Matthew Kresal One of the things that film can do is give the viewer a new perspective. It can be an empathetic medium, allowing us to see the world through a different pair of eyes. Or even turn the world on its head in the modern equivalent of fables. 1995's White Man's Burden from director Desmond Nakano is just such a modern fable. It's a film that takes the racial and economic status quo of America and turns it on its head with fascinating results. It's the premise that very much makes the film. As one of the film's taglines puts it rather succinctly: "Reality just changed sides." The America of White Man's Burden isn't too dissimilar from the real world of 1990s America except for one big difference: Whites are the lower class and those of African descent are the dominant class From the very first scene of the film with a group of wealthy African- Americans sitting around a dinner table being served by an older white woman in typical maid outfit with Thaddeus Thomas (Harry Belafonte) expounding deeply racist views which echo historical views about his race in our world, the truth of the tagline is clear. It's a tale that could easily have come out of Rod Serling's The Twilight Zone or from a number of alternate history works but the film (outside of some interesting choices in costumes and architecture) doesn't focus much on the how of this world. That's something that some have and will continue to complain that the film doesn't do enough to develop to set up this world, but the point isn't to talk about the past but the present and the future. The opening minutes of the film further drive that point home. 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. It is through the differences between these two men that we are introduced to this world and a series of circumstances that build on one another. What starts out as Pinnock trying to curry favor sets off a sequence of events that will eventually lead to eviction, threats, and kidnapping. It's a plot that at once feels familiar yet different thanks to Nakano's premise. Nakano, a Japanese-American writer/director, perhaps brings a different perspective to the film than a different director might have. Some of his points aren't subtle at all, observations that have been time and time again until they become clichés. Other times they are subtle and more effective for being so such as early in the film when young Desmond (Andrew Lawrence) flips through TV channels and sees nothing but African-American characters with the exception of a TV report of a white criminal or when the same young boy goes into a toy shop on his birthday and wants the more expensive superhero action figure rather than his white sidekick. The issues are familiar from media representation to police brutality but it is what Nakano does by turning them on their head that gives the film its power.As do the performances. Belafonte and Travolta both give suitably chameleon-like performances in their respective roles. Belafonte's Thomas finds himself at times lost and at other times trying to understand the situation he finds himself in while the everyman quality apparent in some of Travolta's better performances shines brightly in this one as a hard working man forced into a desperate act which turns into a spiral from which neither man will leave the same. The interactions and relationship between the two of them form the core of the film from moments of friendliness to profanity laced confrontations. There are some surprising performances from the supporting cast as well, especially from Kelly Lynch as Pinnock's wife, who plays the role with a sense of dignity throughout and perhaps most evident in a scene where they are evicted from their home where she is the one who effectively takes charge. The three of them lead a solid, if not very showy cast.When it was released more twenty years ago, it seems to have been a blip on the radar. It was overlooked, written off to a large extent. Looking on the film with some distance, that seems unfair. White Man's Burden has interesting things to say in flipping reality around and many of its points remain relevant. If you can track it down, it's a film well worth a watch as a modern fable.

brokenglassband .This is really two movies. The first one is the race role-reversal gimmick that demands your attention as the main theme. The second is a crime story about a decent guy caught up in a crime situation.The race movie is lame. For a role-reversal to work, it needs to be fair in its analogies. Instead of complicated race relations, we get a world where good and evil are crystal clear (in black and white, one might say). It isn't US society of today, or even of 1995 - the racism is more like Jim Crow. Consequently, instead of offering insights and maybe teaching a lesson, it just polarizes viewers into taking sides and finding fault with the analogies. This could have been so much better with a less ham-handed story and more realistic characters. The race reversal was a good idea and that's why I watched. But the execution was poor.The crime story was OK. Not great, but as good as most TV crime stories. A good man is trying to get ahead and instead he unjustifiably gets fired and his life is ruined. So he reacts without thinking it through, and the situation snowballs until he has no real possibility to resolve it. After you've tried to forget about the silly race angle, you can appreciate the predicament and try to imagine how you might resolve it yourself. You know it will end badly. So, as race parable, the movie fails miserably. As crime story it is not great but perhaps worth watching when there's nothing better on..

susan_mj This movie started out with good intentions, but the premise became lost far too quickly. The beginning scenes were beautifully crafted to show life on the flip side for both races, like the scene where a small white child is flipping through channels on TV with nearly every station and show being predominantly black. Not long after though, the whole thing takes a left turn someplace and the message gets watered down so much it's no longer recognizable.As much of a fan as I am of John Travolta I must concede he was just terrible. Terrible acting, and that terrible awful "black voice" he used. The dialogue was outrageously offensive because although blacks and whites speak differently the basic emotions are still the same. For example, on the phone with his wife, was what should have been a tender moment but went like this: Her -"I miss you" him - "I'm horny too". No idea who wrote this screenplay but it was either a white person whose only experience with blacks is what they see in bad movies or on white media news outlets, OR a self-hating black person. Movies are either entertaining or thought provoking, this is neither. Its a movie that leaves you waiting to see if it WILL be either one but then it ends, which was probably the best part, not the ending itself, but just that it ended.

sibisi73 Nakano's film delivers little subtlety, and even less originality than many seem to give it credit for. The one-note premise never develops into anything other than that and leaves the actors floundering in a movie that would have made a competent short, but not a feature. The performances are all passable, but the story loses credibility and goes nowhere, taking a long time to get there. 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!).