Showing posts with label tyler perry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tyler perry. Show all posts

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Study Shows White People like watching White Actors; Did the study consider Black people and Tyler Perry movies?

South  Park was right: Tyler Perry movies are bad, but Black people love them for the Black actors
We finally got Hollywood in Blackface out (available on Amazon in book form here). If you enjoy this Web site, purchase a copy and help us send it up the list of Amazon best-sellers (the Kindle version reached #5 in movies yesterday). For a donation of $50 or more, we’ll send you a signed copy of both Hollywood in Blackface and SBPDL Year One (make it in the left-hand corner to PayPal).

Having just written Hollywood in Blackface, we at SBPDL are uniquely qualified to answer the pertinent question some researchers at the University of Indiana have asked: Do white people go see movies with predominately white actors?

Here is how the researchers answered the question:
In terms of box-office grosses, this is an extraordinary week for Hollywood: The No. 1 movie in America features a mixed-race cast.

Granted, that movie is Fast Five, the fifth installment of the Fast and Furious action series. Boston Globecalled these films “loud, ludicrous and visually incoherent,” but added that they are “the most progressive force in Hollywood today.” film critic Wesley Morris

As Morris noted, nonwhite actors played major roles in only two of the 30 top-grossing films of 2010. Studio executives believe white audiences prefer to see white characters, while black audiences want to see black characters, so they increasingly make films for each demographic.

Are they being too cynical? Newly published research suggests the answer is, sadly, no. But it also suggests this troubling tendency may largely be the effect of the studios’ all-too-effective marketing strategies.
In short, white moviegoers seem convinced that films with black stars are not made for them.

Andrew Weaver of the Indiana University Department of Telecommunications explored how the racial makeup of the cast impacts the preferences of white filmgoers. Writing in the Journal of Communication, he described an experiment in which 68 white college undergraduates read 12 fictional synopses of new romantic comedies.
“Web pages were created for each movie, and the race of the characters was manipulated to create six versions: an all-white cast; a 70 percent white cast with two white leads; a 70 percent white cast with a white and a black lead; a 70 percent black cast with a white and a black lead; a 70 percent black cast with two black leads; and an all-black cast,” he noted.

After looking over the pages, which featured small photos of the principal cast members, participants were asked a series of questions about their moviegoing habits, racial attitudes and desire to see each movie, either in a theater or at home.

“The higher the percentage of black actors in the movie, the less interested white participants were in seeing the movie,” Weaver reports. “Importantly, this effect occurred regardless of participants’ racial attitudes or actors’ relative celebrity.”

A separate study that used the same technique to assess non-romantic films produced different results. For the participants, 79 white undergraduates, the race of the actors did not influence their desire to see the film.
But a follow-up study by Weaver, which has yet to be published, suggests that result may be an outlier. In it, he used the same technique, but his participants were drawn from a more diverse group in terms of age and education. Specifically, he analyzed the responses of 150 white people between the ages of 18 and 69.
“White participants were more interested in seeing films with white actors than films with black actors,” he found. “This main effect was quite robust, occurring regardless of gender, age, previous movie viewing or the genre of the movie.

“Moreover, this effect was significant despite the very subtle race manipulation. The movie synopses, which were front and center on the page, were unaltered. The only manipulation was in the thumbnail pictures attached to the actors’ names.”

Evidence of continuing racist attitudes on the part of white Americans? Not necessarily. Participants were asked whether they perceived they were similar to the characters, and whether they considered the movie’s plot relevant to their own lives. Weaver found the race of the actors did not significantly affect their replies.
However, the actors’ race did have a big impact on another issue: Whether the participants felt they were part of the “intended audience” for the film. Their likelihood to agree decreased significantly when 70 percent (or 100 percent) of the cast was black, and they were less likely to express interest in seeing those films.
This suggests to Weaver that white reluctance to see films with black actors can be overcome. The perception that “this movie is not for me” could be changed “if more mainstream movies cast minorities,” he writes. If multiracial casts became the norm and movies were marketed to all demographics, the stigma could fade away.

