You'd have to hold a heart of stone or be the world's biggest bigot not to shed a tear at this tragic story of a promising athlete cut down at the prime of his life, all because the police mistook him for somebody else. It's as if this was ripped off the headlines today, yet told both with reality and compassion and fairness to everybody involved. In short, this is a masterpiece that just happened to be released by a film studio known for making violent exploitation films that were made for a black audience. This is a film that screams out to be seen by those who believe in civil justice for everybody, regardless of social status, color of their skin, and where they happen to live.When you first meet Cornbread (Keith Wilkes), you can tell that he has potential, not only as an athlete but as a human being. Preteen neighbor Laurence Fishburne adores him, and the sudden murder of Cornbread by the police practically destroys him and his loving mother (a wonderful Rosalind Cash), stirring up the neighborhood and cresting hardships for Cash due to her disagreeable boyfriend and shifty city officials who want the case to be dropped. They use all sort of threats to stop the case against the city from proceeding, even threatening to close Cash's welfare case, necessary because of her heart ailment.Moses Gunn is commanding as the legal counsel for Cornbread's family, the voice of ethics for the whole situation, and a real hero. He's basically playing the Gary Cooper/James Stewart role in a very Capra like movie, a lost cause that needs to be fought, but not in the way some social justice groups try to fight the system today. Cash is superb, winning the audience over when she shows despondence over Fishburne shoplifting a candybar, obviously determined to reach him right from wrong. As for the character of Cornbread, he's shown to be a typical fun loving but family and neighborhood devoted young man, pranksterish as he involves his parents in an early morning basketball game in their dining room. Madge Sinclair, as the mother, shows both amusement and sternness as she insists that the game be moved outside while complaining about being fouled in an attempt to grab the ball. It is little bits like that which humanizes the characters in this urban neighborhood, although there are a few shady faces thrown in, too, particularly Antonio Fargas's one-eyed numbers runner who obviously intends to corrupt young Cornbread. If this has one flaw, it is the fact that it tries to show too much in a short period of time, indicating that the intended slice of black urban life needed to be expanded a bit and that this was far too important a film to be released as a B picture. 40+ years later, this has the potential to become a masterpiece made before its time. For me, it's a film I will cherish because it gives me a different perspective to look on when stories like this make headlines.

I was very disturbed by the negative review given by a man who actually lived during the times dramatize in "Cornbread, Earl and Me." I am a 26-year-old Black female watching this movie for the first time. I found that every issue addressed in this movie is transcendent, relevant even today.It amazes me that we overlook the importance of a message simply because of the delivery. In all fairness to this movie, there is no blaxploitation present; the language, attire, scenery, etc., everything necessary for a realistic plot, is perfect for the setting and time frame of this movie. Regarding the comment about "ghetto language" there is a balance between the use of the formal and informal in the movie.As an English teacher, and one who has a strong disdain for negative images of African-Americans, I can honestly say that this movie's depiction of African-American life was very well done. It was also poignant and ahead of its time. It is movie that, when the time comes, I will show to my children as a reference to how very little times have changed regarding the ease of wrongful deaths, slandering of names, harassment of witnesses because of racial advantages, or rather disadvantages.The movie is GREAT;-)

I saw this film in the theater in 1975 when it came out. It bothered me a lot then, because I was a 10-year old, insecure black boy and I believed the things I saw on film. I was really sensitive to violent images on screen in those days (not that they mean nothing now, but I'm definitely more desensitized). Anyway, seeing an 18-year old black man shot and killed on screen really made me feel insecure about my own future.Anyway, I just watched this movie again for the first time in 30 years. This movie sucks!!! All of the black characters are like "Ohh, Lawd... we in de ghetto, sho nuff!" All the white characters are horribly racist and every time they open their mouths, no matter what they say, it seems to come out as "nigger!" I'm sure some will say, "Well, that's the way it was in 1975 and these blaxploitation film paved an importance on the way to current progress. Well, whatever. This movie is so bad it's more of a joke than Saturday Night Live.

The film does have a moderately intriguing mesage about polkice brutality and political corruption being obscenely hoisted upon African American communities in the urban United States. That said, the film is horribly dated, and elements of it are unnacceptable by today's standards. I mean the slain icon's name is Cornbread for Pete's sake!!! Where wre his cohorts Fried Chicken and Watermelon? Moreover, the societal corruption is presented in a way that makes us feel sad and powerless rather than angry and indignant. This is really a product of the early seventies Blaxploitation genre that would be utterly offensive by today's standards were it not for the still relevant and timely subject matter of the film. Worthwhile viewing for those who can differentiate between the message and the overdone elements. I fear, however, that the film's excess could leave white biggots laughing at the maudlin African American stereotypes on parade rather than addressing the political concerns of the film at all.