The absence of racism in the film
-
jn15-3 — 9 years ago(December 18, 2016 09:12 PM)
Don't worry about the OP. He's truly upset about any movie that doesn't portray blacks as victims. Instead of an intense, character-driven story he wanted (ironically) a black and white hit-piece that demonizes Hughes as a vile racist with zero redeeming qualities. Do you want to know who else was a racist back in the 1940's? Pretty much everyone, by today's PC standards.
It wouldn't have added anything to the story. While I felt the ending with him standing and looking in the mirror was a little lackluster, it was otherwise a wonderfully paced and written film. DiCaprio was really great in it, and stole the show: much like Hughes himself.
To the OP: it does nothing for the black community to constantly play the victim. You actually hurt the black community by doing so, causing them to believe they are immobilized by oppression when, in fact, they have innumerably more opportunities in western society in the present than they would living the tribal life over in Africa. It's rather narcissistic to think that all movies should cater to what almost seems to be at this point masochistic victim-complex in every piece of media you watch.
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur14004473/ratings -
jn15-3 — 9 years ago(December 18, 2016 09:50 PM)
No, I may agree with him and his views on immigration and the terrorist group black lives matter, but I think our nation has much bigger problems than non-white immigration and safe space BS at stake. I voted for Clinton for that reason (not that I liked ANY of the candidates: it was like going to Red Lobster when you don't like seafood and having to order
something
.) Didn't even care for the libertarian candidate much this time.
I can see by your movie choices you're most likely black, though. Let me guess: another BLM supporter with an inexorable urge to be victimized? Maybe take a look at your own community if you really want to address the plague of violent crime that riddles black neighborhoods. But what terrible human being blames a victim?
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur14004473/ratings -
WithDreday — 9 years ago(December 18, 2016 10:12 PM)
Let me guess: another BLM supporter with an inexorable urge to be victimized? Maybe take a look at your own community if you really want to address the plague of violent crime that riddles black neighborhoods. But what terrible human being blames a victim?
I don't support BLM for that very reason since they only focus on cop killings and they ignore the devaluation of life by our own youth.
Without that issue being solved, the black community will go nowhere as you can't have your future out there being forced to gang bang or being gunned down on their way home from schooling, but that's a story for another day.
My advice to you would be to quit putting all blacks in one box. Yes, a lot of blacks acknowledge racism, but that in no way make them playing the "victim" by doing so.
This type of thinking is the very reason America is as divided as it was in the 1940's.
At least back then, people accepted that the mentality existed.
Edit: And we actually have pretty similar ratings on most seen films, so I don't get you bringing movie taste into this.
No one Gives it to youyou have to take it -
WithDreday — 9 years ago(December 18, 2016 08:54 PM)
They kind of left it all in that one line where he equated all those negative things with quote "screwing a colored girl".
I'm personally glad they left it out as a main subplot since, for better or worse, it was a product of the men of his time, and it didn't warrant that much dedication to it.
Also, remember that the original cut was actually 3 and 1/2 hours, so they probably left a lot of that particular subplot on the cutting room floor.
No one Gives it to youyou have to take it -
-
AnthonySocksss — 3 years ago(November 30, 2022 02:04 AM)
The biggest miss was how the movie glossed over how he became seriously addicted to morphine after his plane crash.
Melton1 Wanted for Pedophilia:
https://i.ibb.co/6cnPmJVr/IMG-0830.jpg
https://m.youtube.com/shorts/Zjxk307CND0 -
P.Error — 3 years ago(November 30, 2022 04:44 AM)
Racism was normalised then.
For obvious reasons, they can't touch on his racism as it would vilify him for modern audiences. It's fine for a book, but won't work for a movie format.
It's like doing a biopic of Wilt Chamberlain, finding out he was against gay marriage, and then saying, "they didn't touch on Wilt's homophobia."
People's morals are influenced by the media, politics, and culture of that time period.
A racist person in the 30s and a racist person in the 2020s are not guilty of the exact same wrong.
We heroise slave-owners who existed in the 1800s. We wouldn't make a statue of someone who owned slaves in 1982.
Never lose your desire.
