Rate the last movie you saw

[Sebastian]

It could have used more Klaue. So delightful. The man loved his work.

 

[Hurl Bruce]

In case you guys didn't know both actors that played young T'Chaka and young Forest Whitaker were their real life sons. I thought that was pretty cool.

Well, that makes my thought of, "Damn, that kid looks just like Forrest" make more sense.

 

[David.]

In the middle of black panther.

I'm sorry for what I'm about to do

@gourimoko what are your feelings about nationalism, racism, and collectivism , especially pertaining to this movie?

I I understand "our culture" to an extent. When dude was saying "people that look like you and me " and having a special bond because of that it rubs me the wrong way. Collective based on race. When it was "people that were from our land" it was an appeal to nationalism.

 

[gourimoko]

In the middle of black panther.

I'm sorry for what I'm about to do

@gourimoko what are your feelings about nationalism, racism, and collectivism , especially pertaining to this movie?

C'mon bro, I think you know my feelings on those issues pretty well.. I mean, I've not left a shred of doubt as to how I feel on all of those topics, have I? To be clear, I'm anti- all of those things.

I understand "our culture" to an extent. When dude was saying "people that look like you and me " and having a special bond because of that it rubs me the wrong way. Collective based on race. When it was "people that were from our land" it was an appeal to nationalism.

If you mean it bothered you that Killmonger expected to find kinship with Wakandans and Africans in general, you might be surprised to find out that those kinds of feelings among African-Americans are not at all uncommon; nor is the initially cold and confused response Killmonger received from Wakandans as an outsider, an American, etc.

Klaue warned Killmonger that he would not likely receive a warm welcome, regardless of him being Black... And that's the truth about African-Americans in Africa, that connection and bond is gone, and speaks to Killmonger's desire to be buried at sea with dead slaves. Wakanda wasn't his home; nor was Africa.

So you have to (try to) understand that the movie speaks to this disconnect that the descendants of slaves feel. It encapsulates in Killmonger just how Afrocentrism, pan-Africanism, and revolutionary rage of the Black radicalism of the 1960s, particularly as these issues relate to post-colonialism is a phenomena that's largely only emphasized within and throughout the African diaspora.

The entire topic of racial equality through class struggle and economic revolution, the theming, etc, was based around the 60's and 70's Black/Marxist revolutionary movements in America.

But with that being said, Killmonger's speech and his aims are supposed to rub you the wrong way, just like they rubbed T'Challa the wrong way; his name is Killmonger.

He's talking about, initially, the reality that Wakanda did nothing while people of African descent dealt with oppression in both Africa, and North and South America. He does not understand, like his father, why Wakanda had a tradition of not using offensive power against colonial nations and those who would oppress or exploit.

This is made evident when Zuri explains that he and T'Chaka had uncovered T'Challa's uncle, Prince N'Jobu, as having been radicalized in America and who was willing to wage war against those in power, using vibranium weapons. He never says that he was a Black nationalist in the Nation of Islam sense of the term; but obviously he's similar to Black radicals and revolutionaries of the 1960s and 1970s. There's even a photo of Huey P. Newton on the wall in N'Jobu's apartment.

That evolves into a proposal by Killmonger about overturning the entire worldwide class-structure -- this is why they're sending weapons all over the world, to overthrow all of those in power, everywhere, and start a global class revolution with Wakanda coming out as the only viable nation in all the chaos.

T'Challa, speaking as his fathers before him would have, explains that other Africans and African-Americans are not "his people" in the sense that he is not their King and he is not responsible for them which, coming from an Afrocentric mindset, Killmonger finds not only offensive but self-contradictory.

Killmonger tries to put to T'Challa that all people, regardless of race, or nationality, are T'Challa's people because all people originate in and from Africa. And since Wakanda very likely has the power to conquer the planet, and T'Challa is the Black Panther, that he and the council of Wakandan elders are negligent in their responsibility to their fellow man, their people, particularly all of the oppressed people of the globe.

T'Challa again, explains to Killmonger that he is King of Wakanda not King of All People; and that his duty is to protect Wakanda. That's effectively where the conversation breaks down, since obviously, Killmonger gives two shits about Wakanda, and instead is more concerned (on the surface) about Oakland and every place like it around the globe; but in reality, he's far more concerned about avenging his father's death and driven by his own bloodlust (again, Black rage).