This won’t happen anytime soon: Hollywood is famously risk-averse. Then again, the enormous success of Fast Five, which made more than $83 million domestically in its first weekend of release, may inspire other producers to take a risk on multiracial casts — perhaps even for films in which the real stars aren’t the cars.

We wrote about Fast Five already and the creation of the new paradigm for the action hero that Hollywood has cultivated over the past 25 years. We've written before about Black television shows that fail to garner an audience (why hasn't there been a Black Bachelor on ABC?) such as Undercovers.

We even pointed out that Tyler Perry movies are filmed (and never screened for credits because, let's face it, they are horrible) with the Black audience in mind. Recall the Netflix graph the New York Times posted: only majority Black area codes bother to rent the drivel Tyler Perry peddles as entertainment.

We haven't yet pointed out that the Home and Garden Channel (HGTV) has gone out of its way to create a more diverse lineup, because -- lo and behold -- Black people like watching Black people instead of just white people:
 

The story notes that five years ago when they realized that their programming was not reflective of ethnic minorities, they made changing this a priority, since, HGTV has been more successful in several ways (sic) :
  • 20% increase in primetime audience
  • 50% increase in African American audiences
  • One of the most popular shows among home-owning African Americans
  • Higher than average viewership among Latino audiences
 Adding diversity translates into Black people watching a program to see Black faces, because they desire seeing Black faces. The study cited above on whites wanting to see only whites in film makes the same point but attempts to chastise such viewing habits as racist.

When Blacks start watching just to see other Blacks remodel a home, it's called "progress."

There's a reason Nicholas Sparks' movies are targeted at white females, and there is a reason Black women find scenes in film distateful where Black male actors like Will Smith (think Men in Black, Hancock), Denzel Washington (think Pelican Brief) and others go after white women. These interracial love scenes when shown to Black audiences  rarely test well:
"If the only time you show a balanced relationship is in an interracial relationship, whether it's conscious or subconscious, it sends a message I'm not comfortable with."
-- "ER" star Eriq LaSalle on asking the series writers to terminate his character's on-screen romance with a white female doctor played by Alex Kingston, 1999.


One of the perennials that always shows up on history-of-TV compilations is the clip from a 1968 musical special in which Petula Clark lightly rested her hand on Harry Belafonte's arm as they sang a duet. That brief touch freaked out Chrysler so badly that it threatened to pull its sponsorship. The clip is always offered in a self-congratulatory "look how far we've come" spirit.

But the secret imperative behind most of Hollywood's black and white star pairings remains: Look but don't touch. We've all been trained by years of moviegoing to know that at some point in thrillers or romantic comedies -- after the growing rapport, the looks that linger just a second longer than necessary -- the male and female leads will get together. Except, that is, when the leading couple is interracial. You can wait until the last credit has rolled in "The Pelican Brief" or "Men in Black" or "Murder at 1600," all movies in which there's a definite chemistry between the black and white leads, and the only physical contact you'll see is -- perhaps -- an affectionate but decidedly nonsexual embrace.

There are no complex sociological reasons for the taboo still attached to interracial romance in movies. It's racism, pure and simple. Perhaps these attitudes are sometimes connected to an executive's fear that audiences will be turned off by the sight of black and white together, but a decision that bows to racism must bear the mark of racism itself.

The difference today is that black actors and audiences may be just as turned off by miscegenation as white ones. We have come from ridiculing Chrysler's horror over a white woman briefly touching a black man to seeing nothing wrong with "ER" star LaSalle's implicit claim that his character's affair with a white woman was an insult to black women. LaSalle, whose character had had unsuccessful relationships with black women in the past, "requested" that the show's writers end the affair because "it sends a message I'm not comfortable with," a message that this relationship could be a happy one. Presumably, LaSalle wouldn't have had any troubles if his character's relationship with Kingston's had been rocky. In other words, it would have been acceptable if it had been depicted as being as doomed as bigots -- the kind who deny being bigots, the "I'm just thinking of the children" variety -- have always said interracial relationships must be.

