Jump to content

"if called by a panther, don't anther"


Cynique

Recommended Posts

Well, the results are in. "Black Panther" which opened this week-end  was a box office sensation to the tune of $192,000,000+, primarily due to the patronage of black people deliriously happy to have a super hero with the same skin color as theirs. These theatergoers showed up in droves, many of them decked out in African garb, all ready to have their hunger for something other than movies depicting the drudgery and cruelty of slavery in America, satisfied. Reviews of this film have been good, and popular opinion has been overwhelming in its enthusiastic approval. That the movie's director is also black, is chocolate icing on the devils food cake.  But there are always voices of dissent and social media provides a platform for this. The pros and cons of this movie are being debated on "Twitter", i hear.  

 

I recently expressed my prejudices toward what i perceived as arrogant immigrants and the upsurge of African surnames dominating the film and publishing industry. I was miffed by these dark-skinned people with clipped British accents and unpronounceable names benefiting from all the "gains" black Americans fought for, only to see roles for them fall into the laps of Africans. e.g. In this year's academy award nominee "Get Out",  the romantic lead who is a professional photographer is played by a goofy looking African with blood-shot eyes, while the comic relief is provided by a black American actor personifying  bufoonery and profanity.   

 

 So, the article below resonated with me.  I'm sure the majority of black Americans will dismiss the author's  complaints as those of a nit-picking malcontent but, naturally, i didn't. I love iconoclasts. 

 

 

Spoiler Alert: the plot details are discussed,  

panther&h=ATMV0J3q8-ZfvtX8aow9Cv0ru_ePcQJqd3t8_BYWcQjc7tm6DbNhaTqVgNStj9i3xsiKcKVUx3hXvGLR4MRK5noy8Rv4m-Un2ovo4wEymSRm3_RKi5ZbWrXxJftQ9jsro4Qu8hTJK0J0MmUHo9wAOFcZnZ2hA39tmB8U3AYvtf0qEE5OaqkkrD1O27yCpqYwUfdt_iilQ6QJLf8gB_1bD7BvkIDFLg8avEziI0v67spzxSLooR2Q4UXuzhiNCiN9kvKXSynG4Gn84A

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno if I was 30 years younger I would probably get excited about this flick, but to me it is just another superhero movie with video game action and the same story written to appeal to teen age boys...

 

I also resist, by my very nature, the herd mentality exhibited by Black folks in seeing this movie.  I feel manipulated, by the people who are making the real money from this film.  

 

@Cynique, I understand the sentiment (and will read the article after I see the film), but all this does is serve to divide Black people.

 

I will however say the people are gorgeous, and the visuals are quite appealing.  I do plan to see the film, probably this evening, so I'll have more to say later. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • A Black story, predominately Black cast and Black director and writer. And it is the hottest movie out, and it is ringing the register. 
  •  
  • This is historic
  • i read Cynique's link. yeah the movie has some societal issues. But it is worthy of discussion.
  • Look at the range of characters. The tech head , the warriors, revolutinary, killers, theives. Yet they are undeniably black without being sterotypical.
  • Black peope posting their exuberance and disdain. Man this is like Obama but with a better ending.

    •  
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


It might be a movie put out for catharsis purposes.

The POWERFUL will put out a film for those who are POWERLESS in this society to live out their fantasies on film as a way of satisfying them INSTEAD OF actually giving them opportunities to improve themselves in real life.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"It's a film with Black Female warriors. The Tech nerd is a woman. The bad guys are white and their leader is black. " Beth.

 

How often are any one of those elements in a film. 

 

You can criticise the film. The villain is noble and heroic. Yes it is a movie. But it is making Black people very visible and it's a compelling story.  So despite all of its flaws it's is a compelling piece of social commentary. 

 

 

Did you know the character predated the Black Panther movement. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Troy and Pioneer you had issues about Viola Davis and how she was presented. The Black Panther has a broad spectrum of believable black characters. Yet no love from you two.  Weren't we talking about not being represented in the culture. 

This Halloween white kids will want to be the Black Panther. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This movie is a fantasy about super heroes living in a  black Utopia full of characters represented by paragons.  i don't get the impression that there's anything believable about this picture.  it is escape entertainment.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't say I had a problem with the film.

I haven't even seen it yet.

Everyone I know who HAS, said it was a good film.....so I'm not dissing it.

I'm just saying that PERHAPS it was a catharsis.

Cynique said it was "escape entertainment"....and that's what a catharsis is.
It's a means of ESCAPE from your reality when you feel you are powerless to change it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry @Delano, I'm not going to jump on the Black Panther lovefest until I've actually seen the film.  Why on Earth would you say I have "no love" for the film?  Looks just because I'm not creaming my pants over a movie like the masses seem to be as reflected on social media -- which is a distortion of reality.  The truth is I don't get that excited about ANY movie.