...

With all that being said, I think you might be trying to apply terms here across incomparable contexts. Wakandans hiding away because they fear outsiders destroying them is protectionism and isolationism, it's not necessarily nationalistic.

Also, describing Wakanda as largely nationalistic would be odd -- especially given Nakia's impassioned plea to Okoye about what it means to love one's country and hope to fix it rather than simply serving it (the classic difference between a patriot and a nationalist); as well as W'Kabi's betrayal of T'Challa; and Okoye's eventual betrayal of Killmonger.

So I would argue that, of the duration of the film it becomes apparent that the State and national identity was far less important for most Wakandans it seems than personal and tribal allegiance; at least, given the behaviors we see on screen.

If Wakanda were a nationalistic country, Killmonger would've never been able to challenge T'Challa; T'Challa would likely have absolute authority (he didn't); and the nation surely would have been far more militaristic (it wasn't).

Also, the debate regarding refugees and Wakanda directly speaks to the outmoded isolationist fears of certain Wakandans and given it was W'Kabi who made these statements, we as the audience can understand them as in error.

Lastly, it's not an appeal to nationalism to say that a country should help it's countrymen.

We have a social safety net here in the United States; we don't extend that safety net out to the rest of the world. Whether it's housing assistance, student loan guarantees, food aid, child tax credits; we help provide for American citizens. That's certainly not "nationalism," nor is asking or expecting the American government to aid American citizens an appeal to nationalism.

...

Anyway, I'm guessing you didn't like the movie?

 

[David.]

I think you know my feelings on those topics pretty well.. I mean, I've not left a shred of doubt as to how I feel on all of those topics, have I? To be clear, I'm anti- all of those things.



If you mean it bothered you that Killmonger expected to find kinship with Wakandans and Africans in general, you might be surprised to find out that those kinds of feelings among African-Americans are not at all uncommon; nor is the initially cold and confused response Killmonger received from Wakandans as an outsider, an American, etc.

Klaue warned Killmonger that he would not likely receive a warm welcome, regardless of him being Black... And that's the truth about African-Americans in Africa, that connection and bond is gone, and speaks to Killmonger's desire to be buried at sea with dead slaves. Wakanda wasn't his home; nor was Africa.

So you have to (try to) understand that the movie speaks to this disconnect that the descendants of slaves feel. It encapsulates in Killmonger just how Afrocentrism, pan-Africanism, and revolutionary rage of the Black radicalism of the 1960s, particularly as these issues relate to post-colonialism is a phenomena that's largely only emphasized within and throughout the African diaspora.

The entire topic of racial equality through class struggle and economic revolution, the theming, etc, was based around the 60's and 70's Black/Marxist revolutionary movements in America.

But with that being said, Killmonger's speech and his aims are supposed to rub you the wrong way, just like they rubbed T'Challa the wrong way; his name is Killmonger.

He's talking about, initially, the reality that Wakanda did nothing while people of African descent dealt with oppression in both Africa, and North and South America. He does not understand, like his father, why Wakanda had a tradition of not using offensive power against colonial nations and those who would oppress or exploit.

This is made evident when Zuri explains that he and T'Chaka had uncovered T'Challa's uncle, Prince N'Jobu, as having been radicalized in America and who was willing to wage war against those in power, using vibranium weapons. He never says that he was a Black nationalist in the Nation of Islam sense of the term; but obviously he's similar to Black radicals and revolutionaries of the 1960s and 1970s. There's even a photo of Huey P. Newton on the wall in N'Jobu's apartment.

That evolves into a proposal by Killmonger about overturning the entire worldwide class-structure -- this is why they're sending weapons all over the world, to overthrow all of those in power, everywhere, and start a global class revolution with Wakanda coming out as the only viable nation in all the chaos.

T'Challa, speaking as his fathers before him would have, explains that other Africans and African-Americans are not "his people" in the sense that he is not their King and he is not responsible for them which, coming from an Afrocentric mindset, Killmonger finds not only offensive but self-contradictory.