When it comes to movies, the two films that best highlight the differences between the two eras are Stanley Kramer's 1967 "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" and Spike Lee's 1991 "Jungle Fever." Both terrible movies by terrible filmmakers willing to subordinate everything to their "message," the films are nonetheless fairly accurate barometers of each era's acceptable liberal sympathies. In Kramer's film, the good, affluent parents played by Katharine Hepburn and Spencer Tracy have to confront their own prejudices when their daughter turns up married to Sidney Poitier. In Lee's film, Wesley Snipes is a married black architect who has an affair with his white assistant, played by Annabella Sciorra.

Lee pays lip service to the way each character is rejected by family and friends as a result of the affair, but he can't hide his disgust with the relationship. (Sciorra has spoken in interviews of how she had to fight to give her character dimension.) The first time Snipes and Sciorra have sex is after hours at their office, on top of a drafting table. It's a device that first popped up in '80s movies like "Fatal Attraction": When the filmmakers want to show disapproval of extramarital sex, they shoot it so that it looks physically uncomfortable. (Think of Michael Douglas screwing Glenn Close while she's perched on the kitchen sink.) Lee's message is a blatant version of the thought that hovers in Hepburn's and Tracy's minds in the Kramer film: "Wouldn't you be happier with your own kind?"

We've reached a point where segregation has become an acceptable liberal position. (It isn't conservative critics who praise Spike Lee movies.) But separatism is not the same thing as either self-determination or racial pride. I'd argue that pride finds its strongest expression in the midst of difference.

 Not that every movie has to be scrupulously integrated. It would be great to see more movies with all-black casts, and the crossover success of the romantic comedy "The Best Man" last year or "How Stella Got Her Groove Back" in 1998 means we may get them. There's a thrill in seeing black actors starring in the classic Hollywood genres blacks have traditionally been excluded from (and a thrill in seeing just how viable those forms can still be). The hugely entertaining "How Stella Got Her Groove Back" is, except for its welcome sexual forthrightness, like those dishy women's pictures of the '40s, full of gossip and luxe surroundings. But it's a drag to see one character's white husband used as an example of her snobbishness. "The Hurricane" has no qualms about exaggerating the role of three white Canadians in freeing Rubin Carter from prison, but it doesn't even mention that in real life Carter had an affair with and eventually married one of them.

Presumably it's OK to show Washington going to bed with a white woman (Milla Jovovich) in Lee's "He Got Game" because her character is a whore. (That's how all the white women, and many of the black women, are portrayed in this viciously misogynist film.) But even that was apparently enough, as was reported when the film was released, to cause some black female viewers to claim that Washington had betrayed them. (There were no objections to Washington's bedding down with an Indian actress, Sarita Choudhury, for some truly sexy love scenes in Mira Nair's "Mississippi Masala.")

The only criterion that should be applied to movie pairings is: Do they work? Actors and directors are hamstrung if their exploration of human relationships is made to pass some test of sociological acceptability. Real-life relationships rarely conform to such standards; sexual attraction is chaos. Why should it seem otherwise in the movies?

Of course we should be able to see comedies and love stories and thrillers with two black stars. It's insulting (to both races) to assume that a movie with black actors will be successful only if there's also a white person in it. But whatever the justification, there are no good reasons to prevent moviemakers from pairing, say, Angela Bassett and Daniel Day-Lewis, Vanessa L. Williams and George Clooney, Snipes and Julia Roberts,Sigourney Weaver. Think of where racial separatism has gotten us in our movie past. There are no musicals that paired Lena Horne and Gene Kelly, no comedies in which Belafonte might have dallied with Marilyn Monroe, nothing to suggest what two fastidious actors like the young Poitier and the young Jane Fonda might have brought out in each other. Taye Diggs and Chloe Sevigny, Courtney B. Vance (one of the most underused good actors around) and Sigourney Weaver. Think of where racial separatism has gotten us in our movie past. There are no musicals that paired Lena Horne and Gene Kelly, no comedies in which Belafonte might have dallied with Marilyn Monroe, nothing to suggest what two fastidious actors like the young Poitier and the young Jane Fonda might have brought out in each other.

