…the most racist movie ever. Guess what color all the savages on Skull Island are? Well, I thought it was racist until I realized it was all a social commentary. See, the main white guy that’s supposed to come from the “civilized” world and stuff is not really worth a darn at all, and is perhaps the most unlikable character in the whole movie. In truth, he’s just as savage as the folks on Skull Island, even more so, in a way.
Anyway, my terrible attempts at humor aside, I found it to be a very good movie. It was just really long, like to the point where it might have hurt to sit down when I got home. It’s at least near three hours, if not more than that. My Dad had a bit of a problem with the fact that the first hour and a half is basically an exposition, or as he might say “the point where the movie was dragging it’s ass.”
Once they get to the Island though, the movie just kicks right into the gear, and Jack Black is actually really good too.
You know this a remake of a 1930’s movie, right? Given that the civilized world expanded from Europe, and that just about every European was white, that’s how people thought back then.
I myself never really understood why a giant wild gorilla would think a tiny human woman would be beautiful.
Very simple. King Kong was a giant monkey pedophile.
Baby monkeys aren’t blonde, nor do they wear clothes like Fay Wray’s.
Kong’s more properly a Zoophile <<!---->_<<!---->
If you think Kong was racist, you should really take a university Race and Media course. I took one of those as a requirement for my graduation (grudgingly even) and I was really surprised. Kong is most likely the tip of the iceberg when it comes to making stereotypes.
Also, while it is a stereotype to put black people on a tropical island, I’ll have you know putting Norwegians would be completely unrealistic because skin color isn’t a race thing, its a latitude thing. The closer you are to the equator, the darker your skin will be because of evolutionary adapations. You’ll notice this trend worldwide. That is in no way a racist comment. It is reality.
Now see, what you want to talk about is therefore the use of “race” and the portrayal of the different “races” in the movie and see if there is an uneven portrayal of one social group over another. As you’ve noticed, the white asshole was not portrayed positively either. If you look at a show like COPS, most people being arested are minorities and people have made the argument that the show therefore portrays minorities more negatively to their audience than it does white people. In a way that’s not a bad point, but also, the producers work with the material they receive and in a way this ends up reflecting on the socio-economic factors governing the distribution of the different groups and what kind of repurcussions that has on societies. Nevertheless though, the point that minorities are disproportionately portrayed negatively doesn’t help.
Also, I take it you’re black?
About as black as Ali G, Nigger.
Im going to leave soon to go see it, and i heard it was pretty darn good. The only thing im not all that excited about is how it is like 3 hrs.
The racism I just see as a result of it being based of a 1930 movie. Although racism would be a wrong term since races don’t exist in biology, they are socially constructed. Ethnocentrism would be more apporpriate.
Hey, i just got back from seeing it, and it was pretty sweet. I dont think it was all that racial though.
yeah, saying a 1930s movie is “racist” because only the “natives” are black is dumb and not funny
Yes, thank you, I would’ve capitalized “terrible” as well.
I suppose there haven’t been too many people here who have seen it then.
Haven’t seen it, probably won’t get a chance to either.
I think that your attempt at humor was a valiant one.
Personally, I don’t see the point in remaking it, but chances are I’ll go see it or just rent it when it comes out on DVD.
One more time for emphasis.
But the reason that racism is so rampant in blahblah while the doctorate of the temptation all of the inside chamber of minorities