Killmonger tries to put to T'Challa that all people, regardless of race, or nationality, are T'Challa's people because all people originate in and from Africa. And since Wakanda very likely has the power to conquer the planet, and T'Challa is the Black Panther, that he and the council of Wakandan elders are negligent in their responsibility to their fellow man, their people, particularly all of the oppressed people of the globe.

T'Challa again, explains to Killmonger that he is King of Wakanda not King of All People; and that his duty is to protect Wakanda. That's effectively where the conversation breaks down, since obviously, Killmonger gives two shits about Wakanda, and instead is more concerned (on the surface) about Oakland and every place like it around the globe; but in reality, he's far more concerned about avenging his father's death and driven by his own bloodlust (again, Black rage).

...

With all that being said, I think you might be trying to apply terms here across incomparable contexts. Wakandans hiding away because they fear outsiders destroying them is protectionism and isolationism, it's not necessarily nationalistic.

Also, describing Wakanda as largely nationalistic would be odd -- especially given Nakia's impassioned plea to Okoye about what it means to love one's country and hope to fix it rather than simply serving it (the classic difference between a patriot and a nationalist); as well as W'Kabi's betrayal of T'Challa; and Okoye's eventual betrayal of Killmonger.

So I would argue that, of the duration of the film it becomes apparent that the State and national identity was far less important for most Wakandans it seems than personal and tribal allegiance; at least, given the behaviors we see on screen.

If Wakanda were a nationalistic country, Killmonger would've never been able to challenge T'Challa; T'Challa would likely have absolute authority (he didn't); and the nation surely would have been far more militaristic (it wasn't).

Also, the debate regarding refugees and Wakanda directly speaks to the outmoded isolationist fears of certain Wakandans and given it was W'Kabi who made these statements, we as the audience can understand them as in error.

Lastly, it's not an appeal to nationalism to say that a country should help it's countrymen.

We have a social safety net here in the United States; we don't extend that safety net out to the rest of the world. Whether it's housing assistance, student loan guarantees, food aid, child tax credits; we help provide for American citizens. That's certainly not "nationalism," nor is asking or expecting the American government to aid American citizens an appeal to nationalism.

...

Anyway, I'm guessing you didn't like the movie?

I paid attention to a lot of it but I'm not into action movies nor superhero movies. It was aesthetically awesome. I didn't like the casting of tchalla.

Some of the issues you wrote about aren't nationalism but they are collectivism and I'm trying to get a better understanding of that concept. Collectivism is family, it's nation, it's race. I'm brand new to actually giving both collectivism and individualism fair shake.

 

[gourimoko]

I paid attention to a lot of it but I'm not into action movies nor superhero movies. It was aesthetically awesome. I didn't like the casting of tchalla.

It's funny. I dislike action movies too. And while I do like superhero films in general, I don't consider them worthwhile movies within the broader format of film as art. This movie was completely different.

Like The Dark Knight, it really resonated, and you could see the intricacy of the story, plot, characters and the depth of the message (perhaps on multiple viewings).

Also, at first, I disliked T'Challa's casting walking in; but man, I thought Chadwick Boseman knocked it out of the park.

Some of the issues you wrote about aren't nationalism but they are collectivism and I'm trying to get a better understanding of that concept. Collectivism is family, it's nation, it's race. I'm brand new to actually giving both collectivism and individualism fair shake.

Well, to be clear, collectivism is giving the group priority over the individual. I'm not sure I would ever categorize myself as a collectivist. In fact, I'm certainly not one. I'm more of an individualist; however, there is a middle path between these two opposite extremes that I think is more viable, with strong preference towards individualism.

Collectivism I think, whether it be family, nation, or especially race, can be damaging, and can justify evils since it externalizes ethical decision making.

However, in this day and age, progressives are called collectivists because we believe in a strong social safety net, and improving society through social, educational and technological means ... and yes, that requires raising taxes on the wealthy.

However, the flip side of this is that it lowers expenses, and reduces costs for the vast majority, and progressive taxation of the wealthiest Americans means the burden of poverty is not felt by all. This means that disparity in wealth is diminished, and a robust middle class is supported by the fruit of their labor.

Is that a form of collectivism? I suppose, sure.. But I don't think that's really the most meaningful or correct way to view something like this. because that could be said of statism as well; or any form of taxation to any supposedly ethical or state-determined necessary end.

 

[David.]

