look, if this were the case and the film was wholly acknowledged and was truthful about the extent and complicity of the Dahomey in the slave trade then this wouldn’t be an argument in the first place. but then again, if they did, they couldn’t have made the movie. the Dahomey were not just unwillingly complicit, they staked a significant portion of their economy on it and were one of the few African nations at the time to have a uniformed standing army so they could continue to supply their “product”. their captives had also been used as slaves within their own kingdom and as human sacrifices, as well. the Agojie were considered “wives of the King” and were often made up of forced conscripts and, you guessed it, slaves, and were forbidden to have husbands outside the king. they glossed over A LOT.
i will agree that this film is attacked a little unfairly, though, in its inaccuracies, because they are far from the first to do so. Hamilton is great but let’s not forget that (cont.)
he kept slaves of his own. The Greatest Showman COMPLETELY ignores what an outright BASTARD PT Barnum was, and racist, and general bigot. Law and Order SVU was inspired by Linda Fairstein, who was the prosecutor in charge of the infamous “Central Park 5” trials that led to the unjust incarceration of five black teenagers for years until the real assailant came forward, fabricating timelines and ignoring evidence to the contrary of her “findings”.
Gone With The Wind? slave owners and Confederates were our protagonists.
Hollywood loves a good story, facts be damned. it’s just sad that it continues to do so despite mankind having the greatest access to information in its history.
It is something to consider. It’s also a question of just what you say- story. Consider this- none of us are likely saints. Perhaps you have cheated on a partner or betrayed a friend or served time in prison for some crime etc etc.
ok. Now let’s say that something REALLY funny or interesting happened to you. Do we need to include a part about how cheated on your partner in a story about a whacky DMV visit or the time you got a DUI when we are telling the story of your unlikely career rise from high school drop out to successful business owner or whatever?
The problem is that it’s sort of inherent that if you pick a person and pick some aspect of their life that seems interesting or inspirational and focus a narrative on that- that story is going to seem or act as s sort of puff piece for them. “Oh look how clever this young man is and how interesting and bold his political career is. What was his name? Joe Stalin? Seems like a great guy!” Of course he is a monster.
It’s hyperbole- if we pick someone more obscure that a good deal of the world is less familiar with it works better- but the point is that there’s hardly a human being or nation or time period we can’t pick and find some interesting aspect that if we ignore the darker parts would seem cool.
Narratively and morally, the slave ownership of a person would need and deserve its own film or at least a major plot line. It might not just seem disrespectful but also confusing to watch a film where half the movie was Chris Farley as a ninja and the other half was a gritty and honest look at his drug use and the pain that caused him as well as others. You COULD make a movie that showed both- the “hurting clown,” and it can be quite good- but only if that was the film. A juxtaposition of things. You couldn’t take Beverley Hills Ninja and intersperse realistic coke binged and crashes. It would be a narrative mess.
Of course it isn’t always “innocent story telling” that leaves the less admirable parts of certain stories off the script page. Media is political. But at the end of the day we can blame film makers but really… the majority of us are just kinda simple. How many chefs have to go out of business making cuisine that expands horizons and explores healthy and sustainable dining and how many billions does mc Donald’s and the like have to make before most chefs focus on small scale niche clients and let the business suits microwaving burgers have the rest? It’s a cliche but true. Transformers and top guns and such make billions and fill seats while legitimately interesting and novel and intelligent films and cult classics often die on the vine and if lucky find a niche or a second life down the road.
The audience demands simple. In truth- it’s all many can understand. Binary. Good and bad. There is a smidge of room for flaws, acceptable flaws that are often remedied in the course of the film. “Bad dad becomes good..” “womanizer finds love..” blah blah. Indiana Jones was almost definitely a sex offender and if not was dangerously close and still ethically murky. He is repeatedly and somewhat rightfully called a grave robber among other things, there’s a bit more. He’s only one example. Here’s a guy they even show his flaws on screen- but the message almost everyone leaves with is “coool.” Of course- if Indy was a convicted serial child rapist who couldn’t teach he’d probably be less palatable. “Complex” villains in mainstream darlings tend to be guys like Hanibal- who later gets an entire back story to make him even more sympathetic. We live in a world where “Tennant” and “Inception” are touted as smart cinema that people can’t understand. For goodness sake. Tennant and Inception.
There is a duality to a free or semi free market. Where there are conglomerates and such, they control the supply and what is available does shape tastes, but in a free or semi free market what is supplied is usually what sells. Look no further than politics in America to see how poorly people cope with nuance in human character. Joe Biden very obviously pulled some strings to help his son and Donald Trump is obviously a criminal in almost every way one can be criminal in business and politics. Yet half the country can’t admit one and half can’t admit the other. You either believe Donald Trump is a baby eating demon or innocent/above punishment. You either believe that Biden wants to steal your children or is an old Angel. We can pick others. GB Jr. Was actually a reasonably bright man and did some great things, but he was either an idiot or a prophet. Blah blah.
The people who make things and sell them make the things we buy. The only way to end the Bs is to outsmart those peddling BS, and… I regret to inform you that humanity is not up to the task. Is it even that people are so dumb? No. Simple, not dumb. We like the BS. We want to believe and have others believe the things that suit us. Like a 17yo convincing their partner you can’t get pregnant standing up. No one in that room likely believes that truly if they posses any intellect or knowledge. Those that proceed WANT to believe it. They want it to be true. If more than one person wants it to be true and plays along… the BS is bought and sold. That’s movies. That’s economics. That’s politics. Not dumb- simple. Self motivated, and a lie that suits one’s self is often seen as better than a truth that doesn’t.
i will agree that this film is attacked a little unfairly, though, in its inaccuracies, because they are far from the first to do so. Hamilton is great but let’s not forget that (cont.)
Gone With The Wind? slave owners and Confederates were our protagonists.
Hollywood loves a good story, facts be damned. it’s just sad that it continues to do so despite mankind having the greatest access to information in its history.
ok. Now let’s say that something REALLY funny or interesting happened to you. Do we need to include a part about how cheated on your partner in a story about a whacky DMV visit or the time you got a DUI when we are telling the story of your unlikely career rise from high school drop out to successful business owner or whatever?
The problem is that it’s sort of inherent that if you pick a person and pick some aspect of their life that seems interesting or inspirational and focus a narrative on that- that story is going to seem or act as s sort of puff piece for them. “Oh look how clever this young man is and how interesting and bold his political career is. What was his name? Joe Stalin? Seems like a great guy!” Of course he is a monster.
Narratively and morally, the slave ownership of a person would need and deserve its own film or at least a major plot line. It might not just seem disrespectful but also confusing to watch a film where half the movie was Chris Farley as a ninja and the other half was a gritty and honest look at his drug use and the pain that caused him as well as others. You COULD make a movie that showed both- the “hurting clown,” and it can be quite good- but only if that was the film. A juxtaposition of things. You couldn’t take Beverley Hills Ninja and intersperse realistic coke binged and crashes. It would be a narrative mess.