 

As Cynique described, it is "escape entertainment," an action flick -- lets keep things in perspective.  This will not change the world. It is entertainment pure and simple. It is designed and created to make money. 

 

Del did you see the film before you wrote all of this?

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, this movie is "escapism", - which, incidentally,  is not a synonym for "cathartic". Just read an interesting take on this film wherein the writer suggested the the villain was actually the hero in this movie     His rebelling against being disinherited by the establishment and denied his status is who black Americans should be identifying with; not the affluent, powerful king of a high tech society.

 

i have yet to understand why black Americans are so frantic to kick their indigenous history to the curb in favor of a fictional  kingdom that never existed anywhere on the African continent.  Black Wall Street and  other thriving  independent black communities like the section in Brooklyn which was plowed under to make way for Central  Park,  Eatonville, Florida, the idyllic all-black home town of Zora Neale Hurston, and Rosewood, Florida, are just 3 noteworthy historical examples of what black folks were capable of doing, much to the chagrin of the white forces that destroyed them. 

 

Something akin to mass hysteria has infected the black community to the "Ka-Ching" of Black Panther's producers.  But, i don't really perceive this as harmful.  It's a feel-good movie. So be it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because the reality is bitter. And not everyone likes the Blues.

24 minutes ago, Cynique said:

i have yet to understand why black Americans are so frantic to kick their indigenous history to the curb in favor of a fictional  kingdom that never existed anywhere on the African continent

Because the reality is bitter. And not everyone likes the Blues.

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Cynique said:

Yes, the reality is bitter, but it's not as if the alternative to this bitterness is an historic reality. It's just a delusion.  

Yes which is why drugs and alcohol are popular. "Reality Is For People That Can't Handle Drugs Group" David Foster Wallace Infinite Jest pg 707

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Cynique the people who create movies and build the hype behind them are really very good at what they do.  This more than anything else explains why people are in a frenzy over the fictional country of Wakanda rather than Tulsa Oklahoma.

 

The marketers who get us all hyped about a film could use this talent to generate hype over actual Black history, which in my opinion is far more fascinating, but uplifting people is not as lucrative as selling movie tickets. 

 

@Delano, Have you seen the film?  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.okayplayer.com/culture/ryan-coogler-michael-b-jordan-reteam-wrong-answer-movie.html

 

Cogler and Jordan plan on doing a movie about the richest man in history 

 

http://thesource.com/2018/02/19/ryan-coogler-and-michael-b-jordan-wants-to-bring-mansa-musa-to-the-big-screen/

These two Brothers know how to work the system. So now the next couple of movies are more realistic based on their success with Black Panther.

You ring the register the studio let's you make a smaller movie. Although based on the success of their previous collaboration they may get an epic budget. 

 

So if they do a small budget film that does box office. They can make an epic film. Not because it's the  right thing to do but because it's a good investment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I saw Black Panther last night. I was definitely a step above the typical action flick, the plot was a bit deeper.  Sure it had all the requisite battles, explosions, fast cars, and attractive women and muscular men engaging in death defying feats aided by super powers -- all of which gives it its universal mass appeal.  

 

I thought it was an excellent film. I was not the greatest film ever, but for a superhero action fick it was as good as they come.  Certainly better than any that I can recall seeing in the last decade. 

 

The audience I watched the move with, in Tampa Florida, which was virtually all white applauded at the end of the film.

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've seen the movie and I think it was great.

I thought it has some pretty powerful spiritual messages in it that related to traditional African spirituality.
Especially as it relates to the "realm of the ancestors".

It reminded me of Shaka Zulu mixed with Game of Thrones....lol.

But unfortunately without the NUDITY that is found in both series.

Another thing I noticed about the film is that with all the Afrocentric concepts introduced.....POLYGAMY which is so common in traditional African culture...was not such much as even hinted.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Another thing I noticed about the film is that with all the Afrocentric concepts introduced.....POLYGAMY which is so common in traditional African culture...was not such much as even hinted.

 

Why would an advanced futuristic Utopian society where women have been elevated, devote any attention to polygamy? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Cynique said:

 

Why would an advanced futuristic Utopian society where women have been elevated, devote any attention to polygamy? 


Once again, YOUR WRONG...lol....but I don't expect you to admit it.

According to the plot, it's not a "futuristic" society but a hidden CONTEMPORARY one parallel with the outside world.