It's funny. I dislike action movies too. And while I do like superhero films in general, I don't consider them worthwhile movies within the broader format of film as art. This movie was completely different.

Like The Dark Knight, it really resonated, and you could see the intricacy of the story, plot, characters and the depth of the message (perhaps on multiple viewings).

Also, at first, I disliked T'Challa's casting walking in; but man, I thought Chadwick Boseman knocked it out of the park.



Well, to be clear, collectivism is giving the group priority over the individual. I'm not sure I would ever categorize myself as a collectivist. In fact, I'm certainly not one. I'm more of an individualist; however, there is a middle path between these two opposite extremes that I think is more viable, with strong preference towards individualism.

Collectivism I think, whether it be family, nation, or especially race, can be damaging, and can justify evils since it externalizes ethical decision making.

However, in this day and age, progressives are called collectivists because we believe in a strong social safety net, and improving society through social, educational and technological means ... and yes, that requires raising taxes on the wealthy.

However, the flip side of this is that it lowers expenses, and reduces costs for the vast majority, and progressive taxation of the wealthiest Americans means the burden of poverty is not felt by all. This means that disparity in wealth is diminished, and a robust middle class is supported by the fruit of their labor.

Is that a form of collectivism? I suppose, sure.. But I don't think that's really the most meaningful or correct way to view something like this. because that could be said of statism as well; or any form of taxation to any supposedly ethical or state-determined necessary end.

I'm superficial. Dude just shouldn't have been the lead, camera didn't like him.




Laws against speaking against Islam, compelled speech and related issues, damore getting fired, professors being persecuted for their beliefs.

Alt right is collectivist, communism obviously, antifa. SOME feminists, blm sects.

Wouldn't persecuting anyone over racist statements be collectivism?

I've only heard negative aspects of collectivism but I've only heard of proponents of individualism

 

[gourimoko]

I'm superficial. Dude just shouldn't have been the lead, camera didn't like him.

Dunno, bitches are going wild for Chadwick on social media, bro..

Laws against speaking against Islam, compelled speech and related issues,

Yeah, of course, this is all crazy... No law should restrict speech in this country, period.

damore getting fired,

Damore was self-absorbed programmer who used the company intranet for his own personal political ends. He made controversial and difficult to recover from statements about the innate qualities of his female colleagues. There's no reason Google should have left him on the job, especially since he could never work as a supervisor or team leader after putting forward his manifesto.

Also, it was just reported that a disabled transgendered Google engineer was also fired for the EXACT same reasons as Damore, just on the opposite end of the spectrum.

Lastly, remember, Google is a private company -- it's not collectivism for Google to fire Damore for their own corporate interest, it's collectivist to say they should be restricted from doing so.

professors being persecuted for their beliefs.

Having beliefs isn't enough, IMHO -- a lot of nutjob professors still have their positions because they're tenured.

I think institutions should do whatever they can to get people out of positions where they are doing more harm than good.

Alt right is collectivist, communism obviously, antifa. SOME feminists, blm sects.

Agreed on these points, but dunno if Antifa has an ideology per se; more like Occupy.

 

[David.]

Dunno, bitches are going wild for Chadwick on social media, bro..



Yeah, of course, this is all crazy... No law should restrict speech in this country, period.

You just don't feel rights extend past the law?

 

[Sebastian]

C'mon bro, I think you know my feelings on those issues pretty well.. I mean, I've not left a shred of doubt as to how I feel on all of those topics, have I? To be clear, I'm anti- all of those things.



If you mean it bothered you that Killmonger expected to find kinship with Wakandans and Africans in general, you might be surprised to find out that those kinds of feelings among African-Americans are not at all uncommon; nor is the initially cold and confused response Killmonger received from Wakandans as an outsider, an American, etc.

Klaue warned Killmonger that he would not likely receive a warm welcome, regardless of him being Black... And that's the truth about African-Americans in Africa, that connection and bond is gone, and speaks to Killmonger's desire to be buried at sea with dead slaves. Wakanda wasn't his home; nor was Africa.

So you have to (try to) understand that the movie speaks to this disconnect that the descendants of slaves feel. It encapsulates in Killmonger just how Afrocentrism, pan-Africanism, and revolutionary rage of the Black radicalism of the 1960s, particularly as these issues relate to post-colonialism is a phenomena that's largely only emphasized within and throughout the African diaspora.