Black male stars have had an easier time of it, but -- with the exception of Washington -- mostly in action movie roles or playing sidekick roles. That's not to slight the pleasure I've had watching Snipes or Ving Rhames in movies like "Blade" or "Mission: Impossible," but I'd love to see them do other things. I can't be the only moviegoer who loved the teddy-bear slyness Rhames brought to his role in "Out of Sight" and envisioned what he might do in comedy. Perhaps the best male performance of last year was Charles S. Dutton in "Cookie's Fortune," and yet he didn't register in any of the year-end awards. Often, the pleasure of watching black actors is tinged with the realization that it may be a long time before you see that actor in another role as good.

Black and white pairings don't seem to be a big deal in foreign movies, as David Thewlis and Thandie Newton showed in Bernardo Bertolucci's great "Besieged," one of the most potent recent movie love stories, and one of the most potent recent movies, period. Likewise with Beatrice Dalle and Alex Descas in "I Can't Sleep," directed by Claire Denis, whose films have frequently dealt with interracial issues. Perhaps those aren't good examples because the issues of interracial love are part of those films' subtext. The same tends to be true of American movies that feature interracial couples. The most intelligent were both made by Carl Franklin -- "One False Move" and "Devil in a Blue Dress," the latter featuring Washington's best performance.

Te fact that a taboo still exists has led some directors to act as provocateurs. At the beginning of "Freeway,""The Loss of Sexual Innocence." (That provocation temporarily scuttled the movie at one point, when a white South African producer pulled out.) a deliciously twisted B-thriller that constantly challenges the assumptions we make based on appearance, Reese Witherspoon shares a big, wet, lazily hungry kiss with her black boyfriend (Bokeem Woodbine), and as director Matthew Bright focuses on the young lovers, you can feel his glee at potentially making some people uncomfortable.
That this rarely happens in real life (where, instead, the Black guy just leaves her pregnant and alone) is a reason Black women want to live vicariously through Tyler Perry, for their existence is more akin to Precious then it is to, say, Meet the Browns.

That most Black men agree with NFL player Albert Haynesworth (who said he doesn't find Black women attractive) is not the kind of news Black women want to hear. A Tyler Perry movie satisfies their need to be desired whereas reality leaves them pumped and dumped.

Right now, pornography is America's number one export to the world, and it's an industry dominated by white, blond haired, blue eyed women. Males of all races purchase (or watch for free on streaming Web sites) America's top export, and the Invisible Hand of the free market dictates that it is white women that are most desired in these pornographic videos.

That a study would be commissioned that finds out the obvious - white people enjoy seeing all-white casts - is a waste of money. That the people behind the study tried to paint this as racist, when Black people love seeing an all-Black cast (though Black males find no problem in seeing white casts, especially white women in movies) shows the true bias.

It's Black women that protest films showcasing pairings of white women with Black males. And this is interesting, isn't it, judging by the standards of most professional athletes and many Black actors, who appear to prefer white women over Black ones.

Look, if we at SBPDL had the opportunity to write a script, we would try and enter the amazing Blue Ocean market that Tyler Perry dominates. His films are horrible. Both South Park and The Boondocks agree (and most movie critics would, too, if Perry would release his films for pre-screening) that Perry is an untalented hack preying upon the desires of Black women everywhere that some fabled hope remains that they can live a nuclear family lifestyle. (Remember that 72 percent of all Black children are born out of wedlock.):

Conversely, Perry’s movies depict the same, tired “lonely woman meets desperate male darkhorse” theme. My goodness. Dr. Seuss has written more intricate storylines than Perry. And it’s really getting old.

Another Madea film?

Another sexually-confused male, dressed in drag, representing Black America?
WTH? Are you serious?

Look, the goal is not to bash Perry. Dude is prolific. Can’t hate. Just calling it like it is. The man has made ‘boo-coo’ bucks formulating such romantic fairy-tales as ‘Diary of a Mad Black Woman’ and ‘Madea’s Family Reunion’ to boost the sensitive egos of low self-esteem, lonely, hungry ‘Waiting to Exhale’ black women.

It’s sort of like the desolate, nerdy recluse who feels he’s completely incapable of attracting a fine woman. Rather than step-up his game, he decides to visit internet porn sites regularly just to jack off.
Let's face it, Tyler Perry movies are for Colored Audiences Only. And they make money that way because Black people want to see Black casts. Funny, the lone white guy to see a Tyler Perry movie was a movie usher who told Black people to be quiet during the screening of one of his films.
The point of all of this is simply this: Hollywood studios are in the business of making money and creating Black Fictional Images for the general consumer. Because white people don't find Black women attractive or compelling (Halle Berry and perhaps Beyonce being the lone exceptions), Hollywood studios rarely cast them in leading roles.