And whether a society practices polygamy or not has NOTHING to do with how elevated the women are.
Western civilization has STRICTLY instituted and promoted monogamy through out it's entire history and has also been one of the most oppressive societies for women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Pioneer1Oh, puleeze.  How do you think bringing polygamy into the story-line would have advanced the plot? It would be an irrelevant distraction. That's why the writer and director left it out.  As usual the info you provide is a non sequitur. And it's debatable whether polygamy would be beneficial in this modern society to anybody but men because it inevitably provides an opportunity for them to oppress and exploit women. Conversely, single women may like playing around  with more than one man but very few of them would be interested in having multiple husbands. They are all looking for that one "Mr. Right".  Another example of  you having knowledge, but not comprehension. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DelAre you referring to gay people? what about the statement below didn't apply to your question.

 

3 hours ago, Cynique said:

Conversely, single women may like playing around  with more than one man but very few of them would be interested in having multiple husbands. They are all looking for that one "Mr. Right

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/02/2018 at 7:58 PM, Cynique said:

Why would an advanced futuristic Utopian society where women have been elevated, devote any attention to polygamy? 

My comment was on response to the above statement. 

How does their sexual preference have any impact on my statement? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DelI'm not sure what statement you are referring to.  My response was to Pioneer's implication equating polygamy with liberating women from the  monogamous society which has a history of oppressing them; something i find questionable, because  belonging to a harem still casts women in a subordinate role.  And that, as far as marriage goes, i really believe that presently women are seeking one spouse who adequately fills all of their needs, rather than a brigade of husbands to keep up with. If they are lesbians, then this still applies.  If they are bi-sexual, then marriage is not a viable option.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Delano

I totally support women having the right to marry more than one husband if they choose to do so.

For me, polygamy means BOTH men and women having the right to choose multiple spouses as long as all involved are consenting adults.

That would be an example of REAL sexual freedom.

 

 

 

 

Cynique


My response was to Pioneer's implication equating polygamy with liberating women from the monogamous society which has a history of oppressing them


Once again you're ATTEMPTING to misconstrue my position, lol.

I didn't say that polygamy either LIBERATED or OPPRESSED women.
Polygamy and monogamy have ALMOST NOTHING to do with how advanced or repressed women are in society.

For thousands of years women had more rights in polygamous Sub-Saharan Africa than they had in monogamous Western Europe.
And today women have more rights in monogamous Western Europe than in polygamous Middle Eastern countries.

The point is....one has nothing to do with the other.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:


Delano

I totally support women having the right to marry more than one husband if they choose to do so.

For me, polygamy means BOTH men and women having the right to choose multiple spouses as long as all involved are consenting adults.

That would be an example of REAL sexual freedom.

 

 

It would appear that Pioneer read both ways. Kudos. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@DelNobody said they were against woman having multiple husbands.  I simply made the realistic observation that in today's modern open society,  single woman can and do  play the field, but when it comes to marriage, they are looking for that one Mr. Right, rather than deluding themselves into thinking that any man worth having would consent to being  a  member of a team of husbands married to one woman.   Get real. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, i ask, who said that polygamy  should be limited to men?  i didn't.  But in an era where woman are becoming increasingly assertive and demanding, when homosexulaity  has set a precedence in challenging societal taboos and subsequently  become acceptable, i find it significant that polygamy is conspicuously absent  from the agenda of women.  Single women, like single males, lead the kind of lives they want to so why was the subject of polygamy even raised by the person who raised it?  No reference to it was included in the movie Black Panther because it has no relevance.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Pioneer1 said:

Delano

I totally support women having the right to marry more than one husband if they choose to do so.

For me, polygamy means BOTH men and women having the right to choose multiple spouses as long as all involved are consenting adults.

That would be an example of REAL sexual freedom.

Perhaps societies that at more open, fair  or equitable or about sexual relationships, would also be more progressive in the main .

6 hours ago, Cynique said:

@DelNobody said they were against woman having multiple husbands.  I simply made the realistic observation that in today's modern open society,  single woman can and do  play the field, but when it comes to marriage, they are looking for that one Mr. Right, rather than deluding themselves into thinking that any man worth having would consent to being  a  member of a team of husbands married to one woman.   Get real. 

Perhaps some women prefer neither marriage nor monogamy . Your response seems more limiting. Your statement or rather your response takes  an open statement ,," it could be many men ." Into a binary western Judeo-Christian perspective .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

@DelWould you want to be one among the multiple husbands of a woman?  What's "open and progressive" about this? It is a form of exploitation, by the person who has more than one spouse.  Who would voluntarily want to be in the pecking order for a shared mate?  You?  It's more beneficial to just be a "side piece".   