The entire topic of racial equality through class struggle and economic revolution, the theming, etc, was based around the 60's and 70's Black/Marxist revolutionary movements in America.

But with that being said, Killmonger's speech and his aims are supposed to rub you the wrong way, just like they rubbed T'Challa the wrong way; his name is Killmonger.

He's talking about, initially, the reality that Wakanda did nothing while people of African descent dealt with oppression in both Africa, and North and South America. He does not understand, like his father, why Wakanda had a tradition of not using offensive power against colonial nations and those who would oppress or exploit.

This is made evident when Zuri explains that he and T'Chaka had uncovered T'Challa's uncle, Prince N'Jobu, as having been radicalized in America and who was willing to wage war against those in power, using vibranium weapons. He never says that he was a Black nationalist in the Nation of Islam sense of the term; but obviously he's similar to Black radicals and revolutionaries of the 1960s and 1970s. There's even a photo of Huey P. Newton on the wall in N'Jobu's apartment.

That evolves into a proposal by Killmonger about overturning the entire worldwide class-structure -- this is why they're sending weapons all over the world, to overthrow all of those in power, everywhere, and start a global class revolution with Wakanda coming out as the only viable nation in all the chaos.

T'Challa, speaking as his fathers before him would have, explains that other Africans and African-Americans are not "his people" in the sense that he is not their King and he is not responsible for them which, coming from an Afrocentric mindset, Killmonger finds not only offensive but self-contradictory.

Killmonger tries to put to T'Challa that all people, regardless of race, or nationality, are T'Challa's people because all people originate in and from Africa. And since Wakanda very likely has the power to conquer the planet, and T'Challa is the Black Panther, that he and the council of Wakandan elders are negligent in their responsibility to their fellow man, their people, particularly all of the oppressed people of the globe.

T'Challa again, explains to Killmonger that he is King of Wakanda not King of All People; and that his duty is to protect Wakanda. That's effectively where the conversation breaks down, since obviously, Killmonger gives two shits about Wakanda, and instead is more concerned (on the surface) about Oakland and every place like it around the globe; but in reality, he's far more concerned about avenging his father's death and driven by his own bloodlust (again, Black rage).

...

With all that being said, I think you might be trying to apply terms here across incomparable contexts. Wakandans hiding away because they fear outsiders destroying them is protectionism and isolationism, it's not necessarily nationalistic.

Also, describing Wakanda as largely nationalistic would be odd -- especially given Nakia's impassioned plea to Okoye about what it means to love one's country and hope to fix it rather than simply serving it (the classic difference between a patriot and a nationalist); as well as W'Kabi's betrayal of T'Challa; and Okoye's eventual betrayal of Killmonger.

So I would argue that, of the duration of the film it becomes apparent that the State and national identity was far less important for most Wakandans it seems than personal and tribal allegiance; at least, given the behaviors we see on screen.

If Wakanda were a nationalistic country, Killmonger would've never been able to challenge T'Challa; T'Challa would likely have absolute authority (he didn't); and the nation surely would have been far more militaristic (it wasn't).

Also, the debate regarding refugees and Wakanda directly speaks to the outmoded isolationist fears of certain Wakandans and given it was W'Kabi who made these statements, we as the audience can understand them as in error.

Lastly, it's not an appeal to nationalism to say that a country should help it's countrymen.

We have a social safety net here in the United States; we don't extend that safety net out to the rest of the world. Whether it's housing assistance, student loan guarantees, food aid, child tax credits; we help provide for American citizens. That's certainly not "nationalism," nor is asking or expecting the American government to aid American citizens an appeal to nationalism.

...

Anyway, I'm guessing you didn't like the movie?

I think this will be the bones of many PhD thesi over the next decade. @jking948

One thing I took away from this, and identified with, is that being a leader and protecting your guys, sometimes means being a shitty person to everyone else. Any Army officer would know that experience.

And I was hoping someone would speak to the divide between African-Americans and Africans, because from a US perspective it has been boiled down to skin color as identification. But, that simply doesn't exist in that interaction and I have friends from Africa who will often recount the cold-shoulders they have received from the African-American community and no doubt the reverse is true.

