For Colored Girls...

So, I should probably be studying...or at least doing something related to school, but I'm not. I just came from seeing "For Colored Girls." Let me start off by saying that I've read the play by Ntozake Shange and seen a stage version of the play. I enjoyed a number of the poems/scenes in the play, in particular "Beau Willie Brown", "Somebody Walked off with my Stuff" and "Toussaint."
A number of questions and thoughts recurred for me throughout the film:
Thought #1: There is a reason there exists a distinction between plays and films. Not every play can be made into a film. In particular, I do not think this play should have been made into a film. "For Colored Girls" consists of a series of 20 poems, which are essentially just monologues. Nowhere in life do people speak in monologue other than on talk shows, perhaps. At one point during the film, Whoopi Goldberg's character and Thandie Newton's character are giving concurrent monologues in the same room. Yes, two people were having monologues which were loosely related to each other, while sitting in the same room, seemingly oblivious to what the other woman was saying...not too well thought out in my opinion. Incorporating monologues into a film is difficult to do naturally and, in my opinion, was done poorly in this instance.
Sub-thought: There is a difference between stage ACTING and screen acting. When people are acting in plays on stage, over-acting is necessary to allow people far from the stage to be able to feel like they know what's going on. In a film on a big screen, this is unnecessary, because the screen is...big. Everyone in the theater can see what's going on, and overacting just comes across as excessive. I'm specifically referring to Anika Noni Rose. She has done well in other films, like "Dreamgirls" but I felt like she was overacting.
Thought #2: Using this film (which took liberties from the play) as a random sample, apparently around 90% of black men are no good. Men are either drunks or cheat on their wives (some of them with other men, an a character Tyler Perry created and added on his own, not in the original play), or are rapists. I understand that the content of the play involved women who have been mistreated by men, but the only man who was actually considered present in any of the poems (to my recollection) was Beau Willie Brown.
Sub-thought: I guess Tyler Perry has something against black men.
Final thought: The two things I most anticipated in this film were seeing Phylicia Rashad's character (because it always makes me nostalgic to see Claire Huxtable) and seeing/hearing the poem "Toussaint." Much to my delight, this monologue was going to be performed BY Phylicia Rashad. To my dismay, however, it was cut short. From all of the artistic license that Tyler Perry took with this adaptation, why did he have to cut this monologue? There were enough outdated monologues which were left unaltered and included in the film...but he HAD to cut that one.
Let me end by saying that this isn't a commentary on Ntozake Shange's work, which I think is excellent. I enjoyed it and decided to see the film for myself, rather than jump on the bandwagon in either direction. Although Tyler Perry's adaptation could have been worse, it could definitely have been a lot better.
And please don't let me hear anyone else use the word "Oscar" in any discussion involving this film.