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, zaji said:

 

Exactly. Folks forget that there are/were African cultures where the woman has more than one man, not the man having more than one woman. Matriarchs. 

I have not actively read about about social sexual mores . Even though I have read erotica from different perspectives and cultural sexual techniques plus sex magic .

Both Thor and the Black Panther cut a lesbian love scene. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps Pioneer can explain 

30 minutes ago, Cynique said:

 

@DelWould you want to be one among the multiple husbands of a woman?  What's "open and progressive" about this? It is a form of exploitation, by the person who has more than one spouse.  Who would voluntarily want to be in the pecking order for a shared mate?  You?  It's more beneficial to just be a "side piece".   

I can't explain why you would want to do it. However other people see the issue differently. You may be confusing a harem with polygamy polyandry or polyamory. 

or maybe I am

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 If you can't explain something then maybe you ought not appoint yourself as the spokesman of "other people".  When i said spouse, this applied to marriage; not a harem.  This is a dead end-conversation, rife with speculation.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cynique said:

 If you can't explain something then maybe you ought not appoint yourself as the spokesman of "other people".  

Cynique you are projecting. And asking me to say what works for other people. 

If you reread what I have written you may find this to be the case, if not then quote my statement and let's discuss it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It was a great movie. I don't think it will get best picture though. Set or costume design may get an award.

 

He covered some big issues by having each character struggle with them: Charity Opression Responsibility Loyalty Allegiance Vengeance Identity Family. 

It joins a handful of my favorite movies that work on more than one level. I would put it slightly above Star Wars because of the acting.

2 hours ago, Cynique said:

 If you can't explain something then maybe you ought not appoint yourself as the spokesman of "other people".  When i said spouse, this applied to marriage; not a harem.  This is a dead end-conversation, rife with 

2 hours ago, Cynique said:

 If you can't explain something then maybe you ought not appoint yourself as the spokesman of "other people".  When i said spouse, this applied to marriage; not a harem.  This is a dead end-conversation, rife with speculation.  

What's with all the binary thinking. I can explain and I am not the spokesperson for anyone. In addition to being a thinker it should be obvious that I have no interest in any active leadership. The only correct statement is   your last sentence. However the dead end is your unwillingness to contemplate another point of view. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Is your point that polygamy is better for men than women. 

 

The reason some choose polygamy is so that they have a choice. Instead of creating a relationship where there is deception,polygamy acknowledges a truth. Some people need more than one (sexual) partner. An open relationship works better if the partners love each other, don't care and or aren't jealous or possessive. 

 

If you would have asked 14 years ago if I could handle polygamy. I would have said yes. If we both could have secondary partners. Honesty and truth is more important. I also would make a difference between sexual and emotional pairings. I could accept a partner cheating on me easier than not listening to me.

 

I reckon this is where we diverge. Which is why you see polygamy as diminishing. It can be but need not be.

 

The end of the book 1984 really defines betrayal. 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Del My point was that polygamy is about multiple spouses, not about single people having various partners.  And given the unlikelihood of the male ego being unable to deal with sharing a wife with other husbands, and considering  how  straight women envision a happy marriage with the man of their dreams fathering their children in a family unit, polygamy hasn't emerged as a feasible choice in today's modern society. Especially  with how women are currently focusing on such issues as equal pay for equal work and, most recently,  on  men sexually harassing them. And, yes, i do think polygamy makes it easy to exploit people.  

 

I don't have a problem with accepting your point of view because, as far as i can discern, it amounts to nothing more than you empathizing with a "different-strokes-for-different-folks" stance.  Your prerogative.

 

If you're gearing up for a prolonged discussion de-constructing sentences and word usage and analyzing the mindset which motivates a point of view, then count me out.  i don't care enough about this subject to go around in circles in pursuit of getting the last word. It's much simpler to agree to disagree if, indeed, that is the case.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Cynique said:

And given the unlikelihood of the male ego being unable to deal with sharing a wife with other husbands, and considering  how  straight women envision a happy marriage with the man of their dreams fathering their children in a family unit, polygamy hasn't emerged as a feasible choice in today's modern society. 

This is what I am questioning. How many of these people do you know  that youkeep mentioning. You are talking about what women want and what men can't handle. I would say there are probably people in your own family that have various arrangements. People are smart enough to not say this publicly. Lest some uninvolved party judge them.

 

I was on the bus and the guy next to me told me who he was a salesmen in a small town and he got introduced into swinging. A few friends and people known to me have said they had non monogamous relationships. Another time a guy told me he felt bad about his relationship with a couple. One of whom was his best friend. Interestingly most of the people involved in non vanilla sex appeared normal.

 

There is a huge difference between what people say and what they do. The Down Low indeed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...