 

[gourimoko]

I think this will be the bones of many PhD thesi over the next decade. @jking948

One thing I took away from this, and identified with, is that being a leader and protecting your guys, sometimes means being a shitty person to everyone else. Any Army officer would know that experience.

And I was hoping someone would speak to the divide between African-Americans and Africans, because from a US perspective it has been boiled down to skin color as identification. But, that simply doesn't exist in that interaction and I have friends from Africa who will often recount the cold-shoulders they have received from the African-American community and no doubt the reverse is true.

The reverse is absolutely true for Black African-Americans .. and I speak from experience. However, my Egyptian, Tunisian and Moroccan relatives (and non-relatives) welcomed me with open arms.

It's just the shape and direction of the African diaspora, unfortunately, but there is definitely some distance, animosity, misunderstanding, and unrealistic expectations between African-Americans who expect kinship and Africans who seem to think "man what are you talking about?"

This is largely due to the concept of race not really transitioning across borders and cultures. The concept does not mean the same thing in American as it does in Africa, where, like the rest of the world, ethnicity is how you track familial ties - not race.

 

[gourimoko]

You just don't feel rights extend past the law?

I think that depends on who you ask, and how you define rights. I know in more higher level discussions about geopolitics, the concept of rights are inherently state-derived; meaning, a stateless person has no rights since there is no entity with power or responsibility or agency to protect any supposed rights of this person.

By contrast, others would contend that some rights are "God-given," or in other (secular) words derived from the innate qualities of simply being a human being; not from living within a society under a social contract. So the individual right to say what you wish is a human (negative) right.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

The reverse is absolutely true for Black African-Americans .. and I speak from experience. However, my Egyptian, Tunisian and Moroccan relatives (and non-relatives) welcomed me with open arms.

It's just the shape and direction of the African diaspora, unfortunately, but there is definitely some distance, animosity, misunderstanding, and unrealistic expectations between African-Americans who expect kinship and Africans who seem to think "man what are you talking about?"

This is largely due to the concept of race not really transitioning across borders and cultures. The concept does not mean the same thing in American as it does in Africa, where, like the rest of the world, ethnicity is how you track familial ties - not race.

I'd just add that despite my Polish and Scottish heritage, the Poles and Scots I've encountered don't see to recognize any particular kinship either, and those are much smaller, more distinctive ethnicities than just "black". It's more like "that's nice."

 

[gourimoko]

I'd just add that despite my Polish and Scottish heritage, the Poles and Scots I've encountered don't see to recognize any particular kinship either, and those are much smaller, more distinctive ethnicities than just "black". It's more like "that's nice."

My bookkeeper is Norwegian, she goes back and they're exceptionally welcoming... But by contrast one of my clients is German, and when he goes to Germany they could give two shits.

It's definitely a cultural thing.

 

[ACisKING]

FWIW, I have it ahead of Logan...

To me Logan was just so much better directed. And I say that as a fan of Ryan Coogler's work and as someone who thinks Coogler did a good job overall on BP. It's just that the action sequences in Black Panther relied way too much on Marvel Studios' tendency to use over-the-top CGI. Some fight scenes (the jungle scene in the beginning and the battle between tribes at the end come to mind) used so much Michael Bay style cross-cutting (a lazy technique that always cheapens action sequences) that it was impossible to tell who was fighting who in real time. The best fight scenes in BP were those that used less cross-cutting, and as a result felt more authentic (like the waterfall fights and the first part of the casino fight). By contrast, practically every action sequence in Logan had a visceral, authentic feel to it. It really felt like in any of those scenes anyone could die - any many characters did. I'm not talking about the gore either - I'm talking about the fact that it felt that each frame of those scenes was shot with precision instead of compiled together hastily in a CGI salad bowl.

But the superior directing in Logan was not just limited to action sequences, but also also to the slower momets...the shots depicting the agony of a dementia-riddled Xavier, of the fear of the persecuted young mutants, of the wear and tear on an aging Logan, or during the burial of a beloved character. I also think the performances of Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, and Dafne Keen were remarkable in that film....far beyond what anyone could reasonably expect from a comic book movie. That being said, I've accepted that I'm a film snob, and I doubt that most people notice or care about the weird things I pay attention to when watching movies.