-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
An original film based on actual African history
- Thread starter DeafTourette
- Start date
- Social Event
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
Their part in the slave trade is a part of the movie
I think that is a bit reductive. If Woman King played by the same rules as current European "historical fantasy" films, then you'd expect ahistorical casting inclusion like Asians and whites, at least in the background.
If Woman King stuck more closely to the actual history then the low diversity casting might be justified, like in The Last Duel. But it's straight Hollywoodized history by taking a real event and warping it to fit a modern agenda, so it should be held to that same standards as Vikings:Valhalla, that Anne Boylen show, and any number of other examples and other ethnicities should not be arbitrarily excluded from the story.
Something like that....
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
I'm not saying they should stop making historical films based outside of Europe. In fact, I hope a lot more are made.
I'm arguing that if you're going to make a historical film then it needs to be accurate. Otherwise, lots of people are going to be left with the impression that the story portrayed on screen is fact. Very few people will research a film to check how accurate it is.
You mentioned the TV show Vikings. A good example. I know people who think it's all fact, when it's so inaccurate that it might as well be fantasy.
How about Braveheart? A film loads of people believe to be a true representation of facts, but that film is so laughably inaccurate that it's insulting to both the English and the Scottish. Yes, telling the true story wouldn't make the English conical bad guys and wouldn't paint William Wallace in the best light, but isn't the truth better than a lie that tries to meet modern social standards?
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
It's not about being accurate... It's about being entertained. We aren't watching documentaries... Having JUST ENOUGH be true is enough. Cinderella Man was kinda fraudulent as it depicted Max Baer ... They made him into a narcissistic sociopath... Which he wasn't.
Folks just have to be more discerning... The movie DOES have factual things going on (as much as we know in the year 1823) but the mixing of made-up elements heightens the drama and action.
As I said, truth can be stranger than fiction but it's not always going to be as entertaining.
BigDeadFreak
Member
Interesting article on the movie. I still contend that people dismiss things like this as 'only a movie' when it fits with their ideology and start raging against it when it doesn't. This is equally true for people on the left and the right.
https://unherd.com/2022/09/the-history-wars-target-dahomey/
https://unherd.com/2022/09/the-history-wars-target-dahomey/
Wimbledon
Member
People who "want to be entertained" will look at this as if its true , strong black women, kills man triumphs HOORAH etc. But for the people who are willing to look into the history it isn't so nice, Black slave owners existed in africa and the United States but god forbid we actually teach people about some of the more ugly sides of history a part of history most people not just whites participated in.
But no lets keep revising history to meet modern-day social standards.
Last edited:
Ouch. That's pretty damning. Good on her though.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Only Disney, lol. Only, Disney.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
She made the documentary BEFORE this movie was made... BEFORE it was cast .. back in 2019.
I still find it so interesting that folks get mad at THIS movie when so many are made with white protagonists who were awful people and those movies are championed and loved... Tons of revisionist history in them yet THIS one is torn down ...
And this is her tweet on the US premier of the documentary (it originally aired in 2019 on BBC)
Last edited:
Yeah, though descended from the Luo in Kenya her own ancestors may have been in the EXACT SAME situation, just selling to Muslims, and also stopped by Europeans.
Sign in - Google Accounts
sites.google.com
During this time, Arab slavers moved into the interior of Kenya with the primary goal of exploiting rivalries between local tribes. The Arabs encouraged the powerful groups to conquer their weaker neighbors and sell them into slavery. The slaves were then forced to the coast and on to Zanzibar to be traded. Both ivory and slaves were hugely profitable and Zanzibar grew rich on the trade. This pattern continued despite the public outrage in Europe demanding an end to all slave trade. Eventually, the British brought their forceful anti-slavery message directly to the Sultan as they established a consulate at his court. After years of pressure, the Sultan finally relented and agreed to ban slavery in 1847.
I entirely agree with you, basically this same situation is played over and over with european/american history.
Buuuuuuut, throwing this film out there during this time when slavery (and almost exclusively the western african slave trade), reparations, and racial identity politics are at such a height makes it VERY tone deaf to try to spin a positive message out of folks that were actually DIRECTLY COMPLICIT in the evil and then demonize or minimize the folks that actually stopped it (and who get blamed for it today).
