"CATCH YOU FUCKERS AT A BAD TIME?"

Sing Sing

SING SING is an unusual movie with a simple appeal: it’s about a theater program in a prison, and most of the cast is made up of actual graduates of the program playing versions of themselves, so there’s an unmistakable feeling of authenticity completely outside of a normal Hollywood production. We see interjections of unscripted or documentary scenes – auditions, video of real plays – but mostly we just see very natural performances by actors/characters speaking or drawing from their hearts in ways that cut deep.

One of the familiar actors in the movie is Paul Raci (DRAGON: THE BRUCE LEE STORY) as the director, Brent, a mentor character similar to his Oscar nominated one in SOUND OF METAL. I forgot exactly what Raci’s background was and fell for the illusion that he was pretty much a real guy going into social worker mode. There’s a scene where as an acting exercise they close their eyes and imagine their happiest place, then they go around the circle and describe what they thought about. They’re all talking about their childhood or about being with their kids or about the pain of their lives in isolation. When Brent notes that men don’t usually get to be emotionally vulnerable like this it could be a scripted line, but it doesn’t feel like one, it feels like just honestly running the exercise and appreciating how it goes.

But this is the story of John “Divine G” Whitfield, a founding member and leader of RTA (Rehabilitation Through the Arts), played by a very well known actor, Colman Domingo (MIRACLE AT ST. ANNA, LINCOLN, RED HOOK SUMMER, THE BUTLER, SELMA, IF BEALE STREET COULD TALK, ZOLA, WITHOUT REMORSE, CANDYMAN, TRANSFORMERS: RISE OF THE BEASTS, DRIVE-AWAY DOLLS). He was nominated for a Best Actor Oscar for this and has a more traditionally show-offy performance that dips into lots of big emotion, plus some Shakespeare, but he does a good job of meshing in with the others. Divine G is fresh off a triumphant performance as Macbeth, and he has a typewriter in his cell for writing plays and working on his appeals. He’s so accomplished that when a stranger approaches him in the cafeteria it turns out not to be a threat, it’s just to get one of his books signed. (The fan is played by the real Divine G.)

What’s unexpected about the character and the way Domingo plays him is that he’s kind of full of shit. Despite the heavy setting, for a while this movie plays pretty comedic. For the next play the group wants something less challenging than Shakespeare, and someone says they should do one of Divine G’s plays. He acts humble for about five second, then launches into a detailed pitch. When the newest member, Divine Eye (Clarence “Divine Eye” Maclin), respectfully asks why they never do comedies, wouldn’t the population like an escape from reality, G says “I don’t write comedies.” Then, “I write satires…”

So you’ve got this guy who is hugely admired within his world of the incarcerated, who has done so much for others, and he acts very modest and open to other people’s ideas, but you can see it’s killing him. He was the one who recruited Divine Eye, a menacing bully in the yard who’s reluctant to admit his interest in acting and has a hard time letting his guard down to participate. Divine G sees something in him and tries to inspire him, but then he loses a role to him – Hamlet! – and has to play a silly role as a gladiator.

But the comical aspect melts away as real tension builds between the two and their different attitudes. G is more physically imposing but (like many Domingo characters) his eyes are wildly emotive and empathetic, while Eye’s are cold and hard as steel and mostly communicate that he’s not with this or doesn’t want to be here.

I had heard the hype about Domingo, but not Maclin, who it turns out received a Best Supporting Actor nomination from the BAFTAs. Good for them. Divine Eye’s fight to break out of the captivity of his tough guy exterior is truly harrowing, and the two Divines alternately reaching out to offer help to each other but not knowing how to accept it is the heart of the movie. Also, while it’s cool to see Domingo do his polished, enunciated Shakespeare, it’s way more of a thrill to watch Maclin evolve from just reading the lines out loud to being able to sell them in his own voice.

There are some subplots with normal prison movie material, but just barely. Mostly we exist in this sanctuary of the theater (in a room that looks like it was literally a church), making it all the more blunt when reality hits. We don’t see many prison guards, so when Divine G’s cell gets searched and all his papers are dumped out and mixed up on the floor you see the true indignity of it. Obviously that’s very low on the scale of bad things that prisons do to people, but he shouldn’t be treated like that. Nobody should be treated like that. By keeping most of the dark stuff off screen or understated I think it comes across more powerfully. When SPOILER Divine G gets out at the end we’re so elated along with him, but he looks into the window of the cell next to him and sees a guy who doesn’t look much older than 20. The cycle continues.

