White Man's Burden
Tags: revenge, alternate reality, alternate history

Plot synopsis:
The movie begins with a dinner engagement at the Thomas residence. Thaddeus Thomas (Harry Belafonte), a wealthy CEO, prompts a discussion about White people and claims they are "genetically inferior" because the children grow up without fathers. In this alternative reality, the lower class consists of White Americans as the large percentage of minorities who live in rundown and crime-infested ghetto communities, and face prejudice from the broader society; while the comfortable middle to upper class is predominantly made of African Americans. The African Americans in the film are dominant in employment, business, and entertainment and they often refer condescendingly to how white children live in poverty and unfortunate conditions. The rich Thomas family are horrified and struggle to be polite in the presence of poor white people.
In an effort to go above and beyond in his position, Louis Pinnacle (John Travolta), a struggling factory worker hoping for a promotion in the candy factory, offers to deliver a package after his shift. He delivers the package to successful CEO Thaddeus Thomas, who lives in a wealthy upper-class community predominantly of blacks. Pinnock is let into the property by a white servant at the security gate point in front of the Thomas residence and accidentally views Thaddeus's wife naked while dressing in her bedroom through the window. Thaddeus notices and complains to the VP at the factory, during a dinner engagement at his house, that he would prefer a different delivery man instead of a "Peeping Tom" to visit his house next time. Although Thaddeus doesn't suggest any form of punishment towards Pinnock, the VP "gets the message" and immediately fires Pinnock anyway. Pinnock returns to the Thomas residence in an attempt to discuss the misunderstanding with Thaddeus, but because Thaddeus was in an important business meeting, he refuses and sends a message to Pinnock that he apologizes but there's nothing he can do to help him. Pinnock begs for two minutes of his time, but is abruptly turned away.
Without any education or advanced skills, Pinnock finds difficulty getting a job and is unable to support his family. The Pinnock family are awakened one early morning by the police who is accompanied by the landlord to enforce the eviction from the house; in mid-chaos the family struggle to gather their important belongings as they vacate the premises. Pinnock's mother-in-law scolds and belittles Louis for being a failure of a man and not taking care of his family; she clearly states there is not enough room for him at her house and his wife and the two kids leave to live with her.
As if the situation could not get worse, Louis's truck breaks down and he is forced to walk. Feeling down and lonely in the midst of the night, Louis is aggressively apprehended by the police who mistaken him for a bank robber because "he fit the description." The people inside the bar come outside and shout at the police, demanding that they leave Pinnock alone. Pinnock is brutally beaten by the police for causing a commotion and the police are chased away, as beer bottles are being thrown by the angry mob.
In a radical quest for justice, Pinnock waits outside the Thomas residence again and kidnaps Thomas at gun point and demands for a large sum of money that is owed for losing his job. After multiple failed attempts for withdrawing the money, Pinnock holds Thomas hostage for the weekend and takes him through the ghetto where he lives. of Thomas is not sympathetic to Pinnock and calls him a failure who blames the world for his problems. But Pinnock takes on Thomas through the ghetto where he lives, and Thomas alternates between enjoying some of the staples of ghetto life (Pinnock shows him how to use salt to enhance the flavor of ketchup with French fries) and having his eyes open to this world's racism (black cops are hostile to Pinnock, treat him like a criminal when he's done nothing wrong, and eventually beat him up for no good reason). In the end, though mistaken for carrying a weapon, Pinnock is shot and killed by the police in an attempt to call for help for Thomas who is in desperate need for medical attention because of breathing problems. The chastened CEO visits Pinnock's grieving widow and offers her the money Louis lost when he was fired. She refuses it, and when Thomas awkwardly asks if she wants more, she bluntly says "How much would ever be enough?" and closes the door in his face as the movie ends.

Review: People, that was exactly the point...to challenge White and Black Americans' perspectives on those very stereotypes!
I can tell you from experience that the most hot-headed, controversial, and hateful examples of racial bigotry and stereotyping in the USA are in the way so many Whites and Blacks view each other.I have met countless Blacks who think that being born White automatically makes you greedy, naturally oppressive of the poor, and have a genetically-inbred desire to dump on every other race in the world.
