted black films.

‘Red Tails’ will hit theaters Jan. 20, check out the trailer below.

Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • Joanne Torku

    Taraji P. Henson is telling people to see this movie and she is a black actress. I am not going to boycott this movie just because there are a lack of black females in the movie. It is Hollywood what did you people expect.

  • Nunya

    Do you think for one second that black men would flock to a ‘support’ a movie that featured black women, no black men, and a white love interest? Or brook any arguments from sisters who challenged their reasons for not going? If you do, I’d like to sell you a bridge in Brooklyn, real cheap.

    At any rate, I wouldn’t watch the movie if 1000 black women in it because war movies bore me to death.

    The symbolic annihilation of phenotypically black women in media is not new. We usually have 2 choices: demonization through stereotype or erasure. Not being in this movie is probably a relief, God knows they might have have portrayed some sassy emasuclating female that the black soldier would go to war to get away from.

    Think about it: why add black women to the story when they KNOW black women will be easily guilted into supporting it, and probably will attend in larger numbers than black men will?

    Adding the white woman will ‘add value’ in the eyes of both white and black men. It’s a win-win for them, which is why they do it.

    Until black women stop supporting their own symbolic annihilation in the name of supporting black men (looking at you Tyler Perry), nothing will ever change.

  • Donronnie

    I realize its a kneejerk opinion, but as the child of a black man and a white woman I always find this line of argumentation irritating. I can understand the idea that are not enough depictions of functional relationships between black people in tv and film, but then the assumption seems to be there is something truly sinister about depicting a white woman and a black man. I’m tired of hearing that my parents are conspirators against black womanhood. Ironically, I’m reminded of nothing so much as the difficulty my mother’s mother had in accepting that her daughter had a child with a black man. This just seems like a stale reflection of white supremacist ‘race traitor’ ideology, that merely be sexually interacting with people of other races you are showing disloyalty. Again, I want to say that I understand the frustration, but I think the reaction is inappropriate.
    PS: Again blaming black men for something a white man produced?