Sean San José might have the second most dialogue in the movie, as Divine G’s right hand man Mike Mike, so of course I wondered about his background. He’s had a few bit parts going back to MOBSTERS in 1991, but he’s mainly a theater actor, director and artistic director in the Bay Area, and in fact he founded a performance group for people of color called Campo Santo, so he has real experience running a theater company. (He’s also a creative executive at Domingo’s production company, maybe that’s where their chemistry comes from.)

But any number of real RTA graduates have moments to shine, in particular Sean “Dino” Johnson, when he explains to Divine Eye in very personal terms what a violation it is to keep getting into fights during their rehearsals. The Oscars broadcast transposed a clip of that scene with a page of script, but I would’ve believed it if you told me he improvised it based on personal experience.

Director Greg Kwedar (TRANSPECOS) is credited as screenwriter along with Clint Bentley (they also wrote the movie JOCKEY together, I heard that was good). SING SING was nominated for the Best Adapted Screenplay Oscar, because it’s credited as being based on the Esquire article “Sing Sing Follies (A Maximum-Security Comedy)” by John H. Richardson and the play Breakin’ the Mummy’s Code by Brent Buell. Yes, that’s the silly time travel comedy they’re putting on in the movie, but it’s more than that: according to the article, Breakin’ is “about six convicts who each write separate plays and then splice them together into one ridiculous romp” so it “has lots of play-within-a-play dialogue about prisoners on the stage.”

Divine Eye and his Hamlet monologue are in the article, but not the rest of his arc from the movie, and Divine G is not even mentioned. That explains why the real Divine Eye and Divine G share story credit with Bentley and Kwedar (and therefore are Oscar nominees!).

Of the many fine movies about heavy subjects that I watched in my Oscar-viewing completism this year, SING SING is maybe the easiest to recommend, because of its emphasis on the ol’ human spirit. There are laughs and there is brotherhood and there are human souls being nourished. Without being corny about it, it shows an example of finding peace and joy in the most miserable of situations, of finding a way to continue after you’ve done wrong or been wronged, of people who have spent their lives hiding their humanity deep inside finding ways to let it out. A beautiful prison movie.

This entry was posted on Thursday, March 13th, 2025 at 10:57 am and is filed under Reviews, Drama. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

17 Responses to “Sing Sing”

  1. I had a tough time with this, because so much of it was triggering, bringing back the memories of when I did time. I can tell you, the cell raids are common, unannounced, and brutal. Whatever you have (and it’s very little) they will just chuck it on the ground and leave it there. Clothing, personal photos, any creative project, it will end up covered in dirt and footprints. I’ve heard there’s a rule after every search that officers have to put everything back where they found it. I saw hundreds of searches — not once was anything put back in its original location.

    It’s completely irrational, but I hated Colman Domingo for this. He gives a great performance, and honestly, truly, I think he’s a hero for being in a movie like this, helping it get made. But the whole time, the movie felt so authentic and I’m just looking at him like he’s such a tourist. I generally am hostile towards these things. Stuff like that show 60 Days In is so, so, so deeply offensive to me.

    I don’t put too much weight on the Oscars. But to me, the lack of a Best Picture nomination (as well as the box office gross) is just a reminder that the general public really doesn’t give a damn about people in prison. I hope there are maybe more movies like this so people can stop talking about inmates in prison like they’re in the afterlife.

    I wrote a little bit more about this a few months ago, if anyone’s interested in some sort of first-hand perspective on the subjects in this movie. https://fromtheyardtothearthouse.substack.com/p/weekend-special-watching-sing-sing

  2. Glaive Robber, thank you for sharing your perspective. I often wonder how films like this (though I haven’t seen it yet) sit with those who have direct experience with the prison system.

    I always appreciate it when people like you and Vern speak out so directly against the prevailing attitudes about incarceration in our deeply fucked up society. It helps to be reminded that I’m not alone in being opposed to the sheer inhumanity and cruelty of it.

  3. I appreciate your thoughts, Mike.

    I do think there’s a lot of inhumanity to mass incarceration, which I of course experienced firsthand. But it’s clear that’s not going to change the mind of people for whom cruelty is the point. Prison isn’t justice to these people, it’s revenge disguised as justice.

