#NNPA BlackPress
FILM REVIEW: The Gentlemen
NNPA NEWSWIRE — Writer/director Guy Ritchie, coined a style of staccato crime/thriller moviemaking that is dense, filled with characters, laden with cheeky graphic language, sexy, often ultra-violent and cast with teams of multicultural British actors. The Gentlemen is an imperfect return to form.
By Dwight Brown, NNPA Newswire Film Critic

It’s a sign of the times. Marijuana, which has been illegal in so many places for so long, is about to go legit in the United Kingdom. Anyone who’s been dealing dope in the shadows can come into the light.
That’s the position American expat Mickey Pearson (Matthew McConaughey) finds himself in. He’s been the ghost boss of a thriving reefer empire in London, England, his new home. Thugs, growers and dealers report to him. Weed liberation is just around the corner, and he’s fully prepared to profit in what is likely be a very lucrative industry.

Charlie Hunnamand Hugh Grant in “The Gentlemen.”
The dude knows he’s large and in charge. And the saying goes: “If you want to be the king of the jungle, you must act like the king of the jungle.” He’s wise enough to be shopping his business around to the highest bidder. He cultivates a gay, cunning and filthy rich billionaire buyer named Matthew (Jeremy Strong, The Big Short), who seizes on business opportunities. Mickey, his wife Rosalind (Michelle Dockery, Downton Abbey), righthand man Ray (Charlie Hunnam, TV’s Sons of Anarchy) and a protective thug named Bunny (Chidi Ajufo, The Widow) are setting themselves up for a big pay day.
Various scoundrels are just as determined to undermine, rob or murder them: There’s Dry Eye (Henry Golding, Crazy Rich Asians) and his crew of saboteurs. The Coach (Colin Farrell, In Burges) and his adolescent gang. The Asian crook Lord George (Tom Wu, Fast & Furious Presents: Hobbs & Shaw). They all fit into the mix. Hands down the most duplicitous one in the bunch is that snooping bugger private investigator Fletcher (Hugh Grant, Four Weddings and a Funeral). He’s never met anyone he couldn’t swindle or blackmail. Drugs, money, loaded guns. What could go wrong?

Michelle Dockery and Matthew McConaughey in “The Gentlemen.”
Writer/director Guy Ritchie, a former video/commercial director turned filmmaker, made his big splash feature film debut with the very clever crime movie Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels. He coined a style of staccato crime/thriller moviemaking that is dense, filled with characters, laden with cheeky graphic language, sexy, often ultra-violent and cast with teams of multicultural British actors. Snatch and RocknRolla followed this pattern. Sherlock Holmes and Aladdin did not. The Gentlemen is an imperfect return to form. As Ritchie wipes away the cobwebs on his signature writing/directing style, he misses a few ingredients—especially breakneck pacing.
The script uses an overabundance of voiceovers and conversations and too many onscreen narrations by Fletcher. Though Hugh Grant is completely charming, he runs his mouth way too much. His recollections are realized in flashbacks, where there is double-dealing, death and betrayals. There’s some of that in the present too. Deciphering it all is like peeling layers off an onion that smells more intensely as you get to the core.
The difference between this clunky piece of storytelling and Lock… or Snatch is that you’re frustrated during the process and not always gleeful. There are lots of stagnant scenes where the pacing (editor James Herbert, Aladdin) grinds to a halt and will test your patience. That’s when your eyes focus on the way too obvious sets (production designer Gemma Jackson and set decorator Sara Whittle) and the neatly pressed clothes (Michael Wilkinson, American Hustle) that look so new you’ll think they’ve still got price tags on them.