Because Black women don't like seeing Black male actors kissing or ogling over white women in films (something they see enough of in real life), Hollywood studios dare not offend their delicate sensibilities.


It's our hope at SBPDL that someone comes along to knock Tyler Perry off his pedestal. His movies are horrible and an affront to cinema. That Black people still flock into theaters to see his tired stories off cross-dressing matriarchs saving the day says more about their peculiar tastes then anything else we can think of; perhaps its because they desire seeing only Black actors, something the researchers from Indiana University failed to even consider.

Here's a great article on The Boondocks going too far with Tyler Perry. Click here to see the South Park episode on Tyler Perry.









Tuesday, March 9, 2010

#45. Tyler Perry Haters


Actors in Hollywood sometime develop cult followings. The inimitable Bruce Campbell stands alone as the actor whose fans flock to his B-movies with a fanatical devotion usually reserved for the likes of stars, like Matt Damon (if that fan happens to be Ben Affleck).

No matter how lame, moronic or outright laughably absurd the plot and story may be, Campbell’s adoring fan base assures high DVD sales and repeat viewership (indeed, Campbell’s cameos in the Spiderman trilogy brought much needed moments of levity in otherwise boring films).

Black people love to watch fellow Black actors excel in lily-white Hollywood (although strangely, the multi-racial Dwayne Johnson – aka The Rock – has seen precipitous drops in his box office returns as of late, a syndrome we at SBPDL would like to dub the true Obama Effect) and love to support Don Cheadle (an excellent character actor), Michael Clarke Duncan, Samuel L. Jackson (the ornery, Black bad ass act is getting stale though), Denzel Washington (played the same character in every film since Philadelphia) and Will Smith.

Black people enjoy seeing Black actors immersed in white worlds, but still retaining enough authenticity to remain truly Black and never engage in the cardinal sin of Acting White (consider Undercover Brother, an interesting 21st century film that labels the ultimate sell-out of Black people their reneging on Blackness and absorbing white characteristics into their demeanor).

It is vital that Black characters never fully emerge into the world of Whitopia’s, for much like in real life, precious little fraternization between the races actually occurs. Unless you live in Los Angeles, Washington DC or New York, it is rare that racial co-mingling is a necessary staple of your life. Almost every major city is a test case in segregation, not by law but by conscious choice of home-purchasing rates and the desire to "find the best schools" (strange how those end up being all-white areas).

Black actors in Hollywood are careful about roles they chose, lest they be the insufferable Tracy Morgan who will take any pay check tossed his way since even he wonders why people consider him funny. The buddy cop paradigm is the ultimate white/Black guy alliance in film that transcends racial barriers (Die Hard, 48 Hours, Lethal Weapon, Rush Hour etc.) and allows the Black character to still maintain authenticity while working in a white world.

However, this has all changed with the work of one man who has single-handily shifted the balance of power in Hollywood from casting Token Black characters in a predominately white world to casting overtly white stereotypes in a micro look at the world Black people live in daily: Tyler Perry.

Most of America has yet to see a Tyler Perry film (or television show), for he successfully markets his films to 13 percent of population without the faintest hope of attracting any member of the majority or other racial segments.

That is known as working your natural market and utilizing sound market segmentation strategies (sadly Disney failed to do this with The Princess and the Frog) to garner the highest return on investment:
A lot of money. Jail has already earned more than $75 million, making it Perry's highest-grossing film to date. And his seven movies — starting with his 2005 big-screen drag debut as Madea in Diary of a Mad Black Woman — have grossed more than $350 million combined, putting him on track to join John Singleton and Keenen Ivory Wayans as one of the most successful black filmmakers ever. He may already be the most divisive. At a time when Barack Obama is presenting the world with a bold new image of black America, Perry is being slammed for filling his films with regressive, down-market archetypes.