    I just think, in the 21st century, a lot of people (particularly younger generations) are starting to question the systems we have in place, everyday stuff like taxes, churches, basic things. And I think it’s worth noting that, you’re gonna have a lot of opposing metrics to define recidivism, to show how many people re-offend when they get out of prison. But it’s pretty much always over 50%, sometimes much higher based on specific evaluations (i.e. future arrests, probation violations, types of crime). And if you have “correctional facilities” (their preferred designation, perversely) where over half of the people still commit crimes, does mass incarceration, which costs taxpayers so much money, even WORK? And yet, people treat this inefficient system as something that is an inarguable part of our culture, something that can never change. We need to talk about it differently.

    I think “Sing Sing’ being nominated for Best Picture would have helped have this conversation. But at the end of the day, who cared?

    (Where is everybody? When I got out of prison, I revisited a lot of the reviews posted over the last decade when I was gone, and there was a ton of engagement, particularly ’16-’19. What happened during COVID where all those readers and commenters disappeared?)

  4. I can tell you, the cell raids are common, unannounced, and brutal.

    Under the theory of ‘bad experiences can produce good depending on perspective’ this is how I discovered Stanley Milgram. As after the 10th time I heard “yeah, this is bullshit. But they ordered this, so if I don’t do it, it’ll be my ass” and it occurred to me that was exactly what all defendants at the Nuremberg trials said

  5. Indeed, Jojo. I confronted a lot of guards who would be apologetic about their dehumanization of me and ask them, “And what is it in service of?” They would get pretty pissed about that, but I tried to make it clear to them, “What part of rehabilitation is what you’re doing right now?” I spent a lot of time in solitary!

  6. This was released last August in the UK and has long since passed out of public, or at least my, memory. So thanks for this review, Vern, and the prompt. Reading the review, I wondered how it walked that line of using actors and “real” people in this setting, which seemed rather problematic with NOMADLAND.

    Thanks for sharing Glaive, I appreciate the additional context and insight. I’m fairly confident I have no real personal insights to add, but here for what they are worth are my two brushes with prisons. A friend of 40 years went down for drunk driving. No one but him was hurt in the accident and consequently his sentence was relatively short and served in a fairly benign setting. Nevertheless, he claimed, and I do not doubt, that he spent a large part of his time helping teach grown men to read and write. I will hazard that it saved his life in removing him from easy access to alcohol.

    Now, I grew up the son of a Johnny Cash fan and am, as I hope I’ve made clear here, one myself. But for all my father’s appreciation of the Fulsom and San Quentin recordings, I am fairly sure he thought the purpose of prison was societal revenge, not rehabilitation. I lived for a number of years in Switzerland and there was a prison and prison farm near where I lived. Moreover, most weekends it was possible to just visit the prison, which we did when my father visited. He had no idea until I told him that it was a prison. I’m sure it had its problems but it was remarkably open and friendly, neat, clean and well appointed. My father who’d left school at 14 and dodged mine work by becoming a farmhand had several conversations with the prisoners who worked on the farm, most of whom spoke excellent English, of course. It kinda blew his mind that these people were convicted criminals in a prison. I think Switzerland has one of the lowest recidivism rates in western Europe.

    With reference to performance and the drive to put on a show, rather than prisons, let me recommend GRAND THEFT HAMLET, a documentary about two actors trying to stage a production of Hamlet within the online world of Grand Theft Auto during a COVID lockdown. It is both hilarious and oddly moving, and I was struck by the enormous power of Shakespeare’s language in ways I have rarely been before.

  7. Regarding the drop in engagement: I think it’s probably a combination of  A. all of us getting older and having less time/mental capacity for talking about movies, and B. the pandemic putting the last nails in the coffin of the monoculture. There used to be more wide release movies, both in theaters and on various home video formats, that were enough of an event that most of us would have seen them or at least developed an opinion about them. Now the movie scene is so disparate, so ephemeral, that there are very few that a sizable portion of us, let alone a majority, would have seen by the time Vern reviews them. So unless we want to comment about how we haven’t seen it (or, in many cases, haven’t even heard of it) we have nothing to add to the conversation. Some regulars seem to put an effort into staying current, but many–and I include myself in that number–just don’t feel compelled to track down all these new movies that seem to come out of nowhere without fanfare and then disappear just as fast. Many probably watch more TV than they used to, because it’s easy and accessible and there’s a lot of it. Others, like myself, probably get more out of digging through film history than they do out of modern cinema. We’re all just out here in our bubbles, watching our own shit, with very little overlap with anyone else. Makes it hard to get a conversation going.