Colin Farrell and Charlie Hunnam in “The Gentlemen.”
The wordy script may be a problem, less for adult viewers, more for casual action/thriller fans. But Ritchie’s overall direction of the action scenes, dramatic moments, murders, and swindling is not. In fact, even though he is not at the peak of his game, his style and swagger is still ultra-cool. The cinematographer (Alan Stewart, Aladdin) has a good eye for composition and lighting. The visuals, coupled with a very fun musical score (Christopher Benstead, Gravity) and toe-thumping playlist give the film a rebellious spirit that carries it to the finish line.
Most of the cast looks like they just stepped out of a GQ photo shoot. McConaughey has an air about him that is even more imperialistic than British royalty. Hunnam as Ray is like a hamster in a cage finding out that he’s being played. Strong is suitably sneaky as the buyer. Farrell brings a touch of dry humor to the Coach. Golding, Wu and Ajufo are fun to watch.
But hats off to Grant as the scene stealer. He does whatever he has to do to make Fletcher look like complete scum. If anything, the dazzling Michelle Dockery is not in enough scenes and ditto for the other few actresses who don’t get enough screen time. This is a boy’s club movie.
Time marches on. That youthful swagger that formally burned through Guy Ritchie’s creative soul has matured. So has his selection of actors. Come for the fun of it, sit through the cumbersome storytelling, find a way to enjoy the puzzling antics and you may experience the heady joy of this gangsta caper.
Visit NNPA News Wire Film Critic Dwight Brown at DwightBrownInk.com and BlackPressUSA.com.
#NNPA BlackPress
Recently Approved Budget Plan Favors Wealthy, Slashes Aid to Low-Income Americans
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts

By Stacy M. Brown
BlackPressUSA.com Senior National Correspondent
The new budget framework approved by Congress may result in sweeping changes to the federal safety net and tax code. The most significant benefits would flow to the highest earners while millions of low-income families face cuts. A new analysis from Yale University’s Budget Lab shows the proposals in the House’s Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Resolution would lead to a drop in after-tax-and-transfer income for the poorest households while significantly boosting revenue for the wealthiest Americans. Last month, Congress passed its Concurrent Budget Resolution for Fiscal Year 2025 (H. Con. Res. 14), setting revenue and spending targets for the next decade. The resolution outlines $1.5 trillion in gross spending cuts and $4.5 trillion in tax reductions between FY2025 and FY2034, along with $500 billion in unspecified deficit reduction.
Congressional Committees have now been instructed to identify policy changes that align with these goals. Three of the most impactful committees—Agriculture, Energy and Commerce, and Ways and Means—have been tasked with proposing major changes. The Agriculture Committee is charged with finding $230 billion in savings, likely through changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps. Energy and Commerce must deliver $880 billion in savings, likely through Medicaid reductions. Meanwhile, the Ways and Means Committee must craft tax changes totaling no more than $4.5 trillion in new deficits, most likely through extending provisions of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Although the resolution does not specify precise changes, reports suggest lawmakers are eyeing steep cuts to SNAP and Medicaid benefits while seeking to make permanent tax provisions that primarily benefit high-income individuals and corporations.
To examine the potential real-world impact, Yale’s Budget Lab modeled four policy changes that align with the resolution’s goals:
- A 30 percent across-the-board cut in SNAP funding.
- A 15 percent cut in Medicaid funding.
- Permanent extension of the individual and estate tax cuts from the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.
- Permanent extension of business tax provisions including 100% bonus depreciation, expense of R&D, and relaxed limits on interest deductions.
Yale researchers determined that the combined effect of these policies would reduce the after-tax-and-transfer income of the bottom 20 percent of earners by 5 percent in the calendar year 2026. Households in the middle would see a modest 0.6 percent gain. However, the top five percent of earners would experience a 3 percent increase in their after-tax-and-transfer income.
Moreover, the analysis concluded that more than 100 percent of the net fiscal benefit from these changes would go to households in the top 20 percent of the income distribution. This happens because lower-income groups would lose more in government benefits than they would gain from any tax cuts. At the same time, high-income households would enjoy significant tax reductions with little or no loss in benefits.
“These results indicate a shift in resources away from low-income tax units toward those with higher incomes,” the Budget Lab report states. “In particular, making the TCJA provisions permanent for high earners while reducing spending on SNAP and Medicaid leads to a regressive overall effect.” The report notes that policymakers have floated a range of options to reduce SNAP and Medicaid outlays, such as lowering per-beneficiary benefits or tightening eligibility rules. While the Budget Lab did not assess each proposal individually, the modeling assumes legislation consistent with the resolution’s instructions. “The burden of deficit reduction would fall largely on those least able to bear it,” the report concluded.
#NNPA BlackPress
A Threat to Pre-emptive Pardons
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process.