In many of his films there's a junkie prostitute, a malaprop-dropping uncle, and Madea, a tough-talking grandma the size of a linebacker (''Jemima the Hutt,'' one character calls her). ''Tyler keeps saying that Madea is based on black women he's known, and maybe so,'' says Donald Bogle, acclaimed author of Toms, Coons, Mulattoes, Mammies, & Bucks: An Interpretive History of Blacks in American Films. ''But Madea does have connections to the old mammy type. She's mammy-like. If a white director put out this product, the black audience would be appalled.''
The question has to asked though: do white people pay for a ticket to see Tyler Perry's film or is Mr. Perry the finest marketer to his target market since Woody Allen started making boring films every year that only individuals of the Jewish faith flock to see?

Time Magazine places the percentage of white people who see Tyler Perry's film at four percent, a shockingly high number that can only be justified for the simple that reason that white people thought Tyler Perry was a white name and thus, a white director.

Perry's seven films have averaged box office gate receipts of roughly $59 million (Highest being Madea Goes to Jail at $90 million), and the theaters are packed with Black families and Black people on dates laughing at Black actors.

White people - and critics - have found the humor that flows through Perry's scripts the same complex enigma that once kept explorers up at night trying to locate the source of the Nile River.

National Public Radio, the Pravda of Disingenuous White Liberals wonders if Perry is catering to a target rich environment that deprives him of extra ticket sales (i.e., the 87 percent of America that isn't Black):
The good news is that Perry can be consistently counted upon to deliver $20 million-plus openings. "Remarkably, he's done this playing to a predominantly African-American audience," Lionsgate distribution president Steve Rothenberg said.

Indeed, Perry clearly holds the distinction of being the best-drawing filmmaker targeting urban moviegoers.

The not-so-great news: Perry's movies just don't seem to be crossing over to mainstream audiences.

That latter observation is perhaps a bit unsurprising as Perry's comedies feature over-the-top caricatures of inner-city characters and his humor is consistently based on the modern black experience. Yet when that focused appeal produces a huge 63% second-session drop -- as with "Tyler Perry's Meet the Browns" this past weekend, an especially big slide for a comedy -- it could mean the time has come for the filmmaker to tweak his approach.

Or not. Lionsgate executives won't go on the record about Perry's crossover prospects, but there's been little for them to grouse about.

Getting into the Tyler Perry business has been like acquiring a license to print money for Lionsgate, whose execs seem content to let the filmmaker chart his own where-from-here strategy. "Browns" opened during the March 21 frame with $20.1 million and went on to gross $32.5 million through its first 10 days -- not bad for a film costing less than $20 million to make.
Tyler Perry films do not have longevity at the box office. Like a firecracker on the Fourth of July, they explode quickly emitting a few oohs and ahhs from Black people, but the experience is short lived and the repeat value fades dramatically upon second viewing.

White people find the firecracker loud, noisy and confusing and don't even bother looking, opting to rent American Pie VI over one of Perry's odd cinematic features.

Perry's films have been criticized by Spike Lee, a once famous authentically Black director whose films have fallen on hard times at the box office and routinely fail as often as Perry's ventures succeed.

The lily-white Turner Broadcasting Systems (TBS) is a huge fan of Tyler Perry and utilize his talents to fulfill the quota for Black shows on their network that covers the cable channels entire run (more than 30 years) and grants them immunity from being labeled the redneck network:
In a deal similar to the one TBS struck for Perry's sitcom House of Payne in 2006, when they ordered 100 episodes before a single one had even aired, they've just announced an 80-episode order for the very similar Perry family sitcom Meet the Browns, which premiered in January.
Problem though: 99 percent of white people and the other races that comprise the 87 percent of America not Black have never, ever seen one of Tyler Perry's sitcoms, save for the commercials advertising an seemingly obnoxious show that makes us all pine for the return of Steve Urkel and Family Matters. Worse, TBS has the moniker of "Very Funny", which a careful examination of a Tyler Perry sitcom proves highly erroneous (Cracked.com finds the Tyler Perry crazed world we live a worthy edition to The Twilight Zone).

Perry's shows offer some of the only diversity on television, a fact with the corollary that Black people are the only group who watch them, giving it the least diverse audience of any sitcom, save the Winter Olympic Games that Black people boycott entirely.