These Whites can cite the fact that there is a high amount of violent crime committed by Blacks despite making up only 12% of the US population (not thinking about the fact that this is a result of poverty, not skin color), or the high amount of hard drug use in Black society (again, depression due to poverty, not skin color).White Man's Burden was very obviously aimed at these two particular groups of people.
By depicting an alternate history with the roles of Blacks and Whites reversed in America, the film shows that lack of knowledge and a tendency towards crime is inspired by growing up in poverty, not by being born with black skin.
I'm watching it again tonight, and I think every white man needs to see the movie, and every black man.
A Caucasian blue-collar named Louis Pinnock(John Travolta)working in a chocolate factory is fired by his boss(Tom Wright) due to a misunderstanding.While he was delivering a package for Thaddeus Thomas(Harry Belafonte), he's mistaken accused as voyeur his wife(Margaret Avery).
Because the roles are completely and totally reversed, swapping black and white character for character, the film is disturbing.
Maybe that's because of the stereotypes we have in place and the roles we do play in the world - if it were just another story about a black man down on his luck we'd all yawn but because it's a white man and all of society is reversed, we watch, we wonder how it will play out, and we're bothered by it.
In short premises featuring alternative planet Earths' and their different histories are thought provoking to say the least and when it was announced that John Travolta ( Let's not forget how massive a star he was then after PULP FICTION ) was going to be starring in an alternative future film where the roles of black and white are reversed the studio execs would have quite rightly tapped themselves on their shoulders knowing they were making a massive hit Strangely I'd forgotten all about this movie until it was broadcast on BBC1 a couple of nights ago and it's not difficult to understand why it's an obscure flop .
The film starts with a black family gathered at the dinner table where patriarch and businessman Thaddues Thomas states his dislike for white people and their problems .
Later due to a series of contrived , not very well written circumstances Pinnock loses his job with the company and decides to kidnap Thomas The problem with WHITE MANS BURDEN is that this is an alternative world where Black Americans are at the apex of social hierarchy while whites are at the bottom bu this scenario is never ever explored .
If you made a film set in " our " America where a disgruntled white employee kidnaps his racist black boss then you would not have to alter one single word never a single scene from this screenplay .
Speaking as an African American female, I understood that this movie was ONLY meant to open my eyes to society's view of race roles of blacks and whites in America.
Sure black people dont walk around with duck-tape on their jackets (as in the scene with the thugs at the restaurant) and little black girls do not have easy access to a revolver that they are permitted to use in the case of an emergency (as in the scene where Belafonte's character hid in a white person's home for safety) and LORD KNOWS a white man will NEVER bring a black girl home to meet his family.
The movie's flaw is that it over-does it's premise - nearly all the white people are poor and rundown, while all the black people come across as elitist snobs.
Reeking of TV movie-of-the-week, John Travolta is playing a desperate factory-worker who kidnaps his ex-boss in a bid to get the money he lost from being fired unfairly.
However, having witnessed similar circumstances and having known a considerable number of people whose accounts are fascinatingly similar to the tendencies portrayed, I found it to be a very accurate study of our human need to find fault with another for whatever reason is most readily available to us.The role reversal played out far better than in any movie that comes to mind as of this writing, and the acting and overall experience served to support the writer/director's vision perfectly.I obviously gave this film ten stars, and would (and always do) recommend it to someone willing to have an open mind who chooses to further their understanding of underlying social structures in a more visceral sense..
I can accept that all of the white people were poor and all of the black people were rich if the movie is supposed to focus on two specific families and a worse case scenario.
Initially, the widespread symbolism is interesting and inventive, yet becomes overbearing relatively quickly, and to me it seemed that the director underestimated his audience's perception and continually rammed home his point with the subtlety of Dolph Lundgren.The film ultimately left me frustrated because I thought the idea was a good one but the story simply wasn't multi-faceted enough to be engaging.
However, the performances were very good, and I thought Belafonte conveyed the defeatism and inherent arrogance of his role particularly well.Overall though, I thought this was pseudo-art: it masqueraded as a deep and meaningful examination of the social relevance of race, but ended up as a very simplistic story disguised by delusions of self worth.5/10.
This could be the film that is needed to refer to right now as whites and blacks in this culture finally begin to circle each other, trying to decide how best to get down and dirty with that damn bugaboo of race and it's shadow players of class, justice and power.John Travolta plays Louis Pinnock, a factory worker for See's Candies with a history of exemplary company loyalty working his way towards a promotion.