It would be like making a film about the suffrage movement but portraying any men who historically helped advance the position into misogynistic assholes and changing women who DIDN'T want women to vote (I'm sure there were plenty of both) into strong advocates for it. just in order to play to the CURRENT feminist movement instead of honoring the history, including the actual contributions, or failings, of the people at the time.
Can it be done? Sure, and it is, quite often. Look at The Aeronauts, a film ostensibly about a real world pair of high flying balloonists, but they replace one of the men who actually DID this death defying deed with a woman and then have the balls to make the film about sexism. WTF?
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
You realize those enslaved were BOUGHT by Europeans and the Americans, right? They're just as culpable in the slave trade as the Dahomey and other tribes. Not to mention other African countries sought to stop the slave trade independent of European efforts.
And don't forget that France, Portugal, Spain, Denmark, Sweden and England were all involved in the Transatlantic slave trade... The Bahamas, Jamaica, the Virgin Islands, Hispaniola (Haiti and the Dominican Republic), Cuba, Puerto Rico, Brazil, etc. There were famous slave revolts in Haiti and Jamaica... Haiti became poor because of having to pay reparations to France .. they've been in debt ever since.
And there's this little tidbit ... Adds some context to "the woke mob" when you see black people in "historical" TV shows and movies set in the 1800s...
"By the mid 18th century London had the largest Black population in Britain, made up of free and enslaved people, as well as many runaways. The total number may have been about 10,000."
Europe
Introduction to European traders involved in the slave trade. From the history of the transatlantic slave trade section of the International Slavery Museum website.
www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk
Britain (and then the rest) began abolishing slavery BEFORE the US but they started it... That doesn't excuse them from enriching themselves LONG before abolitionists gained traction in the political discourse.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I agree with you, and those movies received just as much criticisms for accuracy over the years. To add, most of them weren't stuck in the current year culture war bad actors are pushing either.
Only Hollywood can make a movie about horrible root slavers that put their people and other tribe's people out on cages on the beach waiting to be picked up, where thousands of British armada men lost their lives (after being the first nation to outright ban slavery) at sea blockading other nations from getting to the shores to perpetuate that atrocity. They gloss over all of that down to the Marvel font with modern ideology injected.
It's why we are stuck in the ill-educated world of, "only white people owned and perpetuated slavery." Especially when slavery is alive and kicking still till this day in places like Africa, Asia, South America, Middle East (look up Kuwait's slave trade buying people into servitude from Somalia and the like), etc., etc..
If people actually learned the true roots, maybe we can all accept it and start getting along instead of pointing fingers at one another in the modern day disconnect over emotional and racial manipulation by those bad actors.
No, no, we never heard that (sarcasm). It's just the only thing ever focused on while dismissing the sins of the father in the other direction.
I remember Don Cheedle's face drop when he learned it wasn't the "white man" he kept perpetuating that owned some of his ancestors, it was actually native tribes in America.
Last edited:
InterMusketeer
Member
You're not wrong. Tons of historical films leave out the unsavory bits for the sake of making a likable protagonist or the story more satisfying. Or perhaps for more questionable reasons too.
I still think that's wholly different from taking a warrior culture known primarily for their brutality and involvement in the slave trade, and twisting it into some kind of empowering story about warrior women. The subject of this film is just poorly chosen. I'm sure there's better, more inspiring stories from Africa they could turn into an action flick and I wouldn't mind if they changed some stuff here and there to make that happen.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
I think the point was having an all or nearly all female army as the hook because that's literally unheard of almost anywhere else in the world. Their story is just as valid to be told as any one else's, in Africa or otherwise. The king is mostly to blame for the slave trade continuing. Plenty in the country wanted to replace slave trade with other means of profit like Palm Oil and ... Another thing I can't remember right now... But nothing paid out as much as slavery... Whether to Europeans or Arabs.
So making the WARRIORS the heroes doesn't bother me because the ROYALS are the ones they answered to. They were kinda like the Dora Milaje (whom they inspired in creating)in that their allegiance was to the throne and not any one king... So what the king said, goes. No matter if they disagreed with it.
Thats 10K out of 16.5 MILLION in 1850. Do the math. Even today, after decades of immigration from Africa, it stands at 3.5% of the population, 1/3 that of the US.
