• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Spoilers Black Panther grade and discussion thread

How do you rate "Black Panther"?


  • Total voters
    113
GREEN BOOK winning when BLACKKKLANSMAN was right there is honestly a goddamn shame, but it's also pretty damn typical of the Oscars to go for such a "safer" choice.

I wouldn't call GREEN BOOK terrible, as I thought the chemistry between Viggo and Ali alone made it a worthwhile watch (a deserved Oscar for Ali). But like other "Oscar bait" movies of the past decade like THE IMITATION GAME, it does feel like a movie that has been kept in stasis since the 90s. Right down to being too timid to touch on Doc Shirley's homosexuality. If I didn't know any better, I would have thought it was a Miramax era Weinstein production. But the fact that it won Best Picture is going to tarnish it's reputation from her on out as one of the worst winners ever, deservedly.
 
GREEN BOOK winning when BLACKKKLANSMAN was right there is honestly a goddamn shame, but it's also pretty damn typical of the Oscars to go for such a "safer" choice.
BlacKKKlansman has its own issues of historical accuracy similar to Green Book, as pointed out by rapper/director and Spike Lee fan Boots Riley in a (spoiler-filled) critique:

(click to enlarge)

https://www.rollingstone.com/movies...essay-on-problems-with-blackkklansman-713144/

Without naming names, Spike Lee gave a response to some of the criticism here:
https://thegrapevine.theroot.com/spike-lee-responds-to-boots-rileys-critique-of-blackkkl-1828623570

Makes for an interesting conversation and some added perspective on the film if nothing else.

ETA: Sorry for the off-topic discussion.
 
BlacKKKlansman has its own issues of historical accuracy similar to Green Book,
(Not a rebuttal but an observation)

I did my MA thesis on historical feature films and the issue of accuracy was a central discussion point. Short version: accuracy always comes second to drama/storytelling structure (no surprise); inaccuracies are not inherent disqualifiers in terms of the validity of the overall historical points/arguments made by a film (raised some eyebrows on my committee but my oral defence was persuasive); sometimes a less accurate film account is more effective than a “completely accurate” one (film or other format) at presenting an historical truth (also raised some hackles at the defence).

Historical feature films should make an effort at avoiding gross distortions (though on occasion such distortions can be effective) but accuracy should not be the first criterion used to judge such productions. Film provides an opportunity to supplement more traditional sources of historical knowledge that should not be cavalierly dismissed over accuracy. Even bad historical feature films (bad as history) can provide valuable teaching moments.

At some point I’ll see these two films (I occasionally teach post-Reconstruction US survey courses) and see if they can be useful.
 
His comments backstage were hilarious.

"I'm snakebit. Every time someone's driving somebody, I lose!"

:guffaw:
I loved how impishly gleeful he was at his "cup of tea" joke.
To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

It's interesting though with so many people blowing off awards shows as worthless and meaningless just how much Spike Lee seems to genuinely want to be recognized by the Academy and seems to genuinely feel their opinion has some validity.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top