As CB wrote about last week, Jamie Bell’s next film is called Skin. Bell plays Bryon Widner, a white supremacist raised by skinheads, who changes his ways because of the love of the right woman. Well, the love of the right woman and the FBI, who was breathing down his neck for hate crimes. In an interview Bell gave to ABC News, he admitted the decision to play this character was not an easy one and that he got the chance to tell they man he was playing that as well.
Bell plays a tattooed white supremacist, who earned racist tattoos by performing hate crimes for the skinheads who raised him. This was not an easy role for him to play.
“When you’re wearing that every day, you know, and you’re playing scenes like that, it affects you,” said Bell. “So it was a big moral choice for me, you know? Are we going to give this guy his screen time, you know? Are we going to tell his story and give it the kind of big screen treatment? So I really was kind of flip floppy on that a lot. I was quite on a see-saw morally about it.”
“Skin” is based on the true story of a man who was once one of the FBI’s most sought after white supremacists. But the FBI and the woman he loves help him transform his life to something better. The real guy is now in the witness protection program; but Bell did get the chance to meet him.
“You know, I was very honest with him,” said Bell. “I said, ‘I don’t like what you’ve done. I don’t like the life that you have led and the choices you’ve made and only you will have to reckon with that for the rest of your life.’ And I think, as an actor, you always try not to judge the subject that you’re portraying. But in this instance, it was very difficult.”
[From ABC News via Just Jared]
Bell said the movie had such a limited budget that there came a point when the makeup person could not print out the tattoos Bell wore for his character, so they could not afford for Bell to wash his off. Bell had to walk around in this cloak of hate for the rest of the filming. Between that and feeling unwell from pounding liquid ice cream to put on weight, filming this thing sounds miserable. I’ll bet never being able to wash this man’s crimes off himself weighed heavily on Bell.
My mind is more in line with Bell’s comments about giving this story “big screen treatment.” I’m having trouble seeing the need to tell this guy’s story. If there weren’t horrible examples of hate crimes and white supremacy rearing its ugly head every day in the news, maybe society could use a reminder that there is a deep-seated current of hatred running throughout this country. But as it is, I don’t think I want to know what this guy did to ‘earn’ those tattoos. And once I do know, I’m not sure anything will redeem him in my eyes, I don’t care how in love he is. So yes, I’m sure this was a very hard decision for Bell to make. I hope it was worth it.
Photo credit: WENN Photos
And still George Zimmerman roams the earth.
So did the guy really change or did he just flip on his loser, racist bros for a plea deal? Sincere question.
Also, when you have racist tattoos covering your face and neck and probably all over your body, how does witness protection work? Does he just not leave the house?
That was the question, I would also like to have an answer to. What do you do then with those tattoos? Making a movie about dreadful thing and then you are even restricted to go out for a beer because you look like that.
As for the movie. I say it is good they made it. First of all the medium of art existst to tell you stories about humans, the ugly and the beautiful. Second of all, don’t judge something by your own knowledge. This story may not be news to most of us and I definitely see how argument of white supremacists have enough platform already, makes sense. But a lot of people do live in their own bubbles of comfort. Cinema is the medium accessible to all and is consumed by all. So of that movie affects someone then it was worth making it. Just like with Holocaust, apparently more movies need to be made about it as young people increasingly have less and less knowledge about it. And last, but not least, not all stories need to have a lead who we can and should empathise with and I think it is great that Jamie is so clear on disliking the character he plays and that he has no sympathy for the character or the person he is portraying. There is no “well, his life circumstances this and that and he watched his kitten being run over by a car when he was little, blah, blah”, which is what people like to do these days.
Tattoos can be removed. It’s painful and expensive but it can be done.
you laser it off or your put on concealer, I guess. But the state of the country is such, he could just relocate to a new white supremacist colony and nobody would notice.
He has had them removed.
This guy’s story doesn’t need to be told. Period – end of sentence. Enough of white savior stories! I enjoyed Jaime’s performance in Rocketman. But this movie is a hard pass.
I remember when I first saw Tony Kaye’s American History X; the violence in it is still burned into my memory. Sometimes violence in dramatic films is more affecting than what I see in documentaries and news reports.
However, more often I think this type of film becomes a recruitment tool. Similar to how The Godfather saga is supposed to be about how crime destroys a man, but most people just ignore Michael Corleone’s downfall and focus on the “cool” bits and his power.
Edward Norton 2.0 was my first thought. And since tinseltown is so imaginative, I just thought that this new picture was an American History X remake.
I completely agree with both sentiments. I’ve seen American History X over 12 yrs ago and I still can’t unsee the violence. It only glorifies violence, it doesn’t scare or transform hateful people into peaceful ones. Not one bit.