Not another peeping tom." These few words set off a chain reaction that ricochets for the rest of the movie, serpentining it's way through the issue of color by presenting a mirror image for society to see: Louis and his family (in fact ALL whites in this picture) live in a black world.
Wait until you see the look of incredulous horror of Thaddeus' face when he sees one white man gun down another.What screenwriter and first time director Desmond Nakano (Last Exit To Brooklyn, American Me) has created is a horror movie for white folk, and this SHOULD scare the white folk who have never thought twice about their hegemony in society, and the responsibility it brings.
It's a brutally realistic look at a world, where the roles are reversed:  the whites are working-class people living in rough neighborhoods and the blacks are upper-class people living in mansions.
Though Harry Belafonte's character is a close-minded racist in the beginning, he develops a healthy friendship with John Travolta as the film goes on and eventually he changes his views.
Well I have nothing but the utmost the respect for the actors in this crap movie.However, trying to make current American citizens guilty for the evil crimes of slavery that occurred over 100+ years ago, is just purely wrong.John Travolta is a good to fair actor, and there are many other good actors in this movie.If we truly want to encourage better treatment of each other, the best way is not about endlessly reminding us of the evil's of the past.But to encourage, promote and reward people for treating people fairly.This movie concept is horrible, execution is horrible.There is no remote redeeming value to this movie.I am very sorry to say that..
I think it's important to point out that, in the tease on the back of the DVD box, this movie is described as taking place in a "time" (not in a "world", or in a "society", or in an "alternate reality") where the traditional racial roles have been reversed.
The movie is quite disturbing, whether or not you see beyond the "black and white" that is on the surface; and that is exactly the point.
The most stupid thing about the story is not the fact that it does not go into black white reversal enough but the fact of the Travolta character actually get his boss after 5 minutes to give him his money and his job back ,so why did he not accept that and go home?
The film revels in its stupid gimmick of changing the positions of whites and blacks and beats the audience over the head with heavy handed "lessons" about racism.
Yet this movie has a serious problem:  it tries to show a mirror world in which the roles of whites and blacks are reversed in order to show the injustice.
Travolta's character in this movie is not just your bog standard black man, it's representative of whites in the same class strata.
Perhaps if it gave more thought to the classes instead of just using the race card (and actually looking more into their topic) it would be a good movie.
As an African-American, the idea of a wide scale role reversal between Blacks and Whites is an interesting one to explore...
Factory worker Louis (John Travolta) is charged with a crime he didn't commit, he loses his home and job and finally snaps to the point where he decides to take his boss (Harry Belafonte) hostage and seek justice.WHITE MAN'S BURDEN, I think, has its heart in the right place.
Factory worker Louis (John Travolta) is charged with a crime he didn't commit, he loses his home and job and finally snaps to the point where he decides to take his boss (Harry Belafonte) hostage and seek justice.WHITE MAN'S BURDEN, I think, has its heart in the right place.
I guess the filmmakers thought that white people just couldn't understand the social injustices that are happening across America so they thought it would be a good idea to make a movie and reverse the race roles.
I guess the filmmakers thought that white people just couldn't understand the social injustices that are happening across America so they thought it would be a good idea to make a movie and reverse the race roles.
This was a rather good idea and I think everyone had their hearts in the right place but the end result is a real letdown.The biggest problem with this movie is its rather stupid screenplay, which seems to think that the viewers aren't all that bright and that this role reversal thing will be all it takes to change people's minds on various social issues.
This was a rather good idea and I think everyone had their hearts in the right place but the end result is a real letdown.The biggest problem with this movie is its rather stupid screenplay, which seems to think that the viewers aren't all that bright and that this role reversal thing will be all it takes to change people's minds on various social issues.
THe problem with this movie is that the set-up just isn't all that good and to this day I still remember the various laughs that the film got in the theater as most people just weren't buying it.The screenplay asks a lot of challenging quetions about race, social justice and various other things but we're given no answers, which makes the entire film seems kind of pointless.
THe problem with this movie is that the set-up just isn't all that good and to this day I still remember the various laughs that the film got in the theater as most people just weren't buying it.The screenplay asks a lot of challenging quetions about race, social justice and various other things but we're given no answers, which makes the entire film seems kind of pointless.
