|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 12, 2018 20:25:39 GMT
Not at all. I can have a movie with a bunch of smart business men who are Hispanic. But if a there's one who is stereotypical Pancho Villa-looking and calls himself the Wetbean, that one character would be a racist caricature.
|
|
|
|
Post by taylorfirst1 on Apr 12, 2018 20:53:21 GMT
Not at all. I can have a movie with a bunch of smart business men who are Hispanic. But if a there's one who is stereotypical Pancho Villa-looking and calls himself the Wetbean, that one character would be a racist caricature. That would be a caricature but not a racist caricature. That would be like a saying a movie that has a rich, white, racist business man as the villain is a racist caricature of all white people. Equally incorrect. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 12, 2018 22:26:33 GMT
Apparently in Wakanda there are albino furred apes.
As much as I hate CGi animals, it would be neat to see a few of them in the sequel.
|
|
|
|
Post by merh on Apr 13, 2018 1:45:46 GMT
This whole time, the only Black Panther villain I ever could recall being as it was probably his main villain was Man Ape so here I was thinking when they make Black Panther 2 they gotta go with Man Ape. Turns out M'Baku was actually Man Ape.   Where's his bad ass costume? He looks nothing alike. He was barely even a villain, infact by the end he was a good guy helping Black Panther out. What are they ashamed of the comic or something? You are late. After seeing it opening weekend I looked the character up to see if he was comic based & was surprised to see he was Man Ape. I agree it would be racist to retain. We have the panther tribe. We have the mountain gorilla tribe. They aren't the mountain ape tribe. Do you think they could get away with that? |
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Apr 13, 2018 2:56:27 GMT
Well maybe not as graphic so as to kill a White Gorilla eat parts of it and bathe in its blood on screen but they could have twisted it a little bit so he was still a villain and still wore the costume.  It'd be like that I imagine but with a white gorilla. |
|
|
|
Post by merh on Apr 13, 2018 7:08:45 GMT
Well maybe not as graphic so as to kill a White Gorilla eat parts of it and bathe in its blood on screen but they could have twisted it a little bit so he was still a villain and still wore the costume. It'd be like that I imagine but with a white gorilla. After Harambe? No. Can't remember if his Herc was after Cecil... |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Apr 13, 2018 11:54:38 GMT
Not at all. I can have a movie with a bunch of smart business men who are Hispanic. But if a there's one who is stereotypical Pancho Villa-looking and calls himself the Wetbean, that one character would be a racist caricature. You're going to ridiculous extremes to save your argument. There's a difference between animal-themed tribes and using literal racist slang as a character name. You have to put the whole thing into context. The film deals heavily in cultural traditions of an African nation, which happen to involve animal themes. The director as well as the majority of the cast are black. It isn't belittling or stereotyping anything, within the context of the story or the production. If I made a film with 15 white characters and one black dude from Des Moines and called him Man-Ape, there'd be a problem. But in this context it's fine. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 13, 2018 13:09:18 GMT
Not at all. I can have a movie with a bunch of smart business men who are Hispanic. But if a there's one who is stereotypical Pancho Villa-looking and calls himself the Wetbean, that one character would be a racist caricature. That would be a caricature but not a racist caricature. That would be like a saying a movie that has a rich, white, racist business man as the villain is a racist caricature of all white people. Equally incorrect. Considering the connotations of wet and bean for the Mexican people, yes, it would most definitely be a racist caricature. |
|
|
|
Post by PreachCaleb on Apr 13, 2018 13:11:26 GMT
Not at all. I can have a movie with a bunch of smart business men who are Hispanic. But if a there's one who is stereotypical Pancho Villa-looking and calls himself the Wetbean, that one character would be a racist caricature. You're going to ridiculous extremes to save your argument. There's a difference between animal-themed tribes and using literal racist slang as a character name. You have to put the whole thing into context. The film deals heavily in cultural traditions of an African nation, which happen to involve animal themes. The director as well as the majority of the cast are black. It isn't belittling or stereotyping anything, within the context of the story or the production. If I made a film with 15 white characters and one black dude from Des Moines and called him Man-Ape, there'd be a problem. But in this context it's fine. No, it's the same extreme as Man-Ape. And yes, context. A nearly entirely black production team was on board with not calling him Man-Ape. That's a context I'm fine with. |
|
|
|
Post by Rey Kahuka on Apr 13, 2018 15:21:53 GMT
You're going to ridiculous extremes to save your argument. There's a difference between animal-themed tribes and using literal racist slang as a character name. You have to put the whole thing into context. The film deals heavily in cultural traditions of an African nation, which happen to involve animal themes. The director as well as the majority of the cast are black. It isn't belittling or stereotyping anything, within the context of the story or the production. If I made a film with 15 white characters and one black dude from Des Moines and called him Man-Ape, there'd be a problem. But in this context it's fine. No, it's the same extreme as Man-Ape. And yes, context. A nearly entirely black production team was on board with not calling him Man-Ape. That's a context I'm fine with. They just called him great gorilla, had him wear a gorilla mask and make gorilla sounds. But they were afraid to call him Man Ape? As I've said several times now, they updated it because it's campy. It has nothing to do with racism. Man-Ape's name and costume would be ridiculous on the big screen and they recognized that. |
|
|
|
Post by Hauntedknight87 on May 6, 2018 21:58:03 GMT
Bump!
|
|
|
|
Post by ThatGuy on May 6, 2018 23:55:20 GMT
No, it's the same extreme as Man-Ape. And yes, context. A nearly entirely black production team was on board with not calling him Man-Ape. That's a context I'm fine with. They just called him great gorilla, had him wear a gorilla mask and make gorilla sounds. But they were afraid to call him Man Ape? As I've said several times now, they updated it because it's campy. It has nothing to do with racism. Man-Ape's name and costume would be ridiculous on the big screen and they recognized that. What would be the reason to call him Man-Ape? They all know his actual name. And he and T'Challa are rivals. Do they even call Stark Iron Man past the first movie? They always refer to the suit as the Iron Man armor. Hell, they call Captain America Cap, Steve or Captain Rogers. The only ones that would refer to him as the Man-Ape are people that don't know him, but heard of the legends about him or those talking to people that's never heard of him. Something like "We are now in the territory of the Man-Ape." If they go Man-Ape, they would have to go full Planet of the Apes and have him walk around like a gorilla. |
|
|
|
Post by coldenhaulfield on May 7, 2018 1:24:59 GMT
You're going to ridiculous extremes to save your argument. There's a difference between animal-themed tribes and using literal racist slang as a character name. You have to put the whole thing into context. The film deals heavily in cultural traditions of an African nation, which happen to involve animal themes. The director as well as the majority of the cast are black. It isn't belittling or stereotyping anything, within the context of the story or the production. If I made a film with 15 white characters and one black dude from Des Moines and called him Man-Ape, there'd be a problem. But in this context it's fine. No, it's the same extreme as Man-Ape. And yes, context. A nearly entirely black production team was on board with not calling him Man-Ape. That's a context I'm fine with. That's not what that means. |
|
|
|
Post by spooner5020 on May 7, 2018 2:29:03 GMT
After reading your post i’ve Learned why you have not banned DC-fan. It’s because you are him. That is something DC-Fan would totally say.
|
|
