If you put a word in quotes, and attribute it to a speaker, that’s supposed to be because the speaker said it. If you can point me to a post where I used the word “racist” to refer to The Women King, I’ll eat my hat.

You’re right, the only participants in this discussion should be people with a longstanding interest in the Nation of Dahomey, one that long precedes the discussion of this movie. That must include you, since you’re pushing it as a criteria for me to post here, on a website comment section. So tell me, since I should…

If you think it’s an unfair comparison, you’re welcome to tell me why a movie showing Confederates fighting to free slaves would be different than what The Woman King depicts. But it’s not an unfair question just because it puts you in a jam.

Would you be OK with a movie about the Confederates freeing the slaves, or Nazi protecting the Jews from anti-Semitism? Because if not, you recognize it’s you that has the double standard, right?

It’s not critics of The Woman King who “foregrounded” slavery. It’s the movie itself, which made slavery a major part of the story, but turned the Dahomey into the saviors and not the perpetrators. 

Indeed, there’s never been a major biopic of George Washington, which would be odd for a nation that loves movies so much, until you realize that, yeah, it’s almost certainly because of the whole slavery thing. Even when old-timey Hollywood was happy to churn out endless westerns in which Indians were the villains,…

To add to what you’ve said - I’m sure there are many films that ignore the Founding Fathers’ contribution/attitudes towards slavery, but I can’t imagine that many of these would portray them as actively campaigning against slavery. And I certainly can’t imagine any of those being made nowadays.

Seems entirely plausible that Davis would learn of this tribe of warrior women, discover with some additional research that they were part of a rotten society, and decide “You know what? We’ll just leave that part out.”

I am loathe to defend someone for using the word “edutainment”, but the fact is movies have been distorting and exaggerating history since the birth of the medium.

In total fairness, sure, Saving Private Ryan invents a US army platoon and a rescue mission. But it doesn’t, I dunno, try to make it seem like the Germans were heroically fighting to save France from the evil invading British and Americans.

If most of your story has to be fictionalized, maybe you should tell another story. And how could your film be edutainment if all the history you’re educating people about is made up?

he’s quite visual about his feelings

Well, here’s the thing: What would happen if Dr. Fauci openly derides Trump in public or make him look like the ass he actually is?

Can’t believe I did. It’s one of his only other go-to moves. Discredit, disassociate, disbelieve, dismiss, done. Donald.

Don’t forget the middle step when Trumps pretends he never met them.

There’s always a grace period between when Trump adopts a new “expert” and when he inevitably turns on them, declares himself better at whatever they did, and fires them if they won’t resign. Mattis got it, Tillerson got it, pretty much every person better informed than Trump gets it shortly after the stories about...…

or door #3: a lot of people think Trump is doing a crackerjack job. That is sad and incomprehensible to me

Trying to work with this administration must be infuriating. I can’t imagine what his day to day must be like. Incredibly hard scientific analysis mixed with managing a constant toddler tantrum.

I don’t know what I feel worse about...