No one debates that black people exist in England, just that Anne Boylen wasn't black, medieval villages in Wales were EXTREMELY unlikely to have any black people, etc. I'd argue that africa had more white people in the early 1800's (as a percentage of population) than England, but do you see any white women as Dahomeys? If we are debating that there should be broad attempts to equally represent all races in all shows, when do we make an exemption?
See, you place uneven weight on the players (IMHO). The african slave trade FAR pre-dates "England" as a country, hell, it's in the damned BIBLE. Yet what country had the power to essentially stop (almost) all of it cold? Thats right, Eeeeeeeeengland. So who gets "the blame"? The humans that participated (i.e. EVERYONE that had an opportunity to)? Who gets credit for ending it? The humans that died to do so by resorting to force?Europe
Introduction to European traders involved in the slave trade. From the history of the transatlantic slave trade section of the International Slavery Museum website.
Britain (and then the rest) began abolishing slavery BEFORE the US but they started it... That doesn't excuse them from enriching themselves LONG before abolitionists gained traction in the political discourse.
Obviously I'm not gonna try to absolve 'white people' from the evils of slavery, or even just the Western African slave trade. But there is more than enough blame to go around, as slavery is a HUMAN EVIL, not just a caucasian one. That point is often overlooked in this discussion, in the US at least. I'd rather spend more time to celebrate the folks who stood up to end the practice than focus on the now long dead folks who perpetuated it because everyone has dirty hands in that.
Anyway, Woman Queen seems to be a pretty decent popcorn flick. It certainly can spark some debate. Success all around! It's even doing pretty well at the Box Office so there is really no need to stan for it in any way. It can easily bear any criticism thrown at it.
InterMusketeer
Member
Those warriors were happy to commit brutal acts of violence on their victims. Blaming it all on a king is too easy.
The story of the amazons, or the Dahomey kingdom deserves to be told, yes. Accurately. Because we're dealing with an important and sensitive subject. They could've made a cool film about the forces of Abeokuta defeating a despicable enemy that constantly raids their lands for slaves.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Getting some "they're just following orders" vibes. Yes, yes they were. And history has taught us that we don't dismiss their acts either.
Not sure what your point is?
Okay, so this documentary was made in 2019. Her casting for The Woman King was announced in 2018. When I searched for her name and the movie, I found articles from march 2018.
I'm sorry, I'm just confused. I don't know what you're trying to say here.
I'm gonna watch the movie regardless, because it looks like something I might enjoy. That I talk about the real story around it isn't anything more than me doing that, talking about the story around it. I ended up ordering a book on them due to me being interested. Would I like more historical accuracy and less villians turned to heroes? For sure, but as I've already stated, I'm not too concerned with it. It's a movie after all. I don't expect anything else than that.
Big Baller
Al Pachinko, Konami President
Another Black Panther movie
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
I think my point was that it takes time for documentaries to be finished. The one I was in took almost 2 years to finish (funding, editing, filming, etc). So she may have been cast or agreed to be in it in 2018... But she had already been doing the documentary in 2018 or even 2017. The doc originally aired in Feb 2019. So it's likely she dropped out of TWK for other reasons... Not because the story wasn't 100% truthful like most historical flicks that occurred WELL before any of us were born. Even WWII flicks are largely fictionalized.
A movie is supposed to entertain... That's how you get and KEEP butts in seats. Even if it was about other events or tribes in Africa before 1900, it would STILL have to be largely fictionalized and, depending on style of story you want to tell (action, drama, intrigue, spy, etc), entertaining. Otherwise, it's a documentary.
Anyway, I have been trying not to spoil anything about the movie... As long as you go in without preconceived notions of what to expect, you'll very likely enjoy it. This is real cinema... Not a popcorn flick. It reminds me, in some ways, of films like Lawrence of Arabia and Raiders of the Lost Ark... Not in story but in execution and scale.
Vicetrailia
Banned
You are literally the culture war police. Bend over hollywood, do the story that I want you to do or i'll cancel you.
Last edited:
InterMusketeer
Member
Okay.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
If you want historical accuracy, don't go to the movies. Barely any movie has been 100% historically accurate. ACTUAL events in the movie actually happened (battles, defeats, wins because those can be verified and are part of historical record) but what's in-between is made up. I mean no one had biographers in Dahomey for interpersonal interactions.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
You are correct for the most part, but this is your thread title
So please don't get upset when people have criticisms for the optics Edit: Sony chose and how the thread started off. I think we've all been pretty civil discussing overall in here.