By April Ryan
President Trump is working to undo the traditional presidential pardon powers by questioning the Biden administration’s pre-emptive pardons issued just days before January 20, 2025. President Trump is seeking retribution against the January 6th House Select Committee. The Trump Justice Department has been tasked to find loopholes to overturn the pardons that could lead to legal battles for the Republican and Democratic nine-member committee. Legal scholars and those closely familiar with the pardon process worked with the Biden administration to ensure the preemptive pardons would stand against any retaliatory knocks from the incoming Trump administration. A source close to the Biden administration’s pardons said, in January 2025, “I think pardons are all valid. The power is unreviewable by the courts.”
However, today that same source had a different statement on the nuances of the new Trump pardon attack. That attack places questions about Biden’s use of an autopen for the pardons. The Trump argument is that Biden did not know who was pardoned as he did not sign the documents. Instead, the pardons were allegedly signed by an autopen. The same source close to the pardon issue said this week, “unless he [Trump] can prove Biden didn’t know what was being done in his name. All of this is in uncharted territory. “ Meanwhile, an autopen is used to make automatic or remote signatures. It has been used for decades by public figures and celebrities.
Months before the Biden pardon announcement, those in the Biden White House Counsel’s Office, staff, and the Justice Department were conferring tirelessly around the clock on who to pardon and how. The concern for the preemptive pardons was how to make them irrevocable in an unprecedented process. At one point in the lead-up to the preemptive pardon releases, it was a possibility that the preemptive pardons would not happen because of the complicated nature of that never-before-enacted process. President Trump began the threat of an investigation for the January 6th Select Committee during the Hill proceedings. Trump has threatened members with investigation or jail.
#NNPA BlackPress
Reaction to The Education EO
BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking a higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college.

By April Ryan
There are plenty of negative reactions to President Donald Trump’s latest Executive Order abolishing the Department of Education. As Democrats call yesterday’s action performative, it would take an act of Congress for the Education Department to close permanently. “This blatantly unconstitutional executive order is just another piece of evidence that Trump has absolutely no respect for the Constitution,” said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) who is the ranking member on the House Financial Services Committee. “By dismantling ED, President Trump is implementing his own philosophy on education, which can be summed up in his own words, ‘I love the poorly educated.’ I am adamantly opposed to this reckless action, said Rep. Bobby Scott who is the most senior Democrat on the House Education and Workforce Committee.
Morgan State University President Dr. David Wilson chimed in saying “I’m deeply concerned about efforts to shift federal oversight in education back to the states, particularly regarding equity, justice, and fairness. History has shown us what happens when states are left unchecked—Black and poor children are too often denied access to the high-quality education they deserve. In 1979 then President Jimmy Carter signed a law creating the Department of Education. Arne Duncan, former Obama Education Secretary, reminds us that both Democratic and Republican presidents have kept education a non-political issue until now. However, Duncan stressed Republican presidents have contributed greatly to moving education forward in this country.
During a CNN interview this week Duncan said during the Civil War President Abraham “Lincoln created the land grant system” for colleges like Tennessee State University. “President Ford brought in IDEA.” And “Nixon signed Pell Grants into law.” In 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act was signed into law by President George W. Bush which increased federal oversight of schools through standardized testing. Meanwhile, the new Education EO jeopardizes funding for students seeking higher education. Duncan states, PellGrants are in jeopardy after servicing “6.5 million people” giving them a chance to go to college. Wilson details, “that 40 percent of all college students rely on Pell Grants and student loans.”
Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC) says this Trump action “impacts students pursuing higher education and threatens 26 million students across the country, taking billions away from their educational futures. Meanwhile, During the president’s speech in the East Room of the White House Thursday, Trump criticized Baltimore City, and its math test scores with critical words. Governor West Moore, who is opposed to the EO action, said about dismantling the Department of Education, “Leadership means lifting people up, not punching them down.”
-
#NNPA BlackPress3 weeks ago
Target Takes a Hit: $12.4 Billion Wiped Out as Boycotts Grow
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Undocumented Workers Are Struggling to Feed Themselves. Slashed Budgets and New Immigration Policies Bring Fresh Challenges
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
BREAKING Groundbreaking Singer Angie Stone Dies in Car Accident at 63
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of February 26 – March 4, 2025
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
NAACP Legend and Freedom Fighter Hazel Dukes Passes
-
Arts and Culture3 weeks ago
Beverly Lorraine Greene: A Pioneering Architect and Symbol of Possibility and Progress
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
Apple Shareholders Reject Effort to Dismantle DEI Initiatives, Approve $500 Billion U.S. Investment Plan
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
Trump Kicks the Ukrainian President Out of the White House