Rascism in Manderlay
-
RealDuality — 13 years ago(April 03, 2013 03:14 AM)
MrNuff- You lied about what's actually in the movie in your post.
I don't believe you really watched it. Maybe, it was on in a room you were in and you saw a few scenes at best.
There IS a black person who gets lynched for trusting the kindness of white people. There is another who gets whipped for stealing, which you partially remembered.
The movie isn't about how the structure of slavery is good, but how it is permanent. It is about the continuity of that structure thru the lasting effects of slavery on the preceding generations. -
johnslegers — 16 years ago(August 27, 2009 03:57 PM)
kwalstedt-1 pretty much explains what this film is about. Manderlay and Dogville are both stories critical or naive liberals and how they in their self-indulgent arrogance believe they are better than everyone else while at the same time preaching equality, freedom for all and other nonsense.
-
kyzasoze2003 — 14 years ago(May 19, 2011 08:43 PM)
Now that Von Trier has said he's a Nazi and sympathysis with Adolf Hitler, people will be looking at this film to see if it really is racist. I actually didn't think it was racist and as for Von Trier who knows what he really thinks, he's a crap-talker that now looks like he's dug his own grave. He doesn't want to be thought of like Mel Gibson.
-
RealDuality — 13 years ago(April 03, 2013 03:29 AM)
ZeeXy- Another liar in the media. Your probably too stupid to realize your lying.
You can go to YouTube and view his two minute response to a reporter's question that has been lied about again and again. This is YouTube at its best, cutting thru the bs to the source. If you search Lars and Nazi, it's the first video.
Lars is answering a question about an earlier comment he had made about how Bruno Ganz' portrayal of Hitler in Downfall caused him to sympathize for the historical figure during his last days in his bunker. I am Jewish, and I had the exact same reaction to this movie. This comment was about how great Bruno's performance is and nothing more.
He, further, talks about how he thought he was Jewish his whole life until his mother told him on her deathbed that he was the son of a German composer. When he says he is a Nazi, he means he is German. It's a way of speaking that allows for misinterpretation, and Lars jokes during the whole answer how he knows the member of the media is asking this question so he can purposefully mischaracterize his statements, but he goes on anyway, which I loved.
The most interesting thing about the whole incident was how the media acted like he gave a pro-Hitler/pro-Nazi speech when most of them knew that wasn't true. Some members of the media even admitted that they didn't care about the truth, only what was scandalous. -
PoppyTransfusion — 14 years ago(August 20, 2011 02:54 PM)
"america not ready for them, i think not. () if you can't see a helping hand than you only have
yourself to blame"
(along those lines), the 'only having yourself to blame' is word for word.
The narration in Dogville and Manderlay was deeply ironic/mocking/sarcastic and all told, brilliantly, by a very sincere sounding John Hurt. The idea that America gives a helping hand to anyone is what is being questioned. I think you've been suckered in and have taken it as a literal and sincere statement of the film/film maker.
I'm a fountain of blood
In the shape of a girl -
Robanjo78 — 14 years ago(August 22, 2011 11:04 AM)
The idea that America gives a helping hand to anyone is what is being questioned.
Exactly, and that is what Manderlay is about. You can not easily assimilate people or force new moral standards down on them. Remember the movie was made after the second Iraq war, which probably is the best example. But he doesn't just adress U.S. but the whole western world. But U.S. is after all the leader of the western world. -
nicholast1990 — 13 years ago(April 20, 2012 12:30 AM)
I have some comments that are here and there over your text. First, the quote at the end is logical and true. If it is meant as you say it is, then it most certainly is not aimed at the entirety of the african-americans and only at those who have failed to become well adjusted, functioning members of society. Quite a bit of these types of people exist and you're just being ignorant if you say they don't. I think that the message applies directly to all people and not just african-americans, and took the message that way assuming the way it was presented was solely because it was a understandable and shocking way to present this message. Lars loves the shock.