    Also, I find myself blocked two out of three times I try to comment. I know I’m not alone in that, so that probably lowers the traffic quite a bit. Many times, I’ll have something to say but I figure it’s not even worth the effort to type it out. The technical difficulties have dropped my engagement down to a tenth of what it used to be. If this comment ever goes through, it’ll be because I tried it 20 times over the course of several days.

  8. It also depends on the movie. Vern has broadened his selection of movies beyond the action, horror and blockbuster/franchise movies that he made his name and reputation with – that many of us here could also be expected to be interested in – to cover other types of films such as musicals or foreign-language indies.

    This is a good thing for expanding our cultural horizons … but if it’s a movie that we haven’t seen or heard of, then (as Majestyk says) we won’t have much to contribute in the comments, except when the review itself raises discussion topics related to the genre, the real-world politics of the subject matter, etc.

    Like Glaive, when I read older reviews I see comments from former regulars who seem to have faded away. Occasionally people still ask what might have happened to Griff. I also wonder what happened to MacReady, Paul, Asimovlives etc. And at least one or two other people with reactionary political views did finally get blocked.

    I think those of us who’ve stuck around are either on Vern’s wavelength artistically and politically, or are at least willing to debate him and/or other commenters from a position of mutual respect. The newsie types who just want to vent their disgust at contemporary pop culture have plenty of other places to go.

    (So far I have not had trouble with comments going through.)

  9. I just don’t have a life, so I will probably stick around longer on this websight than even Vern will.

    It is indeed sad to see so many people move on, but as someone who spent the last almost 25 years in a whole bunch of internet communities, from message boards (remember those?) about TV shows, to MySpace, Twitter, Ain’t It Cool News, webcam model chatrooms, Second Life, you name it, let me say that it’s sadly normal for even the healthiest community that most people move on at some point. But usually it’s a quick implosion, caused by a change in leadership or the leader losing every interest, just like the rest of the people. Shit, one of my favourite message boards from 20 years ago died when after the TV show ended, the admin and founder out of all people said almost instantly “Fuck that place” and turned it into a troll board from him and his friends, driving everybody away within a few weeks. (Still hate this guy for doing that.)

    Anyway, the most annoying part of all this is that I still forget to ask the people I like for a way to contact them. One day they are gone and I don’t even know if they are still alive. I should both be smarter and being used to that by now, but nah.

  10. P.S., being told that technical problems are causing us to miss out on commentary from Majestyk is an alarming development, as his input is one of the best things about this place. I hope this problem can be resolved.

  11. I lurked here for a while before I started posting regularly a year or two back, and it is a bummer having less conversations to join in. That said, I spend a lot of time reading old reviews and sometimes the high-comment posts consist mostly of off-topic conversations, back and forth between commenters getting testy (then usually apologizing, at least), and Batman. I can find endless debates about why the latest entry in a popular franchise sucks/rules anywhere online, so I do appreciate that at least the remaining commenters here usually have something more interesting to say (when we bother posting, and when our posts make it through, I am still having the random error block, but less than Majestyk seems to).
    Vern- I want to let you know even if I don’t comment I read every new review you post and appreciate you talking about such a wide range of movies. Stuff is getting added to the watchlist, even if it takes a long time to get to it.

    CJ- I am already bad at staying in contact IRL, so I really drop the ball online. I just followed you on letterboxd, here’s mine if you are interested:
    https://letterboxd.com/Overdue_Reviews/
    If anyone else has one to post I will follow, I think Vern and Bill Reed are the only accounts I follow right now.

    I have also definitely been in my own bubble a la Majestyk. Mine has been deep-diving 80s-90s Hong Kong action and random video store-style obscurities. I started a blog for the reviews I put some work into beyond letterboxd quick hits. I linked it here previously when I posted about my remembering my mom, but I have stuck with it long enough and logged enough reviews that I feel confident putting it out there for people: https://adamsoverduereview.wixsite.com/adam

  12. Funny, I tried to comment on the perceived lack of engagement on Monday night, but my comment was blocked. That’s not a problem I have had much lately, but I imagine trying to post twice and rapidly in the same thread made me look too much like a spambot.