Black people want to watch other Black people
portray sympathetic characters that they can relate, and Perry provides that opportunity on a nightly basis. But again, only Black people are flocking to TBS to tune into Perry's work:

Debmar-Mercury's rookie sitcom, Tyler Perry's House of Payne, is running in the middle of the pack when it comes to off-net sitcoms, but among the African-American audiences it targets, it tops anything else on television.

Among African-American adults age 18-34, 18-49 and 25-54, House of Payne is the No. 1 show in all of network prime, all of cable and all of syndication, according to its — take a breath here — live-plus-seven, season-to-date, gross-average-audience ratings average. That rating includes double-runs on stations and its cable run on TBS.

In primetime, House of Payne beats such ratings monsters as Grey's Anatomy, Dancing With the Stars, Desperate Housewives and CSI in all African-American adult demographics. Among African-Americans 18-34, the weekday airings of the show are scoring a 6.3 household average. That rating climbs as audiences age, scoring a 7.1 among adults 18-49 and a 7.6 among adults 25-54.

Among syndicated shows, Twentieth'sFamily Guy comes closest to House of Payne at a 4.9 among adults 18-34. Among adults 18-49, NBC Universal's Maury inches out Family Guy at a 4.2 to a 4.1. And among older African-American audiences Judge Judy and Oprah are in third and fourth at a 5.1 and 4.3, respectively.

In primetime, Fox's Family Guy is Payne's closest competition among African-Americans 18-34 at a 5.2. ABC's Grey's Anatomy wins third place among African-Americans 18-49 at a 5.2, followed by CBS' 60 Minutes at a 4.8. And among older audiences, CSI: Miami takes third at a 6.5, followed by CSI at a 6.1.

“If you want to reach 7.1% of the African American audience among adults 18-49, you can do that. And you can buy House of Payne for a lot less than CSI,” which ties for sixth in that demographic, says Bob Cesa, Twentieth's executive VP of ad sales. “There's no doubt that House of Payne is a screaming deal.
In his own way, Tyler Perry acts as a microcosm for the Black experience in America and proves that a post-racial America is but a pipe-dream. He is successful by catering his product specifically to his target audience, Black people. White people will never accept his narratives, nor does he really care. The shareholders of the production companies that bankroll his films see excellent profit margins and continue to green light more Perry works that appeal to only 13 percent of the population.

Perry will never be accepted by white people and Disingenuous White Liberals are saddened by this concept, but know deep down that little artist merit can be found in his works.

They make a profit because of the unique selling proposition they offer - a Black director making films that Black people can relate too that lack the Token Black character merely in the script to appease the gatekeepers of Hollywood.

A brand and image unto himself, Tyler Perry has made films that only 13 percent of the population of 300 million Americans will ever care about, but Black people could care less.

They'll read his books, laugh at his nonsensical sitcoms and flock to his movies (actually being quiet during these films) without a second thought.

The key success factor for Perry is to continue to make films that placate Black people and refrain from adding the Token White to the script, diluting his brand and running off his target audience.

Simply put, white people will never view the Tyler Perry brand as anything more than a Black entertainment for Black people. Black people view it the exact same way.

Stuff Black People Don't Like includes Tyler Perry haters, for his work in film, television, stage production and books show that gearing an entire to brand to only 13 percent of the population can create a financial windfall. Damn the critics and the absolute indifference to his work from white people, Tyler Perry will continue to make films that appeal to only his people.

The cult following behind Perry will never tolerate any snide review of his film on Rotten Tomatoes nor fail to attend the revivals masquerading as art when his movies debut (here is a scene from a Tyler Perry film). 87 percent of America falls into the category of Tyler Perry Hater, by the way, for they forgo the simple, divine pleasure his books, films and television shows produce with the exacting simplicity of complete ambivalence (The New York Times provides an interactive map that allows you to view various cities Netflix renting habits, by county... look at white areas vs. Black areas).

And only in Black Run America (BRA) could this be allowed, as the vitriol aimed toward a white director making films for only 68 percent of the population and daring not to include a diverse cast would be deafening.

At least they have Bruce Campbell to cheer for... give me some sugar baby.