ScoobyMint Disappointment for a huge fan!

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Phillipa Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

heather_sullivan I thoroughly enjoyed this film version of "A Raisin in the Sun." The play is an important work of American literature and this adaptation brings it to life with emotional, engaging performances. The strongest portrayals come from Phylicia Rashad (Mama) and Audra McDonald (Ruth). This film includes some scenes that have been added from the original play, but these do not detract from the story; rather, they add context that readers of the play may miss. For instance, the play is set entirely in the Younger family's apartment. However, the film includes scenes set in a number of different locations around 1950's Chicago; this allows the film to show some of the racism that the Younger family faces as African Americans living in pre-Civil Rights America. The theme of racism is present in Hansberry's original play, but it may not be obvious to all readers. This film version does an effective job of illustrating this important theme so that viewers can understand the Youngers' story as one of struggle to overcome systemic discrimination.

william_rivera-roman I think the movie is way different than the book. The play made by Lorraine Hansberry is less detailed than the movie. Although, the movie illustrates the actions of the characters and the emotions that they feel. In the book, there are parts that aren't in the movie like, at the end where Mama takes the plant to the new house. However in the movie Walter takes the plant and hands it to mama. Also, the in the play the Youngers never leave the apartment and in the movie they do. This is a good thing because it show how the life in the 1950s were and the racism that the family faced. To conclude the movie was emotional and decent, I would definitely watch it again.

Scott Amundsen I am not a huge fan of remakes, particularly when the original is as iconic as the 1961 A RAISIN IN THE SUN. But this is a worthy effort, particularly considering it was made for television.I think casting Sean Combs as Walter Lee was a mistake; he lacks the intensity that Sidney Poitier exhibited in the original, and in fact at times seems uncertain as to how to play the role. But the producers have buttressed his performance with some heavy duty talent: Phylicia Rashad as Lena, Audra McDonald as Ruth, and Sanaa Lathan as Beneatha.Yet despite all this there is a curious lack of energy to this production. Rashad tries hard, but she does not have the gravitas that Claudia McNeil brought to the role. McDonald tries even harder, but all I can say is she's no Ruby Dee and perhaps the comparison is even a tad bit unfair. As for Lathan, she's the only one with a certain amount of energy, but I found her deliberate imitation of Diana Sands, right down to the way she read some of her lines, irritating and unworthy of an actress whom I suspect is more talented than that and simply chose to cut corners.The sole improvement on the 1961 film is the role of Asagai. Not so much David Oyelowo's performance, though he's fine here, but in the original film the role was severely cut down from the stage version and this production replaces an important speech delivered by the character to Beneatha after the money has been lost. Pity that Ivan Dixon did not get the chance to deliver this speech in the 1961 film.The five stars are mostly for the smooth camera work and a fair effort on the part of the actresses. As remakes go it isn't bad, but when it was over I still was left with the feeling "Why did they bother?"

Clinton Yuen It is said that an author must have a measured amount of distance (in terms of time) from her subject matter before she can write about it. This is to give her time to digest and let the the incident settle in her mind and emotion so that she may do justice to her work. Lorraine Hansberry's work was written in the 1950's at the height of urban white discrimination and censorship against blacks. This adaption is done some 50 years later at a time when the arts are freer to touch on sensitive issues and from a vantage point from which we can evaluate the white American mindset and value system and how it has played itself out over the course of the past 50 years.Lena Younger is the wise matriarch of a black household residing in an apartment in the urban black section of Chicago in the 1950's. The family is blessed to be humbled and to have a loving and trusting relationships within the household. The well-being of the household is shattered by the expectation and subsequent arrival of a small fortune, a $10,000 life insurance payment to Lena. The expectation of the money is seen as seed money by Lena's son, Walter Lee. Walter Lee has a dead-end job, a chauffeur working for a snobbish white boss. The expectation of the money spawns Walter Lee's imagination as seed money to achieve economic freedom through a business of his own. Berneatha, Lena's daughter, is an artsy, spontaneous type person who looks forward towards using the money to finance her education to become a doctor, a technical discipline. Ruth, Walter Lee's wife, is expecting and sees any additional money as just another way to get by. Lena would like to use the money to provide for the practical future needs of the household and doesn't personally need any funds for herself. The story points out how each of the mentioned character's self-interest agenda, as shaped by the American value system of the time and still applies today, is pursued at the expense of destabilizing the family as result of the $10,000. The money becomes the distraction that takes attention and gratitude away from the most important of family fortunes: the gift of humbleness and the appreciation of the simplicity that harmonized, and lent contentment to the household for all those years before the subject of money ever came up.The social commentary is that America, to a black person and other minorities, is a land of barriers. The system presents barriers to blacks and other minorities who genuinely just want to fulfill their life's purpose, contribute their talents to society and only ask to make a decent living at that. Money or capital is a way to break through these barriers to enter a profession (doctor), business (liquor store) or to retire. The ironic twist is that the very barriers established by the white people to oppress minorities provides for the very education that nurtures character, humbleness and eventually wisdom. You can see that in the genuine, and heartfelt performance by the actors in this movie who dramatize the sensitive social issues covered by Hansberry's work some 50 years later. With a distance in time of 50 years, it can be said that this sincere, from the heart interpretation of Hansberry's work truly does justice to her intended message.