It's really too bad that the film just didn't pack much of a punch because both Travolta and Belafonte are quite good in their roles.As it stands, WHITE MAN'S BURDEN tries to have an "A" message but the entire film seems like a "B" movie from the 1970's when blaxploitation was a big craze.
It's really too bad that the film just didn't pack much of a punch because both Travolta and Belafonte are quite good in their roles.As it stands, WHITE MAN'S BURDEN tries to have an "A" message but the entire film seems like a "B" movie from the 1970's when blaxploitation was a big craze.
The message on the surface you'd think is that what it would be like for the white race if they were in the position that the black race is in and has been for years?
In fact if that is the message and I were a person of African American descent I'd be a little offended because most of the white people (99%) are portrayed in Ghetto's, committing crimes, being beaten, a lower class, sub-intelligent, well meaning group of people but clearly nowhere near the standard of the elite race (in this cast the black race.) I think his message is something different entirely but it's hidden amidst a bit of a muddled story and an unclear premise.John Travolta is a terrific screen presence.
His performance, I think, is very good and one of the more powerful in the film as down on his luck white guy Louis Pinnock.
I would have loved to have seen a black actor with a little more experience and talent perform the role (Morgan Freeman perhaps?) The supporting cast are decent enough including Kelly Lynch as Pinnock's wife and Margaret Avery as Thomas' wife.
Also in a really good performance is the young Andrew Lawrence (of the Lawrence brothers) as Pinnock's son who really does a terrific job in the birthday shopping scene.There are some truly powerful scenes in the film including the above shopping scene where young Donnie Pinnock chooses a popular 'Black' Super Hero toy over a less expensive white one.
I read one review that suggested Nakano's message was that things wouldn't be different for any other race had they had the same situation that black people have had.
Is it to open the white man's eyes to his wrong ways by asking him to put himself in the oppressed group's (i.e blacks) shoes and suffer society's ills?
I've been waiting to see movie where white folks are in the black folks position in life.
Only I don't think any black man would do what John Travolta did in the movie.
The only interesting thing I could find about this movie was the turning around of society and putting white people in the streets and in poverty, while black people are the high class, owners and politicians.
Despite the writer's best efforts some of the scenes seem to reinforce rather than break down some racial stereotypes, and it's really not that shocking to see Travolta as a down-trodden white guy because they actually do exist - as do rich black guys (ask Harry Belafonte if you don't believe me!)..
This fable takes place in an alternate society where racial stereotypes of blacks and whites are reversed.
'White Man's Burden' done better would not have been that big a risk.The movie opens with musical legend Harry Belefonte having dinner with his family in his luxurious manor.
'White Man's Burden' also suffers the cliche of making both races either all good or all bad.
White Man's Burden is a movie that supports Karl Marx's theory that the clashes of the world have never been about racism, religions, nationalities or any form that they may take.
Moreover, John Travolta was more dominant and showed greater power in this movie than Harry Belafonte and the other African-Americans combined.
White Man's Burden is based on a radical idea-it's a story of a man who loses his job and kidnaps his boss in order to get the money he believes he deserves."What's radical about that" you might say...Well in this movie white people are in the place of black people.
The film only makes sense if one substitutes every white character in the story with a black one, and vice versa.
White people will not like watching this movie.
just because the movie reversed the roles that blacks and whites play in society did not make the movie any less clichéd.
i understand that the writer was trying to make a point of showing how it is for blacks in a white society.
so in the movie they were black instead of white.
John Travolta and his family fill the media-reinforced stereotypical role of ignorant, poor people that must beg the imperialists for jobs, survive police savagery and live in a world where you are set up to fail and struggle just to survive.
Even the UK's leading liberal newspaper review gave it the following oddly flat and neutral review which makes no mention of the movie's entire reason for being: "Drama set in an alternative America where black people are members of an elite society and their white counterparts inhabit inner-city ghettos.
The focus of the film is on men at opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of both class and race: Belafonte's business mogul and John Travolta as factory worker Louis Pinnock.
The premise of the film was a good idea to perhaps give a new perspective to none minority people, but as I will discuss I think they missed an opportunity to really have something special.