Last edited:
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
It's still based on real African history... The battles (wins and losses) still actually happened... The king was a real person... There's lots in it that is part of historical record... And I believe I also said "we don't know what their interpersonal interactions were like" ... Which is what is fictionalized.
And this isn't Disney... This is Sony
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
In which we are discussing accuracies and whatnot. Why are you so hellbent on shutting down discussion around that? All historical films receive discussion such as this.
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
I've seen the movie .. going again this weekend with a best friend of mine. I'm not trying to quash discussion on this film. I'm bringing my own perspective because I've seen it. I'm DISCUSSING the film without spoiling it. So I can't get into what's actually inaccurate and what isn't without getting into specifics... I might after this weekend...
I'll say this... I wasn't expecting to be hit with the emotions I felt when watching it. Key parts had me openly weeping. I was actually expecting to be let down because I've never heard of the director before... And figured the action would be Liam Neeson'd to death. I was thankfully proven wrong.
No, not all films do. I just looked back at the Elvis thread. Only one person even touched on the inaccuracies... It was mostly about Baz Luhrman and how bad his movies were, Austin Butler didn't look like Elvis and other superficial things like that. Yet folks went rabid back in the day (on another board) about ALL the inaccuracies about The Patriot... But were quiet as a mouse with BraveHeart. It really depends on the TYPE and STYLE of movie, it seems. I liked BraveHeart more than The Patriot, btw.
Again, I'm not trying to shut anything down... I'm trying to add to the discussion (and a bit of pushback) as someone who's seen the film.
Apologies for any antagonizing on my part. Probably PTSD from ragetubers LoL
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
Soon as I find out, I got you on timetable!
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
When it comes to one of the streaming services, I'm most definitely going to give it a watch.
Historical time period films are my jam.
Last edited:
DeafTourette
Perpetually Offended
GnomeChimpsky
Member
Well we've never seen such cynical revisionism in a movie before so it's well deserved.
GnomeChimpsky
Member
Robert the Bruce betraying WW is probably the worst one, the rest is just your standard Hollywood revisionism. Still doesn't come close to Woman King though.
Slicker than your average
Banned
It is widely known Africans took part in the slave trade too. However it always seems to be a sticking point of whataboutism or to play down the awfulness of the slave trade itself to excuse it.
At the end of the day there wouldn't be a slave trade if there wasn't a market for it in, especially in the US.
BigDeadFreak
Member
A slave trade requires both a market and people willing to enslave others. Both of those have been present in pretty much every human civilisation since time began.
It’s always a difficult thing to talk about because we’re all complicit in it (where do you think your phone comes from) and yet all horrified by it.
It’s always easier to blame ‘others’ for the horrors of the past than it is to take any responsibility for it. Black people often want to blame it all on whites and white people prefer to focus on the fact that they were the ones that stopped it. As a result these discussions just go round in circles.
Humanity would be better off if we stopped squabbling about history and focussed on trying to free the slaves that exist today.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
Braveheart is just standard Hollywood revisionism. It's a lot worse. It's easily the most historically inaccurate film ever made. It's so inaccurate that it's deeply insulting to both the English and the Scottish. Robert the Bruce betraying William Wallace was a minor inaccuracy compared to some of the other shit that film came out with.
I spit on that film.
sol_bad
Member
Yeah, sure, OK.
Don't give Hollywood any ideas.
Elton John already wrote the soundtrack to that film though
Trazyn the Infinite
Member
I saw it and it was a solid film, but rather unmemorable. Almost entirely fiction, so if you are looking for anything of historical value - none to be seen here.
But I do hope that we get to see more African stories being told - just in a better manner than this.
But I do hope that we get to see more African stories being told - just in a better manner than this.
GnomeChimpsky
Member
Poppycock. Watch more films.
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
Such as?
GnomeChimpsky
Member
The Woman King
IDKFA
I am Become Bilbo Baggins
You think The Woman King is more historically inaccurate than Braveheart?
No. Absolutely not. The Woman King may take liberties with the truth, but almost all films based on history do this. Braveheart is so inaccurate it might as well be a fantasy film.