I agree with your last blurb about people getting over the guilt of slavery. Anything outside of regarding each race as equal just makes no sense at this point and from my experiences, is what keeps racism alive. Both on the caucasian side with guilt, and the african-american side playing the victim. I, like you, believe that color should not be your identity, but do think it plays its part. I think the film is less about blacks than it may seem and more about the US as a whole. But who knows I guess. At the very least I'd like to say anyone who is reading this after Meloncholia and Antichrist have came out should not be surprised he chose a topic that would cause controversy, perhaps just because it would. -
RealDuality — 13 years ago(April 03, 2013 02:47 AM)
misprincepessa- You took one line and you twisted it to conform to your view of Lars' perspective. You misquoted the movie by taking it out-of-context.
That being said, the fact that you got upset over a movie about slavery depicting it as an important, permanent part of American history, shows the very importance of its depiction. Our racist history is not something that we can ever escape. It is true that slavery in this sense doesn't exist anymore, but it has shaped the nature of our whole country. There are a number of places where slavery's mark can be clearly seen, like the recent hot topic of NCAA Division 1 Men's basketball and football players.
I love America, but Lars is right that slavery has shaped our nation. It has had a permanent legacy. This is the message that I got from the movie.
I like how Lars didn't shy away from making the black characters racist. Normally, movies about slavery are racist in that only the white people care about race. This is by far the most realistic movie I have ever seen about race.
I think PoppyTransfusion understood the narration better, with the comment that it is the helping hand that is being questioned. I was confused by misprincepessa's analysis; I didn't understand the movie in that context at all.
Furthermore, a number of people have commented that Lars is to blame for people misunderstanding his movie. If a movie is made the right way, as this one is, some types of people are supposed to misunderstand it. -
activista — 11 years ago(July 07, 2014 07:58 PM)
RealDuality
I like how Lars didn't shy away from making the black characters racist. Normally, movies about slavery are racist in that only the white people care about race. This is by far the most realistic movie I have ever seen about race.
Why does it never occur to white people that some black people are racist because white folks or anybody else non-black was racist against them? Nobody ever said black people couldn't be racist, but the difference is, white people historically have always had the laws and the power to back their racism up in this countryTHAT'S the difference, and one people (especially white folks) never seem to get, or understand. Black person historically had very real reasons to hate white people simply because a whit person could do whatever the hell they wanted to a black person and get away with it, particularly in the South, up until about 50 years agoand that's because black people themselves fought for the right to get rid of all that racist bull**** and be treated fair like all American citizens. Also, even though I haven't seen the film, you seem to think black people being racist is some kind of pass for racist white folks to justify their racism, which is some bull**** right there. -
activista — 11 years ago(July 07, 2014 07:38 PM)
@missprincipessa
-affirmative action? (laws that further divide the whites and blacks of america. As a black person I don't find it fair that I should be selected over a white guy that has the exact same qualifications as me just because of the color of my skin, so how do you think someone white might feel about that)
FYI, affirmative action was created in the first place because before 1964, it didn't matter how educated or skilled in a particular trade a black person was, a white person would always get hired over them,no matter whateven if the white person in question wasn't even as qualified as the black person, simply because they were white. So many people have a misunderstanding of affirmative action and how it really works, it's pathetic. It's not about just hiring people because of the color of their skin over white peoplethat's some ignorant BS spread around by conservatives (as usual.) AA was made as a result of the civil rights movement, and to make sure that a certain number of black folks and other minorities were given a fair shot at opportunities in society that they didn't have before due to racial discrimination.
You also forget that before AA even legally existed, white folks had their own affirmative action for virtually the first three hundred years of this country's existencein other words, they made damn sure any opportunities and laws made in society (such as segregation and racial discrimination,to ksep black people and other folks of color from getting anything that would get them out from being just cheap underpaid labor for white people) were for them and to benefit THEM only,plain and simple. Another form of affirmative action for white folks is known as "legacy preferences", which is when a person gets a leg up into a certain college because their grandparents were alumni, or a relative is a big donator to the college. No one ever points that out,but God forbid ONE black person should get hired over a white person for anything (which I doubt even happens that often,anyway) and all hell is raised about it. It's never pointed out that maybe the white person just wasn't qualified for the job, and that the black person was probably the more qualified one. White people usually get hired not only because of merit, but because of who they know and what they know, which has always, until very recently, given them a leg up over most people of color in this country.
I've never seen this film, and anything Lars Van Trier does is to provoke controversy anyway.