    I think there’s maybe something in what Glaive says and maybe something in what Majestyk says. Also perhaps some of us might feel we are being frivolous talking about movies as the world burns.

    But I also think we should not be too nostalgic for a past that might not be exactly as we remember it. For example, just going by the numbers Vern’s 2016 review of Brian De Palma’s CARRIE, a bona fide classic that we all saw when the monoculture was in its pomp, picked up fewer comments than Vern’s recent pre-Oscars Fiennes double bill review. Maybe all the CARRIE comments were golden and the Fiennes comments were garbage, but it makes you think. Last year’s FURIOSA review pulled in a lot of commentary, and the big action movie reviews from the Summer of 1994 series – SPEED, TRUE LIES, both re-reviews – did better in terms of comments volume than Vern’s original reviews.

    Sure, if you’ve been here a while, there will be voices you miss now, but I still get a buzz out of the reviews and the comments. Hell, talking about movies is 90% of my personality and I am too old to change now. And if the world really is gonna burn, I can at least try to remind y’all to catch POLITE SOCIETY on Netflix while you can.

    I’m trying to post more. Thanks.

  13. I’m going to expand on what Majestyk said about “new movies that seem to come out of nowhere without fanfare and then disappear just as fast.”

    Once you lose the habit of going to the movies regularly, you stop seeing trailers and posters, especially for smaller movies. (The ones that go viral online are for big movies that are already highly anticipated.)

    The power of film critics to widely publicize movies has also faded. TV critics such as Siskel and Ebert may have had their blind spots, and trashed movies that they simply weren’t the right audience for, but they still showed you clips and talked about the movie enough to make you aware of them. And say what you want about Entertainment Weekly, but they reviewed everything that came out (even if it was just a capsule review in a sidebar) and also reported on the big festivals like Cannes and Sundance; if you read their film/TV coverage then you were aware of all the upcoming releases.

    The shrinking of theatrical releases (both in duration and location) has also been frustrating. My lady and I were absolutely looking forward to seeing LISA FRANKENSTEIN when it came out, but it vanished from theaters before we had the chance. I had to drive to the next city to see HIGH RISE, MANDY, and OUTLAW JOHNNY BLACK, and I’m in a part of the country where there are indie arthouses that do show specialty films – I know that many people are not so lucky.

    All of which results in films having very low public awareness even when they become awards-season contenders. I’m not sure I even heard of EMILIA PEREZ before the Oscar nominations were announced, and the Oscar ceremony was the first time I actually saw any clips from it.

    So it does require a little more effort to stay aware of new movies. But I think it’s important to try. There’s a long rant I could make about this, but I’ll just say that if we don’t at least try to seek out and support new voices and viewpoints then the bad guys win.

  14. I just asked because I figured, being in prison for all that time, some of you murdered some guys and were trying to lay low or something. I’m relieved it’s just real world reasons, and none of you are murderers. Yet.
    My Letterboxd is here https://letterboxd.com/Fromtheyard/
    Which of course somewhat (but not totally) ties into my (100% free) Substack which I referenced above.

  15. @Borg9- yes, everyone watch Polite Society! I recommended it Vern a few months back as an “in case of emergency- break glass” option to pick his mood up if he watched a few duds in a row, but considering the state of the world I think everyone could use that pick me up right now!

    @Glaive – just followed you on Letterboxd. I have checked out your substack before, just remembered to add it to my favorites tab. Is Substack free/easy to use? My free Wix blog looks like ass, but it seemed like the easiest interface for my internet-ignorant self to work with.

  16. Thanks, Adam. I feel like we’ve been boosting POLITE SOCIETY for a while, but now it’s on Netflix I really don’t feel this is the time to stop. Based on this and We Are Lady Parts, I am thinking Nida Manzoor is the real deal and the sooner she does another movie the better.

    Also, and again I said this elsewhere, MICKEY 17 is maximum Bong and needs to be seen on a big screen.

  17. @Adam, Substack is free to use, and I find it easy (I’m not very tech-y). I think if you want to monetize your Substack, you have to give them a cut, so that may or may not be worth it.

Leave a Reply





XHTML: You can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>